UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

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

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010

¨For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011
oTRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from                 to

Commission file number: 001-33037

SOUTHERN NATIONAL BANCORP OF VIRGINIA, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

VIRGINIA
20-1417448

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization)

 

20-1417448
(I.R.S. Employee

Identification No.)

6830 Old Dominion Drive

McLean, Virginia 22101

(Address or principal executive offices)  (Zip code)

(703) 893-7400

(Registrant’s telephone number including area code)

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

Common Stock, $0.01 par valueNasdaq Global Market
(Title of each class)class (Name of each exchange on which registered)registered
Common Stock, $0.01 par valueNasdaq Global 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.
Yes ¨o                        No x

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act.
Yes ¨o                        No x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes xo No ¨x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate webWeb site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (232.405(§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes.Yes ¨x No ¨o

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K 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.  ¨o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-212b – 2 of the Exchange Act.  (Check one):

Large accelerated filer  ¨Accelerated filer  xNon-accelerated filer  ¨Smaller reporting company  ¨
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Large accelerated filer   o                         Accelerated filer   x                        Smaller reporting company   o
Non-accelerated filer    o   (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).
Yes   ¨o                                No    x

The aggregate market value of voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 20102011 was approximately $79,300,591$71,292,223 based on the closing price of the common stock on such date.

The number of shares of common stock outstanding as of March 2, 2011April 12, 2012 was 11,590,212.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement pursuant to be usedRegulation 14A of the Securities Exchange Act or 1934 in conjunction with the registrant’s 20112012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated into Part III, Items 10-14 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

2
SOUTHERN NATIONAL BANCORP OF VIRGINIA, INC.

FORM 10-K

INDEX

Page
PART I 
    Page

Item 1.

Business 

Business

6
Item 1A.Risk Factors32
Item 1B.Unresolved Staff Comments47
Item 2.Properties48
Item 3.Legal Proceedings49
Item 4.Mine Safety Disclosures49
PART II
  1 

Item 1A.

Risk Factors

23

Item 1B.

Unresolved Staff Comments

35

Item 2.

Properties

36

Item 3.

Legal Proceedings

37

Item 4.

Reserved

37
PART II

Item 5.

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder

Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

49
Item 6.Selected Financial Data53
Item 7.Management’s Discussion and Analysis  38

Item 6.

 

Selected Financial Data

41

Item 7.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis Of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

54
Item 7A.Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures  
42About Market Risk79
Item 8.Financial Statements and 

Item 7A.

Supplementary Data 

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

6880

Item 8.

Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

69

Item 9.

Changes in and Disagreements with

Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure

132
Item 9A.Controls and Procedures132
Item 9B.Other Information135
PART III
  111 

Item 9A.

Controls and Procedures

111

Item 9B.

Other Information

112
PART III

Item 10.

Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance of the Registrant

 113136

Item 11.

Executive Compensation 

Executive Compensation

113136

Item 12.

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial

Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

136
Item 13.Certain Relationships and RelatedTransactions, and  113
 

Item 13.

Director Independence		 

Certain Relationships, Related Transactions and Director Independence

113136

Item 14.

Principal Accounting Fees and Services

136
  113
PART IV
 
PART IV

Item 15.

Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

 137

3
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains statements about future expectations, activities and events that constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of, and subject to the protection of, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Exchange Act and are intended to be covered by the safe harbor provided by the same. Forward-looking statements are based on our beliefs, assumptions and expectations of our future financial and operating performance and growth plans, taking into account the information currently available to us. These statements are not statements of historical fact. The words “believe,” “may,”  “forecast,” “should,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “continue,” “would,” “could,” “hope,” “might,” “assume,” “objective,” “seek,” “plan,” “strive” or similar words, or the negatives of these words, identify forward-looking statements.
Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that may cause our actual results to differ materially from the expectations of future results we express or imply in any forward-looking statements. In addition to the other factors discussed in the “Risk Factors” section of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, factors that could contribute to those differences include, but are not limited to:
 114●our limited operating history;
 
●
the effects of future economic, business and market conditions and changes, domestic and foreign;

i

●
changes in the local economies in our market areas adversely affect our customers and their ability to transact profitable business with us, including the ability of our borrowers to repay their loans according to their terms or a change in the value of the related collateral;
●
changes in the availability of funds resulting in increased costs or reduced liquidity;
●
a deterioration or downgrade in the credit quality and credit agency ratings of the securities in our securities portfolio;
●
impairment concerns and risks related to our investment portfolio of collateralized mortgage obligations, agency mortgage-backed securities and pooled trust preferred securities;
●
the incurrence and possible impairment of goodwill associated with an acquisition and possible adverse short-term effects on our results of operations;
●
increased credit risk in our assets and increased operating risk caused by a material change in commercial, consumer and/or real estate loans as a percentage of our total loan portfolio;
●
the concentration of our loan portfolio in loans collateralized by real estate;
●
our level of construction and land development and commercial real estate loans;
●
changes in the levels of loan prepayments and the resulting effects on the value of our loan portfolio;
●
the failure of assumptions and estimates underlying the establishment of and provisions made to the allowance for loan losses;
●
our ability to expand and grow our business and operations, including the establishment of additional branches and acquisition of additional branches and banks, and our ability to realize the cost savings and revenue enhancements we expect from such activities;
●
changes in governmental monetary and fiscal policies, including interest rate policies of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, or changes in interest rates and market prices, which could reduce our net interest margins, asset valuations and expense expectations;
●
increased competition for deposits and loans adversely affecting rates and terms;
●
the continued service of key management personnel;
●
the potential payment of interest on demand deposit accounts to effectively compete for customers;
●
potential environmental liability risk associated with lending activities;
●
increased asset levels and changes in the composition of assets and the resulting impact on our capital levels and regulatory capital ratios;
4

●
our ability to acquire, operate and maintain cost effective and efficient systems without incurring unexpectedly difficult or expensive but necessary technological changes; and
●
legislative and regulatory changes, including changes in banking, securities and tax laws and regulations and their application by our regulators, including those associated with the Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) and changes in the scope and cost of Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) insurance and other coverage;
●
increases in regulatory capital requirements for banking organizations generally, which may adversely affect our ability to expand our business or could cause us to shrink our business;
●
the effects of war or other conflicts, acts of terrorism or other catastrophic events that may affect general economic conditions;
●
changes in accounting policies, rules and practices and applications or determinations made thereunder;
●
the risk that our deferred tax assets could be reduced if future taxable income  is less than currently estimated, if corporate tax rates in the future are less than current rates,  or if sales of our capital stock trigger limitations on the amount of net operating loss carryforwards that we may utilize for income tax purposes; and
●
other factors and risks described under “Risk Factors” herein and in any of our subsequent reports that we make with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission” or “SEC”) under the Exchange Act.
Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance or results. A forward-looking statement may include a statement of the assumptions or bases underlying the forward-looking statement. We believe we have chosen these assumptions or bases in good faith and that they are reasonable. We caution you, however, that assumptions or bases almost always vary from actual results, and the differences between assumptions or bases and actual results can be material. When considering forward-looking statements, you should keep in mind the risk factors and other cautionary statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. These statements speak only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K (or an earlier date to the extent applicable). Except as required by applicable law, we undertake no obligation to update publicly these statements in light of new information or future events.
5
PART I

Item 1.— – Business

Overview

Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. (“SNBV”Southern National”, “we” or “our”) is the bank holding company for Sonabank (“Sonabank” or the “Bank”), a Virginia state chartered bank which commenced operations on April 14, 2005. Sonabank conducts full-service community banking operations from locations in Fairfax County (Reston, McLean and Fairfax), Charlottesville, Warrenton, Middleburg, Leesburg, New Market, Front Royal, South Riding, Richmond and Clifton Forge, Virginia and in Rockville, Maryland and maintains loan production offices in Richmond, Charlottesville, Warrenton and Fredericksburg. As of December 31, 2010,2011, we reported, on a consolidated basis, total assets of $590.8$611.4 million, total loans, net of unearned income,deferred fees, of $459.4$491.8 million, total deposits of $431.0$461.1 million and shareholders’ equity of $99.1 million.

While we offer a wide range of commercial banking services, we focus on making loans secured primarily by commercial real estate and other types of secured and unsecured commercial loans to small and medium-sized businesses in a number of industries, as well as loans to individuals for a variety of purposes. We are thea leading Small Business Administration (SBA) lender among Virginia community banks. We also invest in real estate-related securities, including collateralized mortgage obligations and agency mortgage backed securities. Our principal sources of funds for loans and investing in securities are deposits and, to a lesser extent, borrowings. We offer a broad range of deposit products, including checking (NOW), savings, money market accounts and certificates of deposit. We actively pursue business relationships by utilizing the business contacts of our directors, senior management and other bank officers, thereby capitalizing on our knowledge of our local market areas.

areas.

Effective December 4, 2009, Sonabank assumed certain deposits and liabilities and acquired certain assets of Greater Atlantic from the FDIC as receiver for Greater Atlantic Bank, pursuant to the terms of a purchase and assumption agreement entered into by the Bank and the FDIC on December 4, 2009 (the “Agreement”).  On December 5, 2009, the former Greater Atlantic offices, located in Reston, New Market, Front Royal and South Riding, Virginia and Rockville, Maryland opened as Sonabank branches.

The Bank

Southern National filed a Form 8-K on February 7, 2012, disclosing that it will restate its financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2009, the interim quarterly periods and year ended December 31, 2010 and the interim quarterly periods through September 30, 2011.  In December 2009, we acquired substantially all of the assets of Greater Atlantic Bank including all loans, and assumed substantially all of its liabilities, includingfrom the insured and uninsured deposits. PursuantFDIC.  We have identified errors in the purchase accounting related to that acquisition.  The most significant adjustment involves the termsinitial estimate of the Agreement,FDIC indemnification asset.  We engaged an outside vendor to calculate the Bank (a) acquired atestimated fair value $113.6 million in loans, $1.0 million in foreclosed assets, $28.1 million in securities available-for-saleof the indemnification asset.  Recently, we retained another vendor to assist with the evaluation and $73.0 million in cashaccounting for the  indemnification asset going forward, and other assets, and (b) assumed at fair value $178.7 million in deposits, $25.4 million in borrowings and $407 thousand in other liabilities and recorded a deferred tax liability of $3.8 million.the error was discovered. The Bank also recorded a core deposit intangible assetrestatement resulted in the amountreversal of $1.2 million and recorded a pre-taxthe entire gain on the transaction of $11.2 million. In connection withmillion recognized during the Greater Atlantic acquisition,fourth quarter of 2009.  All 2009 and 2010 amounts set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as applicable, reflect the FDIC made a cash payment to the Bankrestatement of approximately $27.0 million. The terms of the Agreement provide for the FDIC to indemnify the Bank against claims with respect to liabilities of Greater Atlantic not assumed by the Bank and certain other types of claims listed in the Agreement.

previously issued financial statements. 

The Bank paid no cash or other consideration to acquire Greater Atlantic Bank.  As part of the Greater Atlantic acquisition, theThe Bank and the FDIC entered into a loss sharing agreement (the “loss sharing agreement”) on approximately $143.4 million (cost basis) of Greater Atlantic Bank’s assets.  The Bank will share in the losses on the loans and foreclosed loan collateral with the FDIC as specified in the loss sharing agreement; we refer to these assets collectively as “covered assets.” Pursuant to the terms of the loss sharing agreement, the FDIC is obligated to reimburse the Bank for 80% of losses of up to $19 million with respect to the covered assets.  The FDIC will reimburse the Bank for 95% of losses in excess of $19 million with respect to the covered assets.  The Bank will reimburse the FDIC for 80% of recoveries with respect to losses for which the FDIC paid the Bank 80% reimbursement under the loss sharing agreement, and for 95% of recoveries with respect to losses for which the FDIC paid the Bank 95% reimbursement under the loss sharing agreement.

6
On September 28, 2009, Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc.October 1, 2011, we completed the purchaseacquisition of the Warrenton branch office, acquired at fair value selected loansMidlothian Branch of the Bank of Hampton Roads.  We assumed deposits in the amount of $23.8 million and assumed at fair value approximately $26.8 million of deposits from Millennium Bank, N.A.

