UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

x
þANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010

2011

or

¨
oTRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from _____________ to _____________

For the transition period from             to            

Commission file number0-14289

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Tennessee 
Tennessee62-1222567

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or
organization)

 

(I.R.S. Employer

Identification No.)

100 North Main Street, Greeneville, Tennessee 37743-4992
(Address of principle executive offices) (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: ((423) 639-5111

423) 639-5111

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of Each Class

 

Name of each Exchange on which Registered

Common Stock - $.01 par value 
Common Stock — $2.00 par valueNasdaq Global Select Market

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    YESo¨    NOþx

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    YESo¨    NOþx

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.    YESþx    NOo¨

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).    Yesox    Noo¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.ox

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:

Large accelerated filer¨oAccelerated filer Accelerated¨
Non-accelerated filerþ Non-accelerated filero¨
(Do    (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
  Smaller reporting companyox

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).    YESo¨    NOþx

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant on June 30, 2010,2011, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was approximately $151$32 million. The market value calculation was determined using the closing sale price of the registrant’s common stock on June 30, 2010,2011, as reported on the Nasdaq Global Select Market. For purposes of this calculation, the term “affiliate” refers to all directors, executive officers and 10% shareholders of the registrant. As of the close of business on February 28, 2011, 13,188,896April 5, 2012, 133,160,384 shares of the registrant’s common stock were outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

The following lists the documents incorporated by reference and the Part of the Form 10-K into which the document is incorporated:

1. Portions of Proxy Statement for 2011 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. (Part III)

1.Portions of Proxy Statement for 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. (Part III)

 

 


TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART IPAGE
ITEM 1. BUSINESSPART I

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS1

BUSINESS3

ITEM 1B. 1A

RISK FACTORS27

ITEM 1B

UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS50

ITEM 2. 2

PROPERTIES50

ITEM 3. 3

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS50
ITEM 4. REMOVED AND RESERVED

ITEM 4

PART IIMINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES51
PART II

ITEM 5. 5

MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDERSHAREHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

52

ITEM 6. 6

SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA53

ITEM 7. 7

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

57

ITEM 7A. 7A

QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK75

ITEM 8. 8

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA75
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

ITEM 9

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
137

ITEM 9A. 9A

CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES137

ITEM 9B. 9B

OTHER INFORMATION
PART III138
PART III

ITEM 10. 10

DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE139

ITEM 11. 11

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION139

ITEM 12. 12

SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDERSHAREHOLDER MATTERS

139

ITEM 13. 13

CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE139

ITEM 14. 14

PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
PART IV139
PART IV

ITEM 15. 15

EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
SIGNATURES
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit 10.51139
Exhibit 21.1
Exhibit 23.1
Exhibit 31.1
Exhibit 31.2
Exhibit 32.1
Exhibit 32.2
Exhibit 99.1
Exhibit 99.2


PART I
Forward-Looking Statements
The information contained herein

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This document contains forward-looking statements. Any statements thatabout our expectations, beliefs, plans, predictions, forecasts, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance are not historical facts and may be forward-looking. These statements are often, but not always, made through the use of words or phrases such as “anticipate,” “believes,” “can,” “could,” “may,” “predicts,” “potential,” “should,” “will,” “estimate,” “plans,” “projects,” “continuing,” “ongoing,” “expects,” “intends” and similar words or phrases. Accordingly, these statements are only predictions and involve a number ofestimates, known and unknown risks, assumptions and uncertainties. A number of factors, including those discussed herein,uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in them. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated byin such forward-looking statements whichas a result of several factors more fully described under the caption “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this document, including the appendices hereto.

Any or all of our forward-looking statements in this document may turn out to be inaccurate. The inclusion of this forward-looking information should not be regarded as a representation by the Company or any other person that the future plans, estimates or expectations contemplated by the Company will be achieved. The Company based these forward-looking statements largely on current expectations and projections about future events and financial trends that we believe may affect our financial condition, results of operations, business strategy and financial needs. There are withinimportant factors that could cause our actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements to differ materially from the meaningresults, level of that termactivity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements including, but not limited to, statements regarding:

changes in Section 27Ageneral economic and financial market conditions;

changes in the regulatory environment;

economic conditions generally and in the financial services industry;

changes in the economy affecting real estate values;

our ability to achieve loan and deposit growth;

the completion of the Securities Actproposed merger with our controlling shareholder, Capital Bank Financial Corp.;

the completion of 1933, as amended,our future acquisitions or business combinations and Section 21Eour ability to integrate the acquired business into our business model;

projected population and income growth in our targeted market areas; and

volatility and direction of market interest rates and a weakening of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. In addition, sucheconomy which could materially impact credit quality trends and the ability to generate loans.

All forward-looking statements are necessarily dependent upon assumptions,only estimates and data that may be incorrect or imprecise. Accordingly, any forward-looking statements included herein do not purport to be predictions of future events or circumstancesresults, and may not be realized. Forward-looking statements can be identified by, among other things, the use of forward-looking terminology such as “trends,” “assumptions,” “target,” “guidance,” “outlook,” “opportunity,” “future,” “plans,” “goals,” “objectives,” “expectations,” “near-term,” “long-term,” “projection,” “may,” “will,” “would,” “could,” “expect,” “intend,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “potential,” “regular,” or “continue” or the negatives thereof, or other variations thereon of comparable terminology, or by discussions of strategy or intentions. Such statements may include, but are not limited to, projections of revenue, income or loss, expenditures, acquisitions, plans for future operations, financing needs or plans relating to services of the Company, as well as assumptions relating to the foregoing. The Company’s actual results may differ materially from the results anticipated in forward-looking statements due to a variety of factors, including, but not limited to those identified in “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in this Form 10-K and (1) deterioration in the financial condition of borrowers resulting in significant increases in loan losses and provisions for those losses; (2) continuation of the historically low short-term interest rate environment; (3) changes in loan underwriting, credit review or loss reserve policies associated with economic conditions, examination conclusions, or regulatory developments; (4) increased levels of non-performing and repossessed assets and the ability to resolve these may result in future losses; (5) greater than anticipated deterioration or lack of sustained growth in the national or local economies; (6) rapid fluctuations or unanticipated changes in interest rates; (7) the impact of governmental restrictions on entities participating in the Capital Purchase Program (the “CPP”)of the United States Department of the Treasury (the “Treasury”); (8) changes in state and federal legislation, regulations or policies applicable to banks or other financial service providers, including regulatory or legislative developments, like the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the“Dodd-Frank Act”), arising out of current unsettled conditions in the economy (9) the results of regulatory examinations; (10) the remediation efforts related to the Company’s material weakness in its internal control over financial reporting; (11) increased competition with other financial institutions in the markets that the Bank serves; (12) the Company recording a further valuation allowance related to its deferred tax asset; (13) exploring alternatives available for the future repayment or conversion of the preferred stock issued in the CPP; (14) further deterioration in the valuation of other real estate owned (“OREO”); (15) inability to comply with regulatory capital requirements and to secure any required regulatory approvals for capital actions to raise capital if necessary to comply with any regulatory capital requirements; and (16) the loss of key personnel. The Company undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking statements.

Readersexpectations. You are, therefore, cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-lookingsuch statements madewhich should be read in conjunction with the other cautionary statements that are included elsewhere in this document, sincedocument. In particular, you should consider the statements speaknumerous risks described in the “Risk Factors” section of this document. Further, any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the document’s date. All forward-looking statements included in this Annual Reportdate on Form 10-K are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements in this sectionwhich it is made and to the more detailed risk factors included below under Part I, Item 1A “Risk Factors”. The Company haswe undertake no obligation and does not intend to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements contained in or incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K,statement to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of this documenton which the statement is made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events. Readers are advised,You should, however, review the risk factors we describe in the reports we will file from time to consult any further disclosures the Company may make on related subjects in its documents filedtime with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) or in its other public disclosures.
after the date of this report.

 

1


ITEM 1.
BUSINESS.
Presentation of Amounts
All dollar amounts set forth below, other than share and per-share amounts, are

As used in thousands unless otherwise noted. Unless thisForm 10-K indicates otherwise or the context otherwise requires, document, the terms “we,” “us,” “our,” “us,“Green Bankshares,“the Company” or “Green Bankshares”and “Company” mean Green Bankshares, Inc. and its subsidiaries (unless the context indicates another meaning).

3


The Company

Green Bankshares is a bank holding company incorporated in 1985 and headquartered in Greeneville, Tennessee. Prior to September 7, 2011, Green Bankshares conducted its business primarily through its wholly-owned subsidiary, GreenBank (together with its predecessor entities prior to, and successor entities following the Bank Merger (as defined below), the “Bank”). As described in additional detail in Note 3, on September 7, 2011 (the “Merger Date”), the Bank merged (the “Bank Merger”) with and into Capital Bank, National Association (“Capital Bank, NA”), a subsidiary of our majority shareholder, Capital Bank Financial Corp. (“CBF”), in an all-stock transaction, with Capital Bank, NA as used herein refer tothe surviving entity. Green Bankshares’ approximately 34% ownership interest in Capital Bank, NA is recorded as an equity-method investment in that entity. In addition, five of the seven directors of Green Bankshares, and the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Risk Officer are affiliated with CBF. Through our branches, we offer a wide range of commercial and consumer loans and deposits, as well as ancillary financial services.

Unless otherwise specified, this report describes Green Bankshares, Inc. and its subsidiaries including GreenBank which we sometimes referthrough the Merger Date, and subsequent to as “GreenBank,” “the Bank” or “our Bank”.

that date, includes only Green Bankshares, Inc.
WeInc, and its equity method investment in Capital Bank, NA.

CBF Investment

On September 7, 2011, (the “Transaction Date”) the Company completed the issuance and sale to CBF of 119.9 million shares of Common Stock to CBF for aggregate consideration of $217,019,000 less $750 thousand of CBF’s expenses which were reimbursed by the Company.

The consideration was comprised of approximately $147.6 million in cash and approximately $68.7 million in the form of a contribution to the Company of all 72,278 outstanding shares of Series A Preferred Stock previously issued to the United States Department of the Treasury under the TARP Capital Purchase Program and the related warrant to purchase shares of the Company’s Common Stock, which CBF purchased directly from the Treasury. The Series A Preferred Stock and the related warrant were retired on September 7, 2011 and are no longer outstanding. In connection with the third-largest bank holding company headquarteredCBF Investment, each Company shareholder as of September 6, 2011 received on contingent value right per share (“CVR”) that entitles the holder to receive up to $0.75 in Tennessee,cash per CVR at the end of a five-year period based on the credit performance of GreenBank’s then existing loan portfolio as of May 5, 2011.

As a result of the CBF Investment, CBF owns approximately 90% of the issued and outstanding voting power of the Company. Upon the completion of the Investment, R. Eugene Taylor (Chairman), Christopher G. Marshall, Peter N. Foss, William A. Hodges and R. Bruce Singletary were named to board of directors of the Company (the “Company Board”). Ms. Martha M. Bachman and Dr. Samuel E. Lynch, existing members of the Company Board, remained as such following the closing of the Investment. All other members of the Company Board resigned effective September 7, 2011.

4


Because of the controlling proportion of voting securities in the Company acquired by CBF, the CBF Investment is considered an acquisition for accounting purposes and requires the application and push down of the acquisition method of accounting. The accounting guidance for acquisition accounting requires that the assets acquired and liabilities assumed be recorded at their respective fair values as of the acquisition date. Any purchase price in excess of the net assets acquired is recorded as goodwill.

The most significant fair value adjustments resulting from the application of the acquisition method of accounting were made to loans. Accounting guidance requires that all loans held by the Company on the Transaction Date be recorded at their fair value. The fair value of these acquired loans takes into account both the differences in loan interest rates and market rates and any deterioration in their credit quality. Because concerns about the probability of receiving the full amount of the contractual payments from the borrowers was considered in estimating the fair value of the loans, stating the loans at their fair value results in no allowance for loan loss being provided for these loans as of the Transaction Date. As of September 7, 2011, certain loans had evidence of credit deterioration since origination, and it was probable that not all contractually required principal and interest payments would be collected. Such loans identified at the time of the acquisition were accounted for using the measurement provision for purchased credit-impaired (“PCI”) loans, according to the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 310-30. The special accounting for PCI loans not only requires that they are recorded at fair value at the date of acquisition and that any related allowance for loan and lease losses is not permitted to be carried forward past the Transaction Date, but it also governs how interest income will be recognized on these loans and how any further deterioration in credit quality after the Transaction Date will be recognized and reported.

As a result of the adjustments required by the acquisition method of accounting, the Company’s balance sheet and results of operations from periods prior to the Transaction Date are labeled as Predecessor Company amounts and are not comparable to balances and results of operations from periods subsequent to the Transaction Date, which are labeled as Successor Company. The lack of comparability arises from the assets and liabilities having new accounting bases as a result of recording them at their fair values as of the Transaction Date rather than at their historical cost basis. As a result of the change in accounting bases, items of income and expense such as the rate of interest income and expense as well as depreciation and rental expense will change. In general, these changes in income and expense relate to the amortization of premiums or accretion of discounts to arrive at contractual amounts due. To call attention to this lack of comparability, the Company has placed a black line between the Successor Company and Predecessor Company columns in the Consolidated Financial Statements and in the tables in the notes to the statements and in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

GreenBank Merger with $2.4 billionCapital Bank, NA

On September 7, 2011, GreenBank, which was formerly a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, merged with and into Capital Bank, NA, a national banking association and subsidiary of TIB Financial Corp. (the “TIB Financial”), a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Florida, Capital Bank Corporation, a corporation organized under the laws of the state of North Carolina (“Capital Bank Corp.”) and CBF, with Capital Bank, NA as the surviving entity. CBF is the owner of approximately 90% of the Company’s common stock, approximately 83% of Capital Bank Corp’s common stock and approximately 94% of TIB Financial’s common stock. TIB Bank, the former wholly-owned banking subsidiary of TIB Financial, merged with and into Capital Bank, NA (formerly known as NAFH National Bank) on April 29, 2011. Capital Bank, the former wholly-owned banking subsidiary of Capital Bank Corp. merged with and into Capital Bank, NA (formerly known as NAFH National Bank) on June 30, 2011.

At December 31, 2011, the Company’s net investment of $315.3 million in Capital Bank, NA, was recorded in the Consolidated Balance Sheet as “Equity method investment in Capital Bank, NA” which represented the Company’s pro rata ownership of Capital Bank, NA’s total shareholders’ equity. In periods subsequent to the Merger Date, the Company has and will adjust this equity investment balance based on its equity in Capital Bank, NA’s net income and comprehensive income. In connection with the Bank Merger, assets and liabilities of the Bank were de-consolidated from the Company’s balance sheet resulting in a significant decrease in the total assets and total liabilities of the Company in the third quarter of 2011. Accordingly, as of December 31, 2010. Incorporated2011, no investments, loans or deposits are reported on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet and subsequent to the Merger Date, interest expense is the result of the outstanding trust preferred securities issued by the Company.

Capital Bank, NA was formed in 1985,connection with the July 16, 2010 purchase and assumption of assets and deposits and other liabilities of three banks (collectively, the “FDIC Banks”) – Metro Bank of Dade County (Miami, Florida), Turnberry Bank (Aventura, Florida) and First National Bank of the South (Spartanburg, South Carolina) (collectively, the “Failed Banks”) – from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) and is a party to loss sharing agreements with the FDIC covering the large majority of the loans it acquired from the FDIC. As of December 31, 2011, following the mergers of TIB Bank, Capital Bank and GreenBank, as discussed above, Capital Bank, NA had total assets of $6.5 billion, total deposits of $5.1 billion and shareholders’ equity of $939.8 million. As of December 31, 2011, following the mergers of TIB Bank, Capital Bank and GreenBank as discussed above, Capital Bank, NA operated 143 branches in Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia.

5


Potential Merger of Green Bankshares and Capital Bank Financial Corp.

On September 8, 2011, CBF’s Board of Directors approved and adopted a plan of merger which provides for the merger of Green Bankshares, Inc. with and into CBF, with CBF continuing as the surviving entity (the “Merger”). In the merger, each share of Green Bankshares, Inc. common stock issued and outstanding immediately prior to the completion of the merger, except for certain shares held by CBF or Green Bankshares, Inc., will be converted into the right to receive .0915 of a share of CBF Class A common stock. No fractional share of Class A common stock will be issued in connection with the merger, and holders of Green Bankshares, Inc. common stock will be entitled to receive cash in lieu thereof. Since CBF currently owns more than 90% of the common stock of Green Bankshares, Inc., under Delaware and Tennessee law, no vote of our stockholders is required to complete the merger. CBF will determine when and if the merger will ultimately take place.

Consent Order

During the third quarter of 2011, the FDIC and the Tennessee Department of Financial Institutions (“TDFI”) issued a consent order against the Bank aimed at strengthening the Bank’s operations and its financial condition. The order’s provisions included requirements similar to those that the Bank has already informally committed to comply with, including requirements to maintain the Bank’s capital ratios above those levels required to be considered “well-capitalized” under federal banking regulations. The Consent Order terminated on September 7, 2011 when GreenBank was merged with and into Capital Bank, NA.

Capital Bank’s Business Strategy

Our business strategy is to build a mid-sized regional bank by operating, integrating and growing our existing operations as well as to acquire other banks, including failed, underperforming and undercapitalized banks and other complementary assets. We believe recent and continuing dislocations in the southeastern U.S. banking industry have created an opportunity for us to create a mid-sized regional bank that will be able to realize greater economies of scale compared to smaller community banks while still providing more personalized, local service than larger-sized banks.

Operating Strategy

Our operating strategy emphasizes relationship banking focused on commercial and consumer lending and deposit gathering. We have organized operations under a line of business operating model, under which we have appointed experienced bankers to oversee loan and deposit production in each of our markets, while centralizing credit, finance, technology and operations functions. Our management team possesses significant executive-level leadership experience at Fortune 500 financial services companies, and we believe this experience is an important advantage in executing this regional, more focused, bank business model.

Organic Loan and Deposit Growth

The primary components of our operating strategy are to originate high-quality loans and low-cost customer deposits. Our executive management team has developed a hands-on operating culture focused on performance and accountability, with frequent and detailed oversight by executive management of key performance indicators. We have implemented a sales management system for our branches that is focused on growing loans and core deposits in each of our markets. We believe that this system holds loan officers and branch managers accountable for achieving loan production goals, which are subject to the conservative credit standards and disciplined underwriting practices that we have implemented as well as compliance, profitability and other standards that we monitor. We also believe that accountability is crucial to our results. Our executive management monitors production, credit quality and profitability measures on a quarterly, monthly, weekly and, in some cases, daily basis and provides ongoing feedback to our business unit leaders. During 2011, we originated $728.4 million of new commercial and consumer loans. During this period, the Bank we also grew its core deposits by $265.4 million (or 29.3%) annualized growth) excluding the initial increase in deposits resulting from CBF’s acquisitions of Capital Bank Corp. and Green Bankshares, Inc.

The current market conditions have forced many banks to focus internally, which we believe creates an opportunity for organic growth by strongly capitalized banks such as ourselves. We seek to grow our loan portfolio by offering personalized customer service, local market knowledge and a long-term perspective. We have selectively hired experienced loan officers with local market knowledge and existing client relationships. Additionally, our executive management team takes an active role in soliciting, developing and maintaining client relationships.

6


Efficiency and Cost Savings

Another key element of our strategy is to operate efficiently by carefully managing our cost structure and taking advantage of economies of scale afforded by our acquisitions to control operating costs. We have been able to reduce headcount by consolidating duplicative operations of the acquired banks and streamlining management. In addition, we expect to recognize additional cost savings now that we have fully integrated Green Bankshares, Inc., with the rest of CBF’s business. We plan to further improve efficiency by boosting the productivity of our sales force through our focus on accountability and employee incentives and through selective hiring of experienced loan officers with existing books of business.

To evaluate and control operating costs, we monitor certain performance metrics including our efficiency ratio, which equals total non-interest expenses divided by net revenues (net interest income plus non-interest income). Our efficiency ratio has been and is expected to continue to be significantly impacted by certain costs that follow acquisitions of financial institutions. Capital Bank’s efficiency ratio for 2011 was 69.6%, which was impacted by $7.6 million of conversion expenses due to integration of the acquired banks. Excluding the impact of these items, Capital Bank’s adjusted efficiency ratio for 2011 was 66.6%. The adjusted efficiency ratio is a non-GAAP measure which we believe provides investors with information useful in understanding our business and our operating efficiency. Comparison of our adjusted efficiency ratio with those of other companies may not be possible because other companies may calculate the adjusted efficiency ratio differently. The adjusted efficiency ratio, which equals adjusted non-interest expense (non-interest expense less conversion expense) divided by net revenues (net interest income plus non-interest income), for the twelve months ended December 31, 2011 is as follows:

Capital Bank, NA  Efficiency Ratio for the Twelve
Months Ended December 31, 2011
 

(Dollars in thousands)

  Non-adjusted  Adjusted 

Non-interest expense

  $163,710   $163,710  

Less: Conversion expense

   —      (7,620
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Non-interest expense, adjusted

  $163,710   $156,090  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net interest income

  $193,598   $193,598  

Non-interest income

   40,660    40,660  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net Revenue

  $234,258   $234,258  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Efficiency Ratio

   69.9  66.6

Capital Bank’s Acquisition and Integration Strategy

Acquisition and Integration Strategy

We seek acquisition opportunities consistent with our business strategy that we believe will produce attractive returns for our stockholders. We plan to pursue acquisitions that position us in southeastern U.S. markets with attractive demographics and business growth trends, expand our branch network in existing markets, increase our earnings power or enhance our suite of products. Our future acquisitions may include distressed assets sold by the FDIC or another seller where our operations, underwriting and servicing capabilities or management experience give us an advantage in evaluating and resolving the assets.

Our acquisition process begins with detailed research of target institutions and the markets they serve. We then draw on our management team’s extensive experience and network of industry contacts in the southeastern region of the United States. Our research and analytics team, led by our Chief of Investment Analytics and Research, maintains lists of priority targets for each of our markets. The team analyzes financial, accounting, tax, regulatory, demographic, transaction structures and competitive considerations for each target and prepares acquisition projections for review by our executive management team and Board of Directors.

As part of our diligence process in connection with potential acquisitions, we undertake a detailed portfolio- and loan-level analysis conducted by a team of experienced credit analysts led by our Chief Risk Officer. In addition, our executive management team engages the target management teams in active dialogue and personally conducts extensive on-site diligence at target branches.

7


Our executive management team has demonstrated success not only in acquiring financial institutions and combining them onto a common platform, but also in managing the integration of those financial institutions. Our management team develops integration plans prior to the closing of a given transaction that allows us to (1) reorganize the acquired institution’s management team under our line of business model immediately after closing; (2) implement our credit, risk and interest rate risk management, liquidity and compliance and governance policies and procedures; and (3) integrate our target’s technology and processing systems rapidly. Using our procedures, we have already integrated credit and operational policies across each of our acquisitions. We reorganized the management of the Failed Banks within three months of closing, and we merged their core processing systems with TIB Financial’s platform within six months. We also fully integrated legacy Capital Bank in July 2011 and GreenBank in February 2012.

Sound Risk Management

Sound risk management is an important element of our commercial/retail bank business model and is overseen by our Chief Risk Officer, Bruce Singletary, who has over 19 years of experience managing credit risk. Our credit risk policy, which has been implemented across our organization, establishes prudent underwriting guidelines, limits portfolio concentrations by geography and loan type and incorporates an independent loan review function. Mr. Singletary has created a special assets division with 35 employees to work out or dispose of legacy problem assets using a detailed process taking into account a borrower’s repayment capacity, available guarantees, collateral value, interest accrual and other factors. We believe our risk management policies establish conservative regulatory capital ratios, robust liquidity (including contingency planning), limitations on wholesale funding (including brokered CDs, holding company debt and advances from the FHLB), and restrictions on interest rate risk.

8


Our Competitive Strengths

Experienced and Respected Management Team with a Successful Track Record. Members of our executive management team and Board of Directors have served in executive leadership roles at Fortune 500 financial services companies, including Bank of America, Fifth Third Bancorp and Morgan Stanley. The executive management team has extensive experience overseeing commercial and consumer banking, mergers and acquisitions, systems integrations, technology, operations, credit and regulatory compliance. Many members of our executive management team are from the southeastern region of the United States and have an extensive network of contacts with banking executives, existing and potential customers, and business and civic leaders throughout the region. We believe our executive management team’s reputation and track record give us an advantage in negotiating acquisitions and hiring and retaining experienced bankers.

Growth-Oriented Business Model. Our executive management team seeks to foster a strong sales culture with a focus on developing key client relationships, including direct participation in sales calls, and through regular reporting and accountability while emphasizing risk management. Our executive management and line of business executives monitor performance on a quarterly, monthly, weekly and in some cases daily basis, and our compensation plans reward core deposit and responsible commercial loan growth, subject to credit quality, compliance and profitability standards. We have an integrated, scalable core processing platform and centralized credit, finance and technology operations that we believe will support future growth. Our business model contributed to the Bank’s $728.4 million of commercial and consumer loan originations and $265.4 million in total deposit growth for 2011, excluding the initial increase in deposits resulting CBF’s acquisitions of Capital Bank Corporation and Green Bankshares, Inc.

Highly Skilled and Disciplined Acquirer. CBF has executed six acquisitions in just 14 months. CBF integrated its first four investments into a common core processing platform within six months, integrated the fifth in July 2011 and the sixth in February 2012. We believe our track record of completing and integrating transactions quickly has helped us negotiate transactions on more economically favorable terms. CBF has conducted due diligence on more than 82 financial institutions, many of which its diligence process indicated would not meet its strategic objectives.

Reduced-Risk Legacy Portfolio. Our acquired loan portfolios have been marked-to-market with the application of the acquisition method of accounting, meaning that the carrying value of these assets at the time of their acquisitions reflected our estimate of lifetime credit losses. In addition, as of December 31, 2011, approximately 13% of our loan portfolio was covered by the loss sharing agreements we entered into with the FDIC, resulting in limited credit risk exposure for these assets.

Excess Capital and Liquidity. As a result of its private placements and the disciplined deployment of capital, CBF has ample capital with which to make acquisitions. As of December 31, 2011, CBF had a 13.2% tangible common equity ratio (which is a non-GAAP measure used by certain regulators, financial analysts and others to measure core capital strength) and a 12.6% Tier 1 leverage ratio, which provides CBF with $165.9 million in excess capital relative to the 10% Tier 1 leverage standard required under Capital Bank’s operating agreement with the OCC. As of December 31, 2011, Capital Bank had a 10.4% Tier 1 leverage ratio, a 15.7% Tier 1 risk-based ratio and a 16.7% total risk-based capital ratio. As of December 31, 2011, Capital Bank had cash and securities equal to 21.6% of total assets, representing $427.3 million of liquidity in excess of our target of 15%, which provides ample liquidity to support our existing banking franchises. Further, our investment portfolio consists primarily of U.S. agency-guaranteed mortgage-backed securities, which have limited credit or liquidity risk. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources” for a discussion of the use of the tangible common equity ratio in our business and the reconciliation of tangible common equity ratio.

Scalable Back-Office Systems. All of CBF’s acquired institutions operate on a single information processing system. Our systems are designed to accommodate all of our projected future growth and allow us to offer our customers virtually all of the services currently offered by the nation’s largest financial institutions, including state-of-the-art online banking. Enhancements made to our systems are included to improve our commercial and consumer loan origination, electronic banking and direct response marketing processes, as well as enhance cash management, streamlined reporting, reconciliation support and sales support.

Our Market Area

We view our market area as the southeastern region of the United States. Our six acquisitions have established a footprint defined by the Miami-Raleigh-Nashville triangle, which includes the Carolinas, Southwest Florida (Naples) and Southeast Florida (Miami-Dade and the Keys). These markets include a combination of large and fast-growing metropolitan areas that we believe will offer us opportunities for organic loan and deposit growth. Approximately 47% of our current branches are located in our target MSAs.

9


Products and Services

Banking Services by Business Line

Capital Bank has integrated each of CBF’s six acquisitions under a single line of business operating model. Under this model, we have appointed experienced bankers to oversee loan and deposit growth in each of our markets, while we have centralized other functions, including credit, finance, operations, marketing, human resources and information technology.

The Commercial Bank

Our commercial bank business consists of teams of commercial loan officers operating under the leadership of commercial banking executives in Florida the Carolinas and Tennessee markets. The commercial banking executives are responsible for production goals for loans, deposits and fees. They work with senior credit officers to ensure that loan production is consistent with our loan policies and with financial officers to ensure that loan pricing is consistent with our profitability goals. We focus our commercial bank business on loan originations for established small and middle-market businesses with whom we develop personal relationships that we believe give us a competitive advantage and differentiates us from larger banking institutions. In addition, our commercial lending teams coordinate with personnel in our consumer bank business to provide personal loans and other services to the owners and managers and employees of the bank’s commercial clients. At December 31, 2011, commercial loans totaled $2.9 billion (or 67.0% of our total loan portfolio). Commercial underwriting is driven by cash flow analysis supported by collateral analysis and review. Our commercial lending teams offer a wide range of commercial loan products, including:

owner occupied commercial real estate construction and term loans;

working capital loans and lines of credit;

demand, term and time loans; and

equipment, inventory and accounts receivable financing.

During 2011, Capital Bank originated $561.8 million of new commercial loans. Our commercial lending teams also seek to gather low-cost deposits from commercial customers in connection with extending credit. In addition to business demand, savings and money market accounts, we also provide specialized cash management services and deposit products.

The Consumer Bank

Our consumer bank business consists of Capital Bank’s retail banking branches and associated businesses. Similar to our commercial bank business, we have organized the consumer bank by geographical market, with divisions consisting of our Florida, Carolina and Tennessee branches. Each division reports to a consumer banking executive responsible for achieving core deposit and consumer loan growth goals. Pricing of our deposit products is reviewed and approved by our asset-liability committee and the standards for consumer loan credit quality are documented in our loan policy and reviewed by our credit executives.

We seek to differentiate our consumer bank business from competitors through the personalized service offered by our branch managers, customer service representatives, tellers and other staff. We offer various services to meet the needs of our customers, including checking, savings and money market accounts, certificates of deposit and debit and credit cards. Our products are designed to foster relationships by rewarding our best customers for desirable activities such as debit card transactions, e-statements and direct deposit. In addition to traditional products and services, we offer competitive technology in Internet banking services, which we plan to further upgrade in order to keep pace with technological improvements. Consumer loan products we offer include:

home equity lines of credit;

residential first lien mortgages;

second lien mortgages;

new and used auto loans;

new and used boat loans;

10


overdraft protection; and

unsecured personal credit lines.

Branch managers and their staff are charged with growing core deposits with a special focus on new demand deposit accounts and expected to conduct outbound telephone campaigns, generate qualified referrals, collaborate with business partners in the commercial lending teams and evaluate, and make informed decisions with respect to, existing and prospective customers. In 2011, the Bank generated organic core deposit growth of $265.4 million (or 29.3% annualized growth) excluding the initial increase in deposits resulting from the acquisitions of Capital Bank Corporation and Green Bankshares, Inc. As of December 31, 2011, consumer loans totaled $1.4 billion. During 2011, the Bank originated $166.6 million of new consumer loans.

Ancillary Fee-Based Businesses

Mortgage Banking

Through our newly established mortgage banking business, we aim to originate high-quality loans for customers who are willing to establish a deposit relationship with us. The mortgage loans in our portfolio that do not meet this criteria are sold in to the secondary market to buyers, such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and provide an additional source of fee income. Our mortgage banking capabilities include conventional and nonconforming mortgage underwriting and construction and permanent financing.

Private Banking, Trust and Investment Management

We offer private banking and wealth management services to affluent clients, business owners and retirees, building new relationships and expanding existing relationships to grow deposits, loans and fiduciary and investment management fee income. Through private banking, we offer deposit products, commercial and consumer loans, including mortgage financing, and investment accounts providing access to a wide range of mutual funds, annuities and other financial products, as well as access to our affiliate, Naples Capital Advisors, which is a registered investment advisor with approximately $102 million in assets under management as of December 31, 2011.

Lending Activities

We originate a variety of loans, including loans secured by real estate, loans for construction, loans for commercial purposes, loans to individuals for personal and household purposes, loans to municipalities and loans for new and used cars. A significant portion of our loan portfolio is related to real estate. As of December 31, 2011, loans related to real estate totaled $3.7 billion (or 86% of our total loan portfolio). The economic trends in the regions we serve are influenced by the industries within those regions. Consistent with our emphasis on being a community-oriented financial institution, most of our lending activity is with customers located in and around counties in which we have banking offices. As of December 31, 2011, our owner occupied commercial real estate loans, non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans, residential mortgage loans and commercial and industrial loans represented 21%, 21%, 19% and 11%, respectively, of our $4.3 billion loan portfolio.

We use a centralized risk management process to ensure uniform credit underwriting that adheres to our loan policies as approved annually by the CBF Board of Directors. Lending policies are reviewed on a regular basis to confirm that we are prudent in setting underwriting criteria. Credit risk is managed through a number of methods, including a loan approval process that establishes consistent procedures for the processing and approval of loan requests, risk grading of all commercial loans and certain consumer loans and coding of all loans by purpose, class and collateral type. We seek to focus on underwriting loans that enhance a balanced, diversified portfolio. Management analyzes our commercial real estate concentrations by market and region on a regular basis in an attempt to prevent overexposure to any one type of commercial real estate loan and incorporates third-party real estate and market analysis to monitor market conditions. As of December 31, 2011, the carrying value of our commercial real estate loans in North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Tennessee and Virginia totaled $699.2 million, $303.6 million, $794.4 million, $596.0 million and $15.8 million, respectively. At December 31, 2011, commercial real estate loans in all regions totaled $2.4 billion (21% of which was owner occupied commercial real estate). We have recently tightened underwriting and pricing standards for indirect auto and residential mortgage lending and de-emphasized originations of commercial real estate mortgages.

We believe that early detection of potential credit problems through regular contact with our clients, coupled with consistent reviews of the borrowers’ financial condition, are important factors in overall credit risk management. Our approach to proactively manage credit quality is to aggressively work with customers for whom a problem loan has been identified and assist in resolving issues before a default occurs.

A key component of our growth strategy is to grow our loan portfolio by originating high-quality commercial and consumer loans, other than non-owner occupied real estate loans, that comply with our conservative credit policies and that produce revenues consistent with our financial objectives. From December 31, 2010 to December 31, 2011, the Bank’s loan portfolio grew organically by $107.9 million (or 6.2%

11


annualized growth), excluding the initial increase in deposits resulting from the acquisitions of Capital Bank Corporation and Green Bankshares, Inc., with $728.4 million in new originations partially offset by pay-downs, dispositions and charge-offs. Additionally, we are working to reduce excessive concentrations in commercial real estate, which characterized our acquisitions’ legacy portfolios, in order to achieve a more diversified portfolio. It is our long-term goal to reduce the commercial real estate concentration to approximately 20% of our total loan portfolio.

In addition, we operate an indirect auto lending business which originates loans for new and used cars through relationships with dealers in Southwest Florida, Southeast Florida, the Florida Keys and Tennessee. Loans are approved subject to review of FICO credit scores, vehicle age, and loan-to-value. We are in the process of implementing an expert scoring model which will include additional proprietary underwriting factors. We set pricing for loans based on credit score, vehicle age, and loan term. As of December 31, 2011, we had $87.2 million of indirect auto loans.

Deposits

Deposits are the primary source of funds for lending and investing activities and their cost is the parentlargest category of GreenBank (the “Bank”)interest expense. Deposits are attracted principally from clients within our branch network through the offering of a wide selection of deposit instruments to individuals and owns 100%businesses, including non-interest-bearing checking accounts, interest-bearing checking accounts, savings accounts, money market deposit accounts, certificates of deposit and individual retirement accounts. We are focused on reducing our reliance on high-cost certificates of deposit as a source of funds with low-cost deposit accounts. Deposit account terms vary with respect to the minimum balance required, the time period the funds must remain on deposit and service charge schedules. Interest rates paid on specific deposit types are determined based on (1) the interest rates offered by competitors, (2) the anticipated amount and timing of funding needs, (3) the availability and cost of alternative sources of funding and (4) the anticipated future economic conditions and interest rates. Client deposits are attractive sources of funding because of their stability and relatively low cost. Deposits are regarded as an important part of the capital stockoverall client relationship and provide opportunities to cross-sell other services. In addition, we gather a portion of our deposit base through brokered deposits. At December 31, 2011, total deposits were $5.1 billion of which $5.0 billion (or 97%) were non-brokered deposits and $143.1 million (or 3%) were brokered deposits. At December 31, 2011, our core deposits (total deposits less time deposits) consisted of $683.3 million of non-interest checking accounts, $1.1 billion of negotiable order of withdrawal accounts, $296.4 million of savings accounts and $868.4 million of money market deposits. For the foreseeable future, we remain focused on retaining and growing a strong deposit base and transitioning certain of our customers to low-cost banking services as high-cost funding sources, such as high-interest certificates of deposit, mature.

Investing Activities

Investment securities represent a significant portion of Capital Bank, NA’s assets. The Bank invests in securities as allowable under bank regulations. These securities include obligations of the U.S. Treasury, U.S. government agencies, U.S. government-sponsored entities, including mortgage-backed securities, bank eligible obligations of any state or political subdivision, privately-issued mortgage-backed securities, bank eligible corporate obligations, mutual funds and limited types of equity securities. Our investment activities are governed internally by a written, Board-approved policy. The investment policy is carried out by the Bank’s Asset-Liability Committee (“ALCO”), which meets regularly to review the economic environment and establish investment strategies.

Investment strategies are reviewed by ALCO based on the interest rate environment, balance sheet mix, actual and anticipated loan demand, funding opportunities and the overall interest rate sensitivity of the Bank. In general, the investment portfolio is managed in a manner appropriate to the attainment of the following goals: (i) to provide a sufficient margin of liquid assets to meet unanticipated deposit and loan fluctuations and overall funds management objectives; (ii) to provide eligible securities to secure public funds and other borrowings; and (iii) to earn the maximum return on funds invested that is commensurate with meeting the requirements of (i) and (ii).

Marketing

Our marketing activities support all of our products and services described above. Historically, most of our marketing efforts have supported our real estate mortgage, commercial and retail banking businesses. Our marketing strategy aims to:

capitalize on our personal relationship approach, which we believe differentiates us from our larger competitors in both the commercial and residential mortgage lending businesses;

meet our growth objectives based on current economic and market conditions;

attract core deposits held in checking, savings, money market and certificate of deposit accounts;

provide customers with access to our local executives;

appeal to customers in our region who value quality banking products and personal service;

12


pursue commercial and industrial lending opportunities with small to mid-sized businesses that are underserved by our larger competitors;

cross-sell our products and services to our existing customers to leverage our relationships, grow fee income and enhance profitability;

utilize existing industry relationships cultivated by our senior management team; and

adhere to safe and sound credit standards.

We use a variety of targeted marketing media including the Internet, print, direct mail and financial newsletters. Our online marketing activities include paid advertising, as well as cross-sale marketing through our website and Internet banking services. We believe our marketing strategy will enable us to take advantage of lower average customer acquisition costs, build valuable brand awareness and lower our funding costs.

Information Technology Systems

We have made and continue to make investments in our information technology systems for our banking and lending operations and cash management activities. We seek to integrate our acquisitions quickly and successfully and believe this is a necessary investment in order to enhance our capabilities to offer new products and overall customer experience and to provide scale for future growth and acquisitions. Our enhancements are tailored to improve our commercial and consumer loan origination, electronic banking and direct response marketing processes, as well as enhance cash management, streamlined reporting, reconciliation support and sales support. We work closely with certain third-party service providers to which we outsource certain of our systems and infrastructure. We use the Jack Henry SilverLake System as our banking platform and believe that the scalability of our infrastructure will support our growth strategy and that this platform will support our growth needs.

Competition

The financial services industry in general and our primary markets of South Florida, Tennessee and the Carolinas are highly competitive. We compete actively with national, regional and local financial services providers, including banks, thrifts, credit unions, mortgage bankers and finance companies, money market mutual funds and other financial institutions, some of which are not subject to the same degree of regulation and restrictions imposed upon us. Our largest competitors include Bank of America, Wells Fargo, BB&T, First Citizens, Royal Bank of Canada, SunTrust, Regions, FNB United Corp., Toronto-Dominion, Synovus, First Financial, SCBT, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, EverBank, Fifth Third Bancorp, First Horizon, Pinnacle Financial, First South and U.S. Bancorp.

Competition among providers of financial products and services continues to increase, with consumers having the opportunity to select from a growing variety of traditional and nontraditional alternatives. The primary factors driving commercial and consumer competition for loans and deposits are interest rates, the fees charged, customer service levels and the range of products and services offered. In addition, other competitive factors include the location and hours of our branches and customer service.

Employees

At December 31, 2011, Capital Bank had over 1,375 full-time employees and 165 part-time employees. None of our employees are parties to a collective bargaining agreement. We consider our relationship with our employees to be adequate.

Facilities and Real Estate

Capital Bank currently leases approximately 263,000 square feet of office and operations space in North Carolina, Florida and South Carolina. We operate 35 branches in Florida, 31 in North Carolina, 13 in South Carolina, 63 in Tennessee and one in Virginia. Of these branches, 42 were leased and the rest were owned. In addition, the Company owns approximately 110,000 and leases approximately 100,000 square feet of non-branch office space. Management believes the terms of the various leases are consistent with market standards and were arrived at through arm’s-length bargaining.

Related Person Transactions

Certain of the directors and executive officers of Capital Bank, NA, members of their immediate families and entities with which they are involved are customers of and borrowers from the Bank. As of December 31, 2011, total loans outstanding to directors and executive officers of the Bank, and their associates as a group, equaled approximately $13.1 million. All outstanding loans and commitments included in such transactions were made in the ordinary course of business, on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral, as those prevailing at the time in comparable transactions with persons not related to the Bank, and did not involve more than the normal risk of collectability or present other unfavorable features.

13


Due to the Bank Merger, the Company reported no loans or deposits on its Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2011.

SUPERVISION AND REGULATION

The U.S. banking industry is highly regulated under federal and state law. These regulations affect the operations of the Company and its subsidiaries. Investors should understand that the primary objectives of the U.S. bank regulatory regime are the protection of depositors and consumers and maintaining the stability of the U.S. financial system, and not the protection of stockholders.

As a bank holding company, we are subject to supervision and regulation by the Federal Reserve. Our national bank subsidiary (which will be our sole bank subsidiary following the reorganization) is operatingsubject to supervision and regulation by the Bank.

OCC, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (which we refer to as the “CFPB”) and the FDIC. In addition, we expect that the additional businesses that we may invest in or acquire will be regulated by various state and/or federal regulators, including the OCC, the Federal Reserve, the CFPB and the FDIC.

The description below summarizes certain elements of the applicable bank regulatory framework. This description is not intended to describe all laws and regulations applicable to us and our subsidiaries. Banking statutes, regulations and policies are continually under review by Congress and state legislatures and federal and state regulatory agencies and changes in them, including changes in how they are interpreted or implemented, could have material effects on our business. In addition to laws and regulations, state and federal bank regulatory agencies may issue policy statements, interpretive letters and similar written guidance applicable to us and our subsidiaries. These issuances also may affect the conduct of our business or impose additional regulatory obligations. The description is qualified in its entirety by reference to the full text of the statutes, regulations, policies, interpretive letters and other written guidance that are described.

Bank Holding Company Regulations

Any entity that acquires direct or indirect control of a bank must obtain prior approval of the Federal Reserve to become a bank holding company pursuant to the BHCA. As a bank holding company, we are subject to regulation under the BHCA and to examination, supervision and enforcement by the Board of Governors ofFederal Reserve. While subjecting us to supervision and regulation, we believe that being a bank holding company (as opposed to a non-controlling investor) broadens the investment opportunities available to us among public and private financial institutions, failing and distressed financial institutions, seized assets and deposits and FDIC auctions. Federal Reserve System,jurisdiction also extends to any company that is directly or the Federal Reserve Board (the “FRB”). We are required to file reports with the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (the “FRB-Atlanta”) and are subject to regular examinationsindirectly controlled by that agency. Shares of our common stock are traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the trading symbol “GRNB.”

At December 31, 2010, the Company maintained a main office in Greeneville, Tennessee and 64 full-service bank branches (of which eleven are leased operating premises), a location for mortgage banking and nine separate locations operated by the Bank’s subsidiaries.
The Company’s assets consist primarily of its investment in the Bank and liquid investments. Its primary activities are conducted through the Bank. At December 31, 2010, the Company’s consolidated total assets were $2,406,040, its consolidated net loans were $1,745,378, its total deposits were $1,976,854 and its total shareholders’ equity was $143,897.
The Company’s net income, or net loss, is dependent primarily on the earnings, or loss, of its wholly-owned subsidiary, GreenBank and its level of net income, or net loss. GreenBank’s net income, or net loss, is dependent upon its level of net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income earned on its loansholding company, such as subsidiaries and other interest-earning assetscompanies in which the bank holding company makes a controlling investment.

Statutes, regulations and the interest paidpolicies could restrict our ability to diversify into other areas of financial services, acquire depository institutions and make distributions or pay dividends on deposits and other interest-bearing liabilities plus the Bank’s non-interest income, the sum of which is either partially, or fully, offset by the amount of the Bank’s loan loss provision plus the Bank’s total operating expenses.

Lending Activities:
General:The Bank’s lending activities reflect its community banking philosophy, emphasizing secured loans to individuals and businesses in its primary market areas.
Commercial Real Estate Lending:Commercial real estate loans are loans originated by the Bank that are secured by commercial real estate and includes commercial real estate construction loans to developers, mainly to borrowers based in its primary markets.
Residential Real Estate Lending:The Bank originates traditional one-to-four family, owner occupied, residential mortgages secured by property located in its primary market area. Further detail on consumer residential real estate lending may be found on page 7 of this report.

2


Commercial Business Lending:Commercial business loans are loans originated by the Bank that are generally secured by various types of business assets including inventory, receivables, equipment, financial instruments and commercial real estate. In limited cases, loans may be made on an unsecured basis. Commercial business loans are used for a variety of purposes including working capital and financing the purchase of equipment.
The Bank concentrates on originating commercial business loans to middle-market companies with borrowing requirements of less than $25 million. Substantially all of the Bank’s commercial business loans outstanding at December 31, 2010, were to borrowers based in its primary markets.
Consumer Lending:The Bank makes consumer loans for personal, family or household purposes, such as debt consolidation, automobiles, vacations and education. Consumer lending loans are typically secured by personal property but may also be unsecured personal loans.our equity securities. They may also be made on a revolving line of credit or fixed-term basis.
Investment Activities:
The Bank has authorityrequire us to invest in various types of liquid assets, including U.S. Treasury obligations and securities of various federal agencies and U.S. Government sponsored enterprises, deposits of insured banks and federal funds. The Bank’s investments do not include commercial paper, asset-backed commercial paper, asset-backed securities secured by credit cards, or car loans. The Bank also does not participate in structured investment vehicles. Liquidity may increase or decrease depending upon the availability of funds and comparative yields on investments in relationprovide financial support to the returns on loans and leases. The Bank must also meet reserve requirements of the FRB, which are imposed based on amounts on deposit in various deposit categories.
Sources of Funds:
Deposits:Deposits are the primary source of the Bank’s funds for use in lending and for other general business purposes. Deposit inflows and outflows are significantly influenced by economic and competitive conditions, interest rates, money market conditions and other factors, including depositor confidence. Consumer, small business and commercial deposits are attracted principally from within the Bank’s primary market areas through the offering of a broad selection of deposit instruments including consumer, small business and commercial demand deposit accounts, interest-bearing checking accounts, money market accounts, regular savings accounts, certificates of deposit and retirement savings plans.
The Bank’s marketing strategy emphasizes attracting core deposits held in checking, savings, money- market and certificate of deposit accounts. These accounts are a source of low-interest cost funds and in some cases, provide significant fee income. The composition of the Bank’s deposits has a significant impact on the overall cost of funds. At December 31, 2010, interest-bearing deposits comprised 92% of total deposits, as compared with 91% at December 31, 2009.
Borrowings:Borrowings may be used to compensate for reductions in deposit inflows or net deposit outflows, or to support expanded lending activities. These borrowings include Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances, repurchase agreements, federal funds and other borrowings.
The Bank, as a member of the FHLB system, is required to own a minimum level of FHLB stock and is authorized to apply for advances on the security of such stock, mortgage-backed securities, loans secured by real estate and other assets (principally securities which are obligations of, or guaranteed by, the United States Government), provided certain standards related to creditworthiness have been met. FHLB advances are made pursuant to several different credit programs. Each credit program has its own interest rates and range of maturities. The FHLB prescribes the acceptable uses to which the advances pursuant to each program may be made as well as limitations on the size of advances. In addition to the program limitations, the amounts of advances for which an institution may be eligible are generally based on the FHLB’s assessment of the institution’s creditworthiness.

3


As an additional source of funds, the Bank may sell securities subject to its obligation to repurchase these securities (repurchase agreements) with major customers utilizing government securities or mortgage-backed securities as collateral. Generally, securities with a valueany bank that we control, maintain capital balances in excess of the amount borrowed are required to be maintainedthose desired by management and pay higher deposit insurance premiums as collateral to a repurchase agreement.
Information concerning the Bank’s FHLB advances, repurchase agreements, junior subordinated notes (trust preferred) and other borrowings is set forth in “Management’s Discussion and Analysisresult of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources” and in Note 8 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
We are significantly impacted by prevailing economic conditions, competition and the monetary, fiscal and regulatory policies of governmental agencies. Lending activities are influenced by thea general credit needs of individuals and small and medium-sized businessesdeterioration in the Company’s market areas, competition among lenders,financial condition of Capital Bank or other depository institutions we control. They may also limit the level of interest ratesfees and the availability of funds. Deposit flows and costs of funds are influenced by prevailing market rates of interest, primarily the rates paid on competing funding alternatives, account maturities and the levels of personal income and savings in the Company’s market areas.
Our principal executive offices are located at 100 North Main Street, Greeneville, Tennessee 37743-4992 and our telephone number at these offices is (423) 639-5111. Our internet address iswww.greenbankusa.com. Please note that our website is providedprices Capital Bank charges for its consumer services.

14


Capital Bank, N.A. as an inactive textual reference and the information on our website is not incorporated by reference herein.

GreenBank and its Subsidiaries
Oura National Bank

Capital Bank is a Tennessee-chartered commercialnational bank established in 1890 which hasand is subject to supervision (including regular examination) by its principal executive offices in Greeneville, Tennessee. The principal businessprimary banking regulator, the OCC. Retail operations of the Bank consists of attractingbank are also subject to supervision and regulation by the CFPB. Capital Bank’s deposits from the general public and investing those funds, together with funds generated from operations and from principal and interest payments on loans, primarily in commercial and residential real estate loans, commercial loans and installment consumer loans. At December 31, 2010, the Bank had 63 Tennessee-based full-service banking offices located in Greene, Blount, Cocke, Hamblen, Hawkins, Knox, Loudon, McMinn, Monroe, Sullivan, and Washington Counties in East Tennessee and in Davidson, Lawrence, Macon, Montgomery, Rutherford, Smith, Sumner and Williamson Counties in Middle Tennessee. The Bank also operates two other full service branches—one located in nearby Madison County, North Carolina and the other in nearby Bristol, Virginia. Further, the Bank operates a mortgage banking operation in Knox County, Tennessee.

Our Bank also offers other financial services through three wholly-owned subsidiaries. Through Superior Financial Services, Inc. (“Superior Financial”), the Bank operates eight consumer finance company offices located in Greene, Blount, Hamblen, Washington, Sullivan, Sevier, Knox and Bradley Counties, Tennessee. Through GCB Acceptance Corporation (“GCB Acceptance”), the Bank operates a sub-prime automobile lending company with a sole office in Johnson City, Tennessee. Through Fairway Title Co., the Bank operates a title company headquartered in Knox County, Tennessee. At December 31, 2010, these three subsidiaries had total combined assets of $42,995 and total combined loans, net of unearned interest and loan loss reserve, of $40,671.
As described in more detail below, deposits of our Bank are insured by the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) ofFDIC through the DIF up to applicable limits in the manner and extent provided by law. Capital Bank is subject to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”Act, as amended (which we refer to as the “FDI Act”). Our, and FDIC regulations relating to deposit insurance and may also be subject to supervision by the FDIC under certain circumstances.

OCC Operating Agreement and FDIC Order

Capital Bank is subject to comprehensive regulation, examination and supervision byspecific requirements pursuant to the Tennessee Department of Financial Institutions (the “TDFI”), the FRB and the FDIC.

Business Strategy
In 2011, the Company expects that its primary business strategy will be on managing through the current asset quality issues affecting the Company’s performance and strengthening the Company’s capital position, including, if necessary, through the issuance of additional equity securities. Accordingly, the Company expects that over the short term, given the current economic environment and high levels of nonperforming assets, there will be little to no loan growth until the current economic environment in the Company’s markets stabilizes and the economy begins to improve.

4


The Company’s intermediate term prospects depend principally on the Company’s ability to dealOCC Operating Agreement, which it entered into with the asset quality issues currently facing the Company and the Company’s ability to raise capitalOCC in amounts sufficient to allow the Company and the Bank to achieve capital levels in excess of those required by federal banking regulations and the informal commitments that the Bank has made to the TDFI and FDIC described in more detail below.
The Bank had historically operated under a single bank charter while conducting business under 18 bank brandsconnection with a distinct community-based brand in almost every market. On March 31, 2007 the Bank announced that it had changed all brand names to GreenBank throughout all the communities it serves to better enhance recognition and customer convenience. The Bank continues to offer local decision making through the presence of its regional executives in each of its markets, while maintaining a cost effective organizational structure in its back office and support areas.
The Bank focuses its lending efforts predominately on individuals and small to medium-sized businesses while it generates deposits primarily from individuals in its local communities. To aid in deposit generation efforts, the Bank offers its customers extended hours of operation during the week as well as Saturday and Sunday banking in many of its markets. The Bank also offers free online banking along with its High Performance Checking Program which since its inception has generated a significant number of core transaction accounts.
In addition to the Company’s business model, which is described herein, the Company is continuously investigating and analyzing other lines and areas of business. Conversely, the Company frequently evaluates and analyzes the profitability, risk factors and viability of its various business lines and segments and, depending upon the results of these evaluations and analyses, may conclude to exit certain segments and/or business lines. Further, in conjunction with these ongoing evaluations and analyses, the Company may decide to sell, merge or close certain branch facilities.
Lending Activities
General. The loan portfolioour acquisition of the Company is comprised of commercial real estate, residential real estate, commercial and consumer loans. Such loans are primarily originated within the Company’s market areas of East and Middle Tennessee and are generally secured by residential or commercial real estate or business or personal property located in its market footprint.
Loan Composition. Given the on-going challenging economic environment which began during the second half of 2007 as the recession emerged and the resulting precipitous decline in residential real estate construction values through 2010, the Company significantly reduced its commercial real estate concentration levels, as noted in the table below for each of the periods presented at December 31:
                     
  2010  2009  2008  2007  2006 
                     
Commercial real estate $1,080,805  $1,306,398  $1,430,225  $1,549,457  $921,190 
Residential real estate  378,783   392,365   397,922   398,779   281,629 
Commercial  222,927   274,346   315,099   320,264   258,998 
Consumer  75,498   83,382   89,733   97,635   87,111 
Other  1,913   2,117   4,656   3,871   2,203 
Unearned interest  (14,548)  (14,801)  (14,245)  (13,630)  (11,502)
                
Loans, net of unearned interest $1,745,378  $2,043,807  $2,223,390  $2,356,376  $1,539,629 
                
                     
Allowance for loan losses $(66,830) $(50,161) $(48,811) $(34,111) $(22,302)
                

5


In addition to the segment information listed above, the Company monitors commercial real estate speculative and construction by purpose code as noted in the loan migration table below for each of the periods presented:
Higher Risk Loan Migration Table:
                     
  2010  2009  2008  2007  2006 
                     
Speculative 1-4 family residential real estate                    
Acquisition and development $131,669  $185,087  $242,343  $285,592  $159,760 
Lot warehouse  42,796   66,104   79,555   104,201   64,429 
Commercial 1-4 family residential  31,511   70,434   160,786   279,680   134,390 
                
Sub-total  205,976   321,625   482,684   669,473   358,579 
                     
Construction                    
Commercial vacant land  77,081   101,679   103,160   69,298   37,461 
Commercial construction — non-owner occupied  63,881   164,887   144,344   157,374   80,032 
Commercial construction — owner occupied  5,407   28,213   55,305   58,814   37,515 
Consumer residential construction  14,161   19,073   27,632   38,231   25,279 
                
Sub-total  160,530   313,852   330,441   323,717   180,287 
                     
Total speculative and construction $366,506  $635,477  $813,125  $993,190  $538,866 
                
Loan Maturities.Failed Banks. The following table reflects at December 31, 2010 the dollar amount of loans maturing based on their contractual terms to maturity. Demand loans, loans having no stated schedule of repayments and loans having no stated maturity are reported as due in one year or less.
                 
  Due in One  Due After One Year  Due After    
  Year or Less  Through Five Years  Five Years  Total 
                 
Commercial real estate $437,374  $613,259  $30,172  $1,080,805 
Residential real estate(1)
  42,826   93,735   235,732   372,293 
Commercial  148,500   68,752   5,675   222,927 
Consumer(1)
  19,110   45,815   2,515   67,440 
Other  1,629   236   48   1,913 
             
Total $649,439  $821,797  $274,142  $1,745,378 
             
(1)Net of unearned interest
The following table sets forth the dollar amount of the loans maturing subsequent to the year ended December 31, 2011 distinguished between those with predetermined interest rates and those with floating, or variable, interest rates.
             
  Fixed Rate  Variable Rate  Total 
             
Commercial real estate $432,141  $211,290  $643,431 
Residential real estate  111,198   218,269   329,467 
Commercial  46,740   27,687   74,427 
Consumer  47,696   634   48,330 
Other  236   48   284 
          
Total $638,011  $457,928  $1,095,939 
          
Commercial Real Estate Loans. The Company has significantly curtailed the origination of residential real estate construction and development loans over the past three years as noted in the higher risk loan migration table above. The Company had historically originated commercial real estate loans, including residential real estate construction and development loans, generally to existing business customers, secured by real estate located in the Company’s market area. At December 31, 2010, commercial real estate loans totaled $1,080,805, or 62%, of the Company’s net loan portfolio. Commercial real estate loans were generally underwritten by addressing cash flow (debt service coverage), primary and secondary source of repayment,OCC Operating Agreement requires, among other things, that Capital Bank maintain various financial strength of any guarantor, and strength of the tenant (if any), liquidity, leverage, management experience, ownership structure, economic conditions and collateral. Generally, the Company would loan up to 80-85% of the value of improved property, 65% of the value of raw land and 75% of the value of land to be acquired and developed. A first lien on the property and assignment of lease is required if the collateral is rental property, with second lien positions considered on a case-by-case basis.

6


Residential Real Estate. The Company also originates one-to-four family, owner-occupied residential mortgage loans secured by property located in the Company’s primary market areas. The majority of the Company’s residential mortgage loans consists of loans secured by owner-occupied, single-family residences. At December 31, 2010, the Company had $378,783, or 21%, of its net loan portfolio in residential real estate loans, net of unearned income. Residential real estate loans generally have a loan-to-value ratio of 85% or less. These loans are underwritten by giving consideration to the ability to pay, stability of employment, source of income, credit history and loan-to-value ratio. Home equity loans make up approximately 52% of residential real estate loans. Home equity loans may have higher loan-to-value ratios when the borrower’s repayment capacity and credit history conform to underwriting standards. Superior Financial extends sub-prime mortgages to borrowers who generally have a higher risk of default than mortgages extended by the Bank. Sub-prime mortgages totaled $11,742, or 3%, of the Company’s residential real estate loans, net of unearned income, at December 31, 2010.
The Company sells most of its one-to-four family mortgage loans in the secondary market to Freddie Mac and other mortgage investors through the Bank’s mortgage banking operation. Sales of such loans to Freddie Mac and other mortgage investors totaled $47,881 and $43,050 during 2010 and 2009, respectively, and the related mortgage servicing rights were sold together with the loans. All mortgage loans sales are without recourse and all notes are endorsed to the investor stating without recourse. Certain contingencies do come into play for early prepayment or early payment defaults and would involve a refund of the yield spread premium earned on the transaction given certain events of default. During 2010, no refunds or events of default occurred.
Commercial Loans. Commercial loans are made for a variety of business purposes, including working capital, inventory and equipment and capital expansion. At December 31, 2010, commercial loans outstanding totaled $222,927, or 13%, ofratios and provide notice to, and obtain consent from, the Company’s net loan portfolio. Such loans are usually amortized over one to seven years and generally mature within five years. Commercial loan applications must be supported by current financial information on the borrower and, where appropriate, by adequate collateral. Commercial loans are generally underwritten by addressing cash flow (debt service coverage), primary and secondary sources of repayment, financial strength of any guarantor, liquidity, leverage, management experience, ownership structure, economic conditions and industry-specific trends and collateral. The loan to value ratio depends on the type of collateral. Generally speaking, accounts receivable are financed between 70% and 80% of accounts receivable less than 90 days past due. If other collateral is taken to support the loan, the loan to value of accounts receivable may approach 85%. Inventory financing will range between 50% and 60% depending on the borrower and nature of the inventory. The Company requires a first lien position for such loans. These types of loans are generally considered to be a higher credit risk than other loans originated by the Company.
Consumer Loans. At December 31, 2010, the Company’s consumer loan portfolio, net of unearned income, totaled $67,440, or 4%, of the Company’s total net loan portfolio. The Company’s consumer loan portfolio is composed of secured and unsecured loans originated by the Bank, Superior Financial and GCB Acceptance. The consumer loans of the Bank generally have a higher risk of default than other loans originated by the Bank. Further, consumer loans originated by Superior Financial and GCB Acceptance, which are finance companies rather than banks, generally have a greater risk of default than such loans originated by commercial banks and, accordingly, carry a higher interest rate. Superior Financial and GCB Acceptance consumer loans totaled approximately $32,194, or 48%, of the Company’s installment consumer loans, net of unearned income, at December 31, 2010. The performance of consumer loans will be affected by the local and regional economy as well as the rates of personal bankruptcies, job loss, divorce and other individual-specific characteristics.
Past Due, Special Mention, Classified and Nonaccrual Loans. The Company classifies its loans of concern into three categories: past due loans, special mention loans and classified loans (both accruing and non-accruing interest).
When management determines that a loan is no longer performing and that collection of interest appears doubtful, the loan is placed on nonaccrual status. All loans that are 90 days past due are considered nonaccrual unless they are adequately secured and there is reasonable assurance of full collection of principal and interest. Management closely monitors all loans that are contractually 90 days past due, treated as “special mention” or otherwise classified or on nonaccrual status. Nonaccrual loans that are 120 days past due without assurance of repayment are charged off against the allowance for loan losses.

7


The Company may elect to formally restructure a loan due to the weakening credit status of a borrower so that the restructuring may facilitate a repayment plan that minimizes the potential losses that the Company may have to otherwise incur. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Company had $49,537 and $16,061 of restructured loans of which $9,597 and $4,429 were classified as non-accrual and the remaining were performing.
The following table sets forth informationOCC with respect to the Company’s nonperforming assets at the dates indicated.
                     
  At December 31, 
  2010  2009  2008  2007  2006 
                     
Loans accounted for on a non-accrual basis $143,707  $75,411  $30,926  $32,060  $3,479 
Accruing loans which are contractually past due 90 days or more as to interest or principal payments  2,112   147   509   18   28 
                
Total non-performing loans  145,819   75,558   31,435   32,078   3,507 
Real estate owned:                    
Foreclosures  59,965   56,952   44,964   4,401   1,445 
Other real estate held and repossessed assets  130   216   407   458   243 
                
Total non-performing assets $205,914  $132,726  $76,806  $36,937  $5,195 
                
                     
Restructured loans not included above $39,940  $11,632  $  $  $ 
                
Total non-performing assets increased by $73,188 from December 31, 2009 to December 31, 2010. This increase was principally driven by deterioration in the economy during 2010 which was reflected principally in the Company’s residential real estate construction and development portfolio. In 2010, the Company devoted significant attention to our asset quality issues, including having segregated these assets within our Special Assets Group so that we may diligently work through the resolution of each on an asset-by-asset basis. The Special Assets Group meets monthly to discuss the performance of the portfolio and specific relationships with emphasis on the underperforming assets. The Special Assets Group is responsible for the resolution of problem credits by creating action plans, which could include foreclosure, restructuring the loan, issuing demand letters or other actions. If nonaccrual loans at December 31, 2010 had been current according to their original terms and had been outstanding throughout 2010, or since origination if originated during the year, interest income on these loans in 2010 would have been approximately $5,948. Interest actually recognized on these loans during 2010 was $4,843. Interest income not recognized on restructured loans was not significant for 2010.
OREO increased by $2,927 from December 31, 2009 to December 31, 2010. The real estate consists of 122 properties, of which 49 are 1-4 family residential properties with a carrying value of $3,966; 38 are construction development of 1-4 residential properties with a carrying value of $37,481; two are multi-family residential properties with a carrying value of $648; four are parcels of commercial vacant land with a carrying value of $3,192; 23 are vacant 1-4 family residential lots with a carrying value of $7,038; five are commercial buildings with a carrying value of $5,321; and one is a commercial construction project with a carrying value of $2,318. Management has recorded these properties at estimated fair market value, based on current appraisals, less estimated selling costs. Other repossessed assets decreased from $216 at December 31, 2009 to $130 at December 31, 2010. The decrease is due primarily to the disposition of repossessed automobiles at one of the Company’s subsidiaries.

8


The recorded investment of impaired loans, defined under Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic ASC 310 as loans which, based upon current information and events, it is considered probable that the Company will be unable to collect all amounts of contractual interest and principal as scheduled in the loan agreement, increased by $70,753 from $115,238 at December 31, 2009 to $185,991 at December 31, 2010. The related allowance on the recorded investment of impaired loans also increased by $19,097 from $5,737 at December 31, 2009 to $24,834 at December 31, 2010. Under accounting guidance for impaired loans, the impairment is probable if the future events indicate that the Bank will not collect principal and interest in accordance with contractual terms. Impaired loans are included in non-performing loans. This increase is primarily attributable to the continued deterioration throughout 2010 in residential real estate construction loans located in the Company’s urban markets. The recorded investment of impaired loans of $185,991 at December 31, 2010 and $115,238 at December 31, 2009 are net of balances previously charged-off of $36,574 and $27,937 respectively.
Allowance for Loan Losses. The allowance for loan losses is maintained at a level which management believes is adequate to absorb all probable losses on loans then present in the loan portfolio. The amount of the allowance is affected by: (1) loan charge-offs, which decrease the allowance; (2) recoveries on loans previously charged-off, which increase the allowance; and (3) the provision for possible loan losses charged against income, which increases the allowance. In determining the provision for possible loan losses, it is necessary for management to monitor fluctuations in the allowance resulting from actual charge-offs and recoveries, and to periodically review the size and composition of the loan portfolio in light of current and anticipated economic conditions, including residential real estate prices and transaction volume in the Company’s market areas, in an effort to evaluate portfolio risks. In evaluating residential real estate market conditions, the Company’s internal policies require new appraisals on adversely rated collateral dependent loans to be obtained at least annually. On a quarterly basis, the Company receives a written report from an independent nationally recognized organization which provides updated valuation trends, by price point and by zip code, for each of the major markets in which the Company is conducting business. The information is then used in the Company’s impairment analysis of collateral dependent loans. If actual losses exceed the amount of the allowance for loan losses, earnings of the Company could be adversely affected. The amount of the provision is based on management’s judgment of those risks. During the year ended December 31, 2010, the Company’s provision for loan losses increased by $20,861 to $71,107 from $50,246 for the year ended December 31, 2009 and the allowance for loan losses increased by $16,669 to $66,830 at December 31, 2010 from $50,161 at December 31, 2009.
The elevated allowance for loan losses was attributable primarily to continuing weakened economic conditions experienced in the Company’s urban markets, principally the Nashville and Knoxville markets, beginning in the fourth quarter of 2007 and continuing through 2010, accompanied by deteriorating credit quality associated primarily with residential real estate construction and development loans in these markets. The allowance for loan losses as a percentage of total loans was 3.83% at the end of 2010 versus 2.45% at December 31, 2009. The loan loss reserves reflected the higher level of non-performing banking assets, and losses inherent in this segment of the Company’s business, as noted in Notes 3 and 17 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Although Management believes that the allowance for loan losses is adequate to cover estimated losses inherent in the portfolio, there can be no assurances thatany additional reserves may not be required in the future.

9


The following is a summary of activity in the allowance for loan losses for the periods indicated:
                     
  Year Ended December 31, 
  2010  2009  2008  2007  2006 
                     
Balance at beginning of year $50,161  $48,811  $34,111  $22,302  $19,739 
Reserve acquired in acquisition           9,022    
                
Subtotal  50,161   48,811   34,111   31,324   19,739 
Charge-offs:                    
Commercial real estate  (48,617)  (40,893)  (28,759)  (7,516)  (494)
Commercial  (3,210)  (6,941)  (6,177)  (2,065)  (879)
                
Subtotal  (51,827)  (47,834)  (34,936)  (9,581)  (1,373)
                     
Residential real estate  (3,102)  (3,176)  (2,275)  (840)  (947)
Consumer  (2,889)  (3,880)  (4,058)  (3,050)  (2,009)
Other              (28)
                
Total charge-offs  (57,818)  (54,890)  (41,269)  (13,471)  (4,357)
                
                     
Recoveries:                    
Commercial real estate  1,301   3,066   1,691   289   17 
Commercial  909   1,669   221   227   171 
                
Subtotal  2,210   4,735   1,912   516   188 
                     
Residential real estate  287   402   138   213   284 
Consumer  882   853   1,106   1,038   936 
Other  1   4   3   8   5 
                
Total recoveries  3,380   5,994   3,159   1,775   1,413 
                
Net charge-offs  (54,438)  (48,896)  (38,110)  (11,696)  (2,944)
 
Provision for loan losses  71,107   50,246   52,810   14,483   5,507 
                
Balance at end of year $66,830  $50,161  $48,811  $34,111  $22,302 
                
                     
Ratio of net charge-offs to average loans outstanding, net of unearned discount, during the period  2.84%  2.25%  1.63%  .57%  .20%
                
Ratio of allowance for loan losses to non-performing loans  45.83%  66.39%  155.28%  106.34%  635.93%
                
Ratio of allowance for loan losses to total loans, net of unearned income  3.83%  2.45%  2.20%  1.45%  1.45%
                
Breakdown of allowance for loan losses by portfolio segment.The following table presents an allocation among the listed loan categories of the Company’s allowance for loan losses at the dates indicated and the percentage of loans in each category to the total amount of loans at the respective year-ends:
                                         
  At December 31, 
  2010  2009  2008  2007  2006 
      Percent of      Percent of      Percent of      Percent of      Percent of 
      loans in      loans in      loans in      loans in      loans in 
      each      each      each      each      each 
      category      category      category      category      category 
Balance at end of period     to total      to total      to total      to total      to total 
applicable to: Amount  loans  Amount  loans  Amount  loans  Amount  loans  Amount  loans 
                                         
Commercial real estate $54,203   61.93% $36,527   63.93% $35,714   64.33% $20,489   65.38% $10,619   59.38%
Residential real estate  4,431   21.33%  4,350   18.88%  3,669   17.63%  2,395   16.83%  1,639   18.16%
Commercial  5,080   12.78%  5,840   13.42%  6,479   14.17%  7,575   13.51%  6,645   16.70%
Consumer  3,108   3.86%  3,437   3.67%  2,927   3.66%  3,635   4.12%  3,384   5.62%
Other  8   0.11%  7   0.10%  22   0.21%  17   0.16%  15   0.14%
                               
                                         
Totals $66,830   100.00% $50,161   100.00% $48,811   100.00% $34,111   100.00% $22,302   100.00%
                               

10


Investment Activities
General. The Company maintains a portfolio of investments for general liquidity purposes and to cover minimum pledging requirements for municipal deposits and borrowings.
Securities by Category. The following table sets forth the carrying value of the securities, by major categories, held by the Company at December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008:
             
  At December 31, 
  2010  2009  2008 
             
Securities Held to Maturity:            
State and political subdivisions $215  $251  $404 
Other securities  250   375   253 
          
             
Total $465  $626  $657 
          
             
Securities Available for Sale:            
U.S. government agencies $83,299  $52,048  $98,806 
State and political subdivisions  31,501   32,192   31,804 
Collateralized mortgage obligations  67,575   44,677   68,373 
Mortgage-backed securities  17,964   16,892   2,086 
Trust preferred securities  1,663   1,915   2,493 
          
             
Total $202,002  $147,724  $203,562 
        �� 
Maturity Distributions of Securities. The following table sets forth the distributions of maturities of securities at amortized cost as of December 31, 2010:
                     
      Due After One          
  Due in One  Year through  Due After Five Years  Due    
  Year or Less  Five Years  through 10 Years  After 10 Years  Total 
 
Securities Held to Maturity:                    
State and political subdivisions $215  $  $  $  $215 
Other securities  250            250 
                     
Securities Available for Sale:                    
U.S. government agencies        39,004   45,102   84,106 
State and political subdivisions  1,005   4,067   21,986   4,133   31,191 
Collateralized mortgage obligations     651   1,584   63,809   66,044 
Mortgage-backed securities     5,989   4,012   7,167   17,168 
Trust preferred securities           1,850   1,850 
                
                     
Subtotal $1,470  $10,707  $66,586  $122,061  $200,824 
                     
Market value adjustment on available for sale securities  3   535   554   553   1,645 
                
                     
Total $1,473  $11,242  $67,140  $122,614  $202,469 
                
                     
Weighted average yield (a)  7.08%  4.83%  3.94%  3.44%  3.75%
                
(a)Weighted average yields on tax-exempt obligations have been computed on a fully taxable-equivalent basis using a tax rate of 35%.
Expected maturities may differ from contractual maturities because borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties.

11


Deposits
Deposits are the primary source of funds for the Company. Such deposits consist of noninterest bearing and interest-bearing demand deposit accounts, regular savings deposits, Money Market accounts and market rate certificates of deposit. Deposits are attracted from individuals, partnerships and corporations in the Company’s market areas. In addition, the Company obtains deposits from state and local entities and, to a lesser extent, U.S. Government and other depository institutions. The Company’s Asset/Liability Management Policy permits the acceptance of limited amounts of brokered deposits. At December 31, 2010 the percentage of the Company’s brokered deposits to total deposits was 0.07%, which was within the limits of the Asset/Liability Management Policy. The Company’s brokered deposits were also within the limits of the Asset/Liability Management Policy at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
The following table sets forth the average balances and average interest rates based on daily balances for deposits for the periods indicated:
                         
  Year Ended December 31, 
  2010  2009  2008 
  Average  Average  Average  Average  Average  Average 
  Balance  Rate Paid  Balance  Rate Paid  Balance  Rate Paid 
                         
Types of deposits (all in domestic offices):                        
Noninterest bearing demand deposits $166,814     $162,765     $187,058    
Interest-bearing demand deposits  881,978   1.01%  700,586   1.30%  577,024   1.57%
Savings deposits  98,900   1.02%  83,549   1.13%  68,612   .77%
Time deposits  841,458   2.20%  1,166,640   3.06%  1,317,362   3.68%
                      
Total deposits $1,989,150      $2,113,540      $2,150,056     
                      
The following table indicates the amount of the Company’s certificates of deposit and brokered certificates of deposit of $100 or more by time remaining until maturity as of December 31, 2010:
     
  Certificates of 
Maturity Period Deposits 
 
Three months or less $41,190 
Over three through six months  43,741 
Over six through twelve months  112,097 
Over twelve months  112,673 
    
Total $309,701 
    

12


Competition
The Company seeks to compete effectively through its reliance on local commercial activity; personal contacts by its directors, officers, other employees and shareholders; personalized services; and its reputation in the communities it serves.
According to data as of June 30, 2010 published by SNL Financial LC and using informationfailed bank acquisitions from the FDIC or the appointment of any new director or senior executive officer of Capital Bank.

Capital Bank ranked as(and, with respect to certain provisions, CBF) is also subject to the largest independent commercial bank headquarteredFDIC Order issued in East Tennessee,connection with the FDIC’s approval of our applications for deposit insurance for the Failed Banks. The FDIC Order requires, among other things, that during the first three years following our acquisition of the Failed Banks, Capital Bank must obtain the FDIC’s approval before implementing certain compensation plans and its major market areas include Greene, Blount, Davidson, Hamblen, Hawkins, Knox, Lawrence, Loudon, Macon, McMinn, Montgomery, Rutherford, Smith, Sullivan, Sumner, Washingtonsubmit updated business plans and Williamson Counties, Tennesseereports of material deviations from those plans to the FDIC. Additionally, the FDIC Order requires that Capital Bank maintain Tier 1 common equity (a non-GAAP measure) to total assets of at least 10% during such three-year period and portionsafter such three-year period to remain “well capitalized.”

A failure by CBF or Capital Bank to comply with the requirements of Cockethe OCC Operating Agreement or the FDIC Order could subject CBF to regulatory sanctions; and Monroe Counties, Tennessee. In Greene County, in whichfailure to comply, or the Company enjoyed its largest deposit share asobjection, or imposition of June 30, 2010, there were seven commercial banks and one savings bank, operating 26 branches and holding an aggregate of approximately $1.0 billion in deposits as of June 30, 2010. The following table sets forth the Bank’s deposit share, excluding credit unions, in each county in which it has a full-service branch(s) as of June 30, 2010, according to data publishedadditional conditions by the FDIC:

CountyDeposit Share
Greene, TN28.72%
Hawkins, TN19.36%
Lawrence, TN17.53%
Smith, TN10.58%
Sumner, TN10.12%
Hamblen, TN8.78%
Blount, TN8.15%
Cocke, TN8.15%
Macon, TN7.10%
Madison, NC6.66%
Montgomery, TN6.36%
Loudon, TN6.00%
Washington, TN5.91%
McMinn, TN5.63%
Bristol, VA1
4.39%
Sullivan, TN2.82%
Williamson, TN2.80%
Rutherford, TN2.62%
Monroe, TN1.49%
Knox, TN0.82%
Davidson, TN0.79%
1Bristol, VA is deemed a city.
Employees
OCC or the FDIC, in connection with any materials or information submitted thereunder, could prevent CBF from executing its business strategy and negatively impact its business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. As of December 31, 2010 the Company employed 730 full-time equivalent employees. None2011, Capital Bank was in compliance with all of the Company’s employees are presently represented by a union or covered under a collective bargaining agreement. Management considers relations with employees to be good.

13


Regulation, Supervision and Governmental Policy
The following is a brief summary of certain statutes, rules and regulations affecting the Company and the Bank. A number of other statutes and regulations have an impact on their operations. These laws and regulations are generally intended to protect depositors and borrowers, not shareholders. The following discussion describes the material elementsterms of the OCC Operating Agreement and FDIC Order.

Regulatory Notice and Approval Requirements for Acquisitions of Control

We must generally receive federal regulatory framework that currently apply. In July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act was signed into law, incorporating numerous financialapproval before we can acquire an institution regulatory reforms. Many of these reforms will be implemented over the course of 2011 through regulations to be adopted by various federal banking and securities regulations. The following summary of applicable statutes and regulations does not purport to be complete and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such statutes and regulations.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act was signed into law. The Dodd-Frank Act implements far-reaching reforms of major elements of the financial landscape, particularly for larger financial institutions. Many of its most far-reaching provisions do not directly impact community-based institutions like the Company. For instance, provisions that regulate derivative transactions and limit derivatives trading activity of federally-insured institutions, enhance supervision of “systemically significant” institutions, impose new regulatory authority over hedge funds, limit proprietary trading by banks, and phase-out the eligibility of trust preferred securities for Tier 1 capital are among the provisions that do not directly impact the Company either because of exemptions for institutions below a certain asset size or because of the nature of the Company’s operations. Those provisions that will impact the Company include the following:
Changing the assessment base for federal deposit insurance from the amount of insured deposits to consolidated assets less tangible capital, eliminating the ceiling and increasing the size of the floor of the DIF, and offsetting the impact of the increase in the minimum floor on institutions with less than $10 billion in assets;
Making permanent the $250,000 limit for federal deposit insurance, increasing the cash limit of Securities Investor Protection Corporation protection to $250,000 and providing unlimited federal deposit insurance until December 31, 2012 for non-interest bearing demand transaction accounts at all insured depository institutions;
Repealing the federal prohibition on payment of interest on demand deposits, thereby permitting depositing institutions to pay interest on business transaction and other accounts;
Centralizing responsibility for consumer financial protection by creating a new agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, responsible for implementing federal consumer protection laws, although banks below $10 billion in assets will continue to be examined and supervised for compliance with these laws by their federal banking regulator;
Restricting the preemption of state law by federal law and disallowing national bank subsidiaries from availing themselves of such preemption;
Imposing new requirements for mortgage lending, including new minimum underwriting standards, prohibitions on certain yield-spread compensation to mortgage originators, special consumer protections for mortgage loans that do not meet certain provision qualifications, prohibitions and limitations on certain mortgage terms and various new mandated disclosures to mortgage borrowers;
Applying the same leverage and risk based capital requirements that apply to insured depository institutions to holding companies, although the Company’s currently outstanding subordinated debentures (but not new issuances) will continue to qualify as Tier 1 capital, subject to existing limitations on the amount that may so qualify;
Permitting national and state banks to establish de novo interstate branches at any location where a bank based in that state could establish a branch, and requiring that bank holding companies and banks be well capitalized and well managed in order to acquire banks located outside their home state;
Imposing new limits on affiliated transactions and causing derivative transactions to be subject to lending limits; and
Implementing corporate governance revisions, including with regard to executive compensation and proxy access to shareholders, that apply to all public companies not just financial institutions.

14


Many aspects of the Dodd-Frank Act are subject to rulemaking and will take effect over several years, and their impact on the Company or the financial industry is difficult to predict before such regulations are adopted.
Bank Holding Company Regulation. The Company is registered as a bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act (the “Holding Company Act”) and, as such, is subject to supervision, regulation and examination by the Board of Governors of the FRB.
Acquisitions and Mergers. Under the Holding Company Act,business. Specifically, a bank holding company must obtain the prior approval of the FRB before (1) acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control ofFederal Reserve in connection with any voting shares of any bank or bank holding company if, after such acquisition that results in the bank holding company would directlyowning or indirectly own or controlcontrolling more than 5% of such shares; (2) acquiring all or substantially all of the assets of another bank or bank holding company; or (3) merging or consolidating with another bank holding company. Also, any company must obtain approval of the FRB prior to acquiring control of the Company or the Bank. For purposes of the Holding Company Act, “control” is defined as ownership of more than 25% of any class of voting securities of a bank or another bank holding companycompany. In acting on such applications of approval, the Federal Reserve considers, among other factors: the effect of the acquisition on competition; the financial condition and future prospects of the applicant and the banks involved; the managerial resources of the applicant and the banks involved; the convenience and needs of the community, including the record of performance under the CRA; the effect of the acquisition on the stability of the United States banking or financial system; and the effectiveness of the applicant in combating money laundering activities. Our ability to make investments in depository institutions will depend on our ability to obtain approval of the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve could deny our application based on the above criteria or other considerations. We may also be required to sell branches as a condition to receiving regulatory approval, which may not be acceptable to us or, if acceptable to us, may reduce the benefit of any acquisition.

15


Federal and state laws impose additional notice, approval and ongoing regulatory requirements on any investor that seeks to acquire direct or indirect “control” of an FDIC-insured depository institution or bank holding company. These laws include the abilityBHCA and the Change in Bank Control Act. Among other things, these laws require regulatory filings by an investor that seeks to controlacquire direct or indirect “control” of an FDIC-insured depository institution.

Broad Supervision and Enforcement Powers

The Federal Reserve, the electionOCC and the FDIC have broad supervisory and enforcement authority with regard to bank holding companies and banks, including the power to conduct examinations and investigations, issue cease and desist orders, impose fines and other civil and criminal penalties, terminate deposit insurance and appoint a conservator or receiver. The CFPB similarly has broad regulatory supervision and enforcement authority with regard to consumer protection matters affecting us or our subsidiaries. Bank regulators regularly examine the operations of banks and bank holding companies. In addition, banks and bank holding companies are subject to periodic reporting and filing requirements.

Bank regulators have various remedies available if they determine that the financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, earnings prospects, management, liquidity or other aspects of a majoritybanking organization’s operations are unsatisfactory. The regulators may also take action if they determine that the banking organization or its management is violating or has violated any law or regulation. The regulators have the power to, among other things: enjoin “unsafe or unsound” practices, require affirmative actions to correct any violation or practice, issue administrative orders that can be judicially enforced, direct increases in capital, direct the sale of subsidiaries or other assets, limit dividends and distributions, restrict growth, assess civil monetary penalties, remove officers and directors and terminate deposit insurance.

Engaging in unsafe or unsound practices or failing to comply with applicable laws, regulations and supervisory agreements could subject the Company, its subsidiaries and their respective officers, directors and institution-affiliated parties to the remedies described above and other sanctions. In addition, the FDIC may terminate a bank’s depository insurance upon a finding that the bank’s financial condition is unsafe or unsound or that the exercise of a controlling influence over managementbank has engaged in unsafe or policies ofunsound practices or has violated an applicable rule, regulation, order or condition enacted or imposed by the bank’s regulatory agency.

Interstate Banking

Interstate Banking for State and National Banks

Under the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act (which we refer to as the “Riegle-Neal Act”), a bank holding company or bank. Control is rebuttably presumedmay acquire banks in states other than its home state, subject to exist ifany state requirement that the bank has been organized and operating for a person or company acquires 10% or more, but less than 25%,minimum period of any class of voting securitiestime, not to exceed five years, and either:

Thethe requirement that the bank holding company has registered securities under Section 12not control, prior to or following the proposed acquisition, more than 10% of the Securities Exchange Acttotal amount of 1934;deposits of insured depository institutions nationwide or,
No other person owns a greater percentage of that class of voting securities immediately after unless the transaction.
Our common stockacquisition is registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The regulations provide a procedure for challenge of the rebuttable control presumption.
The Change in Bank Control Act and the related regulations of the FRB require any person or persons acting in concert (except for companies required to make application under the Holding Company Act), to file a written notice with the FRB before such person or persons may acquire control of a bank holding company or bank. The Change in Bank Control Act defines “control” ascompany’s initial entry into the power, directly or indirectly, to vote 25% or more of any voting securities or to direct the management or policies of a bank holding company or an insured bank.
Bank holding companies like the Company are currently prohibited from engaging in activities other than banking and activities so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. The FRB’s regulations contain a list of permissible nonbanking activities that are closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks. A bank holding company must file an application or notice with the FRB prior to acquiringstate, more than 5%30% of the voting shares of a company engaged in such activities. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (the “GLB Act”), however, greatly broadened the scope of activities permissible for bank holding companies. The GLB Act permits bank holding companies, upon election and classification as financial holding companies, to engage in a broad variety of activities “financial” in nature. The Company has not filed an election with the FRB to be a financial holding company, but may choose to do sodeposits in the future.
Capital Requirementsstate (or such lesser or greater amount set by the state). The Company isRiegle-Neal Act also subjectauthorizes banks to FRB guidelines that require bank holding companies to maintain specified minimum ratios of capital to total assets and capital to risk-weighted assets.merge across state lines, thereby creating interstate branches. The Dodd-Frank Act extended additionalpermits a national or state bank, with the approval of its regulator, to open a branch in any state if the law of the state in which the branch is located would permit the establishment of the branch if the bank were a bank chartered in that state. National banks may provide trust services in any state to the same extent as a trust company chartered by that state.

Limits on Transactions with Affiliates

Federal law restricts the amount and the terms of both credit and non-credit transactions between a bank and its nonbank affiliates. Transactions with any single affiliate may not exceed 10% of the capital requirements to bank holding companies onstock and surplus of the bank.

16


Bank Holding Companies as a consolidated basis. See “Capital Requirements.”

Dividends. The FRB has the power to prohibit dividends by bank holding companies if their actions constitute unsafe or unsound practices. The FRB has issued a policy statement expressing its viewSource of Strength

Federal Reserve law requires that a bank holding company should pay cash dividends only to the extent that the company’s net income for the past year is sufficient to cover both the cash dividends and a rate of earnings retention that is consistent with the company’s capital needs, asset quality, and overall financial condition.

15


The Company is a legal entity separate and distinct from the Bank. Over time, the principal source of the Company’s cash flow, including cash flow to pay interest to its holders of trust preferred securities and dividends to holders of the Series A preferred stock the Company issued to the U.S. Treasury in connection with the Capital Purchase Program (“CPP”) and to the Company’s common stock shareholders, will be dividends that the Bank pays to the Company as its sole shareholder. Under Tennessee law, the Company is not permitted to pay dividends if, after giving effect to such payment, the Company would not be able to pay its debts as they become due in the normal course of business or the Company’s total assets would be less than the sum of its total liabilities plus any amounts needed to satisfy any preferential rights if the Company were dissolving. In addition, in deciding whether or not to declare a dividend of any particular size, the Company’s board of directors must consider the Company’s current and prospective capital, liquidity, and other needs.
In addition to the limitations on the Company’s ability to pay dividends under Tennessee law, the Company’s ability to pay dividends on its common stock is also limited by the Company’s participation in the CPP, by certain statutory or regulatory limitations and by an informal commitment the Company has made to the FRB-Atlanta that it will not pay dividends on its common or preferred stock (or interest on its subordinated debentures) without the prior approval of the FRB-Atlanta. The Company also informally committed to the FRB-Atlanta that it will not incur any indebtedness or repurchase any shares of its capital stock without the prior approval of the FRB-Atlanta. Prior to December 23, 2011, unless the Company has redeemed the Series A preferred stock issued to the U.S. Treasury in the CPP or the U.S. Treasury has transferred the Series A preferred stock to a third party, the consent of the U.S. Treasury must be received before the Company can declare or pay any dividend or make any distribution on the Company’s common stock in excess of $0.13 per quarter. Furthermore, if the Company is not current in the payment of quarterly dividends on the Series A preferred stock, it cannot pay dividends on its common stock. These dividend restrictions resulting from the Company’s participation in the CPP are in addition to those resulting from the Company’s informal commitment to the FRB-Atlanta.
Statutory and regulatory limitations also apply to the Bank’s payment of dividends to the Company. Under Tennessee law, the Bank can only pay dividends to the Company in an amount equal to or less than the total amount of its net income for that year combined with retained net income for the preceding two years. Payment of dividends in excess of this amount requires the consent of the Commissioner of the TDFI (the “Commissioner”). Because the Bank incurred a loss in both 2010 and 2009, dividends from the Bank to the Company, including, if necessary, dividends to support the Company’s payment of interest on its subordinated debt and dividends on the Series A preferred stock it sold to the U.S. Treasury will require prior approval by the Commissioner.
The payment of dividends by the Bank and the Company may also be affected by other factors, such as the requirement to maintain adequate capital above regulatory guidelines. The federal banking agencies have indicated that paying dividends that deplete a depository institution’s capital base to an inadequate level would be an unsafe and unsound banking practice. Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”), a depository institution may not pay any dividend if payment would cause it to become undercapitalized or if it already is undercapitalized. Moreover, the federal agencies have issued policy statements that provide that bank holding companies and insured banks should generally only pay dividends out of current operating earnings. Recent supervisory guidance from the FRB indicates that bank holding companies that are participants in the CPP that are experiencing financial difficulty generally should eliminate, reduce or defer dividends on Tier 1 capital instruments including trust preferred securities, preferred stock or common stock, if the holding company needs to conserve capital for safe and sound operation and to serve as a source of financial and managerial strength to its subsidiaries.
On November 9, 2010, following consultation witheach bank that it controls and, under appropriate circumstances, to commit resources to support each such controlled bank.

Under the FRB-Atlanta,prompt corrective action provisions, if a controlled bank is undercapitalized, then the Company notifiedregulators could require the U.S. Treasurybank holding company to guarantee the bank’s capital restoration plan. In addition, if the Federal Reserve believes that the Company was suspending the payment of regular quarterly cash dividends on the Series A preferred stock issueda bank holding company’s activities, assets or affiliates represent a significant risk to the U.S. Treasuryfinancial safety, soundness or stability of a controlled bank, then the Federal Reserve could require the bank holding company to terminate the activities, liquidate the assets or divest the affiliates. The dividends, whichregulators may require these and other actions in support of controlled banks even if such actions are cumulative, will continue to be reported as a preferred dividend requirement that is deducted from net income for financial statement purposes. Additionally, following consultation withnot in the FRB-Atlanta, the Company has exercised its rights to defer regularly scheduled interest payments on all of its issues of junior subordinated notes having an outstanding principal amount of $88.6 million, relating to outstanding trust preferred securities (“TRUPs”). Under the termsbest interests of the trust documents, the Company may defer payments of interest for up to 20 consecutive quarterly periods without triggering an event of default. Duringbank holding company or its stockholders. Because we are a deferral period, the Company may not pay dividends on its common or preferred stock or interest on indebtedness that rankspari passuor junior to the subordinated debentures. The regular scheduled interest payments will continue to be accrued for payment in the future and reported as an expense for financial statement purposes. Together, the deferral of interest payments on TRUPs and suspension of dividend payments to the U.S. Treasury will preserve about $5.1 million per year in cash flow.

16


Support of Banking Subsidiaries. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, and previously under FRB policy, the Company is expected to actbank holding company, we (and our consolidated assets) are viewed as a source of financial and managerial strength for any controlled depository institutions, such as Capital Bank.

The Dodd-Frank Act also directs federal bank regulators to require that all companies that directly or indirectly control an insured depository institution serve as sources of financial strength for the Bank and, where required,institution. The term “source of financial strength” is defined under the Dodd-Frank Act as the ability of a company to commit resourcesprovide financial assistance to support the Bank. This support can be required at times when it would not beits insured depository institution subsidiaries in the best interestevent of financial distress. The appropriate federal banking agency for such a depository institution may require reports from companies that control the Company’s shareholders or creditorsinsured depository institution to assess their abilities to serve as sources of strength and to enforce compliance with the source-of-strength requirements. The appropriate federal banking agency may also require a holding company to provide it. Further, iffinancial assistance to a bank with impaired capital. The Dodd-Frank Act requires that federal banking regulators propose implementing regulations no later than July 21, 2011. Under this requirement, in the Bank’s capital levels were to fall below minimum regulatory guidelines, the Bank would need to develop a capital plan to increase its capital levels and the Company wouldfuture we could be required to guaranteeprovide financial assistance to Capital Bank should it experience financial distress. Based on our ownership of a national bank subsidiary, the Bank’s compliance withOCC could assess us if the capital planof Capital Bank were to become impaired. If we failed to pay the assessment within three months, the OCC could order the sale of our stock in order for such planCapital Bank to cover the deficiency.

In addition, capital loans by us to Capital Bank will be accepted by the federal regulatory authority.subordinate in right of payment to deposits and certain other indebtedness of Capital Bank. In the event of the Company’sour bankruptcy, any commitment by the Companyus to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of theCapital Bank wouldwill be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to a priority of payment.

Under

Depositor Preference

The FDI Act provides that, in the “cross guarantee” provisionsevent of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (the “FDI Act”), any FDIC-insured subsidiary“liquidation or other resolution” of an insured depository institution, the claims of depositors of the Companyinstitution (including the claims of the FDIC as subrogee of insured depositors) and certain claims for administrative expenses of the FDIC as a receiver will have priority over other general unsecured claims against the institution. If our insured depository institution fails, insured and uninsured depositors, along with the FDIC, will have priority in payment ahead of unsecured, nondeposit creditors, including us, with respect to any extensions of credit they have made to such insured depository institution.

Regulatory Capital Requirements

In General

Bank regulators view capital levels as important indicators of an institution’s financial soundness. FDIC-insured depository institutions and their holding companies are required to maintain minimum capital relative to the Bank could be liable for any loss incurred by, or reasonably expectedamount and types of assets they hold. The final supervisory judgment on an institution’s capital adequacy is based on the regulator’s individualized assessment of numerous factors.

As a bank holding company, we are subject to be incurredvarious regulatory capital adequacy requirements administered by the Federal Reserve. In addition, the OCC imposes capital adequacy requirements on our subsidiary bank. The FDIC also may impose these requirements on Capital Bank and other depository institution subsidiaries that we may acquire or control in connection with (i) the default of any other FDIC-insured subsidiary also controlledfuture. The FDI Act requires that the federal regulatory agencies adopt regulations defining five capital tiers for banks: well capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory, and possibly additional discretionary, actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a direct material effect on our financial condition.

17


Quantitative measures, established by the Company or (ii) any assistance provided by the FDICregulators to any FDIC-insured subsidiary of the Company in danger of default.

Transactions with Affiliates. The Federal Reserve Act, as amended by Regulation W, imposes legal restrictions on the quality and amount of creditensure capital adequacy, require that a bank holding company or its non-bank subsidiaries (“affiliates”) may obtain from bank subsidiariesmaintain minimum ratios of capital to risk-weighted assets. There are three categories of capital under the holding company. For instance, these restrictions generally require that any such extensions of credit by a bank to its affiliates be on non-preferential terms and be secured by designated amounts of specified collateral. Further, a bank’s ability to lend to its affiliates is limited to 10% per affiliate (20% inguidelines. With the aggregate to all affiliates) of the bank’s capital and surplus.
Bank Regulation. As a federally-insured, Tennessee banking institution, the Bank is subject to regulation, supervision and regular examination by the TDFI and the FDIC. Tennessee and federal banking laws and regulations control, among other things, required reserves, investments, loans, mergers and consolidations, issuance of securities, payment of dividends, and establishment of branches and other aspects of the Bank’s operations. Supervision, regulation and examination of the Company and the Bank by the bank regulatory agencies are intended primarily for the protection of depositors rather than for the Company’s security holders.
Extensions of Credit. Under joint regulations of the federal banking agencies, including the FDIC, banks must adopt and maintain written policies that establish appropriate limits and standards for extensions of credit that are secured by liens or interests in real estate or are made for the purpose of financing permanent improvements to real estate. These policies must establish loan portfolio diversification standards, prudent underwriting standards, including loan-to-value limits that are clear and measurable, loan administration procedures and documentation, approval and reporting requirements. A bank’s real estate lending policy must reflect consideration of the Interagency Guidelines for Real Estate Lending Policies (the “Interagency Guidelines”) that have been adopted by the federal banking regulators. The Interagency Guidelines, among other things, call upon depository institutions to establish internal loan-to-value limits for real estate loans that are not in excess of the loan-to-value limits specified in the Interagency Guidelines for the various types of real estate loans. The Interagency Guidelines state that it may be appropriate in individual cases to originate or purchase loans with loan-to-value ratios in excess of the supervisory loan-to-value limits. The aggregate amount of loans in excess of the supervisory loan-to-value limits, however, should not exceed 100% of total capital, and the total of such loans secured by commercial, agricultural, multifamily and other non-one-to-four family residential properties should not exceed 30% of total capital.

17


Federal Deposit Insurance. The deposits of the Bank are insured by the FDIC to the maximum extent provided by law, and the Bank is subject to FDIC deposit insurance assessments. The FDIC has adopted a risk-based assessment system for insured depository institutions that takes into account the risks attributable to different categories and concentrations of assets and liabilities. In early 2006, Congress passed the Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Act of 2005, which made certain changes to the Federal deposit insurance program. These changes included merging the Bank Insurance Fund and the Savings Association Insurance Fund, increasing retirement account coverage to $250,000 and providing for inflationary adjustments to general coverage beginning in 2010, providing the FDIC with authority to set the fund’s reserve ratio within a specified range, and requiring dividends to banks if the reserve ratio exceeds certain levels. The statute grants banks an assessment credit based on their share of the assessment base on December 31, 1996, and the amount of the credit can be used to reduce assessments in any year subject to certain limitations.
Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC was required to adopt regulations that would base deposit insurance assessments on total assets less capital rather than deposit liabilities and to include off-balance sheet liabilities of institutions and their affiliates in risk-based assessments.
The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”) provided for a temporary increase in the basic limit on federal deposit insurance coverage from $100,000 to $250,000 per depositor. This increased level of basic deposit insurance was made permanent by the Dodd-Frank Act. In addition, on October 14, 2008, the FDIC instituted temporary unlimited FDIC coverage of non-interest bearing deposit transaction accounts. Following passageimplementation of the Dodd-Frank Act, an institution can provide full coverage on non-interest bearing transaction accounts until December 31, 2012. The Dodd-Frank Act also repealedcertain changes have been made as to the prohibition on paying interest on demand transaction accounts, but did not extend unlimited insurance protection fortype of capital that falls under each of these accounts.
The FDIC may terminate its insurance of deposits if it finds that the institution has engaged in unsafe and unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations, or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, order or condition imposed by the FDIC.
Safety and Soundness Standards. The FDICIA required the federalcategories. For us, as a bank regulatory agencies to prescribe, by regulation, non-capital safety and soundness standards for all insured depository institutions and depository institution holding companies. The FDIC and the other federal banking agencies have adopted guidelines prescribing safety and soundness standards pursuant to FDICIA. The safety and soundness guidelines establish general standards relating to internal controls and information systems, internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, and compensation, fees and benefits. Among other things, the guidelines require banks to maintain appropriate systems and practices to identify and manage risks and exposures identified in the guidelines.
Participation in the Capital Purchase Program of the Troubled Asset Relief Program. On October 3, 2008, the EESA became law. Under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”) authorized by EESA, the U.S. Treasury established the CPP providing for the purchase of senior preferred shares ofcompany, Tier 1 capital includes common shareholders’ equity, qualifying U.S. controlled banks, savings associations and certain bank and savings and loan holding companies. On December 23, 2008, the Company sold 72,278 shares of Series A preferred stock and warrants to acquire 635,504 sharestrust preferred securities issued before May 19, 2010, less goodwill and certain other deductions (including a portion of common stock to the U.S. Treasury pursuant to the CPP for aggregate consideration of $83 million. As a result of the Company’s participation in the CPP, the Company agreed to certain limitations on executive compensation. On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed into law The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (“ARRA”), more commonly known as the economic stimulus or economic recovery package. ARRA, which amends EESA, includes a wide variety of programs intended to stimulate the economy and provide for extensive infrastructure, energy, health, and education needs. Under ARRA, the Company is subject to additional and more extensive executive compensation limitations and corporate governance requirements. ARRA also permits the Company to redeem the preferred shares it sold to the U.S. Treasury without penalty and without the need to raise new capital, subject to the U.S. Treasury’s consultation with the Company’sservicing assets and the Bank’s appropriate regulatory agency.

18


For as long as the U.S. Treasury owns any debt or equityunrealized net gains and losses, after taxes, on securities of the Company issued in connection with the CPP, the Company will be required to take all necessary action to ensure that its benefit plans with respect to its senior executive officers comply in all respects with Section 111(b) of the EESA, as amended by the ARRA, and the regulations issued and in effect thereunder, including the interim final rule related to executive compensation and corporate governance issued by the U.S. Treasury on June 15, 2009 (the “IFR”). This means that, among other things, while the U.S. Treasury owns debt or equity securities issued by the Company in connection with the CPP, the Company must:
Ensure that the incentive compensation programsavailable for its senior executive officers do not encourage unnecessary and excessive risks that threaten the value of the Company;
Implement a required clawback of any bonus or incentive compensation paid to the Company’s senior executive officers and the next twenty most highly compensated employees based on materially inaccurate financial statements or any other materially inaccurate performance metric;
Not make any bonus, incentive or retention payment to any of the Company’s five most highly compensated employees, except as permitted under the IFR;
Not make any “golden parachute payment” (as defined in the IFR) to any of the Company’s senior executive officers or next five most highly compensated employees; and
Agree not to deduct for tax purposes executive compensation in excess of $500,000 in any one fiscal year for each of the Company’s senior executive officers.
Capital Requirementssale). Both the Company and the Bank are required to comply with the capital adequacy standards established by the FRB, in the Company’s case, and the FDIC, in the case of the Bank. The FRB has established a risk-based and a leverage measure of capital adequacy for bank holding companies, like the Company. The Bank is also subject to risk-based and leverage capital requirements adopted by the FDIC, which are substantially similar to those adopted by the FRB for bank holding companies. In addition, the FDIC and TDFI may require state banks that are not members of the FRB, like the Bank, to maintain capital at levels higher than those required by general regulatory requirements.
The risk-based capital standards are designed to make regulatory capital requirements more sensitive to differences in risk profiles among banks and bank holding companies, to account for off-balance-sheet exposure, and to minimize disincentives for holding liquid assets. Assets and off-balance-sheet items, such as letters of credit and unfunded loan commitments, are assigned to broad risk categories, each with appropriate risk weights. The resulting capital ratios represent capital as a percentage of total risk-weighted assets and off-balance-sheet items.
The minimum statutory guideline for the ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets is 8%. Total capital consists of two components, Tier 1 capital and Tier 2 capital. Tier 1 capital generally consists of common stock, minority interests in the equity accounts of consolidated subsidiaries, noncumulative perpetualincludes preferred stock and a limited amount of cumulative perpetualtrust preferred stock, less goodwill and other specified intangible assets. The Series A preferred stock that the Company sold to the U.S. Treasury in connection with the CPP and the TRUPs each qualifiessecurities not qualifying as Tier 1 capital, and as described below will continue to qualify as Tier 1 capital following passage of the Dodd-Frank Act. Under statutory guidelines, Tier 1 capital must equal at least 4% of risk-weighted assets. Tier 2 capital generally consists of subordinated debt, other preferred stock,the allowance for credit losses and a limited amount of loan loss reserves. The total amount ofnet unrealized gains on marketable equity securities, subject to limitations by the guidelines. Tier 2 capital is limited to 100% of Tier 1 capital.
In addition, the FRB has established minimum leverage ratio guidelines for bank holding companies. These guidelines provide for a minimum ratioamount of Tier 1 capital (i.e., at least half of the total capital must be in the form of Tier 1 capital). Tier 3 capital includes certain qualifying unsecured subordinated debt. See “—Changes in Laws, Regulations or Policies and the Dodd-Frank Act.”

Under the guidelines, capital is compared with the relative risk related to average assets, less goodwillthe balance sheet. To derive the risk included in the balance sheet, a risk weighting is applied to each balance sheet asset and off-balance sheet item, primarily based on the relative credit risk of the asset or counterparty. For example, claims guaranteed by the U.S. government or one of its agencies are risk-weighted at 0% and certain real estate-related loans risk-weighted at 50%. Off-balance sheet items, such as loan commitments and derivatives, are also applied a risk weight after calculating balance sheet equivalent amounts. A credit conversion factor is assigned to loan commitments based on the likelihood of the off-balance sheet item becoming an asset. For example, certain loan commitments are converted at 50% and then risk-weighted at 100%. Derivatives are converted to balance sheet equivalents based on notional values, replacement costs and remaining contractual terms. For certain recourse obligations, direct credit substitutes, residual interests in asset securitization and other specified intangible assets, of 3% forsecuritized transactions that expose institutions primarily to credit risk, the capital amounts and classification under the guidelines are subject to qualitative judgments by the regulators about components, risk weightings and other factors.

Banks and bank holding companies that meet specified criteria, including having the highest regulatory rating and implementing the FRB’s risk-based capital measure for market risk. All other bank holding companies generallycurrently are required to maintain a leverage ratioTier 1 capital and the sum of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital equal to at least 4%.6% and 10%, respectively, of their total risk-weighted assets (including certain off-balance sheet items, such as standby letters of credit) to be deemed “well capitalized.” The guidelinesfederal bank regulatory agencies may, however, set higher capital requirements for an individual bank or when a bank’s particular circumstances warrant. At this time, the bank regulatory agencies are more inclined to impose higher capital requirements in order to meet well-capitalized standards, and future regulatory change could impose higher capital standards as a routine matter.

The Federal Reserve may also provide that bankset higher capital requirements for holding companies whose circumstances warrant it. For example, holding companies experiencing high internal growth or making acquisitions will beare expected to maintain strong capital positions substantially above the minimum supervisory levels. Furthermore,levels, without significant reliance on intangible assets. Also, the FRB has indicated that it will considerFederal Reserve considers a bank holding company’s“tangible Tier 1 capital leverage after deductingratio” (deducting all intangibles,intangibles) and other indicatorsindications of capital strength in evaluating proposals for expansion or engaging in new activities.

In late 2010,addition, the federal bank regulatory agencies have established minimum leverage (Tier 1 capital to adjusted average total assets) guidelines for banks within their regulatory jurisdictions. These guidelines provide for a minimum leverage ratio of 5% for banks to be deemed “well capitalized.” Our regulatory capital ratios and those of Capital Bank are in excess of the levels established for “well-capitalized” institutions.

As an additional means to identify problems in the financial management of depository institutions, the FDI Act requires federal bank regulatory agencies to establish certain non-capital safety and soundness standards for institutions for which they are the primary federal regulator. The standards relate generally to operations and management, asset quality, interest rate exposure and executive compensation. The agencies are authorized to take action against institutions that fail to meet such standards.

In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act requires the federal banking agencies to adopt capital requirements that address the risks that the activities of an institution pose to the institution and the public and private stakeholders, including risks arising from certain enumerated activities. The federal banking agencies may change existing capital guidelines or adopt new capital guidelines in the future pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the implementation of Basel III (described below) or other regulatory or supervisory changes. We cannot be certain what the impact of changes to existing capital guidelines will have on us or Capital Bank.

18


Basel I, Basel II and Basel III Accords

The current risk-based capital guidelines that apply to us and our subsidiary bank are based on the 1988 capital accord, referred to as Basel I, of the International Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (which we refer to as the “Basel Committee”), a committee of central banks and bank supervisors, as implemented by federal bank regulators. In 2008, the bank regulatory agencies began to phase in capital standards based on a second capital accord issued by the Basel III, a new capital frameworkCommittee, referred to as Basel II, for large or “core” international banks and bank holding companies. If implementedcompanies (generally defined for U.S. purposes as having total assets of $250 billion or more or consolidated foreign exposures of $10 billion or more). Because we do not anticipate controlling any large or “core” international bank in the United States,foreseeable future, Basel II will not apply to us.

On September 12, 2010, the Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision, the oversight body of the Basel Committee, announced agreement on the calibration and phase in arrangements for a strengthened set of capital requirements, known as Basel III. While the timing and scope of any U.S. implementation of Basel III will imposeremains uncertain, the following items provide a stricter definitionbrief description of capital, with more focus on common equity. At this time, the Company does not know whetherrelevant provisions of Basel III willand their potential impact on our capital levels if applied to us and Capital Bank.

New Minimum Capital Requirements. Subject to implementation by the U.S. federal banking agencies, Basel III would be implementedexpected, among other things, to increase required capital ratios of banking institutions to which it applies, as follows:

Minimum Common Equity. The minimum requirement for common equity, the highest form of loss absorbing capital, would be raised from the current 2.0% level, before the application of regulatory adjustments, to 3.5% as of January 11, 2013 and 4.5% by January 1, 2015 after the application of stricter adjustments. The “capital conversion buffer,” discussed below, would cause required total common equity to rise to 7.0% by January 1, 2019 (4.5% attributable to the minimum required common equity plus 2.5% attributable to the “capital conservation buffer”).

Minimum Tier 1 Capital. The minimum Tier 1 capital requirement, which includes common equity and other qualifying financial instruments based on stricter criteria, would increase from 4.0% to 4.5% by January 1, 2013, and 6.0% by January 1, 2015. Total Tier 1 capital would rise to 8.5% by January 1, 2019 (6.0% attributable to the minimum required Tier 1 capital ratio plus 2.5% attributable to the capital conservation buffer, as discussed below).

Minimum Total Capital. The minimum Total Capital (Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital) requirement would increase to 8.0% (10.5% by January 1, 2019, including the capital conservation buffer).

Capital Conservation Buffer. The capital conservation buffer would add 2.5% to the regulatory minimum common equity requirement (adding 0.625% during each of the three years beginning in January 1, 2016 through January 1, 2019). The buffer would be added to common equity, after the application of deductions. The purpose of the conservation buffer is to ensure that banks maintain a buffer of capital that can be used to absorb losses during periods of financial and economic stress. It is expected that, while banks would be allowed to draw on the buffer during such periods of stress, the closer their regulatory capital ratios approach the minimum requirement, the greater the constraints that would be applied to earnings distributions.

Countercyclical Buffer. Basel III expects regulators to require, as appropriate to national circumstances, a “countercyclical buffer” within a range of 0% to 2.5% of common equity or other fully loss-absorbing capital. The purpose of the countercyclical buffer is to achieve the broader goal of protecting the banking sector from periods of excess aggregate credit growth. For any given country, it is expected that this buffer would only be applied when there is excess credit growth that is resulting in a perceived system-wide buildup of risk. The countercyclical buffer, when in effect, would be introduced as an extension of the capital conservation buffer range.

Regulatory Deductions from Common Equity. The regulatory adjustments (i.e., deductions and prudential filters), including minority interests in financial institutions, mortgage-servicing rights, and deferred tax assets from timing differences, would be deducted in increasing percentages beginning January 1, 2014, and would be fully deducted from common equity by January 1, 2018. Certain instruments that no longer qualify as Tier 1 capital, such as trust preferred securities, also would be subject to phaseout over a 10-year period beginning January 1, 2013.

Non-Risk-Based Leverage Ratios. These capital requirements are supplemented by a non-risk-based leverage ratio that will serve as a backstop to the risk-based measures described above. In July 2010, the Governors and Heads of Supervision agreed to test a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 3.0% during the parallel run period. Based on the results of the parallel run period, any final adjustments would be carried out in the first half of 2017 with a view to adopting the 3.0% leverage ratio on January 1, 2018, based on appropriate review and calibration.

19


Basel III also introduces a non-risk adjusted Tier 1 leverage ratio of 3%, based on a measure of total exposure that includes balance sheet assets, net of provisions and valuation adjustments, as well as potential future exposure to off-balance sheet items, such as derivatives. Basel III also includes both short- and long-term liquidity standards. The phase-in of the United States, and if so implemented whether it will be applicablenew rules is to commence on January 1, 2013, with the Companyphase-in of the capital conservation buffer commencing on January 1, 2016 and the Bank, becauserules to be fully phased in by its terms it is applicable only to internationally active banks. But, ifJanuary 1, 2019.

In November 2010, Basel III is implemented inwas endorsed by the United StatesGroup of Twenty (G-20) Finance Ministers and becomes applicable to the Company, the CompanyCentral Bank Governors and the Bank would likelywill be subject to higher minimumindividual adoption by member nations, including the United States. On December 16, 2010, the Basel Committee issued the text of the Basel III rules, which presents the details of global regulatory standards on bank capital ratios than those to which the Companyadequacy and the Bank are currently subject.

19


Failure to meet statutorily mandated capital guidelines or more restrictive ratios separately established for a financial institution (like those that the Bank has informallyliquidity agreed with the TDFI and FDIC that it will maintain) could subject a bank or bank holding company to a variety of enforcement remedies, including issuance of a capital directive, the termination of deposit insurance by the FDIC, a prohibition on accepting or renewing brokered deposits, limitationsBasel Committee and endorsed by the G-20 leaders. In January 2011, the Basel Committee issued further guidance on the ratesqualification criteria for inclusion in Tier 1 capital. The federal banking agencies will likely implement changes to the current capital adequacy standards applicable to us and our bank subsidiary in light of interest thatBasel III. If adopted by federal banking agencies, Basel III could lead to higher capital requirements, including a restrictive leverage ratio and new liquidity ratios. The ultimate impact of the institution may paynew capital and liquidity standards on its depositsus and other restrictionsour bank subsidiary is currently being reviewed and will depend on its business. As described above, significant additional restrictions can be imposed ona number of factors, including the rule-making and implementation by the U.S. banking regulators.

Prompt Corrective Action

The FDI Act requires federal bank regulatory agencies to take “prompt corrective action” with respect to FDIC-insured depository institutions that fail todo not meet applicableminimum capital requirements.

Additionally, A depository institution’s treatment for purposes of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 establishes a system of prompt corrective action provisions will depend upon how its capital levels compare to resolve the problems of undercapitalized financial institutions. various capital measures and certain other factors, as established by regulation.

Under this system, the federal banking regulators have established five capital categories, (wellwell capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized) into one ofundercapitalized, in which all institutions are placed. The federal banking regulators have also specified by regulation the relevant capital levels for each of the other categories. Federal banking regulators are required to take various mandatory supervisory actions and are authorized to take other discretionary actions with respect to institutions in the three undercapitalized categories. The severity of the action depends upon the capital category in which the institution is placed. Generally, subject to a narrow exception, the banking regulator must appoint a receiver or conservator for an institution that is critically undercapitalized.

Federal Reserve Board regulations require that each bank maintain reserve balances on deposits with the Federal Reserve Bank.

Reserve Requirements

Pursuant to regulations of the Federal Reserve, all banks are required to maintain average daily reserves at mandated ratios against their transaction accounts. In addition, reserves must be maintained on certain non-personal time deposits. These reserves must be maintained in the form of vault cash or in an account at a Federal Reserve Banks.

Deposit Insurance Assessments

FDIC-insured banks are required to pay deposit insurance premium assessments to the FDIC. The FDIC has adopted a risk-based assessment system whereby FDIC-insured depository institutions pay insurance premiums at rates based on their risk classification. An institution’s risk classification is assigned based on its capital levels and the level of supervisory concern the institution poses to the regulators. The FDIC recently raised assessment rates to increase funding for the DIF, which is currently underfunded.

The Dodd-Frank Act makes permanent the general $250,000 deposit insurance limit for insured deposits. In addition, federal banking agencies have specifieddeposit insurance for the full net amount of deposits in non-interest-bearing transaction accounts was extended to January 1, 2013 for all insured banks.

20


The Dodd-Frank Act changes the deposit insurance assessment framework, primarily by regulationbasing assessments on an institution’s total assets less tangible equity (subject to risk-based adjustments that would further reduce the relevant capital levelassessment base for custodial banks) rather than domestic deposits, which is expected to shift a greater portion of the aggregate assessments to large banks, as described in detail below. The Dodd-Frank Act also eliminates the upper limit for the reserve ratio designated by the FDIC each category.

An institutionyear, increases the minimum designated reserve ratio of the DIF from 1.15% to 1.35% of the estimated amount of total insured deposits by September 30, 2020, and eliminates the requirement that the FDIC pay dividends to depository institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds certain thresholds.

The Dodd-Frank Act requires the DIF to reach a reserve ratio of 1.35% of insured deposits by September 30, 2020. On December 20, 2010, the FDIC raised the minimum designated reserve ratio of DIF to 2%. The ratio is categorizedhigher than the minimum reserve ratio of 1.35% as undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized, or critically undercapitalizedset by the Dodd-Frank Act. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC is required to submit an acceptable capital restoration planoffset the effect of the higher reserve ratio on insured depository institutions with consolidated assets of less than $10 billion.

On February 7, 2011, the FDIC approved a final rule on Assessments, Dividends, Assessment Base and Large Bank Pricing. The final rule, mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act, changes the deposit insurance assessment system from one that is based on domestic deposits to one that is based on average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity. Because the new assessment base under the Dodd-Frank Act is larger than the current assessment base, the final rule’s assessment rates are lower than the current rates, which achieves the FDIC’s goal of not significantly altering the total amount of revenue collected from the industry. In addition, the final rule adopts a “scorecard” assessment scheme for larger banks and suspends dividend payments if the DIF reserve ratio exceeds 1.5% but provides for decreasing assessment rates when the DIF reserve ratio reaches certain thresholds. The final rule also determines how the effect of the higher reserve ratio will be offset for institutions with less than $10 billion of consolidated assets.

Continued action by the FDIC to replenish the DIF as well as changes contained in the Dodd-Frank Act may result in higher assessment rates. Capital Bank may be able to pass part or all of this cost on to its appropriate federalcustomers, including in the form of lower interest rates on deposits, or fees to some depositors, depending on market conditions.

The FDIC may terminate a depository institution’s deposit insurance upon a finding that the institution’s financial condition is unsafe or unsound or that the institution has engaged in unsafe or unsound practices or has violated any applicable rule, regulation, order or condition enacted or imposed by the institution’s regulatory agency. If deposit insurance for a banking agency. Abusiness we invest in or acquire were to be terminated, that would have a material adverse effect on that banking business and potentially on the Company as a whole.

Permitted Activities and Investments by Bank Holding Companies

The BHCA generally prohibits a bank holding company from engaging in activities other than banking or managing or controlling banks except for activities determined by the Federal Reserve to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. Provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Modernization Act of 1999 (which we refer to as the “GLB Act”) expanded the permissible activities of a bank holding company that qualifies as a financial holding company. Under the regulations implementing the GLB Act, a financial holding company may engage in additional activities that are financial in nature or incidental or complementary to financial activity. Those activities include, among other activities, certain insurance and securities activities. We have not yet determined whether it would be appropriate or advisable in the future to become a financial holding company.

21


Privacy Provisions of the GLB Act and Restrictions on Cross-Selling

Federal banking regulators, as required under the GLB Act, have adopted rules limiting the ability of banks and other financial institutions to disclose nonpublic information about consumers to nonaffiliated third parties. The rules require disclosure of privacy policies to consumers and, in some circumstances, allow consumers to prevent disclosure of certain personal information to nonaffiliated third parties. The privacy provisions of the GLB Act affect how consumer information is transmitted through diversified financial services companies and conveyed to outside vendors.

Federal financial regulators have issued regulations under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, which have the effect of increasing the length of the waiting period, after privacy disclosures are provided to new customers, before information can be shared among different companies that we own or may come to own for the purpose of cross-selling products and services among companies we own. A number of states have adopted their own statutes concerning financial privacy and requiring notification of security breaches.

Anti-Money Laundering Requirements

Under federal law, including the Bank Secrecy Act, the PATRIOT Act and the International Money Laundering Abatement and Anti-Terrorist Financing Act, certain types of financial institutions, including insured depository institutions, must guaranteemaintain anti-money laundering programs that include established internal policies, procedures and controls; a subsidiary depository institution meets its capital restoration plan, subjectdesignated compliance officer; an ongoing employee training program; and testing of the program by an independent audit function. Among other things, these laws are intended to various limitations. The controlling holding company’s obligationstrengthen the ability of U.S. law enforcement agencies and intelligence communities to fundwork together to combat terrorism on a capital restoration plan is limited to the lesservariety of 5% of an undercapitalized subsidiary’s assets or the amount required to meet regulatory capital requirements. An undercapitalized institution is also generallyfronts. Financial institutions are prohibited from increasing its average total assets, making acquisitions, establishingentering into specified financial transactions and account relationships and must meet enhanced standards for due diligence and customer identification in their dealings with non-U.S. financial institutions and non-U.S. customers. Financial institutions must take reasonable steps to conduct enhanced scrutiny of account relationships to guard against money laundering and to report any branchessuspicious information maintained by financial institutions. Bank regulators routinely examine institutions for compliance with these obligations and they must consider an institution’s compliance in connection with the regulatory review of applications, including applications for banking mergers and acquisitions. The regulatory authorities have imposed “cease and desist” orders and civil money penalty sanctions against institutions found to be violating these obligations.

The OFAC is responsible for helping to insure that U.S. entities do not engage in transactions with certain prohibited parties, as defined by various Executive Orders and Acts of Congress. OFAC publishes lists of persons, organizations and countries suspected of aiding, harboring or engaging in terrorist acts, known as Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons. If we or Capital Bank find a name on any transaction, account or wire transfer that is on an OFAC list, we or Capital Bank must freeze or block such account or transaction, file a suspicious activity report and notify the appropriate authorities.

Consumer Laws and Regulations

Banks and other financial institutions are subject to numerous laws and regulations intended to protect consumers in their transactions with banks. These laws include, among others, laws regarding unfair and deceptive acts and practices and usury laws, as well as the following consumer protection statutes: Truth in Lending Act, Truth in Savings Act, Electronic Funds Transfer Act, Expedited Funds Availability Act, Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, Fair Housing Act, Fair Credit Reporting Act, Fair Debt Collection Act, GLB Act, Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, Right to Financial Privacy Act and Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act.

Many states and local jurisdictions have consumer protection laws analogous, and in addition, to those listed above. These federal, state and local laws regulate the manner in which financial institutions deal with customers when taking deposits, making loans or conducting other types of transactions. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations could give rise to regulatory sanctions, customer rescission rights, action by state and local attorneys general and civil or criminal liability.

22


The Dodd-Frank Act creates the CFPB, a new lineindependent bureau that will have broad authority to regulate, supervise and enforce retail financial services activities of business, except underbanks and various non-bank providers. The CFPB will have authority to promulgate regulations, issue orders, guidance and policy statements, conduct examinations and bring enforcement actions with regard to consumer financial products and services. In general, banks with assets of $10 billion or less, such as Capital Bank, will be subject to regulation of the CFPB but will continue to be examined for consumer compliance by their bank regulator. However, given our growth and bank acquisition strategy, if our total assets were to exceed $10 billion, then we will become subject to the CFPB’s exclusive examination authority and primary enforcement authority.

The Community Reinvestment Act

The CRA is intended to encourage banks to help meet the credit needs of their service areas, including low-and moderate-income neighborhoods, consistent with safe and sound operations. The regulators examine banks and assign each bank a public CRA rating. A bank’s record of fair lending compliance is part of the resulting CRA examination report. The CRA then requires bank regulators to take into account the bank’s record in meeting the needs of its service area when considering an accepted capital restoration planapplication by a bank to establish a branch or to conduct certain mergers or acquisitions. The Federal Reserve is required to consider the CRA records of a bank holding company’s controlled banks when considering an application by the bank holding company to acquire a bank or to merge with FDIC approval. The regulations also establish proceduresanother bank holding company.

When we apply for downgrading anregulatory approval to make certain investments, the regulators will consider the CRA record of the target institution and our depository institution subsidiary. An unsatisfactory CRA record could substantially delay approval or result in denial of an application.

Changes in Laws, Regulations or Policies and the Dodd-Frank Act

Various federal, state and local legislators introduce from time to time measures or take actions that would modify the regulatory requirements or the examination or supervision of banks or bank holding companies. Such legislation could increase or decrease the cost of doing business, limit or expand permissible activities or affect the competitive balance among banks and other financial institutions, all of which could affect our investment opportunities and our assessment of how attractive such opportunities may be. We cannot predict whether potential legislation will be enacted and, if enacted, the effect that it or any implementing regulations would have on our business, results of operations or financial condition.

The Dodd-Frank Act, which was signed into law on July 21, 2010, will have a broad impact on the financial services industry, imposing significant regulatory and compliance changes, increased capital, leverage and liquidity requirements and numerous other provisions designed to improve supervision and oversight of the financial services sector. The following items briefly describe some of the key provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act:

Source of Strength. The Dodd-Frank Act requires all companies that directly or indirectly control a depository institution to serve as a source of strength for the institution.

Limitation on Federal Preemption. The Dodd-Frank Act may limit the ability of national banks to rely upon federal preemption of state consumer financial laws. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the OCC will have the ability to make preemption determinations only if certain conditions are met and on a case-by-case basis. The Dodd-Frank Act also eliminates the extension of preemption to operating subsidiaries of national banks. However, the Dodd-Frank Act preserves certain preemption standards articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court and existing interpretations thereunder, as well as express preemption provisions in other federal laws (such as the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Truth in Lending Act) that specifically address the application of state law in relation to that federal law. The Dodd-Frank Act authorizes state enforcement authorities to bring lawsuits under state law against national banks and authorizes suits by state attorney generals against national banks to enforce rules issued by the CFPB. With this broad grant of enforcement authority to states, institutions, including national banks, could be subject to varying and potentially conflicting interpretations of federal law by various state attorney generals, state regulators and the courts.

23


Mortgage Loan Origination and Risk Retention. The Dodd-Frank Act imposes new standards for mortgage loan originations on all lenders, including banks, in an effort to require steps to verify a borrower’s ability to repay. The Dodd-Frank Act also generally requires lenders or securitizers to retain an economic interest in the credit risk relating to loans the lender sells or mortgages and other asset-backed securities that the securitizer issues. The risk retention requirement generally will be 5%, but could be increased or decreased by regulation.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The Dodd-Frank Act creates the CFPB within the Federal Reserve. The CFPB is tasked with establishing and implementing rules and regulations under certain federal consumer protection laws with respect to the conduct of providers of certain consumer financial products and services. The CFPB has rulemaking authority over many of the statutes governing products and services offered to bank customers. For banking organizations with assets of more than $10 billion, the CFPB has exclusive rule-making and examination and primary enforcement authority under federal consumer financial laws. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act permits states to adopt consumer protection laws and regulations that are stricter than those regulations promulgated by the CFPB.

Deposit Insurance. The Dodd-Frank Act makes permanent the general $250,000 deposit insurance limit for insured deposits. The Dodd-Frank Act also provides unlimited deposit coverage for noninterest-bearing transaction accounts until January 1, 2013. Amendments to the FDI Act also revise the assessment base against which an insured depository institution’s deposit insurance premiums paid to the DIF will be calculated. Under these amendments, the assessment base will no longer be the institution’s deposit base, but rather its average consolidated total assets less its average tangible equity. Additionally, the Dodd-Frank Act makes changes to the minimum designated reserve ratio of the DIF, increasing the minimum from 1.15% to 1.35% of the estimated amount of total insured deposits and eliminating the requirement that the FDIC pay dividends to depository institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds certain thresholds.

Transactions with Affiliates and Insiders. The Dodd-Frank Act generally enhances the restrictions on transactions with affiliates under Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act, including an expansion of the definition of “covered transactions” and an increase in the amount of time for which collateral requirements regarding covered credit transactions must be satisfied. Insider transaction limitations are expanded through the strengthening of loan restrictions to insiders and the expansion of the types of transactions subject to the various limits, including derivatives transactions, repurchase agreements, reverse repurchase agreements and securities lending or borrowing transactions. Restrictions are also placed on certain asset sales to and from an insider to an institution, including requirements that such sales be on market terms and, in certain circumstances, approved by the institution’s board of directors.

24


Corporate Governance. The Dodd-Frank Act addresses many investor protection, corporate governance and executive compensation matters that will affect most U.S. publicly traded companies, including the Company. The Dodd-Frank Act (1) grants stockholders of U.S. publicly traded companies an advisory vote on executive compensation; (2) enhances independence requirements for compensation committee members; (3) requires companies listed on national securities exchanges to adopt incentive-based compensation clawback policies for executive officers; and (4) provides the SEC with authority to adopt proxy access rules that would allow stockholders of publicly traded companies to nominate candidates for election as a director and have those nominees included in a company’s proxy materials.

Interchange Fees. Under the so-called Durbin Amendment of the Dodd-Frank Act, interchange transaction fees that a card issuer receives or charges for an electronic debit transaction must be “reasonable and proportional” to the cost incurred by the card issuer in processing the transaction. Banks that have less than $10 billion in assets are exempt from the interchange transaction fee limitation. On June 29, 2011, the Federal Reserve issued a final rule establishing standards for determining whether the amount of any interchange transaction fee is reasonable and proportional, taking into consideration fraud prevention costs, and prescribing regulations to ensure that network fees are not used, directly or indirectly, to compensate card issuers with respect to electronic debit transactions or to circumvent or evade the restrictions that interchange transaction fees be reasonable and proportional. Under the final rule, the maximum permissible interchange fee that an issuer may receive for an electronic debit will be the sum of $0.21 per transaction and five basis points multiplied by the value of the transaction. The Federal Board also approved on June 29, 2011 an interim final rule that allows for an upward adjustment of no more than $0.01 to an issuer’s debit card interchange fee if the issuer develops and implements policies and procedures reasonably designed to achieve certain fraud-prevention standards set out in the interim final rule. The Dodd-Frank Act also bans card issuers and payment card networks from entering into exclusivity arrangements for debit card processing and prohibits card issuers and payment networks from inhibiting the ability of merchants to direct the routing of debit card transactions over networks of their choice. Finally, merchants will be able to set minimum dollar amounts for the use of a credit card and provide discounts to consumers who pay with various payment methods, such as cash.

Many of the requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act will be implemented over time, and most will be subject to regulations implemented over the course of several years. Given the uncertainty surrounding the manner in which many of the Dodd-Frank Act’s provisions will be implemented by the various regulatory agencies and through regulations, the full extent of the impact on our operations is unclear. The changes resulting from the Dodd-Frank Act may impact the profitability of our business activities, require changes to certain of our business practices, impose upon us more stringent capital, liquidity and leverage requirements or otherwise adversely affect our business.

25


Statistical Information

Certain statistical information is found in Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

26


ITEM 1A.RISK FACTORS.

RISK FACTORS

In addition to the other information included in and incorporated by reference into this document, including the matters addressed in “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements,” you should carefully consider the following risk factors.

Our business is subject to a variety of risks, including the risks described below as well as adverse business conditions and changes in regulations and the local, regional and national economic environment. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing us. Additional risks and uncertainties not known to us or not described below which we have not determined to be material may also impair our business operations. You should carefully consider the risks described below, together with all other information in this report, including information contained in the “Business,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk” sections. This report contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties, including statements about our future plans, objectives, intentions and expectations. Many factors, including those described below, could cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed in forward-looking statements. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected, and we may not be able to achieve our goals. Such events may cause actual results to differ materially from expected and historical results, and the trading price of our common stock could decline.

Risks Relating to the Merger

The merger has been approved without your vote.

CBF owns over 90% of the common stock of Green Bankshares, Inc.. Accordingly, under Tennessee law, no vote of Green Bankshares’ Board of Directors or shareholders is required to complete the merger. As a result, the merger may be completed even if opposed by all of the Green Bankshares, Inc. shareholders unaffiliated with CBF.

Neither CBF nor Green Bankshares, Inc. has hired anyone to represent you and we have a conflict of interest in the merger.

CBF and the Company have not (1) negotiated the merger at arm’s length or (2) hired independent persons to negotiate the terms of the merger for you. Since CBF initiated and structured the merger without negotiating with the Company or any independent person and CBF has an interest in acquiring your shares at the lowest possible price, if independent persons had been hired, the terms of the merger may have been more favorable to you.

Because there is currently no market for CBF Class A common stock and a market for CBF Class A common stock may not develop, you cannot be sure of the market value of the merger consideration you will receive.

Upon completion of the merger, each share of the Company’s common stock will be converted into merger consideration consisting of 0.0915 of a share of CBF’s Class A common stock. Prior to the initial public offering of CBF’s Class A common stock, which is expected to be completed substantially concurrently with the merger, there has been no established public market for CBF’s Class A common stock. An active, liquid trading market for CBF’s Class A common stock may not develop or be sustained following the initial public offering. If an active trading market does not develop, holders of CBF’s Class A common stock may have difficulty selling their shares at an attractive price, or at all. CBF has applied to have its Class A common stock listed on Nasdaq, but its application may not be approved. In addition, the liquidity of any market that may develop or the price that CBF’s stockholders may obtain for their shares of Class A common stock cannot be predicted. The initial public offering price for CBF’s Class A common stock will be determined by negotiations between CBF, its stockholders who choose to sell their shares in the initial public offering and the representative of the underwriters and may not be indicative of prices that will prevail in the open market following the offering.

The outcome of CBF’s initial public offering will affect the market value of the consideration the Company’s shareholders will receive upon completion of the merger. Accordingly, you will not know or be able to calculate the market value of the merger consideration you would receive upon completion of the merger. There will be no adjustment to the exchange ratio for changes in the anticipated outcome of CBF’s initial public offering or changes in the market price of the Company’s common stock.

27


If CBF completes the merger without completing its initial public offering, the size of the outstanding public float of CBF’s Class A common stock will be low and the value and liquidity of CBF’s common stock may be adversely affected.

While the merger is expected to be completed substantially concurrently with CBF’s initial public offering, CBF controls when the merger will take place and there can be no guarantee that CBF’s initial public offering will occur substantially concurrently with the merger or at all. If the merger is completed and CBF’s initial public offering is delayed or does not occur, there will be fewer publicly traded shares of CBF’s Class A common stock outstanding than if the initial public offering is completed as anticipated and, as a result, the value and liquidity of CBF’s shares of Class A common stock that you receive in the merger may be adversely affected.

28


The shares of CBF Class A common stock to be received by Green Bankshares, Inc. shareholders as a result of the merger will have different rights than the shares of Green Bankshares, Inc. common stock.

The rights associated with Green Bankshares, Inc. common stock are different from the rights associated with CBF’s Class A common stock. For example, certain business combinations between Green Bankshares, Inc. and any holder of more than 10% Green Bankshares, Inc. common stock must be approved by holders of at least 80% of the outstanding Green Bankshares, Inc. common stock as well as holders of at least a majority of the shares not held by shareholder engaging in the transaction (these provisions do not apply to the merger because the merger was approved by all members of the Board of Directors of Green Bankshares, Inc.). These provisions do not apply to CBF shareholders. In addition, holders of at least 10% of Green Bankshares, Inc.’ common stock may call a special meeting of Green Bankshares, Inc. shareholders, whereas special meetings of CBF shareholders can only be called by CBF’s Chairman, Chief Executive Officer or its Board of Directors.

Risks Relating to the Company’s Banking Operations

Continued or worsening general business and economic conditions could have a material adverse effect on CBF’s business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

Our business and operations are sensitive to general business and economic conditions in the United States. If the U.S. economy is unable to steadily emerge from the recent recession that began in 2007 or we experience worsening economic conditions, such as a so-called “double-dip” recession, our growth and profitability could be adversely affected. Weak economic conditions may be characterized by deflation, fluctuations in debt and equity capital markets, including a lack of liquidity and/or depressed prices in the secondary market for mortgage loans, increased delinquencies on mortgage, consumer and commercial loans, residential and commercial real estate price declines and lower capital category basedhome sales and commercial activity. All of these factors would be detrimental to our business. On August 5, 2011, Standard & Poor’s lowered the long-term sovereign credit rating of U.S. Government debt obligations from AAA to AA+. On August 8, 2011, S&P also downgraded the long-term credit ratings of U.S. government-sponsored enterprises. These actions initially have had an adverse effect on supervisoryfinancial markets and although we are unable to predict the longer-term impact on such markets and the participants therein, it may be material and adverse.

In addition, significant concern regarding the creditworthiness of some of the governments in Europe, most notably Greece, has contributed to volatility in financial markets in Europe and globally, and to funding pressures on some globally active European banks, leading to greater investor and economic uncertainty worldwide. A failure to adequately address sovereign debt concerns in Europe could hamper economic recovery or contribute to a return to recessionary economic conditions and severe stress in the financial markets, including in the United States.

Our business is also significantly affected by monetary and related policies of the U.S. federal government, its agencies and government-sponsored entities. Changes in any of these policies are influenced by macroeconomic conditions and other factors other than capital.that are beyond our control, are difficult to predict and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

The geographic concentration of our markets in the southeastern region of the United States makes our business highly susceptible to downturns in the local economies and depressed banking markets, which could be detrimental to our financial condition.

Unlike larger financial institutions that are more geographically diversified, Capital Bank is a regional banking franchise concentrated in the southeastern region of the United States. Capital Bank operates branches located in Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia. As of December 31, 2010,2011, 32% of Capital Bank’s loans were in Florida, 26% were in North Carolina, 12% were in South Carolina, 29% were in Tennessee and 1% was in Virginia. A deterioration in local economic conditions in the loan market or in the residential, commercial or industrial real estate market could have a material adverse effect on the quality of Capital Bank’s portfolio, the demand for its products and services, the ability of borrowers to timely repay loans and the value of the collateral securing loans. In addition, if the population or income growth in the region is slower than projected, income levels, deposits and real estate development could be adversely affected and could result in the curtailment of our expansion, growth and profitability. If any of these developments were to result in losses that materially and adversely affected Capital Bank’s capital, the Company and Capital Bank might be subject to regulatory restrictions on operations and growth and to a requirement to raise additional capital.

We depend on our executive officers and key personnel to continue the implementation of its long-term business strategy and could be harmed by the loss of their services.

We believe that our continued growth and future success will depend in large part on the skills of our management team and its ability to motivate and retain these individuals and other key personnel. In particular, we rely on the leadership and experience in the banking industry of its Chief Executive Officer, R. Eugene Taylor. Mr. Taylor is the former Vice Chairman of Bank of America and has extensive experience executing and overseeing bank acquisitions, including NationsBank Corp.’s acquisition and integration of Bank of America, Maryland National Bank and Barnett Banks. The loss of service of Mr. Taylor or one or more of our other executive officers or key personnel could reduce our ability to successfully implement our

29


long-term business strategy, our business could suffer and the value of our and CBF’s common stock could be materially adversely affected. Leadership changes will occur from time to time and we cannot predict whether significant resignations will occur or whether we or CBF will be able to recruit additional qualified personnel. We believe our management team possesses valuable knowledge about the banking industry and that their knowledge and relationships would be considered “well capitalized”very difficult to replicate. Although R. Eugene Taylor has entered into an employment agreement with CBF and it is expected that, prior to the completion of the initial public offering, Christopher G. Marshall, R. Bruce Singletary and Kenneth A. Posner will have entered into employment agreements with CBF, it is possible that they may not complete the term of their employment agreements or renew them upon expiration. Our success also depends on the experience of Capital Bank’s branch managers and lending officers and on their relationships with the customers and communities they serve. The loss of these key personnel could negatively impact our banking operations. The loss of key personnel, or the inability to recruit and retain qualified personnel in the future, could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or operating results.

Capital Bank’s loss sharing agreements impose restrictions on the operation of its business; failure to comply with the terms of the loss sharing agreements with the FDIC or other regulatory agreements or orders may result in significant losses or regulatory sanctions, and Capital Bank is exposed to unrecoverable losses on the Failed Banks’ assets that it acquired.

In July 2010, Capital Bank purchased substantially all of the assets and assumed all of the deposits and certain other liabilities of the Failed Banks in FDIC-assisted transactions, and a material portion of its revenue is derived from such assets. Certain of the purchased assets are covered by the loss sharing agreements with the FDIC, which provide that the FDIC will bear 80% of losses on the covered loan assets acquired in the acquisition of the Failed Banks. Capital Bank is subject to audit by the FDIC at its discretion to ensure it is in compliance with the terms of these agreements. Capital Bank may experience difficulties in complying with the requirements of the loss sharing agreements, the terms of which are extensive and failure to comply with any of the terms could result in a specific asset or group of assets losing their loss sharing coverage.

The FDIC has the right to refuse or delay payment partially or in full for such loan losses if Capital Bank fails to comply with the terms of the loss sharing agreements, which are extensive. Additionally, the loss sharing agreements are limited in duration. Therefore, any losses that Capital Bank experiences after the terms of the loss sharing agreements have ended will not be recoverable from the FDIC, and would negatively impact net income.