SNBV completed a public offering of its common stock in an underwritten public offering. FIG Partners, LLC acted as the sole manager for the offering. SNBV closed on the offering on November 4, 2009, selling 4,791,665 shares of common stock, including 624,999 shares sold pursuant to an over-allotment option granted to the underwriter, at a price of $6.00 per share. The gross proceeds from the shares sold were $28.7$42.2 million. The net proceeds to SNBV from the offering were approximately $26.9 million after deducting $1.3 million in underwriting commission and an estimated $486 thousand in other expenses incurred in connection with the offering.

We primarily market our products and services to small and medium-sized businesses and to retail consumers. Our strategy is to provide superior service through our employees, who are relationship-oriented and committed to their respective customers. Through this strategy, we intend to grow our business, expand our customer base and improve our profitability. The key elements of our strategy are to:

 •
●

Utilize the Strength of our Management Team. The experience and market knowledge of our management team is one of our greatest strengths and competitive advantages. Our chairman, Georgia S. Derrico, was the founder, chairman of the board and chief executive officer, and our president, R. Roderick Porter, was the president and chief operating officer, of Southern Financial Bancorp, Inc., a publicly traded bank holding company. At the time of its sale to Provident Bankshares, Inc. in April of 2004, Southern Financial had $1.5 billion in assets and operated 34 full-service banking offices of Southern Financial Bank, which was founded in Fairfax County and subsequently expanded into Central and Southern Virginia. Including the members of our current senior management team, 3835 of our employees previously worked with our chairman and president at Southern Financial Bank.

 •●

Leverage Our Existing Foundation for Additional Growth.Based on our management’s depth of experience and certain infrastructure investments, we believe that we will be able to take advantage of certain economies of scale typically enjoyed by larger organizations to expand our operations both organically and through strategic cost-effective branch or bank acquisitions. We believe that the investments we have made in our data processing, staff and branch network will be able to support a much larger asset base. We are committed, however, to control any additional growth in a manner designed to minimize the risk and to maintain strong capital ratios.

 •●

Continue to Pursue Selective Acquisition Opportunities. Historically, acquisitions have been a key part of our growth. Since our formation, we have completed the acquisition of the Midlothian Branch in Richmond, Virginia on October 1, 2011, the acquisition and assumption of certain assets and liabilities of Greater Atlantic Bank from the FDIC on December 4, 2009, the acquisition of a branch of Millennium Bank in Warrenton, Virginia on September 28, 2009, the acquisition of the Leesburg branch location from Founders Corporation which opened on February 11, 2008, the acquisition of 1stst Service Bank in December of 2006 and the acquisition of the Clifton Forge branch of First Community Bancorp, Inc. in December of 2005. We intend to continue to review branch and whole bank acquisition opportunities, including possible acquisitions of failed financial institutions in FDIC assisted transactions, and will pursue these opportunities if they represent the most efficient use of our capital under the circumstances. We believe that we have demonstrated that we have the skill set and experience to acquire and integrate successfully both bank and branch acquisitions, and that with the strong capital position we have, we are well-positioned to take advantage of acquisition opportunities as they may arise. We intend to focus on targets in our market areas or other attractive areas with significant core deposits and/or a potential customer base compatible with our growth strategy.

7
 •●
De novo branch expansion.  In addition to our acquisition strategy, we plan to open de novo branches from time to time to fill in our existing footprint as we did in Middleburg in 2011.
 

●

Focus on the Business Owner. It is our goal to be the bank that business owners in our markets turn to first for commercial banking needs as a result of our superior personal service and the tailored products and services that we provide. To help achieve this goal, we:

have a standing credit committee that meets as often as necessary on a “when needed” basis to review completed loan applications, making extensive use of technology to facilitate our internal communications and thereby enabling us to respond to our customers promptly;

are an SBA approved “Preferred” lender, which permits us to make SBA loan decisions at Sonabank rather than waiting for SBA processing. We offer a number of different types of SBA loans designed for the small and medium-sized business owner and some of our SBA loan customers also have other relationships with Sonabank. This product group is complex and “paper intensive” and not well utilized by some of our competitors;

 •ohave a standing credit committee that meets as often as necessary on a “when needed” basis to review completed loan applications, making extensive use of technology to facilitate our internal communications and thereby enabling us to respond to our customers promptly;
 

o

are an SBA approved “Preferred” lender, which permits us to make SBA loan decisions at Sonabank rather than waiting for SBA processing. We offer a number of different types of SBA loans designed for the small and medium-sized business owner and some of our SBA loan customers also have other relationships with Sonabank. This product group is complex and “paper intensive” and not well utilized by some of our competitors;
o
provide Internet business banking atwww.sonabank.com which allows our business customers 24-hour web-based access to their accounts so they can confirm or transfer balances, pay bills, download statements and use our “Web Lockbox” or “Sona Cash Manager;”

provide our business customers with “Sona In-House,” a service that utilizes Check 21 technology to allow customers to make remote deposits from their business locations and gives them access to those funds within 24 to 48 hours; and

provide our business customers with access to SABL, our recently developed state-of-the-art asset-based lending system. Unlike most asset-based lending systems, which are based on manual processes or software that certifies a company’s borrowing base periodically, SABL provides a real time capability to analyze and adjust borrowing availability based on actual collateral levels. SABL is predicated on a link between any kind of accounting software used by the customer and Sonabank’s server.

 •oprovide our business customers with “Sona In-House,” a service that utilizes Check 21 technology to allow customers to make remote deposits from their business locations and gives them access to those funds within 24 to 48 hours; and
 

o

provide our business customers with access to SABL, our recently developed state-of-the-art asset-based lending system. Unlike most asset-based lending systems, which are based on manual processes or software that certifies a company’s borrowing base periodically, SABL provides a real time capability to analyze and adjust borrowing availability based on actual collateral levels. SABL is predicated on a link between any kind of accounting software used by the customer and Sonabank’s server.
●
Maintain Local Decision-Making and Accountability. We believe that we have a competitive advantage over larger national and regional financial institutions by providing superior customer service with experienced, knowledgeable management, localized decision-making capabilities and prompt credit decisions. We believe that our customers want to deal directly with the persons who make the credit decisions.

 •●

Focus on Asset Quality and Strong Underwriting. We consider asset quality to be of primary importance and have taken measures in an effort to ensure that, despite the growth in our loan portfolio, we strive to maintain strong asset quality.

 •●

Build a Stable Core Deposit Base. We intend to continue to grow a stable core deposit base of business and retail customers. To the extent that our asset growth outpaces this local deposit funding source, we plan to continue to borrow and raise deposits in the national market using deposit intermediaries. We intend to continue our practice of developing a deposit relationship with each of our loan customers.

8
General

Our principal business is the acquisition of deposits from the general public through our branch offices and deposit intermediaries and the use of these deposits to fund our loan and investment portfolios. We seek to be a full service community bank that provides a wide variety of financial services to our middle market corporate clients as well as to our retail clients. We are an active commercial lender, have been designated as a “Preferred SBA Lender” and participate in the Virginia Small Business Financing Authority lending program. In addition, we are an active commercial real estate lender. We also invest funds in mortgage-backed securities, collateralized mortgage obligations, securities issued by agencies of the federal government and pooled trust preferred securities.

The principal sources of funds for our lending and investment activities are deposits, amortization and repayment of loans, prepayments from mortgage-backed securities, repayments of maturing investment securities, Federal Home Loan Bank advances and other borrowed money.

Principal sources of revenue are interest and fees on loans and investment securities, as well as fee income derived from the maintenance of deposit accounts and income from bank-owned life insurance policies. Our principal expenses include interest paid on deposits and advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (“FHLB”) and other borrowings, and operating expenses.

Available Information

SNBVSouthern National files annual, quarterly and other reports under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).  These reports are posted and are available at no cost on our website,www.sonabank.com, through the Investor Relations link, as soon as reasonably practicable after we file such documents with the SEC.  Our filings are also available through the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.

Lending Activities

Our primary strategic objective is to serve small to medium-sized businesses in our market with a variety of unique and useful services, including a full array of commercial mortgage and non-mortgage loans. These loans include commercial real estate loans, construction to permanent loans, development and builder loans, accounts receivable financing, lines of credit, equipment and vehicle loans, leasing, and commercial overdraft protection. We strive to do business in the areas served by our branches, which is also where our marketing is focused, and the vast majority of our loan customers are located in existing market areas. Virtually all of our loans are from Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia, or Washington D.C. The Small Business Administration may from time to time come to us because of our reputation and expertise as an SBA lender and ask us to review a loan outside of our core counties but within our market area. Prior to making a loan, we obtain loan applications to determine a borrower’s ability to repay, and the more significant items on these applications are verified through the use of credit reports, financial statements and confirmations.

The following is a discussion of each of the major types of lending:

Commercial Real Estate Lending
Permanent.

Permanent. Commercial real estate lending includes loans for permanent financing. Commercial real estate lending typically involves higher loan principal amounts and the repayment of loans is dependent, in large part, on sufficient income from the properties securing the loans to cover operating expenses and debt service. As a general practice, we require our commercial real estate loans to be secured by well-managed income producing properties with adequate margins and to be guaranteed by responsible parties. We look for opportunities where cash flow from the collateral properties provides adequate debt service coverage and the guarantor’s net worth is strong. At December 31, 2010,2011, our commercial real estate loans for permanent financing including multi-family residential loans and loans secured by farmland totaled $200.0$237.3 million, of which $19.7$16.7 million was acquired in the Greater Atlantic transaction.

9
Our underwriting guidelines for commercial real estate loans reflect all relevant credit factors, including, among other things, the income generated from the underlying property to adequately service the debt, the availability of secondary sources of repayment and the overall creditworthiness of the borrower. In addition, we look to the value of the collateral, while maintaining the level of equity invested by the borrower.

All valuations on property which will secure loans over $250 thousand are performed by independent outside appraisers who are reviewed by our executive vice president of risk management and/or an officer independent of the transaction. We retain a valid lien on real estate and obtain a title insurance policy (on first trust loans only) that insures the property is free of encumbrances.  In addition, we do title searches on all loans secured by real estate.

Construction. We recognize that construction loans for commercial, multifamily and other non-residential properties can involve risk due to the length of time it may take to bring a finished real estate product to market. As a result, we will only make these types of loans when pre-leasing or pre-sales or other credit factors suggest that the borrower can carry the debt if the anticipated market and property cash flow projections change during the construction phase.

Income producing property loans are supported by evidence of the borrower’s capacity to service the debt. All of our commercial construction loans are guaranteed by the principals or general partners. At December 31, 2010,2011, we had $40.6$42.4 million of construction, land and development loans, of which $1.1$2.9 million was acquired in the Greater Atlantic transaction.

Construction loan borrowers are generally pre-qualified for the permanent loan by us or a third party. We obtain a copy of the contract with the general contractor who must be acceptable to us. All plans, specifications and surveys must include proposed improvements. We review feasibility studies and risk analyses showing sensitivity of the project to variables such as interest rates, vacancy rates, lease rates and operating expenses.

Commercial Business Lending

These loans consist of lines of credit, revolving credit facilities, demand loans, term loans, equipment loans, SBA loans, stand-by letters of credit and unsecured loans. Commercial business loans are generally secured by accounts receivable, equipment, inventory and other collateral, such as readily marketable stocks and bonds with adequate margins, cash value in life insurance policies and savings and time deposits at Sonabank. At December 31, 2010,2011, our commercial business loans totaled $77.6$92.1 million, of which $1.0$2.1 million was acquired in the Greater Atlantic transaction.

In general, commercial business loans involve more credit risk than residential mortgage loans and real estate-backed commercial loans and, therefore, usually yield a higher return to us. The increased risk for commercial business loans is due to the type of collateral securing these loans. The increased risk also derives from the expectation that commercial loans will be serviced principally from the operations of the business, and that those operations may not be successful. Historical trends have shown that these types of loans do have higher delinquencies than mortgage loans. Because of this, we often utilize the SBA 7(a) program (which guarantees the repayment of up to 90% of the principal and accrued interest to us) to reduce the inherent risk associated with commercial business lending.

10
Another way that we reduce risk in the commercial loan portfolio is by taking accounts receivable as collateral. Our accounts receivable financing facilities, which provide a relatively high yield with considerable collateral control, are lines of credit under which a company can borrow up to the amount of a borrowing base which covers a certain percentage of the company’s receivables. From our customer’s point of view, accounts receivable financing is an efficient way to finance expanding operations because borrowing capacity expands as sales increase. Customers can borrow from 75% to 90% of qualified receivables. In most cases, the borrower’s customers pay us directly. For borrowers with a good track record for earnings and quality receivables, we will consider pricing based on an increment above the prime rate for transactions in which we lend up to a percentage of qualified outstanding receivables based on reported aging of the receivables portfolio.