Capital Bank’s loss sharing agreements also impose limitations on how it manages loans covered by loss sharing. For example, under the FDIC’s prompt correctiveloss sharing agreements, Capital Bank is not permitted to sell a covered loan even if in the ordinary course of business it is determined that taking such action provisions; however,would be advantageous. These restrictions could impair Capital Bank’s ability to manage problem loans and extend the Bank has informally committedamount of time that such loans remain on its balance sheet and could negatively impact Capital Bank’s business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

In addition to the TDFIloss sharing agreements, in August 2010, Capital Bank entered into an Operating Agreement with the OCC (which we refer to as the “OCC Operating Agreement”), in connection with the acquisition of the Failed Banks. Capital Bank (and, with respect to certain provisions, the Company and CBF) is also subject to an Order of the FDIC, dated July 16, 2010 (which we refer to as the “FDIC Order”) issued in connection with the FDIC’s approval of CBF’s deposit insurance applications for the Failed Banks. The OCC Operating Agreement and the FDIC Order require that Capital Bank maintain various financial and capital ratios and require prior regulatory notice and consent to take certain actions in connection with operating the business and they restrict Capital Bank’s ability to pay dividends to CBF and the Company and to make changes to its capital structure. A failure by CBF or Capital Bank to comply with the requirements of the OCC Operating Agreement or the FDIC Order could subject CBF to regulatory sanctions; and failure to comply, or the objection, or imposition of additional conditions, by the OCC or the FDIC, in connection with any materials or information submitted thereunder, could prevent CBF from executing our business strategy and negatively impact its business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

Any requested or required changes in how we determine the impact of loss share accounting on its financial information could have a material adverse effect on our reported results.

A material portion of our financial results is based on loss share accounting, which is subject to assumptions and judgments made by us, our accountants and the regulatory agencies to whom we report such information. Loss share accounting is a complex accounting methodology. If these assumptions are incorrect or the accountants or the regulatory agencies to whom CBF and Capital Bank report require that management change or modify these assumptions, such change or modification could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, operations or previously reported results. As such, any financial information generated through the use of loss share accounting is subject to modification or change. Any significant modification or change in such information could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and our previously reported results.

30


Our financial information reflects the application of the acquisition method of accounting. Any change in the assumptions used in such methodology could have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

As a result of CBF’s recent acquisition, of us, our financial results are heavily influenced by the application of the acquisition method of accounting. The acquisition method of accounting requires management to make assumptions regarding the assets purchased and liabilities assumed to determine their fair market value. Capital Bank’s interest income, interest expense and net interest margin (which were equal to $226.4 million, $32.8 million and 3.41%, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2011) reflect the impact of accretion of the fair value adjustments made to the carrying amounts of interest earning assets and interest bearing liabilities and Capital Bank’s non-interest income (which totaled $40.7 million as of December 31, 2011) for periods subsequent to the acquisitions includes the effects of discount accretion and amortization of the FDIC indemnification asset. In addition, the balances of non-performing assets were significantly reduced by the adjustments to fair value recorded in conjunction with the relevant acquisition. If our assumptions are incorrect or the regulatory agencies to whom we report require that we change or modify its assumptions, such change or modification could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations or our previously reported results.

Our business is highly susceptible to credit risk.

As a lender, Capital Bank is exposed to the risk that its customers will be unable to repay their loans according to their terms and that the collateral (if any) securing the payment of their loans may not be sufficient to assure repayment. The risks inherent in making any loan include risks with respect to the period of time over which the loan may be repaid, risks relating to proper loan underwriting and guidelines, risks resulting from changes in economic and industry conditions, risks inherent in dealing with individual borrowers and risks resulting from uncertainties as to the future value of collateral. The credit standards, procedures and policies that Capital Bank has established for borrowers may not prevent the incurrence of substantial credit losses.

Although Capital Bank does not have a long enough operating history to have restructured many of its loans for borrowers in financial difficulty, in the future, it may restructure originated or acquired loans if Capital Bank believes the borrowers have a viable business plan to fully pay off all obligations. However, for its originated loans, if interest rates or other terms are modified upon extension of credit or if terms of an existing loan are renewed in such a situation and a concession is granted, Capital Bank may be required to classify such action as a troubled debt restructuring (which we refer to as a “TDR”). Capital Bank would classify loans as TDRs when certain modifications are made to the loan terms and concessions are granted to the borrowers due to their financial difficulty. Generally, these loans would be restructured to provide the borrower additional time to execute its business plan. With respect to restructured loans, Capital Bank may grant concessions by (1) reduction of the stated interest rate for the remaining original life of the debt or (2) extension of the maturity date at a stated interest rate lower than the current market rate for new debt with similar risk. In situations where a TDR is unsuccessful and the borrower is unable to satisfy the terms of the restructured agreement, the loan would be placed on nonaccrual status and written down to the underlying collateral value.

Recent economic and market developments and the potential for continued economic disruption present considerable risks to CBF and it is difficult to determine the depth and duration of the economic and financial market problems and the many ways in which they may impact CBF’s business in general. Any failure to manage such credit risks may materially adversely affect CBF’s business and its consolidated results of operations and financial condition.

A significant portion of Capital Bank’s loan portfolio is secured by real estate, and events that negatively impact the real estate market could hurt its business.

A significant portion of Capital Bank’s loan portfolio is secured by real estate. As of December 31, 2011, approximately 86% of Capital Bank’s loans had real estate as a primary or secondary component of collateral. The real estate collateral in each case provides an alternate source of repayment in the event of default by the borrower and may deteriorate in value during the time the credit is extended. A continued weakening of the real estate market in Capital Bank’s primary market areas could continue to result in an increase in the number of borrowers who default on their loans and a reduction in the value of the collateral securing their loans, which in turn could have an adverse effect on Capital Bank’s profitability and asset quality. If Capital Bank is required to liquidate the collateral securing a loan to satisfy the debt during a period of reduced real estate values, its earnings and shareholders’ equity could be adversely affected.

31


Additionally, recent weakness in the secondary market for residential lending could have an adverse impact on Capital Bank’s profitability. Significant ongoing disruptions in the secondary market for residential mortgage loans have limited the market for and liquidity of most mortgage loans other than conforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loans. The effects of ongoing mortgage market challenges, combined with the ongoing correction in residential real estate market prices and reduced levels of home sales, could result in further price reductions in single family home values, adversely affecting the value of collateral securing mortgage loans held, any future mortgage loan originations and gains on sale of mortgage loans. Continued declines in real estate values and home sales volumes and financial stress on borrowers as a result of job losses or other factors could have further adverse effects on borrowers that result in higher delinquencies and charge-offs in future periods, which could adversely affect Capital Bank’s financial position and results of operations.

Capital Bank’s construction and land development loans are based upon estimates of costs and the values of the complete projects.

While Capital Bank intends to focus on originating loans other than non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans, its portfolio includes construction and land development loans (which we refer to as “C&D loans”) extended to builders and developers, primarily for the construction and/or development of properties. These loans have been extended on a presold and speculative basis and they include loans for both residential and commercial purposes.

In general, C&D lending involves additional risks because of the inherent difficulty in estimating a property’s value both before and at completion of the project. Construction costs may exceed original estimates as a result of increased materials, labor or other costs. In addition, because of current uncertainties in the residential and commercial real estate markets, property values have become more difficult to determine than they have been historically. The repayment of construction and land acquisition and development loans is often dependent, in part, on the ability of the borrower to sell or lease the property. These loans also require ongoing monitoring. In addition, speculative construction loans to a residential builder are often associated with homes that are not presold and, thus, pose a greater potential risk than construction loans to individuals on their personal residences. Slowing housing sales have been a contributing factor to an increase in non-performing loans as well as an increase in delinquencies.

As of December 31, 2011, C&D loans totaled $509.3million (or 12% of Capital Bank’s total loan portfolio), of which $85.9 million was for construction and/or development of residential properties and $423.3 million was for construction/development of commercial properties. As of December 31, 2011, non-performing C&D loans covered under FDIC loss share agreements totaled $39.4 million and non-performing C&D loans not covered under FDIC loss share agreements totaled $94.9 million.

Capital Bank’s non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans may be dependent on factors outside the control of its borrowers.

While Capital Bank intends to focus on originating loans other than non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans, in the acquisitions it acquired non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans for individuals and businesses for various purposes, which are secured by commercial properties. These loans typically involve repayment dependent upon income generated, or expected to be generated, by the property securing the loan in amounts sufficient to cover operating expenses and debt service. This may be adversely affected by changes in the economy or local market conditions. Non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans expose a lender to greater credit risk than loans secured by residential real estate because the collateral securing these loans typically cannot be liquidated as easily as residential real estate. In such cases, Capital Bank may be compelled to modify the terms of the loan or engage in other potentially expensive work-out techniques. If Capital Bank forecloses on a non-owner occupied commercial real estate loan, the holding period for the collateral typically is longer than a 1-4 family residential property because there are fewer potential purchasers of the collateral. Additionally, non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans generally have relatively large balances to single borrowers or related groups of borrowers. Accordingly, charge-offs on non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans may be larger on a per loan basis than those incurred with Capital Bank’s residential or consumer loan portfolios.

As of December 31, 2011, Capital Bank’s non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans totaled $903.9 million (or 21% of its total loan portfolio). As of December 31, 2011, non-performing non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans covered under FDIC loss share agreements totaled $15.3 million and non-performing non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans not covered under FDIC loss share agreements totaled $49.5 million.

Repayment of Capital Bank’s commercial business loans is dependent on the cash flows of borrowers, which may be unpredictable, and the collateral securing these loans may fluctuate in value.

Capital Bank’s business plan focuses on originating different types of commercial business loans. Capital Bank classifies the types of commercial loans offered as owner-occupied term real estate loans, business lines of credit and term equipment financing.

32


Commercial business lending involves risks that are different from those associated with non-owner occupied commercial real estate lending. Capital Bank’s commercial business loans are primarily underwritten based on the cash flow of the borrower and secondarily on the underlying collateral, including real estate. The borrowers’ cash flow may be unpredictable, and collateral securing these loans may fluctuate in value. Some of Capital Bank’s commercial business loans are collateralized by equipment, inventory, accounts receivable or other business assets, and the liquidation of collateral in the event of default is often an insufficient source of repayment because accounts receivable may be uncollectible and inventories may be obsolete or of limited use.

As of December 31, 2011, Capital Bank’s commercial business loans totaled $1.4 billion (or 32% of its total loan portfolio). Of this amount, $902.8 million was secured by owner-occupied real estate and $465.8 million was secured by business assets. As of December 31, 2011, non-performing commercial business loans covered under FDIC loss share agreements totaled $29.8 million and non-performing commercial business loans not covered under FDIC loss share agreements totaled $67.7 million.

Capital Bank’s allowance for loan losses and fair value adjustments may prove to be insufficient to absorb losses for loans that it originates.

Lending money is a substantial part of Capital Bank’s business and each loan carries a certain risk that it will maintainnot be repaid in accordance with its terms or that any underlying collateral will not be sufficient to assure repayment. This risk is affected by, among other things:

cash flow of the borrower and/or the project being financed;

the changes and uncertainties as to the future value of the collateral, in the case of a Tier 1 leveragecollateralized loan;

the duration of the loan;

the discount on the loan at the time of acquisition;

the credit history of a particular borrower; and

changes in economic and industry conditions.

Non-performing loans covered under loss share agreements with the FDIC totaled $124.2 million, and Non-performing loans not covered under loss share agreements with the FDIC totaled $258.3 million as of December 31, 2011. Capital Bank maintains an allowance for loan losses with respect to loans it originates, which is a reserve established through a provision for loan losses charged to expense, which management believes is appropriate to provide for probable losses in Capital Bank’s loan portfolio. The amount of this allowance is determined by Capital Bank’s management team through periodic reviews. As of December 31, 2011, the allowance on loans covered by loss share agreements with the FDIC was $11.8 million, and the allowance on loans not covered by loss share agreements with the FDIC was $22.9 million. As of December 31, 2011, the ratio of not less than 10%Capital Bank’s allowance for loan losses to non-performing loans covered by loss share agreements with the FDIC was 9.5% and a Total risk-based capitalthe ratio of its allowance for loan losses to non-performing loans not covered by loss share agreements with the FDIC was 8.9%.

The application of the acquisition method of accounting to CBF’s completed acquisitions impacted Capital Bank’s allowance for loan losses. Under the acquisition method of accounting, all loans were recorded in financial statements at their fair value at the time of their acquisition and the related allowance for loan loss was eliminated because the fair value at the time was determined by the net present value of the expected cash flows taking into consideration estimated credit quality. Capital Bank may in the future determine that the estimates of fair value are too high, in which case Capital Bank would provide for additional loan losses associated with the acquired loans. As of December 31, 2011, the allowance for loan losses on purchased credit-impaired loan pools totaled $26.3 million, of which $11.8 million was related to loan pools covered by loss share agreements with the FDIC and $14.5 million was related to loan pools not covered by loss share agreements with the FDIC.

The determination of the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses inherently involves a high degree of subjectivity and requires Capital Bank to make significant estimates of current credit risks and future trends, all of which may undergo material changes. Changes in economic conditions affecting borrowers, new information regarding existing loans that Capital Bank originates, identification of additional problem loans originated by Capital Bank and other factors, both within and outside of management’s control, may require an increase in the allowance for loan losses. If current trends in the real estate markets continue, Capital Bank’s management expects that it will continue to experience increased delinquencies and credit losses, particularly with respect to construction, land development and land loans. In addition, bank regulatory agencies periodically review Capital Bank’s allowance for loan losses and may require an increase in the provision for probable loan losses or the recognition of further loan charge-offs, based on judgments different than those of management. In addition, if charge-offs in future periods exceed the allowance for loan losses, Capital Bank will need additional provisions to increase the allowance for loan losses. Any increases in the allowance for loan losses will result in a decrease in net income and, possibly, capital and may have a material adverse effect on Capital Bank’s financial condition and results of operations.

33


Capital Bank continues to hold and acquire other real estate, which has led to increased operating expenses and vulnerability to additional declines in real property values.

Capital Bank forecloses on and take title to the real estate serving as collateral for many of its loans as part of its business. Real estate owned by Capital Bank and not used in the ordinary course of its operations is referred to as “other real estate owned” or “OREO” property. At December 31, 2011, Capital Bank had $168.8 million of OREO. Increased OREO balances have led to greater expenses as costs are incurred to manage and dispose of the properties. Capital Bank’s management expects that its earnings will continue to be negatively affected by various expenses associated with OREO, including personnel costs, insurance and taxes, completion and repair costs, valuation adjustments and other expenses associated with property ownership, as well as by the funding costs associated with assets that are tied up in OREO. Any further decrease in real estate market prices may lead to additional OREO write-downs, with a corresponding expense in Capital Bank’s statement of operations. Capital Bank’s management evaluates OREO properties periodically and writes down the carrying value of the properties if the results of such evaluations require it. The expenses associated with OREO and any further property write-downs could have a material adverse effect on Capital Bank’s financial condition and results of operations.

Capital Bank is subject to environmental liability risk associated with lending activities.

A significant portion of Capital Bank’s loan portfolio is secured by real property. During the ordinary course of business, Capital Bank may foreclose on and take title to properties securing certain loans. In doing so, there is a risk that hazardous or toxic substances could be found on these properties. If hazardous or toxic substances are found, Capital Bank may be liable for remediation costs, as well as for personal injury and property damage. Environmental laws may require Capital Bank to incur substantial expenses to address unknown liabilities and may materially reduce the affected property’s value or limit the Bank’s ability to use or sell the affected property. In addition, future laws or more stringent interpretations or enforcement policies with respect to existing laws may increase Capital Bank’s exposure to environmental liability. Although Capital Bank has policies and procedures to perform an environmental review before initiating any foreclosure action on nonresidential real property, these reviews may not be sufficient to detect all potential environmental hazards. The remediation costs and any other financial liabilities associated with an environmental hazard could have a material adverse effect on Capital Bank’s financial condition and results of operations.

Delinquencies and defaults in residential mortgages have increased, creating a backlog in courts and an increase in industry scrutiny by regulators, as well as resulting in proposed new laws and regulations governing foreclosures. Such laws and regulations might restrict or delay Capital Bank’s ability to foreclose and collect payments for single family residential loans under the loss sharing agreements.

Recent laws delay the initiation or completion of foreclosure proceedings on specified types of residential mortgage loans (some for a limited period of time), or otherwise limit the ability of residential loan servicers to take actions that may be essential to preserve the value of the mortgage loans. Any such limitations are likely to cause delayed or reduced collections from mortgagors and generally increased servicing costs. As a servicer of mortgage loans, any restriction on Capital Bank’s ability to foreclose on a loan, any requirement that the Bank forego a portion of the amount otherwise due on a loan or any requirement that the Bank modify any original loan terms will in some instances require Capital Bank to advance principal, interest, tax and insurance payments, which may negatively impact its business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

In addition, for the single family residential loans covered by the loss sharing agreements, Capital Bank cannot collect loss share payments until it liquidates the properties securing those loans. These loss share payments could be delayed by an extended foreclosure process, including delays resulting from a court backlog, local or national foreclosure moratoriums or other delays, and these delays could have a material adverse effect on Capital Bank’s results of operations.

Like other financial services institutions, Capital Bank’s asset and liability structures are monetary in nature. Such structures are affected by a variety of factors, including changes in interest rates, which can impact the value of financial instruments held by the Bank.

Like other financial services institutions, Capital Bank has asset and liability structures that are essentially monetary in nature and are directly affected by many factors, including domestic and international economic and political conditions, broad trends in business and finance, legislation and regulation affecting the national and international business and financial communities, monetary and fiscal policies, inflation, currency values, market conditions, the availability and cost of short-term or long-term funding and capital, the credit capacity or perceived creditworthiness of customers and counterparties and the level and volatility of trading markets. Such factors can impact customers and counterparties of a financial services institution and may impact the value of financial instruments held by a financial services institution.

34


Capital Bank’s earnings and cash flows largely depend upon the level of its net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income it earns on loans, investments and other interest earning assets, and the interest it pays on interest bearing liabilities, such as deposits and borrowings. Because different types of assets and liabilities may react differently and at different times to market interest rate changes, changes in interest rates can increase or decrease Capital Bank’s net interest income. When interest-bearing liabilities mature or reprice more quickly than interest earning assets in a period, an increase in interest rates could reduce net interest income. Similarly, when interest earning assets mature or reprice more quickly, and because the magnitude of repricing of interest earning assets is often greater than interest bearing liabilities, falling interest rates could reduce net interest income.

Additionally, an increase in interest rates may, among other things, reduce the demand for loans and Capital Bank’s ability to originate loans and decrease loan repayment rates, while a decrease in the general level of interest rates may adversely affect the fair value of the Bank’s financial assets and liabilities and its ability to realize gains on the sale of assets. A decrease in the general level of interest rates may affect Capital Bank through, among other things, increased prepayments on its loan and mortgage-backed securities portfolios and increased competition for deposits.

Accordingly, changes in the level of market interest rates affect Capital Bank’s net yield on interest earning assets, loan origination volume, loan and mortgage-backed securities portfolios and its overall results. Changes in interest rates may also have a significant impact on any future mortgage loan origination revenues. Historically, there has been an inverse correlation between the demand for mortgage loans and interest rates. Mortgage origination volume and revenues usually decline during periods of rising or high interest rates and increase during periods of declining or low interest rates. Changes in interest rates also have a significant impact on the carrying value of a significant percentage of the assets on Capital Bank’s balance sheet. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors beyond the Bank’s management’s control, including general economic conditions and policies of various governmental and regulatory agencies, particularly the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (which we refer to as the “Federal Reserve”). Capital Bank’s management cannot predict the nature and timing of the Federal Reserve’s interest rate policies or other changes in monetary policies and economic conditions, which could negatively impact the Bank’s financial performance.

Capital Bank has benefited in recent periods from a favorable interest rate environment, but management believes that this environment cannot be sustained indefinitely and interest rates would be expected to rise as the economy recovers. A strengthening U.S. economy would be expected to cause the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve to increase short-term interest rates, which would increase Capital Bank’s borrowing costs.

The fair value of Capital Bank’s investment securities can fluctuate due to market conditions out of management’s control.

As of December 31, 2011, approximately 94% of Capital Bank’s investment securities portfolio was comprised of U.S. government agency and sponsored enterprises obligations, U.S. government agency and sponsored enterprises mortgage-backed securities and securities of municipalities. As of December 31, 2011, the fair value of Capital Bank’s investment securities portfolio was approximately $827.4 million. Factors beyond Capital Bank’s control can significantly influence the fair value of securities in its portfolio and can cause potential adverse changes to the fair value of these securities. These factors include, but are not limited to, rating agency downgrades of the securities, defaults by the issuer or with respect to the underlying securities, changes in market interest rates and continued instability in the credit markets. In addition, Capital Bank has historically taken a conservative investment posture, concentrating on government issuances of short duration. In the future, Capital Bank may seek to increase yields through more aggressive investment strategies, which may include a greater percentage of corporate issuances and structured credit products. Any of these mentioned factors, among others, could cause other-than-temporary impairments in future periods and result in a realized loss, which could have a material adverse effect on Capital Bank’s business. The process for determining whether impairment is other-than-temporary usually requires complex, subjective judgments about the future financial performance of the issuer and any collateral underlying the security in order to assess the probability of receiving all contractual principal and interest payments on the security. Because of changing economic and market conditions affecting issuers and the performance of the underlying collateral, Capital Bank may recognize realized and/or unrealized losses in future periods, which could have an adverse effect on its financial condition and results of operations.

Capital Bank has a significant deferred tax asset that may not be fully realized in the future.

Capital Bank’s net deferred tax asset totaled $164.2 million as of December 31, 2011. The ultimate realization of a deferred tax asset is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods prior to the expiration of the related net operating losses. If Capital Bank’s estimates and assumptions about future taxable income are not accurate, the value of its deferred tax asset may not be recoverable and may result in a valuation allowance that would impact the Bank’s earnings.

35


Recent market disruptions have caused increased liquidity risks and, if Capital Bank is unable to maintain sufficient liquidity, it may not be able to meet the cash flow requirements of its depositors and borrowers.

The recent disruption and illiquidity in the credit markets have generally made potential funding sources more difficult to access, less reliable and more expensive. Capital Bank’s liquidity is generally used to make loans and to repay deposit liabilities as they become due or are demanded by customers, and further deterioration in the credit markets or a prolonged period without improvement of market liquidity could present significant challenges in the management of Capital Bank’s liquidity and could adversely affect its business, results of operations and prospects. For example, if as a result of a sudden decline in depositor confidence resulting from negative market conditions, a substantial number of bank customers tried to withdraw their bank deposits simultaneously, Capital Bank’s reserves may not be able to cover the withdrawals.

Furthermore, an inability to increase Capital Bank’s deposit base at all or at attractive rates would impede its ability to fund the Bank’s continued growth, which could have an adverse effect on the Bank’s business, results of operations and financial condition. Collateralized borrowings such as advances from the FHLB are an important potential source of liquidity. Capital Bank’s borrowing capacity is generally dependent on the value of the collateral pledged to the FHLB. An adverse regulatory change could reduce Capital Bank’s borrowing capacity or eliminate certain types of collateral and could otherwise modify or even eliminate the Bank’s access to FHLB advances, Federal Fund line borrowings and discount window advances. Liquidity may also be adversely impacted by bank supervisory and regulatory authorities mandating changes in the composition of Capital Bank’s balance sheet to asset classes that are less liquid. Any such change or termination may have an adverse effect on Capital Bank’s liquidity.

Capital Bank’s access to other funding sources could be impaired by factors that are not specific to the Bank, such as a disruption in the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the financial services industry in light of recent turmoil faced by banking organizations and the unstable credit markets. Capital Bank may need to incur additional debt in the future to achieve its business objectives, in connection with future acquisitions or for other reasons. Any borrowings, if sought, may not be available to Capital Bank or, if available, may not be on favorable terms. Without sufficient liquidity, Capital Bank may not be able to meet the cash flow requirements of its depositors and borrowers, which could have a material adverse effect on the Bank’s financial condition and results of operations.

Capital Bank may not be able to retain or develop a strong core deposit base or other low-cost funding sources.

Capital Bank expects to depend on checking, savings and money market deposit account balances and other forms of customer deposits as its primary source of funding for the Bank’s lending activities. Capital Bank’s future growth will largely depend on its ability to retain and grow a strong deposit base. Because 43% of Capital Bank’s deposits as of December 31, 2011 were time deposits, it may prove harder to maintain and grow the Bank’s deposit base than 14%.would otherwise be the case. Capital Bank is also working to transition certain of its customers to lower cost traditional banking services as higher cost funding sources, such as high interest certificates of deposit, mature. There may be competitive pressures to pay higher interest rates on deposits, which could increase funding costs and compress net interest margins. Customers may not transition to lower yielding savings or investment products or continue their business with Capital Bank, which could adversely affect its operations. In addition, with recent concerns about bank failures, customers have become concerned about the extent to which their deposits are insured by the FDIC, particularly customers that may maintain deposits in excess of insured limits. Customers may withdraw deposits in an effort to ensure that the amount that they have on deposit with Capital Bank is fully insured and may place them in other institutions or make investments that are perceived as being more secure. Further, even if Capital Bank is able to grow and maintain its deposit base, the account and deposit balances can decrease when customers perceive alternative investments, such as the stock market, as providing a better risk/return tradeoff. If customers move money out of bank deposits and into other investments (or similar products at other institutions that may provide a higher rate of return), Capital Bank could lose a relatively low cost source of funds, increasing its funding costs and reducing the Bank’s net interest income and net income. Additionally, any such loss of funds could result in lower loan originations, which could materially negatively impact Capital Bank’s growth strategy and results of operations.

Capital Bank operates in a highly competitive industry and faces significant competition from other financial institutions and financial services providers, which may decrease its growth or profits.

Consumer and commercial banking is highly competitive. Capital Bank’s market contains not only a large number of community and regional banks, but also a significant presence of the country’s largest commercial banks. Capital Bank competes with other state and national financial institutions as well as savings and loan associations, savings banks and credit unions for deposits and loans. In addition, Capital Bank competes with financial intermediaries, such as consumer finance companies, mortgage banking companies, insurance companies, securities firms, mutual funds and several government agencies as well as major retailers, all actively engaged in providing various types of loans and other financial services. Some of these competitors may have a long history of successful operations in Capital Bank’s markets, greater ties to local businesses and more expansive banking relationships, as well as better established depositor bases. Competitors with greater resources may possess an advantage by being capable of maintaining numerous banking locations in more convenient sites, operating more ATMs and conducting extensive promotional and advertising campaigns or operating a more developed Internet platform.

36


The financial services industry could become even more competitive as a result of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and continued consolidation. Banks, securities firms and insurance companies can merge under the umbrella of a financial holding company, which can offer virtually any type of financial service, including banking, securities underwriting, insurance (both agency and underwriting) and merchant banking. Increased competition among financial services companies due to the recent consolidation of certain competing financial institutions may adversely affect Capital Bank’s ability to market its products and services. Also, technology has lowered barriers to entry and made it possible for banks to compete in Capital Bank’s market without a retail footprint by offering competitive rates, as well as non-banks to offer products and services traditionally provided by banks. Many of Capital Bank’s competitors have fewer regulatory constraints and may have lower cost structures. Additionally, due to their size, many competitors may offer a broader range of products and services as well as better pricing for certain products and services than Capital Bank can.

Capital Bank’s ability to compete successfully depends on a number of factors, including:

the ability to develop, maintain and build upon long-term customer relationships based on quality service and high ethical standards;

the ability to attract and retain qualified employees to operate the Bank’s business effectively;

the ability to expand the Bank’s market position;

the scope, relevance and pricing of products and services offered to meet customer needs and demands;

the rate at which the Bank introduces new products and services relative to its competitors;

customer satisfaction with the Bank’s level of service; and

industry and general economic trends.

Failure to perform in any of these areas could significantly weaken Capital Bank’s competitive position, which could adversely affect its growth and profitability, which, in turn, could harm the Bank’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Capital Bank may be adversely affected by the soundness of other financial institutions

Capital Bank’s ability to engage in routine funding and other transactions could be adversely affected by the actions and commercial soundness of other financial institutions. Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty or other relationships. Defaults by, or even rumors or questions about, one or more financial institutions, or the financial services industry generally, may lead to market-wide liquidity problems and losses of depositor, creditor and counterparty confidence and could lead to losses or defaults by us or by other institutions.

Capital Bank is subject to losses due to the errors or fraudulent behavior of employees or third parties.

Capital Bank is exposed to many types of operational risk, including the risk of fraud by employees and outsiders, clerical recordkeeping errors and transactional errors. Capital Bank’s business is dependent on its employees as well as third-party service providers to process a large number of increasingly complex transactions. Capital Bank could be materially adversely affected if one of its employees causes a significant operational breakdown or failure, either as a result of human error or where an individual purposefully sabotages or fraudulently manipulates the Bank’s operations or systems. When Capital Bank originates loans, it relies upon information supplied by loan applicants and third parties, including the information contained in the loan application, property appraisal and title information, if applicable, and employment and income documentation provided by third parties. If any of this information is misrepresented and such misrepresentation is not detected prior to loan funding, Capital Bank generally bears the risk of loss associated with the misrepresentation. Any of these occurrences could result in a diminished ability of Capital Bank to operate its business, potential liability to customers, reputational damage and regulatory intervention, which could negatively impact the Bank’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Capital Bank is dependent on its information technology and telecommunications systems and third-party servicers, and systems failures, interruptions or breaches of security could have an adverse effect on the Bank’s financial condition and results of operations.

Capital Bank’s business is highly dependent on the successful and uninterrupted functioning of its information technology and telecommunications systems and third-party servicers. Capital Bank outsources many of its major systems, such

37


as data processing, loan servicing and deposit processing systems. The failure of these systems, or the termination of a third-party software license or service agreement on which any of these systems is based, could interrupt the Bank’s operations. Because Capital Bank’s information technology and telecommunications systems interface with and depend on third-party systems, the Bank could experience service denials if demand for such services exceeds capacity or such third-party systems fail or experience interruptions. If sustained or repeated, a system failure or service denial could result in a deterioration of Capital Bank’s ability to process new and renewal loans, gather deposits and provide customer service, compromise the Bank’s ability to operate effectively, damage its reputation, result in a loss of customer business and/or subject the Bank to additional regulatory scrutiny and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the Bank’s financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, Capital Bank provides its customers the ability to bank remotely, including online over the Internet. The secure transmission of confidential information is a critical element of remote banking. Capital Bank’s network could be vulnerable to unauthorized access, computer viruses, phishing schemes, spam attacks, human error, natural disasters, power loss and other security breaches. Capital Bank may be required to spend significant capital and other resources to protect against the threat of security breaches and computer viruses, or to alleviate problems caused by security breaches or viruses. To the extent that Capital Bank’s activities or the activities of its customers involve the storage and transmission of confidential information, security breaches and viruses could expose the Bank to claims, litigation and other possible liabilities. Any inability to prevent security breaches or computer viruses could also cause existing customers to lose confidence in Capital Bank’s systems and could adversely affect its reputation, results of operations and ability to attract and maintain customers and businesses. In addition, a security breach could also subject Capital Bank to additional regulatory scrutiny, expose the Bank to civil litigation and possible financial liability and cause reputational damage.

Hurricanes or other adverse weather events would negatively affect Capital Bank’s local economies or disrupt its operations, which would have an adverse effect on the Bank’s business or results of operations.

Capital Bank’s market areas in the southeastern region of the United States are susceptible to natural disasters, such as hurricanes, tornadoes, tropical storms, other severe weather events and related flooding and wind damage, and manmade disasters, such as the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Capital Bank’s market areas in Tennessee are susceptible to natural disasters, such as tornadoes and floods. These natural disasters could negatively impact regional economic conditions, cause a decline in the value or destruction of mortgaged properties and an increase in the risk of delinquencies, foreclosures or loss on loans originated by Capital Bank, damage its banking facilities and offices and negatively impact the Bank’s growth strategy. Such weather events can disrupt operations, result in damage to properties and negatively affect the local economies in the markets where Capital Bank operates. The Bank’s management cannot predict whether or to what extent damage that may be caused by future hurricanes or tornadoes will affect Capital Bank’s operations or the economies in its current or future market areas, but such weather events could negatively impact economic conditions in these regions and result in a decline in local loan demand and loan originations, a decline in the value or destruction of properties securing Capital Bank’s loans and an increase in delinquencies, foreclosures or loan losses. Capital Bank’s business or results of operations may be adversely affected by these and other negative effects of natural or manmade disasters.

Risks Relating to Capital Bank’s Growth Strategy

Capital Bank may not be able to effectively manage its growth.

Capital Bank’s future operating results depend to a large extent on its ability to successfully manage its rapid growth. Capital Bank’s rapid growth has placed, and it may continue to place, significant demands on its operations and management. Whether through additional acquisitions or organic growth, Capital Bank’s current plan to expand its business is dependent upon:

the ability of its officers and other key employees to continue to implement and improve its operational, credit, financial, management and other internal risk controls and processes and its reporting systems and procedures in order to manage a growing number of client relationships;

to scale its technology platform;

to integrate its acquisitions and develop consistent policies throughout the various businesses; and

to manage a growing number of client relationships.

Capital Bank may not successfully implement improvements to, or integrate, its management information and control systems, procedures and processes in an efficient or timely manner and may discover deficiencies in existing systems and controls. In particular, Capital Bank’s controls and procedures must be able to accommodate an increase in expected

38


loan volume and the infrastructure that comes with new branches and banks. Thus, Capital Bank’s growth strategy may divert management from its existing businesses and may require the Bank to incur additional expenditures to expand its administrative and operational infrastructure and, if Capital Bank is unable to effectively manage and grow its banking franchise, its business and the Bank’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition could be materially and adversely impacted. In addition, if Capital Bank is unable to manage future expansion in its operations, the Bank may experience compliance and operational problems, have to slow the pace of growth, or have to incur additional expenditures beyond current projections to support such growth, any one of which could adversely affect Capital Bank’s business.

Many of Capital Bank’s new activities and expansion plans require regulatory approvals, and failure to obtain them may restrict its growth.

Capital Bank intends to complement and expand its business by pursuing strategic acquisitions of banks and other financial institutions. Generally, any acquisition of target financial institutions or assets by CBF or Capital Bank will require approval by, and cooperation from, a number of governmental regulatory agencies, possibly including the Federal Reserve, the OCC and the FDIC, as well as state banking regulators. In acting on such applications of approval, federal banking regulators consider, among other factors:

the effect of the acquisition on competition;

the financial condition and future prospects of the applicant and the banks involved;

the managerial resources of the applicant and the banks involved;

the convenience and needs of the community, including the record of performance under the Community Reinvestment Act (which we refer to as the “CRA”); and

the effectiveness of the applicant in combating money laundering activities.

Such regulators could deny an application based on the above criteria or other considerations or the regulatory approvals may not be granted on terms that are acceptable to CBF or Capital Bank. For example, Capital Bank could be required to sell branches as a condition to receiving regulatory approvals, and such a condition may not be acceptable to CBF or Capital Bank or may reduce the benefit of any acquisition.

The success of future transactions will depend on CBF’s ability to successfully identify and consummate transactions with target financial institutions that meet its investment criteria. Because of the significant competition for acquisition opportunities and the limited number of potential targets, CBF may not be able to successfully consummate acquisitions necessary to grow its business.

The success of future transactions will depend on CBF’s ability to successfully identify and consummate transactions with target financial institutions that meet its investment criteria. There are significant risks associated with CBF’s ability to identify and successfully consummate transactions with target financial institutions. There are a limited number of acquisition opportunities, and CBF expects to encounter intense competition from other banking organizations competing for acquisitions and also from other investment funds and entities looking to acquire financial institutions. Many of these entities are well established and have extensive experience in identifying and effecting acquisitions directly or through affiliates. Many of these competitors possess ongoing banking operations with greater technical, human and other resources than CBF and Capital Bank do, and CBF’s financial resources will be relatively limited when contrasted with those of many of these competitors. These organizations may be able to achieve greater cost savings through consolidating operations than CBF could. CBF’s ability to compete in acquiring certain sizable target institutions will be limited by its available financial resources. These inherent competitive limitations give others an advantage in pursuing the acquisition of certain target financial institutions. In addition, increased competition may drive up the prices for the types of acquisitions CBF intends to target, which would make the identification and successful consummation of acquisition opportunities more difficult. Competitors may be willing to pay more for target financial institutions than CBF believes are justified, which could result in CBF having to pay more for target financial institutions than it prefers or to forego target financial institutions. As a result of the foregoing, CBF may be unable to successfully identify and consummate future transactions to grow its business on commercially attractive terms, or at all.

Because the institutions CBF intends to acquire may have distressed assets, CBF may not be able to realize the value it predicts from these assets or make sufficient provision for future losses in the value of, or accurately estimate the future write-downs taken in respect of, these assets.

Delinquencies and losses in the loan portfolios and other assets of financial institutions that CBF acquires may exceed its initial forecasts developed during the due diligence investigation prior to acquiring those institutions. Even if CBF conducts extensive due diligence on an entity it decides to acquire, this diligence may not reveal all material issues that may affect a particular entity. The diligence process in FDIC-assisted transactions is also expedited due to the short acquisition timeline that

39


is typical for these depository institutions. If, during the diligence process, CBF fails to identify issues specific to an entity or the environment in which the entity operates, CBF may be forced to later write down or write off assets, restructure its operations, or incur impairment or other charges that could result in other reporting losses. Any of these events could adversely affect the financial condition, liquidity, capital position and value of institutions CBF acquires and of CBF as a whole. If any of the foregoing adverse events occur with respect to one subsidiary, they may adversely affect other of CBF’s subsidiaries or the CBF as a whole. Current economic conditions have created an uncertain environment with respect to asset valuations and there is no certainty that CBF will be able to sell assets of target institutions if it determines it would be in its best interests to do so. The institutions CBF will target may have substantial amounts of asset classes for which there is currently limited or no marketability.

The success of future transactions will depend on CBF’s ability to successfully combine the target financial institution’s business with CBF’s existing banking business and, if CBF experiences difficulties with the integration process, the anticipated benefits of the acquisition may not be realized fully or at all or may take longer to realize than expected.

The success of future transactions will depend, in part, on CBF’s ability to successfully combine the target financial institution’s business with its existing banking business. As with any acquisition involving financial institutions, there may be business disruptions that result in the loss of customers or cause customers to remove their accounts and move their business to competing banking institutions. It is possible that the integration process could result in additional expenses in connection with the integration processes and the disruption of ongoing business or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures and policies that adversely affect Capital Bank’s ability to maintain relationships with clients, customers, depositors and employees or to achieve the anticipated benefits of the acquisition. Integration efforts, including integration of the target financial institution’s systems into Capital Bank’s systems may divert the Bank’s management’s attention and resources, and CBF may be unable to develop, or experience prolonged delays in the development of, the systems necessary to operate its acquired banks, such as a financial reporting platform or a human resources reporting platform call center. If CBF experiences difficulties with the integration process, the anticipated benefits of any future transaction may not be realized fully or at all or may take longer to realize than expected. Additionally, CBF and Capital Bank may be unable to recognize synergies, operating efficiencies and/or expected benefits within expected timeframes within expected cost projections, or at all. CBF may also not be able to preserve the goodwill of the acquired financial institution.

Projected operating results for entities to be acquired by CBF may be inaccurate and may vary significantly from actual results.

CBF will generally establish the pricing of transactions and the capital structure of entities to be acquired on the basis of financial projections for such entities. In general, projected operating results will be based primarily on management judgments. In all cases, projections are only estimates of future results that are based upon assumptions made at the time that the projections are developed and the projected results may vary significantly from actual results. General economic, political and market conditions, which are not predictable, can have a material adverse impact on the reliability of such projections. In the event that the projections made in connection with CBF’s acquisitions, or future projections with respect to new acquisitions, are not accurate, such inaccuracies could materially and adversely affect Capital Bank’s business and CBF’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition.

40


Changes in accounting standards may affect how we report our financial condition and results of operations.

Our accounting policies and methods are fundamental to how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. From time to time, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (which we refer to as the “FASB”) or other regulatory authorities change the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of financial statements. These changes can be hard to predict and can materially impact how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. In some cases, we could be required to apply a new or revised standard retroactively, resulting in us restating prior period financial statements.

Risks Relating to the Regulation of Capital Bank’s Industry

Capital Bank operates in a highly regulated industry and the laws and regulations that govern its operations, corporate governance, executive compensation and financial accounting, or reporting, including changes in them or Capital Bank’s failure to comply with them, may adversely affect us.

Capital Bank is subject to extensive regulation and supervision that govern almost all aspects of its operations. Intended to protect customers, depositors, consumers, deposit insurance funds and the stability of the U.S. financial system, these laws and regulations, among other matters, prescribe minimum capital requirements, impose limitations on the Company and Capital Bank’s business activities, limit the dividend or distributions that Capital Bank or the Company can pay, restrict the ability of institutions to guarantee Capital Bank’s debt and impose certain specific accounting requirements that may be more restrictive and may result in greater or earlier charges to earnings or reductions in the Bank’s capital than generally accepted accounting principles. Compliance with laws and regulations can be difficult and costly and changes to laws and regulations often impose additional compliance costs. Capital Bank is currently facing increased regulation and supervision of the industry as a result of the financial crisis in the banking and financial markets. Such additional regulation and supervision may increase Capital Bank’s costs and limit its ability to pursue business opportunities. Further, the Company, CBF or Capital Bank’s failure to comply with these laws and regulations, even if the failure was inadvertent or reflects a difference in interpretation, could subject the Bank to restrictions on its business activities, fines and other penalties, any of which could adversely affect its results of operations, capital base and the price of CBF’s or the Company’s securities. Further, any new laws, rules and regulations could make compliance more difficult or expensive or otherwise adversely affect Capital Bank’s business and financial condition.

Capital Bank is periodically subject to examination and scrutiny by a number of banking agencies and, depending upon the findings and determinations of these agencies, the Bank may be required to make adjustments to its business that could adversely affect it.

Federal and state banking agencies periodically conduct examinations of Capital Bank’s business, including compliance with applicable laws and regulations. If, as a result of an examination, a federal banking agency were to determine that the financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, asset concentration, earnings prospects, management, liquidity sensitivity to market risk or other aspects of any of Capital Bank’s operations has become unsatisfactory, or that the Bank incurredor its management is in violation of any law or regulation, it could take a number of different remedial actions as it deems appropriate. These actions include the second halfpower to enjoin “unsafe or unsound” practices, to require affirmative actions to correct any conditions resulting from any violation or practice, to issue an administrative order that can be judicially enforced, to direct an increase in Capital Bank’s capital, to restrict its growth, to change the asset composition of its portfolio or balance sheet, to assess civil monetary penalties against its officers or directors, to remove officers and directors and, if it is concluded that such conditions cannot be corrected or there is an imminent risk of loss to depositors, to terminate its deposit insurance. If Capital Bank becomes subject to such regulatory actions, its business, results of operations and reputation may be negatively impacted.

The enactment of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 may have a material effect on Capital Bank’s operations.

On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (which we refer to as the “Dodd-Frank Act”), which imposes significant regulatory and compliance changes. The key effects of the Dodd-Frank Act on Capital Bank’s business are:

changes to regulatory capital levels fell below these required minimum levels at December 31, 2010. At December 31,requirements;

exclusion of hybrid securities, including trust preferred securities, issued on or after May 19, 2010 the Bank’sfrom Tier 1 leverage ratio was 8.88%capital;

creation of new government regulatory agencies (such as the Financial Stability Oversight Council, which will oversee systemic risk, and its ratiothe Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which will develop and enforce rules for bank and non-bank providers of Total capitalconsumer financial products);

41


potential limitations on federal preemption;

changes to risk-weighted assets was 13.22%.deposit insurance assessments;

Because the Bank’s capital levels at December 31, 2010 were below those thatregulation of debit interchange fees the Bank had informally committed to its primary regulators that it would maintain,earns;

changes in retail banking regulations, including potential limitations on certain fees the Bank was requiredmay charge; and

changes in regulation of consumer mortgage loan origination and risk retention.

In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act restricts the ability of banks to submit a Capital Action Planengage in certain proprietary trading or to its primary regulators.

sponsor or invest in private equity or hedge funds. The Dodd-Frank Act also contains a number of provisions dealing with capital adequacydesigned to limit the ability of insured depository institutions, and their holding companies and fortheir affiliates to conduct certain swaps and derivatives activities and to take certain principal positions in financial instruments.

Some provisions of the most partDodd-Frank Act became effective immediately upon its enactment. Many provisions, however, will resultrequire regulations to be promulgated by various federal agencies in insured depository institutions and their holding companies being subjectorder to be implemented, some of which have been proposed by the applicable federal agencies. The provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act may have unintended effects, which will not be clear until implementation. The changes resulting from the Dodd-Frank Act may impact the profitability of Capital Bank’s business activities, require changes to certain of its business practices, impose upon the Bank more stringent capital, liquidity and leverage requirements or otherwise adversely affect Capital Bank’s business. These changes may also require Capital Bank to invest significant management attention and resources to evaluate and make any changes necessary to comply with new statutory and regulatory requirements. UnderFailure to comply with the so-called Collins Amendmentnew requirements may negatively impact Capital Bank’s results of operations and financial condition. While management cannot predict what effect any presently contemplated or future changes in the laws or regulations or their interpretations would have on Capital Bank or the Company, these changes could be materially adverse to the Company, Capital Bank and CBF.

The short-term and long-term impact of the new regulatory capital standards and the forthcoming new capital rules is uncertain.

On September 12, 2010, the Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision, the oversight body of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, announced an agreement to a strengthened set of capital requirements for internationally active banking organizations in the United States and around the world, known as Basel III. Basel III increases the requirements for minimum common equity, minimum Tier 1 capital and minimum total capital, to be phased in over time until fully phased in by January 1, 2019.

Various provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act federal regulators were directed to establish minimumincrease the capital requirements of bank holding companies, such as the Company, and non-bank financial companies that are supervised by the Federal Reserve. The leverage and risk-based capital requirements for, among otherratios of these entities banks and bank holding companies on a consolidated basis. These minimum requirements can’tmay not be less than the generally applicable leverage and risk-based capital requirements established for insured depository institutions nor quantitatively lower than the leverage and risk-based capital requirements established for insured depository institutions that were in effect as of the date that the Dodd-Frank Act was enacted. These requirements in effect create capital level floors for bank holding companies similar to those in place currentlyratios for insured depository institutions. The Collins Amendment also excludesIn particular, bank holding companies, many of which have long relied on trust preferred securities issued after May 19, 2010 from being included inas a component of their regulatory capital, will no longer be permitted to count trust preferred securities toward their Tier 1 capital. While the Basel III changes and other regulatory capital unless the issuing companyrequirements will likely result in generally higher regulatory capital standards, it is a bank holding company with less than $500 million in total assets. Trust preferred securities issued priordifficult at this time to that datepredict how any new standards will continue to count as Tier 1 capital for bank holding companies with less than $15 billion in total assets, and such securities willultimately be phased out of Tier 1 capital treatment for bank holding companies with over $15 billion in total assets over a three-year period beginning in 2013. The Collins Amendment did not exclude preferred stock issuedapplied to the U.S. Treasury throughCompany, CBF and Capital Bank.

The FDIC’s restoration plan and the CPP from Tier 1related increased assessment rate could adversely affect Capital Bank’s earnings.

The FDIC insures deposits at FDIC-insured depository institutions, such as Capital Bank, up to applicable limits. The amount of a particular institution’s deposit insurance assessment is based on that institution’s risk classification under an FDIC risk-based assessment system. An institution’s risk classification is assigned based on its capital treatment. Accordingly,levels and the Company’s TRUPslevel of supervisory concern the institution poses to its regulators. Market developments have significantly depleted the deposit insurance fund of the FDIC (which we refer to as the “DIF”) and Series A preferred stock issuedreduced the ratio of reserves to insured deposits. As a result of recent economic conditions and the U.S. Treasury throughenactment of the CPP will continueDodd-Frank Act, the FDIC has increased the deposit insurance assessment rates and thus raised deposit premiums for insured depository institutions. If these increases are insufficient for the DIF to qualify as Tier 1 capital.

meet its funding requirements, there may need to be further special assessments or increases in deposit insurance premiums. Capital Bank is generally unable to control the amount of premiums that it is required to pay for FDIC insurance. If there are additional bank or financial institution failures, Capital Bank may be required to pay even higher FDIC premiums than the recently increased levels. Any future additional assessments, increases or required prepayments in FDIC insurance premiums may materially adversely affect results of operations, including by reducing Capital Bank’s profitability or limiting its ability to pursue certain business opportunities.

 

20

42


Capital Bank is subject to federal and state and fair lending laws, and failure to comply with these laws could lead to material penalties.

More information concerningFederal and state fair lending laws and regulations, such as the Company’s,Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Bank’s, regulatory capital ratios at December 31, 2010 is included in Note 12 to the “Notes to ConsolidatedFair Housing Act, impose nondiscriminatory lending requirements on financial institutions. The Department of Justice, Consumer Financial Statements” included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Legislative, LegalProtection Bureau and Regulatory Developments. The banking industry is generally subject to extensive regulatory oversight. The Company, as a publicly held bank holding company,other federal and the Bank, as a state-chartered bank with deposits insured by the FDIC,state agencies are subject to a number ofresponsible for enforcing these laws and regulations. Many of thesePrivate parties may also have the ability to challenge an institution’s performance under fair lending laws in private class action litigation. A successful challenge to Capital Bank’s performance under the fair lending laws and regulations have undergone significant changecould adversely impact the Bank’s rating under the Community Reinvestment Act and result in recent years. In July 2010,a wide variety of sanctions, including the U.S. Congress passed,required payment of damages and President Obama signed into law, the Dodd-Frank Act, which includes significant consumer protection provisions related to residential mortgage loans that is likely to increase our regulatory compliance costs. These laws and regulations imposecivil money penalties, injunctive relief, imposition of restrictions on activities, minimum capital requirements, lendingmerger and depositacquisition activity and restrictions on expansion activity, which could negatively impact Capital Bank’s reputation, business, financial condition and numerous other requirements. Future changes to these lawsresults of operations.

Capital Bank faces a risk of noncompliance and regulations,enforcement action with the Bank Secrecy Act and other new financial services lawsanti-money laundering statutes and regulations, are likely and cannot be predicted with certainty. With the enactments of EESA, AARA and the Dodd-Frankregulations.

The federal Bank Secrecy Act, and the significant amount of regulations that are to come from the passage of that legislation, the nature and extent of the future legislative and regulatory changes affecting financial institutions and the resulting impact on those institutions is very unpredictable at this time. The Dodd-Frank Act, in particular, will require that a significant number of new regulations be adopted by various financial regulatory agencies over 2011 and 2012.

USA Patriot Act. The President of the United States signed the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act (the “Patriotof 2001 (which we refer to as the “PATRIOT Act”), into law on October 26, 2001. and other laws and regulations require financial institutions, among other duties, to institute and maintain effective anti-money laundering programs and file suspicious activity and currency transaction reports as appropriate. The Patriot Act establishes a wide variety of new and enhanced ways of combating international terrorism. The provisions that affect banks (and other financial institutions) most directly are contained in Title III offederal Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, established by the act. In general, Title III amended existing law — primarilyU.S. Treasury Department to administer the Bank Secrecy Act, is authorized to provideimpose significant civil money penalties for violations of those requirements and has recently engaged in coordinated enforcement efforts with the Secretaryindividual federal banking regulators, as well as the U.S. Department of U.S. TreasuryJustice, Drug Enforcement Administration and other departmentsInternal Revenue Service. There is also increased scrutiny of compliance with the rules enforced by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (which we refer to as “OFAC”). If Capital Bank’s policies, procedures and agenciessystems are deemed deficient or the policies, procedures and systems of the federal government with enhanced authority to identify, deter, and punish international money laundering and other crimes.
Among other things, the Patriot Act prohibits financial institutions from doing business with foreign “shell” banksthat CBF has already acquired or may acquire in the future are deficient, Capital Bank would be subject to liability, including fines and requires increased due diligence for private banking transactions and correspondent accounts for foreign banks. In addition, financial institutions will haveregulatory actions such as restrictions on its ability to follow new minimum verification of identity standards for all new accounts and will be permitted to share information with law enforcement authorities under circumstances that were not previously permitted. These and other provisions of the Patriot Act became effective at varying timespay dividends and the Treasury and various federal banking agencies are responsible for issuing regulationsnecessity to implement the new law.
Additional Information
The Company maintains a website at www.greenbankusa.com and is notobtain regulatory approvals to proceed with certain aspects of its business plan, including the information contained on this website as a part of, or incorporating it by reference into, this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The Company makes available free of charge (other than an investor’s own internet access charges) through its website its Annual Report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to these reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after the Company electronically files such material with, or furnishes such material to, the SEC.

21


ITEM 1A.
RISK FACTORS.
Investing in our common stock involves various risks which are particular to our company, our industry and our market area. Several risk factors regarding investing in our common stock are discussed below. This listing should not be considered as all-inclusive. If any of the following risks were to occur, we may not be able to conduct our business as currently planned and our financial condition or operating results could be negatively impacted. These matters could cause the trading price of our common stock to decline in future periods.
We could sustain additional losses if our asset quality declines further.
Our earnings are affected by general economic conditions, economic conditions within our markets, loan concentrations and our ability to properly originate, underwrite and service loans. We could sustain additional losses if we incorrectly assess the creditworthiness of our borrowers or fail to detect or respond to deterioration in asset quality in a timely manner. Recent problems with asset quality, particularly within the commercial real estate segment of our loan portfolio, have caused, and could continue to cause, our interest income and net interest margin to decrease and our provisions for loan losses and noninterest expenses to increase, which could continue to adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. Further increases in non-performing loans would reduce net interest income below levels that would exist if such loans were performing.
Our loan portfolio includes an elevated, although shrinking level, of residential construction and land development loans, which loans have a greater credit risk than residential mortgage loans.
The Company engages in both traditional single-family residential lending and residential construction and land development lending to developers. The percentage of speculative 1-4 family loans to developers plus construction and land development loans to developers in the Bank’s portfolio was approximately 21.9% at December 31, 2010 compared to 31.1% of total loans at December 31, 2009. This type of lending is generally considered to have relatively high credit risks because the principal is concentrated in a limited number of loans with repayment dependent on the successful completion and operation of the related real estate project. Consequently, the credit quality of many of these loans have deteriorated as a result of the current adverse conditions in the real estate market within our markets. These loans are generally less predictable and more difficult to evaluate and monitor and collateral may be difficult to dispose of in a market decline. A continued reduction in residential real estate market prices and demand could result in further price reductions in home and land values adversely affecting the value of collateral securing the construction and development loans that we hold. These adverse economic and real estate market conditions may lead to further increases in non-performing loans and other real estate owned, increased losses and expenses from the management and disposition of non-performing assets, increases in provision for loan losses, and increases in operating expenses as a result of the allocation of management time and resources to the collection and work out of these loans, all ofacquisition plans, which would negatively impact ourits business, financial condition and results of operations.
Furthermore, during adverse general economic conditions, Failure to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing could also have serious reputational consequences for Capital Bank.

Federal, state and local consumer lending laws may restrict Capital Bank’s ability to originate certain mortgage loans or increase the Bank’s risk of liability with respect to such loans and could increase its cost of doing business.

Federal, state and local laws have been adopted that are intended to eliminate certain lending practices considered “predatory.” These laws prohibit practices such as we believe are now being experienced in residential real estate construction nationwide,steering borrowers involved in the residential real estate construction and development business may suffer above normal financial strain. Throughout 2010, the number of newly constructed homes or lots sold in our market areas has continuedaway from more affordable products, selling unnecessary insurance to decline, but at a lesser rate than experienced in 2009, negatively affecting collateral values. As the residential real estate development and construction market in our markets has deteriorated, our borrowers, in this segment have experienced difficulty repaying their obligations to us. As a result, our loans to these borrowers have deteriorated and may deteriorate further and may result in additional charge-offs negatively impacting our results of operations.

Additionally, to the extent repayment is dependent upon the sale of newly constructed homes or of lots, such sales are likely to be at lower prices or at a slower rate than as expected when the loan was made, which may result in such loans being placed on non-accrual status and subject to higher loss estimates even if the borrower keeps interest payments current. These adverse economic and real estate market conditions may lead to further increases in non-performingrepeatedly refinancing loans and other real estate owned, increased charge-offs from the disposition of non-performing assets, and increases in provision for loan losses, all of which would negatively impact our financial condition and results of operations.
Negative developments in the U.S. and local economy and in local real estate markets have adversely impacted our operations and results and may continue to adversely impact our results in the future.
Economic conditions in the markets in which we operate deteriorated significantly between early 2008 and the second half of 2010. Asmaking loans without a result, we incurred significant losses in 2008, 2009 and 2010. These challenges resulted primarily from provisions for loan losses related to declining collateral values in our construction and development loan portfolio plus rising OREO related costs associated with the holding and disposition of these assets. Although the FRB has issued statements that economic data suggests stronglyreasonable expectation that the recession ended inborrowers will be able to repay the latter halfloans irrespective of 2009, we believe that this difficult economic environment will continue at least into the second half of 2011, and we expect that our results of operations will continue to be negatively impacted as a result. There can be no assurance that the economic conditions that have adversely affected the financial services industry, and the capital, credit and real estate markets generally or us in particular, will improve materially, or at all, in the near future, or thereafter, in which case we could continue to experience significant losses and write-downs of assets, and could face capital and liquidity constraints or other business challenges.

22


Negative developments in the financial services industry and U.S. and global credit markets may adversely impact our operations and results.
Negative developments beginning in 2008 and continuing into 2010 in the capital markets have resulted in uncertainty in the financial markets in general with the expectation of the general economic downturn continuing into 2011. Loan portfolio performances have deteriorated at many institutions resulting from, amongst other factors, a weak economy and a decline in the value of the collateral supporting their loans. underlying property. It is Capital Bank’s policy not to make predatory loans, but these laws create the potential for liability with respect to the Bank’s lending and loan investment activities. They increase Capital Bank’s cost of doing business and, ultimately, may prevent the Bank from making certain loans and cause it to reduce the average percentage rate or the points and fees on loans that it does make.

The competitionFederal Reserve may require the Company or CBF and its other subsidiaries to commit capital resources to support Capital Bank.

The Federal Reserve, which examines the Company and CBF, requires a bank holding company to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to a subsidiary bank and to commit resources to support such subsidiary bank. Under the “source of strength” doctrine, the Federal Reserve may require a bank holding company to make capital injections into a troubled subsidiary bank and may charge the bank holding company with engaging in unsafe and unsound practices for our deposits has increased significantly duefailure to liquidity concernscommit resources to such a subsidiary bank. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act directs the federal bank regulators to require that all companies that directly or indirectly control an insured depository institution serve as a source of strength for the institution. Under these requirements, in the future, the Company or CBF could be required to provide financial assistance to Capital Bank if it experiences financial distress.

A capital injection may be required at manytimes when the Company or CBF do not have the resources to provide it, and therefore the Company or CBF may be required to borrow the funds. In the event of these same institutions. Stock pricesa bank holding company’s bankruptcy, the bankruptcy trustee will assume any commitment by the holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a subsidiary bank. Moreover, bankruptcy law provides that claims based on any such commitment will be entitled to a priority of payment over the claims of the holding company’s general unsecured creditors, including the holders of its note obligations. Thus, any borrowing that must be done by the holding company in order to make the required capital injection becomes more difficult and expensive and will adversely impact the holding company’s cash flows, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

43


Stockholders may be deemed to be acting in concert or otherwise in control of Capital Bank, which could impose prior approval requirements and result in adverse regulatory consequences for such holders.

The Company and CBF are bank holding companies have been negatively affectedregulated by the current conditionFederal Reserve. Accordingly, acquisition of control of CBF or the Company (or a bank subsidiary) requires prior regulatory notice or approval. With certain limited exceptions, federal regulations prohibit potential investors from, directly or indirectly, acquiring ownership or control of, or the power to vote, more than 10% (more than 5% if the acquirer is a bank holding company) of any class of our voting securities, or obtaining the ability to control in any manner the election of a majority of directors or otherwise exercising a controlling influence over CBF or Capital Bank’s management or policies, without prior notice or application to, and approval of, the financial markets,Federal Reserve under the Change in Bank Control Act or the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as has our ability,amended (which we refer to as the “BHCA”). Any bank holding company or foreign bank with a U.S. presence also is required to obtain the approval of the Federal Reserve under the BHCA to acquire or retain more than 5% of the Company or CBF’s outstanding voting securities.

In addition to regulatory approvals, any stockholder deemed to “control” the Company or CBF for purposes of the BHCA would become subject to investment and activity restrictions and ongoing regulation and supervision. Any entity owning 25% or more of any class of the Company or CBF’s voting securities, or a lesser percentage if needed,such holder or group otherwise exercises a “controlling influence” over the Company or CBF, may be subject to raise capital at reasonable pricesregulation as a “bank holding company” in accordance with the BHCA. In addition, such a holder may be required to divest 5% or borrowmore of the voting securities of investments that may be deemed incompatible with bank holding company status, such as an investment in a company engaged in non-financial activities.

Regulatory determination of “control” of a depository institution or holding company is based on all of the relevant facts and circumstances. In certain instances, stockholders may be determined to be “acting in concert” and their shares aggregated for purposes of determining control for purposes of the Change in Bank Control Act. “Acting in concert” generally means knowing participation in a joint activity or parallel action towards the common goal of acquiring control of a bank or a parent company, whether or not pursuant to an express agreement. How this definition is applied in individual circumstances can vary among the various federal bank regulatory agencies and cannot always be predicted with certainty. Many factors can lead to a finding of acting in concert, including whether:

stockholders are commonly controlled or managed;

stockholders are parties to an oral or written agreement or understanding regarding the acquisition, voting or transfer of control of voting securities of a bank or bank holding company;

the holders each own stock in a bank and are also management officials, controlling stockholders, partners or trustees of another company; or

both a holder and a controlling stockholder, partner, trustee or management official of the holder own equity in the debt markets comparedbank or bank holding company.

The Company’s or CBF’s common stock owned by holders determined by a bank regulatory agency to recent years.

be acting in concert would be aggregated for purposes of determining whether those holders have control of a bank or bank holding company for Change in Bank Control Act purposes. Because the control regulations under the Change in Bank Control Act and the BHCA are complex, potential investors should seek advice from qualified banking counsel before making an investment in the Company’s common stock.

Risks Related to CBF’s Common Stock Proposed to be Issued in the merger

Our business isThe market price of CBF’s Class A common stock could decline due to the large number of outstanding shares of its common stock eligible for future sale.

Sales of substantial amounts of CBF’s Class A common stock in the public market following the initial public offering or in future offerings, or the perception that these sales could occur, could cause the market price of CBF’s Class A common stock to decline. These sales could also make it more difficult for CBF to sell equity or equity-related securities in the future, at a time and place that CBF deems appropriate.

In addition, CBF intends to file a registration statement on Form S-8 under the Securities Act to register additional shares of Class A common stock for issuance under CBF’s 2010 Equity Incentive Plan. CBF may issue all of these shares without any action or approval by CBF’s stockholders and these shares once issued (including upon exercise of outstanding options) will be

44


available for sale into the public market subject to the successrestrictions described above, if applicable to the holder. Any shares issued in connection with acquisitions, the exercise of stock options or otherwise would dilute the percentage ownership held by investors who acquire CBF’s shares in the merger.

If shares of CBF’s Class B non-voting common stock are converted into shares of Class A common stock, your voting power subsequent to the merger will be diluted.

Generally, holders of CBF’s Class B non-voting common stock have no voting power and have no right to participate in any meeting of stockholders or to have notice thereof. However, holders of Class B non-voting common stock that are converted into Class A common stock will have all the voting rights of the local economies where we operate.other holders of Class A common stock. Class B non-voting common stock is not convertible in the hands of the initial holder. However, a transferee unaffiliated with the initial holder that receives Class B non-voting common stock subsequent to transfer permitted by CBF’s certificate of incorporation may elect to convert each share of Class B non-voting common stock into one share of Class A common stock. Subsequent to the merger, upon conversion of any Class B non-voting common stock, your voting power will be diluted in proportion to the decrease in your ownership of the total outstanding Class A common stock.

The market price of CBF’s Class A common stock may be volatile, which could cause the value of an investment in CBF’s Class A common stock to decline.

The market price of CBF’s Class A common stock may fluctuate substantially due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control, including:

general market conditions;

Our success significantly depends upondomestic and international economic factors unrelated to CBF or Capital Bank’s performance;

actual or anticipated fluctuations in CBF or Capital Bank’s quarterly operating results;

changes in or failure to meet publicly disclosed expectations as to CBF or Capital Bank’s future financial performance;

downgrades in securities analysts’ estimates of CBF or Capital Bank’s financial performance or lack of research and reports by industry analysts;

changes in market valuations or earnings of similar companies;

any future sales of CBF’s common stock or other securities; and

additions or departures of key personnel.

The stock markets in general have experienced substantial volatility that has often been unrelated to the growthoperating performance of particular companies. These types of broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the trading price of CBF’s Class A common stock. In the past, stockholders have sometimes instituted securities class action litigation against companies following periods of volatility in population, income levels, deposits, residential real estate stabilitythe market price of their securities. Any similar litigation against the Company or CBF could result in substantial costs, divert management’s attention and housing starts in our market areas. If the communities in which we operate do not grow or if prevailing economic conditions locally or nationally are unfavorable,resources and harm our business may not succeed. Adverse economic conditions in our specific market areas could cause us to continue to experience negative, or limited, growth, affect the ability of our customers to repay their loans to us and generally affect our financial condition and results of operations. Moreover,For example, we cannot give any assuranceare currently operating in, and have benefited from, a protracted period of historically low interest rates that we will benefit from anynot be sustained indefinitely, and future fluctuations in interest rates could cause an increase in volatility of the market growth or favorable economic conditions in our primary market areas if theyprice of CBF’s Class A common stock.

CBF and the Company do occur.

Continued adverse market or economic conditionsnot currently intend to pay dividends on shares of their common stock in the state of Tennessee generally,foreseeable future and in our markets specifically, may increase the risk that our borrowersability to pay dividends will be unablesubject to timely makerestrictions under applicable banking laws and regulations.

CBF and the Company do not currently intend to pay cash dividends on their loan payments. In addition,common stock in the foreseeable future. The payment of cash dividends in the future will be dependent upon various factors, including earnings, if any, cash balances, capital requirements and general financial condition. The payment of any dividends will be within the discretion of the then-existing Board of Directors. It is the present intention of the Boards of Directors of the Company and CBF to retain all earnings, if any, for use in business operations in the foreseeable future and, accordingly, the Boards of Directors do not currently anticipate declaring any dividends. Because CBF and the Company do not expect to pay cash dividends on their common stock for some time, any gains on an investment in CBF’s Class A common stock will be limited to the appreciation, if any, of the market value of the real estate securing loans as collateral has been and may continue to be adversely affected by continued unfavorable changes in market and economic conditions. As of December 31, 2010, approximately 47% of our loans held for investment were secured by non-owner occupied commercial real estate. Of this amount, approximately 26% were speculative 1-4 residential construction and land development loans to developers, 21% were commercial construction and development loans and 53% were non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans. We experienced increased payment delinquencies with respect to these loans throughout 2009 and 2010 which negatively impacted our results of operations and a sustained period of increased payment delinquencies, foreclosures or losses caused by continuing adverse market or economic conditions in the state of Tennessee generally, and in our markets specifically, could adversely affect the value of our assets, revenues, results of operations and financial condition.

An inadequate allowance for loan losses would reduce our earnings.
The risk of credit losses on loans varies with, among other things, general economic conditions, the type of loan being made, the creditworthiness of the borrower over the term of the loan and, in the case of a collateralized loan, the value and marketability of the collateral for the loan. Management maintains an allowance for loan losses based upon, among other things, historical experience, an evaluation of economic conditions and regular reviews of delinquencies and loan portfolio quality. Based upon such factors, management makes various assumptions and judgments about the ultimate collectability of the loan portfolio and provides an allowance for loan losses based upon a percentage of the outstanding balances and takes a charge against earnings with respect to specific loans when their ultimate collectability is considered questionable.
Class A common stock.

 

23

45


If management’s assumptionsBanks and judgments provebank holding companies are subject to be incorrect andcertain regulatory restrictions on the allowance for loan losses is inadequate to absorb losses, or if thepayment of cash dividends. Federal bank regulatory authorities require us to increase our allowance for loan losses as a part of their examination process additional provision expense would be incurred and our earnings and capital could be significantly and adversely affected. Moreover, additions to the allowance may be necessary based on changes in economic and real estate market conditions, new information regarding existing loans or borrowers, identification of additional problem loans and other factors, both within and outside of our management’s control. These additions may require increased provision expense which would negatively impact our results of operations.
The Company’s policy requires new appraisals on adversely rated collateral dependent loans to be obtained at least annually. On a quarterly basis, the Company receives a written report from an independent nationally recognized organization which provides updated valuation trends, by price point and by zip code, for each of the major markets in which the Company is conducting business. The information obtained is then used in the Company’s impaired loan analysis of collateral dependent loans and potentially could impact the allowance for loan losses.
We, or our bank subsidiary, may become subject to supervisory actions and/or enhanced regulation that could have an additional material negative effect on our business, operating flexibility, financial condition and the value of our common stock. In addition, addressing regulatory concerns in this market environment will require significant time and attention from our management team, which may increase our costs, impede the efficiency of our internal business processes and adversely affect our profitability in the near-term.
Under federal and state laws and regulations pertaining to the safety and soundness of insured depository institutions, the FRB (for bank holding companies), the TDFI (for Tennessee-chartered banks) and, separately, the FDIC (as the insurer of bank deposits),agencies have the authority to compelprohibit bank holding companies from engaging in unsafe or unsound practices in conducting their business. The payment of dividends by CBF and the Company depending on their financial condition could be deemed an unsafe or unsound practice. The ability to pay dividends will directly depend on the ability of Capital Bank to pay dividends to us, which in turn will be restricted by the requirement that it maintains an adequate level of capital in accordance with requirements of its regulators and, in the future, can be expected to be further influenced by regulatory policies and capital guidelines. In addition, on August 24, 2010, Capital Bank entered into the OCC Operating Agreement that may restrict Capital Bank’s ability to pay dividends to us, to make changes to its capital structure and to make certain actions on our part,other business decisions.

Certain provisions of CBF’s certificate of incorporation and the loss sharing agreements may have anti-takeover effects, which could limit the price investors might be willing to pay in the future for CBF’s common stock and could entrench management. In addition, Delaware law may inhibit takeovers of CBF and could limit CBF’s ability to engage in certain strategic transactions its Board of Directors believes would be in the best interests of stockholders.

CBF’s certificate of incorporation contains provisions that may discourage unsolicited takeover proposals that stockholders may consider to be in their best interests. These provisions include the ability of CBF’s Board of Directors to designate the terms of and issue new series of preferred stock, which may make the removal of management more difficult and may discourage transactions that otherwise could involve payment of a premium over prevailing market prices for CBF’s securities, including its Class A common stock.

The loss sharing agreements with the FDIC require that Capital Bank receive prior FDIC consent, which may be withheld by the FDIC in its sole discretion, prior to CBF, Capital Bank or the partCompany’s stockholders engaging in certain transactions. If any such transaction is completed without prior FDIC consent, the FDIC would have the right to discontinue the relevant loss sharing arrangement. Among other things, prior FDIC consent is required for (1) a merger or consolidation of CBF or its bank subsidiary with or into another company if CBF’s stockholders will own less than 66.66% of the combined company, (2) the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of any of CBF’s bank subsidiary and (3) a sale of shares by a stockholder, or a group of related stockholders, that will effect a change in control of Capital Bank, if they determine that we,as determined by the FDIC with reference to the standards set forth in the Change in Bank Control Act (generally, the acquisition of between 10% and 25% of any class of CBF’s voting securities where the presumption of control is not rebutted, or the Bank, have insufficient capitalacquisition by any person, acting directly or are otherwise operatingindirectly or through or in a manner that may be deemed to be inconsistentconcert with safe and sound banking practices. Under this authority, our, and the Bank’s regulators can require usone or more persons, of 25% or more of any class of CBF’s voting securities). If CBF or any stockholder desired to enter into informalany such transaction, the FDIC may not grant its consent in a timely manner, without conditions, or formal enforcement orders, including board resolutions, memorandaat all. If one of understanding, written agreements andthese transactions were to occur without prior FDIC consent or cease and desist orders, pursuant to which we, or the Bank, would be required to take identified corrective actions to address cited concerns and to refrain from taking certain actions. For additional information relating to the extensive regulation, supervision and legislation that govern most aspects of our operations and limit the businesses in which we engage, please see “Regulation, Supervision and Governmental Policy” beginning on page 14.

In light of declining asset quality and earnings in 2010, the Bank informally committed to the TDFI and the FDIC that, among other things, it would maintain a Tier 1 leverage ratio of at least 10% and Total risk-based capital ratio of at least 14%, and the Company informally committed to the FRB-Atlanta that, among other things, we would not incur any additional indebtedness, pay dividends on our common or preferred stock or pay interest on our TRUPs, without, in each case, the prior approval of the FRB-Atlanta.
During the third quarter of 2010, the Bank was subject to a joint examination by the FDIC and the TDFI. Based on initial findings presented to the Bank’s management, the Bank expects that either the FDIC or the TDFI or both will require the Bank to agree to certain improvements inwithdrew its operations, particularly in relation to asset quality matters. We also believe that the Bank will be required to agree to maintain or increase capital to levels above those required to be considered well capitalized. We do not know at this time what minimum levels of capital the regulators will require. If the requirement to maintain higher capital levels than those required to be well capitalized under the prompt corrective action provisions of the FDICIA is contained in a formal enforcement action of the FDIC, the Bank may be subject to additional limitations on its operations including its ability to pay interest on deposits above proscribed rates, which could adversely affect the Bank’s liquidity and/or operating results. The terms of any such supervisory action that goes beyond the steps we have already taken may have a significant negative effect on our business, operating flexibility, results of operations, financial condition and the value of our common stock.

24


If we, or our bank subsidiary, are unable to maintain capital levels above those that we, or the bank subsidiary, are required to maintain either as a result of federal regulations or as a result of commitments or agreements that we, or our bank subsidiary, have made to, or with, our regulators, we would likely need to raise additional capital, but that capital may not be available when it is needed.
We, and the Bank, are required by federal and state regulatory authorities to maintain adequate levels of capital to support our, and the Bank’s, operations. In addition, the Bank has informally committed to the TDFI and the FDIC that it will maintain a Tier 1 leverage ratio of at least 10% and a Total risk-based capital ratio of at least 14%. At December 31, 2010, the Bank’s Tier 1 leverage ratio and Total risk-based capital ratio were each below the levels that the Bank had committed to maintain and a Capital Action Plan was submitted to our regulators. At December 31, 2010, the Company did not have sufficient capital available to contribute to the Bank to aid the Bank in meeting its commitment. If the Bank is unable to generate sufficient earnings or reduce the size of its assets to achieve the capital levels that it has informally committed to maintain, the Company will likely have to raise additional capital and contribute that capital to the Bank. We can give you no assurance that we will be able to raise this additional capital on terms acceptable to us and given our current stock price and recent financial performance, it is likely that the price at which we could raise such capital, if at all, would result in significant dilution to our existing shareholders. Further, our ability to raise common equity is limited by the number of authorized, but unissued shares reserved under our charter. If we were to raise capital through a common stock offering, we would likely need to increase our authorized common stock, which would require approval of our shareholders. We cannot assure you that our shareholders would approve such a request.
Liquidity needs could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
We rely on dividends from the Bank as our primary source of funds. The primary source of funds of the Bank, are customer deposits and loan repayments. While scheduled loan repayments are a relatively stable source of funds, they are subject to the ability of borrowers to repay the loans which may be more difficult in economically challenging environments like those currently being experienced. The ability of borrowers to repay loans can be adversely affected by a number of factors, including changes in economic conditions, adverse trends or events affecting business industry groups, reductions in real estate values or markets, business closings or lay-offs, inclement weather, natural disasters and international instability. Additionally, deposit levels may be affected by a number of factors, including rates paid by competitors, general interest rate levels, customer confidence levels and the Bank’s financial strength, returns available to customers on alternative investments, our financial condition and general economic conditions. Accordingly, we may be required from time to time to rely on secondary sources of liquidity to meet withdrawal demands or otherwise fund operations. Such sources include FHLB advances and federal funds lines of credit from correspondent banks. While we believe that these sources are currently adequate,loss share protection, there can be no assurance they will be sufficient to meet future liquidity demands. We may be required to continue to reduce our asset size, slow or discontinue capital expenditures or other investments or liquidate assets should such sources not be adequate.
We rely on dividends from our bank subsidiary as our primary source of liquidity and payment of these dividends is limited under Tennessee law.
Under Tennessee law, the amount of dividends that may be declared by the Bank in a year without approval of the Commissioner is limited to net income for that year combined with retained net income for the two preceding years. Because of the losses incurred by the Bank in 2009 and 2010, dividends from the Bank to us, including, if necessary, dividends to support our payment of interest on our subordinated debt and dividends on our preferred stock, including the preferred stock we issued to the U.S. Treasury, would have required prior approval by the Commissioner. During the fourth quarter of 2010, we elected to defer the interest payments on our subordinated debt and dividends on the preferred stock that we issued to the U.S. Treasury as disclosed in our third quarter 2010 Form 10-Q.

25


Our ability to maintain required capital levels and adequate sources of funding and liquidity could be impacted by changes in the capital markets and deteriorating economic and market conditions.
We, and the Bank, are required to maintain certain capital levels established by banking regulations or specified by bank regulators or to which we have committed or agreed to maintain. We must also maintain adequate funding sources in the normal course of business to support our operations and fund outstanding liabilities. Our ability to maintain capital levels, sources of funding and liquidity could be impacted by changes in the capital markets and deteriorating economic and market conditions. Failure by the Bank to meet applicable capital guidelines (including those higher levels that the Bank has committed, or may commit in the future, to maintain) or to satisfy certain other regulatory requirements could subject the Bank to a variety of enforcement remedies available to the federal regulatory authorities.
We have increased levels of other real estate, primarily as a result of foreclosures, and we anticipate higher levels of foreclosed real estate expense.
As we have begun to resolve non-performing real estate loans, we have increased the level of foreclosed properties primarily those acquired from builders and from residential land developers. Foreclosed real estate expense consists of three types of charges: maintenance costs, valuation adjustments due to new appraisal values and gains or losses on disposition. As levels of other real estate increase and also as local real estate values decline these charges will likely increase, negatively affecting our results of operations.
Environmental liability associated with commercial lending could result in losses.
In the course of business, the Bank may acquire, through foreclosure, properties securing loans it has originated or purchased which are in default. Particularly in commercial real estate lending, there is a risk that hazardous substances could be discovered on these properties. In this event, we, or the Bank, might be required to remove these substances from the affected properties at our sole cost and expense. The cost of this removal could substantially exceed the value of affected properties. We may not have adequate remedies against the prior owner or other responsible parties and could find it difficult or impossible to sell the affected properties. These events could have anmaterial adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Changes in interest rates could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Changes in interest rates may affect our level of interest income, the primary component of our gross revenue, as well as the level of our interest expense. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors that are beyond our control, including general economic conditions and the policies of various governmental and regulatory authorities. Accordingly, changes in interest rates could decrease our net interest income. Changes in the level of interest rates also may negatively affect our ability to originate real estate loans, the value of our assets and our ability to realize gains from the sale of our assets, all of which ultimately affects our earnings.
National or state legislation or regulation may increase our expenses and reduce earnings.
Federal bank regulators are increasing regulatory scrutiny, and additional restrictions (including those originating from the Dodd-Frank Act) on financial institutions have been proposed or adopted and signed into law by the President, regulators and Congress. Changes in federal legislation, regulation or policies, such as bankruptcy laws, deposit insurance, consumer protection laws, and capital requirements, among others, can result in significant increases in our expenses and/or charge-offs, which may adversely affect our earnings. Changes in state or federal tax laws or regulations can have a similar impact. Furthermore, financial institution regulatory agencies are expected to continue to be very aggressive in responding to concerns and trends identified in examinations, including the continued issuance of additional formal or informal enforcement or supervisory actions. These actions, whether formal or informal, could result in our, or the Bank, agreeing to limitations or to take actions that limit our operational flexibility, restrict our growth or increase our capital or liquidity levels. Failure to comply with any formal or informal regulatory restrictions, including informal commitments like those we and the Bank have made to our primary regulators, could lead to further regulatory enforcement actions. Negative developments in the financial services industry and the impact of recently enacted or new legislation in response to those developments could negatively impact our operations by restricting our business operations, including our ability to originate or sell loans, and adversely impact our financial performance. In addition, industry, legislative or regulatory developments may cause us to materially change our existing strategic direction, capital strategies, compensation or operating plans.

26


Competition from financial institutions and other financial service providers may adversely affect our profitability.
The banking business is highly competitive and we experience competition in each of our markets from many other financial institutions. We compete with commercial banks, credit unions, savings and loan associations, mortgage banking firms, consumer finance companies, securities brokerage firms, insurance companies, money market funds, and other mutual funds, as well as other community banks and super-regional and national financial institutions that operate offices in our primary market areas and elsewhere.
Additionally, we face competition from de novo community banks, including those with senior management who were previously affiliated with other local or regional banks or those controlled by investor groups with strong local business and community ties. These de novo community banks may offer higher deposit rates or lower cost loans in an effort to attract our customers, and may attempt to hire our management and employees.
We compete with these other financial institutions both in attracting deposits and in making loans. In addition, we have to attract our customer base from other existing financial institutions and from new residents. We expect competition to increase in the future as a result of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and the continuing trend of consolidation in the financial services industry. Our profitability depends upon our continued ability to successfully compete with an array of financial institutions in our market areas.
We reported a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, and if we are unable to improve our internal controls, our financial results may not be accurately reported.
Management’s assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010 identified a material weakness in its internal control over financial reporting, as described in “Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.” This material weakness, or difficulties encountered in implementing new or improved controls or remediation, could prevent us from accurately reporting our financial results, result in material misstatements in our financial statements or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. Failure to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 could negatively affect our business, the price of our common stock and market confidence in our reported financial information.
We have a deferred tax asset and cannot assure you that it will be fully realized.
We had net deferred tax assets (“DTA”) of $45.7 million as of December 31, 2010 and established a valuation allowance against our federal net deferred tax assets of $43.5 million. A valuation allowance is recognized for a net DTA if, based on the weight of available evidence, it is more-likely-than-not that some portion or the entire DTA will not be realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. In making such judgments, significant weight is given to evidence that can be objectively verified.
As a result of the increased credit losses, the Company entered into a three-year cumulative pre-tax loss position (excluding the goodwill impairment charge recognized in the second quarter of 2009) as of June 30, 2010. A cumulative loss position is considered significant negative evidence in assessing the realizability of a deferred tax asset which is difficult to overcome. The Company’s estimate of the realization of its net DTA was based on the scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities and taxable income available in prior carry back years, and tax planning strategies. Once profitability has been restored for a reasonable time and such profitability is considered sustainable, the valuation allowance would be reversed. Reversal of the valuation allowance requires a great deal of judgment and will be based on the circumstances that exist as of that future date.
We are subject to lawsuits as a result of the losses we incurred in the third quarter of 2010.
In the third quarter of 2010, we recognized significant losses as a result of higher costs related to loan charge-offs, coupled with losses incurred on OREO resulting from sales completed and updated property appraisals received during that quarter. As a result, various plaintiffs filed class action lawsuits, which have subsequently been consolidated into one class action, alleging, among other things, disclosure violations regarding our collateral valuations, the timing of our impairment charges and our accounting for loan charge-offs. The defense of this matter has and will continue to entail considerable cost and will be time-consuming for our management. Unfavorable outcomes in this matter could have an adverse effect on our business,Capital Bank’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
In addition, statutes, regulations and policies that govern bank holding companies, including the BHCA, may restrict CBF’s ability to enter into certain transactions.

CBF is also subject to anti-takeover provisions under Delaware law. CBF has not opted out of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law (which we refer to as the “DGCL”), which, subject to certain exceptions, prohibits a public Delaware corporation from engaging in a business combination (as defined in such section) with an “interested stockholder” (defined generally as any person who beneficially owns 15% or more of the outstanding voting stock of such corporation or any person affiliated with such person) for a period of three years following the time that such stockholder became an interested stockholder, unless (1) prior to such time the board of directors of such corporation approved either the business combination or the transaction that resulted in the stockholder becoming an interested stockholder; (2) upon consummation of the transaction that resulted in the stockholder becoming an interested stockholder, the interested stockholder owned at least 85% of the voting stock of such corporation at the time the transaction commenced (excluding for purposes of determining the voting stock outstanding (but not the outstanding voting stock owned by the interested stockholder) the voting stock owned by directors who are also officers or held in employee benefit plans in which the employees do not have a confidential right to tender or vote stock held by the plan); or (3) on or subsequent to such time the business combination is approved by the board of directors of such corporation and authorized at a meeting of stockholders by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the outstanding voting stock of such corporation not owned by the interested stockholder.

 

27

46


Risks Related to Our Common Stock

CBF is a controlling shareholder and may have interests that differ from the interests of our other shareholders.

We rely heavily onUpon completion of the servicesCBF Investment, CBF owned approximately 90% of key personnel.
We are dependent on certain key officers who have important customer relationshipsthe Company’s outstanding voting power. As a result, CBF will be able to control the election of our directors, determine our corporate and management policies and determine the outcome of any corporate transaction or are instrumentalother matter submitted to our operations. Changesshareholders for approval. Such transactions may include mergers and acquisitions (including the contemplated potential merger of the Company with and into CBF), sales of all or some of the Company’s assets (including sales of such assets to CBF and/or CBF’s other subsidiaries) or purchases of assets from CBF and/or CBF’s other subsidiaries, and other significant corporate transactions.

Five of our seven directors, our Chief Executive Officer, our Chief Financial Officer, and our Chief Risk Officer are affiliated with CBF. CBF also has sufficient voting power to amend our organizational documents. The interests of CBF may differ from those of our other shareholders, and it may take actions that advance its interests to the detriment of our other shareholders. Additionally, CBF is in key personnelthe business of making investments in or acquiring financial institutions and their responsibilitiesmay, from time to time, acquire and hold interests in businesses that compete directly or indirectly with us. CBF may also pursue, for its own account, acquisition opportunities that may be disruptivecomplementary to our business, and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We believe that our future results will also depend in part upon our attracting and retaining highly skilled and qualified management and sales and marketing personnel, particularly in those areas where we may open new branches. Competition for such personnel is intense, and we cannot assure you that we will be successful in attracting or retaining such personnel.

On February 16, 2011, we announced that James E. Adams, our Chief Financial Officer, will be retiring on May 16, 2011 after the Annual Shareholders Meeting on May 12, 2011. We have commenced a search for a replacement for Mr. Adams, but there can be no assurance that we will have found a suitable replacement prior to that date.
The limitations on bonuses, retention awards, severance payments and incentive compensation contained in ARRA may adversely affect our ability to retain our highest performing employees.
For so long as any equity securities that we issued to the U.S. Treasury under the CPP remain outstanding, ARRA and regulations issued thereunder, including the IFR, severely restrict bonuses, retention awards, severance and change in control payments and other incentive compensation payable to our most highly compensated employees including our five senior executive officers. It is possible that we may be unable to create a compensation structure that permits us to retain such officers or other key employees or recruit additional employees, especially if we are competing against institutions that are not subject to the same restrictions. Failure to retain our key employees could materially adversely affect our business and results of operations.
We are subject to extensive regulation that could limit or restrict our activities.
We operate in a highly regulated industry and are subject to examination, supervision, and comprehensive regulation by various federal and state agencies including the FRB, the FDIC and the TDFI. Our regulatory compliance is costly and restricts certain of our activities, including payment of dividends, mergers and acquisitions, investments, loans and interest rates charged, interest rates paid on deposits and locations of offices. We are also subject to capitalization guidelines established by our regulators, which require us to maintain adequate capital to support our operations.
The laws and regulations applicable to the banking industry could change at any time, and we cannot predict the effects of these changes on our business and profitability. Because government regulation greatly affects the business and financial results of all commercial banks and bank holding companies, our cost of compliance could adversely affect our ability to operate profitably.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and the related rules and regulations promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Nasdaq Stock Market that are applicable to us, have increased the scope, complexity and cost of corporate governance, reporting and disclosure practices. We expect that the Dodd-Frank Act will similarly result in increases in our compliance costs. As a result, we have experienced, and may continue to experience, greater compliance costs.

28


Our long-term business strategy includes the continuation of growth plans, and our financial condition and results of operations could be affected if our long-term business strategies are not effectively executed.
Although our primary focus in the near term will be on strengthening our asset quality and improving our capital position, we intend, over the longer term, to continue pursuing a growth strategy for our business through acquisitions and de novo branching. Our prospects must be considered in light of the risks, expenses and difficulties occasionally encountered by financial services companies in growth stages, which may include the following:
Maintaining loan quality;
Maintaining adequate management personnel and information systems to oversee such growth; and,
Maintaining adequate control and compliance functions.
Operating Results:There is no assurance that existing offices or future offices will maintain or achieve deposit levels, loan balances or other operating results necessary to avoid losses or produce profits. Our growth and de novo branching strategy necessarily entails growth in overhead expenses as it routinely adds new offices and staff. Our historical resultsthose acquisition opportunities may not be indicative of future results or results that may be achieved as we continueavailable to increase the number andus.

This concentration of ownership could also have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in our branch offices.

Development of Offices:There are considerable costs involved in opening branches, and new branches generally do not generate sufficient revenuescontrol or impeding a merger or consolidation, takeover or other business combination that could be favorable to offset their costs until they have been in operation for at least a year or more. Accordingly, our de novo branches may be expected to negatively impact our earnings during this period of time until the branches reach certain economies of scale.
Expansion into New Markets:Muchother holders of our growth overcommon stock, and the last five years has been focused in the highly competitive Nashville, Knoxville and Clarksville metropolitan markets. The customer demographics and financial services offerings in these markets are unlike those found in the smaller, more rural East Tennessee markets that we historically served. In the Nashville, Knoxville and Clarksville markets, we face competition from a wide arraytrading prices of financial institutions. Our expansion efforts in these new markets may be impacted if we are unable to meet customer demands or compete effectively with the financial institutions operating in these markets.
Regulatory and Economic Factors:Our growth and expansion plansour common stock may be adversely affected by the absence or reduction of a numbertakeover premium in the trading price.

As a controlled company, we are exempt from certain Nasdaq corporate governance requirements.

The Company’s common stock is currently listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market. The Nasdaq generally requires a majority of regulatorydirectors to be independent and economic developments or other events. Failurerequires independent director oversight over the nominating and executive compensation functions. However, under the rules applicable to obtain required regulatory approvals, changes in lawsthe Nasdaq, if another company owns more than 50% of the voting power of a listed company, that company is considered a “controlled company” and regulations or other regulatory developmentsexempt from rules relating to independence of the board of directors and changes in prevailing economic conditions or other unanticipated eventsthe compensation and nominating committees. The Company is a controlled company because CBF beneficially owns more than 50% of the Company’s outstanding voting stock. Accordingly, the Company is exempt from certain corporate governance requirements and its shareholders may prevent or adversely affect our continued growth and expansion.

Failurenot have all the protections that these rules are intended to successfully address the issues identified above could have a material adverse effect on our business, future prospects, financial condition or results of operations, and could adversely affect our ability to successfully implement our longer term business strategy.
provide.

We may face risks with respectchoose to voluntarily delist our common stock from Nasdaq or cease to be a reporting issuer under SEC rules.

We may choose to, or our majority shareholder CBF may cause us to, voluntarily delist from the Nasdaq Global Select Market. If we were to delist from Nasdaq, we may or may not list ourselves on another exchange, and may or may not be required to continue to file periodic and current reports and other information as a reporting issuer under SEC rules. A delisting of our common stock could negatively impact shareholders by reducing the liquidity and market price of our common stock, reducing information available about the Company on an ongoing basis and potentially reducing the number of investors willing to hold or acquire our common stock. In addition, if we were to delist from Nasdaq, we would no longer be subject to any of the corporate governance rules applicable to Nasdaq listed companies. See also “—As a controlled company, we are exempt from certain Nasdaq corporate governance requirements.”

47


Future issuance or sales of our common stock or other securities will dilute the ownership interests of our existing shareholders and could depress the market price of our common stock.

In order to maintain our capital at desired levels or required regulatory levels, or to fund future expansion.

Fromgrowth, the Company Board may decide from time to time we may engage into issue additional de novo branch expansion as well as the acquisitionshares of other financial institutions or parts of those institutions. We may also consider and enter into new lines of business or offer new products or services. Acquisitions and mergers involve a number of risks, including:
the time and costs associated with identifying and evaluating potential acquisitions and merger partners;
inaccuracies in the estimates and judgments used to evaluate credit, operations, management and market risks with respect to the target institution;
the time and costs of evaluating new markets, hiring experienced local management and opening new offices, and the time lags between these activities and the generation of sufficient assets and deposits to support the costs of the expansion;
our ability to finance an acquisition and possible dilution to our existing shareholders;
the diversion of our management’s attention to the negotiation of a transaction, and the integration of the operations and personnel of the combining businesses;
entry into new markets where we lack experience;
the introduction of new products and services into our business;
the incurrence and possible impairment of goodwill associated with an acquisition and possible adverse short-term effects on our results of operations; and
the risk of loss of key employees and customers.

29


We may incur substantial costs to expand. There can be no assurance that integration efforts for any future mergers or acquisitions will be successful. Also, we may issue equity securities, including common stock, andpreferred stock or securities convertible into, exchangeable for or representing rights to acquire shares of our common stock in connection with future acquisitions, which could cause ownership and economic dilution to our shareholders. There is no assurance that, following any future mergers or acquisitions, our integration efforts will be successful or we, after giving effect to the acquisition, will achieve profits comparable to or better than our historical experience.
We are subject to Tennessee anti-takeover statutes and certain charter provisions which could decrease our chancesstock. The sale of being acquired even if the acquisition is inthese shares may significantly dilute our shareholders’ best interests.
As a Tennessee corporation, we are subject to various legislative acts which impose restrictions onownership interest and require compliance with procedures designed to protect shareholders against unfair or coercive mergers and acquisitions. These statutes may delay or prevent offers to acquire us and increase the difficulty of consummating any such offers, even if the acquisition of us would be in our shareholders’ best interests. Our amended and restated charter also contains provisions which may make it difficult for another entity to acquire us without the approval of a majority of the disinterested directors on our board of directors.
The success and growthper share book value of our business will depend on our ability to adapt to technological changes.
The banking industry and the ability to deliver financial services is becoming more dependent on technological advancement, such as the ability to process loan applications over the Internet, accept electronic signatures, provide process status updates instantly and on-line banking capabilities and other customer expected conveniences that are cost efficient to our business processes. As these technologies are improvedcommon stock. New investors in the future we may in orderalso have rights, preferences and privileges senior to remain competitive, be required to make significant capital expenditures.
our current shareholders which may adversely impact our current shareholders.

Even thoughResales of our common stock is currently traded on The Nasdaq Global Select Market,or other securities in the trading volume inpublic market may cause the market price of our common stock has been thin and the saleto fall.

Sales of a substantial amountsnumber of shares of our common stock in the public market by our shareholders (including CBF), or the perception that such sales are likely to occur, could depresscause the market price of our common stock.

We cannot say with any certainty when a more activestock to decline. Pursuant to the CBF Investment we have agreed to provide customary registration rights for the shares of common stock issued to CBF and liquid trading market forCBF can exercise those rights in order to sell additional shares of our common stock will develop or be sustained. Because of this, our shareholders may not be able to sell their shares at the volumes, prices, or times that they desire.
its discretion. We cannot predict the effect, if any, that future sales of our common stock in the market, or availability of shares of our common stock for sale in the market, will have on the market price of our common stock. We therefore can give no assurance that sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the market, or the potential for large amounts of sales in the market, would not cause the price of our common stock to decline or impair our ability to raise capital through sales of our common stock.

Market conditions and other factors may affect the value of our common stock.

The trading price of the shares of our common stock will depend on many factors, which may change from time to time, including the factors substantially similar to those identified above under “—The market price of CBF’s Class A common stock may be volatile, which could cause the value of an investment in CBF’s Class A common stock to decline.”

The trading volume in our common stock has been low and the sale of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market could depress the price of our common stock.

Our common stock is thinly traded. The average daily trading volume of our shares on The Nasdaq Global Select Market during 2011 was approximately 48,413 shares. Thinly traded stock can be more volatile than stock trading in an

48


active public market. In recent years, the stock market has experienced a high level of price and volume volatility, and market prices for the stock of many companies have experienced wide price fluctuations that have not necessarily been related to their operating performance. Therefore, our shareholders may not be able to sell their shares at the volumes, prices, or times that they desire.

We cannot predict the effect, if any, that future sales of our common stock in the market, or availability of shares of our common stock for sale in the market, will have on the market price of our common stock. We therefore can give no assurance sales of substantial amounts of our common stock may fluctuate in the future, and these fluctuations may be unrelated to our performance. General market, price declines or overall market volatilitythe potential for large amounts of sales in the future could adversely affectmarket, would not cause the price of our common stock and the current market price may not be indicative of future market prices.

We may issue additional common stockto decline or other equity securities in the future which could dilute the ownership interest of existing common shareholders.
In orderimpair our ability to maintain ourraise capital at desired levels or required regulatory levels, or to fund future growth, our board of directors may decide from time to time to issue additional shares of common stock, preferred stock or securities convertible into, exchangeable for or representing rights to acquire sharesthrough sales of our common stock. The sale of these shares may significantly dilute our shareholders’ ownership interest and the per share book value of our common stock. New investors in the future may also have rights, preferences and privileges senior to our current shareholders which may adversely impact our current shareholders.

30


Our ability to declare and pay dividends is limited by law, by commitments we have made to our regulators and by the terms of the Series A preferred stock that we have issued to the U.S. Treasury, and we may be unable to pay future dividends.
We derive our income solely from dividends on the shares of common stock of the Bank. The Bank’s ability to declare and pay dividends to us is limited by its obligations to maintain sufficient capital and by other general restrictions on its dividends that are applicable to banks that are regulated by the FDIC and the TDFI. In addition, the terms of the Series A preferred stock impose restrictions on our ability to pay dividends on our common stock and we have informally committed to the FRB-Atlanta that we will not pay dividends on our common or preferred stock without the FRB-Atlanta’s prior approval. On November 9, 2010, following consultation with the FRB-Atlanta, we notified the U.S. Treasury that we were suspending the payment of regular quarterly cash dividends on preferred stock that we had issued to the U.S. Treasury in the CPP. We do not know when we will receive permission from the FRB-Atlanta to resume paying dividends on our common or preferred stock. We cannot assure our shareholders that we will declare or pay dividends on shares of our common stock in the future.
Holders of our junior subordinated debentures have rights that are senior to those of our common and Series A preferred shareholders.stockholders.

We hadhave supported our previouscontinued growth through the issuance of trust preferred securities from special purpose trusts and accompanying junior subordinated debentures. This financing vehicle is no longer an attractive source for funding acquisitions as a result of the changing characteristics of trust preferred securities and their limited attributes towards qualifying as primary regulatory capital. At December 31, 2010,2011, we had outstanding trust preferred securities and accompanying junior subordinated debentures with face values totaling $88.7 million. Payments of the principal and interest on the trust preferred securities of these special purpose trusts are conditionally guaranteed by us. Further, the accompanying junior subordinated debentures we issued to the special purpose trusts are senior to our shares of common stock and the Series A preferred stock that we issued to the U.S. Treasury in the CPP.stock. As a result, we must make payments on the junior subordinated debentures before any dividends can be paid on our common stock or the Series A preferred stock and, in the event of our bankruptcy, dissolution or liquidation, the holders of the junior subordinated debentures must be satisfied before any distributions can be made on our common stock or Series A preferred stock. We have the right to defer distributions on our junior subordinated debentures (and the related trust preferred securities) for up to five years, during which time no dividends may be paid on our common stock or our Series A preferred stock.

As described above, we have informally committed to the FRB-Atlanta that we will not pay interest on the subordinated debentures without the prior approval of the FRB-Atlanta. In the fourth quarter of 2010, following consultation with the FRB-Atlanta, we notified the trustees with respect to each series of our subordinated debentures, of our intent to defer interest payments on the subordinated debentures beginning with the interest payments due in the fourth quarter of 2010.

The Series A preferred stock impacts net income available to our common shareholders and our earnings per share.

As long as shares of our Series A preferred stock are outstanding, no dividends may be paid onAn investment in our common stock unless all dividends onis not an insured deposit.

Our common stock is not a bank deposit and, therefore, is not insured against loss by the Series A preferred stock have been paidFDIC, any other deposit insurance fund or by any other public or private entity. Investment in full. Additionally, prior to December 23, 2011, unless we redeem the Series A preferred stock or the U.S. Treasury has transferred the Series A preferred stock to a third party, we are not permitted to pay cash dividends on our common stock is inherently risky for the reasons described in excess of $0.13 per quarter without the U.S. Treasury’s consent. The dividends declared on shares of our Series A preferred stock will reduce the net income available to common shareholdersthis “Risk Factors” section and our earnings per common share. Additionally, warrants to purchase our common stock issuedelsewhere in this report and is subject to the Treasury, in conjunction withsame market forces that affect the issuance of the Series A preferred stock, may be dilutive to our earnings per share. The shares of our Series A preferred stock will also receive preferential treatment in the event of our liquidation, dissolution or winding up.

31


Holders of the Series A preferred stock have rights that are senior to those of our common shareholders.
The Series A preferred stock that we have issued to the U.S. Treasury is senior to our sharesprice of common stock and holdersin any company. As a result, our shareholders may lose some or all of the Series A preferred stock have certain rights and preferences that are senior to holders oftheir investment in our common stock. The Series A preferred stock will rank senior to our common stock and all other equity securities of ours designated as ranking junior to the Series A preferred stock. So long as any shares of the Series A preferred stock remain outstanding, unless all accrued and unpaid dividends on shares of the Series A preferred stock for all prior dividend periods have been paid or are contemporaneously declared and paid in full, no dividend whatsoever shall be paid or declared on our common stock or other junior stock, other than a dividend payable solely in common stock. Prior to December 23, 2011, unless we redeem the Series A preferred stock or the U.S. Treasury has transferred the Series A preferred stock to a third party we and our subsidiaries also may not, with certain limited exceptions, purchase, redeem or otherwise acquire any shares of our common stock or other junior stock without the U.S. Treasury’s consent. During that three-year period, and thereafter, we and our subsidiaries may not purchase, redeem or otherwise acquire for consideration any shares of our common stock or other junior stock unless we have paid in full all accrued and unpaid dividends on the Series A preferred stock, other than in certain circumstances. Furthermore, the Series A preferred stock is entitled to a liquidation preference over shares of our common stock in the event of our liquidation, dissolution or winding up.
Holders of the Series A preferred stock may, under certain circumstances, have the right to elect two directors to our board of directors.
As described above, on November 9, 2010, we notified the U.S. Treasury that we were suspending the payment of dividends on the Series A preferred stock beginning with the dividend payment due in the fourth quarter of 2010. In the event that we fail to pay dividends on the Series A preferred stock for an aggregate of six quarterly dividend periods or more (whether or not consecutive), the authorized number of directors then constituting our board of directors will be increased by two. Holders of the Series A preferred stock, together with the holders of any outstanding parity stock with like voting rights, referred to as voting parity stock, voting as a single class, will be entitled to elect the two additional members of our board of directors, referred to as the preferred stock directors, at the next annual meeting (or at a special meeting called for the purpose of electing the preferred stock directors prior to the next annual meeting) and at each subsequent annual meeting until all accrued and unpaid dividends for all past dividend periods have been paid in full.

49


ITEM 1B.
UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS.
None.

We did not receive any written comments during 2011 from the Commission staff regarding our periodic and current reports under the Act that remain unresolved from any prior period.

ITEM 2.
PROPERTIES.
At December 31, 2010, the Company maintained a main office in Greeneville, Tennessee in a building it owns, 65 full-service bank branches (of which 54 are owned premises

The information set forth on page 13 of Item 1, “Business — Facilities and 11 are leased premises) and a building for mortgage lending operations which it owns. In addition, the Bank’s subsidiaries operate from nine separate locations, all of which are leased.

Real Estate” is incorporated herein by reference.

ITEM 3.
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.

On November 18, 2010, a shareholder of the Company filed a putative class action lawsuit (styledBill Burgraff v. Green Bankshares, Inc., et al., U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Tennessee, Northeastern Division, Case No. 2:10-cv-00253)10-cv-00253) against the Company and certain of its current and former officers in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee in Greeneville, Tennessee on behalf of all persons that acquired shares of the Company’sCompany common stock between January 19, 2010 and November 9, 2010. On January 18, 2011, a separate shareholder of the Company filed a putative class action lawsuit (styledBrian Molnar v. Green Bankshares, Inc., et al., U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Tennessee, Northeastern Division, Case No. 2:11-cv-00014) against the Company and certain of its current and former officers in the same court on behalf of all persons that acquired shares of the Company’sCompany common stock between January 19, 2010 and October 20, 2010. These lawsuits were filed following, and relate to the drop in value of the Company’s common stock price after, the Company announced its third quarter performance results on October 20, 2010. The Burgraff case also complains of the Company’s decision on November 9, 2010, to suspend payment of certain quarterly cash dividends.

32


The plaintiffs allege that defendants made false and/or misleading statements or failed to disclose that the Company was purportedly overvaluing collateral of certain loans; failing to timely take impairment charges of these certain loans; failing to properly account for loan charge-offs; lacking adequate internal and financial controls; and providing false and misleading financial results. The plaintiffs have asserted federal securities laws claims against all defendants for alleged violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The plaintiffs have also asserted control person liability claims against the individual defendants named in the complaints pursuant to Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act.
The two cases were consolidated on February 4, 2011. Plaintiffs have 60 days from that date within which to file an amended and consolidated complaint. On February 11, 2011, the Court appointed movant Jeffrey Blomgren as lead plaintiff.
The Company On May 3, 2011, the plaintiff filed an amended and consolidated complaint alleging a class period of January 19, 2010 to November 9, 2010. On July 11, 2011, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint. We and the individual named by the defendants collectively intend to vigorously defend themselves against these allegations.

On May 12, 2011, a stockholder of the Company filed a putative class action lawsuit (styledBetty Smith v. Green Bankshares, Inc., et al., Case No. 11-625-III, Davidson County, Tennessee, Chancery Court) against the Company, GreenBank, the Company Board and CBF on behalf of all persons holding common stock of the Company. This lawsuit was filed following our public announcement on May 5, 2011 of our entering into an investment agreement with CBF and relates to the investment in the Company by CBF. The complaint alleges that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties to the Company by accepting a sale price for the shares to be sold to us that was unfair to stockholders of the Company. The complaint also alleges that CBF, the Company and GreenBank aided and abetted these breaches of fiduciary duty. It seeks an injunction and/or rescission of the Green Bankshares investment and fees and expenses in an unspecified amount.

50


On May 25 and June 16, 2011, two other stockholders of the Company filed similar putative class action lawsuits (styledMark McClinton v. Green Bankshares, Inc,. et al., Case No. 11-CV-284kt, Greene County Circuit Court, Greeneville, Tennessee andThomas Cook v. Green Bankshares, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:11-cv-00176, Greenville Division, E.D. Tenn., respectively) against the Company, the Company Board and CBF on behalf of all persons holding common stock of the Company. The complaints similarly allege that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties to the Company by agreeing to sell shares to us at a price unfair to stockholders of the Company. The complaints also allege that CBF and the Company aided and abetted these breaches of fiduciary duty. In addition, the Cook complaint further alleges that the proxy statement filed with the SEC by the Company in connection with the transaction was issued with material omissions and misleading statements. Both claims seek an injunction and/or rescission of the CBF Investment and fees and expenses in an unspecified amount.

On July 6, 2011, another shareholder of the Company filed a lawsuit (styledBarbara N. Ballard v. Stephen M. Rownd, et al., Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-00201, E.D. Tenn.) against Green Bankshares, its subsidiaries areBoard of Directors and CBF asserting an individual claim that alleges that the individual defendants violated the securities laws by issuing a preliminary proxy statement that contains alleged material misstatements and omissions. The complaint also alleges a class action claim on behalf of all persons holding the Green Bankshares common stock against the individual defendants for breach of fiduciary duty based on these same alleged material misstatements and omissions. The complaint also alleges that Green Bankshares and CBF aided and abetted the breaches of fiduciary duty. It seeks an injunction and/or rescission of the CBF Investment and fees and expenses in an unspecified amount.

On July 26, 2011, the parties to the above-referenced class action lawsuits commenced in 2011 (other than the Molnar case) reached an agreement in principle to resolve these lawsuits on the basis of the inclusion of certain additional disclosures regarding the CBF Investment proxy statement filed with the SEC on the same date. The proposed settlement is subject to, among other things, court approval. On February 3, 2012, the court in theSmith action entered a final order resolving all claims and, suits arising inon February 15, 2012, the ordinary courseCook action was dismissed by the court with prejudice.

From time to time we are a party to various litigation matters incidental to the conduct of our business. InWe are not presently party to any such legal proceeding the opinion of management, the ultimate resolution of these pending claims and legal proceedings will notwhich we believe would have a material adverse effect on the Company’sour business, operating results, of operations.

financial condition or cash flow.

ITEM 4.
REMOVED AND RESERVED
MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES.

Not applicable.

 

33

51


PART II

ITEM 5.
MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.

On February 28, 2011,April 5, 2012, Green Bankshares, Inc. had 13,188,896133,160,384 shares of common stock outstanding.outstanding, of which 119,900,000 are owned by CBF. The Company’s shares are traded on The Nasdaq Global Select Market, under the symbol “GRNB”. As of February 28, 2011, the Company estimates that it had approximately 5,200March 23, 2012, Green Bankshares, Inc. has 2527 registered shareholders including approximately 2,600 shareholdersand 84 brokers for 2,611 holders of record and approximately 2,600 beneficial owners holding shares in nominee or “street” name.

its common stock.

The following table shows the high and low sales price and closing price for the Company’s common stock as reported by The Nasdaq Global Select Market for 20102011 and 2009. The table also sets forth the2010.

   High/Low Sales Price
During Quarter
   Closing
Price
   Dividends Paid
Per Share
 

2011:

      

First quarter

  $3.89 /2.51    $2.79    $—    

Second quarter

   3.30 /1.99     2.62     —    

Third quarter

   2.90 / 1.20     1.26     —    

Fourth quarter

   1.68 / 1.05     1.21     —    
      $—    
      

 

 

 

2010:

      

First quarter

  $9.48 /3.52    $8.16    $—    

Second quarter

   15.04 /7.96     12.77     —    

Third quarter

   13.11 /6.58     6.79     —    

Fourth quarter

   7.73 / 2.39     3.20     —    
      $—    
      

 

 

 

We do not currently intend to pay dividends per share paid each quarter during 2010 and 2009.

             
          
  High/Low Sales Price  Closing  Dividends Paid 
  During Quarter  Price  Per Share 
2010:
            
First quarter $9.48 / 3.52  $8.16  $ 
Second quarter  15.04 / 7.96   12.77    
Third quarter  13.11 / 6.58   6.79    
Fourth quarter  7.73 / 2.39   3.20    
          $ 
            
2009:
            
First quarter $14.71 / 4.51  $8.80  $0.13 
Second quarter  9.73 / 4.14   4.48    
Third quarter  6.83 / 3.25   5.00    
Fourth quarter  5.48 / 3.51   3.55    
          $0.13 
            
Holderson shares of the Company’sour common stock are entitledin the foreseeable future and our ability to receivepay dividends when, aswill be subject to restrictions under applicable banking laws and regulations. The payment of cash dividends in the future will be dependent upon various factors, including our earnings, if declared byany, cash balances, capital requirements and general financial condition. The payment of any dividends will be within the Company’s boarddiscretion of directors outour then-existing Board of funds legally availableDirectors. It is the present intention of our Board of Directors to retain all earnings, if any, for use in our business operations in the foreseeable future and, accordingly, our Board of Directors does not currently anticipate declaring any dividends. Historically, the Company has paid quarterlyBecause we do not expect to pay cash dividends on itsour common stock. On June 2, 2009 the Company announced that duestock for some time, any gains on an investment in our common stock will be limited to the uncertain natureappreciation, if any, of the current economic environment that it was suspendingmarket value of our common stock.

Banks and bank holding companies are subject to certain regulatory restrictions on the payment of cash dividends. Federal bank regulatory agencies have the authority to prohibit bank holding companies from engaging in unsafe or unsound practices in conducting their business. The payment of dividends by us depending on our financial condition could be deemed an unsafe or unsound practice. Our ability to pay dividends will directly depend on the ability of our subsidiary bank to pay dividends to common shareholdersus, which in order to prudently preserve capital levels. Inturn will be restricted by the fourth quarter of 2010, the Company informally committed to the FRB-Atlantarequirement that it would not pay dividends onmaintains an adequate level of capital in accordance with requirements of its common or preferred stock withoutregulators and, in the priorfuture, can be expected to be further influenced by regulatory policies and capital guidelines.

In addition, in August 2010, Capital Bank entered into an Operating Agreement with the OCC (which we refer to as the “OCC Operating Agreement”), in connection with CBF’s acquisition of the Failed Banks. Capital Bank (and, with respect to certain provisions, the Company) is also subject to the FDIC Order issued in connection with the FDIC’s approval of CBF’s deposit insurance applications for the FRB-Atlanta.Failed Banks. The Company’sOCC Operating Agreement and the FDIC Order require that Capital Bank maintain various financial and capital ratios and require prior regulatory notice and consent to take certain actions in connection with operating the business and may restrict Capital Bank’s ability to pay dividends to its shareholders in the future will depend on its earningsowners, including CBF and financial condition, liquidity and capital requirements, the general economic and regulatory climate, the Company’s ability to service any equity or debt obligations senior to its common stock, including its outstanding trust preferred securities and accompanying junior subordinated debentures, and other factors deemed relevant by the Company’s board of directors. In addition, in order to pay dividends to shareholders, the Company must receive cash dividends from the Bank. As a result, the Company’s ability to pay future dividends will depend upon the earnings of the Bank, its financial condition and its need for funds.

34


Moreover, there are a number of federal and state banking policies and regulations that restrict the Bank’s ability to pay dividends to the Company, and the Company’s ability to pay dividendsmake changes to its shareholders. In particular, because the Bank is a depository institution and its deposits are insured by the FDIC, it may not pay dividends or distribute capital assets if it is in default on any assessment due to the FDIC. In addition, the Tennessee Banking Act prohibits the Bank from declaring dividends in excess of net income for the calendar year in which the dividend is declared plus retained net income for the preceding two years without the approval of the Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Financial Institutions. Because of the losses incurred by the Bank in 2010 and 2009, the Bank will need to receive the approval of the Commissioner of the TDFI before if pays dividends to the Company. Also, the Bank is subject to regulations which impose certain minimum regulatory capital and minimum state law earnings requirements that affect the amount of cash available for distribution to the Company.
In addition, as long as shares of Series A preferred stock are outstanding, no dividends may be paid on our common stock unless all dividends on the Series A preferred stock have been paid in full and in no event may dividends on our common stock exceed $0.13 per quarter without the consent of the U.S. Treasury for the first three years following our sale of Series A preferred stock to the U.S. Treasury. Lastly, under Federal Reserve policy, the Company is required to maintain adequate regulatory capital, is expected to serve as a source of financial strength to the Bank and to commit resources to support the Bank. These policies and regulations may have the effect of reducing or eliminating the amount of dividends that the Company can declare and pay to its shareholders in the future. For information regarding restrictions on the payment of dividends by the Bank to the Company, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources” and “Business — Regulation, Supervision and Governmental Policy — Dividends” in this Annual Report. See also Note 12 of Notes of Consolidated Financial Statements.
structure.

The Company made no repurchases of its common stock during the quarter ended December 31, 2010.

2011.

 

35

52


ITEM 6.
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA.
                     
  2010  2009  2008  2007(1)  2006 
  (in thousands, except per share data, ratios and percentages) 
                     
Total interest income $120,864  $138,456  $170,516  $176,626  $117,357 
Total interest expense  37,271   57,931   75,491   81,973   45,400 
                
Net interest income  83,593   80,525   95,025   94,653   71,957 
Provision for loan losses  (71,107)  (50,246)  (52,810)  (14,483)  (5,507)
                
Net interest income after provision for loan losses  12,486   30,279   42,215   80,170   66,450 
Noninterest income  32,544   31,578   33,614   27,602   20,710 
Noninterest expense  (110,815)  (229,587)  (85,837)  (69,252)  (52,708)
                
Income (loss) before income taxes  (65,785)  (167,730)  (10,008)  38,520   34,452 
Income tax (expense) benefit  (14,910)  17,036   4,648   (14,146)  (13,190)
                
Net income (loss)  (80,695)  (150,694)  (5,360)  24,374   21,262 
Preferred stock dividend and accretion of discount on warrants  (5,001)  (4,982)  (92)      
                
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders $(85,696) $(155,676) $(5,452) $24,374  $21,262 
                
                     
Per Share Data:
                    
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders, basic $(6.54) $(11.91) $(0.42) $2.07  $2.17 
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders, assuming dilution $(6.54) $(11.91) $(0.42) $2.07  $2.14 
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders, assuming dilution adjusted for goodwill impairment charge(7)
 $(6.54) $(1.40) $(0.42) $2.07  $2.14 
Dividends declared $0.00  $0.13  $0.52  $0.68  $0.64 
Common book value(2)(7)
 $5.75  $12.15  $24.09  $24.94  $18.80 
Tangible common book value(3)(7)
 $5.23  $11.44  $12.23  $12.73  $14.87 
                     
Financial Condition Data:
                    
Assets $2,406,040  $2,619,139  $2,944,671  $2,947,741  $1,772,654 
Loans, net of unearned interest $1,745,378  $2,043,807  $2,223,390  $2,356,376  $1,539,629 
Cash and investments $504,559  $378,785  $410,344  $314,615  $91,997 
Federal funds sold $4,856  $3,793  $5,263  $  $25,983 
Deposits $1,976,854  $2,084,096  $2,184,147  $1,986,793  $1,332,505 
FHLB advances and notes payable $158,653  $171,999  $229,349  $318,690  $177,571 
Subordinated debentures $88,662  $88,662  $88,662  $88,662  $13,403 
Federal funds purchased and repurchase agreements $19,413  $24,449  $35,302  $194,525  $42,165 
Shareholders’ equity $143,897  $226,769  $381,231  $322,477  $184,471 
Common shareholders’ equity(2)(7)
 $75,776  $160,034  $315,885  $322,477  $184,471 
Tangible common shareholders’ equity(3)(7)
 $69,025  $150,699  $160,411  $164,650  $145,931 
Tangible shareholders’ equity(4)(7)
 $137,146  $217,434  $225,757  $164,650  $145,931 
                     
Selected Ratios:
                    
Interest rate spread  3.79%  3.19%  3.48%  3.83%  4.32%
Net interest margin(6)
  3.86%  3.34%  3.70%  4.25%  4.77%
Total tangible equity to tangible assets(4)(5)(7)
  5.72%  8.33%  8.09%  5.90%  8.42%
Tangible common equity to tangible assets(3)(5)(7)
  2.88%  5.77%  5.75%  5.90%  8.42%
Return on average assets  (3.41%)  (5.59%)  (0.18%)  0.98%  1.28%
Return on average equity  (38.56%)  (50.44%)  (1.64%)  8.96%  11.91%
Return on average common equity(2)(7)
  (55.35%)  (64.25%)  (1.65%)  8.96%  11.91%
Return on average common tangible equity(3)(7)
  (58.32%)  (96.77%)  (3.14%)  15.41%  15.25%
Average equity to average assets  8.85%  11.09%  11.24%  10.91%  10.78%
Dividend payout ratio  N/M   N/M   N/M   32.85%  29.49%
Ratio of nonperforming assets to total assets  8.56%  5.07%  2.61%  1.25%  0.29%
Ratio of allowance for loan losses to nonperforming loans  45.83%  66.39%  155.28%  106.34%  635.93%
Ratio of allowance for loan losses to total loans, net of unearned income loans  3.83%  2.45%  2.20%  1.45%  1.45%

   Successor                
   Company  Predecessor Company 
   Sept 8 - Dec 31  Jan 1 - Sept 7             
   2011  2011  2010  2009  2008  2007(1) 
      (in thousands, except per share data, ratios and percentages) 

Total interest income

  $—     $71,180   $120,864   $138,456   $170,516   $176,626  

Total interest expense

   977    18,404    37,271    57,931    75,491    81,973  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net interest income

   (977  52,776    83,593    80,525    95,025    94,653  

Provision for loan losses

   —      (43,742  (71,107  (50,246  (52,810  (14,483
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net interest income after provision for loan losses

   (977  9,034    12,486    30,279    42,215    80,170  

Noninterest income

   3,465    27,803    32,544    31,578    33,614    27,602  

Noninterest expense

   (282  (77,382  (110,815  (229,587  (85,837  (69,252
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income (loss) before income taxes

   2,206    (40,545  (65,785  (167,730  (10,008  38,520  

Income tax provision (benefit)

   (441  974    14,910    (17,036  (4,648  14,146  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss)

   2,647    (41,519  (80,695  (150,694  (5,360  24,374  

Preferred stock dividend and accretion of discount on warrants

   —      3,409    (5,001  (4,982  (92  —    

Gain on retirement of Series A preferred allocated to common stockholders

   —      11,188    —      —      —      —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss) available to common shareholders

  $2,647   $(33,740 $(85,696 $(155,676 $(5,452 $24,374  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Per Share Data:

        

Net income (loss), basic

  $0.02   $(2.57 $(6.54 $(11.91 $(0.42 $2.07  

Net income (loss), assuming dilution

   0.02    (2.57  (6.54  (11.91  (0.42  2.07  

Net income (loss), assuming dilution adjusted for goodwill impairment charge(7)

   0.02    (2.57  (6.54  (1.40  (0.42  2.07  

Dividends declared

   —      —      —      0.13    0.52    0.68  

Common book value(2)(7)

   1.95    N/A    5.75    12.15    24.09    24.94  

Tangible common book value(3)(7)

   1.63    N/A    5.23    11.44    12.23    12.73  
 

Financial Condition Data:

        

Assets

  $321,238    N/A   $2,406,040   $2,619,139   $2,944,671   $2,947,741  

Loans, net of unearned interest

   —      N/A    1,745,378    2,043,807    2,223,390    2,356,376  

Cash and investments

   317,434    N/A    509,415    378,785    410,344    314,615  

Federal funds sold

   —      N/A    4,856    3,793    5,263   $—    

Deposits

   —      N/A    1,976,854    2,084,096    2,184,147    1,986,793  

FHLB advances and notes payable

   —      N/A    158,653    171,999    229,349    318,690  

Subordinated debentures

   45,180    N/A    88,662    88,662    88,662    88,662  

Federal funds purchased and repurchase agreements

   —      N/A    19,413    24,449    35,302    194,525  

Shareholders’ equity

   260,049    N/A    143,897    226,769    381,231    322,477  

Common shareholders’ equity(2)(7)

   260,049    N/A    75,776    160,034    315,885    322,477  

Tangible common shareholders’ equity(3)(7)

   216,810    N/A    69,025    150,699    160,411    164,650  

Tangible shareholders’ equity(4)(7)

   216,810    N/A    137,146    217,434    225,757    164,650  
 

Selected Ratios:

        

Interest rate spread

   N/A    3.87  3.79  3.19  3.48  3.83

Net interest margin(6)

   N/A    3.86  3.86  3.34  3.70  4.25

Total tangible equity to tangible
assets
(4)(5)(7)

   77.99  N/A    5.72  8.33  8.09  5.90

Tangible common equity to tangible
assets
(3)(5)(7)

   77.99  N/A    2.88  5.77  5.75  5.90

Return on average assets

   2.76  N/A    -3.41  -5.59  -0.18  0.98

Return on average equity

   3.24  N/A    -38.56  -50.44  -1.64  8.96

Return on average common equity(2)(7)

   3.24  N/A    -55.35  -64.25  -1.65  8.96

Return on average common tangible
equity
(3)(7)

   3.87  N/A    -58.32  -96.77  -3.14  15.41

Average equity to average assets

   85.08  N/A    8.85  11.09  11.24  10.91

Dividend payout ratio

   N/A    N/A    N/M    N/M    N/M    32.85

Ratio of nonperforming assets to total assets

   N/A    N/A    8.56  5.07  2.61  1.25

Ratio of allowance for loan losses to nonperforming loans

   N/A    N/A    45.83  66.39  155.28  106.34

Ratio of allowance for loan losses to total loans, net of unearned income loans

   N/A    N/A    3.83  2.45  2.20  1.45

1

Information for the 2007 fiscal year includes the operations of CVBG, with which the Company merged on May 18, 2007.

2

Common shareholders’ equity is shareholders’ equity less preferred stock.

36


3

Tangible common shareholders’ equity is shareholders’ equity less goodwill, other intangible assets and preferred stock.

4

Tangible shareholders’ equity is shareholders’ equity less goodwill and other intangible assets.

5

Tangible assets is total assets less goodwill and other intangible assets.

53


6

Net interest margin is the net yield on interest earning assets and is the difference between the Fully Taxable Equivalent yield earned on interest-earning assets less the effective cost of supporting liabilities.

7

Please refer to the “GAAP Reconciliation and Management Explanation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section following “Selected Financial Data” for more information, including a reconciliation of this non-GAAP financial measure.

GAAP Reconciliation and Management Explanation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures

Certain financial information included in the selected financial data is determined by methods other than in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted within the United States (“GAAP”). These non-GAAP financial measures are “net income (loss) per share assuming dilution adjusted for goodwill impairment charge,” “common shareholders’ equity,” “tangible assets,” “tangible shareholders’ equity,” “tangible common book value per share,” “tangible common shareholders’ equity,” “return on average common equity,” and “return on average common tangible equity.” The Company’s management, the entire financial services sector, bank stock analysts, and bank regulators use these non-GAAP measures in their analysis of the Company’s performance.

“Net income (loss) per share available to common shareholders assuming dilution adjusted for goodwill impairment charge” is defined as net income (loss) per share available to common shareholders reduced by goodwill impairment charge, net of tax.

“Common shareholders’ equity” is shareholders’ equity less preferred stock.

“Tangible assets” are total assets less goodwill and other intangible assets.

“Tangible shareholders’ equity” is shareholders’ equity less goodwill and other intangible assets.

“Tangible common book value per share” is defined as total equity reduced by recorded goodwill, other intangible assets and preferred stock divided by total common shares outstanding. This measure discloses changes from period-to-period in book value per share exclusive of changes in intangible assets and preferred stock. Goodwill, an intangible asset that is recorded in a purchase business combination, has the effect of increasing total book value while not increasing the tangible assets of a company. Companies utilizing purchase accounting in a business combination, as required by GAAP, must record goodwill related to such transactions.

“Tangible common shareholders’ equity” is shareholders’ equity less goodwill, other intangible assets and preferred stock.

“Return on average common equity” is defined as net income (loss) available to common shareholders’ for the period divided by average equity reduced by average preferred stock.

“Return on average common tangible equity” is defined as net income (loss) available to common shareholders’ for the period divided by average equity reduced by average goodwill, other intangible assets and preferred stock.

54


These disclosures should not be viewed as a substitute for results determined in accordance with GAAP, and are not necessarily comparable to non-GAAP performance measures which may be presented by other companies.

37


The following reconciliation table provides a more detailed analysis of these non-GAAP performance measures:
                     
  At and for the Fiscal Years Ended December 31, 
  2010  2009  2008  2007  2006 
Total shareholders’ equity $143,897  $226,769  $381,231  $322,477  $184,471 
Less: Preferred stock  (68,121)  (66,735)  (65,346)      
                
Common shareholders’ equity
 $75,776  $160,034  $315,855  $322,477  $184,471 
                
                     
Total shareholders’ equity $143,897  $226,769  $381,231  $322,477  $184,471 
Less:                    
Goodwill        (143,389)  (143,140)  (31,327)
Core Deposit and other intangibles  (6,751)  (9,335)  (12,085)  (14,687)  (7,213)
Preferred stock  (68,121)  (66,735)  (65,346)      
                
Tangible common shareholders’ equity
 $69,025  $150,699  $160,411  $164,650  $145,931 
                
                     
Total shareholders’ equity $143,897  $226,769  $381,231  $322,477  $184,471 
Less:                    
Goodwill        (143,389)  (143,140)  (31,327)
Core Deposit and other intangibles  (6,751)  (9,335)  (12,085)  (14,687)  (7,213)
                
Tangible shareholders’ equity
 $137,146  $217,434  $225,757  $164,650  $145,931 
                
                     
Total assets $2,406,040  $2,619,139  $2,944,671  $2,947,741  $1,772,654 
Less:                    
Goodwill        (143,389)  (143,140)  (31,327)
Core Deposit and other intangibles  (6,751)  (9,335)  (12,085)  (14,687)  (7,213)
                
Tangible assets
 $2,399,289  $2,609,804  $2,789,197  $2,789,914  $1,734,114 
                
                     
Common book value per share $5.75  $12.15  $24.09  $24.94  $18.80 
Effect of intangible assets $(0.52) $(0.71) $(11.86) $(12.21) $(3.93)
Tangible common book value per share $5.23  $11.44  $12.23  $12.73  $14.87 
                     
Return on average common equity  (55.35%)  (64.25%)  (1.65%)  8.96%  11.91%
Effect of intangible assets  (2.97%)  (32.52%)  (1.49%)  6.45%  3.34%
Return on average common tangible equity  (58.32%)  (96.77%)  (3.14%)  15.41%  15.25%

   Successor                 
   Company  Predecessor Company 
   Sept 8 - Dec 31  Jan 1 - Sept 7   At and for the Fiscal Years Ended December 31, 
   2011  2011   2010  2009  2008  2007 

Total shareholders’equity

  $260,049    N/A    $143,897   $226,769   $381,231   $322,477  

Less: Preferred stock

   —      N/A     (68,121  (66,735  (65,346  —    

Common shareholders’equity

  $260,049    N/A    $75,776   $160,034   $315,855   $322,477  
 

Total shareholders’equity

  $260,049    N/A    $143,897   $226,769   $381,231   $322,477  

Less:

         
 

Goodwill

   38,131    N/A     —      —      (143,389  (143,140

Core Deposit and other intangibles

   5,108    N/A     (6,751  (9,335  (12,085  (14,687

Preferred stock

   —      N/A     (68,121  (66,735  (65,346  —    

Tangible common shareholders’equity

  $216,810    N/A    $69,025   $150,699   $160,411   $164,650  
 

Total shareholders’equity

  $260,049    N/A    $143,897   $226,769   $381,231   $322,477  

Less:

         
 

Goodwill

   38,131    N/A     —      —      (143,389  (143,140

Core Deposit and other intangibles

   5,108    N/A     (6,751  (9,335  (12,085  (14,687

Tangible shareholders’equity

  $216,810    N/A    $137,146   $217,434   $225,757   $164,650  
 

Total assets

  $321,238    N/A    $2,406,040   $2,619,139   $2,944,671   $2,947,741  

Less:

         
 

Goodwill

   38,131    N/A     —      —      (143,389  (143,140

Core Deposit and other intangibles

   5,108    N/A     (6,751  (9,335  (12,085  (14,687

Tangible assets

  $277,999    N/A    $2,399,289   $2,609,804   $2,789,197   $2,789,914  
 

Common book value per share

   1.95    N/A    $5.75   $12.15   $24.09   $24.94  

Effect of intangible assets

   (.32  N/A    $(0.52 $(0.71 $(11.86 $(12.21

Tangible common book value per share

   1.63    N/A    $5.23   $11.44   $12.23   $12.73  
 

Return on average common equity

   3.24  N/A     -55.35  -64.25  -1.65  8.96

Effect of intangible assets

   0.63  N/A     -2.97  -32.52  -1.49  6.45

Return on average common tangible equity

   3.87  N/A     -58.32  -96.77  -3.14  15.41

In the table above, note that tangible shareholders’ equity and tangible assets are adjusted for the Company’s pro rata share of intangible assets of Capital Bank,N.A.

 

38

55


The table below presents computations and other financial information excluding the goodwill impairment charge that the Company incurred in 2009. The goodwill impairment charge is included in the financial results presented in accordance with GAAP. The Company believes that the exclusion of the goodwill impairment in expressing net operating income (loss), operating expenses and earnings (loss) per diluted share data provides a more meaningful base for period to period comparisons which will assist investors in analyzing the operating results of the Company. The Company utilizes these non-GAAP financial measures to compare the operating performance with comparable periods in prior years and with internally prepared projections. Non-GAAP financial measures have inherent limitations, are not required to be uniformly applied and are not audited. To mitigate these limitations, the Company has policies in place to address goodwill impairment from other normal operating expenses to ensure that the Company’s operating results are properly reflected for period to period comparisons.
                     
  For the Fiscal Years Ended December 31, 
  2010  2009  2008  2007  2006 
Total non-interest expense $110,815  $229,587  $85,837  $69,252  $52,708 
Goodwill impairment charge     (143,389)         
                
Operating expenses
 $110,815  $86,198  $85,837  $69,252  $52,708 
                
                     
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders $(85,696) $(155,676) $(5,452) $24,374  $21,262 
Goodwill impairment charge, net of tax of $5,975     137,414          
                
Net operating income (loss) available to common shareholders
 $(85,696) $(18,262) $(5,452) $24,374  $21,262 
                
                     
Per Diluted Share:
                    
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders $(6.54) $(11.91) $(0.42) $2.07  $2.14 
Goodwill impairment charge, net of tax of $5,975     10.51          
                
Net operating income (loss)
 $(6.54) $(1.40) $(0.42) $2.07  $2.14 
                

   Successor                 
   Company   Predecessor Company 
   Sept 8 - Dec 31   Jan 1 - Sept 7  At and for the Fiscal Years Ended December 31, 
   2011   2011  2010  2009  2008  2007 

Total non-interest expense

  $282    $77,382   $110,815   $229,587   $85,837   $69,252  

Goodwill impairment charge

   —       —      —      (143,389  —      —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Operating expenses

  $282    $77,382   $110,815   $86,198   $85,837   $69,252  
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss) available to common shareholders

  $2,647    $(33,740 $(85,696 $(155,676 $(5,452 $24,374  

Goodwill impairment charge, net of tax of $5,975

   —       —      —      137,414    —      —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net operating income (loss)

  $2,647    $(33,740 $(85,696 $(18,262 $(5,452 $24,374  
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Per Diluted Share:

         

Net income (loss) available to common shareholders

  $0.02    $(2.57 $(6.54 $(11.91 $(0.42 $2.07  

Goodwill impairment charge, net of tax of $5,975

   —       —      —      10.51    —      —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net operating income (loss)

  $0.02    $(2.57 $(6.54 $(1.40 $(0.42 $2.07  
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

39

56


ITEM 7.
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Overview

Headquartered in Greeneville, Tennessee, Green Bankshares, Inc. (the “Company”), is a financial services company with a 34% equity method investment in Capital Bank NA, a national banking association with approximately $6.5 billion in total assets and 143 full-service banking offices throughout Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia.

Capital Bank Financial Corp. Investment

On September 7, 2011, the Company completed the issuance and sale of 119.9 million shares of its common stock to CBF for approximately $217 million in consideration. CBF is a bank holding company formed with the goal of creating a regional banking franchise in the southeastern region of the United States through organic growth and acquisition of other banks, including failed, underperforming and undercapitalized banks. CBF is the controlling owner of Capital Bank, NA. In connection with the CBF Investment, all of the Company’s Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, and related warrants to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock issued to the U.S. Treasury through the TARP were purchased by CBF directly from the Treasury. The Series A Preferred Stock and the related warrant were retired on September 7, 2011 and are no longer outstanding.

Because of the controlling proportion of voting securities in the Company acquired by CBF, the CBF Investment is considered an acquisition for accounting purposes and requires the application and push down of the acquisition method of accounting. The accounting guidance for acquisition accounting requires that the assets acquired and liabilities assumed be recorded at their respective fair values as of the acquisition date. Any purchase price in excess of the net assets acquired is recorded as goodwill.

The most significant fair value adjustments resulting from the application of the acquisition method of accounting were made to loans. Accounting guidance requires that all loans held by the Company on the Transaction Date be recorded at their fair value. The fair value of these acquired loans takes into account both the differences in loan interest rates and market rates and any deterioration in their credit quality. Because concerns about the probability of receiving the full amount of the contractual payments from the borrowers was considered in estimating the fair value of the loans, stating the loans at their fair value results in no allowance for loan loss being provided for these loans as of the Transaction Date. As of September 7, 2011, certain loans had evidence of credit deterioration since origination, and it was probable that not all contractually required principal and interest payments would be collected. Such loans identified at the time of the acquisition were accounted for using the measurement provision for purchased credit-impaired (“PCI”) loans, according to the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 310-30. The special accounting for PCI loans not only requires that they are recorded at fair value at the date of acquisition and that any related allowance for loan and lease losses is not permitted to be carried forward past the Transaction Date, but it also governs how interest income will be recognized on these loans and how any further deterioration in credit quality after the Transaction Date will be recognized and reported.

GreenBank Merger with Capital Bank, NA

On September 7, 2011, GreenBank, which was formerly a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, merged with and into Capital Bank, NA, a national banking association and subsidiary of TIB Financial Corp., Capital Bank Corp., and CBF, with Capital Bank, NA as the surviving entity. CBF is the owner of approximately 90% of the Company’s common stock, approximately 83% of Capital Bank Corp’s common stock and approximately 94% of TIB Financial’s common stock.

The Company began to account for its ownership in Capital Bank, NA under the equity method of accounting and the assets and liabilities of the Bank were de-consolidated from the Company’s balance sheet.

Potential Merger of Green Bankshares, Inc. and Capital Bank Financial Corp.

On September 8, 2011, CBF’s Board of Directors approved and adopted a plan of merger which provides for the merger of Green Bankshares, Inc. with and into CBF, with CBF continuing as the surviving entity. In the merger, each share of Green Bankshares, Inc. common stock issued and outstanding immediately prior to the completion of the merger, except for certain shares held by CBF or Green Bankshares, Inc., will be

57


converted into the right to receive .0915 of a share of CBF Class A common stock. No fractional share of Class A common stock will be issued in connection with the merger, and holders of Green Bankshares, Inc. common stock will be entitled to receive cash in lieu thereof. Since CBF currently owns more than 90% of the common stock of Green Bankshares, Inc., under Delaware and Tennessee law, no vote of our stockholders is required to complete the merger. CBF will determine when and if the merger will ultimately take place.

Presentation

All dollar amounts reported or discussed in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K are shown in thousands, except per share amounts. Financial results for the period from September 8, 2011 through December 31, 2011 were significantly impacted by the controlling investment in the Company by CBF. As a result of the CBF Investment, CBF now owners 90% of the voting securities of the Company and followed the acquisition method of accounting and applied “acquisition accounting.” Acquisition accounting requires that the assets purchased, the liabilities assumed, and non-controlling interests all be reported in the acquirer’s financial statements at their fair value, with any excess of purchase consideration over the net assets being reported as goodwill. As part of the valuation, intangible assets were identified and a fair value was determined as required by the accounting guidance for business combinations. Accounting guidance also allows the application of “push down accounting,” whereby the adjustments of assets and liabilities to fair value and the resultant goodwill are shown in the financial statements of the acquiree. The Company is still in the process of completing its fair value analysis of assets and liabilities, and final fair value adjustments may differ from the preliminary estimates recorded to date. Balances and activity in the Company’s consolidated financial statements prior to the CBF Investment have been labeled with “Predecessor Company” while balances and activity subsequent to the CBF Investment have been labeled with “Successor Company.”

Due to the difference in lengths of reporting periods and the Bank Merger discussed above and the resulting deconsolidation of GreenBank on September 7, 2011, the operating results for 2011 only include the results of GreenBank for approximately 8 months and therefore are generally not comparable to the operations in prior years.

Performance Overview

The Successor Company reported net income of $2.6 million, or $0.02 per diluted share, for the period subsequent to the CBF investment of September 8, 2011 through December 31, 2011. Earnings primary reflect the Company’s equity method income in Capital Bank, NA, partially offset by interest expense interest on trust preferred securities.

The Predecessor Company reported a net loss available to common shareholders of $85,696$33.7 million, or $2.57 per diluted share, for the full year 2010 compared with a net loss availableperiod prior to common shareholders of $155,676 for the full year 2009.CBF investment from January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011. The loss for the year 2010 was primarily attributable to an increase in credit costs which remained elevated, including both a higherthe $43.7 million loan loss provision and elevated costs$24.8 million in foreclosed asset related expenses associated with the disposition and revaluation of OREO related assets along withassets. Net loan charge-offs were $38.8 million for the effectsperiod from January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011. Partially offsetting elevated credit costs was a gain of $11.2 million as a result of the continued weaknesses inredemption of the economy through 2010. This weakness was manifested primarily in the Company’s residential real estate constructioncompany series A preferred stock.

The Predecessor Company reported a net loss of $85.7 million or $(6.54) per diluted share for 2010 and development portfolio. As a result, the Company’s provision for loan losses for the full year 2010 remained elevated at $71,107 compared to $50,246 in 2009 and $52,810 in 2008. Additionally, Other Real Estate Owned (“OREO”) charges totaled $29,895 in 2010 compared with $8,156net loss of $18.3 million or $(1.40) per diluted share for 2009, and $7,028 in 2008. As the economy in the Company’s market areas continued to struggle to improve during 2010, net loan charge-offs rose to $54,438 in 2010 compared with net loan charge-offs of $48,896 in 2009 and $38,110 in 2008. Onexcluding a diluted per share basis, the net operating loss available to common shareholders in 2010 was $6.54 compared with a net operating loss in 2009, excluding the$137,414 goodwill impairment charge, net of $1.40 (please see “ITEM 6 — GAAP Reconciliation and Management Explanationstax of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” above for more information) and a net operating loss available to common shareholders of $0.42 for 2008.$5,975. The net loss available to common shareholders on a diluted per share basis for 20102009 was $6.54 and$11.91 including the goodwill impairment charge, onimpairment. The loss reported for 2010 was primarily due to a diluted per share basis the net$71.1 million provision for loan losses and $35.4 million in foreclosed asset related expenses. The loss available to common shareholdersreported for 2009 was $11.91 compared withdue primarily to a net loss available to common shareholders of $0.42$50.2 million provision for 2008.

loan losses and $12.5 million in foreclosed asset related expenses. Net interest incomeloan charge-offs were $54.4 million for 2010 was $83,593 compared with $80,525 in 2009 including the impact of interest reversals of $2,965 in 2010 and $2,606 in$48.9 million for 2009. Despite the decline in average earning assets, the improvement in net interest income was due to the Company experiencing the benefit of interest rate floors built into loan agreements beginning in 2009 plus the re-pricing of interest bearing liabilities in a lower market interest rate environment in 2010. As a result, the Company experienced a widening in its net interest margin from 3.34% in 2009 to 3.86% in 2010. Noninterest income improved modestly from $31,578 in 2009 to $32,544 in 2010 principally as a result of higher fee income generated from the sales of annuity and investment products. Operating expenses for 2010 totaled $110,815 in 2010 compared with $229,587 in 2009, or $86,198, excluding the goodwill impairment charge of $143,389 (please see “ITEM 6 — GAAP Reconciliation and Management Explanations of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” above for more information). The increase in operating expenses of $24,617 (excluding the goodwill impairment charge taken in 2009 of $143,389) was principally driven by the increased costs associated with the losses incurred on the revaluations and dispositions of OREO related assets.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The Company’s consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of these financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reported periods.

58


Financial results for 2011 were significantly impacted by the controlling investment in the Company by CBF. The Company elected to apply push-down accounting. Accordingly, the Company’s assets and liabilities were adjusted to estimated fair values at the CBF Investment date, resulting in elimination of the allowance for loan losses. The Company is still in the process of completing its fair value analysis of assets and liabilities, and final fair value adjustments may differ from the preliminary estimates recorded to date.