We also actively pursue for our customers equipment lease financing opportunities. We provide financing and use a third party to service the leases. Payment is derived from the cash flow of the borrower, so credit quality may not be any lower than it would be in the case of an unsecured loan for a similar amount and term.

SBA Lending

We have developed an expertise in the federally guaranteed SBA program. The SBA program is an economic development program which finances the expansion of small businesses. We are a Preferred Lender in the Washington D.C. and Richmond Districts of the SBA. As an SBA Preferred lender, our pre-approved status allows us to quickly respond to customers’ needs. Under the SBA program, we originate and fund SBA 7(a) loans which qualify for guarantees up to 90% of principal and accrued interest. We also originate 504 chapter loans in which we generally provide 50% of the financing, taking a first lien on the real property as collateral.

We provide SBA loans to potential borrowers who are proposing a business venture, often with existing cash flow and a reasonable chance of success. We do not treat the SBA guarantee as a substitute for a borrower meeting our credit standards, and, except for minimum capital levels or maximum loan terms, the borrower must meet our other credit standards as applicable to loans outside the SBA process.

Residential Mortgage Lending
Permanent.

Permanent.Our business model generally does not include making permanent residential mortgage loans.  We do it only on a case-by-case basis. In the case of conventional loans, we typically lend up to 80% of the

appraised value of single-family residences and require mortgage insurance for loans exceeding that amount. We have no sub-prime loans. At December 31, 2010, we had $88.8 millionSubstantially all of permanentthe residential mortgage loans. Of that amount, $27.2 million remain from the purchase of 1st Service Bank, and $29.9 million wasloans were acquired in the Greater Atlantic transaction.previous acquisitions.

We retain a valid lien on real estate and obtain a title insurance policy that insures the property is free of encumbrances. We also require hazard insurance and flood insurance for all loans secured by real property if the real property is in a flood plain as designated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. We also require most borrowers to advance funds on a monthly basis from which we make disbursements for items such as real estate taxes, private mortgage insurance and hazard insurance.

Construction.We typically make single family residential construction loans to builders/developers in our market areas. Construction loans generally have interest rates of prime plus one to two percent and fees of one to three points, loan-to-value ratios of 80% or less based on current appraisals and terms of generally nine months or less. In most cases, when we make a residential construction loan to a builder, the residence is pre-sold. All plans, specifications and surveys must include proposed improvements. Borrowers must evidence the capacity to service the debt.

11
Home Equity Lines of Credit.Sonabank rarely originates home equity lines of credit.  At December 31, 2010,2011, we had outstanding balances totaling $50.8$44.5 million, of which $40.3$35.4 million waswere acquired in the Greater Atlantic transaction. We had previously acquired outstanding balances of home equity lines of credit in the amount of $8.0 million in the acquisition of 1st Service Bank in 2006.

Consumer Lending

To a limited extent, we offer various types of secured and unsecured consumer loans. We make consumer loans primarily for personal, family or household purposes as a convenience to our customer base since these loans are not the focus of our lending activities. As a general guideline, a consumer’s debt service should not exceed 40% of his gross income or 45% of net income. For purposes of this calculation, debt includes house payment or rent, fixed installment payments, the estimated payment for the loan being requested and the minimum required payment on any revolving debt. At December 31, 2010,2011, we had $2.2$2.0 million of consumer loans.

Credit Approval and Collection Policies

Because future loan losses are so closely intertwined with our underwriting policy, we have instituted what management believes is a stringent loan underwriting policy. Our underwriting guidelines are tailored for particular credit types, including lines of credit, revolving credit facilities, demand loans, term loans, equipment loans, real estate loans, SBA loans, stand-by letters orof credit and unsecured loans. We will make extensions of credit based, among other factors, on the potential borrower’s creditworthiness, likelihood of repayment and proximity to market areas served.

We have a standing Credit Committee comprised of certain officers, each of whom has a defined lending authority in combination with other officers. These individual lending authorities are determined by our Chief Executive Officer and certain directors and are based on the individual’s technical ability and experience. These authorities must be approved by our board of directors and our Credit Committee. Our Credit Committee is comprised of four levels of members: junior, regular, senior, and executive, based on experience. Our executive members are Ms. Derrico and Messrs. Porter and Baker. Mr. Stevens, Chief Risk Officer, must approve risk ratings for loans over $1.5 million.  Loans over a certain size must be approved by the full Board of Directors or two outside directors. (See “Management.”) Under our loan approval process, the sponsoring loan officer’s approval is required on all credit submissions. This approval must be included in or added to the individual and joining authorities outlined below. The sponsoring loan officer is primarily responsible for the customer’s relationship with us, including, among other things, obtaining and maintaining adequate credit file information. We require each loan officer to maintain loan files in an order and detail that would enable a disinterested third party to review the file and determine the current status and quality of the credit.

In addition to approval of the sponsoring loan officer, we require approvals from one or more members of the Credit Committee on all loans. The approvals required differ based on the size of the borrowing relationship. At least one senior or one executive member must approve all loans in the amount of $100,000 or more. All three of the executive members of the committee must approve all loans of $1 million or more. Regardless of the number of approvals needed, we encourage each member not to rely on another member’s approval as a basis for approval and to treat his approval as if it were the only approval necessary to approve the loan. Our legal lending limit to one borrower is limited to 15% of our unimpaired capital and surplus. We have an internal guidance line of 75% to 80% of the legal lending limit.  As of December 31, 2010,2011, our legal lending limit was approximately $13.9 million, although we have no loans to one borrower that approach our legal lending limit to date.$13.8 million. Our largest group credit as of December 31, 2010,2011, was approximately $9.0$13.0 million.

12
The following collection actions are the minimal procedures which management believes are necessary to properly monitor past due loans and leases. When a borrower fails to make a payment, we contact the borrower in person, in writing or on the telephone. At a minimum, all borrowers are notified by mail when payments of principal and/or interest are 10 days past due. Real estate and commercial loan borrowers are assessed a late charge when payments are 10-15 days past due. Customers are contacted by a loan officer before the loan becomes 60 days delinquent. After 90 days, if the loan has not been brought current or an acceptable arrangement is not worked out with the borrower, we will institute measures to remedy the default, including commencing foreclosure action with respect to mortgage loans and repossessions of collateral in the case of consumer loans.

If foreclosure is effected, the property is sold at a public auction in which we may participate as a bidder. If we are the successful bidder, we include the acquired real estate property in our real estate owned account until it is sold. These assets are carried at fair value net of estimated selling costs. To the extent there is a decline in value, that amount is charged to operating expense. At December 31, 2010,2011, we had other real estate owned totaling $4.6$14.3 million, of which $676$636 thousand, net of discount, resulted from foreclosures on loans that were acquired in the Greater Atlantic transaction.

Special Products and Services

To complement our array of loans, we also provide the following special products and services to our commercial customers:

Cash Management Services

Cash Management services are offered that enable the Bank’s business customer to maximize the efficiency of their cash management. Specific products offered in our cash management services program include the following:

●Investment/sweep accounts

●     Wire Transfer services

●     Employer Services/Payroll processing services

●     Zero balance accounts

●     Night depository services

●     Lockbox services

●     Depository transfers

●     Merchant services (third party)

●     ACH originations

●     Business debit cards

●     Controlled disbursement accounts

●     SONA 24/7 (Check 21 processing)

●     Sonabank asset based lending (SABL)

Some of the products listed above are described in-depth below.

●           SONA 24/7/Check 21:SONA 24/7 is ideal for landlords, property managers, medical professionals, and any other businesses that accept checks. Sonabank is a market leader in banking technology, and has created SONA 24/7 to empower its business customers. Now the customers of Sonabank can have total control over how, when, and where their checks will be deposited. SONA 24/7 uses the new Check Truncation technology outlined by the “Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act”, passed in October 2004 (Check 21). This act allows banks to have a universal technique for processing checks. With Check Truncation, paper checks can now be converted to electronic images and processed between participating banks, vastly speeding up the check clearing process. SONA In-House passes on the benefits of Check Truncation directly to Sonabank’s business customers.

13
●           Lockbox Services:Sonabank will open a lockbox, retrieve and scan incoming checks, and deposit them directly into the customer’s account. The images of the checks will then be available to view online. This makes bookkeeping for the customer fast and easy, and because Sonabank is checking the lockbox daily, funds will often be available sooner. Big businesses have been using lockboxes for decades as a cash management tool. Sonabank makes this service cost effective for all small and medium sized businesses as well.

●           Employer Services:Sonabank will provide its business clients with software that allows them to generate ACH payroll transactions to their employees’ accounts.

●           SABL:Asset Based Lending is a form of “collateral-based” lending. It is a combination of secured lending and short-term business lending. It is a specialized form of financing that allows a bank’s commercial customers to pledge their working assets, typically inventory and account receivables as collateral to secure financing. Asset Based Lending borrowers are typically in the service, manufacturing or distribution fields.

SABL is an Asset Based Lending software system, built by Sonabank that allows the bank to monitor the collateral of its commercial borrowers who have pledged their working assets (accounts receivables and other qualifying assets such as inventory) as collateral. SABL will also have the ability to track other offsets (liabilities, e.g. other loans the customer has with the bank) to the line of credit. SABL will serve to provide the more stringent controls and supervision that this type of lending requires.

One control that is typical of Asset Based Lending is that the commercial borrower is required to have its customers remit invoice payments to a bank controlled lockbox. The bank retrieves these payments and the bank applies them directly to any outstanding balance on the line. SABL allows for this and can combine that service with remote capture (check 21) if warranted.

Most Asset Based Lending systems are manual processes or software that certifies the borrowing base periodically. These certifications are usually provided in the form of manually created borrowing bases backed up with field exams. SABL will provide a real time capability to analyze and adjust borrowing availability based on the levels of collateral at the moment.

SABL also offers an automated collateral upload, taking receivable information directly from the clients accounting system. SABL also offers discretionary borrowings and pay offs, allowing clients to borrow on or pay down their line at their discretion, as long as they are compliant with the SABL system. Lastly, SABL offers superior reporting, offering reports to bank officers that provide all the information they need to monitor risk. Customized reports can also be built for clients.

●           Other Consumer/Retail Products and Services. Other products and services that are offered by the Bank are primarily directed toward the individual customer and include the following:

Debit cards

●Debit cards

ATM services

●ATM services

Travelers Checks

●Travelers Checks

Savings bonds

●Savings bonds

Notary service in some branches

●Notary service in some branches

Wire transfers

●Wire transfers

Telephone banking

●Telephone banking

Online banking with bill payment services

●Online banking with bill payment services

Credit Cards

●Credit Cards

14
Competition

The banking business is highly competitive, and our profitability depends principally on our ability to compete in the market areas in which our banking operations are located. We experience substantial competition in attracting and retaining savings deposits and in lending funds. The primary factors we encounter in competing for savings deposits are convenient office locations and rates offered. Direct competition for savings deposits comes from other commercial bank and thrift institutions, money market mutual funds and corporate and government securities which may offer more attractive rates than insured depository institutions are willing to pay. The primary factors we encounter in competing for loans include, among others, interest rate and loan origination fees and the range of services offered. Competition for origination of loans normally comes from other commercial banks, thrift institutions, mortgage bankers, mortgage brokers and insurance companies. We have been able to compete effectively with other financial institutions by:

●     emphasizing customer service and technology;

●     establishing long-term customer relationships and building customer loyalty; and

●     providing products and services designed to address the specific needs of our customers.

Employees

At December 31, 2010,2011, we had 107112 full-time equivalent employees, fourfive of whom were executive officers. Management considers its relations with its employees to be good. Neither we nor Sonabank are a party to any collective bargaining agreement.

SUPERVISION AND REGULATION

The business of SNBVSouthern National and the Bank are subject to extensive regulation and supervision under federal banking laws and other federal and state laws and regulations.regulations, including primary oversight by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and secondary oversight by Virginia and possibly other authorities. In general, these laws and regulations are intended for the protection of the customers and depositors of the Bank and not for the protection of SNBVSouthern National or its shareholders. Set forth below are brief descriptions of selected laws and regulations applicable to SNBVSouthern National and the Bank. These descriptions are not intended to be a comprehensive description of all laws and regulations to which SNBVSouthern National and the Bank are subject or to be complete descriptions of the laws and regulations discussed. The descriptions of statutory and regulatory provisions are qualified in their entirety by reference to the particular statutes and regulations. Changes in applicable statutes, regulations or regulatory policy may have a material effect on SNBV,Southern National, the Bank and their business.

In addition to the system of regulation and supervision referenced above, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), which is discussed in greater detail below, created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “Bureau”), a new federal regulatory body with broad authority to regulate the offering and provision of consumer financial products.  The Bureau officially came into being on July 21, 2011, and rulemaking authority for a range of consumer financial protection laws (such as the Truth in Lending Act, the Electronic Funds Transfer Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, among others) transferred from the federal prudential banking regulators to the Bureau on that date.  The Dodd-Frank Act gives the Bureau authority to supervise and examine depository institutions with more than $10 billion in assets for compliance with these federal consumer laws.  The authority to supervise and examine depository institutions with $10 billion or less in assets for compliance with federal consumer laws will remain largely with those institutions’ primary regulators.  However, the Bureau may participate in examinations of these smaller institutions on a “sampling basis” and may refer potential enforcement actions against such institutions to their primary regulators.  The Bureau will also have supervisory and examination authority over certain nonbank institutions that offer consumer financial products.  The Dodd-Frank Act identifies a number of covered nonbank institutions, and also authorizes the Bureau to identify additional institutions that will be subject to its jurisdiction.  Accordingly, the Bureau may participate in examinations of the Bank, and could supervise and examine other direct or indirect subsidiaries of Southern National that offer consumer financial products.
15
The earnings of the Bank and therefore of Southern National are affected by general economic conditions, changes in federal and state laws and regulations and actions of various regulatory authorities, including those referenced above.  Additional changes to the laws and regulations applicable to us are frequently proposed at both the federal and state levels.  The regulatory framework under which we operate will change substantially over the next several years as the result of the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act, which calls for a variety of mandatory and permissive rulemakings to implement its requirements.  The Dodd-Frank Act represents a significant overhaul of many aspects of the regulation of the financial services industry, addressing, among other things, systemic risk, capital adequacy, deposit insurance assessments, consumer financial protection, interchange fees, derivatives, lending limits, mortgage lending practices, registration of investment advisors and changes among the bank regulatory agencies.
TheFederal Reserve Oversight, including the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956.Under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (“BHCA”), SNBV iswe are subject to periodic examination by the Federal Reserve Board (“FRB”) and required to file periodic reports regarding itsour operations and any additional information that the FRB may require. Our activities at the bank holding company level are limited to:

banking, managing or controlling banks;

furnishing services to or performing services for our bank subsidiary; and

engaging in other activities that the FRB has determined by regulation or order to be so closely related to banking as to be a proper incident to these activities.

●banking, managing or controlling banks;

●furnishing services to or performing services for our bank subsidiary; and
●engaging in other activities that the FRB has determined by regulation or order to be so closely related to banking as to be a proper incident to these activities.
Some of the activities that the FRB has determined by regulation to be proper incidents to the business of a bank holding company include making or servicing loans and specific types of leases, performing specific data processing services and acting in some circumstances as a fiduciary or investment or financial adviser. In approving acquisitions of banking or nonbanking organizations or the addition of nonbanking activities, the FRB considers, among other things, whether the acquisition or the additional activities can reasonably be expected to produce benefits to the public, such as greater convenience, increased competition, or gains in efficiency, that outweigh such possible adverse effects as undue concentration of resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interest or unsound banking practices. SNBVSouthern National does not currently plan to perform any of these activities, but may do so in the future.

With some limited exceptions, the BHCA requires every bank holding company to obtain the prior approval of the FRB before: (i) acquiring substantially all the assets of any bank; (ii) acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of any voting shares of any bank if after such acquisition it would own or control more than 5% of the voting shares of such bank (unless it already owns or controls the majority of such shares); or (iii) merging or consolidating with another bank holding company. In approving bank acquisitions by bank holding companies, the FRB is required to consider, among other things, the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the bank holding company and the banks concerned, the convenience and needs of the communities to be served, and various competitive factors.

16
In addition, and subject to some exceptions, the BHCA and the Change in Bank Control Act, together with their regulations, require FRB approval prior to any person or company acquiring “control” of a bank holding company. Control is conclusively presumed to exist if an individual or company acquires 25% (5% in the case of an acquirer that is a bank holding company) or more of any class of voting securities of the bank holding company. Control is rebuttably presumed to exist if a person acquires 10% or more, of any class of voting securities and either has registered securities under Section 12 of the Exchange Act or no other person owns a greater percentage of that class of voting securities immediately after the transaction. The regulations provide a procedure for challenging this rebuttable control presumption.  On September 22, 2008, the FRB issued a policy statement on equity investments in bank holding companies and banks, which allows the FRB to generally be able to conclude that an entity’s investment is not “controlling” if the entity does not own in excess of 15% of the voting power and 33% of the total equity of the bank holding company or bank.  Depending on the nature of the overall investment and the capital structure of the banking organization, based on the policy statement, the FRB will permit noncontrolling investments in the form of voting and nonvoting shares that represent in the aggregate (i) less than one-third of the total equity of the banking organization (and less than one-third of any class of voting securities, assuming conversion of all convertible nonvoting securities held by the entity) and (ii) less than 15% of any class of voting securities of the banking organization.

In November 1999, Congress enacted the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (“GLBA”), which made substantial revisions to the statutory restrictions separating banking activities from other financial activities. Under the GLBA, bank holding companies that are well-capitalized under the prompt-corrective-action provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Act of 1991 and well-managed under applicable FRB regulations and meet other conditions can elect to become “financial holding companies.”companies” and engage in certain activities that are not permissible for a bank holding company. As financial holding companies, they and their subsidiaries are permitted to acquire or engage in previously impermissible activities such as insurance underwriting, securities underwriting and distribution, travel agency activities, insurance agency activities, merchant banking and other activities that the FRB determines to be financial in nature or complementary to these activities. Financial holding companies continue to be subject to the overall oversight and supervision of the FRB, but the GLBA applies the concept of functional regulation to the activities conducted by subsidiaries. For example, insurance activities would be subject to supervision and regulation by state insurance authorities. Furthermore, if after becoming a financial holding company and undertaking activities not permissible for a bank holding company, the company fails to continue to meet any of the prerequisites for financial holding company status, the company must enter into an agreement with the FRB to comply with all applicable capital and management requirements. If the company does not return to compliance within 180 days, the FRB may order the company to divest its subsidiary bank or the company may discontinue or divest investments in companies engaged in, activities permissible only for a bank holding company that has elected to be treated as a financial holding company. Although SNBVSouthern National has not elected to become a financial holding company in order to exercise the broader activity powers provided by the GLBA, SNBVwe may elect to do so in the future.

In addition, as a Federal Reserve Member bank, the Bank is also subject to primary oversight by the FRB, as well as secondary oversight by the Virginia Bureau of Financial Institutions and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Notably, the discussions below are relevant to both Southern National and the Bank.
Bank Permitted Activities and Investments.  Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“FDIA”), the activities and investments of state member banks are generally limited to those permissible for national banks, notwithstanding state law.  With appropriate regulatory approval, a member bank may engage in activities not permissible for a national bank if the appropriate bank regulator determines that the activity does not pose a significant risk to the Deposit Insurance Fund and that the bank meets its minimum capital requirements.
17
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.  In July 2010, Congress enacted the Dodd-Frank Act regulatory reform legislation, which the President signed into law on July 21, 2010.  Many aspects of the Dodd-Frank Act are subject to further rulemaking and will take effect over several years, making it difficult for us to anticipate the overall financial impact to us or across the industry.  The Dodd-Frank Act broadly affects the financial services industry by implementing changes to the financial regulatory landscape aimed at strengthening the sound operation of the financial services sector, including provisions that, among other things:
●Create a new regulatory authority, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, responsible for implementing, examining and enforcing compliance with federal consumer financial laws;
●Apply new regulatory capital requirements, including changes to leverage and risk-based capital standards and changes to the components of permissible tiered capital, which, among other things, will require us to deduct all trust preferred securities issued on or after May 19, 2010 from our Tier 1 capital (existing trust preferred securities issued prior to May 19, 2010 for all bank holding companies with less than $15.0 billion in total consolidated assets as of December 31, 2009 are exempt from this requirement);
●Broaden the base for FDIC insurance assessments from the amount of insured deposits to average total consolidated assets less average tangible equity during the assessment period;
●Permanently increase FDIC deposit insurance to $250,000 and provide unlimited FDIC deposit insurance beginning December 31, 2010 through December 31, 2012 for noninterest bearing demand transaction accounts at all insured depository institutions;
●Permit banks to engage in de novo interstate branching if the laws of the state where the new branch is to be established would permit the establishment of the branch if it were chartered by such state;
●Repeal the federal prohibitions on the payment of interest on demand deposits, thereby permitting depository institutions to pay interest on business transaction and other accounts;
●Require financial holding companies to be well capitalized and well managed as of July 21, 2011. Bank holding companies and banks must also be both well capitalized and well managed in order to acquire banks located outside their home state;
●Eliminate the ceiling on the size of the DIF and increase the floor of the size of the DIF;
●Add new limitations on federal preemption;
●Impose new prohibitions and restrictions on the ability of a banking entity and nonbank financial company to engage in proprietary trading and have certain interests in, or relationships with, a hedge fund or private equity fund
●Require that sponsors of asset-backed securities retain a percentage of the credit risk underlying the securities;
●Requirement that banking regulators remove references to and requirements of reliance upon credit ratings from their regulations and replace them with appropriate alternatives for evaluating creditworthiness;
●Implement corporate governance revisions, including with regard to executive compensation and proxy access by shareholders, that apply to all public companies, not just financial institutions;
●Amend the Electronic Fund Transfer Act which, among other things, gave the FRB the authority to establish rules regarding interchange fees charged for electronic debit transactions by payment card issuers having assets over $10 billion and to enforce a new statutory requirement that such fees be reasonable and proportional to the actual cost of a transaction to the issuer; and
18
●Increase the authority of the FRB to examine us and our non-bank subsidiaries.
Some of these and other major changes could materially impact the profitability of our business, the value of assets we hold or the collateral available for our loans, require changes to business practices, or force us to discontinue businesses and expose us to additional costs, taxes, liabilities, enforcement actions and reputational risk. Many of these provisions became effective upon enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act, while others are subject to further study, rule- making, and the discretion of regulatory bodies. In light of these significant changes and the discretion afforded to federal regulators, we cannot fully predict the effect that compliance with the Dodd-Frank Act or any implementing regulations will have on our businesses or ability to pursue future business opportunities. Additional regulations resulting from the Dodd-Frank Act may materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.
The likelihood, timing, and scope of any such change and the impact any such change may have on us are impossible to determine with any certainty.  Also, additional changes to the laws and regulations applicable to us are frequently proposed at both the federal and state levels.  We cannot predict whether new legislation or regulations will be enacted and, if enacted, the effect that it, or any regulations, would have on our business, financial condition or results of operations.  Set forth below is a brief description of the significant federal and state laws and regulations to which we are currently subject.  These descriptions do not purport to be complete and are qualified in their entirety by reference to the particular statutory or regulatory provision.
Insurance of Deposits.Substantially all of the deposits of the Bank are insured up to applicable limits by the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) of the FDIC and the Bank must pay deposit insurance assessments to the FDIC for such deposit insurance protection.  The FDIC maintains the DIF by designating a required reserve ratio.  If the reserve ratio falls below the designated level, the FDIC must adopt a restoration plan that provides that the DIF will return to an acceptable level generally within 5 years.  The designated reserve ratio is currently set at 2.00%. The FDIC has the discretion to price deposit insurance according to the risk for all insured institutions regardless of the level of the reserve ratio.

The DIF reserve ratio is maintained by assessing depository institutions an insurance premium based upon statutory factors. Under its current regulations,factors, including the degree of risk the institution poses to the DIF.