Due to its ownership level and significant influence, the Company’s investment in Capital Bank, NA is recorded as an equity-method investment in that entity. As of December 31, 2011, the Company’s investment in Capital Bank, NA totaled $315.3 million, representing the Company’s primary asset. The investment reflected the Company’s 34% pro rata ownership of Capital Bank, NA’s total shareholders’ equity as a result of the Bank Merger. In periods subsequent to the Merger, the Company will adjust this equity investment balance based on its equity in Capital Bank, NA’s net income and comprehensive income. In connection with the Bank Merger, assets and liabilities of GreenBank were de-consolidated from the Company’s balance sheet resulting in a significant decrease in total assets and total liabilities of the Company in the third quarter of 2011.

Management continually evaluates the Company’s accounting policies and estimates it uses to prepare the consolidated financial statements. In general, management’s estimates are based on current and projected economic conditions, historical experience, information from regulators and third party professionals and various assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the then existing set of facts and circumstances. Actual results could differ from those estimates made by management.

The Company believes its

Prior to the Bank Merger, critical accounting policies and estimates includeincluded the valuation of the allowance for loan losses and the fair value of financial instruments and other accounts, including OREO. Based on management’s calculation, an allowance of $66,830, or 3.83%, of total loans, net of unearned interest was an adequate estimate of losses inherent in the loan portfolio as of December 31, 2010. This estimate resulted in a provision for loan losses on the income statement of $71,107 during 2010. If the mix and amount of future charge-off percentages differ significantly from those assumptions used by management in making its determination, the allowance for loan losses and provision for loan losses on the income statement could be materially affected. For further discussion of the allowance for loan losses and a detailed description of the methodology management uses in determining the adequacy of the allowance, see “ITEM 1. Business — Lending Activities — Allowance for Loan Losses” located above, and “Changes in Results of Operations — Provision for Loan Losses” located below.

40


The consolidated financial statements include certain accounting and disclosures that require management to make estimates about fair values. Estimates of fair value arewere used in the accounting for securities available for sale, loans held for sale, goodwill, other intangible assets, OREO and acquisition purchase accounting adjustments. Estimates of fair values are used in disclosures regarding securities held to maturity, stock compensation, commitments, and the fair values of financial instruments. Fair values are estimated using relevant market information and other assumptions such as interest rates, credit risk, prepayments and other factors. The fair values of financial instruments are subject to change as influenced by market conditions.

The Company believes its critical accounting policies and estimates also include the valuation of the allowance for net Deferred Tax Assets (“DTA”). As a result of the application of the acquisition method of accounting a net DTA.deferred tax asset of $53,407 was recognized at acquisition date. The net deferred tax asset is primarily related to the recognition of differences between certain tax and book bases of assets and liabilities related to the acquisition method of accounting, including fair value adjustments discussed elsewhere in this section, along with federal and state net operating losses that the Company determined to be realizable as of the acquisition date. A valuation allowance is recorded for deferred tax assets, including net operating losses if the Company determines that it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.

Results of Operations

Due to the Bank Merger discussed above and the resulting deconsolidation of GreenBank on September 7, 2011, operating results for 2011 only include the results of GreenBank for approximately 8 months and therefore are generally not comparable to the operations in prior years.

Net Income / (Loss).

September 8 through December 31, 2011 (Successor Company):

The Successor Company reported net income of $2.6 million for the period from September 8, 2011 through December 31, 2011. Basic and diluted income per common share was $.02. Equity method income in Capital Bank, NA of $3.4 million was partially offset by $977 of interest expense interest on trust preferred securities.

January 1 through September 7, 2011 (Predecessor Company):

The Predecessor Company reported a net loss available to common shareholders of $33.7 million, or $2.57 per diluted share, for the period prior to the CBF investment from January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011.

The loss was primarily attributable to credit costs which remained elevated, including both the $43.7 million loan loss provision and $24.8 million in foreclosed asset related expenses associated with the disposition and revaluation of OREO related assets. Net loan charge-offs were $38.8 million. Partially offsetting elevated credit costs was a gain of $11.2 million as a result of the redemption of the company series A preferred stock.

59


Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2010 (Predecessor Company):

The net loss for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 was $85.7 million or $(6.54) per diluted share.

The loss was primarily due to a $71.1 million provision for loan losses and $35.4 million in foreclosed asset related expenses. Net loan charge-offs were $54.4 million.

Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2009 (Predecessor Company):

The Company reported a net loss of $18.3 million or $(1.40) per diluted share for 2009, excluding a $137.4 million goodwill impairment charge, net of tax of $6 million. The net loss available to common shareholders on a diluted per share basis for 2009 was $11.91 including the goodwill impairment. The loss was due primarily to a $50.2 million provision for loan losses and $12.5 million in foreclosed asset related expenses. Net loan charge-offs were $48.9 million for 2009.

Net Interest Income.

September 8 through December 31, 2011 (Successor Company):

Subsequent to the deconsolidation of GreenBank on September 7, 2011, the Successor Company has no interest bearing assets. The Company’s primary asset is an equity method investment in Capital Bank for which earnings are reported as non-interest income.

January 1 through September 7, 2011 (Predecessor Company):

The largest source of earnings for the Predecessor Company was net interest income, which is the difference between interest income on interest earning assets and interest expense on deposits and other interest-bearing liabilities. The primary factors that affect net interest income are changes in volumes and rates on earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, which are affected in part by management’s anticipatory responses to changes in interest rates through asset/liability management.

Net interest income for the period of January 1 through September 7, 2011 was $52.8 million. The net interest margin was 3.86%, unchanged versus the full year of 2010 as a 0.37% decline in earning asset yields, as loan runoff was replaced with lower yield securities and liquid assets, was offset by a 0.44% decline in rates paid on interest bearing liabilities as declines in certificates of deposit were largely offset by growth in lower cost non-time deposits

Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2010 (Predecessor Company):

Net interest income for 2010 was $83.6 million, up $3.1 million versus 2009 despite deleveraging average earning assets of the Company by $248 million from 2009 to 2010. The net interest margin was 3.86% for 2010, up 0.52% versus the 2009 net interest margin of 3.34%, as interest rate floors were triggered in loan agreements and interest-bearing liabilities were re-priced in a lower interest rate market environment. The 2010 net interest margin also benefited from a modest increase in average non-interest bearing demand deposits.

Average loan balances in 2010 were $1,834 million compared with $2,096 million in 2009 and were principally responsible for the decline in average earning assets, partially offset by an increase in short-term investments as liquidity levels increased. Simultaneously, the Company reduced its large certificates of deposit as average balances declined by $325 million and further eliminated $56 million in borrowed funds.

60


Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2009 (Predecessor Company):

Net interest income for 2009 was $80.5 million, down $14.5 million versus 2008. The net interest margin was 3.34% for 2009.

The Company experienced a decline in average balances of interest-earning assets, with average total interest-earning assets decreasing by $157 million, or 6%, to $2,433 million in 2009 from $2,590 million in 2008. Most of the decline occurred in loans, with average loan balances decreasing by $203 million, or 9%, to $2,096 million in 2009 from $2,299 million in 2008. The decrease was primarily due to the continued downturn in economic conditions throughout 2009 that resulted in lower loan demand and heightened levels of loan charge-offs. Average investment securities also decreased $84 million, or 31%, to $189 million in 2009 from $273 million in 2008 as the Company focused on de-levering the balance sheet and reducing excess liquidity. Average balances of total interest-bearing liabilities also decreased in 2009 from 2008, with average total interest-bearing deposit balances decreasing by $12 million, or 1%, to $1,951 million in 2009 from $1,963 million in 2008, and average securities sold under repurchase agreements and short-term borrowings, and subordinated debentures and FHLB advances and notes payable decreased by $111 million or 25%, to $338 million in 2009 from $449 million in 2008. These decreases are primarily related to the reduction in securities sold under repurchase agreements and short-term borrowings along with the maturities and early payoffs of FHLB advances.

Average Balances, Interest Rates and Yields.

Predecessor Company net interest income was affected by (i) the difference between yields earned on interest-earning assets and rates paid on interest-bearing liabilities (“interest rate spread”) and (ii) the relative amounts of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. The Predecessor Company’s interest rate spread was affected by regulatory, economic and competitive factors that influence interest rates, loan demand and deposit flows. When the total of interest-earning assets approximates or exceeds the total of interest-bearing liabilities, any positive interest rate spread will generate net interest income. An indication of the effectiveness of an institution’s net interest income management is its “net yield on interest-earning assets,” which is net interest income on a fully taxable equivalent basis divided by average interest-earning assets.

The following table sets forth certain information relating to the Predecessor Company’s consolidated average interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities and reflects the average fully taxable equivalent yield on assets and average cost of liabilities for the periods indicated. Such yields and costs are derived by dividing income or expense by the average daily balance of assets or liabilities, respectively, for the periods presented.

61


   2010  2009 
   Average
Balance
   Interest   Average
Rate
  Average
Balance
   Interest   Average
Rate
 

Interest-earning assets:

           

Loans(1)(4)

           

Real estate loans

  $1,517,937    $86,904     5.73 $1,719,026    $99,796     5.81

Commercial loans

   250,126     14,358     5.74  295,913     16,284     5.50

Consumer and other loans-net(2)

   65,802     8,963     13.62  81,242     9,660     11.89

Fees on loans

   —       3,563      —       3,532    
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

 

 

   

Total loans (including fees)

  $1,833,865    $113,788     6.20 $2,096,181    $129,272     6.17
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

 

 

   

Investment securities(3)

           

Taxable

  $137,148    $4,937     3.60 $144,881    $7,035     4.86

Tax-exempt(4)

   30,799     1,909     6.20  31,660     1,938     6.12

FHLB and other stock

   12,734     530     4.16  12,836     573     4.46
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

 

 

   

Total investment securities

  $180,681    $7,376     4.08 $189,377    $9,546     5.04

Other short-term investments

   170,952     435     0.25  147,918     376     0.25
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

 

 

   

Total interest-earning assets

  $2,185,498    $121,599     5.56 $2,433,476    $139,194     5.72
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

 

 

   

Noninterest-earning assets

           

Cash and due from banks

  $42,743       $45,870      

Premises and equipment

   80,556        83,478      

Other, less allowance for loan losses

   202,649        219,831      
  

 

 

      

 

 

     

Total noninterest- earning assets

  $325,948       $349,179      
  

 

 

      

 

 

     

Total assets

  $2,511,446       $2,782,655      
  

 

 

      

 

 

     

1

Average loan balances exclude nonaccrual loans.

2

Installment loans are stated net of unearned income.

3

The average balance of and the related yield associated with securities available for sale is based on the cost of such securities.

4

Fully Taxable Equivalent (“FTE”) at the rate of 35%. The FTE basis adjusts for the tax benefits of income on certain tax-exempt loans and investments using the federal statutory rate of 35% for each period presented. The Company believes this measure to be the preferred industry measurement of net interest income and provides relevant comparison between taxable and non-taxable amounts.

62


   2010  2009 
   Average
Balance
   Interest   Average
Rate
  Average
Balance
   Interest   Average
Rate
 

Interest-bearing liabilities:

           

Deposits

           

Savings, interest checking, and money market accounts

  $980,878    $9,924     1.01 $784,135    $10,078     1.29

Time deposits

   841,458     18,510     2.20  1,166,640     35,690     3.06
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

 

 

   

Total deposits

  $1,822,336    $28,434     1.56 $1,950,775    $45,768     2.35

Securities sold under repurchase agreements and short-term borrowings

   22,338     22     0.10  28,049     29     0.10

Subordinated debentures

   88,662     1,980     2.23  88,662     2,577     2.91

FHLB advances and notes payable

   171,229     6,835     3.99  221,282     9,557     4.32
  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

 

 

   

Total interest-bearing liabilities

  $2,104,565    $37,271     1.77 $2,288,768    $57,931     2.53

Noninterest bearing liabilities:

           

Demand deposits

  $166,814       $162,765      

Other liabilities

   17,854        22,477      
  

 

 

      

 

 

     

Total non-interest-bearing liabilities

  $184,668       $185,242      

Shareholders’ equity

   222,213        308,645      
  

 

 

      

 

 

     

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $2,511,446       $2,782,655      
  

 

 

      

 

 

     

Net interest income

    $84,328       $81,263    
    

 

 

      

 

 

   

Margin analysis:

           

Interest rate spread

       3.79      3.19
      

 

 

      

 

 

 

Net yield on interest-earning assets (net interest margin)

       3.86      3.34
      

 

 

      

 

 

 

63


Rate/Volume Analysis. The following table analyzes net interest income in terms of changes in the volume of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities and changes in yields and rates. The table reflects the extent to which changes in the interest income and interest expense are attributable to changes in volume (changes in volume multiplied by prior year rate) and changes in rate (changes in rate multiplied by prior year volume). Changes attributable to the combined impact of volume and rate have been separately identified.

   2010 vs. 2009  2009 vs. 2008 
   Volume  Rate  Rate/
Volume
  Total
Change
  Volume  Rate  Rate/
Volume
  Total
Change
 

Interest income:

         

Loans, net of unearned income

  $(16,177 $792   $109   $(15,484 $(13,729 $(13,909 $1,227   $(26,411

Investment securities:

         

Taxable

   (376  (1,826  (104  (2,098  (4,645  (1,713  623    (5,735

Tax-exempt

   (53  25    1    (27  (66  9    —      (57

FHLB and other stock, at cost

   (5  (38  —      (43  13    (88  1    (74

Other short-term investments

   59    —      —      59    1,272    (127  (944  201  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total interest income

   (16,552  (1,047  6    (17,593  (17,155  (15,828  907    (32,076
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest Expense:

         

Savings, interest checking, and money market accounts

   2,529    (2,145  (539  (155  2,128    (1,347  (291  490  

Time deposits

   (9,948  (10,027  2,795    (17,180  (5,549  (8,201  938    (12,812

Short-term borrowings

   (6  (1  —      (7  (1,671  (1,379  968    (2,082

Subordinated debentures

   —      (597  —      (597  —      (1,978  —      (1,978

Notes payable

   (2,162  (724  164    (2,722  (1,389  242    (31  (1,178
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total interest expense

   (9,587  (13,494  2,420    (20,661  (6,481  (12,663  1,584    (17,560
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net interest income

  $(6,965 $12,447   $(2,414 $3,068   $(10,674 $(3,165 $(677 $(14,516
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

At December 31, 2010, loans outstanding, net of unearned income, were $1,745,378 compared to $2,043,807 at 2009 year end. The decrease is primarily due to weak loan demand resulting from the continued economic pressures experienced within our markets throughout 2010, loan foreclosures resulting in loan balances being transferred to OREO and repossessed assets and increased loan charge-offs. Average outstanding loans, net of unearned interest, for 2010 were $1,833,865, a decrease of 13% from the 2009 average of $2,096,181. Average outstanding loans for 2008 were $2,298,905.

Average investment securities for 2010 were $180,681 compared to $189,377 in 2009 and $273,343 in 2008. The decreases of $8,696 and $83,966, or 5% and 31%, from 2009 to 2010 and 2008 to 2009 primarily reflect the elimination of excess liquidity in the balance sheet through de-levering. In 2010, the average yield on investments was 4.08%, a decrease from the 5.04% yield in 2009 and from the 5.64% yield in 2008. The declining investment yields since 2008 represent the reinvestment of proceeds of maturing securities in a lower interest rate environment. Fully taxable equivalent income provided by the investment portfolio in 2010 was $7,376 as compared to $9,546 in 2009 and $15,412 in 2008.

Provision for Loan Losses.

September 8 through December 31, 2011 (Successor Company):

Subsequent to the deconsolidation of GreenBank on September 7, 2011, the Company has no loans, and thus no provision for loan losses.

Predecessor Company:

For the Predecessor Company, management assessed the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses by considering a combination of regulatory and credit risk criteria. The entire loan portfolio was graded and potential loss factors were assigned accordingly. The potential loss factors for impaired loans were assigned

64


based on independent valuations of underlying collateral and management’s judgment. The potential loss factors associated with unimpaired loans were based on a combination of both internal and industry net loss experience, as well as management’s review of trends within the portfolio and related industries.

Generally, commercial real estate, residential real estate and commercial loans were assigned a level of risk at inception. Thereafter, these loans were reviewed on an ongoing basis. The review includes loan payment and collateral status, borrowers’ financial data and borrowers’ internal operating factors such as cash flows, operating income, liquidity, leverage and loan documentation, and any significant change can result in an increase or decrease in the loan’s assigned risk grade. Aggregate dollar volume by risk grade was monitored on an ongoing basis. The establishment of and any changes to risk grades for consumer loans are generally based upon payment performance.

The Bank’s loan loss allowance was increased or decreased based on management’s assessment of the overall risk of its loan portfolio. A portion of the allowance may be allocated to specific loans reflecting unusual circumstances.

Management reviewed certain key loan quality indicators on a monthly basis, including current economic conditions, historical charge-offs, delinquency trends and ratios, portfolio mix changes and other information management deems necessary. This review process provided a degree of objective measurement that was used in conjunction with periodic internal evaluations. To the extent that this process yields differences between estimated and actual observed losses, adjustments were made to provisions and/or the level of the allowance for loan losses.

Increases and decreases in the allowance for loan losses due to changes in the measurement of impaired loans were reviewed monthly given the current economic environment. To the extent that impairment was deemed probable, an adjustment was reflected in the provision for loan losses, if necessary, to reflect the losses inherent in the loan portfolio. Loans continued to be classified as impaired unless payments were brought fully current and satisfactory performance was observed for a period of at least six months and management further considered the collection of scheduled interest and principal to be probable.

The Predecessor Company’s provision for loan losses was $43,742 for the period of January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011, versus $71,107 for the year 2010 while the total loan loss reserve increased from $66,830 at December 31, 2010 to $71,745 at September 7, 2011. For the period of January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011, net charge-offs were $38,827 compared with net charge-offs of $54,438 for the full year 2010. Management continually evaluated the existing portfolio in light of loan concentrations, current general economic conditions and economic trends. On a monthly basis, the Company undertook an extensive review of every loan in excess of $1 million that is adversely risk graded and every loan regardless of amount graded substandard.

The Company recorded a risk allocation allowance for loan losses on impaired loans where the risk of loss was deemed to be probable and the amount could be reasonably estimated. Further, the Company specifically recorded additional allowance amounts for individual loans when the circumstances so warrant.

To further manage its credit risk on loans, the Company maintained a “watch list” of loans that, although currently performing, had characteristics that require closer supervision by management. At December 31, 2010 “watch list” loans totaled $88,130 declining from $212,288 at year end 2009.

65


Non-interest Income.

September 8 through December 31, 2011 (Successor Company):

Subsequent to the deconsolidation of GreenBank on September 7, 2011, the Company’s non-interest income consists of earnings on its equity method investment in Capital Bank, which totaled $3,446 for the period of September 8, 2011 through December 31, 2011.

January 1 through September 7, 2011 (Predecessor Company):

Predecessor Company non-interest income, which consisted primarily of service charges, commissions and fees, totaled $27,803 for the period from January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011. The largest component of non-interest income was service charges on deposit accounts, which totaled $16,346. Other significant categories for the period from January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011 included $1,457 of trust and investment services income and $6,324 of gains from the sale of investment securities.

Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2010 (Predecessor Company):

Non-interest income totaled $32,544 in 2010, up $966 or 3% versus 2009. The increase in total non-interest income in 2010 primarily reflects higher service charges on deposit accounts, trust and investment services income, mortgage banking income and lower other-than-temporary impairment charges on investments.

Non-interest Expense.

The Company is unable to provide a comparable analysis in this discussion of non-interest expense because there are no comparable periods due to the Bank Merger discussed above.

September 8 through December 31, 2011 (Successor Company):

Expenses for the period of September 8, 2011 through December 31, 2011 were $282, consisting primarily of legal costs and management fee expense related to services provided to the Company by employees of Capital Bank, NA.

January 1 through September 7, 2011 (Predecessor Company):

Predecessor Company non-interest expenses for the period of January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011 totaled $77,382. The two largest categories of expenses were employment costs, which totaled $21,560, and costs associated with losses and revaluations on OREO properties held for sale, which remained elevated at $24,804, reflecting continued credit challenges. Employment costs included severance costs of approximately $570 associated with the Company’s reduction in force effected in the first quarter of 2011 given the current business environment and level of business activity.

Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2010 (Predecessor Company):

Total non-interest expense was $110,815 in 2010 compared to $229,587 in 2009. The decline in 2010 of $118,772 from 2009 principally reflects the one-time non-cash charge taken for goodwill impairment of $143,389. During 2010, the Company incurred $35,447 in costs associated with losses and revaluations on OREO properties held for sale compared with $12,509 incurred in 2009.

Income Taxes.

The Successor Company’s effective tax rate for the period of September 8, 2011 through December 31, 2011 was (20.0)% as its equity method income in Capital Bank, NA is not taxable.

For the period of January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011, the Predecessor Company’s only income tax was a $974 Modified Endowment Contract penalty associated with the surrender of bank owned life insurance policies. No tax benefit was recorded related to the Company’s net loss before tax, due to an offsetting increase in the valuation allowance against deferred taxes.

66


The Predecessor Company’s effective tax rate was (22.7)% and 10.2% in 2010 and 2009, respectively. The year ended December 31, 2010 was significantly impacted by the DTA valuation allowance of $43,455. A valuation allowance is recognized for a net DTA if, based on the weight of available evidence, it is more-likely-than-not that some portion or the entire DTA will not be realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. In making such judgments, significant weight is given to evidence that can be objectively verified. As a result of the increased credit losses, the Company entered into a three-year cumulative pre-tax loss position (excluding the goodwill impairment charge recognized in the first quarter of 2009) as of December 31, 2010. A cumulative loss position is considered significant negative evidence in assessing the realizability of a deferred tax asset which is difficult to overcome.

The Company’s estimate of the realization of its net DTA was based on the scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities and taxable income available in prior carry back years, and tax planning strategies. Based on management’s calculation, a valuation allowance of $43,455, or 95.2% of the net DTA, was an adequate estimate as of December 31, 2010. This estimate resulted in a valuation allowance for the net DTA in the income statement of $43,455 for the period ended December 31, 2010. Once profitability has been restored for a reasonable time, generally considered four consecutive quarters, and such profitability is considered sustainable, the valuation allowance would be reversed. Reversal of the valuation allowance requires a great deal of judgment and will be based on the circumstances that exist as of that future date.
The consolidated financial statements include certain accounting disclosures that require management to make estimates about fair values. Independent third party valuations are used for securities available for sale and securities held to maturity as well as acquisition purchase accounting adjustments. Third party valuations are inputs, but are not solely determinative of value. Estimates of fair value are used in the accounting for loans held for sale, goodwill and other intangible assets. Estimates of fair values are used in disclosures regarding stock compensation, commitments, and the fair values of financial instruments. Fair values are estimated using relevant market information and other assumptions such as interest rates, credit risk, prepayments and other factors. The fair values of financial instruments are subject to change as influenced by market conditions.
Changes in Results of Operations
Net loss. The net loss available to common shareholders was $85,696 in 2010 and $155,676 for 2009. The net loss for the year 2009 was primarily attributable to a non-cash charge taken for the impairment of goodwill of $137,414, net of tax of $5,975 and the continued weaknesses in the economy through 2009. Excluding the goodwill impairment charge, net of tax, of $137,414 the Company’s net operating loss was $18,262 for 2009 (please see “ITEM 6 — GAAP Reconciliation and Management Explanations of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” above for more information). When comparing the net operating loss of $85,696 in 2010 to the net operating loss of $18,262, excluding the goodwill impairment charge, for 2009 the principal reasons for the increased loss in 2010 were credit related costs that continued to escalate in 2010 driven by both a higher loan loss provision coupled with rising costs associated with the maintenance, disposition and revaluation of OREO along with continued deterioration in economic conditions in our markets. These costs were partially offset by improvements in both net interest income and non-interest income.

41


The net loss available to common shareholders’ for 2009 was $155,676 compared to a net loss of $5,452 in 2008. The net loss for the year 2009 was primarily attributable to a non-cash charge taken for the impairment of goodwill of $137,414, net of tax of $5,975 and the continued weaknesses in the economy through 2009. Excluding the goodwill impairment charge, net of tax, of $137,414 the Company’s net operating loss was $18,262 for 2009 (please see “ITEM 6 — GAAP Reconciliation and Management Explanations of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” above for more information).The increase in the net operating loss between 2009 and 2008 was primarily attributable to a decline in net interest income of $14,500 from $95,025 in 2008 to $80,525 in 2009 due to narrowing interest rate spreads and deteriorating economic conditions throughout 2009 impacting residential real estate construction lending plus a decline in net securities gains of $2,222 between periods due to higher other-than-temporary impairment charges taken in 2009.
Net Interest Income. The largest source of earnings for the Company is net interest income, which is the difference between interest income on earning assets and interest paid on deposits and other interest-bearing liabilities. The primary factors that affect net interest income are changes in volumes and rates on earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, which are affected in part by management’s anticipatory responses to changes in interest rates through asset/liability management. Despite deleveraging average earning assets of the Company by $247,978 from 2009 to 2010, net interest income improved from $80,525 in 2009 to $83,593 in 2010 as interest rate floors were triggered in loan agreements and interest-bearing liabilities were re-priced in a lower interest rate market environment. As a result of the re-pricing characteristics of the balance sheet plus a modest increase of $4,049 in average non-interest bearing demand deposits, the Company’s net interest margin rose from 3.34% in 2009 to 3.86% in 2010. Average loan balances in 2010 were $1,833,865 compared with $2,096,181 in 2009 and this reduction was principally responsible for the decline in average earning assets, partially offset by an increase in short-term investments as liquidity levels increased. Simultaneously, the Company reduced its large certificates of deposit as average balances declined by $325,182 and further eliminated $55,764 in borrowed funds.
During 2009, net interest income was $80,525 as compared to $95,025 in 2008. The Company experienced a decline in average balances of interest-earning assets, with average total interest-earning assets decreasing by $156,713, or 6%, to $2,433,476 in 2009 from $2,590,189 in 2008. Most of the decline occurred in loans, with average loan balances decreasing by $202,724, or 9%, to $2,096,181 in 2009 from $2,298,905 in 2008. The decrease was primarily due to the continued downturn in economic conditions throughout 2009 that resulted in lower loan demand and heightened levels of loan charge-offs. Average investment securities also decreased $83,966, or 31%, to $189,377 in 2009 from $273,343 in 2008 as the Company focused on de-levering the balance sheet and reducing excess liquidity. Average balances of total interest-bearing liabilities also decreased in 2009 from 2008, with average total interest-bearing deposit balances decreasing by $12,223, or 1%, to $1,950,775 in 2009 from $1,962,998 in 2008, and average securities sold under repurchase agreements and short-term borrowings, and subordinated debentures and FHLB advances and notes payable decreased by $111,132, or 25%, to $337,993 in 2009 from $449,125 in 2008. These decreases are primarily related to the reduction in securities sold under repurchase agreements and short-term borrowings along with the maturities and early payoffs of FHLB advances.
Average Balances, Interest Rates and Yields.Net interest income is affected by (i) the difference between yields earned on interest-earning assets and rates paid on interest-bearing liabilities (“interest rate spread”) and (ii) the relative amounts of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. The Company’s interest rate spread is affected by regulatory, economic and competitive factors that influence interest rates, loan demand and deposit flows. When the total of interest-earning assets approximates or exceeds the total of interest-bearing liabilities, any positive interest rate spread will generate net interest income. An indication of the effectiveness of an institution’s net interest income management is its “net yield on interest-earning assets,” which is net interest income on a fully taxable equivalent basis divided by average interest-earning assets.

42


The following table sets forth certain information relating to the Company’s consolidated average interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities and reflects the average fully taxable equivalent yield on assets and average cost of liabilities for the periods indicated. Such yields and costs are derived by dividing income or expense by the average daily balance of assets or liabilities, respectively, for the periods presented.
                                     
  2010  2009  2008 
  Average      Average  Average      Average  Average      Average 
  Balance  Interest  Rate  Balance  Interest  Rate  Balance  Interest  Rate 
Interest-earning assets:
                                    
Loans(1)(4)
                                    
Real estate loans $1,517,937  $86,904   5.73% $1,719,026  $99,796   5.81% $1,890,209  $121,168   6.41%
Commercial loans  250,126   14,358   5.74%  295,913   16,284   5.50%  319,131   20,020   6.27%
Consumer and other
loans- net(2)
  65,802   8,963   13.62%  81,242   9,660   11.89%  89,565   10,516   11.74%
Fees on loans     3,563          3,532          3,979     
                               
                                     
Total loans (including fees) $1,833,865  $113,788   6.20% $2,096,181  $129,272   6.17% $2,298,905  $155,683   6.77%
                               
                                     
Investment securities(3)
                                    
Taxable $137,148  $4,937   3.60% $144,881  $7,035   4.86% $227,710  $12,770   5.61%
Tax-exempt(4)
  30,799   1,909   6.20%  31,660   1,938   6.12%  32,743   1,995   6.09%
FHLB and other stock  12,734   530   4.16%  12,836   573   4.46%  12,890   647   5.02%
                               
                                     
Total investment securities $180,681  $7,376   4.08% $189,377  $9,546   5.04% $273,343  $15,412   5.64%
                                     
Other short-term investments  170,952   435   0.25%  147,918   376   0.25%  17,941   175   0.98%
                               
                                     
Total interest-earning assets $2,185,498  $121,599   5.56% $2,433,476  $139,194   5.72% $2,590,189  $171,270   6.61%
                               
                                     
Noninterest-earning assets:
                                    
Cash and due from banks $42,743          $45,870          $51,181         
Premises and equipment  80,556           83,478           83,411         
Other, less allowance for loan losses  202,649           219,831           231,499         
                                  
                                     
Total noninterest-earning assets $325,948          $349,179          $366,091         
                                  
                                     
Total assets $2,511,446          $2,782,655          $2,956,280         
                                  
1Average loan balances exclude nonaccrual loans.
2Installment loans are stated net of unearned income.
3The average balance of and the related yield associated with securities available for sale is based on the cost of such securities.
4Fully Taxable Equivalent (“FTE”) at the rate of 35%. The FTE basis adjusts for the tax benefits of income on certain tax-exempt loans and investments using the federal statutory rate of 35% for each period presented. The Company believes this measure to be the preferred industry measurement of net interest income and provides relevant comparison between taxable and non-taxable amounts.

43


                                     
  2010  2009  2008 
  Average      Average  Average      Average  Average      Average 
  Balance  Interest  Rate  Balance  Interest  Rate  Balance  Interest  Rate 
Interest-bearing liabilities:
                                    
Deposits                                    
Savings, interest checking, and money market accounts $980,878  $9,924   1.01% $784,135  $10,078   1.29% $645,636  $9,588   1.49%
Time deposits  841,458   18,510   2.20%  1,166,640   35,690   3.06%  1,317,362   48,502   3.68%
                               
                                     
Total deposits $1,822,336  $28,434   1.56% $1,950,775  $45,768   2.35% $1,962,998  $58,090   2.96%
                                     
Securities sold under repurchase agreements and short-term borrowings  22,338   22   0.10%  28,049   29   0.10%  106,309   2,111   1.99%
Subordinated debentures  88,662   1,980   2.23%  88,662   2,577   2.91%  88,662   4,555   5.14%
FHLB advances and notes payable  171,229   6,835   3.99%  221,282   9,557   4.32%  254,154   10,735   4.22%
                               
                                     
Total interest-bearing liabilities $2,104,565  $37,271   1.77% $2,288,768  $57,931   2.53% $2,412,123  $75,491   3.13%
                                     
Noninterest bearing liabilities:
                                    
Demand deposits $166,814          $162,765          $187,058         
 
Other liabilities  17,854           22,477           24,832         
                                  
Total non-interest- bearing liabilities $184,668          $185,242          $211,890         
                                     
Shareholders’ equity  222,213           308,645           332,267         
                                  
                                     
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $2,511,446          $2,782,655          $2,956,280         
                                  
                                     
Net interest income     $84,328          $81,263          $95,799     
                                  
                                     
Margin analysis:
                                    
Interest rate spread          3.79%          3.19%          3.48%
                                  
                                     
Net yield on interest-earning assets (net interest margin)          3.86%          3.34%          3.70%
                                  

44


Rate/Volume Analysis. The following table analyzes net interest income in terms of changes in the volume of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities and changes in yields and rates. The table reflects the extent to which changes in the interest income and interest expense are attributable to changes in volume (changes in volume multiplied by prior year rate) and changes in rate (changes in rate multiplied by prior year volume). Changes attributable to the combined impact of volume and rate have been separately identified.
                                 
  2010 vs. 2009  2009 vs. 2008 
          Rate/  Total          Rate/  Total 
  Volume  Rate  Volume  Change  Volume  Rate  Volume  Change 
Interest income:
                                
Loans, net of unearned income $(16,177) $792  $(99) $(15,484) $(13,729) $(13,909) $1,227  $(26,411)
Investment securities:                                
Taxable  (376)  (1,826)  104   (2,098)  (4,645)  (1,713)  623   (5,735)
Tax-exempt  (53)  25   1   (27)  (66)  9      (57)
FHLB and other stock, at cost  (5)  (38)     (43)  13   (88)  1   (74)
Other short-term investments  59         59   1,272   (127)  (944)  201 
                         
                                 
Total interest income  (16,552)  (1,047)  6   (17,593)  (17,155)  (15,828)  907   (32,076)
                         
                                 
Interest Expense:
                                
Savings, interest checking, and money market accounts  2,529   (2,145)  (539)  (155)  2,128   (1,347)  (291)  490 
Time deposits  (9,948)  (10,027)  2,795   (17,180)  (5,549)  (8,201)  938   (12,812)
Short-term borrowings  (6)  (1)     (7)  (1,671)  (1,379)  968   (2,082)
Subordinated debentures     (597)     (597)     (1,978)     (1,978)
Notes payable  (2,162)  (724)  164   (2,722)  (1,389)  242   (31)  (1,178)
                         
                                 
Total interest expense  (9,587)  (13,494)  2,420   (20,661)  (6,481)  (12,663)  1,584   (17,560)
                         
                                 
Net interest income $(6,965) $12,447  $(2,414) $3,068  $(10,674) $(3,165) $(677) $(14,516)
                         
At December 31, 2010, loans outstanding, net of unearned income, were $1,745,378 compared to $2,043,807 at 2009 year end. The decrease is primarily due to weak loan demand resulting from the continued economic pressures experienced within our markets throughout 2010, loan foreclosures resulting in loan balances being transferred to OREO and repossessed assets and increased loan charge-offs. Average outstanding loans, net of unearned interest, for 2010 were $1,833,865, a decrease of 13% from the 2009 average of $2,096,181. Average outstanding loans for 2008 were $2,298,905.
Average investment securities for 2010 were $180,681 compared to $189,377 in 2009 and $273,343 in 2008. The decreases of $8,696 and $83,966, or 5% and 31%, from 2009 to 2010 and 2008 to 2009 primarily reflect the elimination of excess liquidity in the balance sheet through de-levering. In 2010, the average yield on investments was 4.08%, a decrease from the 5.04% yield in 2009 and from the 5.64% yield in 2008. The declining investment yields since 2008 represent the reinvestment of proceeds of maturing securities in a lower interest rate environment. Fully taxable equivalent income provided by the investment portfolio in 2010 was $7,376 as compared to $9,546 in 2009 and $15,412 in 2008.

45


Provision for Loan Losses. Management assesses the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses by considering a combination of regulatory and credit risk criteria. The entire loan portfolio is graded and potential loss factors are assigned accordingly. The potential loss factors for impaired loans are assigned based on independent valuations of underlying collateral and management’s judgment. The potential loss factors associated with unimpaired loans are based on a combination of both internal and industry net loss experience, as well as management’s review of trends within the portfolio and related industries.
Generally, commercial real estate, residential real estate and commercial loans are assigned a level of risk at inception. Thereafter, these loans are reviewed on an ongoing basis. The review includes loan payment and collateral status, borrowers’ financial data and borrowers’ internal operating factors such as cash flows, operating income, liquidity, leverage and loan documentation, and any significant change can result in an increase or decrease in the loan’s assigned risk grade. Aggregate dollar volume by risk grade is monitored on an ongoing basis. The establishment of and any changes to risk grades for consumer loans are generally based upon payment performance.
The Bank’s loan loss allowance is increased or decreased based on management’s assessment of the overall risk of its loan portfolio. A portion of the allowance may be allocated to specific loans reflecting unusual circumstances.
Management reviews certain key loan quality indicators on a monthly basis, including current economic conditions, historical charge-offs, delinquency trends and ratios, portfolio mix changes and other information management deems necessary. This review process provides a degree of objective measurement that is used in conjunction with periodic internal evaluations. To the extent that this process yields differences between estimated and actual observed losses, adjustments are made to provisions and/or the level of the allowance for loan losses.
Increases and decreases in the allowance for loan losses due to changes in the measurement of impaired loans are reviewed monthly given the current economic environment. To the extent that impairment is deemed probable, an adjustment is reflected in the provision for loan losses, if necessary, to reflect the losses inherent in the loan portfolio. Loans continue to be classified as impaired unless payments are brought fully current and satisfactory performance is observed for a period of at least six months and management further considers the collection of scheduled interest and principal to be probable.
The Company’s provision for loan losses increased for the year 2010 by $20,861 to $71,107 from $50,246 in 2009 while the total loan loss reserve increased from $50,161 at December 31, 2009 to $66,830 at December 31, 2010. The impact of the continuing challenging economic environment, elevated net charge-offs and increased non-performing assets were the primary reasons for the increase in provision expense in 2010. Net charge-offs were $54,438 in 2010 compared with net charge-offs of $48,896 in 2009 and $38,110 in 2008. Management continually evaluates the existing portfolio in light of loan concentrations, current general economic conditions and economic trends. On a monthly basis, the Company undertakes an extensive review of every loan in excess of $1 million that is adversely risk graded and every loan regardless of amount graded substandard.
Appraisals received by the Company during the second half of 2010 on existing OREO and targeted loans reflected further significant deterioration in the value of the underlying properties from the prior year, which along with the deterioration of previously performing relationships, triggered increased charge-offs during this period of time. Management believes that the economic slowdown in the Company’s markets occurring throughout 2008, 2009 and 2010 will continue into at least the first half of 2011. Based on its evaluation of the allowance for loan loss calculation and review of the loan portfolio, management believes the allowance for loan losses is adequate at December 31, 2010. However, the provision for loan losses could further increase throughout 2011 if the general economic trends continue to weaken or the residential real estate markets in Nashville or Knoxville or the financial conditions of borrowers deteriorate beyond management’s current expectations.

46


The ratio of nonperforming assets to total assets reached 8.56% at December 31, 2010 compared with 5.07% at December 31, 2009 and 2.61% at December 31, 2008 reflecting not only the challenging economic environment but also the rise in non-performing asset levels combined with a shrinking Balance Sheet. Total nonperforming assets increased to $205,914 in 2010 from $132,726 in 2009 from $76,806 at year-end 2008. Nonaccrual loans, included in non-performing assets, increased to $143,707 as of December 31, 2010 compared to $75,411 at December 31, 2009 and $30,926 at December 31, 2008. Further reflecting the economic downturn, OREO and repossessed assets increased from $45,371 at the end of 2008 to $57,168 at year-end 2009 and $60,095 at December 31, 2010. Management believes that, based upon recent appraisals, these assets have been appropriately written down based on current economic conditions. The recorded investment of impaired loans, which include substandard loans as well as nonaccrual loans, increased from $47,215 at December 31, 2008 to $115,238 at December 31, 2009 and $185,991 at December 31, 2010. The related allowance on the investment of impaired loans also increased from $2,651 at December 31, 2008 to $5,737 at December 31, 2009 and $24,834 at December 31, 2010. The Company records a risk allocation allowance for loan losses on impaired loans where the risk of loss is deemed to be probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. Further, the Company specifically records additional allowance amounts for individual loans when the circumstances so warrant. For further discussion of nonperforming assets as it relates to foreclosed real estate and impaired loans, see “ITEM 1. Business — Lending Activities — Past Due, Special Mention, Classified and Nonaccrual Loans” located above.
To further manage its credit risk on loans, the Company maintains a “watch list” of loans that, although currently performing, have characteristics that require closer supervision by management. At December 31, 2010 “watch list” loans totaled $88,130 declining from $212,288 identified at year end 2009. At December 31, 2008 “watch list” loans totaled $182,984. If, and when, conditions are identified that would require additional loan loss reserves to be established due to potential losses inherent in these loans, action would then be taken.
Non-interest Income. The generation of non-interest income, which is income that is not related to interest-earning assets and consists primarily of service charges, commissions and fees, has become more important as increases in levels of interest-bearing deposits and other liabilities continually challenge interest rate spreads.
Total non-interest income for 2010 increased slightly to $32,544 compared to $31,578 in 2009 and declined modestly from $33,614 in 2008. The largest components of non-interest income are service charges on deposit accounts, which totaled $24,179 in 2010, $23,738 in 2009 and $23,176 in 2008. The increase in total non-interest income in 2010 primarily reflects higher service charges on deposit accounts, trust and investment services income and lower other-than-temporary impairment charges on investments. The decrease in total non-interest income from 2008 to 2009 reflected a reduction in net securities gains of $2,222 to $439 in 2009 from $2,661 in 2008. This decrease is a result of lower realized gains on the sale of securities of $1,415 in 2009 compared to $2,661 in 2008 coupled with additional charges taken in 2009 of $976 for other-than-temporary impairment on certain investment portfolio securities. Deposit service charges are fees generated from the higher volume of deposit-related products, specifically fees associated with the continued success of the Bank’s High Performance Checking Program. From the inception of this new product during the first quarter of 2005, the Company experienced “net” new checking account growth of 7,665 in 2005 to net new checking account growth of 14,269 during 2010.
Non-interest Expense. Control of non-interest expense also is an important aspect in generating earnings. Non-interest expense includes, among other expenses, personnel, occupancy, goodwill impairment charges, write downs and net losses from the sales on OREO and expenses such as data processing, printing and supplies, legal and professional fees, postage and FDIC assessments. Total non-interest expense was $110,815 in 2010 compared to $229,587 in 2009 and $85,837 in 2008. The decline in 2010 of $118,772 from 2009 principally reflects the one-time non-cash charge taken for goodwill impairment of $143,389. During 2010, the Company incurred $29,895 in costs associated with losses and revaluations on OREO properties held for sale compared with $8,156 incurred in 2009 and $7,028 in 2008.
Employee compensation and employee benefit costs are the primary element of the Company’s non-interest expenses, excluding the one-time, non-cash write-off of goodwill in 2009. For the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, compensation and benefits represented $35,368, or 32% and $34,446, or 40% (excluding the goodwill impairment charge of $143,389 — see “ITEM 6 — GAAP Reconciliation and Management Explanations of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” above for more information), respectively, of total non-interest expense. Including Bank branches and non-Bank office locations, the Company had 65 locations at December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the number of full-time equivalent employees totaled 730 at December 31, 2010 and 716 at December 31, 2009.

47


Income Taxes. The Company’s effective income tax rate (benefit) was 22.7% in 2010 compared to (10.2%) in 2009 and (46.4%) in 2008. The effective tax rate for the year ended December 31, 2010 was significantly impacted by the DTA valuation allowance of $43,455. A valuation allowance is recognized for a net DTA if, based on the weight of available evidence, it is more-likely-than-not that some portion or the entire DTA will not be realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. In making such judgments, significant weight is given to evidence that can be objectively verified. As a result of the increased credit losses, the Company entered into a three-year cumulative pre-tax loss position (excluding the goodwill impairment charge recognized in the second quarter of 2009) as of June 30, 2010. A cumulative loss position is considered significant negative evidence in assessing the realizability of a deferred tax asset which is difficult to overcome.
The Company’s estimate of the realization of its net DTA was based on the scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities and taxable income available in prior carry back years, and tax planning strategies.
Changes in Financial Condition
Total

Subsequent to the Merger Date, the Successor Company’s significant assets and liabilities are comprised of cash, its equity method investment in Capital Bank, NA, deferred income tax accounts and trust preferred securities.

Predecessor Company total assets at December 31, 2010 were $2,406,040 compared with $2,619,139 at December 31, 2009 a decrease of $213,099. Major changes in the balance sheet categories reflect a decline in loan balances of $298,429 from the prior year comprised of loan charge-offs of $54,438 and transfers to foreclosures of $54,613 accompanied with a decline in lending associated with the current challengingrecessionary conditions in the economy. These decreases were offset by an increase of $83,720 in cash and cash equivalents and interest earning deposits in banks. Average assets for 2010 also decreased to $2,511,446, a reduction of $271,209, or 10%, from the average asset balance of $2,782,655 for 2009. This decrease in average assets was also due primarily to the items mentioned previously. The Company’s return on average assets was (3.41%) in 2010 and (5.59%) in 2009, principally as a result of significant provisioning expense and OREO expenses in 2010 and the goodwill impairment charge in 2009.

Total assets at December 31, 2009 were $2,619,139, a decrease of $325,532 from total assets of $2,944,671 at December 31, 2008. Major changes in the balance sheet categories reflect a decline in loan balances of $179,583 from the prior year comprised of loan charge-offs of $48,896 and transfers to foreclosures of $75,545 accompanied with a decline in lending associated with recessionary conditions in the economy. An increase of $23,136 in cash and cash equivalents from year-end 2008 was driven principally by the deleveraging of the balance sheet through reducing investment portfolio holdings, partially offset by liquidating borrowed funds. Average assets for 2009 declined to $2,782,655 from $2,956,280 in 2008, a decrease of $173,625. This decrease in average assets was due primarily to the decline in average loan volume of $202,724.

Earning assets consist of loans, investment securities and short-term investments that earn interest. Average earning assets during 2010 were $2,185,498 compared with $2,433,476 in 2009, a decrease of 10%. The decrease in average earnings assets was due primarily to the reduction of loan and investment securities balances throughout 2010 as the Company de-levered the Balance Sheet plus the general decline in demand for loanslending associated with challengingrecessionary conditions in the economy.

Nonperforming loans include nonaccrual loans and loans past due 90 days and still on accrual. The Company has a policy of placing loans 90 days delinquent in nonaccrual status and charging them off at 120 days past due. Other loans past due that are well secured and in the process of collection continue to be carried on the Company’s balance sheet. For further information, see NotesNote 1 and 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. The Company has aggressive collection practices in which senior management is significantly and directly involved.

The Company maintains an investment portfolio to primarily cover pledging requirements for deposits and borrowings and secondarily as a source of liquidity while modestly adding to earnings. Investments at December 31, 2010 had an amortized cost of $200,824 and a market value of $202,469 compared with investments at December 31, 2009 which had an amortized cost of $148,040 and a market value of $148,362. As excess balance sheet liquidity continued to build throughout 2010, the Company increased its investment portfolio accordingly. The Company invests principally in callable federal agency securities. These callable federal agency securities will provide a higher yield than non-callable securities with similar maturities. The primary risk involved in callable securities is that they may be called prior to maturity and the call proceeds received would be re-invested at lower yields. In 2010, the Company purchased $137,297 of callable federal agency securities, which have a high likelihood of being called on the first call date, $31,538 of collateralized mortgage obligations, and $2,985 of mortgage-backed securities. Also in 2010, the Company received $9,095 from the pay down of collateralized mortgage obligations, $2,233 from the pay down of mortgage-backed securities, $105,890 on the maturity or call of various U.S. agency securities, and $1,025 from the maturity or call of municipal securities.

48


The Company’s deposits totaled $1,976,854 at December 31, 2010, which represents a decrease of $107,242, or 5%, from $2,084,096 at December 31, 2009. Non-interest bearing demand deposit balances declined to $152,752 at December 31, 2010 from $177,602 at December 31, 2009. The decrease in total deposits was due primarily to the reduction of $83,155 in Certificates of Deposits in excess of $100,000. Average interest-bearing deposits decreased $128,439, or 7%, to $1,822,336 from $1,950,775 at December 31, 2009. In 2009, average interest-bearing deposits decreased $12,223, or 1%, to $1,950,775 from $1,962,998 at December 31, 2008.

67


Interest paid on deposits in 2010 was $28,434 at an effective rate of 1.56% compared with $45,768 in 2009 at an average cost of 2.35% as market interest rates declined throughout the 2010. In 2008, interest of $58,090 was paid at a cost of 2.96% on average deposits of $1,962,998.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Liquidity.Liquidity refers to the ability or the financial flexibility to manage future cash flows to meet the needs of depositors and borrowers and fund operations. Maintaining appropriate levels of liquidity allows the Company to have sufficient funds available for reserve requirements, customer demand for loans, withdrawal of deposit balances and maturities of deposits and other liabilities.

The Successor Company had cash balances of $2.1 million as of December 31, 2011, sufficient to fund interest payments on trust preferred securities for approximately one year. As discussed in Note 14, the Successor Company’s primary source of liquidity is dividends paid by the Bank. Applicable Tennessee statutes and regulations impose restrictions on the amount of dividends that may be declared by the Bank. Under Tennessee law, the Bank can onlyfunds to pay dividends to shareholders is the dividends it receives from Capital Bank. In August 2010, Capital Bank entered into an Operating Agreement with the OCC (which we refer to as the “OCC Operating Agreement”), in connection with the acquisition of the Failed Banks. Capital Bank (and, with respect to certain provisions, the Company and CBF) is also subject to an Order of the FDIC, dated July 16, 2010 (which we refer to as the “FDIC Order”) issued in an amount equal to or less thanconnection with the total amountFDIC’s approval of its net income for that year combined with retained net incomeCBF’s deposit insurance applications for the preceding two years. Payment ofFailed Banks. The OCC Operating Agreement and the FDIC Order require that Capital Bank maintain various financial and capital ratios and require prior regulatory notice and consent to take certain actions in connection with operating the business and they restrict Capital Bank’s ability to pay dividends in excess of this amount requiresto CBF and the consentCompany and to make changes to its capital structure. A failure by CBF or Capital Bank to comply with the requirements of the CommissionerOCC Operating Agreement or the FDIC Order could subject CBF to regulatory sanctions; and failure to comply, or the objection, or imposition of the Tennessee Department of Financial Institutions (“TDFI”), FDIC, and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (“FRB-Atlanta”). Further, any dividend payments are subject to the continuing ability of the Bank to maintain compliance with minimum federal regulatory capital requirements, or any higher requirements that the Bank may be subject to, (like those that the Bank has informally committed to the TDFI and FDIC that it will maintain), and to retain its characterization under federal regulations as a “well-capitalized” institution. Because of the Bank’s losses in 2009 and 2010, dividends from the Bank to the Company, including funds for payment of dividends on preferred stock and trust preferred, including the preferred stock issued to the U.S. Treasury, and interest on trust preferred securities to the extent that the Company does not have sufficient cash available at the holding company level, will require prior approval of the TDFI, FDIC and FRB.

Supervisory guidance from the FRB indicates that bank holding companies that are experiencing financial difficulties generally should eliminate, reduce or defer dividends on Tier 1 capital instruments including trust preferred securities, preferred stock or common stock, if the holding company needs to conserve capital for safe and sound operation and to serve as a source of strength to its subsidiaries. The Company has informally committed to the FRB that it will not (1) declare or pay dividends on the Company’s common or preferred stock, including the preferred shares ownedadditional conditions, by the U.S. Treasury (2) makeOCC or the FDIC, in connection with any distributions on subordinated debenturesmaterials or trust preferred securities or (3) incur any additional indebtedness without in each case, the prior written approvalinformation submitted thereunder, could prevent CBF from executing its business strategy and negatively impact its business, financial condition, liquidity and results of the FRB. On November 9, 2010, following consultation with the FRB-Atlanta, theoperations.

The Predecessor Company notified the U.S. Treasury that the Company was suspending the payment of regular quarterly cash dividends on the Series A preferred stock issued to the U.S. Treasury. The dividends, which are cumulative, will continue to be accrued for payment in the future and reported as a preferred dividend requirement that is deducted from net income for financial statement purposes. Additionally, following consultation with the FRB-Atlanta, the Company has exercised its rights to defer regularly scheduled interest payments on all of its issues of junior subordinated notes having an outstanding principal amount of $88.6 million, relating to outstanding trust preferred securities (“TRUPs”). In addition, the Company maintainsmaintained borrowing availability with the FHLB which was fully utilized at December 31, 2010. The Company also maintainsmaintained federal funds lines of credit totaling $70,000 at four correspondent banks of which $70,000 was available at December 31, 2010,2009, and $10,000 of the federal funds lines of credit is secured by cash on deposit. The Company believesbelieved it hashad sufficient liquidity to satisfy its current operating needs.

For the period from September 8, 2011 through December 31, 2011, the Successor Company experienced a $540,634 decline in cash. The two primary contributors were (i) the merger of GreenBank into Capital Bank, NA, which reduced cash by $393,433 and (ii) a $142,850 increase in the investment in Capital Bank, NA.

For the period from January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011, the operating activities of the Predecessor Company provided $32,697 of cash flows. Cash flows from operating activities were positively affected by various non-cash items, including (i) $43,742 in provision for loan losses, (ii) $3,597 of depreciation and amortization and (iii) $20,362 net loss on OREO and repossessed assets. This was offset in part by a net loss of $41,519. In addition, cash flows from operating activities were increased by the proceeds from the sale of held-for-sale loans of $20,362, offset by cash used to originate held-for-sale loans of $20,563.

For the period of January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011, investing activities, including lending, provided $197,623 of the Predecessor Company’s cash flows. Cash flows from investing activities increased from (i) the sale of OREO in the amount of $19,781, (ii) the net decrease in loans of $146,969 and (iii) maturities and sales of investments available for sale which exceeded investment purchases by $32,074. Premises and equipment of $947 reduced cash provided from investing activities.

For the period of January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011, net cash flows of $18,191 were generated by Predecessor Company financing activities, primarily reflecting a $124,497 decline in deposits offset by $147,569 of proceeds from the CBF Investment.

In 2010, operating activities of the Predecessor Company provided $44,842 of cash flows. Cash flows from operating activities were positively affected by various non-cash items, including (i) $71,107 in provision for loan losses, (ii) $7,152 of depreciation and amortization, (iii) $29,895 net loss on OREO and repossessed assets, and (iv) $26,739 in deferred tax expense. This was offset in part by (i) a net loss of $80,695, (ii) a decrease in other assets of $4,139, and (iii) a reduction in accrued interest payable and other liabilities of $5,505. In addition, cash flows from operating activities were increased by the proceeds from the sale of held-for-sale loans of $47,881, offset by cash used to originate held-for-sale loans of $46,994.

 

49

68


Investing activities, including lending, provided $167,213 of the Predecessor Company’s cash flows in 2010. Cash flows from investing activities increased from (i) the sale of OREO in the amount of $16,136, (ii) the net decrease in interest-bearing deposits with banks of $11,000, and (iii) the net decrease in loans of $195,847. Investments from the purchase of securities in excess of maturities from securities available for sale over in the amount of $53,414 and premises and equipment of $1,551 in 2010 reduced cash provided from investing activities.

Net cash flows of $128,335 were used by Predecessor Company financing activities. The financing cash flow activity in 2010 with respect to notes payable reflected a repayment of funds in the amount of $13,346 and a repayment of funds of $57,350 during 2009. The Company elected to repay FHLB advances by the overall contraction of the balance sheet. In addition, federal funds purchased and repurchase agreements were reduced by $5,036 during 2009. Cash flows used by the net change in total deposits reduced deposits by $107,242, as the continued to reduce the size of the balance sheet. The Company’s cash flow from financing activities was also decreased by the Company’s dividend payments during 2010 of $2,711 on preferred stock.

Capital Resources. The Company’s regulatory capital position

On September 7, 2011, the Company completed the issuance and sale of 119.9 million shares of its common stock to CBF for approximately $217 million in consideration. CBF is reflected in its shareholders’ equity, subject to certain adjustments for regulatory purposes. Shareholders’ equity, or capital, is a measurethe controlling owner of Capital Bank, NA. In connection with the CBF Investment, all of the Company’s net worth, soundnessFixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, and viability.related warrants to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock issued to the U.S. Treasury through the TARP were purchased by CBF from the Treasury. The Series A Preferred Stock and the related warrant were retired on September 7, 2011 and are no longer outstanding.

The Predecessor Company’s capital had continued to exceed the regulatory definition of a “well capitalized” financial institution at December 31, 2010, but fellhad fallen below the levels that the Bank informally committed to the TDFI and FDIC that it would maintain. Management believes the capital base of the Company allows it to consider business opportunities while maintaining the level of resources deemed appropriate by management of the Company to address business risks inherentinformal agreement reached with regulators as discussed in the Company’s daily operations.

Form 10-Q for the third quarter of 2010 for the Bank to maintain a Tier 1 leverage ratio of 10.0% and the Total risk-based capital ratio of 14.0%.

On September 25, 2003, the Company issued $10,310 of subordinated debentures, as part of a privately placed pool of trust preferred securities. The securities, due in 2033, bear interest at a floating rate of 2.85% above the three-month LIBOR rate, reset quarterly, and are currently callable by the Company without penalty. The Company used the proceeds of the offering to support its acquisition of Independent Bankshares Corporation, and the capital raised from the offering qualified as Tier 1 capital for regulatory purposes.

On June 28, 2005, the Company issued an additional $3,093 of subordinated debentures, as part of a privately placed pool of trust preferred securities. The securities, due in 2035, bear interest at a floating rate of 1.68% above the three-month LIBOR rate, reset quarterly, and are callable by the Company five years from the date of issuance without penalty. The Company used the proceeds to augment its capital position in connection with its significant asset growth, and the capital raised from the offering qualifies as Tier 1 capital for regulatory purposes.

On May 16, 2007, the Company issued $57,732 of subordinated debentures, as part of a privately placed pool of trust preferred securities. The securities, due in 2037, bear interest at a floating rate of 1.65% above the three-month LIBOR rate, reset quarterly, and are callable by the Company five years from the date of issuance without penalty. The Company used the proceeds of the offering to support its acquisition of CVBG, and the capital raised from the offering qualified as Tier I capital for regulatory purposes.

On May 18, 2007 the Company assumed the obligations of the following two trusts in the CVBG acquisition.

On December 28, 2005, CVBG issued $13,403 of subordinated debentures, as part of a privately placed pool of trust preferred securities. The securities, due in 2036, bear interest at a floating rate of 1.54% above the three-month LIBOR rate, reset quarterly, and are callable five years from the date of issuance without penalty.

On July 31, 2001, CVBG issued $4,124 of subordinated debentures, as part of a privately placed pool of trust preferred securities. The securities, due in 2031, bear interest at a floating rate of 3.58% above the three-month LIBOR rate, reset quarterly, and are currently callable without penalty.

 

50

69


During 2007 the FRB issued regulations which allow continued inclusion of outstanding and prospective issuances of trust preferred securities as Tier 1 capital subject to stricter quantitative and qualitative limits than allowed under prior regulations. The new limits will phase in over a five-year transition period and would permit the Company’s trust preferred securities, including those obligations assumed in the CVBG acquisition, to continue to be treated as Tier 1 capital. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the Company’s trust preferred securities should continue to qualify as Tier I capital.
The Company’s ability to repurchase the trust preferred securities or pay dividends on the trust preferred securities, may be limited as a result of the Company’s participation in the CPP, as described above and is limited by the informal commitment the Company made to the FRB-Atlanta in 2010, also as described above.

Shareholders’ equity on December 31, 2010 was $143,897, a decrease of $82,872, or 37%, from $226,769 on December 31, 2009. The decrease in shareholders’ equity was primarily driven by the net loss available to common shareholders2010 provision expense of $85,696 in 2010.

$71,107 and DTA valuation allowance of $43,455.

On December 23, 2008 the Company entered into a definitive agreement with the U.S. Treasury. Pursuant to the Agreement, we sold to the U.S. Treasury 72,280 shares of Series A preferred stock, having a liquidation amount equal to $1,000 per share, with an attached warrant (the “Warrant”) to purchase 635,504 shares of our common stock, par value $2.00 per share, for $17.06 per share.

The preferred stock qualifies as Tier 1 capital and payspayed cumulative dividends at a rate of 5% per year, for the first five years, and 9% per year thereafter. The Warrant hashad a 10-year term and an exercise price, subject to anti-dilution adjustments, equal to $17.06 per share of common stock.

The Company is permitted to redeem the Series A preferred stock at any time without penalty subject to the U.S. Treasury’s consultation with the Company’s and the Bank’s appropriate regulatory agency.
As noted above, in connection with the CBF Investment, all of the Company’s Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, and related warrants to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock issued to the U.S. Treasury through the TARP were purchased by CBF from the Treasury and are no longer outstanding.

Risk-based capital regulations adopted by the FRB and the FDIC require both bank holding companies and banks to achieve and maintain specified ratios of capital to risk-weighted assets. The risk-based capital rules are designed to measure “Tier 1” capital (consisting of stockholders’ equity and trust preferred securities, less goodwill) and total capital in relation to the credit risk of both on- and off-balance sheet items. Under the guidelines, one of four risk weights is applied to the different on-balance sheet items. Off-balance sheet items, such as loan commitments, are also subject to risk weighting after conversion to balance sheet equivalent amounts. All bank holding companies and banks must maintain a minimum total capital to total risk-weighted assets ratio of 8.00%, at least half of which must be in the form of core, or Tier 1, capital. At December 31, 2010 and 2011, the Predecessor Company and the Bank each satisfied their respective minimum regulatory capital requirements, and the Bank was “well-capitalized” within the meaning of federal regulatory requirements. In light of declining asset quality and earnings in 2010, the Bank informally committed to the TDFI and the FDIC that, among other things, it would maintain a Tier 1 leverage ratio (Tier 1 Capital to Average Assets) of at least 10% and Total risk-based capital ratio (Total Capital to Risk Weighted Assets) of at least 14%.

51


As reflected in the table below, the Bank did not satisfy these higher ratio requirements at December 31, 2010. Actual capital levels and minimum levels (in millions) were:
                         
                  Minimum Amounts 
                  to be Well 
          Minimum Required  Capitalized Under 
          for Capital  Prompt Corrective 
  Actual  Adequacy Purposes  Action Provisions 
  Actual  Ratio (%)  Actual  Ratio (%)  Actual  Ratio (%) 
2010                        
Total Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)                        
Consolidated $239.7   13.2  $145.2   8.0  $181.6   10.0 
Bank  239.6   13.2   145.0   8.0   181.3   10.0 
Tier 1 Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)                        
Consolidated $216.5   11.9  $72.6   4.0  $108.9   6.0 
Bank  216.4   11.9   72.5   4.0   108.8   6.0 
Tier 1 Capital (to Average Assets)                        
Consolidated $216.5   8.9  $97.6   4.0  $122.0   5.0 
Bank  216.4   8.9   97.5   4.0   121.8   5.0 
                         
2009                        
Total Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)                        
Consolidated $318.5   14.9  $171.0   8.0  $213.8   10.0 
Bank  317.4   14.9   170.7   8.0   213.4   10.0 
Tier 1 Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)                        
Consolidated $291.5   13.6  $85.5   4.0  $128.3   6.0 
Bank  290.4   13.6   85.4   4.0   128.0   6.0 
Tier 1 Capital (to Average Assets)                        
Consolidated $291.5   10.7  $108.6   4.0  $135.8   5.0 
Bank  290.4   10.7   108.6   4.0   135.7   5.0 

70


           Minimum Required 
           to be Well 
   Actual   Capitalized 
   Actual   Ratio (%)   Actual   Ratio (%) 

Successor Company:

        

December 31, 2011:

        

Total Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)

        

Consolidated

  $306.7     99.8    $30.7     10  

Tier 1 Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)

        

Consolidated

  $306.7     99.8    $18.4     6  

Tier 1 Capital (to Average Assets)

        

Consolidated

  $306.7     100.7    $15.2     5  

Predecessor Company:

        

December 31, 2010:

        

Total Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)

        

Consolidated

  $239.7     13.2    $181.6     10  

Bank

   239.6     13.2     181.3     10  

Tier 1 Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)

        

Consolidated

  $216.5     11.9    $108.9     6  

Bank

   216.4     11.9     108.8     6  

Tier 1 Capital (to Average Assets)

        

Consolidated

  $216.5     8.9    $122.0     5  

Bank

   216.4     8.9     121.8     5  

71


Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

At December 31, 2010,

Subsequent to the Company had outstanding unused linesdeconsolidation of credit and standby letters of credit totaling $227,647 and unfunded loan commitments outstanding of $6,291. Because these commitments generally have fixed expiration dates and many will expire without being drawn upon, the total commitment level does not necessarily represent future cash requirements. If needed to fund these outstanding commitments,GreenBank on September 7, 2011, the Company has no off-balance sheet arrangements.

Asset/Liability Management

Subsequent to the Merger Date, the Successor Company’s significant assets and liabilities are comprised of cash, its equity method investment in Capital Bank, NA, deferred income tax accounts and trust preferred securities.

Market risk is the risk that a financial institution’s earnings and capital, or its ability to liquidate federal funds soldmeet its business objectives, will be adversely affected by movements in market rates or securities available-for-sale prices such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates, equity rates, equity prices, credit spreads and/or on a short-term basis, to borrow or purchase federal funds from other financial institutions. At December 31, 2010, thecommodity prices. The Company had accommodations with upstream correspondent banks for unsecured federal funds lines. These accommodations have various covenants related to their term and availability, and in most cases must be repaid within less than a month. The following table presents additional information about the Company’s commitmentshas assessed its market risk as predominately interest rate risk. As of December 31, 2010,2011, the Company has no interest earning assets and our interest-bearing liabilities consist of trust preferred securities with a notional amount of $86 million. Accordingly, our net interest income is sensitive to changes in interest rates. As the most significant component of our future operating results will be derived from our 34% investment in Capital Bank, NA, which by their terms has contractual maturity dates subsequent torepresents approximately 98% of the Company’s total assets at December 31, 2010:

                     
  Less than 1          More than 5    
  Year  1-3 Years  3-5 Years  Years  Total 
                     
Commitments to make loans — fixed $3,827  $  $  $  $3,827 
Commitments to make loans — variable  2,464            2,464 
Unused lines of credit  101,145   14,460   13,457   72,911   201,973 
Letters of credit  17,632   8,042         25,674 
                
Total $125,068  $22,502  $13,457  $72,911  $233,938 
                
Asset/Liability Management
2011, we anticipate that net interest income will become a less significant measure of the operating results of the Company in future periods. As all of the Company’s trust preferred securities are tied to the three month LIBOR rate, changes in net interest income would be directly correlated to changes in this rate. Accordingly, 100 and 200 basis point changes in this rate would result in $860,000 and $1,720,000 changes in interest expense, respectively.

The Predecessor Company’s Asset/Liability Committee (“ALCO”) actively measuresmeasured and managesmanaged interest rate risk using a process developed by the Bank. The ALCO iswas also responsible for recommending the Company’s asset/liability management policies to the Board of Directors for approval, overseeing the formulation and implementation of strategies to improve balance sheet positioning and earnings, and reviewing the Company’s interest rate sensitivity position.

52


The primary tool that management usesused to measure short-term interest rate risk is a net interest income simulation model prepared by an independent national consulting firm and reviewed by another separate and independent national consulting firm. These simulations estimateestimated the impact that various changes in the overall level of interest rates over one- and two-year time horizons would have on net interest income. The results helphelped the Company develop strategies for managing exposure to interest rate risk.

Like any forecasting technique, interest rate simulation modeling is based on a large number of assumptions. In this case, the assumptions relate primarily to loan and deposit growth, asset and liability prepayments, interest rates and balance sheet management strategies. Management believes thatbelievedthat both individually and in the aggregate the assumptions arewere reasonable. Nevertheless, the simulation modeling process producesproduced only a sophisticated estimate, not a precise calculation of exposure.

The Predecessor Company’s current guidelines for interest rate risk management callcalled for preventive measures if a gradual 200 basis point increase or decrease in short-term rates over the next 12 months would affect net interest income over the same period by more than 18.5%. The Company hashad been operating well within the guidelines. As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, based on the results of the independent consulting firm’s simulation model, the Company could expect net interest income to increase by approximately 6.31% and 12.75%, respectively, if short-term interest rates immediately increase by 200 basis points. Conversely, if short-term interest rates immediately decrease by 200 basis points, net interest income could be expected to decrease by approximately 5.40% and 14.20%, respectively.

The scenario described above, in which net interest income increases when interest rates increase and decreases when interest rates decline, is typically referred to as being “asset sensitive” because interest-earning assets exceed interest-bearing liabilities. At December 31, 2010, approximately 43% of the Company’s gross loans had adjustable rates. While management believes, based on its asset/liability modeling, that the Company is liability sensitive as measured over the one year time horizon, it also believes that a rapid, significant and prolonged increase or decrease in rates could have a substantial adverse impact on the Company’s net interest margin.

72


The Predecessor Company’s net interest income simulation model incorporatesincorporated certain assumptions with respect to interest rate floors on certain deposits and other liabilities. Further, given the relatively low interest rates on some deposit products, a 200 basis point downward shock could very well reduce the costs on some liabilities below zero. In these cases, the Company’s model incorporates constraints which prevent such a shock from simulating liability costs to zero.

The Predecessor Company also usesused an economic value of equity model, prepared and reviewed by the same independent national consulting firm, to complement its short-term interest rate risk analysis. The benefit of this model is that it measures exposure to interest rate changes over time frames longer than the two-year net interest income simulation. The economic value of the Company’s equity iswas determined by calculating the net present value of projected future cash flows for current asset and liability positions based on the current yield curve.

Economic value analysis has several limitations. For example, the economic values of asset and liability balance sheet positions do not represent the true fair values of the positions, since economic values reflect an analysis at one particular point in time and do not consider the value of the Company’s franchise. In addition, we must estimate cash flow for assets and liabilities with indeterminate maturities. Moreover, the model’s present value calculations do not take into consideration future changes in the balance sheet that will likely result from ongoing loan and deposit activities conducted by the Company’s core business. Finally, the analysis requires assumptions about events which span several years. Despite its limitations, the economic value of equity model is a relatively sophisticated tool for evaluating the long term effect of possible interest rate movements.

53


The Predecessor Company’s current guidelines for risk management callcalled for preventive measures if an immediate 200 basis point increase or decrease in interest rates would reduce the economic value of equity by more than 23%. The Company operated well within the upper guideline but did not operate within the lower guideline for this ratio as of December 31, 2010. As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, based on the results of an independent national consulting firm’s simulation model and reviewed by a separate independent national consulting firm, the Company could expect its economic value of equity to increase by approximately 16.71% and 10.48%, respectively, if short-term interest rates immediately increased by 200 basis points. Conversely, if short-term interest rates immediately decrease by 200 basis points, economic value of equity could be expected to decrease by approximately 27.85% and 21.94%, at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The down 200 basis point scenario came in below the Company’s minimum operating guideline of 23% as a result of loan transfers to OREO and non-accrual status thus reducing the impact of the down 200 basis point scenario from the asset side of our balance sheet.

Disclosure of Contractual Obligations

Subsequent to the Merger Date, the Successor Company’s significant liabilities are comprised of deferred income tax accounts and trust preferred securities.

   Less than 1 Year   1-3 Years   3-5 Years   More than 5
Years
   Total 

Subordinated debentures

   —       —       —      $45,180    $45,180  

The above balance for subordinated debentures reflects fair value. Excluding the fair value adjustment, subordinated debenture balances were $88,662 as of December 31, 2011.