The Dodd-Frank Act amended the statutory regime governing the DIF. Among other things, the Dodd-Frank Act established a minimum designated reserve ratio (“DRR”) of 1.35 percent of estimated insured deposits, required that the fund reserve ratio reach 1.35 percent by September 30, 2020 and directed the FDIC imposes assessmentsto amend its regulations to redefine the assessment base used for calculating deposit insurance accordingassessments.  Specifically, the Dodd-Frank Act requires the assessment base to be an amount equal to the average consolidated total assets of the insured depository institution during the assessment period, minus the sum of the average tangible equity of the insured depository institution during the assessment period and an amount the FDIC determines is necessary to establish assessments consistent with the risk-based assessment system found in the Federal Deposit Insurance Act.
On February 7, 2011, the FDIC approved a depository institution’s ranking infinal rule that amended its existing DIF restoration plan and implemented certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.  This rule, which took effect April 1, 2011, changed the FDIC’s assessment system from one of four risk categories based upon supervisory and capital evaluations. The assessment rate for an individual institution is determined according to a formula based on a combination of weighted average CAMELS component ratings, financial ratios and, for institutions that have long-term debt ratings,domestic deposits to one based on the average ratingsconsolidated total assets of a bank minus its long-term debt. Well-capitalized institutions (generally those with CAMELS composite ratings of 1 or 2) are groupedaverage tangible equity during each quarter. Under the February 7, 2011 final rule, the total base assessment rates will vary depending on the DIF reserve ratio.  For example, for banks in Risk Category I and the initialbest risk category, the total base assessment rate for deposit insurance is set at an annual rate ofwill be between 12 and 16 basis points. The initial base assessment rate for institutions in Risk Categories II, III and IV is set at annual rates of 22, 32 and 502.5 -and 9 basis points respectively. These initial base assessment rates are adjusted to determine an institution’s final assessment rate based on its brokered deposits, secured liabilities and unsecured debt. Total base assessment rates after adjustments range fromwhen the DIF reserve ratio is below 1.15 percent, between 1.5 and- 7 to 24 basis points for Risk Category I, 17 to 43when the DIF reserve ratio is between 1.15 percent and 2 percent, between 1 and- 6 basis points for Risk Category II, 27 to 58when the DIF reserve ratio is between 2 percent and 2.5 percent and between 0.5 and- 5 basis points for Risk Category III, and 40 to 77.5 basis points for Risk Category IV.

Inwhen the DIF reserve ratio is 2.5 percent or higher.

19
Separately, in November 2009, the FDIC adopted a rule that required all insured institutions with limited exceptions, to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012.  The assessment, which totaled $1.9 million for SNBV,Southern National, was calculated by taking the institution’s actual September 30, 2009 assessment base and adjusting it quarterly by an estimated 5% annual growth rate through the end of 2012.  Each institution recorded the entire amount of its prepaid assessment as a prepaid expense, an asset on its balance sheet, as of December 31, 2009.  As of December 31, 2009, and each quarter thereafter, each institution records an expense, or a charge to earnings, for its quarterly assessment invoiced on its quarterly statement and an offsetting credit to the prepaid assessment until the asset is exhausted.  As of December 31, 2010, $1.2 million2011, $678 thousand in prepaid assessments is included in other assets in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.

On February 7, 2011, the FDIC approved a final rule that amends its existing DIF restoration plan and implements certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Effective April 1, 2011, the assessment base will be determined using average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity rather than the current assessment base of adjusted domestic deposits. Since the change will result in a much larger assessment base, the final rule also lowers the assessment rates in order to keep the total amount collected from financial institutions relatively unchanged from the amounts currently being collected. The new assessment rates, calculated on the revised assessment base, will generally range from 2.5 to 9 basis points for Risk Category I institutions, 9 to 24 basis points for Risk Category II institutions, 18 to 33 basis points for Risk Category III institutions, and 30 to 45 basis points for Risk Category IV institutions. The new assessment rates will be calculated for the quarter beginning April 1, 2011 and reflected in invoices for assessments due September 30, 2011.

Safety and Soundness. There are a number of obligations and restrictions imposed on bank holding companies and their depository institution subsidiaries by federal law and regulatory policy that are designed to reduce potential loss exposure to the depositors of such depository institutions and to the DIF in the event that the depository institution is insolvent or is in danger of becoming insolvent. These obligations and restrictions are not for the benefit of investors. The FRB’s Regulation Y, for example, generally requires a holding company to give the FRB prior notice of any redemption or repurchase of its own equity securities, if the consideration to be paid, together with the consideration paid for any repurchases or redemptions in the preceding year, is equal to

10% or more of the holding company’s consolidated net worth. The FRB may oppose the transaction if it believes that the transaction would constitute an unsafe or unsound practice or would violate any law or regulation. Depending upon the circumstances, the FRB could take the position that paying a dividend would constitute an unsafe or unsound banking practice.

Regulators may pursue an administrative action against any bank holding company or national bank which violates the law, engages in an unsafe or unsound banking practice or which is about to engage in an unsafe and unsound banking practice. The administrative action could take the form of a cease and desist proceeding, a removal action against the responsible individuals or, in the case of a violation of law or unsafe and unsound banking practice, a civil penalty action. A cease and desist order, in addition to prohibiting certain action, could also require that certain action be undertaken. Under the policies of the FRB, SNBVSouthern National is required to serve as a source of financial strength to the Bank and to commit resources to support the Bank in circumstances where SNBVSouthern National might not do so otherwise.

Notably, the Dodd-Frank Act codified the FRB’s “source of strength” doctrine; this statutory change became effective in July 21, 2011. In addition to the foregoing requirements, the Dodd-Frank Act’s new provisions authorize the FRB to require a company that directly or indirectly controls a bank to submit reports that are designed both to assess the ability of such company to comply with its “source of strength” obligations and to enforce the company’s compliance with these obligations. As of March 27, 2012, the FRB and other federal banking regulators have not yet issued rules implementing this requirement, which are scheduled to be issued by July 21, 2012.

20
Capital Requirements.Each of the FRB and the FDIC has issued risk-based and leverage capital guidelines under a two-tier capital framework applicable to banking organizations that it supervises. Under the risk-based capital requirements, SNBVSouthern National and the Bank are each generally required to maintain a minimum ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets (including specific off-balance sheet activities, such as standby letters of credit) of 8%. At least half of the total capital must be composed of “Tier 1 Capital,” which generally consists of common shareholders’ equity, retained earnings, a limited amount of qualifying perpetual preferred stock, qualifying trust preferred securities and noncontrolling interests in the equity accounts of consolidated subsidiaries, less goodwill and certain intangibles.  Tier 2 capital generally consists of certain hybrid capital instruments and perpetual debt, mandatory convertible debt securities and a limited amount of subordinated debt, qualifying preferred stock, loan loss allowance and unrealized holding gains on certain equity securities. In addition, each of the federal banking regulatory agencies has established minimum leverage capital requirements for banking organizations. Under these requirements, banking organizations must maintain a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to adjusted average quarterly assets equal to not less than 3% to 5%not less than 4%, subject to federal bank regulatory evaluation of an organization’s overall safety and soundness. In sum, the capital measures used by the federal banking regulators are:

the Total Risk-Based Capital ratio, which is the total of Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital and Tier 2 Capital;

the Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital ratio; and

●the Total Risk-Based Capital ratio, which is the total of Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital and Tier 2 Capital;

the leverage ratio.

●the Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital ratio; and

●the leverage ratio.
Under these regulations, a state bank will be:

“well capitalized” if it has a Total Risk-Based Capital ratio of 10% or greater, a Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital ratio of 6% or greater, a leverage ratio of 5% or greater, and is not subject to any written agreement, order, capital directive, or prompt corrective action directive by a federal bank regulatory agency to meet and maintain a specific capital level for any capital measure;

“adequately capitalized” if it has a Total Risk-Based Capital ratio of 8% or greater, a Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital ratio of 4% or greater, and a leverage ratio of 4% or greater—or 3% in certain circumstances—and is not well capitalized;

●“well capitalized” if it has a Total Risk-Based Capital ratio of 10% or greater, a Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital ratio of 6% or greater, a leverage ratio of 5% or greater, and is not subject to any written agreement, order, capital directive, or prompt corrective action directive by a federal bank regulatory agency to meet and maintain a specific capital level for any capital measure;

“undercapitalized” if it has a Total Risk-Based Capital ratio of less than 8% or greater, a Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital ratio of less than 4% (or 3% in certain circumstances), or a leverage ratio of less than 4% (or 3% in certain circumstances);

●“adequately capitalized” if it has a Total Risk-Based Capital ratio of 8% or greater, a Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital ratio of 4% or greater, and a leverage ratio of 4% or greater—or 3% in certain circumstances—and is not well capitalized;

“significantly undercapitalized” if it has a Total Risk-Based Capital ratio of less than 6%, a Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital ratio of less than 3%, or a leverage ratio of less than 3%; or

●“undercapitalized” if it has a Total Risk-Based Capital ratio of less than 8% or greater, a Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital ratio of less than 4%, or a leverage ratio of less than 4% (or 3% in certain circumstances);

“critically undercapitalized” if its tangible equity is equal to or less than 2% of tangible assets.

●“significantly undercapitalized” if it has a Total Risk-Based Capital ratio of less than 6%, a Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital ratio of less than 3%, or a leverage ratio of less than 3%; or

●“critically undercapitalized” if its tangible equity is equal to or less than 2% of tangible assets.
The risk-based capital standards of each of the FRB and the FDIC explicitly identify concentrations of credit risk and the risk arising from non-traditional activities, as well as an institution’s ability to manage these risks, as

important factors to be taken into account by the agency in assessing an institution’s overall capital adequacy. The capital guidelines also provide that an institution’s exposure to a decline in the economic value of its capital due to changes in interest rates be considered by the agency as a factor in evaluating a banking organization’s capital adequacy.

The federal banking agencies’ risk-based and leverage ratios are minimum supervisory ratios generally applicable to banking organizations that meet certain specified criteria. Banking organizations not meeting these criteria are expected to operate with capital positions well above the minimum ratios. The federal bank regulatory agencies may set capital requirements for a particular banking organization that are higher than the minimum ratios when circumstances warrant. FRB guidelines also provide that banking organizations experiencing internal growth or making acquisitions will be expected to maintain strong capital positions substantially above the minimum supervisory levels, without significant reliance on intangible assets.

In addition to requiring undercapitalized institutions to submit a capital restoration plan, agency regulations contain broad restrictions on certain activities of undercapitalized institutions including asset growth, acquisitions, branch establishment and expansion into new lines of business. With certain exceptions, an insured depository institution is prohibited from making capital distributions, including dividends, and is prohibited from paying management fees to control persons if the institution would be undercapitalized after any such distribution or payment.

21
As an institution’s capital decreases, the FDIC’s enforcement powers become more severe. A significantly undercapitalized institution is subject to mandated capital raising activities, restrictions on interest rates paid and transactions with affiliates, removal of management and other restrictions. The FDIC has only very limited discretion in dealing with a critically undercapitalized institution and is virtually required to appoint a receiver or conservator.

Banks with risk-based capital and leverage ratios below the required minimums may also be subject to certain administrative actions, including the termination of deposit insurance upon notice and hearing, or a temporary suspension of insurance without a hearing in the event the institution has no tangible capital.

Changes to Definition of Tier 1 Capital.
Under Section 171 of the Dodd-Frank Act trust preferred securities issued on or after May 19, 2010 no longer qualify as tier 1 capital. However, bank holding companies with assets of less than $15 billion (as of December 31, 2009) may continue to count trust preferred securities issued before May 19, 2010 towards their tier 1 capital. For bank holding companies with more than $15 billion, there is a three year phase out of tier 1 treatment for trust preferred securities issued before May 19, 2010 (from January 1, 2013 through January 1, 2016). Basel III also eliminates trust preferred securities from the definition of tier 1 capital, but calls for a 10 year phase out of this tier 1 capital qualification. However, Basel III has not yet been implemented by US regulators. The inconsistencies that exist between the Dodd-Frank Act and Basel III are expected to be addressed by regulators through future rulemakings.
Proposed Revisions to Capital Adequacy Requirements. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act requires the FRB, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) and the FDIC to adopt regulations imposing a continuing “floor” of the 1988 capital accord (“Basel I”) of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the “Basel Committee”) capital requirements in cases where the 2004 Basel Committee capital accord (“Basel II”) capital requirements and any changes in capital regulations resulting from Basel III (defined below) otherwise would permit lower requirements. In December 2010,June of 2011, the FRB, the OCC and the FDIC issued a joint notice of proposed rulemaking that wouldfinal rule to implement this requirement.requirement for institutions that satisfy certain asset thresholds or those that voluntarily apply the final rule.

On December 16, 2010, the Basel Committee released its final framework for strengthening international capital and liquidity regulation (“Basel III”). Basel III, when implemented by the U.S. banking agencies and fully phased-in, will require bank holding companies and their bank subsidiaries to maintain substantially more capital, with a greater emphasis on common equity. In June 2011, the Basel Committee issued a revised version of the rules that included a minor modification of the credit valuation adjustment (or the risk of loss caused by changes in the credit spread of a counterparty due to changes in its credit quality).  The U.S. banking agencies have indicated informally that they expectyet to proposeissue regulations implementing Basel III in mid-2011 with final adoption of implementing regulations in mid-2012.III.. Notwithstanding its release of the Basel III framework, the Basel Committee is considering further amendments to Basel III, including the imposition of additional capital surcharges on globally and systemically important financial institutions. In addition to Basel III, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act requires or permits the Federal banking agencies to adopt regulations affecting banking institutions’ capital requirements in a number of respects. Accordingly, the regulations ultimately applicable to the Company may be substantially different from the Basel III final framework as published in December 2010.

2010 and modified in June 2011.

The Basel III final capital framework, among other things, (i) introduces as a new capital measure “Common Equity Tier 1” (“CET1”), (ii) specifies that Tier 1 capital consists of CET1 and “Additional Tier 1

capital” instruments meeting specified requirements, (iii) defines CET1 narrowly by requiring that most adjustments to regulatory capital measures be made to CET1 and not to the other components of capital and (iv) expands the scope of the adjustments as compared to existing regulations.

22
When fully phased in on January 1, 2019, Basel III requires banks to maintain (i) as a newly adopted international standard, a minimum ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 4.5%, plus a 2.5% “capital conservation buffer” (which is added to the 4.5% CET1 ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 7%), (ii) a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 6.0%, plus the capital conservation buffer (which is added to the 6.0% Tier 1 capital ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum Tier 1 capital ratio of 8.5% upon full implementation), (iii) a minimum ratio of total (that is, Tier 1 plus Tier 2) capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 8.0%, plus the capital conservation buffer (which is added to the 8.0% total capital ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum total capital ratio of 10.5% upon full implementation) and (iv) as a newly adopted international standard, a minimum leverage ratio of 3%, calculated as the ratio of Tier 1 capital to balance sheet exposures plus certain off-balance sheet exposures (computed as the average for each quarter of the month-end ratios for the quarter). Basel III also provides for a “countercyclical capital buffer,” that would be added to the capital conservation buffer generally to be imposed when national regulators determine that excess aggregate credit growth becomes associated with a buildup of systemic risk.

Proposed Liquidity Requirements. Historically, regulation and monitoring of bank and bank holding company liquidity has been addressed as a supervisory matter, without required formulaic measures. The Basel III final framework will require banks and bank holding companies to measure their liquidity against specific liquidity tests that, although similar in some respects to liquidity measures historically applied by banks and regulators for management and supervisory purposes, going forward will be required by regulation. One test, referred to as the liquidity coverage ratio (“LCR”), is designed to ensure that the banking entity maintains an adequate level of unencumbered high-quality liquid assets equal to the entity’s expected net cash outflow for a 30-day time horizon (or, if greater, 25% of its expected total cash outflow) under an acute liquidity stress scenario. The other, referred to as the net stable funding ratio (“NSFR”), is designed to promote more medium- and long-term funding of the assets and activities of banking entities over a one-year time horizon. These requirements will incentivize banking entities to increase their holdings of U.S. Treasury securities and other sovereign debt as a component of assets and increase the use of long-term debt as a funding source. The Basel III framework calls for the LCR wouldto be implemented subject to an observation period beginning in 2011, but would not be introduced as a requirement until January 1, 2015, and the NSFR would not be introduced as a requirement until January 1, 2018. TheseHowever, these requirements have not yet been implemented by U.S. banking regulators. Thus, these new standards are subject to further rulemaking and their terms could change before implementation.

Prompt Corrective Action. Under Section 38 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“FDIA”), each federal banking agency is required to implement a system of prompt corrective action for institutions whichthat it regulates. The federal banking agencies (including the FRB and the FDIC) have adopted substantially similar regulations to implement Section 38 of the FDIA. Section 38 of the FDIA and the regulations promulgated thereunder also specify circumstances under which the FDIC may reclassify a well capitalized bank as adequately capitalized and may require an adequately capitalized bank or an undercapitalized bank to comply with supervisory actions as if it were in the next lower category (except that the FDIC may not reclassify a significantly undercapitalized bank as critically undercapitalized).

The FRB and the FDIC may take various corrective actions against any undercapitalized bank and any bank that fails to submit an acceptable capital restoration plan or fails to implement a plan accepted by the FRB or the FDIC. These powers include, but are not limited to, requiring the institution to be recapitalized, prohibiting asset growth, restricting interest rates paid, requiring prior approval of capital distributions by any bank holding company that controls the institution, requiring divestiture by the institution of its subsidiaries or by the holding company of the institution itself, requiring a new election of directors, and requiring the dismissal of directors and officers.

23
The aggregate liability of the holding company of an undercapitalized bank is limited to the lesser of 5% of the institution’s assets at the time it became undercapitalized or the amount necessary to cause the institution to be “adequately capitalized.” The bank regulators have greater power in situations where an institution becomes “significantly” or “critically” undercapitalized or fails to submit a capital restoration plan. For example, a bank holding company controlling such an institution can be required to obtain prior FRB approval of proposed dividends, or might be required to consent to a consolidation or to divest the troubled institution or other affiliates.

Brokered Deposit Restrictions.  Adequately capitalized institutions (as defined for purposes of the prompt corrective action rules described above) cannot accept, renew or roll over brokered deposits except with a waiver from the FDIC, and are subject to restrictions on the interest rates that can be paid on such deposits. Undercapitalized institutions may not accept, renew, or roll over brokered deposits.deposits

.

Payment of Dividends. SNBVSouthern National is a legal entity separate and distinct from Sonabank. The principal sources of SNBV’sour cash flow, including cash flow to pay dividends to its stockholders, are dividends that Sonabank pays to its sole shareholder, SNBV.Southern National. Statutory and regulatory limitations apply to Sonabank’s payment of dividends to us as well as to SNBV’sSouthern National’s payment of dividends to its stockholders.

It is the policy of the FRB that bank holding companies should pay cash dividends on common stock only out of income available over the past year and only if prospective earnings retention is consistent with the organization’s expected future needs and financial condition. The policy provides that bank holding companies should not maintain a level of cash dividends that undermines the bank holding company’s ability to serve as a source of strength to its banking subsidiaries.

Under FRB policy, a bank holding company has historically been required to act as a source of financial strength to each of its banking subsidiaries. TheAs described above in the discussion of “Safety and Soundness” requirements, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act codifies this policy as a statutory requirement. Under this requirement, SNBVSouthern National is expected to commit resources to support Sonabank, including at times when SNBVwe may not be in a financial position to provide such resources. Any capital loans by a bank holding company to any of its subsidiary banks are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and to certain other indebtedness of such subsidiary banks. As discussed below, a bank holding company, in certain circumstances, could be required to guarantee the capital plan of an undercapitalized banking subsidiary.

Capital adequacy requirements serve to limit the amount of dividends that may be paid by Sonabank. Sonabank. Under federal law, the Bank cannot pay a dividend if, after paying the dividend, the bank will be “undercapitalized.” The bank regulatory agencies may declare a dividend payment to be unsafe and unsound even though the Bank would continue to meet its capital requirements after the dividend.

The ability of SNBVSouthern National to pay dividends is also subject to the provisions of Virginia law. The payment of dividends by SNBVSouthern National and Sonabank 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, 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.

24
In the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, the trustee will be deemed to have assumed and to cure immediately any deficit under any commitment by the debtor holding company to any of the federal banking agencies to maintain the capital of an insured depository institution. Any claim for breach of such obligation will generally have priority over most other unsecured claims.

Because we are a legal entity separate and distinct from our subsidiary Sonabank, our right to participate in the distribution of assets of any subsidiary upon the subsidiary’s liquidation or reorganization will be subject to the prior claims of the subsidiary’s creditors. In the event of a liquidation or other resolution of an insured depository institution, the claims of depositors and other general or subordinated creditors are entitled to a priority of payment over the claims of holders of any obligation of the institution to its shareholders, arising as a result of their status as shareholders, including any depository institution holding company (such as us) or any shareholder or creditor thereof.

Privacy.Under the GLBA, financial institutions are required to disclose their policies for collecting and protecting confidential information. Customers generally may prevent financial institutions from sharing nonpublic personal financial information with nonaffiliated third parties except under narrow circumstances, such as the processing of transactions requested by the consumer or when the financial institution is jointly sponsoring a product or service with a nonaffiliated third party. Additionally, financial institutions generally may not disclose consumer account numbers to any nonaffiliated third party for use in telemarketing, direct mail marketing or other marketing to consumers. Financial institutions are further required to disclose their privacy policies to customers annually. Financial institutions, however, will be required to comply with state law if it is more protective of customer privacy than the GLBA. Sonabank has established policies and procedures to assure our compliance with all privacy provisions of the GLBA.

Consumer Credit Reporting.On December 4, 2003, President Bush signed the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act amending the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act. These amendments to the Fair Credit Reporting Act (the “FCRA Amendments”) became effective in 2004.

The FCRA Amendments include, among other things:

requirements for financial institutions to develop policies and procedures to identify potential identity theft and, upon the request of a consumer, place a fraud alert in the consumer’s credit file stating that the consumer may be the victim of identity theft or other fraud;

consumer notice requirements for lenders that use consumer report information in connection with risk-based credit pricing programs;

●requirements for financial institutions to develop policies and procedures to identify potential identity theft and, upon the request of a consumer, place a fraud alert in the consumer’s credit file stating that the consumer may be the victim of identity theft or other fraud;

for entities that furnish information to consumer reporting agencies (which would include Sonabank), requirements to implement procedures and policies regarding the accuracy and integrity of the furnished information and regarding the correction of previously furnished information that is later determined to be inaccurate; and

●consumer notice requirements for lenders that use consumer report information in connection with risk-based credit pricing programs;

a requirement for mortgage lenders to disclose credit scores to consumers.

●
for entities that furnish information to consumer reporting agencies (which would include Sonabank), requirements to implement procedures and policies regarding the accuracy and integrity of the furnished information and regarding the correction of previously furnished information that is later determined to be inaccurate; and

●
a requirement for mortgage lenders to disclose credit scores to consumers.
The FCRA Amendments also prohibit a business that receives consumer information from an affiliate from using that information for marketing purposes unless the consumer is first provided a notice and an opportunity to direct the business not to use the information for such marketing purposes (the opt-out), subject to certain exceptions. We do not share consumer information among our affiliated companies for marketing purposes, except as allowed under exceptions to the notice and opt-out requirements. Because no affiliate of SNBVSouthern National is currently sharing consumer information with any other affiliate for marketing purposes, the limitations on sharing of information for marketing purposes do not have a significant impact on us.

25
Audit Reports. Insured institutions with total assets of $500 million or more must submit annual audit reports prepared by independent auditors to federal and state regulators. In some instances, the audit report of the institution’s holding company can be used to satisfy this requirement. Auditors must receive examination reports, supervisory agreements and reports of enforcement actions. For institutions with total assets of $1 billion or more, financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, management’s certifications concerning responsibility for the financial statements, internal controls and compliance with legal requirements designated by the FDIC, and an attestation by the auditor regarding the statements of management

relating to the internal controls must be submitted. For institutions with total assets of more than $3 billion, independent auditors may be required to review quarterly financial statements. FDICIAThe Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”) requires that independent audit committees be formed, consisting of outside directors only. The committees of such institutions must include members with experience in banking or financial management, must have access to outside counsel, and must not include representatives of large customers.

Anti-Terrorism and Anti-Money Laundering Legislation.A major focus of governmental policy on financial institutions in recent years has been aimed at combating money laundering and terrorist financing. The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 (the “USA Patriot Act”) substantially broadened the scope of United States anti-money laundering laws and regulations by imposing significant new compliance and due diligence obligations, creating new crimes and penalties and expanding the extra-territorial jurisdiction of the United States. The United States Treasury Department has issued and, in some cases, proposed a number of regulations that apply various requirements of the USA Patriot Act to financial institutions. These regulations impose obligations on financial institutions to maintain appropriate policies, procedures and controls to detect, prevent and report money laundering and terrorist financing and to verify the identity of their customers. Certain of those regulations impose specific due diligence requirements on financial institutions that maintain correspondent or private banking relationships with non-U.S. financial institutions or persons. Failure of a financial institution to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing, or to comply with all of the relevant laws or regulations, could have serious legal and reputational consequences for the institution.