In the ordinary course of operations, the Predecessor Company enters into certain contractual obligations. Such obligations include the funding of operations through debt issuances as well as leases for premises and equipment. The following table summarizes the Predecessor Company’s significant fixed and determinable contractual obligations as of December 31, 2010:

                     
  Less than 1          More than 5    
  Year  1-3 Years  3-5 Years  Years  Total 
                     
Certificate of deposits $531,829  $192,743  $55,068  $3,446  $783,086 
Repurchase agreements  19,413            19,413 
FHLB advances and notes payable  15,288   65,566   30,605   47,194   158,653 
Subordinated debentures           88,662   88,662 
Operating lease obligations  1,243   2,294   1,226   734   5,497 
Deferred compensation  1,543      256   475   2,274 
Purchase obligations  1,611            1,611 
                
Total $570,927  $260,603  $87,155  $140,511  $1,059,196 
                

   Less than
1 Year
   1-3 Years   3-5 Years   More than
5 Years
   Total 

Certificate of deposits

  $531,829    $192,743    $55,068    $3,446    $783,086  

Repurchase agreements

   19,413     —       —       —       19,413  

FHLB advances and notes payable

   15,288     65,566     30,605     47,194     158,653  

Subordinated debentures

   —       —       —       88,662     88,662  

Operating lease obligations

   1,243     2,294     1,226     734     5,497  

Deferred compensation

   1,543     —       256     475     2,274  

Purchase obligations

   1,611     —       —       —       1,611  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $570,927    $260,603    $87,155    $140,511    $1,059,196  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

73


Additionally, the Company routinely enters into contracts for services. These contracts may require payment for services to be provided in the future and may also contain penalty clauses for early termination of the contract. Management is not aware of any additional commitments or contingent liabilities which may have a material adverse impact on the liquidity or capital resources of the Company.

Inflation

The effect of inflation on financial institutions differs from its impact on other types of businesses. Since assets and liabilities of banks are primarily monetary in nature, they are more affected by changes in interest rates than by the rate of inflation.

Inflation generates increased credit demand and fluctuation in interest rates. Although credit demand and interest rates are not directly tied to inflation, each can significantly impact net interest income. As in any business or industry, expenses such as salaries, equipment, occupancy, and other operating expenses also are subject to the upward pressures created by inflation.

Since the rate of inflation has been stable during the last several years, the impact of inflation on the earnings of the Company has been insignificant.

Effect of New

Recent Accounting Standards

FASB — ASU — 2010-06 — Pronouncements

In January 2010,September 2011, the FASB issued additionalASU No. 2011-08, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing Goodwill for Impairment (“ASU 2011-08”). ASU 2011-08 amended guidance on the annual goodwill impairment test performed by the Company. Under the amended guidance, the Company will have the option to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is necessary to perform a two-step impairment test. If the Company believes, as a result of the qualitative assessment, that it is more likely than not that the fair value disclosures.of a reporting unit is less than the carrying value, the quantitative impairment test is required. If the Company believes the fair value of a reporting unit is greater than the carrying value, no further testing is required. A company can choose to perform the qualitative assessment on some or none of its reporting entities. The amended guidance includes examples of events and circumstances that might indicate that a reporting unit’s fair value is less than its carrying amount. These include macro-economic conditions such as deterioration in the entity’s operating environment, entity-specific events such as declining financial performance, and other events such as an expectation that a reporting unit will be sold. The amended guidance is effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011. However, an entity can choose to early adopt the amended guidance even if its annual test date is before the issuance of the final standard, provided that the entity has not yet performed its 2011 annual impairment test or issued its financial statements. The adoption of this update did not have an impact on the Company’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income (“ASU 2011-05”). The new guidance clarifies twoamends existing disclosure requirements and requires two new disclosuresguidance by (i) eliminating the option to present components of other comprehensive income (which we refer to as follows: (1) a “gross”“OCI”) as part of the statement of changes in shareholders’ equity, (ii) requiring the presentation of activities (purchases, sales,each component of net income and settlements) withineach component of OCI either in a single continuous statement or in two separate but consecutive statements, and (iii) requiring the Level 3 rollforward reconciliation, which will replacepresentation of reclassification adjustments on the “net” presentation format; and (2) detailed disclosures aboutface of the transfersstatement. The new guidance does not change the option to present components of OCI either before or after related income tax effects, the items that must be reported in and outOCI, when an item of Level 1 and 2 measurements.OCI should be reclassified to net income, or the computation of earnings per share (which continues to be based on net income). This guidance is effective for the first interim orand annual reporting periodperiods beginning on or after December 15, 2009, except2011 for public companies, with early adoption permitted and retrospective application required. The adoption of this update did not have an impact on the Company’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations but will alter future disclosures.

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs (“ASU 2011-04”). The amended guidance (i) clarifies how a principal market is determined, (ii) establishes the valuation premise for the gross presentationhighest and best use of nonfinancial assets, (iii) addresses the fair value measurement of instruments with offsetting market or counterparty credit risks, (iv) extends the prohibition on blockage factors to all three levels of the fair value hierarchy, and (v) requires additional disclosures including transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, quantitative and qualitative information and a description of an entity’s valuation process for Level 3 rollforward information, whichfair value measurements, and fair value hierarchy disclosures for financial instruments not measured at fair value. This guidance is requiredeffective for interim and annual periods beginning on or after December 15, 2011, with early adoption prohibited. The adoption of this update did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

74


In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-02, Receivables. The new guidance amended existing guidance for assisting a creditor in determining whether a restructuring is a troubled debt restructuring. The amendments clarify the guidance for a creditor’s evaluation of whether it has granted a concession and whether a debtor is experiencing financial difficulties. This guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after DecemberJune 15, 2010,2011, and for interim reporting periods within those years. The Company adoptedshould be applied retrospectively to the fair value disclosures guidance on January 1, 2010, except for the gross presentationbeginning of the Level 3 rollforward information which is not required to be adopted by the Company until January 1, 2011.

54


FASB — ASC — 810 and amended by FASB ASU — 2010-10 became effective on January 1, 2010, and was amended to change how a company determines when an entity that is insufficiently capitalized or is not controlled through voting (or similar rights) should be consolidated.annual period of adoption. The determinationadoption of whether a company is required to consolidate an entity is based on, among other things, an entity’s purpose and design and a company’s ability to direct the activities of the entity that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance. The new authoritative accounting guidance requires additional disclosures about the reporting entity’s involvement with variable-interest entities and any significant changes in risk exposure due to that involvement as well as its affect on the entity’s financial statements. The new authoritative accounting guidance under ASC 810 was effective January 1, 2010 andthis update did not have a significantmaterial impact on the Company’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-29, Disclosure of Supplementary Pro Forma Information for Business Combinations, to amend ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations. The amendments in this update specify that if a public entity presents comparative financial statements, the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period only. The amendments in this update are effective prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010. Adoption of this update did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In July 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-20, — “DisclosuresDisclosures about the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses”Losses, to amend ASC Topic 320, Receivables. The new standard governingamendments in this update are intended to provide disclosures that facilitate financial statement users’ evaluation of the disclosures associated withnature of credit qualityrisk inherent in the entity’s portfolio of financing receivables, how that risk is analyzed and assessed in arriving at the allowance for loan losses. This standard requires additional disclosures related tocredit losses, and the changes and reasons for those changes in the allowance for loan loss withcredit losses. The disclosures as of the objectiveend of providing financial statement users with greater transparency about an entity’s loan loss reserves and overall credit quality. Additional disclosures include showing on a disaggregated basis the aging of receivables, credit quality indicators, and troubled debt restructures with its effect on the allowance for loan loss. The provisions of this standard werereporting period are effective for interim and annual periods ending on or after December 15, 2010. The adoptiondisclosures about activity that occurs during a reporting period are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2010. Adoption of this standardupdate did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position and resultsstatements.

In March 2010, the FASB issued new guidance impacting receivables. The new guidance clarifies that a modification to a loan that is part of operations, but did increasea pool of loans that were acquired with deteriorated credit quality should not result in the amount and qualityremoval of the credit disclosuresloan from the pool. This guidance is effective for any modifications of loans accounted for within a pool in the notesfirst interim or annual reporting period ending after July 15, 2010. The adoption of this guidance was not material to our consolidated financial statements.

In February 2010, the FASB issued new guidance impacting fair value measurements and disclosures. The new guidance requires a gross presentation of purchases and sales of Level 3 activities and adds a new requirement to disclose transfers in and out of Level 1 and Level 2 measurements. The guidance related to the consolidated financial statements.

transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 measurements was effective for us on January 1, 2010. The guidance that requires increased disaggregation of the Level 3 activities is effective for us on January 1, 2011.

ITEM 7A.
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

The information set forth on pages 5272 through 5473 of Item 7, “MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Asset/Liability Management” is incorporated herein by reference.

 

55


ITEM 8.
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

The Company’s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act. The Company’s internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation ofconsolidated financial statements, for external purposes in accordance with U.S. GAAP. The Company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policiesnotes thereto and procedures that:

(i) pertain to the maintenancereport of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company;
(ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the Company; and
(iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the Company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
Management assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework.
As a result of management’s evaluation of the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting, management identified deficiencies, that when evaluated in combination, lead to the determination that there is a reasonable possibility that the Company’s internal controls could fail to prevent or detect a material misstatement on a timely basis as of December 31, 2010. Accordingly, as a result of this material weakness, management has concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2010. This material weakness relates to controls surrounding the valuation, documentation and review of impaired loans and other real estate owned at December 31, 2010. As a result of this material weakness, management has adopted a specific action plan to address these deficiencies in internal controls which are discussed in more detail below in Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.
The Company’s independent registered public accounting firm has issued a reportthereon included on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. That report appears onfollowing pages 57 and 58 of this Report.
are incorporated herein by reference.

Index to Consolidated Financial Statements

Page

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

76

Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2011 (Successor) and 2010 (Predecessor)

79

Consolidated Statements of Income for the period from September 8, 2011 through December 31, 2011 (Successor), the period from January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011, year ended December 31, 2010 and year ended December 31, 2009 (Predecessor)

80

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the period from January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011, year ended December 31, 2010 and year ended December 31, 2009 (Predecessor)

81

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the period from September 8, 2011 through December 31, 2011 (Successor)

82

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the period from September 8, 2011 through December 31, 2011 (Successor), the period from January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011, year ended December 31, 2010 and year ended December 31, 2009 (Predecessor)

83

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the period from September 8, 2011 through December 31, 2011 (Successor), the period from January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011, year ended December 31, 2010 and year ended December 31, 2009 (Predecessor)

84

 

56

75


Report of Independent Registered Certified Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS
GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
We have auditedof Green Bankshares, Inc.

In our opinion, the accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2011 and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for the period September 8, 2011 to December 31, 2011 present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Green Bankshares, Inc. and subsidiaries’ (the “Company”) internal control over financial reporting as ofits subsidiaries (Successor Company) at December 31, 2010, based on criteria established2011 and the results of their operations and their cash flows for the period September 8, 2011 to December 31, 2011 inInternal Control—Integrated Frameworkissued by conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the CommitteeUnited States of Sponsoring OrganizationsAmerica. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Treadway Commission. The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control overthese financial reportingstatements based on our audit.

We conducted our audit of these statements in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control overthe financial reporting was maintainedstatements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control overthe financial reporting,statements, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists,accounting principles used and testingsignificant estimates made by management, and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the Company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. A combination of deficiencies noted as of December 31, 2010 give rise to the following material weakness which is included in management’s assessment. As of December 31, 2010, the Company did not have adequate internal controls surrounding the valuation, documentation and review of impaired loans and other real estate owned. This material weakness was considered in determining the nature, timing and extent of audit tests applied in our audit of the 2010 consolidated financial statements, and this report does not affect our report dated March 15, 2011 on those consolidated financial statements.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Ft. Lauderdale, FL

April 9, 2012

 

57

76


Report of Independent Registered Certified Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders

of Green Bankshares, Inc.

In our opinion, becausethe accompanying consolidated statements of income, changes in shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for the effectperiod January 1, 2011 to September 7, 2011 present fairly, in all material respects, the results of the material weakness described above on the achievementoperations and cash flows of the objectives of the control criteria, Green Bankshares, Inc. and its subsidiaries has not maintained effective internal control over(Predecessor Company) for the period January 1, 2011 to September 7, 2011 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. These financial reporting asstatements are the responsibility of December 31, 2010,the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Frameworkissued by the Committeeour audit. We conducted our audit of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.

We also have audited,these statements in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States),. Those standards require that we plan and perform the consolidatedaudit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of Green Bankshares, Inc.material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 and for each of the yearsdisclosures in the three-year period ended December 31, 2010, and our report dated March 15, 2011, expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements. Our report on the consolidated financial statements, referred to above refers toassessing the adoption ofaccounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a new accounting standard in relation to accountingreasonable basis for other-than-temporary impairments of debt securities in 2009.
our opinion.

/s/ Dixon Hughes PLLC

Atlanta, Georgia
March 15, 2011
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Ft. Lauderdale, FL

April 9, 2012

 

58

77


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheetssheet of Green Bankshares, Inc. and subsidiaries (Predecessor Company) as of December 31, 2010, and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in shareholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-yeartwo-year period ended December 31, 2010. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by Management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Green Bankshares, Inc. and subsidiaries (Predecessor Company) as of December 31, 2010, and 2009, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-yeartwo-year period ended December 31, 2010, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Effective January 1, 2009, the Company changed its method of accounting for other-than-temporary impairments of debt securities in connection with the adoption of revised accounting guidance issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board.

We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Green Bankshares, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, based on criteria established inInternal Control—Integrated Frameworkissued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission, and our report dated March 15, 2011 expressed an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

/s/ Dixon Hughes PLLC

Goodman LLP

(formerly Dixon Hughes PLLC)

Atlanta, Georgia

March 15, 2011

 

59

78


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

December 31, 20102011 and 2009

2010

(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)

         
  2010  2009 
ASSETS
        
Cash and due from banks $289,358  $206,701 
Federal funds sold  4,856   3,793 
       
Cash and cash equivalents  294,214   210,494 
Interest earning deposits in other banks     11,000 
Securities available for sale  202,002   147,724 
Securities held to maturity (with a market value of $467 and $638)  465   626 
Loans held for sale  1,299   1,533 
Loans, net of unearned interest  1,745,378   2,043,807 
Allowance for loan losses  (66,830)  (50,161)
Other real estate owned and repossessed assets  60,095   57,168 
Premises and equipment, net  78,794   81,818 
FHLB and other stock, at cost  12,734   12,734 
Cash surrender value of life insurance  31,479   30,277 
Core deposit and other intangibles  6,751   9,335 
Deferred tax asset (net of valuation allowance of $43,455 and $0)  2,177   13,600 
Other assets  37,482   49,184 
       
         
Total assets $2,406,040  $2,619,139 
       
         
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
        
Liabilities        
Non interest-bearing deposits $152,752  $177,602 
Interest-bearing deposits  1,822,703   1,899,910 
Brokered deposits  1,399   6,584 
       
Total deposits  1,976,854   2,084,096 
         
Repurchase agreements  19,413   24,449 
FHLB advances and notes payable  158,653   171,999 
Subordinated debentures  88,662   88,662 
Accrued interest payable and other liabilities  18,561   23,164 
       
Total liabilities $2,262,143  $2,392,370 
       
         
Shareholders’ equity        
Preferred stock: no par, 1,000,000 shares authorized, 72,278 shares outstanding $68,121  $66,735 
Common stock: $2 par, 20,000,000 shares authorized, 13,188,896 and 13,171,474 shares outstanding  26,378   26,343 
Common stock warrants  6,934   6,934 
Additional paid-in capital  188,901   188,310 
Retained earnings (deficit)  (147,436)  (61,742)
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  999   189 
       
Total shareholders’ equity  143,897   226,769 
       
         
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $2,406,040  $2,619,139 
       

   Successor  Predecessor 
   Company  Company 
   Dec. 31  Dec. 31 
   2011  2010 

ASSETS

    

Cash and due from banks

  $2,091   $289,358  

Federal funds sold

   —      4,856  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

   2,091    294,214  

Investment in Capital Bank, NA

   315,343   

Securities available-for-sale (“AFS”)

   —      202,002  

Securities held-to-maturity (with a December 31, 2010 market value of $467)

   —      465  

FHLB and other stock, at cost

   —      12,734  

Loans held for sale

   —      1,299  

Loans, net of unearned income

   —      1,745,378  

Allowance for loan losses

   —      (66,830

Other real estate owned and repossessed assets

   —      60,095  

Bank premises and equipment, net

   —      78,794  

Cash surrender value of life insurance

   —      31,479  

Core deposit and other intangibles

   —      6,751  

Deferred Tax Asset ( December 31, 2010 net of valuation allowance of $43,455)

   —      2,177  

Other assets

   3,804    37,482  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets

  $321,238   $2,406,040  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY

    

Non-interest-bearing deposits

  $—     $152,752  

Interest-bearing deposits

   —      1,822,703  

Brokered deposits

   —      1,399  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total deposits

   —      1,976,854  

Federal funds purchased

   —      —    

Repurchase agreements

   —      19,413  

FHLB advances and notes payable

   —      158,653  

Subordinated debentures

   45,180    88,662  

Deferred Tax Liability

   15,522    —    

Accrued interest payable and other liabilities

   487    18,561  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   61,189    2,262,143  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY

    

Preferred stock: no par value, 1,000,000 shares authorized;

    0 and 72,278 shares outstanding

   —      68,121  

Common stock: $.01 and $2 par value, 300,000,000 and 20,000,000 shares authorized;

    133,160,384 and 13,188,896 shares outstanding

   1,332    26,378  

Common stock warrants

   —      6,934  

Additional paid in capital

   257,531    188,901  

Retained earnings (deficit)

   2,647    (147,436

Accumulated other comprehensive income

   (1,461  999  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total shareholders’ equity

   260,049    143,897  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total liabilities & shareholders’ equity

  $321,238   $2,406,040  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See accompanying notes.

 

60

79


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME

Years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 2009 and 2008

2009

(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)

             
  2010  2009  2008 
Interest income            
Interest and fees on loans $113,721  $129,212  $155,627 
Taxable securities  4,938   7,035   12,770 
Nontaxable securities  1,241   1,260   1,297 
FHLB and other stock  530   573   647 
Federal funds sold and other  434   376   175 
          
Total interest income  120,864   138,456   170,516 
             
Interest expense            
Deposits  28,434   45,768   58,090 
Federal funds purchased and repurchase agreements  22   29   2,111 
FHLB advances and notes payable  6,835   9,557   10,735 
Subordinated debentures  1,980   2,577   4,555 
          
Total interest expense  37,271   57,931   75,491 
             
Net interest income  83,593   80,525   95,025 
             
Provision for loan losses  71,107   50,246   52,810 
          
             
Net interest income after provision for loan losses  12,486   30,279   42,215 
             
Non-interest income            
Service charges on deposit accounts  24,179   23,738   23,176 
Other charges and fees  1,791   1,999   2,192 
Trust and investment services income  2,842   1,977   1,878 
Mortgage banking income  703   383   804 
Other income  3,122   3,042   2,903 
Securities gains (losses), net            
Realized gains     1,415   2,661 
Other-than-temporary impairment  (553)  (1,678)   
Less non-credit portion recognized in other comprehensive income  460   702    
          
Total securities gains (loss), net  (93)  439   2,661 
          
Total non-interest income  32,544   31,578   33,614 
             
Non-interest expense            
Employee compensation  31,990   30,611   33,615 
Employee benefits  3,378   3,835   4,788 
Occupancy expense  6,908   6,956   6,900 
Equipment expense  2,846   3,092   3,555 
Computer hardware/software expense  3,523   2,816   2,752 
Professional services  2,777   2,108   2,069 
Advertising  2,388   1,894   3,538 
OREO maintenance expense  2,324   1,222   825 
Collection and repossession expense  3,228   3,131   1,109 
Loss on OREO and repossessed assets  29,895   8,156   7,028 
FDIC insurance  4,155   4,960   1,631 
Core deposit and other intangibles amortization  2,584   2,750   2,602 
Goodwill impairment     143,389    
Other expenses  14,819   14,667   15,425 
          
Total non-interest expense  110,815   229,587   85,837 
             
Income (loss) before income taxes  (65,785)  (167,730)  (10,008)
             
Provision (benefit) for income taxes  14,910   (17,036)  (4,648)
          
             
Net income (loss)  (80,695)  (150,694)  (5,360)
             
Preferred stock dividends and accretion of discount  5,001   4,982   92 
          
             
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders $(85,696) $(155,676) $(5,452)
          
             
Earnings (loss) per common share:            
Basic $(6.54) $(11.91) $(0.42)
Diluted  (6.54)  (11.91)  (0.42)

    Successor  Predecessor Company 
   Company     Year Ended 
    Sept 8 - Dec 31
2011
  Jan 1 - Sept 7
2011
  Dec. 31
2010
  Dec. 31
2009
 

Interest income:

      

Interest and fees on loans

  $—     $65,258   $113,721   $129,212  

Taxable securities

   —      4,290    4,938    7,035  

Nontaxable securities

   —      790    1,241    1,260  

FHLB and other stock

   —      374    530    573  

Federal funds sold and other

   —      468    434    376  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total interest income

   —      71,180    120,864    138,456  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Interest expense:

      

Deposits

   —      12,764    28,434    45,768  

Federal funds purchased and repurchase agreements

   —      11    22    29  

FHLB advances and notes payable

   —      4,314    6,835    9,557  

Subordinated debentures

   977    1,315    1,980    2,577  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total interest expense

   977    18,404    37,271    57,931  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net interest income

   (977  52,776    83,593    80,525  

Provision for loan losses

   —      43,742    71,107    50,246  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net interest income (loss) after provision for loan losses

   (977  9,034    12,486    30,279  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Non-interest income:

      

Service charges on deposit accounts

   —      16,346    24,179    23,738  

Other charges and fees

   —      1,147    1,791    1,999  

Trust and investment services income

   —      1,457    2,842    1,977  

Mortgage banking income

   —      271    703    383  

Equity Method Income in Capital Bank NA

   3,446    —      —      —    

Other income

   19    2,258    3,122    3,042  

Securities gains (losses), net

      

Realized gains (losses), net

   —      6,324    —      1,415  

Other-than-temporary impairment

   —      —      (553  (1,678

Less non-credit portion recognized in other comprehensive income

   —      —      460    702  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total non-interest income

   3,465    27,803    32,544    31,578  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Non-interest expense:

      

Employee compensation

   —      21,560    31,990    30,611  

Employee benefits

   —      2,458    3,378    3,835  

Occupancy expense

   —      5,308    6,908    6,956  

Equipment expense

   —      2,176    2,846    3,092  

Computer hardware/software expense

   —      2,508    3,523    2,816  

Professional services

   163    3,099    2,777    2,108  

Advertising

   —      1,533    2,388    1,894  

OREO maintenance expense

   —      2,976    2,324    1,222  

Collection and repossession expense

   —      1,727    3,228    3,131  

Loss on OREO and repossessed assets

   —      20,101    29,895    8,156  

FDIC insurance

   —      2,629    4,155    4,960  

Core deposit and other intangible amortization

   —      1,716    2,584    2,750  

Goodwill impairment

   —      —      —      143,389  

Other expenses

   119    9,591    14,819    14,667  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total non-interest expense

   282    77,382    110,815    229,587  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income (loss) before income taxes

   2,206    (40,545  (65,785  (167,730

Income taxes provision (benefit)

   (441  974    14,910    (17,036
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss)

   2,647    (41,519  (80,695  (150,694

Preferred stock dividends and accretion of discount on warrants

   —      3,409    5,001    4,982  

Gain on retirement of Series A preferred allocated to common shareholders

   —      11,188    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss) available to common shareholders

  $2,647   $(33,740 $(85,696  (155,676
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Per share of common stock:

      

Basic earnings (loss)

  $.02   $(2.57 $(6.54 $(11.91
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Diluted earnings (loss)

  $.02   $(2.57 $(6.54 $(11.91
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Dividends

  $0.00   $0.00   $0.00   $0.00  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Weighted average shares outstanding:

      

Basic

   133,083,705    13,125,521    13,093,847    13,068,407  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Diluted

   133,160,384    13,125,521    13,093,847    13,068,407  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See accompanying notes.

 

61

80


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY

Period from January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011 and

Years ended December 31, 2010 2009 and 2008

2009

(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)

                                 
              Warrants          Accumulated    
              For  Additional  Retained  Other  Total 
  Preferred  Common Stock  Common  Paid-in  Earnings  Comprehensive  Shareholders’ 
  Stock  Shares  Amount  Stock  Capital  (Deficit)  Income (Loss)  Equity 
Balance, January 1, 2008
     12,931,015   25,862      185,170   109,938   1,507   322,477 
                                 
Preferred stock transactions:                                
Issuance of 72,278 shares of preferred stock  72,278                     72,278 
Discount associated with 635,504 common stock warrants issued with preferred stock  (6,934)        6,934             
Accretion of preferred stock discount  2               (2)      
Preferred stock dividends accrued                 (90)     (90)
Common stock transactions:                                
Exercise of shares under stock option plan     9,759   19      201         220 
Common stock exchanged for exercised stock options     (7,991)  (16)     (93)        (109)
Issuance of restricted common shares     60,907   122      (122)         
Stock dividend     118,997   238      1,822   (2,060)      
Compensation expense:                                
Stock options              456          456 
Restricted stock              303          303 
Stock option tax benefit              5         5 
Dividends paid ($.52 per share)                 (6,779)     (6,779)
Comprehensive loss:                                
Net loss                 (5,360)     (5,360)
Change in unrealized losses, net of reclassification and taxes                    (2,170)  (2,170)
                         
Total comprehensive loss                              (7,530)
                                
                                 
Balance, December 31, 2008
  65,346   13,112,687   26,225   6,934   187,742   95,647   (663)  381,231 
                                 
Preferred stock transactions:                                
Accretion of preferred stock discount  1,389               (1,389)      
Preferred stock dividends                 (3,593)     (3,593)
Common stock transactions:                                
Issuance of restricted common shares     58,787   118      (118)         
Compensation expense:                                
Stock options              387         387 
Restricted stock              299         299 
Dividends paid ($.13 per share)                 (1,713)     (1,713)
Comprehensive loss:                                
Net loss                 (150,694)     (150,694)
Change in unrealized gains, net of reclassification and taxes                    852   852 
                         
Total comprehensive loss                              (149,842)
                                
 
Balance, December 31, 2009
 $66,735   13,171,474  $26,343  $6,934  $188,310  $(61,742) $189  $226,769 
                         
                                 
Preferred stock transactions:                                
Accretion of preferred stock discount  1,386               (1,386)      
Preferred stock dividends                 (3,613)     (3,613)
Common stock transactions:                                
Issuance of restricted common shares     17,422   35      (35)         
Compensation expense:                                
Stock options              295         295 
Restricted stock              331         331 
Comprehensive loss:                                
Net loss                 (80,695)     (80,695)
Change in unrealized gains, net of reclassification and taxes                    810   810 
                         
Total comprehensive loss                              (79,885)
                                
 
Balance, December 31, 2010
 $68,121   13,188,896  $26,378  $6,934  $188,901  $(147,436) $999  $143,897 
                         

           Warrants        Other    
  Preferred  Common Stock  for
Common
  

Additional

Paid in

  

Retained

Earnings

  Comprehensive
Income
    

Predecessor Company

 Stock  Shares  Amount  Stock  Capital  (Deficit)  (Loss)  Total 

Balance, January 1, 2009

 $65,346    13,112,687   $26,225   $6,934   $187,742   $95,647   $(663 $381,231  

Preferred stock transactions:

        

Accretion of preferred stock discount

  1,389    —      —      —      —      (1,389  —      —    

Preferred stock dividends

  —      —      —      —      —      (3,593  —      (3,593

Common stock transactions:

        

Issuance of Restricted Common Shares

  —      58,787    118    —      (118  —      —      —    

Compensation Expense:

        

Stock Options

  —      —      —      —      387    —      —      387  

Restricted stock

  —      —      —      —      299    —      —      299  

Dividends paid ($.13 per share)

  —      —      —      —      —      (1,713  —      (1,713

Comprehensive loss:

        

Net loss

  —      —      —      —      —      (150,694  —      (150,694

Change in unrealized gain on AFS securities, net of tax

  —      —      —      —      —      —      852    852  
        

 

 

 

Total comprehensive loss

  —      —      —      —      —      —      —      (149,842

Balance, December 31, 2009

 $66,735    13,171,474   $26,343   $6,934   $188,310   $(61,742 $189   $226,769  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Preferred stock transactions:

        

Accretion of preferred stock discount

  1,386    —      —      —      —      (1,386  —      —    

Preferred stock dividends

  —      —      —      —      —      (3,613  —      (3,613

Common stock transactions:

        

Issuance of Restricted Common Shares

  —      17,422    35    —      (35  —      —      —    

Compensation Expense:

        

Stock Options

  —      —      —      —      295    —      —      295  

Restricted stock

  —      —      —      —      331    —      —      331  

Comprehensive loss:

        

Net loss

  —      —      —      —      —      (80,695  —      (80,695

Change in unrealized gain on AFS securities, net of tax

  —      —      —      —      —      —      810    810  
        

 

 

 

Total comprehensive loss

  —      —      —      —      —      —      —      (79,885

Balance, December 31, 2010

 $68,121    13,188,896   $26,378   $6,934   $188,901   $(147,436 $999   $143,897  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Preferred stock transactions:

        

Stock-based compensation

  —      85,474    171    —      777    —      —      948  

Accretion of preferred stock discount

  925    —      —      —      —      (925  —      —    

Preferred stock dividends

  —      —      —      —      —      (2,484  —      (2,484

Comprehensive loss:

        

Net loss

  —      —      —      —      —      (41,519  —      (41,519

Change in unrealized gain on AFS securities, net of tax

  —      —      —      —      —      —      2,601    5,082  

Gain on security sales, net of tax

        (3,843  (6,324
        

 

 

 

Total comprehensive loss

  —      —      —      —      —      —      —      (42,761

Balance, September 7, 2011

 $69,046    13,274,370   $26,549   $6,934   $189,678   $(192,364 $(243 $99,600  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See accompanying notes.

 

62

81


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWSCHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Years ended

Period from September 8, 2011 through December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

(Amounts in thousands)
             
  2010  2009  2008 
Cash flows from operating activities
            
Net loss $(80,695) $(150,694) $(5,360)
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by operating activities            
Provision for loan losses  71,107   50,246   52,810 
Impairment of goodwill     143,389    
Depreciation and amortization  7,152   7,117   7,030 
Security amortization and accretion, net  538   73   (983)
Write down of investments and other securities for impairment  93   1,272   174 
(Gain) loss on sale of securities     (1,415)  (2,661)
FHLB stock dividends        (464)
Net gain on sale of mortgage loans  (653)  (264)  (573)
Originations of mortgage loans held for sale  (46,994)  (43,879)  (49,501)
Proceeds from sales of mortgage loans  47,881   43,050   51,962 
Increase in cash surrender value of life insurance  (1,202)  (1,125)  (1,073)
Gain from settlement of life insurance     (305)   
Net (gains) losses from sales of fixed assets  (1)  (85)  665 
Stock-based compensation expense  626   686   759 
Net loss on OREO and repossessed assets  29,895   8,156   7,028 
Deferred tax (benefit)  26,739   (1,654)  (4,374)
Net changes:            
Other assets  (4,139)  (21,375)  78 
Accrued interest payable and other liabilities  (5,505)  (3,177)  (10,875)
          
Net cash provided by operating activities  44,842   30,016   44,642 
Cash flows from investing activities
            
Net change in interest-earning deposits with banks  11,000   (11,000)   
Purchase of securities available for sale  (171,820)  (92,100)  (180,626)
Proceeds from sale of securities available for sale     36,266   123,701 
Proceeds from maturities of securities available for sale  118,246   113,440   88,711 
Proceeds from maturities of securities held to maturity  160   30   645 
Purchase of FHLB stock        (417)
Net change in loans  195,847   99,111   27,754 
Proceeds from settlement of life insurance     691    
Proceeds from sale of other real estate  16,136   11,930   20,654 
Improvements to other real estate  (813)  (307)  (1,071)
Proceeds from sale of fixed assets  8   800   58 
Premises and equipment expenditures  (1,551)  (3,542)  (5,814)
          
Net cash provided by investing activities  167,213   155,319   73,595 
Cash flows from financing activities
            
Net change in core deposits  (102,057)  270,162   48,589 
Net change in brokered deposits  (5,185)  (370,213)  148,765 
Net change in federal funds purchased and repurchase agreements  (5,036)  (10,853)  (159,223)
Tax benefit resulting from stock options        5 
Proceeds from FHLB advances and notes payable        20,916 
Repayment of FHLB advances and notes payable  (13,346)  (57,350)  (110,258)
Preferred stock dividends paid  (2,711)  (3,232)   
Common stock dividends paid     (1,713)  (6,779)
Proceeds from issuance of preferred stock and common stock warrants        72,278 
Proceeds from issuance of common stock        111 
          
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities  (128,335)  (173,199)  14,404 
          
Net change in cash and cash equivalents
  83,720   12,136   132,641 
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year  210,494   198,358   65,717 
          
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year
 $294,214  $210,494  $198,358 
          
Supplemental disclosures — cash and noncash
            
Interest paid $41,875  $62,198  $77,761 
Income taxes paid net of refunds  (148)  1,675   5,674 
Loans converted to other real estate  54,613   75,545   37,991 
Unrealized gain (loss) on available for sale securities, net of tax  810   852   (2,170)
See accompanying notes.

2011

63


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)

    Common Stock
Shares
  Common
Stock
   Additional
Paid in
Capital
  Accumulated
Earnings
(Deficit)
   Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
  Total 

Successor Company

         

Balance, September 8, 2011

   133,174,370   $1,332    $257,711   $—      $—     $259,043  

Net income

   —      —       —      2,647     —      2,647  

Change in unrealized gain on AFS securities, net of tax

   —      —       —      —       (1,461  (1,461
         

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

          1,186  

Investment in Capital Bank, NA

      (153     (153

RSA’s surrendered

   (13,986  —       (27  —       —      (27
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2011

   133,160,384   $1,332    $257,531   $2,647    $(1,461 $260,049  
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

See accompanying notes.

82


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

Years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 2009 and 20082009

(Amounts in thousands)

   Successor          
   Company  Predecessor Company 
   Sept 8 - Dec 31
2011
  Jan 1 - Sept 7
2011
  2010  2009 
       

Cash flows from operating activities

      

Net income (loss)

   2,647    (41,519  (80,695  (150,694

Adjustments to reconcile net income / (loss) to net cash provided by operating activities:

      

Provision for loan losses

   —      43,742    71,107    50,246  

Impairment of goodwill

   —      —      —      143,389  

Depreciation and amortization

   —      3,597    7,152    7,117  

Security amortization and accretion, net

   —      232    538    73  

Write down of investments for impairment

   —      —      93    1,272  

Gain on sales of securities available for sale

   —      (6,324  —      (1,415

Net gain on sale of mortgage loans

   —      (251  (653  (264

Originations of mortgage loans held for sale

   —      (20,563  (46,994  (43,879

Proceeds from sales of mortgage loans

   —      20,362    47,881    43,050  

Increase in cash surrender value of life insurance

   —      (767  (1,202  (1,125

Gain from settlement of life insurance

   —      —      —      (305

Net losses from sales of fixed assets

   —      444    (1  (85

Stock-based compensation expense

   —      948    626    686  

Net loss on other real estate and repossessed assets

   —      20,100    29,895    8,156  

Deferred tax benefit

   —      —      26,739    (1,654

Amortization of Subordinated Debenture Discount

   1,543     

Net changes:

      

Other assets

   554    11,996    (4,139  (21,375

Accrued interest payable and other liabilities

   (3,884  700    (5,505  (3,177
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash provided by operating activities

   860    32,697    44,842    30,016  
 

Cash flows from investing activities

      

Net change in interest-bearing deposits with banks

   —      —      11,000    (11,000

Purchase of securities available for sale

   —      (209,790  (171,820  (92,100

Proceeds from sales of securities available for sale

   —      176,577    —      36,266  

Proceeds from maturities of securities available for sale

   —      64,822    118,246    113,440  

Proceeds from maturities of securities held to maturity

   —      465    160    30  

Net change in loans

   —      146,969    195,847    99,111  

Proceeds from settlement of life insurance

   —      —      —      691  

Proceeds from sale of other real estate

   —      19,781    16,136    11,930  

Improvements to other real estate

   —      (261  (813  (307

Proceeds from sale of fixed assets

   —      7    8    800  

Net Change in Cash Due to Merger of GreenBank into Capital Bank, NA

   (393,433  —      —      —    

Investment in Capital Bank, NA

   (142,850  —      —      —    

Premises and equipment expenditures

   —      (947  (1,551  (3,542
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash provided by investing activities

   (536,283  197,623    167,213    155,319  
 

Cash flows from financing activities

      

Net change in deposits

   —      (124,497  (102,057  270,162  

Net change in brokered deposits

   —      —      (5,185  (370,213

Net change in repurchase agreements

   —      (4,026  (5,036  (10,853

Repayments of FHLB advances and notes payable

   —      (855  (13,346  (57,350

Proceeds from Capital Bank Financial Corp.

      

Investment

   (5,211  147,569    —      —    

Preferred stock dividends paid

      (2,711  (3,232

Common stock dividends paid

   —      —      —      (1,713
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash (used) in financing activities

   (5,211  18,191    (128,335  (173,199
 

Net change in cash and cash equivalents

   (540,634  248,511    83,720    12,136  
 

Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year

   542,725    294,214    210,494    198,358  
 

Cash and cash equivalents, end of year

   2,091    542,725    294,214    210,494  
 

Supplemental disclosures – cash and noncash

      

Interest paid

   2,331    17,815    41,875    62,198  

Income taxes paid net of refunds

   —      —      (148  1,675  

Loans converted to other real estate

   —      51,851    54,613    75,545  

Unrealized gain (loss) on available for sale securities, net of tax

   (1,461  (1,242  810    852  

On September 7, 2011, GreenBank merged with and into Capital Bank, NA in an all-stock transaction, resulting in all GreenBank assets and liabilities being transferred to Capital Bank, NA. The net cash impact of this merger on the Successor Company is shown above in the Statement of Cash Flows. Successor Company cash flows from financing activities also includes $5.1 million of underwriting costs associated with the CBF Investment.

See accompanying notes.

83


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

NOTE 1 – BASIS OF PRESENTATION

The accompanying consolidated financial statements of Green Bankshares, Inc. (the “Company”) have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and in accordance with the instructions to as promulgated by the SEC.

The Company is a bank holding company headquartered in Greeneville, Tennessee. Prior to September 7, 2011, the Company conducted its business primarily through its wholly-owned subsidiary, GreenBank. As described in additional detail in Note 3, on September 7, 2011 (the “Merger Date”), the Bank merged with and into Capital Bank, a subsidiary of our majority shareholder, CBF, in an all-stock transaction, with Capital Bank, NA as the surviving entity. The Company’s approximately 34% ownership interest in Capital Bank, NA is recorded as an equity-method investment in that entity. As of December 31 2011, the Company’s investment in Capital Bank, NA totaled $315,343 which reflected the Company’s pro rata ownership of Capital Bank, NA’s total shareholders’ equity. In periods subsequent to the Merger Date, the Company will adjust this equity investment balance based on its equity in Capital Bank, NA’s net income and comprehensive income. In connection with the Bank Merger, assets and liabilities of the Bank were de-consolidated from the Company’s balance sheet resulting in a significant decrease in

(Continued)

84


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

the total assets and total liabilities of the Company in the third quarter of 2011. Accordingly, as of December 31, 2011, no investments, loans or deposits are reported on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. Subsequent to the Merger Date, the Company’s significant assets and liabilities are comprised of cash, its equity method investment in Capital Bank, NA, deferred income tax accounts and trust preferred securities. The Company’s operating results subsequent to the Merger Date include the Company’s proportionate share of equity method income from Capital Bank, NA and interest expense resulting from the outstanding trust preferred securities issued by the Company. Unless otherwise specified, this report describes Green Bankshares, Inc. and its subsidiaries including GreenBank through the Merger Date, and subsequent to that date, includes only Green Bankshares, Inc, and its equity method investment in Capital Bank, NA.

On September 7, 2011, pursuant to the CBF Investment, GreenBank, the Company’s previously wholly-owned subsidiary, was merged with and into Capital Bank, NA., a subsidiary of CBF, with Capital Bank, NA as the surviving entity. As a result of the Bank Merger, the Company received shares of Capital Bank, NA equating to an approximately 34% ownership interest in Capital Bank, NA. As the Company is a majority owned subsidiary of CBF, the Bank Merger was a restructuring transaction between commonly-controlled entities. The difference between the amount of the Company’s initial equity method investment in Capital Bank, NA., subsequent to the Bank Merger, and the Company’s investment in GreenBank, immediately preceding the Bank Merger, was accounted for as an increase in additional paid in capital of $15,960. As the Company began to account for its investment in the combined entity under the equity

(Continued)

85


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

method, the change in the balance of the Company’s equity method investment between September 7, 2011 and December 31, 2011 resulting from the Company’s proportional share of earnings of $3,446 was recorded as “Equity method income in Capital Bank, NA,” in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Income for the period. At December 31, 2011, the Company’s net investment of $315,343 in Capital Bank, NA, was recorded in the Consolidated Balance Sheet as “Investment in Capital Bank, NA.”

The following table presents summarized financial information for Capital Bank, NA for the three months ended December 31, 2011:

(Continued)

86


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Interest income

  $74,163  

Interest expense

   9,266  
  

 

 

 

Net interest income

   64,897  

Provision for loan losses

   16,790  

Non-interest income

   16,105  

Non-interest expense

   53,271  
  

 

 

 

Net income

  $6,797  
  

 

 

 

Beginning in 2012, the quarterly disclosure will be supplemented with the presentation of Capital Bank, NA’s condensed income statement for the calendar year to date.

(Continued)

87


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Capital Bank Financial Corp. Investment

On September 7, 2011, (the “Transaction Date”) the Company completed the issuance and sale to CBF of 119.9 million shares of common stock for aggregate consideration of $217,019 (the “CBF Investment”). The consideration was comprised of approximately $148,319 in cash and approximately $68,700 in the form of a contribution to the Company of all 72,278 outstanding shares of Series A Preferred Stock previously issued to the U.S. Treasury Department (“Treasury”) under the TARP Capital Purchase Program and the related warrant to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock, which CBF purchased directly from the Treasury. The Series A Preferred Stock and the related warrant were retired on September 7, 2011 and are no longer outstanding.

As a result of the CBF Investment, pursuant to which CBF acquired approximately 90% of the voting securities of the Company, the Company followed the acquisition method of accounting as required by the Business Combinations Topic of the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 805, Business Combinations (“ASC 805”). Under the accounting guidance the application of “push down” accounting was applied.

(Continued)

88


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Acquisition accounting requires that the assets purchased, the liabilities assumed, and non-controlling interests all be reported in the acquirer’s financial statements at their fair value, with any excess of purchase consideration over the net assets being reported as goodwill. Application of the push down method of accounting requires that the valuation of assets, liabilities, and non-controlling interests be recorded in the acquiree’s records as well. Accordingly, the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements and transactional records prior to the CBF Investment reflect the historical accounting basis of assets and liabilities and are labeled “Predecessor Company,” while such records subsequent to the CBF Investment are labeled “Successor Company” and reflect the push down basis of accounting for the new fair values in the Company’s financial statements. This change in accounting basis is represented in the Consolidated Financial Statements by a vertical black line which appears between the columns entitled “Predecessor Company” and “Successor Company” on the statements and in the relevant notes. The black line signifies that the amounts shown for the periods prior to and subsequent to the CBF Investment are not comparable.

In addition to the new accounting basis established for assets, liabilities and noncontrolling interests, acquisition accounting also requires the reclassification of any retained earnings from periods prior to the acquisition to be recognized as common share equity and the elimination of any accumulated other comprehensive income or loss and surplus within the Company’s Shareholders’ Equity section of the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. Accordingly, retained earnings and accumulated other comprehensive income at December 31, 2011 represents only the results of operations subsequent to September 7, 2011, the date of the CBF Investment.

NOTE 2 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

The Company’s consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of these financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reported periods.

Financial results for the period of September 8, 2011 – December 31, 2011 were significantly impacted by the controlling investment in the Company by CBF. The Company elected to apply push-down accounting. Accordingly, the Company’s assets and liabilities were adjusted to estimated fair values at the CBF Investment date, resulting in elimination of the allowance for loan losses. The Company is still in the process of completing its fair value analysis of assets and liabilities, and final fair value adjustments may differ from the preliminary estimates recorded to date.

Due to its ownership level and significant influence, the Company’s investment in Capital Bank, NA is recorded as an equity-method investment in that entity. As of December 31, 2011, the Company’s investment in Capital Bank, NA totaled $315.3 million, representing the Company’s primary asset. The investment reflected the Company’s 34% pro rata ownership of Capital Bank, NA’s total shareholders’ equity as a result of the Bank Merger. In periods subsequent to the Merger, the Company will adjust this equity investment balance based on its equity in Capital Bank, NA’s net income and comprehensive income. In connection with the Bank Merger, assets and liabilities of GreenBank were de-consolidated from the Company’s balance sheet resulting in a significant decrease in total assets and total liabilities of the Company in the third quarter of 2011.

(Continued)

89


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Management continually evaluates the Company’s accounting policies and estimates it uses to prepare the consolidated financial statements. In general, management’s estimates are based on historical experience, information from regulators and third party professionals and various assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the existing facts and circumstances. Actual results could differ from those estimates made by management.

Prior to the Bank Merger, critical accounting policies and estimates included the valuation of the allowance for loan losses and the fair value of financial instruments and other accounts, including OREO. Estimates of fair value were used in the accounting for securities available for sale, loans held for sale, goodwill, other intangible assets, OREO and acquisition accounting adjustments. Estimates of fair values are used in disclosures regarding securities held to maturity, stock compensation, commitments, and the fair values of financial instruments. Fair values are estimated using relevant market information and other assumptions such as interest rates, credit risk, prepayments and other factors. The fair values of financial instruments are subject to change as influenced by market conditions.

The Company believes its critical accounting policies and estimates also include the valuation of the allowance for net Deferred Tax Assets (“DTA”). As a result of the application of the acquisition method of accounting a net deferred tax asset of $53,407 was recognized at acquisition date. The net deferred tax asset is primarily related to the recognition of differences between certain tax and book bases of assets and liabilities related to the acquisition method of accounting, including fair value adjustments discussed elsewhere in this section, along with federal and state net operating losses that the Company determined to be realizable as of the acquisition date. A valuation allowance is recorded for deferred tax assets, including net operating losses, if the Company determines that it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.

Key Accounting Policies for the Predecessor Company were as follows:

Principles of Consolidation: The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Green Bankshares, Inc. (the “Company”) and its wholly owned subsidiary, GreenBank (the “Bank”), and the Bank’s wholly owned subsidiaries, Superior Financial Services, Inc., GCB Acceptance Corp., Inc., Fairway Title Company, Inc, and GB Holdings, LLC. All significant inter-company balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Nature of Operations: The Company primarily provides financial services through its offices in Eastern, Middle and Southeastern Tennessee, Western North Carolina and Southwestern Virginia. Its primary deposit products are checking, savings, and term certificate accounts, and its primary lending products are residential mortgage, commercial, and installment loans. Substantially all loans are secured by specific items of collateral including business assets, consumer assets and real estate. Commercial loans are expected to be repaid from cash flow from operations of businesses. Real estate loans are secured by both residential and commercial real estate.

Use of Estimates: To prepare financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, management makes estimates and assumptions based on available information. These estimates and assumptions impact the amounts reported in the financial statements and the disclosures provided, and future results could differ. The allowance for loan losses, deferred tax asset valuation, OREO valuation and fair values of financial instruments are significant items based on estimates and assumptions.

Cash Flows: Cash and cash equivalents include cash, deposits with other financial institutions under 90 days, and federal funds sold. Net cash flows are reported for loan, deposit and other borrowing transactions.

Securities: Securities are classified as held to maturity and carried at amortized cost when management has the positive intent and ability to hold them to maturity. Securities are classified as available for sale when they might be sold before maturity. Securities available for sale are carried at fair value, with unrealized holding gains and losses reported in accumulated other comprehensive income.

Interest income includes amortization of purchase premium or discount and is recognized based upon the level-yield method. Gains and losses on sales are based on the amortized cost of the security sold. Securities are written down to fair value when a decline in fair value is other than temporary.

Investments in Equity Securities Carried at Cost: Investment in Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) stock, which is carried at cost because it can only be redeemed at par, is a required investment based on membership requirements. The Bank also carries certain other equity investments at cost, which approximates fair value.

(Continued)

90


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Loans: Loans are reported at the principal balance outstanding, net of unearned interest, deferred loan fees and costs.

Interest income is reported on the interest method over the loan term. Loan origination fees, net of certain direct originationoriginations costs, are deferred and recognized in interest income using the level-yield method. Interest income includes amortization of purchase premiums or discounts on loans purchased. Premiums and discounts are amortized on the level yield-method. Interest income on mortgage and commercial loans is discontinued at the time the loan is 90 days delinquent unless the loan is well secured and in process of collection. Most consumer loans are charged off no later than 120 days past due. In all cases, loans are placed on nonaccrual or charged off at an earlier date if collection of principal and interest is doubtful. Interest accrued but not collected is reversed against interest income when a loan is placed on nonaccrual status.

(Continued)

 

64(Continued)

91


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 1 — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES(Continued)

Interest received is recognized on the cash basis or cost recovery method until qualifying for return to accrual status. Accrual is resumed when all contractually due payments are brought current, six months of payment performance can be measured, and future payments are reasonably assured.

Allowance for Loan Losses: The allowance for loan losses is a valuation allowance for probable incurred credit losses, increased by the provision for loan losses and decreased by charge-offs less recoveries. Management estimates the allowance balance required using past loan loss experience, known and inherent risks in the nature and volume of the portfolio, information about specific borrower situations and estimated collateral values, economic conditions, and other factors. Allocations of the allowance may be made for specific loans, but the entire allowance is available for any loan that, in management’s judgment, should be charged-off. Loan losses are charged against the allowance when management believes the uncollectibility of a loan is confirmed.

The Bank uses several factors in determining if a loan is impaired. The internal asset classification procedures include a thorough review of significant loans and lending relationships and include the accumulation of related data. This data includes loan payment and collateral status, borrowers’ financial data and borrowers’ operating factors such as cash flows, operating income, liquidity, leverage and loan documentation, and any significant changes. A loan is considered impaired, based on current information and events, if it is probable that the Bank will be unable to collect the scheduled payments of principal or interest when due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. Uncollateralized loans are measured for impairment based on the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the historical effective interest rate, while all collateral-dependent loans are measured for impairment based on the fair value of the collateral. Larger groups of smaller balance, homogeneous loans, such as consumer and residential real estate loans, are collectively evaluated for impairment, and accordingly, they are not separately identified for impairment disclosures.

Foreclosed Assets: Assets acquired through or instead of loan foreclosure are initially recorded at fair value less estimated cost to sell when acquired, establishing a new cost basis. If fair value declines, a valuation allowance is recorded through expense. Costs after acquisition are expensed.

Premises and Equipment: Premises and equipment are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation. Depreciation is computed over an asset’s useful life on a straight-line basis. Buildings and related components have useful lives ranging from 10 to 40 years, while furniture, fixtures and equipment have useful lives ranging from 3 to 10 years. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the lesser of the life of the asset or lease term.

Mortgage Banking Activities: Mortgage loans originated and intended for sale in the secondary market are carried at the lower of aggregate cost or marketfair value. The Company controls its interest rate risk with respect to mortgage loans held for sale and loan commitments expected to close by usually entering into agreements to sell loans. The Company records loan commitments related to the origination of mortgage loans held for sale as derivative instruments. The Company’s commitments for fixed rate mortgage loans, generally last 60 to 90 days and are at market rates when initiated. The Company had $4,813 in outstanding loan commitment derivatives at December 31, 2010. The aggregate marketfair value of mortgage loans held for sale takes into account the sales prices of such agreements. The Company also provides currently for any losses on uncovered commitments to lend or sell. The Company sells mortgage loans servicing released.

Bank Owned Life Insurance: The Company has purchased life insurance policies on certain key executives. Company owned life insurance is recorded at its cash surrender value or the amount that can be realized.

(Continued)

 

65(Continued)

92


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 1 — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES(Continued)

Goodwill, Core Deposit Intangibles and Other Intangible Assets: Goodwill results from prior business acquisitions and represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of acquired tangible assets and liabilities and identifiable intangible assets. Goodwill is assessed at least annually for impairment and any such impairment is recognized in the period identified. During the second quarter of 2009 the Company identified impairment in its goodwill resulting from a prolonged decline in the market value of its stock price relative to book value, and took the appropriate actions. This is explained further in“Note 6 —8 – Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets”.

Core deposit intangibleintangibles assets arise from whole bank and branch acquisitions. They are initially measured at fair value and then are amortized on a straight line method over their estimated useful lives, which range from seven to 15 years and are determined by an independent consulting firm. Core deposit intangible assets are assessed at least annually for impairment and any such impairment is recognized in the period identified.

Other intangible assets consist of mortgage servicing rights (“MSR’s”). MSR’s represent the cost of acquiring the rights to service mortgage loans. MSR’s are amortized based on the principal reduction of the underlying loans. The Company is obligated to service the unpaid principal balances of these loans, which were approximately $33 million and $43 million as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The Company pays a third party subcontractor to perform servicing and escrow functions with respect to loans sold with retained servicing. MSR’s are assessed at least annually for impairment. The Company does not intend to further pursue this line of business.

Long-term Assets: Premises and equipment and other long-term assets are reviewed for impairment when events indicate their carrying amount may not be recoverable from future undiscounted cash flows. If impaired, the assets are recorded at fair value.

Repurchase Agreements: All repurchase agreement liabilities represent secured borrowings from existing Bank customers and are not covered by federal deposit insurance.

Benefit Plans: Retirement plan expense is the amount contributed to the plan as determined by Board decision. Deferred compensation expense is recognized during the year the benefit is earned.

Stock Compensation: Compensation cost for stock-based payments is measured based on the fair value of the award, which most commonly includes restricted stock (i.e., unvested common stock), stock options, and stock appreciation rights at the grant date and is recognized in the consolidated financial statements on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for service-based awards. The fair value of restricted stock is determined based on the price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant. The fair value of stock options is estimated at the date of grant using a Black-Scholes option pricing model and related assumptions.

Income Taxes: Income tax expense is the total of the current year income tax due or refundable and the change in deferred tax assets and liabilities. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are the expected future tax amounts for the temporary differences between carrying amounts and tax bases of assets and liabilities, computed using enacted tax rates. A valuation allowance reduces deferred tax assets to the amount expected to be realized and as of December 31, 2010 the Company had recorded a deferred tax valuation allowance of $43,455.

Loan Commitments and Related Financial Instruments: Financial instruments include credit instruments, such as commitments to make loans and standby letters of credit, issued to meet customer financing needs. The face amount for these items represents the exposure to loss before considering customer collateral or ability to repay. Such financial instruments are recorded when they are funded. Instruments such as standby letters of credit are considered financial guarantees in accordance with applicable accounting standards. The fair value of these financial guarantees is not material.

(Continued)

 

66(Continued)

93


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 1 — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES(Continued)

Earnings (loss) Per Common Share:Share: Basic earnings (loss) per common share are net income (loss) available to common shareholders divided by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted earnings available to common shareholders per common share includes the dilutive impact of additional potential common shares issuable under stock options, unvested restricted stock awards and stock warrants issued toassociated with the U.S. Treasury in connection with the Capital Purchase Program.

Comprehensive Income: Comprehensive income consists of net income and other comprehensive income. Other comprehensive income includes unrealized gains and losses on securities available for sale which are also recognized as a separate component of equity. Comprehensive income is presented in the consolidated statements of changes in shareholders’ equity.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements: FASB — ASU — 2010-06 — In January 2010, the FASB issued additional guidance on fair value disclosures. The new guidance clarifies two existing disclosure requirements and requires two new disclosures as follows: (1) a “gross” presentation of activities (purchases, sales, and settlements) within the Level 3 rollforward reconciliation, which will replace the “net” presentation format; and (2) detailed disclosures about the transfers in and out of Level 1 and 2 measurements. This guidance is effective for the first interim or annual reporting period beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the gross presentation of the Level 3 rollforward information, which is required for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim reporting periods within those years. The Company adopted the fair value disclosures guidance on January 1, 2010, except for the gross presentation of the Level 3 rollforward information which is not required to be adopted by the Company until January 1, 2011.
FASB — ASC — 810 and amended by FASB ASU — 2010-10 became effective on January 1, 2010, and was amended to change how a company determines when an entity that is insufficiently capitalized or is not controlled through voting (or similar rights) should be consolidated. The determination of whether a company is required to consolidate an entity is based on, among other things, an entity’s purpose and design and a company’s ability to direct the activities of the entity that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance. The new authoritative accounting guidance requires additional disclosures about the reporting entity’s involvement with variable-interest entities and any significant changes in risk exposure due to that involvement as well as its affect on the entity’s financial statements. The new authoritative accounting guidance under ASC 810 was effective January 1, 2010 and did not have a significant impact on the Company’s financial statements.
FASB — ASU — 2010-20 — “Disclosures about the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses. The Company adopted the new standard governing the disclosures associated with credit quality and the allowance for loan losses. This standard requires additional disclosures related to the allowance for loan loss with the objective of providing financial statement users with greater transparency about an entity’s loan loss reserves and overall credit quality. Additional disclosures include showing on a disaggregated basis the aging of receivables, credit quality indicators, and troubled debt restructures with its effect on the allowance for loan loss. The provisions of this standard were effective for interim and annual periods ending on or after December 15, 2010. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position and results of operations, but did increase the amount and quality of the credit disclosures in the notes to the consolidated financial statements.
(Continued)

67


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 1 — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES(Continued)
Loss Contingencies: Loss contingencies, including claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business, are recorded as liabilities when the likelihood of loss is probable and an amount or range of loss can be reasonably estimated. In the third quarter of 2010, we recognized significant losses asManagement does not believe there are any such matters that will have a result of higher costs related to loan charge-offs, coupled with losses incurred on OREO resulting from sales completed and updated property appraisals received during that quarter. As a result, various plaintiffs filed class action lawsuits, which have subsequently been consolidated into one class action, alleging, among other things, disclosure violations regarding our collateral valuations, the timing of our impairment charges and our accounting for loan charge-offs. The defense of this matter has and will continue to entail considerable cost and will be time-consuming for our management. Unfavorable outcomes in this matter could have an adversematerial effect on our business,the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
statements.

Restrictions on Cash: Cash on hand or on deposit with the Federal Reserve Bank of $14,457 and $19,245 was required to meet regulatory reserve and clearing requirements at year-end 2010 and 2009. These balances do not earn interest.

Segments: Internal financial reporting is primarily reported and aggregated in five lines of business: banking, mortgage banking, consumer finance, subprime automobile lending, and title insurance. Banking accounts for 93.6% of revenues for 2010.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments: Fair values of financial instruments are estimated using relevant market information and other assumptions, as more fully disclosed in a separate note. Fair value estimates involve uncertainties and matters of significant judgment regarding interest rates, credit risk, prepayments, and other factors, especially in the absence of broad markets for particular items. Changes in assumptions or in market conditions could significantly affect the estimates.

Reclassifications: Certain items in prior year financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the 2010 presentation. These reclassifications had no effect on net income or shareholders’ equity as previously reported.

(Continued)

 

68(Continued)

94


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 2 — SECURITIES
Securities are summarized as follows:
                 
      Gross  Gross    
  Amortized  Unrealized  Unrealized  Fair 
  Cost  Gains  Losses  Value 
Available for Sale                
2010                
U.S. government agencies $84,106  $115  $(922) $83,299 
States and political subdivisions  31,192   705   (396)  31,501 
Collateralized mortgage obligations  66,043   1,901   (369)  67,575 
Mortgage-backed securities  17,168   815   (19)  17,964 
Trust preferred securities  1,850      (187)  1,663 
             
                 
  $200,359  $3,536  $(1,893) $202,002 
             
                 
2009                
U.S. government agencies $52,937  $99  $(988) $52,048 
States and political subdivisions  31,764   877   (449)  32,192 
Collateralized mortgage obligations  44,018   1,281   (622)  44,677 
Mortgage-backed securities  16,607   291   (6)  16,892 
Trust preferred securities  2,088      (173)  1,915 
             
                 
  $147,414  $2,548  $(2,238) $147,724 
             
                 
Held to Maturity                
2010                
States and political subdivisions $215  $1  $  $216 
Other securities  250   1      251 
             
                 
  $465  $2  $  $467 
             
                 
2009                
States and political subdivisions $251  $4  $  $255 
Other securities  375   8      383 
             
                 
  $626  $12  $  $638 
             
(Continued)

 

69NOTE 3 – BUSINESS COMBINATION

On September 7, 2011, the Company completed the issuance and sale of 119.9 million shares of its common stock to CBF for gross consideration of $217,019 less $750 thousand of CBF’s expenses which were reimbursed by the Company. The consideration was comprised of approximately $147.6 million in cash and approximately $68.7 million in the form of a contribution to the Company of all 72,278 outstanding shares of Series A Preferred Stock previously issued to the United States Department of the Treasury under the TARP Capital Purchase Program and the related warrant to purchase shares of the Company’s Common Stock, which CBF purchased directly from the Treasury. The Series A Preferred Stock and the related warrant were retired on September 7, 2011 and are no longer outstanding. In connection with the CBF Investment, each Company shareholder as of September 6, 2011 received one contingent value right per share (“CVR”) that entitles the holder to receive up to $0.75 in cash per CVR at the end of a five-year period based on the credit performance of GreenBank’s then existing loan portfolio as of May 5, 2011.

As a result of the CBF Investment, CBF now owns approximately 90% of the voting securities of the Company and followed the acquisition method of accounting and applied “acquisition accounting.” Acquisition accounting requires that the assets purchased, the liabilities assumed, and non-controlling interests all be reported in the acquirer’s financial statements at their fair value, with any excess of purchase consideration over the net assets being reported as goodwill. As part of the valuation, intangible assets were identified and a fair value was determined as required by the accounting guidance for business combinations. Accounting guidance also allows the application of “push down accounting,” whereby the adjustments of assets and liabilities to fair value and the resultant goodwill are shown in the financial statements of the acquiree.

Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The methodology used to obtain the fair values to apply acquisition accounting is described in Note 6 “Fair Value Disclosures” of these Consolidated Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the CBF Investment and Company’s opening balance sheet as of September 8, 2011 adjusted to fair value:

Fair value of assets acquired:

  

Cash and cash equivalents

  $542,725  

Securities available for sale

   176,466  

Loans

   1,344,184  

Premises and equipment

   72,261  

Goodwill

   19,032  

Intangible assets

   12,118  

Deferred tax asset

   53,407  

Other assets

   142,836  

Total assets acquired

  $2,363,029  
  

 

 

 

Fair value of liabilities assumed:

  

Deposits

  $1,872,050  

Long-term debt and other borrowings

   229,345  

Other liabilities

   18,551  

Total liabilities assumed

  $2,119,946  

Less: Non-controlling interest at fair value

   26,814  
  

 

 

 
  $216,269  

Legal costs

   750  
  

 

 

 

Purchase consideration

  $217,019  
  

 

 

 

(Continued)

95


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

The above estimated fair values of assets acquired and liabilities assumed are based on the information that was available to make preliminary estimates of the fair value. While the Company believes that information provides a reasonable basis for estimating the fair values, it expects to obtain additional information and evidence during the measurement period (not to exceed one year from the acquisition date) that may result in changes to the estimated fair value amounts. Thus, the provisional measurements of fair value reflected are subject to change as other confirming events occur including the receipt and finalization of updated appraisals. Such changes could be significant. The Company expects to finalize the valuation and complete the purchase price allocation as soon as practicable but no later than one year from the acquisition date. Subsequent adjustments, if any, will be retrospectively reflected in future filings.

A summary and description of the assets, liabilities and non-controlling interests fair valued in conjunction with applying the acquisition method of accounting is as follows:

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The cash and cash equivalents, which include proceeds from the CBF Investment, held at acquisition date approximated fair value on that date and did not require a fair value adjustment.

Investment Securities

Investment securities are reported at fair value at acquisition date. To account for the CBF Investment, the difference between the fair value and par value became the new premium or discount for each security held by the Company. The fair value of investment securities is primarily based on values obtained from third parties pricing models which are based on recent trading activity for the same or similar securities.

The fair value of the investment securities is primarily based on values obtained from third parties that are based on recent activity for the same or similar securities. Immediately before the acquisition, the investment portfolio had an amortized cost of $174,841 and was in a net unrealized loss position of $392. The difference between the fair value and the current par value was recorded as the new premium or discount on a security by security basis.

Loans

All loans in the loan portfolio were adjusted to estimated fair value at the CBF Investment date. Upon analyzing estimated credit losses as well as evaluating differences between contractual interest rates and market interest rates at acquisition, the Company recorded a loan fair value discount of $165,708. All acquired loans were considered to be acquired impaired loans with the exception of certain consumer revolving lines of credit. Subsequent to the CBF Investment, acquired impaired loans will be accounted for as described in Critical Accounting Policies.

Premises and Equipment

Premises and equipment was adjusted to report these assets at their acquisition date fair values. To account for the CBF Investment in premises and equipment, the difference between the fair value and book value was recorded by the Company for each asset. The total adjustment to premises and equipment resulted in a net write down of $4,051. The estimates of fair value of premises and equipment were primarily based on values obtained from third parties including property appraisers and other asset valuation providers whose methods, models and assumptions were reviewed and accepted by management after being deemed reasonable and consistent with industry practice.

(Continued)

96


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Goodwill

Goodwill represents the excess of purchase price over the fair value of acquired net assets. This acquisition was nontaxable and, as a result, there is no tax basis in the resulting goodwill. Accordingly, none of the goodwill associated with the acquisition is deductible for tax purposes.

Core Deposit Intangible

Other than goodwill, the only other intangible asset identified as part of the valuation of the Company was the Core Deposit Intangible (“CDI”) which is amortized as noninterest expense over its estimated useful life. The estimated fair value of the CDI at the acquisition date was $11,900. This amount represents the present value of the difference between a market participant’s cost of obtaining alternative funds and the cost to maintain the acquired deposit base. The present value is calculated over the estimated life of the acquired deposit base and will be amortized on a straight line basis over an eight year period. Deposit accounts evaluated for the CDI were demand deposit accounts, money market accounts and savings accounts.

Deferred Tax Asset

As a result of the application of the acquisition method of accounting a net deferred tax asset of $53,407 was recognized at acquisition date. The net deferred tax asset is primarily related to the recognition of differences between certain tax and book bases of assets and liabilities related to the acquisition method of accounting, including fair value adjustments discussed elsewhere in this section, along with federal and state net operating losses that the Company determined to be realizable as of the acquisition date. A valuation allowance is recorded for deferred tax assets, including net operating losses, if the Company determines that it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.

Other Assets

The most significant other assets which are reported at fair value in the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements at each reporting period and that were reviewed for valuation adjustments as part of the acquisition accounting were $71,914 in repossessed assets and other owned real estate, the $32,247 cash surrender value of bank owned life insurance policies, $12,734 in FHLB investment stock and $5,529 in prepaid FDIC assessments. It was deemed not practicable to determine the fair value of FHLB due to restrictions placed on their transferability.

Various other assets held by the Company did not have a fair value adjustment as part of acquisition accounting since their carrying value approximated fair value such as accrued interest receivable.

Deposits

Time deposits were not included in the CDI valuation. Instead, a separate valuation of term deposit liabilities was conducted due to the contractual time frame associated with these liabilities. Term deposits evaluated for acquisition accounting consisted of certificates of deposit (“CDs”). The fair value of these deposits was determined by first stratifying the deposit pool by maturity and calculating the interest rate for each maturity period. Then cash flows were projected by period and discounted to present value using current market interest rates.

The outstanding balance of CDs at acquisition date was $588,799, and the estimated fair value premium totaled $9,234. The Company will amortize these premiums into income as a reduction of interest expense on a level-yield basis over the weighted average term.

Long-term and Other Borrowings

Included in borrowings are FHLB advances and repurchase agreements. Fair values for FHLB advances were estimated by developing cash flow estimates for each of these debt instruments based on scheduled principal and interest payments, current market interest rates, and prepayment penalties. Once the cash flows were determined, a market rate for comparable debt was used to discount the cash flows to the present value. The outstanding balance of FHLB advances at acquisition date was $170,398 and the estimated fair value premium totals $12,600. The Company will amortize the premium into income as reductions of interest expense on a level-yield basis over the contractual term of each debt instrument. No adjustment was made to overnight repurchase agreements of $15,388 for which carrying value approximated fair value.

(Continued)

97


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Included in subordinated debt are variable rate trust preferred securities issued by the Company. Fair values for the trust preferred securities were estimated by developing cash flow estimates for each of these debt instruments based on scheduled principal and interest payments and current market interest rates. Once the cash flows were determined, a market rate for comparable subordinated debt was used to discount the cash flows to the present value. The outstanding balance of trust preferred securities and subordinated debt at acquisition date was $88,662 and the estimated fair value discount on each totaled $45,102. The Company will accrete the discount as an increase to interest expense on a level-yield basis over the contractual term of each debt instrument.

Contingent Value Rights

In connection with the CBF Investment, each existing shareholder as of September 6, 2011 received one contingent value right per share that entitles the holder to receive up to $0.75 in cash per CVR at the end of a five-year period based on the credit performance of GreenBanks’s existing loan portfolio as of May 5, 2011. The Company estimated the fair value of these CVRs at $520 which was based on its estimate of credit losses on the existing loan portfolio over the five-year life of these instruments. These CVRs were recorded at fair value in other liabilities in acquisition accounting.

Non-controlling Interest

In determining the estimated fair value of the non-controlling interest, the Company utilized the closing market price of its common stock on the acquisition date of $2.02 and multiplied this stock price by the number of outstanding non-controlling shares at that date.

Transaction Expenses

As required by the CBF Investment, the Company incurred and reimbursed third party expenses of $750 which were recorded as a reduction of proceeds received from the issuance of common shares to CBF. The Company also incurred $5.1 million of underwriting costs associated with the CBF Investment.

There were no indemnification assets in this transaction, nor was there any contingent consideration to be recognized except for contingent value rights. In connection with the CBF Investment, each Company shareholder as of September 6, 2011 received one contingent value right per share (“CVR”) that entitles the holder to receive up to $0.75 in cash per CVR at the end of a five-year period based on the credit performance of GreenBank’s then existing loan portfolio as of May 5, 2011.

(Continued)

98


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

NOTE 4 – SECURITIES

Due to the Bank Merger, the Company reported no investment securities on its Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2011 (Successor). Investment securities as of December 31, 2010 2009 and 2008

NOTE 2 — SECURITIES(Continued)
(Predecessor) are summarized as follows:

   Amortized
Cost
   Gross
Unrealized
Gains
   Gross
Unrealized
Losses
  Fair
Value
 

Available for Sale

       

December 31, 2010

       

U.S. government agencies

  $84,106    $115    $(922 $83,299  

States and political subdivisions

   31,192     705     (396  31,501  

CMO Agency

   62,589     1,858     (265  64,182  

CMO Non-Agency

   3,454     43     (104  3,393  

Mortgage-backed securities

   17,168     815     (19  17,964  

Trust preferred securities

   1,850     —       (187  1,663  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 
  $200,359    $3,536    $(1,893 $202,002  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Held to Maturity

       

December 31, 2010

       

States and political subdivisions

  $215    $1    $—     $216  

Other securities

   250     1     —      251  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 
  $465    $2    $—     $467  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Contractual maturities of securities at year-end 2010 are shown below. Securities not due at a single maturity date, collateralized mortgage obligations and mortgage-backed securities are shown separately.