Office of Foreign Assets Control Regulation. The United States has imposed economic sanctions that affect transactions with designated foreign countries, nationals and others. These are typically known as the “OFAC” rules based on their administration by the U.S. Treasury Department Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”). The OFAC-administered sanctions targeting countries take many different forms. Generally, however, they contain one or more of the following elements: (i) restrictions on trade with or investment in a sanctioned country, including prohibitions against direct or indirect imports from and exports to a sanctioned country and prohibitions on “U.S. persons” engaging in financial transactions relating to making investments in, or providing investment-related advice or assistance to, a sanctioned country; and (ii) a blocking of assets in which the government or specially designated nationals of the sanctioned country have an interest, by prohibiting transfers of property subject to U.S. jurisdiction (including property in the possession or control of U.S. persons). Blocked assets (e.g., property and bank deposits) cannot be paid out, withdrawn, set off or transferred in any manner without a license from OFAC. Failure to comply with these sanctions could have serious legal and reputational consequences.

Virginia Law.Certain state corporation laws may have an anti-takeover affect. Virginia law restricts transactions between a Virginia corporation and its affiliates and potential acquirers. The following discussion summarizes the two Virginia statutes that may discourage an attempt to acquire control of SNBV.Southern National.

26
Virginia Code Sections 13.1-725 – 727.1 govern “Affiliated Transactions.” These provisions, with several exceptions discussed below, require approval by the holders of at least two-thirds of the remaining voting shares of material acquisition transactions between a Virginia corporation and any holder of more than 10% of any class of its outstanding voting shares. Affiliated Transactions include mergers, share exchanges, material dispositions of corporate assets not in the ordinary course of business, any dissolution of the corporation proposed by or on behalf of an interested shareholder, or any reclassification, including a reverse stock split, recapitalization, or merger of the corporation with its subsidiaries which increases the percentage of voting shares owned beneficially by any 10% shareholder by more than 5%.

For three years following the time that a shareholder becomes an owner of 10% of the outstanding voting shares, a Virginia corporation cannot engage in an Affiliated Transaction with that shareholder without approval of two-thirds of the voting shares other than those shares beneficially owned by that shareholder, and majority approval of the disinterested directors. A disinterested director is a member of the company’s board of directors who was (i) a member on the date the shareholder acquired more than 10%, and (ii) recommended for election

by, or was elected to fill a vacancy and received the affirmative vote of, a majority of the disinterested directors then on the board. At the expiration of the three-year period, the statute requires approval of Affiliated Transactions by two-thirds of the voting shares other than those beneficially owned by the 10% shareholder.

The principal exceptions to the special voting requirement apply to transactions proposed after the three-year period has expired and require either that the transaction be approved by a majority of the corporation’s disinterested directors or that the transaction satisfies the fair-price requirement of the statute. In general, the fair-price requirement provides that in a two-step acquisition transaction, the 10% shareholder must pay the shareholders in the second step either the same amount of cash or the same amount and type of consideration paid to acquire the Virginia corporation’s shares in the first step.

None of the foregoing limitations and special voting requirements applies to a transaction with any 10% shareholder whose acquisition of shares taking him or her over 10% was approved by a majority of the corporation’s disinterested directors.

These provisions were designed to deter certain takeovers of Virginia corporations. In addition, the statute provides that, by affirmative vote of a majority of the voting shares other than shares owned by any 10% shareholder, a corporation can adopt an amendment to its articles of incorporation or bylaws providing that the Affiliated Transactions provisions shall not apply to the corporation. SNBVSouthern National “opted out” of the Affiliated Transactions provisions when it incorporated.

Virginia law also provides that shares acquired in a transaction that would cause the acquiring person’s voting strength to meet or exceed any of the three thresholds (20%, 33 1/31/3%% or 50%) have no voting rights for those shares exceeding that threshold, unless granted by a majority vote of shares not owned by the acquiring person. This provision empowers an acquiring person to require the Virginia corporation to hold a special meeting of shareholders to consider the matter within 50 days of the request. SNBVSouthern National also “opted out” of this provision at the time of its incorporation.

Federal Reserve Monetary Policy.The Bank will be directly affected by government monetary and fiscal policy and by regulatory measures affecting the banking industry and the economy in general. The actions of the FRB as the nation’s central bank can directly affect the money supply and, in general, affect the lending activities of banks by increasing or decreasing the cost and availability of funds. An important function of the FRB is to regulate the national supply of bank credit. Among the instruments of monetary policy used by the FRB to implement this objective are open market operations in United States government securities, changes in the discount rate on member bank borrowings and changes in reserve requirements against bank deposits. These means are used in varying combinations to influence overall growth of bank loans, investments and deposits, and interest rates charged on loans or paid on deposits. The monetary policies of the FRB have had a significant effect on the operating results of commercial banks in the past and are expected to continue to do so in the future.future; however, the effects of the various FRB policies on our future business and earnings cannot be predicted.

27
Reserve Requirements.In 1980, Congress enacted legislation that imposed reserve requirements on all depository institutions that maintain transaction accounts or nonpersonal time deposits. NOW accounts, money market deposit accounts and other types of accounts that permit payments or transfers to third parties fall within the definition of transaction accounts and are subject to these reserve requirements, as are any nonpersonal time deposits at an institution. For net transaction accounts in 2011,2012, the first $10.7$11.5 million will be exempt from reserve requirements. A 3.0% reserve ratio will be assessed on net transaction accounts over $10.7$11.5 million to and including $58.8$71.0 million. A 10.0% reserve ratio will be applied to net transaction accounts in excess of $58.8$71.0 million. These percentages are subject to adjustment by the FRB.

Restrictions on Transactions with Affiliates and Insiders.Transactions between banks and their affiliates are governed by Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act. An affiliate of a bank is any bank or entity that controls, is controlled by or is under common control with such bank. In general, Section 23A imposes limits on the amount of such transactions to 10% of Sonabank’s capital stock and surplus and requires that such

transactions be secured by designated amounts of specified collateral. It also limits the amount of advances to third parties which are collateralized by the securities or obligations of SNBVSouthern National or its subsidiaries. Commencing inAs of July 21, 2011, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act will require thateliminated the exclusion of transactions by a depository institution with its  financial subsidiary from the 10% of capital limit onunder Section 23A for all covered transactions begin to apply to financial subsidiaries.entered into on or after July 21, 2010. “Covered transactions” are defined by statute to include a loan or extension of credit, as well as a purchase of securities issued by an affiliate, a purchase of assets (unless otherwise exempted by the FRB) from the affiliate, the acceptance of securities issued by the affiliate as collateral for a loan, and the issuance of a guarantee, acceptance or letter of credit on behalf of an affiliate.

Affiliate transactions are also subject to Section 23B of the Federal Reserve Act, which generally requires that certain transactions between Sonabank and its affiliates be on terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable to Sonabank, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with or involving other nonaffiliated persons. The FRB has also issued Regulation W, which codifies prior regulations under Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and interpretive guidance with respect to affiliate transactions.

The restrictions on loans to directors, executive officers, principal shareholders and their related interests (collectively referred to herein as “insiders”) contained in the Federal Reserve Act and Regulation O apply to all insured institutions and their subsidiaries and holding companies. These restrictions include limits on loans to one borrower and conditions that must be met before such a loan can be made. There is also an aggregate limitation on all loans to insiders and their related interests. These loans cannot exceed the institution’s total unimpaired capital and surplus, and the FDIC may determine that a lesser amount is appropriate. Insiders are subject to enforcement actions for knowingly accepting loans in violation of applicable restrictions.

28
Concentrated Commercial Real Estate Lending Regulations. The In 2006, the federal banking agencies, including the FDIC, have promulgated guidance governing financial institutions with concentrations in commercial real estate lending. The guidance sets forth parameters for risk management practices that are consistent with the level and nature of a financial institution’s commercial real estate lending portfolio. The guidance provides that a bank has a concentration in commercial real estate lending if (i) total reported loans for construction, land development, and other land represent 100% or more of total capital or (ii) total reported loans secured by multifamily and non-farm residential properties and loans for construction, land development, and other land represent 300% or more of total capital and the bank’s commercial real estate loan portfolio has increased 50% or more during the prior 36 months. Owner occupied loans are excluded from this second category. If a concentration is present, management must employ heightened risk management practices that address the following key elements: including board and management oversight and strategic planning, portfolio management, development of underwriting standards, risk assessment, review and monitoring through market analysis and stress testing, and maintenance of increased capital levels as needed to support the level of commercial real estate lending.

In October 2009, the federal banking agencies issued additional guidance on commercial real estate lending that emphasizes these considerations and also supports prudent loan workouts for financial institutions working with commercial real estate borrowers who are experiencing diminished operating cash flows, depreciated collateral values, or prolonged delays in selling or renting commercial properties.
In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act contains provisions that may impact the Bank’s business by reducing the amount of our commercial real estate lending and increasing the cost of borrowing, including rules relating to risk retention of securitized assets. Section 941 of the Dodd-Frank Act requires, among other things, that a loan originator or a securitizer of asset-backed securities retain a percentage of the credit risk of securitized assets. The banking agencies have jointly issued a proposed rule to implement these requirements but have yet to issue final rules.
Cross-Guarantee Provisions. The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 contains a “cross-guarantee” provision which generally makes commonly controlled insured depository institutions liable to the FDIC for any losses incurred in connection with the failure of a commonly controlled depository institution.

Community Reinvestment Act. Under the Community Reinvestment Act and related regulations, depository institutions have a continuing and affirmative obligation to assist in meeting the credit needs of their market areas, including low and moderate-income areas, consistent with safe and sound banking practice. The Community Reinvestment Act requires the adoption by each institution of a Community Reinvestment Act statement for each of its market areas describing the depository institution’s efforts to assist in its community’s credit needs. Depository institutions are periodically examined for compliance with the Community Reinvestment Act and are periodically assigned ratings in this regard. Banking regulators consider a depository institution’s Community Reinvestment Act rating when reviewing applications to establish new branches, undertake new lines of business, and/or acquire part or all of another depository institution. An unsatisfactory rating can significantly delay or even prohibit regulatory approval of a proposed transaction by a bank holding company or its depository institution subsidiaries.

The GLBA and federal bank regulators have made various changes to the Community Reinvestment Act. Among other changes, Community Reinvestment Act agreements with private parties must be disclosed and annual reports must be made to a bank’s primary federal regulatory. A bank holding company will not be permitted to become a financial holding company and no new activities authorized under the GLBA may be commenced by a holding company or by a bank financial subsidiary if any of its bank subsidiaries received less than a “satisfactory” rating in its latest Community Reinvestment Act examination. The Bank received a “satisfactory” rating in the most recent examination for Community Reinvestment Act compliance in October 2010.

29
Fair Lending; Consumer Laws. In addition to the Community Reinvestment Act, other federal and state laws regulate various lending and consumer aspects of the banking business. Governmental agencies, including the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice, have become concerned that prospective borrowers experience discrimination in their efforts to obtain loans from depository and other lending institutions. These agencies have brought litigation against depository institutions alleging discrimination against borrowers. Many of these suits have been settled, in some cases for material sums, short of a full trial.

Recently, these governmental agencies have clarified what they consider to be lending discrimination and have specified various factors that they will use to determine the existence of lending discrimination under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Housing Act, including evidence that a lender discriminated on a prohibited basis, evidence that a lender treated applicants differently based on prohibited factors in the absence of evidence that the treatment was the result of prejudice or a conscious intention to discriminate, and evidence that a lender applied an otherwise neutral non-discriminatory policy uniformly to all applicants, but the practice had a discriminatory effect, unless the practice could be justified as a business necessity.

Banks and other depository institutions also are subject to numerous consumer-oriented laws and regulations. These laws, which include the Truth in Lending Act, the Truth in Savings Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and the Fair Housing Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Expedited Funds Availability Act require compliance by depository institutions with various disclosure requirements and requirements regulating the availability of funds after deposit or the making of some loans to customers.