             
  Available for Sale  Held to Maturity 
  Fair  Carrying  Fair 
  Value  Amount  Value 
   
Due in one year or less $979  $465  $467 
Due after one year through five years  4,226       
Due after five years through ten years  61,208       
Due after ten years  50,050       
Collateralized mortgage obligations  67,575       
Mortgage-backed securities  17,964       
          
             
Total maturities $202,002  $465  $467 
          

   Available for Sale   Held to Maturity 
   Fair   Carrying   Fair 
   Value   Amount   Value 

Due in one year or less

  $979    $465    $467  

Due after one year through five years

   4,226     —       —    

Due after five years through ten years

   61,208     —       —    

Due after ten years

   50,050     —       —    

Collateralized mortgage obligations

   67,575     —       —    

Mortgage-backed securities

   17,964     —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total maturities

  $202,002    $465    $467  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Gross gains of $6,324, $0 $1,415 and $2,661$1,415 were recognized infor the Predecessor periods of January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011 and full year 2010 2009 and 2008,2009, respectively, from proceeds of $177,787, $0 $36,266, and $123,701,$36,266, respectively, on the sale of securities available for sale.

(Continued)

99


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Securities with a fair value of $135,692 and $125,005 at year-end 2010 and 2009 were pledged for public deposits and securities sold under agreements to repurchase and to the Federal Reserve Bank. The balance of pledged securities in excess of the pledging requirements was $7,983 and $9,135 at year-end 2010 and 2009, respectively.

The Company held 200 and 168 securities in its portfolio as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, and of these securities 53 and 35 had an unrealized loss. Unrealized losses on securities are due to changes in interest rates and not due to credit quality issues.

Securities with unrealized losses at year-end 2010 and 2009 not recognized in income arewere as follows:

                         
  Less than 12 months  12 months or more  Total 
  Fair  Unrealized  Fair  Unrealized  Fair  Unrealized 
  Value  Loss  Value  Loss  Value  Loss 
2010                        
U. S. government agencies $65,178  $(922) $  $  $65,178  $(922)
States and political subdivisions  2,488   (114)  1,659   (282)  4,147   (396)
Collateralized mortgage obligations  14,666   (266)  2,699   (104)  17,365   (370)
Mortgage-backed securities  2,821   (17)  8   (2)  2,829   (19)
Trust preferred securities        1,663   (186)  1,663   (186)
                   
Total temporarily impaired $85,153  $(1,319) $6,029  $(574) $91,182  $(1,893)
                   
                         
2009                        
U. S. government agencies $40,959  $(988) $  $  $40,959  $(988)
States and political subdivisions  2,463   (24)  3,075   (425)  5,538   (449)
Collateralized mortgage obligations  4,997   (32)  3,222   (590)  8,219   (622)
Mortgage-backed securities  2,028   (5)  11   (1)  2,039   (6)
Trust preferred securities  1,783   (122)  132   (51)  1,915   (173)
                   
Total temporarily impaired $52,230  $(1,171) $6,440  $(1,067) $58,670  $(2,238)
                   
(Continued)

   Less than 12 months  12 months or more  Total 
   Fair   Unrealized  Fair   Unrealized  Fair   Unrealized 
   Value   Loss  Value   Loss  Value   Loss 

2010

          

U. S. government agencies

  $65,178    $(922 $—      $—     $65,178    $(922

States and political subdivisions

   2,488     (114  1,659     (282  4,147     (396

Collateralized mortgage obligations

   14,666     (266  2,699     (104  17,365     (370

Mortgage-backed securities

   2,821     (17  8     (2  2,829     (19

Trust preferred securities

   —       —      1,663     (186  1,663     (186
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total temporarily impaired

  $85,153    $(1,319 $6,029    $(574 $91,182    $(1,893
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

70(Continued)

100


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 2 — SECURITIES(Continued)

The Predecessor Company reviewsreviewed its investment portfolio on a quarterly basis judging each investment for other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”). Management does not have the intent to sell any of the temporarily impaired investments and believes it is more likely than not that the Company will not have to sell any such securities before a recovery of cost. The OTTI analysis focusesfocused on the duration and amount a security is below book value and assessesassessed a calculation for both a credit loss and a non credit loss for each measured security considering the security’s type, performance, underlying collateral, and any current or potential debt rating changes. The OTTI calculation for credit loss iswas reflected in the income statement while the non credit loss iswas reflected in other comprehensive income (loss).

The Predecessor Company holdsheld a single issue trust preferred security issued by a privately held bank holding company. Based upon available but limited information we have estimated that the likelihood of collecting the security’s principal and interest payments is approximately 50%. In addition, the bank holding company deferred its interest payments beginning in the second quarter of 2009, and we havehad placed the security on non-accrual. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis entered into an agreement with the bank holding company on October 22, 2009 which was made public on October 30, 2009. Among other provisions of the regulatory agreement, the bank holding company must strengthen its management of operations, strengthen its credit risk management practices, and submit a capital plan. As of December 31, 2010 no other communications between the bank holding company and the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis have been made public.

The Company valued the security by projecting estimated cash flows given the assumption of collecting approximately 50% of the security’s principal and interest and then discounting the amount back to the present value using a discount rate of 3.50% plus three month LIBOR. As of December 31, 2010, our best estimate for the three month LIBOR over the next twenty years (the remaining life of the security) iswas 3.17%. The difference in the present value and the carrying value of the security was the OTTI credit portion. Due to the illiquid trust preferred market for private issuers and the absence of a credible pricing source, we calculated a 15% illiquidity premium for the security to calculate the OTTI non credit portion. The security is currentlywas booked at a fair value of $638 at December 31, 2010 and during the twelve months ended December 31,30, 2010 the Company recognized a write-down of $75 through non-interest income representing other-than-temporary impairment on the security.

The Predecessor Company holdsheld a private label class A21 collateralized mortgage obligation that was analyzed for the year ended December 31, 2010 with multiple stress scenarios using conservative assumptions for underlying collateral defaults, loss severity, and prepayments. The average principal at risk given the stress scenarios was calculated at 4.37%, and then analyzed using the present value of the future cash flows using the fixed rate of the security of 5.5% as the discount rate. The difference in the present value and the carrying value of the security was the OTTI credit portion. The security is currentlywas booked at a fair value of $2,699 at December 31, 2010 and during the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 the Company recognized a write-down of $18 through non-interest income representing other-than-temporary impairment on the security.

(Continued)

The Predecessor Company held a private label class 2A1 collateralized mortgage obligation that was analyzed for the year ended December 31, 2009 but was not analyzed for the year ended December 31, 2010. This security’s book value for the year ended December 31, 2010 was $651 while the fair value for the same period was recorded at $695. Since the fair value of the security was in excess of the book value at December 31, 2010, it was removed from the OTTI analysis for December 31, 2010.

 

71(Continued)

101


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 2 — SECURITIES(Continued)

The following table presents more detail on selective Predecessor Company security holdings as of year-end 2010. These details are listed separately due to the inherent level of risk for OTTI on these securities.

                         
                      Present 
      Current              Value 
      Credit  Book  Fair  Unrealized  Discounted 
Description Cusip #  Rating  Value  Value  Loss  Cash Flow 
Collateralized mortgage obligations
                        
Wells Fargo — 2007 - 4 A21  94985RAW2  Caa2  $2,802  $2,699   (103) $2,887 
                         
Trust preferred securities
                        
West Tennessee Bancshares, Inc.  956192AA6  N/A   675   638   (37)  675 

       Current
Credit
   Book   Fair   Unrealized  Present
Value
Discounted
 

Description

  Cusip#   Rating   Value   Value   Loss  Cash Flow 

Collateralized mortgage obligations

           

Wells Fargo – 2007 - 4 A21

   94985RAW2     Caa2    $2,802    $2,699    $(103 $2,887  

Trust preferred securities

           

West Tennessee Bancshares, Inc.

   956192AA6     N/A     675     638     (37  675  

The following table presents a roll-forward of the cumulative amount of credit losses on the Company’s investment securities that have been recognized through earnings as of December 31, 2010 and 2009. Credit losses on the Company’s investment securities recognized in earnings were $93 for the year ended December 31, 2010 and $976 for the year ended December 31, 2009.

         
  December 31,  December 31, 
  2010  2009 
Beginning balance of credit losses at January 1, 2010 and 2009 $976  $ 
Other-than-temporary impairment credit losses  93   976 
       
         
Ending balance of cumulative credit losses recognized in earnings $1,069  $976 
       
NOTE 3 — LOANS
Loans at year-end by segment, net of unearned interest, were as follows:
             
  2010  2009  2008 
   
Commercial real estate $1,080,805  $1,306,398  $1,430,225 
Residential real estate  378,783   392,365   397,922 
Commercial  222,927   274,346   315,099 
Consumer  75,498   83,382   89,733 
Other  1,913   2,117   4,656 
Unearned interest  (14,548)  (14,801)  (14,245)
          
Loans, net of unearned interest $1,745,378  $2,043,807  $2,223,390 
          
             
Allowance for loan losses $(66,830) $(50,161) $(48,811)
          
(Continued)

   December 31,
2010
   December 31,
2009
 

Beginning balance of credit losses at January 1, 2010 and 2009

  $976    $—    

Other-than-temporary impairment credit losses

   93     976  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Ending balance of cumulative credit losses recognized in earnings

  $1,069    $976  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

72(Continued)

102


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

NOTE 5 – LOANS

Due to the Bank Merger, the Company reported no loans on its Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2011 (Successor). All of the disclosures in this section are related to the Predecessor Company. The composition of the Predecessor Company’s loan portfolio by loan type as of December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009 and 2008

NOTE 3 — LOANS (Continued)
was as follows:

   2010  2009 

Commercial real estate

  $1,080,805   $1,306,398  

Residential real estate

   378,783    392,365  

Commercial

   222,927    274,346  

Consumer

   75,498    83,382  

Other

   1,913    2,117  

Unearned interest

   (14,548  (14,801
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Loans, net of unearned interest

  $1,745,378   $2,043,807  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Allowance for loan losses

  $(66,830 $(50,161
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Activity in the allowance for loan losses is as follows:

             
  2010  2009  2008 
             
Beginning balance $50,161  $48,811  $34,111 
Add (deduct):            
Provision for loan losses  71,107   50,246   52,810 
Loans charged off  (57,818)  (54,890)  (41,269)
Recoveries of loans charged off  3,380   5,994   3,159 
          
Balance, end of year $66,830  $50,161  $48,811 
          

   2010  2009 

Beginning balance

  $50,161   $48,811  

Add (deduct):

   

Provision for loan losses

   71,107    50,246  

Loans charged off

   (57,818  (54,890

Recoveries of loans charged off

   3,380    5,994  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance, end of year

  $66,830   $50,161  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Activity in the allowance for loan losses and recorded investment in loans by segment:

                         
  Commercial  Residential             
  Real Estate  Real Estate  Commercial  Consumer  Other  Total 
2010
                        
Allowance for loan losses:
                        
Beginning balance $36,527  $4,350  $5,840  $3,437  $7  $50,161 
Add (deduct):                        
Charge-offs  (48,617)  (3,102)  (3,210)  (2,889)     (57,818)
Recoveries  1,301   287   909   882   1   3,380 
Provision  64,992   2,896   1,541   1,678      71,107 
                   
Ending balance $54,203  $4,431  $5,080  $3,108  $8  $66,830 
                   
 
Allowance for loan losses:
                        
Allocation for loans individually evaluated for impairment $22,939  $1,027  $722  $146  $  $24,834 
                   
Allocation for loans collectively evaluated for impairment  31,264   3,404   4,358   2,962   8   41,996 
                   
Ending Balance $54,203  $4,431  $5,080  $3,108  $8  $66,830 
                   
                         
Loans:
                        
Ending balance: individually evaluated for impairment  170,175   8,697   6,149   970      185,991 
                   
Ending balance: collectively evaluated for impairment  910,630   363,506   216,778   66,470   1,913   1,559,387 
                   
Impaired loans were as follows:
             
  2010  2009  2008 
             
Loans with no allowance allocated $81,981  $89,292  $29,602 
Loans with allowance allocated $104,010  $25,946  $17,613 
Amount of allowance allocated  24,834   5,737   2,651 
Average impaired loan balance during the year  212,167   125,280   48,347 
Interest income not recognized during impairment  1,105   558   619 
(Continued)

   Commercial
Real Estate
  Residential Real
Estate
  Commercial  Consumer  Other   Total 

Jan 1 – Sept 7, 2011

        

Allowance for loan losses:

        

Beginning balance

  $54,203   $4,431   $5,080   $3,108   $8    $66,830  

Add (deduct):

        

Charge-offs

   (34,538  (1,466  (3,397  (1,413  —       (40,814

Recoveries

   726    142    633    486    —       1,987  

Provision

   37,559    1,952    3,634    597    —       43,742  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Ending balance

   57,950    5,059    5,950    2,778    8     71,745  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

73(Continued)

103


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

   Commercial
Real Estate
  Residential Real
Estate
  Commercial  Consumer  Other   Total 

2010

        

Allowance for loan losses:

        

Beginning balance

  $36,527   $4,350   $5,840   $3,437   $7    $50,161  

Add (deduct):

        

Charge-offs

   (48,617  (3,102  (3,210  (2,889  —       (57,818

Recoveries

   1,301    287    909    882    1     3,380  

Provision

   64,992    2,896    1,541    1,678    —       71,107  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Ending balance

   54,203    4,431    5,080    3,108    8     66,830  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Loans:

        

Ending balance: individually evaluated for impairment

   170,175    8,697    6,149    970    —       185,991  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Ending balance: collectively evaluated for impairment

   910,630    363,506    216,778    66,470    1,913     1,559,387  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

(Continued)

104


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Impaired loans were as follows:

   2010   2009 

Loans with no allowance allocated

  $81,981    $89,292  

Loans with allowance allocated

  $104,010    $25,946  

Amount of allowance allocated

   24,834     5,737  

Average impaired loan balance during the year

   212,167     125,280  

Interest income not recognized during impairment

   1,105     558  

Impaired loans, net of allowance, of $142,221 and $109,501, respectively, at December 31, 2010 2009 and 2008

NOTE 3 — LOANS (Continued)
Impaired loans of $185,991, $115,238 and $47,215, respectively, at 2010,December 31, 2009 2008 are shown net of amounts previously charged off of $36,574 $27,937, and 11,995,$27,937, respectively. Interest income actually recognized on these loans during 2010 2009 and 20082009 was $7,470 and $2,842, and $2,135, respectively.

Impaired loans by class are presented below for 2010:

                     
    Unpaid    Average  Interest 
  Recorded  Principal  Related  Recorded  Income 
  Investment  Balance  Allowance  Investment  Recognized 
                     
Commercial Real Estate:
                    
Speculative 1-4 Family $72,138  $98,141  $11,830  $85,487  $2,292 
Construction  56,758   69,355   8,366   63,710   2,565 
Owner Occupied  13,590   14,513   851   14,119   644 
Non-owner Occupied  25,824   27,561   1,823   28,786   1,375 
Other  1,865   2,090   69   2,278   66 
Residential Real Estate:
                    
HELOC  2,807   2,894   346   2,603   88 
Mortgage-Prime  4,539   4,722   590   4,661   209 
Mortgage-Subprime  370   370   57   370    
Other  981   1,285   34   2,419   47 
Commercial
  6,149   7,510   722   6,729   171 
Consumer:
                    
Prime  217   228   32   252   13 
Subprime  228   228   35   228    
Auto-Subprime  525   525   79   525    
Other
               
                
Total $185,991  $229,422  $24,834  $212,167  $7,470 
                

   Recorded
Investment
   Unpaid
Principal
Balance
   Related
Allowance
   Average
Recorded
Investment
   Interest
Income
Recognized
 

Commercial Real Estate:

          

Speculative 1-4 Family

  $72,138    $98,141    $11,830    $85,487    $2,292  

Construction

   56,758     69,355     8,366     63,710     2,565  

Owner Occupied

   13,590     14,513     851     14,119     644  

Non-owner Occupied

   25,824     27,561     1,823     28,786     1,375  

Other

   1,865     2,090     69     2,278     66  

Residential Real Estate:

          

HELOC

   2,807     2,894     346     2,603     88  

Mortgage-Prime

   4,539     4,722     590     4,661     209  

Mortgage-Subprime

   370     370     57     370     —    

Other

   981     1,285     34     2,419     47  

Commercial

   6,149     7,510     722     6,729     171  

Consumer:

          

Prime

   217     228     32     252     13  

Subprime

   228     228     35     228     —    

Auto-Subprime

   525     525     79     525     —    

Other

   —       —       —       —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

   185,991     229,422     24,834     212,167     7,470  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

(Continued)

105


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

The Bank managesPredecessor Company managed the loan portfolio by assigning one of nine credit risk ratings based on an internal assessment of credit risk. The credit risk categories are prime, desirable, satisfactory I or pass, satisfactory II, acceptable with care, management watch, substandard, and loss.

Prime credit risk rating: Assets of this grade are the highest quality credits of the Bank. They exceed substantially all the Bank’s underwriting criteria, and provide superior protection for the Bank through the paying capacity of the borrower and value of the collateral. The Bank’s credit risk is considered to be negligible. Included in this section are well-established borrowers with significant, diversified sources of income and net worth, or borrowers with ready access to alternative financing and unquestioned ability to meet debt obligations as agreed. A loan secured by cash or other highly liquid collateral, where the Bank holds such collateral, may be assigned this grade.

Desirable credit risk rating: Assets of this grade also exceed substantially all of the Bank’s underwriting criteria; however, they may lack the consistent long-term performance of a Prime rated credit. The credit risk to the Bank is considered minimal on these assets. Paying capacity of the borrower is still very strong with favorable trends and the value of the collateral is considered more than adequate to protect the Bank. Unsecured loans to borrowers with above-average earnings, liquidity and capital may be assigned this grade.

(Continued)

74


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 3 — LOANS (Continued)
Satisfactory I credit risk rating or pass credit rating: Assets of this grade conform to all of the Bank’s underwriting criteria and evidence a below-average level of credit risk. Borrower’s paying capacity is strong, with stable trends. If the borrower is a company, its earnings, liquidity and capitalization compare favorably to typical companies in its industry. The credit is well structured and serviced. Secondary sources of repayment are considered to be good. Payment history is good, and borrower consistently complies with all major covenants.

Satisfactory II credit risk rating: Assets of this grade conform to substantially all of the Bank’s underwriting criteria and evidence an average level of credit risk. However, such assets display more susceptibility to economic, technological or political changes since they lack the above-average financial strength of credits rated Satisfactory Tier I. Borrower’s repayment capacity is considered to be adequate. Credit is appropriately structured and serviced; payment history is satisfactory.

Acceptable with care credit risk rating: Assets of this grade conform to most of the Bank’s underwriting criteria and evidence an acceptable, though higher than average, level of credit risk. However, these loans have certain risk characteristics that could adversely affect the borrower’s ability to repay, given material adverse trends. Therefore, loans in this category require an above-average level of servicing or show more reliance on collateral and guaranties to preclude a loss to the Bank, should material adverse trends develop. If the borrower is a company, itits earnings, liquidity and capitalization are slightly below average, when compared to its peers.

Management watch credit risk rating: Assets included in this category are currently protected but are potentially weak. These assets constitute an undue and unwarranted credit risk but do not presently expose the Bank to a sufficient degree of risk to warrant adverse classification. However, Management Watch assets do possess credit deficiencies deserving management’s close attention. If not corrected, such weaknesses or deficiencies may expose the Bank to an increased risk of loss in the future. Management Watch loans represent assets where the Bank’s ability to substantially affect the outcome has diminished to some degree, and thus it must closely monitor the situation to determine if and when a downgrade is warranted.

Substandard credit risk rating: Substandard assets are inadequately protected by the current net worth and financial capacity of the borrower or of the collateral pledged, if any. Assets so classified must have a well-defined weakness or weaknesses that jeopardize the liquidation of the debt. They are characterized by the distinct possibility that the Bank will sustain some loss if the deficiencies are not corrected. Loss potential, while existing in the aggregate amount of substandard assets, does not have to exist in individual assets classified as Substandard.

(Continued)

106


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Loss credit rating: These assets are considered uncollectible and of such little value that their continuance as assets is not warranted. This classification does not mean that an asset has absolutely no recovery or salvage value, but rather it is not practical or desirable to defer writing off a basically worthless asset even though partial recovery may be affected in the future. Losses should be taken in the period in which they are identified as uncollectible.

(Continued)

Credit quality indicators by class are presented below for 2010:

   Speculative
1-4 Family
   Construction   Owner Occupied   Non-Owner
Occupied
   Other 

Commercial Real Estate Credit Exposure

          

Prime

  $—      $—      $—      $—      $—    

Desirable

   —       1,573     968     177     —    

Satisfactory tier I

   2,836     978     38,623     56,221     4,246  

Satisfactory tier II

   14,010     34,239     102,383     130,850     17,999  

Acceptable with care

   69,902     47,093     62,198     159,216     45,597  

Management Watch

   27,383     15,259     5,298     26,415     2,965  

Substandard

   91,845     61,388     16,289     38,037     6,817  

Loss

   —       —       —       —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

   205,976     160,530     225,759     410,916     77,624  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

   Commercial 

Commercial Credit Exposure

  

Prime

  $1,236  

Desirable

   7,951  

Satisfactory tier I

   33,859  

Satisfactory tier II

   91,505  

Acceptable with care

   72,286  

Management Watch

   8,511  

Substandard

   7,579  

Loss

   —    
  

 

 

 

Total

   222,927  
  

 

 

 

   HELOC   Mortgage   Mortgage –
Subprime
   Other 

Consumer Real Estate Credit Exposure

        

Pass

  $188,086    $131,845    $11,692    $29,833  

Management Watch

   1,017     317     —       —    

Substandard

   2,807     5,117     50     1,529  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

   191,910     137,279     11,742     31,362  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

75(Continued)

107


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 3 — LOANS (Continued)
Credit quality indicators by class are presented below as of December 31, 2010:
                     
  Speculative 1-4          Non-Owner    
  Family  Construction  Owner Occupied  Occupied  Other 
Commercial Real Estate Credit Exposure
                    
Prime $  $  $  $  $ 
Desirable     1,573   968   177    
Satisfactory tier I  2,836   978   38,623   56,221   4,246 
Satisfactory tier II  14,010   34,239   102,383   130,850   17,999 
Acceptable with care  69,902   47,093   62,198   159,216   45,597 
Management Watch  27,383   15,259   5,298   26,415   2,965 
Substandard  91,845   61,388   16,289   38,037   6,817 
Loss               
                
Total  205,976   160,530   225,759   410,916   77,624 
                
     
  Commercial 
Commercial Credit Exposure
    
Prime $1,236 
Desirable  7,951 
Satisfactory tier I  33,859 
Satisfactory tier II  91,505 
Acceptable with care  72,286 
Management Watch  8,511 
Substandard  7,579 
Loss   
    
Total  222,927 
    
                 
          Mortgage —    
  HELOC  Mortgage  Subprime  Other 
Consumer Real Estate Credit Exposure
                
Pass $188,086  $131,845  $11,692  $29,833 
Management Watch  1,017   317       
Substandard  2,807   5,117   50   1,529 
             
Total  191,910   137,279   11,742   31,362 
             
(Continued)

 

76

   Consumer – Prime   Consumer –
Subprime
   Consumer Auto –
Subprime
 

Consumer Credit Exposure

      

Pass

  $35,029    $13,093    $18,588  

Management Watch

   —       —       —    

Substandard

   217     39     474  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

   35,246     13,132     19,062  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 3 — LOANS (Continued)
             
  Consumer —  Consumer —  Consumer Auto — 
  Prime  Subprime  Subprime 
Consumer Credit Exposure
            
Pass $35,029  $13,093  $18,588 
Management Watch         
Substandard  217   39   474 
          
Total  35,246   13,132   19,062 
          
A substantial portion of the Predecessor Company’s commercial real estate loans arewas secured by real estate in markets in which the Company is located. These loans are often structured with interest reserves to fund interest costs during the construction and development period. Additionally, certain of these loans arewere structured with interest-only terms. A portion of the consumer mortgage and commercial real estate portfolios were originated through the permanent financing of construction, acquisition and development loans. The prolonged economic downturn has negatively impacted many borrowers’borrower’s and guarantors’ ability to make payments under the terms of the loans as their liquidity has been depleted. Accordingly, the ultimate collectability of a substantial portion of these loans and the recovery of a substantial portion of the carrying amount of other real estate owned are susceptible to changes in real estate values in these areas. Continued economic distress could negatively impact additional borrowers’ and guarantors’ ability to repay their debt which will make more of the Company’s loans collateral dependent.

Age analysis of past due loans by class are presented below as of December 31,for 2010:

                             
  30-59  60-89  Greater              Recorded 
  Days  Days  Than  Total      Total  Investment > 90 
  Past Due  Past Due  90 Days  Past Due  Current  Loans  Days and Accruing 
                             
Commercial real estate:
                            
Speculative 1-4 Family $22,267  $1,777  $30,802  $54,846  $151,130  $205,976  $1,758 
Construction  14,541      26,915   41,456   119,074   160,530    
Owner Occupied  8,114   1,633   4,137   13,884   211,875   225,759    
Non-owner Occupied  4,014   5,961   8,814   18,789   392,127   410,916   170 
Other  116   865   1,491   2,472   75,152   77,624   18 
Residential real estate:
                            
HELOC  747   358   644   1,749   190,161   191,910    
Mortgage-Prime  1,359   915   1,779   4,053   133,226   137,279   8 
Mortgage-Subprime  100   51   98   249   11,493   11,742    
Other  403   176   566   1,145   30,217   31,362   19 
Commercial
  2,422   593   3,922   6,937   215,990   222,927   92 
Consumer:
                            
Prime  315   86   108   509   34,737   35,246   29 
Subprime  155   64   6   225   12,907   13,132    
Auto-Subprime  476   166   101   743   18,319   19,062   18 
Other
  73         73   1,840   1,913    
                      
Total  55,102   12,645   79,383   147,130   1,598,248   1,745,378   2,112 
                      
(Continued)

   30-59 Days
Past Due
   60-89 Days
Past Due
   Greater Than
90 Days
   Total Past
Due
   Current   Total Loans   Recorded
Investment >
90 Days and
Accruing
 

Commercial real estate:

              

Speculative 1-4 Family

  $22,267    $1,777    $30,802    $54,846    $151,130    $205,976    $1,758  

Construction

   14,541     —       26,915     41,456     119,074     160,530     —    

Owner Occupied

   8,114     1,633     4,137     13,884     211,875     225,759     —    

Non-owner Occupied

   4,014     5,961     8,814     18,789     392,127     410,916     170  

Other

   116     865     1491     2,472     75,152     77,624     18  

Residential real estate:

              

HELOC

   747     358     644     1,749     190,161     191,910     —    

Mortgage-Prime

   1,359     915     1,779     4,053     133,226     137,279     8  

Mortgage-Subprime

   100     51     98     249     11,493     11,742     —    

Other

   403     176     566     1,145     30,217     31,362     19  

Commercial

   2,422     593     3,922     6,937     215,990     222,927     92  

Consumer:

              

Prime

   315     86     108     509     34,737     35,246     29  

Subprime

   155     64     6     225     12,907     13,132     —    

Auto-Subprime

   476     166     101     743     18,319     19,062     18  

Other

   72     —       —       73     1,840     1,913     —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

   55,102     12,645     79,383     147,130     1,598,248     1,745,378     2,112  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

77(Continued)

108


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 3 — LOANS (Continued)

Non-accrual loans by class as of December 31, 2010 are presented below:

     
Commercial real estate:
    
Speculative 1-4 Family $63,298 
Construction  41,789 
Owner Occupied  5,511 
Non-owner Occupied  18,772 
Other  1,865 
Residential real estate:
    
HELOC  1,668 
Mortgage-Prime  3,350 
Mortgage-Subprime  254 
Other  957 
Commercial
  5,813 
Consumer:
    
Prime  130 
Subprime  107 
Auto-Subprime  193 
Other
   
    
Total  143,707 
    

    2010 

Commercial real estate:

  

Speculative 1-4 Family

  $63,298  

Construction

   41,789  

Owner Occupied

   5,511  

Non-owner Occupied

   18,772  

Other

   1,865  

Residential real estate:

  

HELOC

   1,668  

Mortgage-Prime

   3,350  

Mortgage-Subprime

   254  

Other

   957  

Commercial

   5,813  

Consumer:

  

Prime

   130  

Subprime

   107  

Auto-Subprime

   193  

Other

   —    
  

 

 

 

Total

   143,707  
  

 

 

 

Nonperforming loans at December 31 were as follows:

         
  2010  2009 
         
Loans past due 90 days still on accrual $2,112  $147 
Nonaccrual loans  143,707   75,411 
       
         
Total $145,819  $75,558 
       

   2010   2009 

Loans past due 90 days still on accrual

  $2,112    $147  

Nonaccrual loans

   143,707     75,411  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

  $145,819    $75,558  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

(Continued)

109


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Nonperforming loans and impaired loans are defined differently. Nonperforming loans are loans that are 90 days past due and still accruing interest and nonaccrual loans. Impaired loans are loans that based upon current information and events it is considered probable that the Company will be unable to collect all amounts of contractual interest and principal as scheduled in the loan agreement. Some loans may be included in both categories, whereas other loans may only be included in one category.

(Continued)

78


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 3 — LOANS (Continued)
The Predecessor Company may electhave elected to formally restructure a loan due to the weakening credit status of a borrower so that the restructuring may facilitate a repayment plan that minimizes the potential losses that the Company may have to otherwise incur. At December 31, 2010, the Company had $49,537 of restructured loans of which $9,597 was classified as non-accrual and the remaining were performing. The Company had taken charge-offs of $843 on the restructured non-accrual loans as of December 31, 2010. At December 31, 2009, the Company had $16,061 of restructured loans of which $4,429 was classified as non-accrual and the remaining were performing. The Company had taken charge-offs of $1,743 on the restructured non-accrual loans as of December 31, 2009.

The aggregate amount of loans to executive officers and directors of the Company and their related interests was approximately $7,848 and $4,936 at year-end 2010 and 2009, respectively.2010. During 2010, and 2009, new loans aggregating approximately $22,124, and $10,545, respectively, and amounts collected of approximately $19,212 and $23,964, respectively, were transacted with such parties.

NOTE 4 —6 – FAIR VALUE DISCLOSURES

Following completion of the CBF Investment, and the Bank Merger of GreenBank into Capital Bank, NA, the Company’s primary asset is its ownership of approximately 34% of Capital Bank, NA, recorded as an equity-method investment in that entity.

Fair value is defined 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. Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”), 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. The standard describes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value:

Level 1

Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. Level 1 assets and liabilities include debt and equity securities and derivative contracts that are traded in an active exchange market, as well as certain U.S. Treasury, other U.S. Government and agency mortgage-backed debt securities that are highly liquid and are actively traded in over-the-counter markets.

Level 2

Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not active; 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 debt securities with quoted prices that are traded less frequently than exchange-traded instruments and derivative contracts 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. This category generally includes certain U.S. Government and agency mortgage-backed debt securities, corporate debt securities, derivative contracts and residential mortgage loans held-for-sale.

held-forsale.

(Continued)

110


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Level 3

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, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques, as well as instruments for which the determination of fair value requires significant management judgment or estimation. This category generally includes certain private equity investments, retained residual interests in securitizations, residential mortgage servicing rights, and highly structured or long-term derivative contracts.

(Continued)

79


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 4 — FAIR VALUE DISCLOSURES (continued)
Following is a description of valuation methodologies used for assets and liabilities recorded at fair value.

Investment Securities Available-for-Sale

Investment securities available-for-sale are recorded at fair value on a recurring basis. Fair value measurement is based upon quoted prices of like or similar securities, if available and these securities are classified as Level 1 or Level 2. If quoted prices are not available, fair values are measured using independent pricing models or other model-based valuation techniques such as the present value of future cash flows, adjusted for the security’s credit rating, prepayment assumptions and other factors such as credit loss assumptions and are classified as Level 3.

Loans Held for Sale

Loans held for sale are carried at the lower of cost or market value. The fair value of loans held for sale is based on what secondary markets are currently offering for portfolios with similar characteristics. As such, the Company classifies loans held for sale subjected to nonrecurring fair value adjustments as Level 2.

Impaired Loans

The Company does not record loans at fair value on a recurring basis. However, from time to time, a loan is considered impaired and an allowance for loan losses is established. Loans for which it is probable that payment of interest and principal will not be made in accordance with the contractual terms of the loan agreement are considered impaired. Once a loan is identified as individually impaired, management measures impairment in accordance with GAAP. The fair value of impaired loans is estimated using one of several methods, including collateral value, market value of similar debt, enterprise value, liquidation value and discounted cash flows. Those impaired loans not requiring an allowance represent loans for which the fair value of the expected repayments or collateral exceed the recorded investments in such loans. At December 31, 2010, substantially all of the total impaired loans were evaluated based on either the fair value of the collateral or its liquidation value. In accordance with GAAP, impaired loans where an allowance is established based on the fair value of collateral require classification in the fair value hierarchy. When the fair value of the collateral is based on an observable market price or a current appraised value, the Company records the impaired loan as nonrecurring Level 2. When an appraised value is not available or management determines the fair value of the collateral is further impaired below the appraised value and there is no observable market price, the Company records the impaired loan as nonrecurring Level 3.

Other Real Estate

Other real estate, consisting of properties obtained through foreclosure or in satisfaction of loans, and requiring subsequent charge-offs, is reported at fair value, determined on the basis of current appraisals, comparable sales, and other estimates of value obtained principally from independent sources, adjusted for estimated selling costs. At the time of foreclosure, any excess of the loan balance over the fair value of the real estate held as collateral is treated as a charge against the allowance for loan losses. Gains or losses on sale and any subsequent adjustments to the value are recorded as a component of foreclosed real estate expense. Other real estate is included in Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy.

Loan Servicing Rights
Loan servicing rights are subject to impairment testing. A valuation model, which utilizes a discounted cash flow analysis using interest rates and prepayment speed assumptions currently quoted for comparable instruments and a discount rate determined by management, is used in the completion of impairment testing. If the valuation model reflects a value less than the carrying value, loan servicing rights are adjusted to fair value through a valuation allowance as determined by the model. As such, the Company classifies loan servicing rights subjected to nonrecurring fair value adjustments as Level 3.
(Continued)

 

80(Continued)

111


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 4 — FAIR VALUE DISCLOSURES (continued)

Assets and Liabilities Recorded at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis

Below is a table that presents information about certain Predecessor Company assets and liabilities measured at fair value at year-end 2010 and 2009:

                     
              Total    
  Fair Value  Carrying  Assets/Liabilities 
  Measurement Using  Amount in  Measured 
Description Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Balance Sheet  at Fair Value 
2010
                    
Securities available for sale                    
U.S. government agencies $  $83,299  $  $83,299  $83,299 
States and political subdivisions     31,501      31,501   31,501 
Collateralized mortgage obligations     67,575      67,575   67,575 
Mortgage-backed securities     17,964      17,964   17,964 
Trust preferred securities     1,025   638   1,663   1,663 
                     
2009
                    
Securities available for sale                    
U.S. government agencies $  $52,048  $  $52,048  $52,048 
States and political subdivisions     32,192      32,192   32,192 
Collateralized mortgage obligations     44,677      44,677   44,677 
Mortgage-backed securities     16,892      16,892   16,892 
Trust preferred securities     1,277   638   1,915   1,915 

             
       Total Carrying   Assets/Liabilities 
   Fair Value Measurement Using   Amount in   Measured at Fair 

Description

  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3   Balance Sheet   Value 

2010

          

Securities available for sale

          

U.S. government agencies

  $—      $83,299    $—      $83,299    $83,299  

States and political subdivisions

   —       31,501     —       31,501     31,501  

Collateralized mortgage obligations

   —       67,575     —       67,575     67,575  

Mortgage-backed securities

   —       17,964     —       17,964     17,964  

Trust preferred securities

   —       1,025     638     1,663     1,663  

2009

          

Securities available for sale

          

U.S. government agencies

  $—      $52,048    $—      $52,048    $52,048  

States and political subdivisions

   —       32,192     —       32,192     32,192  

Collateralized mortgage obligations

   —       44,677     —       44,677     44,677  

Mortgage-backed securities

   —       16,892     —       16,892     16,892  

Trust preferred securities

   —       1,277     638     1,915     1,915  

Level 3 Valuations

Financial instruments are considered Level 3 when their values are determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies or similar techniques and at least one significant model assumption or input is unobservable. Level 3 financial instruments also include those for which the determination of fair value requires significant management judgment or estimation.

Currently the

The Predecessor Company hashad one trust preferred security that is considered Level 3. For more information on this security please refer to Note 2 —4 – Securities.

(Continued)

 

81(Continued)

112


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 4 — FAIR VALUE DISCLOSURES (continued)

The following table shows a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances for assets measured at fair value for the periods ended September 7, 2011 and December 31, 2010 and 2009 on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs.

         
  2010  2009 
Beginning balance $638  $ 
Total gains or (loss) (realized/unrealized)        
Included in earnings  (75)  (778)
Included in other comprehensive income  75   (112)
Paydowns and maturities      
Transfers into Level 3     1,528 
       
Ending balance $638  $638 
       

   Predecessor Company 
   Jan 1 - Sept 7  Jan 1 - Dec 31 
   2011  2010 

Beginning balance, January 1

  $638   $638  

Total gains or (loss) (realized/unrealized)

   

Included in earnings

   —      (75

Included in other comprehensive income

   (162  75  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Ending balance

  $476   $638  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Assets and Liabilities Recorded at Fair Value on a Nonrecurring Basis

The Predecessor Company may bewas required, from time to time, to measure certain assets at fair value on a nonrecurring basis in accordance with GAAP. These include assets that are measured at the lower of cost or market that were recognized at fair value below cost at the end of the period. Assets measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis are included in the table below.

                     
              Total Carrying  Assets/Liabilities 
  Fair Value Measurement Using  Amount in  Measured at Fair 
Description Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Balance Sheet  Value 
2010
                    
Other real estate $  $  $38,086  $38,086  $38,086 
Impaired loans        129,088   129,088   129,088 
                
Total assets at fair value
 $  $  $167,174  $167,174  $167,174 
                
                     
2009
                    
Other real estate $  $  $23,508  $23,508  $23,508 
Impaired loans        57,914   57,914   57,914 
                
Total assets at fair value
 $  $  $81,422  $81,422  $81,422 
                
(Continued)

Description

  Fair Value Measurement Using   Total  Carrying
Amount in
Balance Sheet
   Assets/Liabilities
Measured at
Fair Value
 
  Level 1   Level 2   Level 3     

December 31, 2010

            

Other real estate

  $—      $—      $38,086    $38,086      $38,086  

Impaired loans

   —       —       129,088     129,088       129,088  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

Total assets at fair value

  $—      $—      $167,174    $167,174      $167,174  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

 

82(Continued)

113


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 4 — FAIR VALUE DISCLOSURES(Continued)

The carrying value and estimated fair value of the Company’s financial instruments are as follows at year-endDecember 31, 2011 (Successor period) and December 31, 2010 and 2009.

                 
  2010  2009 
  Carrying  Fair  Carrying  Fair 
  Value  Value  Value  Value 
Financial assets:                
Cash and cash equivalents $294,214  $294,214  $221,494  $221,494 
Securities available for sale  202,002   202,002   147,724   147,724 
Securities held to maturity  465   467   626   638 
Loans held for sale  1,299   1,317   1,533   1,552 
Loans, net  1,678,548   1,664,126   1,993,646   1,950,684 
FHLB and other stock  12,734   12,734   12,734   12,734 
Cash surrender value of life insurance  31,479   31,479   30,277   30,277 
Accrued interest receivable  7,845   7,845   9,130   9,130 
                 
Financial liabilities:                
Deposit accounts $1,976,854  $1,987,105  $2,084,096  $2,095,611 
Federal funds purchased and repurchase agreements  19,413   19,413   24,449   24,449 
FHLB Advances and notes payable  158,653   166,762   171,999   176,602 
Subordinated debentures  88,662   64,817   88,662   70,527 
Accrued interest payable  2,140   2,140   2,561   2,561 
(Predecessor period).

   Successor
December  31,

2011
   Predecessor
December  31,
2010
 
   Carrying
Value
   Fair
Value
   Carrying
Value
   Fair Value 

Financial assets:

         

Cash and cash equivalents

  $2,091    $2,091    $294,214    $294,214  

Securities available for sale

   —       —       202,002     202,002  

Securities held to maturity

   —       —       465     467  

Loans held for sale

   —       —       1,299     1,317  

Loans, net

   —       —       1,678,548     1,664,126  

FHLB and other stock

   —       —       12,734     12,734  

Cash surrender value of life insurance

   —       —       31,479     31,479  

Accrued interest receivable

   —       —       7,845     7,845  
  

Financial liabilities:

         

Deposit accounts

  $—      $—      $1,976,854    $1,987,105  

Federal funds purchased and repurchase agreements

   —       —       19,413     19,413  

FHLB Advances and notes payable

   —       —       158,653     166,762  

Subordinated debentures

   45,180     47,547     88,662     64,817  

Accrued interest payable

   —       —       2,140     2,140  

The following methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair values for financial instruments that are not disclosed previously in this note. The carrying amount is considered to estimate fair value for cash and short-term instruments, demand deposits, liabilities for repurchase agreements, variable rate loans or deposits that reprice frequently and fully, and accrued interest receivable and payable. For fixed rate loans or deposits and for variable rate loans or deposits with infrequent repricing or repricing limits, the fair value is estimated by discounted cash flow analysis using current market rates for the estimated life and credit risk. No adjustment has been made for illiquidity in the market on loans as there is no information from which to reasonably base this estimate. Liabilities for FHLB advances and notes payable are estimated using rates of debt with similar terms and remaining maturities. The fair value of off-balance sheet items is based on the current fees or costs that would be charged to enter into or terminate such arrangements, which is not material. The fair value of commitments to sell loans is based on the difference between the interest rates at which the loans have been committed to sell and the quoted secondary market price for similar loans, which is not material.

(Continued)

Subordinated debentures are associated with prior years’ issuance of variable rate trust preferred securities. Fair value for these instruments was determined using a discounted cash flow method, incorporating the relevant terms, including balance, remaining term, interest rate and payment terms.

 

83(Continued)

114


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

NOTE 5 —7 – PREMISES AND EQUIPMENT

Year-end

Due to the Bank Merger, the Company reported no premises or equipment on its Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2011 (Successor).

Predecessor Company year-end premises and equipment were as follows:

   2010  2009 

Land

  $18,372   $18,372  

Premises

   62,474    61,809  

Leasehold improvements

   3,092    3,061  

Furniture, fixtures and equipment

   28,057    25,222  

Automobiles

   103    112  

Construction in progress

   138    2,162  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 
   112,236    110,738  

Accumulated depreciation

   (33,442  (28,920
  

 

 

  

 

 

 
  $78,794   $81,818  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 
Annual

Predecessor Company rent expense for operating leases was $1,013, $1,223, and $1,216, respectively,$766 for the year-end periodsperiod of January 1 through September 7, 2011 and $1,013, and $1,223 for the full year 2010 and full year 2009, and 2008, respectively. Rent

The Successor Company had no rent commitments under noncancelable operating leases were as follows, before considering renewal options that generally are present:

     
2011 $1,243 
2012  1,251 
2013  1,043 
2014  793 
2015  433 
Thereafter  734 
    
     
Total $5,497 
    
(Continued)
of December 31, 2011.

 

84(Continued)

115


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

NOTE 6 —8 – GOODWILL AND OTHER INTANGIBLE ASSETS

Goodwill

The Successor Company reported no goodwill on its Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2011.

For the Predecessor Company, the change in the amount of goodwill iswas as follows:

         
  2010  2009 
         
Beginning of year $  $143,389 
Impairment     (143,389)
End of year $  $ 
       

   2010   2009 

Beginning of year

  $—      $143,389  

Impairment

   —       (143,389

Adjustment to Goodwill

   —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

End of year

  $—      $—    
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

In conjunction with significant acquisitions, the Predecessor Company recognized goodwill impairment in 2009 of $143,389. The Predecessor Company’s goodwill remained at $0 since the 2009 goodwill impairment remains at $0.

impairment.

Core deposit and other intangible

The

Due to the Bank Merger, the Successor Company reported no core deposit and other intangibles on its Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2011.

For the Predecessor Company, the change in core deposit and other intangibles iswas as follows:

         
Core deposit intangibles 2010  2009 
Gross carrying amount $19,796  $19,796 
         
Accumulated amortization, beginning of year  (10,803)  (8,304)
Amortization  (2,495)  (2,499)
       
Accumulated amortization, end of year  (13,298)  (10,803)
       
         
End of year $6,498  $8,993 
       
         
Other intangibles 2010  2009 
Gross carrying amount $745  $745 
         
Accumulated amortization, beginning of year  (403)  (152)
Amortization  (89)  (251)
       
Accumulated amortization, end of year  (492)  (403)
       
         
End of year $253  $342 
       
Estimated amortization expense for each of the next five years is as follows:
     
2011 $2,531 
2012  2,401 
2013  1,701 
2014  118 
2015   
    
Total $6,751 
    
(Continued)

Core deposit intangibles

  2010  2009 

Gross carrying amount

  $19,796   $19,796  

Accumulated amortization, beginning of year

   (10,803  (8,304

Amortization

   (2,495  (2,499
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Accumulated amortization, end of year

   (13,298  (10,803
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

End of year

  $6,498   $8,993  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Other intangibles

  2010  2009 

Gross carrying amount

  $745   $745  

Accumulated amortization, beginning of year

   (403  (152

Amortization

   (89  (251
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Accumulated amortization, end of year

   (492  (403
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

End of year

  $253   $342  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

85(Continued)

116


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

NOTE 9 – DEPOSITS

Due to the Bank Merger, the Company reported no deposits on its Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

NOTE 7 — DEPOSITS
Deposits2011 (Successor).

For the Predecessor Company, deposits at year-end were as follows:

   2010   2009 

Noninterest-bearing demand deposits

  $152,752    $177,602  

Interest-bearing demand deposits

   939,091     837,268  

Savings deposits

   101,925     86,166  

Brokered deposits

   1,399     6,584  

Time deposits

   781,687     976,476  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total deposits

  $1,976,854    $2,084,096  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 
Brokered

Predecessor Company brokered and time deposits of $100 or more were $309,701 and $395,595 at year-end 2010 and 2009, respectively.

Scheduled maturities of brokered and time deposits for the next five years and thereafter were as follows:
     
2011 $531,829 
2012  139,812 
2013�� 52,931 
2014  14,822 
2015  40,246 
Thereafter  3,446 

The aggregate amount of Predecessor Company deposits of executive officers and directors of the Company and their related interests was approximately $3,679 and $3,611 at year-end 2010 and 2009, respectively.

(Continued)

 

86(Continued)

117


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

NOTE 10 – BORROWINGS

Due to the Bank Merger, the only borrowings reported on the Successor Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

NOTE 8 — BORROWINGS
2011 were subordinated debentures associated with prior years’ issuance of variable rate trust preferred securities.

Federal funds purchased, securities sold under agreements to repurchase and treasury tax and loan deposits are financing arrangements. Securities involved with the agreements are recorded as assets and are held by a safekeeping agent and the obligations to repurchase the securities are reflected as liabilities. Securities sold under agreements to repurchase consist of short-term excess funds and overnight liabilities to deposit customers arising from a cash management program.

Information

Regarding the Predecessor Company, information concerning securities sold under agreements to repurchase at year-end 2010 2009 and 20082009 is as follows:

             
  2010  2009  2008 
             
Average balance during the year $22,342  $28,008  $74,881 
Average interest rate during the year  0.10%  0.10%  1.57%
Maximum month-end balance during the year $26,161  $35,935  $98,925 
Weighted average interest rate at year-end  0.10%  0.10%  0.10%

   2010  2009 

Average balance during the year

  $22,342   $28,008  

Average interest rate during the year

   0.10  0.10

Maximum month-end balance during the year

  $26,161   $35,935  

Weighted average interest rate at year-end

   0.10  0.10

Predecessor Company FHLB advances and notes payable consistconsisted of the following at year-end:

         
  2010  2009 
Short-term borrowings
        
Fixed rate FHLB advance, 4.44%
Matures December 2011
 $15,000  $ 
         
Variable rate FHLB advances at 5.00% to 5.31%
Matured December 2010
     12,000 
       
Total short-term borrowings  15,000   12,000 
       
         
Long-term borrowings
        
Fixed rate FHLB advances, from 1.50% to 3.36%,
Various maturities through June 2023
  51,327   50,766 
Fixed rate FHLB advances from 4.18% to 6.35%,
Various maturities through 2020
  92,326   109,233 
Total long term borrowings  143,653   159,999 
       
         
Total borrowings $158,653  $171,999 
       

   2010   2009 

Short-term FHLB borrowings

    

Fixed rate FHLB advance, 4.44%

Matured December 2011

  $15,000    $—    

Variable rate FHLB advances at 5.00% to 5.31%

Matured December 2010

   —       12,000  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total short-term borrowings

   15,000     12,000  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Long-term FHLB borrowings

    

Fixed rate FHLB advances, from 1.50% to 6.35%,

Various maturities through June 2023

   143,653     159,999  

Total FHLB borrowings

  $158,653    $171,999  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Each FHLB advance iswas payable at its maturity date; however, prepayment penalties arewere required if paid before maturity. The fixed rate advances includeincluded $155,000 of advances that arewere callable by the FHLB under certain circumstances. The advances arewere collateralized by a required blanket pledge of qualifying mortgage, commercial, agricultural and home equity lines of credit loans and securities totaling $500,354 and $552,721 at year-end 2010 and 2009, respectively.

(Continued)

 

87(Continued)

118


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 8 — BORROWINGS(Continued)
Scheduled maturities of FHLB advances and notes payable over the next five years and thereafter are as follows:
     
  Total 
     
2011 $15,288 
2012  65,278 
2013  288 
2014  10,296 
2015  20,309 
Thereafter  47,194 
    
  $158,653 
    

At year-end 2010, the Predecessor Company had approximately $70,000 of federal funds lines of credit available from correspondent institutions of which $10,000 was secured.

In September 2003, the Company formed Greene County Capital Trust I (“GC Trust I”). GC Trust I issued $10,000 of variable rate trust preferred securities as part of a pooled offering of such securities. The Company issued $10,310 subordinated debentures to the GC Trust I in exchange for the proceeds of the offering, which debentures represent the sole asset of GC Trust I. The debentures pay interest quarterly at the three-month LIBOR plus 2.85% adjusted quarterly (3.14%(3.25% and 3.13%3.14% at year-end 20102011 and 2009,2010, respectively). Subject to the limitations on repurchases resulting from the Company’s participation in the CPP, theThe Company may redeem the subordinated debentures, in whole or in part, at a price of 100% of face value. The subordinated debentures must be redeemed no later than 2033.

In June 2005, the Company formed Greene County Capital Trust II (“GC Trust II”). GC Trust II issued $3,000 of variable rate trust preferred securities as part of a pooled offering of such securities. The Company issued $3,093 subordinated debentures to the GC Trust II in exchange for the proceeds of the offering, which debentures represent the sole asset of GC Trust II. The debentures pay interest quarterly at the three-month LIBOR plus 1.68% adjusted quarterly (1.98%(2.23% and 1.93%1.98% at year-end 20102011 and 2009,2010, respectively). Subject to the limitations on repurchases resulting from the Company’s participation in the CPP, theThe Company may redeem the subordinated debentures, in whole or in part, beginning September 2010 at a price of 100% of face value. The subordinated debentures must be redeemed no later than 2035.

In May 2007, the Company formed GreenBank Capital Trust I (“GB Trust I”). GB Trust I issued $56,000 of variable rate trust preferred securities as part of a pooled offering of such securities. The Company issued $57,732 subordinated debentures to the GB Trust I in exchange for the proceeds of the offering, which debentures represent the sole asset of GB Trust I. The debentures pay interest quarterly at the three-month LIBOR plus 1.65% adjusted quarterly (1.95%(2.20% and 1.90%1.95% at year-end 20102011 and 2009)2010). Subject to the limitations on repurchases resulting from the Company’s participation in the CPP, theThe Company may redeem the subordinated debentures, in whole or in part, beginning June 2012 at a price of 100% of face value. The subordinated debentures must be redeemed no later than 2037.

Also in May 2007 the Company assumed the liability for two trusts affiliated with the acquisition of Franklin, Tennessee-based Civitas Bankgroup, Inc. (“CVBG”) that the Company acquired on May 18, 2007, Civitas Statutory Trust I (“CS Trust I”) and Cumberland Capital Statutory Trust II (“CCS Trust II”).

(Continued)

88


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 8 — BORROWINGS(Continued)
In December 2005 CS Trust I issued $13,000 of variable rate trust preferred securities as part of a pooled offering of such securities. CVBG issued $13,403 subordinated debentures to the CS Trust I in exchange for the proceeds of the offering, which debentures represent the sole asset of CS Trust I. The debentures pay interest quarterly at the three-month LIBOR plus 1.54% adjusted quarterly (1.84%(2.09% and 1.79%1.84% at year-end 20102011 and 2009)2010). Subject to the limitations on repurchases resulting from the Company’s participation in the CPP, theThe Company may redeem the subordinated debentures, in whole or in part, beginning March 2011 at a price of 100% of face value. The subordinated debentures must be redeemed no later than March 2036.

In July 2001 CCS Trust II issued $4,000 of variable rate trust preferred securities as part of a pooled offering of such securities. CVBG issued $4,124 subordinated debentures to the CCS Trust II in exchange for the proceeds of the offering, which debentures represent the sole asset of CCS Trust II. The debentures pay interest quarterly at the three-month LIBOR plus 3.58% adjusted quarterly (3.87%(4.01% and 3.86%3.87% at year-end 20102011 and 2009)2010). Subject to the limitations on repurchases resulting from the Company’s participation in the CPP, theThe Company may redeem the subordinated debentures, in whole or in part, at a price of 100% of face value. The subordinated debentures must be redeemed no later than July 2031.

Following consultation with the FRB,

(Continued)

119


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

During September 2011, the Company gave notice on November 9, 2010 to the U.S. Treasury Department that the Company is suspending the payment of regular quarterly cash dividends on the Company’s Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A issued to the U.S. Treasury. Since the dividends are cumulative, the dividends will be reported for the duration of the deferral period as a preferred dividend requirement that is deducted from net income for financial statement purposes.

Additionally the Company, following consultation with the FRB, has also exercised its rights to defer regularly scheduledpaid interest payments on all of its issuesseries of junior subordinated debentures having an outstanding principal amount of $88,662,$88.7 million, relating to outstanding trust preferred securities (TRUPs). Under(“TRUPs”), for which payments had been deferred beginning in the termsfourth quarter of the trust documents associated with these debentures, the Company may defer payments of interest for up to 20 consecutive quarterly periods without default. During the period that the2010.

The Company is deferring paymentsnot considered the primary beneficiary of interest on these debentures, it may not pay dividends on its common or preferred stock. The regular scheduled interest payments will continue to be accrued for payment in the future and reported as an expense for financial statement purposes.

In accordance with ASC 810, GC Trust I, GC Trust II, GB Trust I, CS Trust I and CCS Trust IIII. Therefore the trusts are not consolidated within the Company. Accordingly,Company’s consolidated financial statements, but rather the Company does not report the securities issued by GC Trust I, GC Trust II, GB Trust I, CS Trust I and CCS Trust II as liabilities, and instead reports as liabilities the subordinatedsubordinate debentures issued by the Company and held by each Trust.Trust are presented as a liability. However, the Company has fully and unconditionally guaranteed the repayment of the variable rate trust preferred securities. These trust preferred securities currently qualify as Tier 1 capital for regulatory capital requirements of the Company.

NOTE 11 – BENEFIT PLANS

Due to the Bank Merger, the Success Company subject to certain limitations and the Company expects that a portionhad no benefit plans as of the trust preferred securities will continue to qualify as Tier 1 capital with the residual qualifying as Tier 2 capital following passage of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”).

(Continued)

89


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 9 — BENEFIT PLANS
2011.

The Predecessor Company hashad a profit sharing plan which allowsallowed employees to contribute from 1% to 20% of their compensation. The Company contributescontributed an additional amount at a discretionary rate established annually by the Board of Directors. Company contributions to the Plan were $0, $0 and $409 for the period from January 1 through September 7, 2011 and $1,535 forthe full years 2010 2009 and 2008,2009, respectively. Effective July 2009 the Company suspended contributions to the profit sharing plan and willintended to reevaluate re-instating these contributions in the future when the Company returnssolidly returned to a sustained level of profitability.

Directors have deferred

The Predecessor Company allowed directors to defer some of their fees for future payment, including interest. The amount accrued for deferred compensation was $2,274 and $2,637 at year-end 2010 and 2009. Amounts expensed under the Plan were $85 for the period from January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011, $133 for 2010 and $27 and $207 during 2010, 2009, and 2008, respectively. Duringfor 2009. Beginning in 2009 the Company modified the annual earning crediting rate formula as follows; The annual crediting rate will bewas set equal to 100% of the annual return on stockholders’ equity with a 4% floor and a 12% ceiling, for the year then ended, on balances in the Plan until the director experiencesexperienced a separation from services, and, thereafter, at a earnings crediting rate based on 75% of the Company’s return on average stockholders’ equity for the year then ending with a 3% floor and a 9% ceiling. During 2008 the

The Predecessor Company used a formula which provided an annual earnings crediting rate based on 75% of the annual return on average stockholders’ equity, for the year then ended, on balances in the Plan until the director experiences a separation from service, and, thereafter, at an earnings crediting rate of 56.25% of the Company’s return on average stockholders’ equity for the year then ending. The return on annual shareholders’ equity was negative in 2008 and no earnings were credited for 2008. Alsohad certain officers of the Company are participants underparticipating in a Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan. The amount accrued for future payments under this Plan was $1,568 and $1,409 at year-end 2010 and 2009, respectively. Amounts expensed under the Plan were $166 for the period from January 1, 2011 through September 7, 2011, $259 for 2010 and $312 and $283 during 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.for 2009. Related to these plans, the Predecessor Company purchased single premium life insurance contracts on the lives of the related participants. The cash surrender value of these contracts iswas recorded as an asset of the Company.

(Continued)
The Predecessor Company surrendered its life insurance contracts during 2011.

 

90(Continued)

120


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

NOTE 10 —12 – INCOME TAXES

Income tax expense (benefit) is summarized as follows:

             
  2010  2009  2008 
             
Current — federal $(10,054) $(12,906) $(221)
Current — state  (1,775)  (2,476)  (53)
Deferred — federal  (13,870)  (1,397)  (3,649)
Deferred — state  (2,846)  (257)  (725)
Deferred tax asset — valuation allowance  43,455       
          
             
  $14,910  $(17,036) $(4,648)
          

  Successor
Company
  Predecessor Company 
  Sept. 8 - Dec 31
2011
  Jan. 1 - Sept. 7
2011
  2010  2009 

Current – federal

 $(305 $(8,277 $(10,054 $(12,906

Current – state

  (22  (1,681  (1,775  (2,476

Deferred – federal

  (109  (2,408  (13,870  (1,397

Deferred – state

  (5  (451  (2,846  (257

Deferred tax asset – valuation allowance

  —      13,791    43,455   
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total

 $(441 $974   $14,910   $(17,036
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes reflect the effect of “temporary differences” between values recorded for assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and values utilized for measurement in accordance with tax laws. The tax effects of the primary temporary differences giving rise to the Company’s net deferred tax assets and liabilities are as follows:

                 
  2010  2009 
  Assets  Liabilities  Assets  Liabilities 
                 
Allowance for loan losses $26,214  $  $19,675  $ 
Deferred compensation  2,129      1,973    
REO basis  12,175          
Purchase accounting adjustments     (1,424)  672    
Depreciation     (1,998)     (2,129)
FHLB dividends     (1,658)     (1,658)
Core deposit intangible  2,189         (4,860)
Unrealized (gain) loss on securities     (645)     (122)
NOL carry forward  10,192         (122)
Other      (1,542)  49    
Deferred tax asset — valuation allowance      (43,455)      
             
                 
Total deferred income taxes $52,899  $(50,722) $22,369  $(8,769)
             

   Successor Company  Predecessor Company 
   2011  2010  2009 
   Assets   Liabilities  Assets   Liabilities  Assets   Liabilities 

Allowance for loan losses

  $—      $—     $26,214    $—     $19,675    $—    

Deferred compensation

   85     —      2,129     —      1,973     —    

REO basis

   —       —      12,175     —      —       —    

Purchase accounting adjustments

   —       —      —       (1,424  672     —    

Depreciation

   —       —      —       (1,998  —       (2,129

FHLB dividends

   —       —      —       (1,658  —       (1,658

Core deposit intangible

   —       —      2,189     —      —       (4,860

PAA Borrowings TRUPS

   —       (15,934  —       —      —       —    

Unrealized (gain) loss on securities

   —       —      —       (645  —       (122

NOL carryforward

   —       —      10,192     —      —       —    

Other

   327     —      —       (1,542  49     —    

Deferred tax asset – valuation allowance

   —       —      —       (43,455  —       —    
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total deferred income taxes

  $412    $(15,934 $52,899    $(50,722 $22,369    $(8,769
  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

(Continued)

121


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

A valuation allowance is recognized for a net DTA if, based on the weight of available evidence, it is more-likely-than-not that some portion or the entire DTA will not be realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. In making such judgments, significant weight is given to evidence that can be objectively verified. As a result of the increased credit losses, the Predecessor Company entered into a three-year cumulative pre-tax loss position (excluding the goodwill impairment charge recognized in the secondfirst quarter of 2009) as of JuneSeptember 30, 2010.

A cumulative loss position is considered significant negative evidence in assessing the realizability of a deferred tax asset which is difficult to overcome. The Predecessor Company’s estimate of the realization of its net DTA was based on the scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities and taxable income available in prior carry back years and tax planning strategies. Based on management’s calculation, a valuation allowance of $43,455, or 95% of the Predecessor Company’s net DTA, was an adequate estimate as of December 31, 2010. This estimate resulted in a valuation allowance for the net DTA in the income statement of $43,455 for the period end 2010.

(Continued)

91


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 10 — INCOME TAXES(Continued)
A reconciliation of expected income tax expense (benefit) at the statutory federal income tax rate of 35% with the actual effective income tax rates is as follows:
             
  2010  2009  2008 
 
Statutory federal tax rate  (35.0%)  (35.0%)  (35.0%)
State income tax, net of federal benefit  (4.6)  (1.1)  (5.2)
Tax exempt income  (2.0)  (0.5)  (8.0)
Goodwill impairment     26.4    
Deferred tax asset — valuation allowance  66.1       
Other  (1.8)  (0.5)   
          
             
   (22.7%)  (10.2%)  (46.4%)
          

   Successor
Company
  Predecessor Company 
   Sept. 8 - Dec 31
2011
  Jan. 1 -Sept. 7
2011
  2010  2009 

Statutory federal tax rate

   35.0  35.0  35.0  35.0

State income tax, net of federal benefit

   (0.9  4.3    4.6    1.1  

Equity in income from investment in subsidiary

   (54.7   

Tax exempt income

     0.7    2.0    .0.5  

Goodwill impairment

      —      (26.4

Deferred tax asset – valuation allowance

     (42.5  (66.1  —    

Other

   0.6    0.1    1.8    —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total

   (20.0%)   (2.4%)   (22.7%)   10.2
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The Company recognizes accrued interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions in tax expense.

 At the date of adoption of interpretive guidance on accounting for uncertainty in income taxes, the Predecessor Company had recognized approximately $150 for the payment of interest and penalties.

The Predecessor Company’s Federal returns are open and subject to examination for the years of 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2009.2010. The Predecessor Company’s State returns are open and subject to examination for the years of 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2009.

At December 31, 2010 the Company had gross federal net operating loss carry-forwards of $24,118. The carry-forwards begin2010.

(Continued)

122


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to expireConsolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in 2031. At December 31, 2010 the Company had gross state net operating loss carry-forwards of $41,433. Of the total $41,433 in carry-forwards, $18,490 begin to expire in 2025 while the remaining $22,943 begin to expire in 2026.

thousands except share and per share data)

NOTE 11 —13 – COMMITMENTS AND FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS WITH OFF-BALANCE-SHEET RISK

Due to the Bank Merger, the Company reported no commitments or financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk as of December 31, 2011 (Successor).

Some financial instruments, such as loan commitments, credit lines, letters of credit, and overdraft protection, are issued to meet customer-financing needs. These are agreements to provide credit or to support the credit of others, as long as conditions established in the contract are met, and usually have expiration dates. Commitments may expire without being used. Off-balance-sheet risk to credit loss exists up to the face amount of these instruments, although material losses are not anticipated. The same credit policies are used to make such commitments as are used for loans, including obtaining collateral at exercise of the commitment.

Financial

Predecessor Company financial instruments with off-balance-sheet risk were as follows at year-end:

         
  2010  2009 
 
Commitments to make loans — fixed $3,827  $1,202 
Commitments to make loans — variable  2,464   4,718 
Unused lines of credit  201,973   239,374 
Letters of credit  25,674   30,107 

   2010   2009 

Commitments to make loans – fixed

  $3,827    $1,202  

Commitments to make loans – variable

   2,464     4,718  

Unused lines of credit

   201,973     239,374  

Letters of credit

   25,674     30,107  

The fixed rate loan commitments have interest rates ranging from 5.49% to 8.75% and maturities ranging from one to fifteen years. Letters of credit are considered financial guarantees under ASC 460.

(Continued)

92


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 12 —14 – CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS ON RETAINED EARNINGS

Banks and bank holding companies are subject to regulatory capital requirements administered by federal banking agencies. Capital adequacy guidelines and, additionally for banks, prompt corrective action regulations 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. Failure to meet capital requirements can initiate regulatory action.

Prompt corrective action regulations provide five classifications: well capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized, and critically undercapitalized, although these terms are not used to represent overall financial condition. If adequately capitalized, regulatory approval is required to accept brokered deposits. If undercapitalized, capital distributions are limited, as is asset growth and expansion, and capital restoration plans are required.

Based on

On September 7, 2011, the most recent notifications fromCompany completed the issuance and sale of 119.9 million shares of its regulators,common stock to CBF for approximately $217 million in consideration (“CBF Investment”). CBF is the controlling owner of Capital Bank, is well capitalized underNA. In connection with the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action. However,CBF Investment, all of the Bank has informally committedCompany’s Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, and related warrants to its primary regulators that it will maintain a Tier 1 leverage ratio (Tier 1 Capitalpurchase shares of the Company’s common stock issued to Average Assets) in excess of 10% and a Total risk-based capital ratio (Total Capital to Risk Weighted Assets) in excess of 14%.

the U.S. Treasury through the TARP were repurchased by CBF.

During the third quarter of 2010, the Bank was subject to a joint examination by2011, the FDIC and the TDFI. Based on initial findings presented toTDFI issued a consent order against the Bank aimed at strengthening the Bank’s management, the Bank expects that either the FDIC or the TDFI or both will require the Bankoperations and its financial condition. The order’s provisions included requirements similar to agree to certain improvements in its operations, particularly in relation to asset quality matters. We also believethose that the Bank will be requiredhas already informally committed to agreecomply with, including requirements to maintain or increasethe Bank’s capital to levelsratios above those levels required to be considered well capitalized. We do not know at this time what minimum levels of capital the regulators will require. If the requirement to maintain higher capital levels than those required to be well capitalized“well-capitalized” under the prompt corrective action provisionsfederal banking regulations. As a result of the FDICIAsubsequent Bank merger, the consent order is containedno longer in a formal enforcement action of the FDIC, the Bank may be subject to additional limitations on its operations including its ability to pay interest on deposits above proscribed rates, which could adversely affect the Bank’s liquidity and/or operating results. The terms of any such supervisory action that goes beyond the steps we have already taken may have a significant negative effect on our business, operating flexibility and results of operations. Failure by the Bank to meet applicable capital guidelines or to satisfy certain other regulatory requirements could subject the Bank to a variety of enforcement remedies available to the federal regulatory authorities.

(Continued)
effect.

 

93(Continued)

123


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 12 — CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS ON RETAINED EARNINGS (continued)
As reflected in the table below, the Bank did not satisfy these higher ratio requirements at December 31, 2010. Actual capital levels and minimum required levels (in millions) were as follows. Because the Bank’s capital levels at December 31, 2010 were below those that the Bank had informally committed to its primary regulators that it would maintain, the Bank was required to submit a Capital Action Plan to its primary regulators.
                         
                  Minimum Amounts to 
                  be Well Capitalized 
          Minimum Required  Under Prompt 
     for Capital  Corrective 
  Actual  Adequacy Purposes  Action Provisions 
  Actual  Ratio (%)  Actual  Ratio (%)  Actual  Ratio (%) 
2010                        
Total Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)                        
Consolidated $239.7   13.2  $145.2   8.0  $181.6   10.0 
Bank  239.6   13.2   145.0   8.0   181.3   10.0 
Tier 1 Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)                        
Consolidated $216.5   11.9  $72.6   4.0  $108.9   6.0 
Bank  216.4   11.9   72.5   4.0   108.8   6.0 
Tier 1 Capital (to Average Assets)                        
Consolidated $216.5   8.9  $97.6   4.0  $122.0   5.0 
Bank  216.4   8.9   97.5   4.0   121.8   5.0 
                         
2009                        
Total Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)                        
Consolidated $318.5   14.9  $171.0   8.0  $213.8   10.0 
Bank  317.4   14.9   170.7   8.0   213.4   10.0 
Tier 1 Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)                        
Consolidated $291.5   13.6  $85.5   4.0  $128.3   6.0 
Bank  290.4   13.6   85.4   4.0   128.0   6.0 
Tier 1 Capital (to Average Assets)                        
Consolidated $291.5   10.7  $108.6   4.0  $135.8   5.0 
Bank  290.4   10.7   108.6   4.0   135.7   5.0 
(Continued)

 

94


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 12 — CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS ON RETAINED EARNINGS(continued)
The Successor Company’s primary source of funds to pay dividends to shareholders is the dividends it receives from Capital Bank. In August 2010, Capital Bank entered into an Operating Agreement with the Bank. Applicable state lawsOCC (which we refer to as the “OCC Operating Agreement”), in connection with the acquisition of the Failed Banks. Capital Bank (and, with respect to certain provisions, the Company and CBF) is also subject to an Order of the FDIC, dated July 16, 2010 (which we refer to as the “FDIC Order”) issued in connection with the FDIC’s approval of CBF’s deposit insurance applications for the Failed Banks. The OCC Operating Agreement and the regulations ofFDIC Order require that Capital Bank maintain various financial and capital ratios and require prior regulatory notice and consent to take certain actions in connection with operating the Federal Reserve Bankbusiness and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation regulate the payment of dividends. Under the state regulations, the amount of dividends that may be paid by the Bank to the Company without prior approval of the Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Financial Institutions is limited in any one year to an amount equal to the net income in the calendar year of declaration plus retained net income for the preceding two years; however, future dividends will be dependent on the level of earnings, capital and liquidity requirements and considerations of the Bank and Company.
In general, the Bank may not declare or pay a dividend to the Company in excess of 100% of its net retained profits for the current year combined with its net retained profits for the preceding two calendar years without prior approval of the Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Financial Institutions. Thethey restrict Capital Bank’s ability to make capital distributions inpay dividends to CBF and the future may require regulatory approvalCompany and may be restricted by its regulatory authorities. The Bank’s ability to make any such distributions will also depend onchanges to its earnings and abilitycapital structure. A failure by CBF or Capital Bank to meet minimum regulatory capitalcomply with the requirements in effect during future periods. These capital adequacy standards may be higher in the future than existing minimum regulatory capital requirements. The FDIC also has the authority to prohibit the payment of dividends by a bank when it determines such payments would constitute an unsafe and unsound banking practice. In addition, income tax considerations may limit the ability of the BankOCC Operating Agreement or the FDIC Order could subject CBF to make dividend paymentsregulatory sanctions; and failure to comply, or the objection, or imposition of additional conditions, by the OCC or the FDIC, in excessconnection with any materials or information submitted thereunder, could prevent CBF from executing its business strategy and negatively impact its business, financial condition, liquidity and results of its currentoperations.

Actual capital levels and accumulated tax “earningsminimum required levels to be well capitalized under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action (in millions) were as follows:

   Actual   Minimum Required
to be Well
Capitalized
 
   Actual   Ratio (%)   Actual   Ratio (%) 

Successor Company:

        

December 31, 2011:

        

Total Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)

        

Consolidated

  $306.7     99.8    $30.7     10  

Tier 1 Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)

        

Consolidated

  $306.7     99.8    $18.4     6  

Tier 1 Capital (to Average Assets)

        

Consolidated

  $306.7     100.7    $15.2     5  

Predecessor Company:

        

December 31, 2010:

        

Total Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)

        

Consolidated

  $239.7     13.2    $181.6     10  

Bank

   239.6     13.2     181.3     10  

Tier 1 Capital (to Risk Weighted Assets)

        

Consolidated

  $216.5     11.9    $108.9     6  

Bank

   216.4     11.9     108.8     6  

Tier 1 Capital (to Average Assets)

        

Consolidated

  $216.5     8.9    $122.0     5  

Bank

   216.4     8.9     121.8     5  

(Continued)

124


Green Bankshares and profits” (“E&P”). Annual dividend distributionsSubsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in excess of E&P could result in a tax liability based onthousands except share and per share data)

NOTE 15 – STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION

For the amount of excess earnings distributedperiod from September 8, 2011 through December 31, 2011, the Successor Company had no stock or option grants and current tax rates. The Company has informally committed to the FRB-Atlanta that it will not pay dividends on its common or preferred stock (or interest on its subordinated debentures) without the prior approval of the FRB-Atlanta. The Company also informally committed to the FRB-Atlanta that it will not incur any indebtedness without the prior approval of the FRB-Atlanta.

On November 9, 2010, the Company following consultation with the FRB announced that it had suspended preferred stock dividends and interest payments on its junior subordinated debenturesno expenses associated with its trust preferred securities in order to preserve capital.
On December 23, 2008 thestock-based compensation.

The Predecessor Company entered into a definitive agreement (the “Agreement”) with the U.S. Treasury to participate in the Capital Purchase Program (“CPP”). Pursuant to the Agreement, the Company sold 72,278 shares of Series A preferred stock with an attached warrant to purchase 635,504 shares of our common stock priced at $17.06 per common share, to the U.S. Treasury for an aggregate consideration of $83 million.

NOTE 13 — STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION
The Company maintainsmaintained a 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended (the “Plan”), whereby a maximum of 500,000 shares of common stock maycould be issued to directors and employees of the Company and the Bank. The Plan providesprovided for the issuance of awards in the form of stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted shares, restricted share units, deferred share units and performance awards. Stock options granted under the Plan arewere typically granted at exercise prices equal to the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant and typically havehad terms of ten years and vestvested at an annual rate of 20%. Shares of restricted stock awarded under the Plan havehad restrictions that expireexpired within the vesting period of the award which range from 12 months to 60 months. At December 31, 2010, 170,324 shares remained available for future grant. The compensation cost related to options that has been charged against income for the Plan was approximately $177, $295 and $387 for the period of January 1 through September 7, 2011 and $456 for the years ended December 31, 2010 2009 and 2008,2009, respectively. The compensation cost related to restricted stock that hashad been charged against income for the Plan was approximately $771, $331 and $299 for the period of January 1 through September 7, 2011 and $303 for the years ended December 31, 2010 2009, and 2008,2009, respectively. As of December 31, 2010, there was $678 of total unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested share-based compensation arrangements, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.3 years.
(Continued)

arrangements.

95


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 13 — STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION(Continued)
Stock Options

The fair market value of each option award is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The Company did not grant any incentive stock options for 2011, 2010 2009, or 2008.

2009.

A summary of stock option activity under the Predecessor Company Plan for the three years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 is presented below:

                 
          Weighted    
      Weighted  Average    
      Average  Remaining  Aggregate 
  Stock  Exercise  Contractual  Intrinsic 
  Options  Price  Term  Value 
Outstanding at January 1, 2008  452,077  $25.72         
Exercised  (9,759)  12.63         
Forfeited  (1,565)  30.65         
Expired  (16,310)  23.00         
                
                 
Outstanding at December 31, 2008  424,443  $26.10         
Forfeited  (1,374)  32.05         
Expired  (34,875)  25.58         
                
                 
Outstanding at December 31, 2009  388,194  $26.14         
Exercised              
Forfeited  (6,484)  33.12         
Expired              
                
Outstanding at December 31, 2010  381,710  $25.96  3.6 years  $ 
                
Options exercisable at December 31, 2010  344,029  $25.17  3.4 years  $ 
                
During

   Stock
Options
  Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
   Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term
   Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
 

Outstanding at December 31, 2009

   388,194   $26.14      

Exercised

   —      —        

Forfeited

   (6,484  33.12      
       

Expired

   —      —        
  

 

 

      

Outstanding at December 31, 2010

   381,710   $25.96     3.6 years    $—    
  

 

 

      

Options exercisable at December 31, 2010

   344,029   $25.17     3.4 years    $—    
  

 

 

      

The total aggregate intrinsic value of stock options (which is the years-endedamount by which the stock price exceeded the exercise price of the stock options) exercised during the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, there were no exercised stock options.was $0 and $0, respectively. The total fair value of stock options vesting during the yearsperiod of January 1 through September 7, 2011 and the year ended December 31, 2010 was $319 and 2009 was $376, respectively.

During 2011 and $450, respectively.

(Continued)
2010 there were no exercised stock options.

 

96(Continued)

125


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 13 — STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION(Continued)

Stock options outstanding at year-end 2010 were as follows:

                         
  Outstanding  Exercisable 
      Weighted          Weighted    
      Average  Weighted      Average  Weighted 
      Remaining  Average      Remaining  Average 
Range of Number  Contractual  Exercise  Number  Contractual  Exercise 
Exercise Prices Outstanding  Life  Price  Outstanding  Life  Price 
                         
$12.41 – $15.00  24,142   1.8  $12.95   24,142   1.8  $12.95 
                         
$15.01 – $20.00  77,698   1.8  $17.63   77,698   1.8  $17.63 
                         
$20.01 – $25.00  50,635   3.1  $23.36   50,635   3.1  $23.36 
                         
$25.01 – $30.00  135,476   4.7  $28.00   122,137   4.6  $27.91 
                         
$30.01 – $36.32  93,759   4.4  $34.80   69,417   3.8  $34.37 
                       
                         
Total  381,710           344,029         
                       
(Continued)

   Outstanding   Exercisable 

Range of Exercise Prices

  Number
Outstanding
   Weighted
Average
Remaining

Contractual
Life
   Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
   Number
Outstanding
   Weighted
Average
Remaining

Contractual
Life
   Weighted
Average
Exercise

Price
 

$12.41 - $15.00

   24,142     1.8    $12.95     24,142     1.8    $12.95  

$15.01 - $20.00

   77,698     1.8    $17.63     77,698     1.8    $17.63  

$20.01 - $25.00

   50,635     3.1    $23.36     50,635     3.1    $23.36  

$25.01 - $30.00

   135,476     4.7    $28.00     122,137     4.6    $27.91  

$30.01 - $36.32

   93,759     4.4    $34.80     69,417     3.8    $34.37  
  

 

 

       

 

 

     

Total

   381,710         344,029      
  

 

 

       

 

 

     

 

97(Continued)

126


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

NOTE 13 — STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION(Continued)

Restricted Stock

A summary of restricted stock activity under the Predecessor Company Plan as of September 7, 2011 and for the year ended December 31, 2010 2009, and 20082009 is presented below.

         
      Weighted 
      Average 
      Price Per 
  Shares  Share 
 
Balance at January 1, 2008    $ 
Granted:        
Non-employee Directors  7,852   16.56 
Executive officers & management  62,015   19.20 
Cancelled:        
Non-employee Directors      
Executive officers & management  (8,960)  19.44 
       
         
Balance at December 31, 2008  60,907   18.83 
Granted:        
Non-employee Directors  7,060   7.08 
Non-executive officers & management  56,934   7.08 
Vested:        
Non-employee Directors  (7,852)  16.56 
Executive officers, non-executive officers & management  (10,584)  19.16 
Cancelled:        
Non-employee Directors      
Non-executive officers & management  (5,207)  14.98 
         
Balance at December 31, 2009  101,258  $11.74 
Granted:        
Non-employee Directors  6,548   6.11 
Executive officers  18,382   8.16 
Vested:        
Non-employee Directors  (7,060)  7.08 
Executive officers, non-executive officers & management  (20,335)  12.77 
Cancelled:        
Executive officers  (1,543)  16.56 
Non-executive officers & management  (5,968)  11.82 
       
         
Balance at December 31, 2010  91,282  $10.67 
       
         
Weighted-average fair value of nonvested stock awards granted during the year ended December 31,        
2010 $7.62     
        
2009 $7.08     
        
2008 $18.90     
        
(Continued)

Predecessor Company:  Shares  Weighted
Average
Price Per
Share
 

Balance at January 1, 2009

   60,907   $18.83  

Granted:

   

Non-employee Directors

   7,060    7.08  

Non-executive officers & management

   56,934    7.08  

Vested:

   

Non-employee Directors

   (7,852  16.56  

Executive officers, non-executive officers & management

   (10,584  19.16  

Cancelled:

   

Non-employee Directors

   —      —    

Non-executive officers & management

   (5,207  14.98  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2009

   101,258   $11.74  

Granted:

   

Non-employee Directors

   6,548    6.11  

Executive officers

   18,382    8.16  

Vested:

   

Non-employee Directors

   (7,060  7.08  

Executive officers, non-executive officers & management

   (20,335  12.77  

Cancelled:

   

Executive officers

   (1,543  16.56  

Non-executive officers & management

   (5,968  11.82  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2010

   91,282   $10.67  

Granted:

   

Non-employee Directors

   22,336    2.65  

Executive officers

   72,807    1.60  

Vested:

   

Non-employee Directors

   (28,884  3.43  

Executive officers, non-executive officers & management

   (18,716  12.66  

Cancelled:

   

Executive officers

   (1,029  16.56  

Non-executive officers & management

   (8,646  10.88  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance at September 7, 2011

   129,150   $5.74  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

98(Continued)

127


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Weighted-average fair value of non-vested stock awards granted during the period from January 1 through September 7, 2011 and the year ended December 31, 2010 2009 and 2008

2009:

Predecessor:

    

Jan 1 – Sept 7, 2011

  $1.54  

2010

  $7.62  

2009

  $7.08  

NOTE 13 — STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION (Continued)

Cash Settled Stock Appreciation Rights

During 2010, only non-employee Directors receivedthe year ended December 31, 2009 the Predecessor Company granted cash-settled stock appreciation rights (“SAR’s”). During the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 the Company granted SAR’s awards to non-employee Directors, executive officers and select employees. During the year ended December 31, 2007 only select employees received SAR’s. Each award, when granted, providesprovided the participant with the right to receive payment in cash, upon exercise of each SAR, for the difference between the appreciation in market value of a specified number of shares of the Company’s Common Stock over the award’s exercise price. The SAR’s vest over the same period as the stock option awards issued and the restricted stock grants and can only be exercised in tandem with the stock option awards or vesting of the restricted stock grants. The per-share exercise price of an SAR is equal to the closing market price of a share of the Predecessor Company’s common stock on the date of grant. For the year ended December 31, 2010 the Company recorded anrecognized a recovery in expense of $15 and for the year ended December 31, 2009 the Company recognized a recovery inan expense of $24 related to outstanding awarded SAR’s. As of December 31, 2010, there was noan estimated $346 of unrecognized compensation cost related to SAR’s. The cost, is measured at each reporting period until the award is settled.settled, is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 1.3 years. As of December 31, 2010, no cash settled SAR’s had been exercised and as such, no share-based liabilities were paid.

(Continued)

128


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

A summary of the SAR activity during years ended December 31, 2010 2009, and 20082009 is presented below.

         
      Weighted 
      Average 
      Price Per 
  SAR’s  Share 
         
Balance at January 1, 2008  19,000   34.63 
Granted:        
Non-employee Directors  7,852   16.56 
Executive officers & management  62,015   19.20 
Cancelled/Expired:        
Non-employee Directors      
Executive officers & management  (8,960)  19.44 
       
         
Balance at December 31, 2008  79,907  $22.58 
Granted:        
Non-employee Directors  7,060   7.08 
Non-executive officers & management  56,934   7.08 
Cancelled/Expired:        
Non-employee Directors  (7,852)  16.56 
Non-executive officers & management  (15,817)  17.78 
       
 
Balance at December 31, 2009  120,232  $15.36 
Granted:        
Non-employee Directors  6,548   6.11 
Non-executive officers & management      
Cancelled/Expired:        
Non-employee Directors  (7,060)  7.08 
Non-executive officers & management  (27,777)  12.75 
       
         
Balance at December 31, 2010  91,943  $16.12 
       
(Continued)

 

Predecessor Company:  Shares  Weighted
Average
Price Per
Share
 

Balance at January 1, 2009

   79,907   $22.58  

Granted:

   

Non-employee Directors

   7,060    7.08  

Non-executive officers & management

   56,934    7.08  

Cancelled/Expired:

   

Non-employee Directors

   (7,852  16.56  

Non-executive officers & management

   (15,817  17.78  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2009

   120,232   $15.36  

Granted:

   

Non-employee Directors

   6,548    6.11  

Non-executive officers & management

   —      —    

Cancelled/Expired:

   

Non-employee Directors

   (7,060  7.08  

Non-executive officers & management

   (27,777  12.75  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2010

   91,943   $16.12  

Granted:

   

Non-employee Directors

   —      —    

Non-executive officers & management

   —      —    

Cancelled:

   

Non-employee Directors

   —      —    

Non-executive officers & management

   (8,158  12.48  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balance at September 7, 2011

   83,785   $16.48  
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Weighted-average fair value of cash-settled SAR's granted during the year ended December 31,

   

Predecessor:

   

Jan 1 – Sept 7, 2011

   N/A   
  

 

 

  

2010

  $6.11   
  

 

 

  

2009

  $7.08   
  

 

 

  

99


GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
Note 13 — Stock-Based Compensation (CONTINUED)
         
Weighted-average fair value of cash-settled SAR’s granted during the year ended December 31,        
2010     $6.11 
        
2009    $7.08 
        
2008    $18.93 
        
The following table illustrates the assumptions for the Black-Scholes model used in determining the fair value of the SAR’s at the time of grant for the periods ending December 31.
         
  2010  2009 2008
Risk-free interest rate  0.307%  0.67% – 1.89% 3.81% – 3.85%
         
Volatility  57.06%  40.18% 29.46% – 32.81%
Expected life  1 year  1 – 5 years 1 – 5 years
Dividend yield  0.00%  7.34% 3.54%

   2010 2009

Risk-free interest rate

  0.307% 0.67% –1.89%

Volatility

  57.06% 40.18%

Expected life

  1 year 1 - 5 years

Dividend yield

  0.00% 7.34%

(Continued)

129


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)

Cash-settled SAR’s awarded in stock-based payment transactions are accounted for under ASC 718 which classifies these awards as liabilities. Accordingly, the Predecessor Company recordsrecorded these awards as a component of other non-current liabilities on the balance sheet. For liability awards, the fair value of the award, which determines the measurement of the liability on the balance sheet, iswas remeasured at each reporting period until the award is settled. Fluctuations in the fair value of the liability award arewere recorded as increases or decreases in compensation cost, either immediately or over the remaining service period, depending on the vested status of the award.

The risk-free interest rate is based upon a U.S. Treasury instrument with a life that is similar to the expected life of the SAR. Expected volatility is based upon the historical volatility of the Company’s common stock based upon prior year’s trading history. The expected term of the SAR is based upon the average life of previously issued stock options and restricted stock grants. The expected dividend yield is based upon current yield on the date of grant. These SAR’s can only be settledexercised in tandem with thestock options being exercised or vesting of restricted stock awards and only if the value at settlement date is greater than the value at award date.

(Continued)
stock.

 

100(Continued)

130


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

NOTE 14 —16 – EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE

A reconciliation of the numerators and denominators of the earnings (loss) per common share and earnings (loss) per common share assuming dilution computations are presented below.

             
  2010  2009  2008 
Basic Earnings (Loss) Per Share
            
             
Net income (loss) $(80,695) $(150,694) $(5,360)
Less: preferred stock dividends and accretion of discount on warrants  5,001   4,982   92 
          
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders $(85,696) $(155,676) $(5,452)
          
             
Weighted average common shares outstanding  13,093,847   13,068,407   12,932,576 
          
             
Basic earnings (loss) per share $(6.54) $(11.91) $(0.42)
          
             
Diluted Earnings (Loss) Per Share
            
             
Net income (loss) $(80,695) $(150,694) $(5,360)
Less: preferred stock dividends and accretion of discount on warrants  5,001   4,982   92 
          
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders $(85,696) $(155,676) $(5,452)
          
             
Weighted average common shares outstanding  13,093,847   13,068,407   12,932,576 
             
Add: Dilutive effects of assumed conversions of restricted stock and exercises of stock options and warrants        58,214 
          
             
Weighted average common and dilutive potential common shares outstanding(1) (2)
  13,093,847   13,068,407   12,990,790 
          
             
Diluted earnings (loss) per common share(1) (2)
 $(6.54) $(11.91) $(0.42)
          
             

  Successor
Company
  Predecessor Company 
  Sept 8 - Dec 31
2011
  Jan 1 - Sept 7
2011
  2010  2009 

Basic Earnings (loss) Per Share

     

Net income (loss)

 $2,647   $(41,519 $(80,695 $(150,694

Less: preferred stock dividends and accretion of discount on warrants

   $3,409    

Less: Gain on retirement of Series A preferred allocated to common shareholders

  —      11,188    5,001    4,982  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss) available to common shareholders

 $2,647   $(33,740 $(85,696 $(155,676
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Weighted average common shares outstanding

  133,083,705    13,125,521    13,093,847    13,068,407  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Basic earnings (loss) per share available to common shareholders

  .02    (2.57  (6.54  (11.91
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Diluted Earnings (loss) Per Share

     

Net income (loss)

 $2,647   $(41,519 $(80,695 $(150,694

Less: preferred stock dividends and accretion of discount on warrants

  —      3,409    —      —    

Less: Gain on retirement of Series A preferred allocated to common shareholders

  —      11,188    5,001    4,982  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss) available to common shareholders

 $2,647   $(33,740 $(85,696 $(155,676
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Weighted average common shares outstanding

  133,083,705    13,125,521    13,093,847    13,068,407  

Add: Dilutive effects of assumed conversions of restricted stock and exercises of stock options and warrants (1), (2)

  76,679    —      —      —    
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Weighted average common and dilutive potential common shares outstanding

  133,160,384    13,125,521    13,093,847    13,068,407  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Diluted earnings (loss) per share available to common shareholders

  .02    (2.57  (6.54  (11.91
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

1(1)Diluted weighted average shares outstanding for the period from Jan 1, 2011 to September 7, 2011, and 2010 and 2009 excludes 94,930, 92,979 and 96,971 shares of unvested restricted stock because they are anti-dilutive and is equal to weighted average common shares outstanding.
2(2)Stock options and warrants of 976,659, 1,017,645 1,058,992 and 387,1211,058,992 were excluded from theJan 1, 2011 to September 7, 2011 and 2010 2009 and 20082009 diluted earnings per share because their impact was anti-dilutive.
(Continued)

 

101(Continued)

131


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

NOTE 15 —17 – PARENT COMPANY CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Due to the Bank Merger, the Successor Company’s financial results are equivalent to those of the parent company.

BALANCE SHEETS
Years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009

         
  2010  2009 
         
ASSETS        
Cash and due from financial institutions $1,707  $3,081 
Investment in subsidiary  228,590   308,831 
Other  4,795   4,692 
       
         
Total assets $235,092  $316,604 
       
         
LIABILITIES        
Subordinated debentures $88,662  $88,662 
Other liabilities  2,533   1,173 
       
         
Total liabilities  91,195   89,835 
         
Shareholders’ equity  143,897   226,769 
       
         
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $235,092  $316,604 
       

   Successor
Company
   Predecessor Company 
   Dec. 31, 2011   Dec. 31, 2010   Dec. 31, 2009 

ASSETS

       

Cash and due from financial institutions

  $2,091    $1,707    $3,081  

Investment in subsidiary

   315,343     228,590     308,831  

Other

   3,804     4,795     4,692  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total assets

  $321,238    $235,092    $316,604  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

LIABILITIES

       

Subordinated debentures

  $45,180    $88,662    $88,662  

Other liabilities

   16,009     2,532     1,173  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities

   61,189     91,194     89,835  
 

Shareholders’ equity

   260,049     143,898     226,769  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $321,238    $235,092    $316,604  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

STATEMENTS OF INCOME
Years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008

             
  2010  2009  2008 
             
Dividends from subsidiary $2,500  $3,000  $13,600 
Other income  96   180   241 
Interest expense  (1,980)  (2,577)  (4,555)
Other expense  (2,002)  (1,718)  (2,022)
          
Income (loss) before income taxes  (1,386)  (1,115)  7,264 
Income tax benefit  (743)  (1,488)  (2,330)
Equity in undistributed net income (loss) of subsidiary  (80,052)  (151,067)  (14,954)
          
Net income (loss)  (80,695)  (150,694)  (5,360)
Preferred stock dividends and accretion of discount on warrants  5,001   4,982   92 
          
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders $(85,696) $(155,676) $(5,452)
          
(Continued)

   Successor
Company
  Predecessor Company 
   Sep. 8, 2011
to
Dec. 31, 2011
  Jan. 1, 2011
to
Sep. 7, 2011
  Year
Ended
Dec. 31, 2010
  Year
Ended
Dec. 31, 2009
 

Dividends from subsidiary

  $—     $—     $2,500   $3,000  

Other income

   19    88    96    180  

Interest expense

   (977  (1,383  (1,980  (2,577

Other expense

   (282  (2,110  (2,002  (1,718
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Income before income taxes

   (1,240  (3,405  (1,386  (1,115

Income tax benefit

   (441  (889  (743  (1,488

Equity in undistributed net income (loss) of subsidiary

   3,446    (39,003  (80,052  (151,067
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss)

   2,647    (41,519  (80,695  (150,694

Preferred stock dividends and accretion of discount on warrants

   —      3,409    5,001    4,982  
     

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss) available to common shareholders

  $2,647   $(44,928 $(85,696 $(155,676
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

102(Continued)

132


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
NOTE 15 — PARENT COMPANY CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS(Continued)

STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

Years ended December 31, 2010 2009, and 2008

             
  2010  2009  2008 
Operating activities
            
Net income (loss) $(80,695) $(150,694) $(5,360)
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided (used) by operating activities:            
Undistributed (net income) loss of subsidiaries  80,052   151,067   14,954 
Stock compensation expense  626   686   759 
Change in other assets  104   1,868   (1,413)
Change in liabilities  1,250   (412)  (14)
          
Net cash provided (used) by operating activities  1,337   2,515   8,926 
             
Investing activities
            
Capital investment in bank subsidiary        (77,278)
          
Net cash used in investing activities        (77,278)
             
Financing activities
            
Preferred stock dividends paid  (2,711)  (3,232)   
Common stock dividends paid     (1,713)  (6,779)
Proceeds from issuance of preferred stock        72,278 
Proceeds from issuance of common stock        111 
             
Tax benefit resulting from stock options        5 
          
Net cash provided (used in) financing activities  (2,711)  (4,945)  65,615 
          
             
Net change in cash and cash equivalents
  (1,374)  (2,430)  (2,737)
             
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year  3,081   5,511   8,248 
          
             
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year
 $1,707  $3,081  $5,511 
          
2009

   Successor
Company
  Predecessor Company 
   Sept. 8, 2011
to
Dec. 31, 2011
  Jan. 1, 2011
to
Sept. 7, 2011
  Year
Ended
Dec. 31, 2010
  Year
Ended
Dec. 31, 2009
 

Operating activities

      

Net income (loss)

  $2,647   $(41,519 $(80,695 $(150,694

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided (used) by operating activities:

      

Undistributed (net income) loss of subsidiaries

   —      39,003    80,052    151,067  

Stock compensation expense

   —      528    627    686  

Amortization of Subordinated Debenture Discount

   1,543     

Change in other assets

   554    996    103    1,868  

Change in liabilities

   (3,884  4,416    1,250    (412
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash provided (used) by operating activities

   860    3,424    1,337    2,515  
 

Investing activities

      

Capital investment in Capital Bank

   (142,850  —      —      —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash used in investing activities

   (142,850   —      —    
 

Financing activities

      

Preferred stock dividends paid

   —      (3,409  (2,711  (3,232

Common stock dividends paid

   —      —      —      (1,713

Proceeds from CBF Investment

   (5,211  147,569    —      —    
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash provided (used in) financing activities

   (5,211  144,160    (2,711  (4,945
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net change in cash and cash equivalents

   (147,201  147,584    (1,374  (2,430
 

Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year

   149,292    1,708    3,081    5,511  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents, end of year

  $2,091   $149,292   $1,707   $3,081  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

NOTE 16 —18 – OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

Other comprehensive income components were as follows.

             
  2010  2009  2008 
Unrealized holding gains and (losses) on securities available for sale, net of tax of $523, $1,105 and ($357), respectively $810  $1,712  $(553)
Reclassification adjustment for losses (gains) realized in net income, net of tax of $0, ($555) and ($1,044), respectively     (860)  (1,617)
          
             
Other comprehensive income (loss) $810  $852  $(2,170)
          
(Continued)

   Sucessor
Company
  Predecessor Company 
   Sept. 8, 2011
to
Dec. 31, 2011
  Jan. 1, 2011
to
Sept. 7, 2011
  Year
Ended
Dec. 31, 2010
   Year
Ended
Dec. 31, 2009
 

Unrealized holding gains and (losses) on securities available for sale, net of tax of $943, $1,678, $523, $1,105 respectively

  

$

(1,461

 $2,601   $810    $1,712  

Reclassification adjustment for losses (gains) realized in net income, net of tax of $0, $(2,481), $0, ($555), respectively

  

 

—  

  

  (3,843  —       (860
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Other comprehensive income (loss)

  $(1,461 $(1,242 $810    $852  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

103(Continued)

133


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

NOTE 17 —19 – SEGMENT INFORMATION

The Successor’s Company has a single operating segment, its 34% ownership of Capital Bank, NA, which is accounted for using the equity method. Thus, segment information is not relevant for the Successor Company.

The Predecessor Company’s operating segments include banking, mortgage banking, consumer finance, subprime automobile lending and title insurance. The reportable segments are determined by the products and services offered, and internal reporting. Loans, mortgage banking, investments and deposits provide the revenues in the banking operation,operation; loans and fees provide the revenues in consumer finance and subprime lendingmortgage banking and insurance commissions provide revenues for the title insurance company. Consumer finance, subprime automobile lending and title insurance do not meet the quantitative threshold for disclosure on an individual basis, and are therefore shown below in “other”“Other Segments”. Mortgage banking operations are included in “Bank”. All operations are domestic.

The accounting policies used are the same as those described in the summary of significant accounting policies. Segment

Predecessor Company segment performance is evaluated using net interest income and noninterestnon-interest income. Income taxes are allocated based on income before income taxes, and indirect expenses (includes management fees) are allocated based on time spent for each segment. Transactions among segments are made at fair value. Information reported internally for performance assessment follows.

                     
      Other  Holding      Total 
2010 Banking  Segments  Company  Eliminations  Segments 
Net interest income $77,246  $8,327  $(1,980) $  $83,593 
Provision for loan losses  69,568   1,539         71,107 
Noninterest income  31,467   1,899   96   (918)  32,544 
Noninterest expense  105,088   4,643   2,002   (918)  110,815 
Income tax expense (benefit)  14,068   1,585   (743)     14,910 
                
Segment profit (loss) $(80,011) $2,459  $(3,143) $  $(80,695)
                
                     
Segment assets $2,356,543  $42,995  $6,502  $  $2,406,040 
                
                     
      Other  Holding      Total 
2009 Banking  Segments  Company  Eliminations  Segments 
Net interest income $74,628  $8,474  $(2,577) $  $80,525 
Provision for loan losses  47,483   2,763         50,246 
Noninterest income  30,258   2,127   180   (987)  31,578 
Noninterest expense  223,989   4,868   1,717   (987)  229,587 
Income tax expense (benefit)  (16,712)  1,164   (1,488)     (17,036)
                
Segment profit (loss) $(149,874) $1,806  $(2,626) $  $(150,694)
                
                     
Segment assets $2,568,926  $42,251  $7,962  $  $2,619,139 
                
                     
      Other  Holding      Total 
2008 Banking  Segments  Company  Eliminations  Segments 
Net interest income $91,900  $7,680  $(4,555) $  $95,025 
Provision for loan losses  50,074   2,736         52,810 
Noninterest income  32,012   2,231   241   (870)  33,614 
Noninterest expense  79,548   5,137   2,022   (870)  85,837 
Income tax expense (benefit)  (3,118)  800   (2,330)     (4,648)
                
Segment profit (loss) $(2,592) $1,238  $(4,006) $  $(5,360)
                
                     
Segment assets $2,895,163  $39,846  $9,662  $  $2,944,671 
                
(Continued)

Predecessor Company

Jan 1, 2011 through Sept 7, 2011

  Banking  Other
Segments
   Holding
Company
  Eliminations  Total
Segments
 

Net interest income

  $48,181   $5,977    $(1,382 $—     $52,776  

Provision for loan losses

   43,116    626     —      —      43,742  

Noninterest income

   27,196    1,150     88    (631  27,803  

Noninterest expense

   72,577    3,326     2,110    (631  77,382  

Income tax expense (benefit)

   641    1,222     (889  —      974  
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Segment profit (loss)

  $(40,957 $1,953    $(2,515 $—     $(41,519
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Segment assets

  $2,191,032   $43,661    $153,308   $—     $2,388,001  
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

2010

  Banking  Other
Segments
   Holding
Company
  Eliminations  Total
Segments
 

Net interest income

  $77,246   $8,327    $(1,980 $—     $83,593  

Provision for loan losses

   69,568    1,539     —      —      71,107  

Noninterest income

   31,467    1,899     96    (918  32,544  

Noninterest expense

   105,088    4,643     2,002    (918  110,815  

Income tax expense (benefit)

   14,068    1,585     (743  —      14,910  
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Segment profit (loss)

  $(80,011 $2,459    $(3,143 $—     $(80,695
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Segment assets

  $2,356,543   $42,995    $6,502   $—     $2,406,040  
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

2009

  Banking  Other
Segments
   Holding
Company
  Eliminations  Total
Segments
 

Net interest income

  $74,628   $8,474    $(2,577 $—     $80,525  

Provision for loan losses

   47,483    2,763     —      —      50,246  

Noninterest income

   30,258    2,127     180    (987  31,578  

Noninterest expense

   223,989    4,868     1,717    (987  229,587  

Income tax expense (benefit)

   (16,712  1,164     (1,488  —      (17,036
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Segment profit (loss)

  $(149,874 $1,806    $(2,626 $—     $(150,694
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Segment assets

  $2,568,926   $42,251    $7,962   $—     $2,619,139  
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

104

(Continued)

134


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

NOTE 17 — SEGMENT INFORMATION(continued)

Asset Quality Ratios
             
As of and for the period ended December 31, 2010 Bank  Other  Total 
             
Nonperforming loans as percentage of total loans, net of unearned income  8.40%  1.30%  8.35%
Nonperforming assets as a percentage of total assets  8.52%  1.34%  8.56%
Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of total loans, net of unearned income  3.68%  7.33%  3.83%
Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of nonperforming loans  43.80%  562.24%  45.83%
Net charge-offs to average total loans, net of unearned income  2.76%  4.20%  2.84%
             
As of and for the period ended December 31, 2009 Bank  Other  Total 
             
Nonperforming loans as percentage of total loans, net of unearned income  3.69%  1.50%  3.70%
Nonperforming assets as a percentage of total assets  5.04%  2.02%  5.07%
Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of total loans, net of unearned income  2.30%  8.05%  2.45%
Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of nonperforming loans  62.29%  538.31%  66.39%
Net charge-offs to average total loans, net of unearned income  2.15%  5.88%  2.25%
(Continued)

As of and for the period ended December 31, 2010

  Bank  Other  Total 

Nonperforming loans as percentage of total loans, net of unearned income

   8.40  1.30  8.35

Nonperforming assets as a percentage of total assets

   8.52  1.34  8.56

Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of total loans, net of unearned income

   3.68  7.33  3.83

Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of nonperforming loans

   43.80  562.24  45.83

Net charge-offs to average total loans, net of unearned income

   2.76  4.20  2.84

As of and for the period ended December 31, 2009

  Bank  Other  Total 

Nonperforming loans as percentage of total loans, net of unearned income

   3.69  1.50  3.70

Nonperforming assets as a percentage of total assets

   5.04  2.02  5.07

Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of total loans, net of unearned income

   2.30  8.05  2.45

Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of nonperforming loans

   62.29  538.31  66.39

Net charge-offs to average total loans, net of unearned income

   2.15  5.88  2.25

 

105(Continued)

135


Green Bankshares and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

NOTE 18 —20 – SELECTED QUARTERLY FINANCIAL INFORMATION (UNAUDITED)

Presented below is a summary of the consolidated quarterly financial data:

                 
  For the three months ended 
Summary of Operations 3/31/10  6/30/10  9/30/10  12/31/10 
                 
Net interest income $21,659  $21,473  $20,747  $19,714 
Provision for loan losses  3,889   4,749   36,823   25,646 
Noninterest income  7,686   8,771   9,029   7,058 
Noninterest expense  20,546   21,274   27,009   41,986 
Income tax expense (benefit)  1,714   1,410   1,098   10,688 
             
Net income (loss) $3,196  $2,811  $(35,154) $(51,548)
             
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders $1,946  $1,561  $(36,405) $(52,798)
             
Comprehensive income $4,166  $3,705  $(34,583) $(53,173)
             
                 
Basic earnings (loss) per common share $0.15  $0.12  $(2.78) $(4.03)
             
Diluted earnings (loss) per common share $0.15  $0.12  $(2.78) $(4.03)
             
Dividends per common share $0.00  $0.00  $0.00  $0.00 
Average common shares outstanding  13,082,347   13,097,611   13,097,611   13,097,611 
Average common shares outstanding — diluted  13,172,727   13,192,648   13,097,611   13,097,611 
                 
  For the three months ended 
Summary of Operations 3/31/09  6/30/09  9/30/09  12/31/09 
                 
Net interest income $19,429  $20,180  $20,338  $20,578 
Provision for loan losses  985   24,384   18,475   6,402 
Noninterest income  6,943   7,541   9,189   8,134 
Noninterest expense  17,831   169,143   22,365   20,477 
Income tax expense (benefit)  2,776   (15,656)  (4,815)  659 
             
Net income (loss) $4,780  $(150,150) $(6,498) $1,174 
             
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders $3,548  $(151,400) $(7,748) $(76)
             
Comprehensive income $5,668  $(150,557) $(5,073) $120 
             
                 
Basic earnings (loss) per common share $0.27  $(11.58) $(0.59) $(0.01)
             
Diluted earnings (loss) per share $0.27  $(11.58) $(0.59) $(0.01)
             
Dividends per common share $0.13  $0.00  $0.00  $0.00 
Average common shares outstanding  13,062,881   13,070,216   13,070,216   13,070,216 
Average common shares outstanding — diluted  13,141,840   13,070,216   13,070,216   13,070,216 
(Continued)

   Predecessor Company  Successor Company 
   Three months ended  

07/01/2011

through

  

09/08/2011

through

  Three Months
Ended
 

Summary of Operations

 03/31/2011  06/30/2011  09/07/2011  09/30/2011  12/31/2011 

Net interest income

 $19,267   $19,452   $14,058   $(236 $(741

Provision for loan losses

  13,897    14,333    15,513    —      —    

Noninterest income

  7,627    8,236    11,940    1,169    2,297  

Noninterest expense

  23,027    24,770    29,585    95    188  

Income tax expense (benefit)

  281    281    974    (123  (318

Net income (loss)

 $(10,311 $(11,134 $(20,074 $961   $1,686  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss) available to common shareholders

 $(11,561 $(12,384 $(20,983 $961   $1,686  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

 $(10,272 $(11,096 $(20,286 $(308 $1,494  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Basic earnings (loss) per share

 $(0.88 $(0.94 $(3.23 $0.01   $.01  

Diluted earnings (loss) per share

 $(0.88 $(0.94 $(3.23 $0.01   $.01  
 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Dividends per common share

 $0.00   $0.00   $0.00   $0.00   $0.00  

Average common shares outstanding

  13,108,598    13,126,923    13,145,744    133,083,075    133,083,075  

Average common shares outstanding – diluted

  13,108,598    13,126,923    13,145,744    133,174,370    133,160,384  

Predecessor Company:

    For the three months ended 

Summary of Operations

  03/31/2010   06/30/2010   09/30/2010  12/31/2010 

Net interest income

  $21,659    $21,473    $20,747   $19,714  

Provision for loan losses

   3,889     4,749     36,823    25,646  

Noninterest income

   7,686     8,771     9,029    7,058  

Noninterest expense

   20,546     21,274     27,009    41,986  

Income tax expense (benefit)

   1,714     1,410     1,098    10,688  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss)

  $3,196    $2,811    $(35,154 $(51,548
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net income (loss) available to common shareholders

  $1,946    $1,561    $(36,405 $(52,798
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Comprehensive income

  $4,166    $3,705    $(34,583 $(53,173
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Basic earnings (loss) per share

  $0.15    $0.12    $(2.78 $(4.03
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Diluted earnings (loss) per share

  $0.15    $0.12    $(2.78 $(4.03
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

 

Dividends per common share

  $0.00    $0.00    $0.00   $0.00  

Average common shares outstanding

   13,082,347     13,097,611     13,097,611    13,097,611  

Average common shares outstanding – diluted

   13,172,727     13,192,648     13,097,611    13,097,611  

 

106

136


ITEM 9:
ITEM 9.
CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.
DISCLOSURE
None.

Not applicable.

ITEM 9A:CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

ITEM 9A. 
CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.
(a)
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

The Company, with the participation of its management, including the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer carried out an evaluation ofhave evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of itsCompany’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15 under the Exchange Act) as of the end of the period covered by this Report.

report. Based upon that evaluation, and as of the end of the period covered by this Report,they have concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures are effective in ensuring that information required to be disclosed is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Commission’s rules and forms and are also designed to ensure that the information required to be disclosed in the reports filed or submitted under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, concluded that, as a result of the deficiencies identifiedto allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures.

(b)Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Changes in internal controls that when evaluated in combination give rise to a material weakness as described above under the caption entitled “Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting” in Item 8 of this Report, the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were not effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed in its reports that the Company files or submits to the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported on a timely basis. In light of this material weakness, in preparing the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Report, the Company performed a thorough review of credit quality, focusing especially on the timely receipt and review of updated appraisals from outside independent third parties and internal supporting documentation to ensure that the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Report have been prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP.

The Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have certified that, based on their knowledge, the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Report fairly present in all material respects the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented in this Report.
Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Company has included a report of management’s assessment of the design and operating effectiveness of its internal controls as part of this Report.
Changes In Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Management’s assessment of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting identified deficiencies in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting at December 31, 2010 related to: 1) the timely receipt and review of updated appraisals received from outside independent third parties. The increased volume of impaired and nonperforming assets requiring updated valuations during the second half of 2010 resulted in an internal control deficiency related to the timely acquisition and review of these appraisals. 2) A new process was implemented with the establishment of the Special Assets Group where appraisals, once received, are sent to an independent external appraisal review service. Controls surrounding this process in regards to the potential impairment of an asset prior to the completion of our review process are in the process of being documented. 3) Documentation and review of supporting documentation relating to impaired loans and

There have been no other real estate owned. Areas were identified where the documentation supporting certain impaired loans and other real estate owned charge-offs were lacking in sufficient detail and did not provide adequate evidence of secondary review. Other than the remediation plan identified below for these deficiencies, there were nosignificant changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the fourth fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

107


Remediation planManagement of Green Bankshares, Inc. (the “Company”) is responsible for significant deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting:
Prior toestablishing and subsequent to December 31, 2010, and following management’s identification of the above-referenced deficiencies, management began taking steps to remediate those identified. These ongoing efforts that commenced during 2010 and continuing on in 2011 included the following:
During the fourth quarter and as of December 31, 2010 all appraisals on impaired assets are, and will continue to be, ordered 90 days prior to the annual appraisal date, or when evidence of impairment has occurred, and submitted to the independent third party for review upon completion, in order to assure that all appraisals on impaired assets are received in accordance with the Company’s internal policies;
Pre-reviewed appraisals indicating evidence that impairment has occurred will be separately reviewed and discussed in the monthly valuation meeting held between the Special Assets Group, Loan Review and Accounting to ensure that there is adequate documentation of the consideration for recording a potential impairment when the review process is not 100% complete but it is probable that a loss has been incurred; and
Controls evidencing adequate secondary review and approval of impaired loan valuations and other real estate owned will be appropriately documented and evident within the Special Assets Group.
Management anticipates that these remedial actions will strengthen the Company’smaintaining effective internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and will address15d-15(f) under the individual deficiencies identified asSecurities Exchange Act of December 31, 2010. Because some1934. Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of these remedial actions will take place on a quarterly basis, their successful implementation will continue to be evaluated beforefinancial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

Under the supervision and with the participation of management, is able to conclude thatincluding the deficiencies have been remediated.

Management Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
The reportprincipal executive officer and principal financial officer, the Company conducted an evaluation of the Company’s management on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting is set forthbased on page 56the framework in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The attestationSponsoring Organizations of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm related toTreadway Commission. Based on this evaluation under the Company’sframework inInternal Control—Integrated Framework, management of the Company has concluded the Company maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2011.

Internal control over financial reporting cannot provide absolute assurance of achieving financial reporting objectives because of its inherent limitations. Internal control over financial reporting is set fortha process that involves human diligence and compliance and is subject to lapses in judgment and breakdowns resulting from human failures. Internal control over financial reporting can also be circumvented by collusion or improper management override. Because of such limitations, there is a risk that material misstatements may not be prevented or detected on pages 57 and 58 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 9B.
OTHER INFORMATION.
None.
a timely basis by internal control over financial reporting.

 

108

137


ITEM 9B.OTHER INFORMATION.

None.

138


PART III

This Part incorporates certain information from the definitive proxy statement (the “2012 Proxy Statement”) for the Company’s 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, to be filed with the SEC within 120 days after the end of the Company’s fiscal year.

ITEM 10.
DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE.
GOVERNANCE
The information required by this item

Information concerning the Company’s executive officers is included under the caption “Executive Officers of Green Bancshares, Inc.” in the 2012 Proxy Statement. Information concerning the Company’s directors and filing of certain reports of beneficial ownership is incorporated herein by reference to the sections captionedentitled “Proposal 2 —1: Election of Directors”; “Corporate Governance — Section and “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance”; “Corporate Governance — Code of Conduct”; “Corporate Governance — Meetings and Committees in the 2012 Proxy Statement. Information concerning the Audit Committee of the Board”; and “Executive OfficersCompany’s Board of Green Bankshares”Directors is incorporated by reference to the section entitled “Information about Our Board of Directors – Board of Directors Committees – Audit Committee” in the 2012 Proxy Statement. There have been no material changes to the procedures by which security holders may recommend nominees to the Company’s definitiveBoard of Directors since the date of the Company’s Proxy Statement for the Company’s 2011 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (the “Proxy Statement”).

ITEM 11.
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION.
Shareholders.

The informationCompany has adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (our “Code of Ethics”) that applies to our employees, officers and directors. The complete Code of Ethics is available on our website atwww.capitalbank-us.com. If at any time it is not available on our website, we will provide a copy upon written request made to our Corporate Secretary, c/o Capital Bank Corporation, 333 Fayetteville Street, Suite 700, Raleigh, North Carolina 27601, telephone (919) 645-6400. Information on our website is not part of this report. If we amend or grant any waiver from a provision of our Code of Ethics that applies to our executive officers, we will publicly disclose such amendment or waiver as required by this itemapplicable law, including by posting such amendment or waiver on our website atwww.capitalbank-us.com or by filing a Current Report on Form 8-K.

ITEM 11.EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

This information is incorporated herein by reference tofrom the sections captioned “Executive Compensation” and “Corporate Governance — Compensationentitled “Compensation,” “Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation” ofand “Compensation Committee Report” in the 2012 Proxy Statement.

ITEM 12.
SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS.
MATTERS

This information is incorporated by reference from the sections entitled “Principal Shareholders” and “Compensation – Equity Compensation Plan Information” in the 2012 Proxy Statement.

(a)Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners.
Information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference to the section captioned “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” in the Proxy Statement.
(b)Security Ownership of Management.
Information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference to the section captioned “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” in the Proxy Statement.
(c)Changes in Control.
Management of the Company knows of no arrangements, including any pledge by any person of securities of the Company, the operation of which may at a subsequent date result in a change in control of the registrant.
(d)Equity Compensation Plan Information.
The following table sets forth certain information with respect to securities to be issued under the Company’s equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2010.
             
  (a)  (b)  (c) 
        Number of securities 
  Number of securities  Weighted-average  remaining available for 
  to be issued upon  exercise price of  future issuance under 
  exercise of  outstanding  equity compensation plans 
  outstanding options,  options, warrants  (excluding securities 
Plan Category warrants and rights  and rights  reflected in column (a)) 
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders  345,710  $27.13   170,324 
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders  36,000  $16.33   * 
          
             
Total  381,710  $25.96   170,324 
          
*R. Stan Puckett, was the sole participant under this plan, which was a part of Mr. Puckett’s employment agreement. This employment agreement was amended during 2005 to provide that future option grants to the key executive would be made at no less than fair market value on the date of grant in order to comply with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
ITEM 13.
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE.
INDEPENDENCE
The

This information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference tofrom the sections captioned “Proposal 2 — Electionentitled “Director Compensation – Certain Transactions” and “Information about Our Board of Directors” and “Corporate Governance — Certain Transactions” in the 2012 Proxy Statement.

 

109


ITEM 14.
PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANTACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES.
SERVICES
The responses to this Item are

This information is incorporated herein by reference tofrom the section captionedentitled “Proposal 5 —2: Ratification of the Appointment of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm”Firm – Audit Firm Fee Summary” in the 2012 Proxy Statement.

PART IV

ITEM 15.
EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES.

(a)(1)The following consolidated financial statements of the Company included in the Company’s 20102011 Annual Report to the Shareholders (the “Annual Report”) are incorporated herein by reference from Item 8 of this Form 10-K. The remaining information appearing in the Annual Report is not deemed to be filed as part of this Form 10-K, except as expressly provided herein.

139


 1.Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.

 2.Consolidated Balance Sheets December 31, 20102011 and 2009.2010.

 3.Consolidated Statements of Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2011, 2010 2009 and 2008.2009.

 4.Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2011, 2010 2009 and 2008.2009.

 5.Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2011, 2010 2009 and 2008.2009.

 6.Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

(a)(2)All schedules for which provision is made in the applicable accounting regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission are not required under the related instructions or are inapplicable and therefore have been omitted.

(a)(3)The following exhibits either are filed as part of this Report or are incorporated herein by reference:

 2.1
Merger Agreement, dated as of January 25, 2007, by and between Greene County Bancshares, Inc. and Civitas Bankgroup, Inc.(Pursuant (Pursuant to Item 601(b)(2) of Regulation S-K the schedules and exhibits to this agreement have been omitted from this filing) incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed January 26, 2007.

 2.2Plan of Merger adopted by the Board of Directors of North American Financial Holdings, Inc. on September 8, 2011 – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).

 2.3Investment Agreement, dated May 5, 2011, among Green Bankshares, Inc., GreenBank and North American Financial Holdings, Inc. (Exhibits to this agreement have been omitted pursuant to Item 601(b)(2) of Regulation S-K. A copy of any omitted exhibit will be furnished supplementally to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request) – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).

 2.4Purchase and Assumption Agreement, dated as of July 16, 2010, among the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Receiver of First National Bank of the South, Spartanburg, South Carolina, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and NAFH National Bank (Single Family Shared-Loss Agreement and Commercial Shared-Loss Agreement included as Exhibits 4.15A and 4.15B thereto, respectively) – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).

2.5Purchase and Assumption Agreement, dated as of July 16, 2010, among the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Receiver of Metro Bank of Dade County, Miami, Florida, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and NAFH National Bank (Single Family Shared-Loss Agreement and Commercial Shared-Loss Agreement included as Exhibits 4.15A and 4.15B thereto, respectively) – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).

2.6Purchase and Assumption Agreement, dated as of July 16, 2010, among the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Receiver of Turnberry Bank, Aventura, Florida, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and NAFH National Bank (Single Family Shared-Loss Agreement and Commercial Shared-Loss Agreement included as Exhibits 4.15A and 4.15B thereto, respectively) – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).

2.7Plan of Merger adopted by the Board of Directors of North American Financial Holdings, Inc. on September 8, 2011 – incorporated by reference to Appendix A to the prospectus forming a part of North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).

140


 3.1Amended and Restated Charter incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K12G3/A filed on January 22, 2009.

 3.2Amendment to the Charter – incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 2, 2011.

 3.3Amendment to the Charter – incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on September 7, 2011.

3.4Amendment to the Charter – incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on September 7, 2011.

3.5Amended and Restated Bylaws incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on November 20, 2007.

 3.6Amendment to the Amended and Restated Bylaws – incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 2, 2011.

 4.1Form of Certificate for the Series A Preferred Stock incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December 23, 2008. In connection with the CBF Investment, all of the Company’s Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, and related warrants to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock issued to the U.S. Treasury through the TARP were repurchased by CBF.

 4.2Warrant for Purchase of Shares of Common Stock dated December 23, 2008 incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December 23, 2008. In connection with the CBF Investment, all of the Company’s Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, and related warrants to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock issued to the U.S. Treasury through the TARP were repurchased by CBF.

 10.1Employment Agreement and Amendment to Employment Agreement between the Company and R. Stan Puckett incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on January 7, 2008.*

 

110


 
10.2Employment Agreement between the Company and Kenneth R. Vaught incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on January 7, 2008.*

 10.3Employment Agreement between the Company and Ronald E. Mayberry – incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.*

141


10.4Non-competition Agreement between the Company and R. Stan Puckett – incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.*
10.4Non-competition Agreement between the Company and R. Stan Puckett — incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.*
10.5  Non-competition Agreement between the Company and Kenneth R. Vaught incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004.*
10.6  Green Bankshares, Inc. Amended and Restated 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan. incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.*
10.7  Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Amended and Restated Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-employee Directors incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December 17, 2004.*
10.8  Form of Stock Option Award Agreement - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*
10.9  Deferred Fee Agreement between the Bank and John Tolsma dated December 13, 2004 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*, **
10.10  Amendment and Restatement of the Greene County Bank Deferred Compensation Agreements dated March 11, 1997, March 1, 1999 and November 15, 2004 between the Bank and Philip M. Bachman dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*
10.11  Amendment and Restatement of the Greene County Bank Deferred Compensation Agreement dated March 1, 1999 between the Bank and W.T. Daniels dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*2004 .*, **
10.12  Amendment and Restatement of the Greene County Bank Deferred Compensation Agreement dated March 1, 1999 between the Bank and Terry Leonard dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*
10.13  Amendment and Restatement of the Greene County Bank Deferred Compensation Agreement dated May 1, 1999 between the Bank and Charles S. Brooks dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*
10.14  Amendment and Restatement of the Greene County Bank Deferred Compensation Agreement dated May 1, 1999 between the Bank and Jerald K. Jaynes dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*
10.15  Amendment and Restatement of the Greene County Bank Deferred Compensation Agreement dated May 1, 2003 between the Bank and Charles H. Whitfield, Jr. dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*

111


2004 .*, **
10.16  Greene County Bank Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement between the Bank and R. Stan Puckett dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*
10.17  Greene County Bank Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement between the Bank and Kenneth R. Vaught dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*2004 .*, **

142


10.18  Greene County Bank Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement between the Bank and Ronald E. Mayberry dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*2004 .*
10.19  Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Change in Control Protection Plan incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 26, 2004.*
10.20  Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Change in Control Protection Plan Participation Agreement between the Company and Steve L. Droke incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 26, 2004.*
10.21  Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Change in Control Protection Plan Participation Agreement between the Company and Ronald E. Mayberry incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 26, 2004.*
10.22  Summary of Compensation Arrangement for James E. Adams incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on November 15, 2005.*
10.23  Amended and Restated Deferred Compensation Plan for Nonemployee Directors incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December 21, 2005.*
10.24  Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Change in Control Protection Plan Participation Agreement between the Company and James E. Adams incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed March 12, 2007.*
10.25  Form of Stock Appreciation Right Award Agreement incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed March 23, 2007.*
10.26  Amended and Restated Trust Agreement of GreenBank Capital Trust I (“GB Trust I”) dated as of May 16, 2007 by and among the Greene County Bancshares, Inc., as Depositor, Wilmington Trust Company, as Property Trustee, Wilmington Trust Company, as Delaware Trustee and the Administrative Trustees named therein (the “GB Capital Trust Agreement”) incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.
10.27  Form of Certificate for Common Securities of GB Trust I included as Exhibit B to the GB Capital Trust Agreement incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.
10.28  Form of Certificate for Preferred Securities of GB Trust I included as Exhibit C to the GB Capital Trust Agreement incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.
10.29  Junior Subordinated Indenture dated as of May 16, 2007 between the Company and Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee included as Exhibit D to the GB Capital Trust Agreement (the “Junior Subordinated Indenture”) incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.

112


10.30  Form of Certificate for $57,732,000 Note issued pursuant to the Junior Subordinated Indenture included as Sections 2.1 and 2.2 to the Junior Subordinated Indenture incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.
10.31  Guarantee Agreement dated as of May 16, 2007 between Greene County Bancshares, Inc., as Guarantor and Wilmington Trust Company, as Guarantee Trustee incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.
10.32  Form of Restricted Stock Agreement incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed January 23, 2008.*

143


10.33  Form of Stock Appreciation Right Agreement incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 29, 2008.*
10.34  Letter agreement, dated December 23, 2008, between the Company and the United States Department of Treasury, including Securities Purchase Agreement Standard Terms with respect to the issuance and sale of the Series A preferred shares and the Warrant incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed December 23, 2008. In connection with the CBF Investment, all of the Company’s Series A preferred shares and the Warrant were repurchased by CFB.
10.35  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and R. Stan Puckett dated December 23, 2008 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.*2008 .*
10.36  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and Kenneth R. Vaught dated December 23, 2008 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.*2008 .*
10.37  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and James E. Adams dated December 23, 2008 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.*2008 .*
10.38  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and Steve L. Droke dated December 23, 2008 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.*2008 .*
10.39  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and William C. Adams dated December 23, 2008 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.*2008 .*
10.40  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and R. Stan Puckett dated December 3, 2009* —2009 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.*
10.41  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and Kenneth R. Vaught dated December 4, 2009 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.*
10.42  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and James E. Adams dated December 1, 2009 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.*
10.43  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and Steve L. Droke December 3, 2009 incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.*

113


10.44  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and William C. Adams dated December 2, 2009 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.*
10.45  Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Change in Control Protection Plan Participation Agreement between the Company and William C. Adams - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.*2008 .*
10.46  Stock Option Agreement, dated May 5, 2011, between Green Bankshares, Inc. and North American Financial Holdings, Inc. - incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).
Letter
10.47Contingent Value Rights Agreement effective March 15, 2010,dated September 7, 2011, by Green Bankshares, Inc. - incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).
10.48Registration Rights Agreement dated September 7, 2011, by and amongbetween Green Bankshares, Inc., and North American Financial Holdings, Inc. - incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).
10.49Form of Indemnification Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and its directors and certain officers - incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).

144


10.50Form of Indemnification Agreement by and between GreenBank and Stephen M. Rownd —its directors and certain officers – incorporated hereinby reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).
10.51Stipulation of the Issuance of a Consent Order, dated August 12, 2011 – incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed March 18, 2010.*August 17, 2011.
10.52  
10.47Consulting Agreement by and among Green Bankshares, Inc.,Consent Order between GreenBank and R. Stan Puckett,the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, dated April 1, 2010 —August 15, 2011 – incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed April 1, 2010.*August 17, 2011.
10.48Form of TARP CPP Executive Officer Restricted Stock Award Agreement — incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed April 2, 2010.*
10.49R. Stan Puckett — First Amendment to the Greene County Bank Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement — incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010.*
10.50R. Stan Puckett — Second Amendment to the Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Non-Competition Agreement — incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010.*
10.51Director and Named Executive Officer Compensation Summary.*
11.1  Statement re Computation of Per Share Earnings incorporated by reference to Note 1416 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements herein.
21.1  Subsidiaries of the Company.
23.1  Consent of Dixon Hughes PLLC.Goodman LLP.
23.2  Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.
31.1  Chief Executive Officer Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a).

145


31.2  Chief Financial Officer Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a).
32.1  Chief Executive Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.2  Chief Financial Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
99.1  Certification of Chief Executive Officer under the Capital Purchase Program of the Troubled Assets Relief Program.
99.2  Certification of Chief Financial Officer under the Capital Purchase Program of the Troubled Assets Relief Program.

Exhibit 101.INS+  

XBRLInstance Document

*
Exhibit 101.SCH+  XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
Exhibit 101.CAL+XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document
Exhibit 101.DEF+XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document
Exhibit 101.LAB+XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document
Exhibit 101.PRE+XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document

*Management contract or compensatory plan.
**Following their September 7, 2011 resignation from the Company’s Board of Directors, Messrs. Daniels, Tolsma, Vaught and Whitfield received a lump sum distribution of their deferred compensation plan balances, as per terms of their agreements.

 

+

Users of this data are advised that pursuant to Rule 406T of Regulation S-T, the interactive data files on Exhibit 101 hereto are deemed not filed or part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of Section 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, are deemed not filed for purpose of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and otherwise are not subject to liability under those sections.

114


The Company is a party to certain agreements entered into in connection with the offering by Greene County Capital Trust I, Greene County Capital Trust II, GreenBank Capital Trust I, Civitas Statutory Trust I and Cumberland Capital Statutory Trust II of an aggregate of $86 million of variable rate trust preferred securities, as more fully described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. In accordance with Item 601(b)(4)(iii) of Regulation S-K, and because the total amount of the trust preferred securities is not in excess of 10% of the Company’s total assets, the Company has not filed the various documents and agreements associated with certain of these trust preferred securities herewith. The Company has, however, agreed to furnish copies the various documents and agreements associated with the trust preferred securities to the SEC upon request.

 (b)
Exhibits. The exhibits required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K are either filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K or incorporated herein by reference.

 (c)
Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedules Excluded From Annual Report. There are no financial statements and financial statement schedules which were excluded from the Annual Report pursuant to Rule 14a-3(b)(1) which are required to be included herein.

 

115

146


SIGNATURES

SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrantregistrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

  
GREEN BANKSHARES, INC.Green Bankshares, Inc.Registrant
Date: March 15, 2011April 9, 2012 By: /s/ Stephen M. Rownd
Stephen M. RowndChristopher G. Marshall
 
  Chairman of the Board andChristopher G. Marshall
 
  

Chief ExecutiveFinancial Officer

(Duly Authorized Representative)

Principal Accounting Officer)

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities indicated and on the dates indicated.

April 9, 2012.

Signature

Title

   
SIGNATURE AND TITLE:

/s/R. Eugene Taylor

R. Eugene Taylor

  DATE:
/s/ Stephen M. Rownd
Stephen M. Rownd

President, Chief Executive Officer

and Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)

  March 15, 2011 

/s/Christopher G. Marshall

Christopher G. Marshall

  
/s/ Kenneth R. Vaught
Kenneth R. Vaught
President, Chief Operating Officer, and Director
March 15, 2011 
/s/ James E. Adams
James E. Adams

Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer

and Secretary
Director

(Principal Financial Officer and Principal

Accounting Officer)

  March 15, 2011 

/s/R. Bruce Singletary

R. Bruce Singletary

  

Executive Vice President, Chief Risk Officer

and Director

/s/Charles F. Atkins

Charles F. Atkins

Director

/s/Peter N. Foss

Peter N. Foss

Director

/s/Martha M. Bachman

Martha M. Bachman
Director

  March 15, 2011 
Director  

/s/ Bruce Campbell

Bruce Campbell
DirectorSamuel E. Lynch

Samuel E. Lynch

  March 15, 2011 
Director  
/s/ W. T. Daniels
W.T. Daniels
Director
March 15, 2011 
/s/ Robert K. Leonard
Robert K. Leonard
Director
March 15, 2011 
/s/ Samuel E. Lynch
Samuel E. Lynch
Director
March 15, 2011 
/s/ Bill Mooningham
Bill Mooningham
Director
March 15, 2011 
/s/ John Tolsma
John Tolsma
Director
March 15, 2011 
/s/ Charles H. Whitfield, Jr.
Charles H. Whitfield, Jr.
Director
March 15, 2011 

 

116

147


EXHIBIT INDEX

 2.1
Merger Agreement, dated as of January 25, 2007, by and between Greene County Bancshares, Inc. and Civitas Bankgroup, Inc.(Pursuant (Pursuant to Item 601(b)(2) of Regulation S-K the schedules and exhibits to this agreement have been omitted from this filing) incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed January 26, 2007.

 2.2Plan of Merger adopted by the Board of Directors of North American Financial Holdings, Inc. on September 8, 2011 – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).

 3.32.3Investment Agreement, dated May 5, 2011, among Green Bankshares, Inc., GreenBank and North American Financial Holdings, Inc. (Exhibits to this agreement have been omitted pursuant to Item 601(b)(2) of Regulation S-K. A copy of any omitted exhibit will be furnished supplementally to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request) – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).

 2.4Purchase and Assumption Agreement, dated as of July 16, 2010, among the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Receiver of First National Bank of the South, Spartanburg, South Carolina, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and NAFH National Bank (Single Family Shared-Loss Agreement and Commercial Shared-Loss Agreement included as Exhibits 4.15A and 4.15B thereto, respectively) – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).

2.5Purchase and Assumption Agreement, dated as of July 16, 2010, among the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Receiver of Metro Bank of Dade County, Miami, Florida, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and NAFH National Bank (Single Family Shared-Loss Agreement and Commercial Shared-Loss Agreement included as Exhibits 4.15A and 4.15B thereto, respectively) – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).

2.6Purchase and Assumption Agreement, dated as of July 16, 2010, among the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Receiver of Turnberry Bank, Aventura, Florida, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and NAFH National Bank (Single Family Shared-Loss Agreement and Commercial Shared-Loss Agreement included as Exhibits 4.15A and 4.15B thereto, respectively) – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).

2.7Plan of Merger adopted by the Board of Directors of North American Financial Holdings, Inc. on September 8, 2011 – incorporated by reference to Appendix A to the prospectus forming a part of North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011).

3.1Amended and Restated Charter incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K12G3/A filed on January 22, 2009.

 3.2Amendment to the Charter – incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 2, 2011.

 3.3Amendment to the Charter – incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on September 7, 2011.

 3.4Amendment to the Charter – incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on September 7, 2011.

 3.5Amended and Restated Bylaws incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on November 20, 2007.

 3.6Amendment to the Amended and Restated Bylaws – incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 2, 2011.

148


 4.1Form of Certificate for the Series A Preferred Stock incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December 23, 2008.

 4.2Warrant for Purchase of Shares of Common Stock dated December 23, 2008 incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December 23, 2008.

 10.1Employment Agreement and Amendment to Employment Agreement between the Company and R. Stan Puckett incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on January 7, 2008.*

 10.2Employment Agreement between the Company and Kenneth R. Vaught incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on January 7, 2008.*

 10.3Employment Agreement between the Company and Ronald E. Mayberry incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.*

 10.4Non-competition Agreement between the Company and R. Stan Puckett incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.*

 10.5Non-competition Agreement between the Company and Kenneth R. Vaught incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004.*

 10.6Green Bankshares, Inc. Amended and Restated 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan. incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.*

 10.7Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Amended and Restated Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-employee Directors incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December 17, 2004.*

 10.8Form of Stock Option Award Agreement - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*

 10.9Deferred Fee Agreement between the Bank and John Tolsma dated December 13, 2004 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*, **

 10.10Amendment and Restatement of the Greene County Bank Deferred Compensation Agreements dated March 11, 1997, March 1, 1999 and November 15, 2004 between the Bank and Philip M. Bachman dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*

 

117

149


10.11

  Amendment and Restatement of the Greene County Bank Deferred Compensation Agreement dated March 1, 1999 between the Bank and W.T. Daniels dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*2004 .*, **

10.12

  Amendment and Restatement of the Greene County Bank Deferred Compensation Agreement dated March 1, 1999 between the Bank and Terry Leonard dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*

10.13

  Amendment and Restatement of the Greene County Bank Deferred Compensation Agreement dated May 1, 1999 between the Bank and Charles S. Brooks dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*

10.14

  Amendment and Restatement of the Greene County Bank Deferred Compensation Agreement dated May 1, 1999 between the Bank and Jerald K. Jaynes dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*

10.15

  Amendment and Restatement of the Greene County Bank Deferred Compensation Agreement dated May 1, 2003 between the Bank and Charles H. Whitfield, Jr. dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 .*, **

10.16

Greene County Bank Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement between the Bank and R. Stan Puckett dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*
10.16Greene County Bank Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement between the Bank and R. Stan Puckett dated March 11, 2005 — incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*

10.17

  Greene County Bank Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement between the Bank and Kenneth R. Vaught dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*2004 .*, **

10.18

  Greene County Bank Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement between the Bank and Ronald E. Mayberry dated March 11, 2005 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.*2004 .*

10.19

  Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Change in Control Protection Plan incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 26, 2004.*

10.20

  Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Change in Control Protection Plan Participation Agreement between the Company and Steve L. Droke incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 26, 2004.*

10.21

  Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Change in Control Protection Plan Participation Agreement between the Company and Ronald E. Mayberry incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 26, 2004.*

10.22

  Summary of Compensation Arrangement for James E. Adams incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on November 15, 2005.*

10.23

  Amended and Restated Deferred Compensation Plan for Nonemployee Directors incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December 21, 2005.*

10.24

  Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Change in Control Protection Plan Participation Agreement between the Company and James E. Adams incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed March 12, 2007.*

 

118

150


10.25

  Form of Stock Appreciation Right Award Agreement incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed March 23, 2007.*

10.26

  Amended and Restated Trust Agreement of GreenBank Capital Trust I (“GB Trust I”) dated as of May 16, 2007 by and among the Greene County Bancshares, Inc., as Depositor, Wilmington Trust Company, as Property Trustee, Wilmington Trust Company, as Delaware Trustee and the Administrative Trustees named therein (the “GB Capital Trust Agreement”) incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.

10.27

  Form of Certificate for Common Securities of GB Trust I included as Exhibit B to the GB Capital Trust Agreement incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.

10.28

  Form of Certificate for Preferred Securities of GB Trust I included as Exhibit C to the GB Capital Trust Agreement incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.

10.29

  Junior Subordinated Indenture dated as of May 16, 2007 between the Company and Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee included as Exhibit D to the GB Capital Trust Agreement (the “Junior Subordinated Indenture”) incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.

10.30

  Form of Certificate for $57,732,000 Note issued pursuant to the Junior Subordinated Indenture included as Sections 2.1 and 2.2 to the Junior Subordinated Indenture incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.

10.31

  Guarantee Agreement dated as of May 16, 2007 between Greene County Bancshares, Inc., as Guarantor and Wilmington Trust Company, as Guarantee Trustee incorporated by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007.

10.32

  Form of Restricted Stock Agreement incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed January 23, 2008.*

10.33

  Form of Stock Appreciation Right Agreement incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 29, 2008.*

10.34

  Letter agreement, dated December 23, 2008, between the Company and the United States Department of Treasury, including Securities Purchase Agreement Standard Terms with respect to the issuance and sale of the Series A preferred shares and the Warrant incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed December 23, 2008. In connection with the CFB Investment, all of the Company’s Series A preferred shares and the Warrant were repurchased by CBF.

10.35

  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and R. Stan Puckett dated December 23, 2008 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 .*

10.36

  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and Kenneth R. Vaught dated December 23, 2008 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 .*

10.37

  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and James E. Adams dated December 23, 2008 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 .*

10.38

  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and Steve L. Droke dated December 23, 2008 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 .*

 

119

151


10.39

  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and William C. Adams dated December 23, 2008 - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.*2008 .*

10.40

  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and R. Stan Puckett dated December 3, 2009* —2009 – incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.*

10.41

  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and Kenneth R. Vaught dated December 4, 2009 incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.*

10.42

  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and James E. Adams dated December 1, 2009 incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.*

10.43

  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and Steve L. Droke December 3, 2009 incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.*

10.44

  Senior Executive Officer Letter Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and William C. Adams dated December 2, 2009 incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.*

10.45

  Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Change in Control Protection Plan Participation Agreement between the Company and William C. Adams - incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.*2008 .*

10.46

  Stock Option Agreement, dated May 5, 2011, between Green Bankshares, Inc. and North American Financial Holdings, Inc. – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011.

10.47

  Contingent Value Rights Agreement dated September 7, 2011, by Green Bankshares, Inc. – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011.
10.46

10.48

  LetterRegistration Rights Agreement effective March 15, 2010,dated September 7, 2011, by and amongbetween Green Bankshares, Inc., and North American Financial Holdings, Inc. – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011.

10.49.

Form of Indemnification Agreement by and between Green Bankshares, Inc. and its directors and certain officers – incorporated by reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011.

10.50

Form of Indemnification Agreement by and between GreenBank and Stephen M. Rownd —its directors and certain officers – incorporated hereinby reference to North American Financial Holdings, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-176796) filed with the SEC on September 12, 2011.

10.51

Stipulation of the Issuance of a Consent Order, dated August 12, 2011 – incorporated by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed March 18, 2010.*August 17, 2011.

10.52

  
10.47Consulting Agreement by and among Green Bankshares, Inc.,Consent Order between GreenBank and R. Stan Puckett,the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, dated April 1, 2010 —August 15, 2011 – incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed April 1, 2010.*August 17, 2011.
10.48Form of TARP CPP Executive Officer Restricted Stock Award Agreement — incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed April 2, 2010.*
10.49R. Stan Puckett — First Amendment to the Greene County Bank Executive Deferred Compensation Agreement — incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010.*
10.50R. Stan Puckett — Second Amendment to the Greene County Bancshares, Inc. Non-Competition Agreement — incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010.*.
10.51Director and Named Executive Officer Compensation Summary.*

11.1

  Statement re CompuationComputation of Per Share Earnings incorporated by reference to Note 1416 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements herein.

21.1

  Subsidiaries of the Company.

23.1

  Consent of Dixon Hughes PLLC.Goodman LLP.

23.2

  Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.

31.1

  Chief Executive Officer Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a).

31.2

  Chief Financial Officer Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a).

120


32.1

  Chief Executive Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.2

  Chief Financial Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

99.1

  Certification of Chief Executive Officer under the Capital Purchase Program of the Troubled Assets Relief Program.

99.2

  Certification of Chief Financial Officer under the Capital Purchase Program of the Troubled Assets Relief Program.

Exhibit 101.INS+  XBRL Instance Document
*
Exhibit 101.SCH+  XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
Exhibit 101.CAL+XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document
Exhibit 101.DEF+XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document
Exhibit 101.LAB+XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document
Exhibit 101.PRE+XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document

*Management contract or compensatory plan.
**Following their September 7, 2011 resignation from the Company’s Board of Directors, Messrs. Daniels, Tolsma, Vaught and Whitfield received a lump sum distribution of their deferred compensation plan balances, as per terms of their agreements.

 

121152