Many of the foregoing laws and regulations are subject to change resulting from the provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act, which in many cases calls for revisions to implementing regulations. In addition, oversight responsibility for these and other consumer protection laws and regulations has, in large measure, transferred to the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (“Bureau”). The Bureau has republished the transferred regulations in a new section of the Code of Federal Regulations but has not yet made substantive changes to these rules. It is anticipated that the Bureau will be making substantive changes to a number of consumer protection regulations and associated disclosures in the near term.
The foregoing is only a brief summary of certain statutes, rules, and regulations that may affect SNBVSouthern National and the Bank. Numerous other statutes and regulations also will have an impact on the operations of SNBVSouthern National and the Bank. Supervision, regulation and examination of banks by the regulatory agencies are intended primarily for the protection of depositors, not shareholders.

Legislative Initiatives.In light of current conditions and the market outlook forpossibility of continuing weak economic conditions, regulators have increased their focus on the regulation of financial institutions.  From time to time, various legislative and regulatory initiatives are introduced in Congress and State Legislatures.  Such initiatives may change banking statutes and the operating environment for us and Sonabank in substantial and unpredictable ways. We cannot determine the ultimate effect that any potential legislation, if enacted, or implementing regulations with respect thereto, would have, upon the financial condition or results of our operations or the operations of Sonabank. A change in statutes, regulations or regulatory policies applicable to us or Sonabank could have a material effect on the financial condition, results of operations or business of our company and Sonabank.

30
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. In July 2010, Congress enacted the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act regulatory reform legislation, which the President signed into law on July 21, 2010. Many aspects of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act are subject to further rulemaking and will take effect over several years, making it difficult for us to anticipate the overall financial impact to us or across the industry. This new law broadly affects the financial

services industry by implementing changes to the financial regulatory landscape aimed at strengthening the sound operation of the financial services sector, including provisions that, among other things, will:

Create a new agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, responsible for implementing, examining and enforcing compliance with federal consumer financial laws;

Apply the same leverage and risk–based capital requirements that apply to insured depository institutions to most bank holding companies, which, among other things, will require us to deduct all trust preferred securities issued on or after May 19, 2010 from our Tier 1 capital (existing trust preferred securities issued prior to May 19, 2010 for all bank holding companies with less than $15.0 billion in total consolidated assets as of December 31, 2009 are exempt from this requirement);

Broaden the base for FDIC insurance assessments from the amount of insured deposits to average total consolidated assets less average tangible equity during the assessment period;

Permanently increase FDIC deposit insurance to $250,000 and provide unlimited FDIC deposit insurance beginning December 31, 2010 until January 1, 2013 for noninterest bearing demand transaction accounts at all insured depository institutions;

Permit banks to engage in de novo interstate branching if the laws of the state where the new branch is to be established would permit the establishment of the branch if it were chartered by such state;

Repeal the federal prohibitions on the payment of interest on demand deposits, thereby permitting depository institutions to pay interest on business transaction and other accounts;

Require financial holding companies to be well capitalized and well managed as of July 21, 2011. Bank holding companies and banks must also be both well capitalized and well managed in order to acquire banks located outside their home state;

Eliminate the ceiling on the size of the DIF and increase the floor of the size of the DIF;

Implement corporate governance revisions, including with regard to executive compensation and proxy access by shareholders, that apply to all public companies, not just financial institutions;

Amend the Electronic Fund Transfer Act to, among other things, give the FRB the authority to establish rules regarding interchange fees charged for electronic debit transactions by payment card issuers having assets over $10 billion and to enforce a new statutory requirement that such fees be reasonable and proportional to the actual cost of a transaction to the issuer; and

Increase the authority of the FRB to examine us and our non-bank subsidiaries.

Management is actively reviewing the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and assessing its probable impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Provisions in the legislation that affect deposit insurance assessments and payment of interest on demand deposits could increase the costs associated with deposits as well as place limitations on certain revenues those deposits may generate. Provisions in the legislation that revoke the Tier 1 capital treatment of newly issued trust preferred securities could require us to seek other sources of capital in the future. Many aspects of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act are subject to rulemaking and will take effect over several years, making it difficult to anticipate the overall financial impact on us, our customers or the financial industry more generally.

Incentive Compensation.Compensation.  In June 2010, the FRB, OCC and FDIC issued comprehensive final guidance on incentive compensation policies intended to ensure that the incentive compensation policies of banking organizations do not undermine the safety and soundness of such organizations by encouraging excessive risk-taking. The guidance, which covers all employees that have the ability to materially affect the risk profile of an organization, either individually or as part of a group, is based upon the key principles that a banking organization’s incentive compensation arrangements should (i) provide incentives that do not encourage risk-taking beyond the organization’s ability to effectively identify and manage risks, (ii) be compatible with

effective internal controls and risk management, and (iii) be supported by strong corporate governance, including active and effective oversight by the organization’s board of directors.  Also, on February 7, 2011, the FDIC proposed an interagency rule to implement certain incentiveincentive-based compensation requirements of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Under the proposed rule, financial institutions must prohibitwith $1 billion or more in assets would be prohibited from offering incentive-based compensation arrangements that encourage inappropriate risk taking that are deemedby providing excessive compensation or that may lead to material losses.

financial loss. Regulators have yet to issue final rules on the topic.

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

Enforcement Powers of Federal and State Banking Agencies.The federal banking agencies have broad enforcement powers, including the power to terminate deposit insurance, impose substantial fines and other civil and criminal penalties, and appoint a conservator or receiver. Failure to comply with applicable laws, regulations, and supervisory agreements could subject SNBVSouthern National or the Bank and their subsidiaries, as well as officers, directors, and other institution-affiliated parties of these organizations, to administrative sanctions and potentially substantial civil money penalties. In addition to the grounds discussed above, the appropriate federal banking agency may appoint the FDIC as conservator or receiver for a banking institution (or the FDIC may appoint itself, under certain circumstances) if any one or more of a number of circumstances exist, including, without limitation, the fact that the banking institution is undercapitalized and has no reasonable prospect of becoming adequately capitalized; fails to become adequately capitalized when required to do so; fails to submit a timely and acceptable capital restoration plan; or materially fails to implement an accepted capital restoration plan. The Virginia Bureau of Financial Institutions also has broad enforcement powers over the Bank, including the power to impose orders, remove officers and directors and impose fines.

Future Regulatory Uncertainty.Because federal regulation of financial institutions changes regularly and is the subject of constant legislative debate, we cannot forecast how federal regulation of financial institutions may change in the future and impact our operations. SNBVSouthern National fully expects that the financial institution industry will remain heavily regulated in the near future and that additional laws or regulations may be adopted further regulating specific banking practices.

31
Item 1A.  Risk Factors

An investment in our common stock involves risks. The following is a description of the material risks and uncertainties that SNBVSouthern National believes affect its business and an investment in the common stock. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are unaware of, or that we currently deem immaterial, also may become important factors that affect us and our business. If any of the risks described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K were to occur, SNBV’sour financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be materially and adversely affected. If this were to happen, the value of the common stock could decline significantly and you could lose all or part of your investment.

We have a limited operating history, which makes it difficult to predict future prospects and financial performance.

We have only been operating as a bank holding company since April of 2005. Due to this limited operating history, it may be difficult to evaluate our business prospects and future financial performance. There can be no assurance that we can maintain our profitability. Further, our future operating results depend upon a number of factors, including our ability to manage our growth, retain our customer base and to successfully identify and respond to emerging trends in our market areas.

Difficult market conditions and economic trends have adversely affected the banking industry and could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are operating in a challenging and uncertain economic environment, including generally uncertain conditions nationally and locally in our markets. Financial institutions continue to be affected by declines in the real estate market that have negatively impacted the credit performance of mortgage, construction and commercial real estate loans and resulted in significant write-downs of assets by many financial institutions. Concerns over the stability of the financial markets and the economy have resulted in decreased lending by financial institutions to their customers and to each other. We retain direct exposure to the residential and commercial real estate markets, and we are affected by these events. Our ability to assess the creditworthiness of customers and to estimate the losses inherent in our credit portfolio is made more complex by these difficult market and economic conditions.

A prolonged national economic recession or further deterioration of these conditions in our markets could drive losses beyond that which is provided for in our allowance for loan losses and result in the following consequences:

increases in loan delinquencies;

increases in nonperforming assets and foreclosures;

●increases in loan delinquencies;

decreases in demand for our products and services, which could adversely affect our liquidity position; and

decreases in the value of the collateral securing our loans, especially real estate, which could reduce customers’ borrowing power.

●increases in nonperforming assets and foreclosures;

●decreases in demand for our products and services, which could adversely affect our liquidity position; and
●decreases in the value of the collateral securing our loans, especially real estate, which could reduce customers’ borrowing power.
While economic conditions in the Commonwealth of Virginia and the U.S. are showing signs of recovery, there can be no assurance that these difficult conditions will continue to improve. Continued declines in real estate values, home sales volumes and financial stress on borrowers as a result of the uncertain economic environment, including job losses, could have an adverse affect on our borrowers and/or their customers, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

32
Liquidity risk could impair our ability to fund operations and jeopardize our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Liquidity is essential to our business. Our ability to implement our business strategy will depend on our ability to obtain funding for loan originations, working capital, possible acquisitions and other general corporate

purposes. An inability to raise funds through deposits, borrowings, securities sold under repurchase agreements, the sale of loans and other sources could have a substantial negative effect on our liquidity. We do not anticipate that our retail and commercial deposits will be sufficient to meet our funding needs in the foreseeable future. We therefore rely on deposits obtained through intermediaries, FHLB advances, securities sold under agreements to repurchase and other wholesale funding sources to obtain the funds necessary to implement our growth strategy.

Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance our activities or on terms which are acceptable to us could be impaired by factors that affect us specifically or the financial services industry or economy in general, including a decrease in the level of our business activity as a result of a downturn in the markets in which our loans are concentrated or adverse regulatory action against us. Our ability to borrow could also be impaired by factors that are not specific to us, such as a disruption in the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the financial services industry in light of the recent turmoil faced by banking organizations and the continued deterioration in credit markets. To the extent we are not successful in obtaining such funding, we will be unable to implement our strategy as planned which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Sonabank’s reliance on brokered deposits could adversely affect its liquidity and results of operations.

Among other sources of funds, Sonabank relies on brokered deposits to provide funds with which to make loans and provide for its other liquidity needs. Like many community banks, Sonabank’s loan demand has exceeded the rate at which it has been able to increase its deposits, and, as a result, Sonabank has relied on brokered deposits as a source of funds, though less so during 2010. As of December 31, 2010, brokered deposits, which include brokered certificates of deposit and brokered money market deposits, amounted to $37.2 million with an average cost of 1.02%, or approximately 8.6% of total deposits, a decrease of $59.8 million, or 61.6%, compared with brokered certificates of deposit and brokered money market deposits of $97.0 million with an average cost of 1.85% at December 31, 2009. Generally, brokered deposits may not be as stable as other types of deposits, and, in the future, those depositors may not renew their deposits when they mature, or Sonabank may have to pay a higher rate of interest to keep those deposits or to replace them with other deposits or with funds from other sources. Additionally, if Sonabank ceases to be “well capitalized” for bank regulatory purposes, it will not be able to accept, renew or rollover brokered deposits without a waiver from the FDIC. As of December 31, 2010, Sonabank is categorized as well-capitalized with total risk-based capital, Tier 1 risk-based capital and leverage ratios of 20.99%, 19.74% and 14.64%, respectively. An inability to maintain or replace these brokered deposits as they mature could adversely affect Sonabank’s liquidity. Further, paying higher interest rates to maintain or replace these deposits could adversely affect Sonabank’s net interest margin and its results of operations.

Declines in asset values may result in impairment charges and adversely affect the value of our investments, financial performance and capital.

We maintain an investment portfolio that includes, but is not limited to, collateralized mortgage obligations, agency mortgage-backed securities and pooled trust preferred securities. The market value of investments may be affected by factors other than the underlying performance of the issuer or composition of the bonds themselves, such as ratings downgrades, adverse changes in the business climate and a lack of liquidity for resales of certain investment securities. We periodically, but not less than quarterly,At each reporting period, we evaluate investments and other assets for impairment indicators. We may be required to record additional impairment charges if our investments suffer a decline in value that is considered other-than-temporary. During the year ended December 31, 2011, we incurred other-than-temporary impairment charges of $329 thousand pre-tax on two of our trust preferred securities holdings.  During the year ended December 31, 2010, we incurred other-than-temporary impairment charges of $288 thousand pre-tax on two of our trust preferred securities holdings and one collateralized mortgage obligation. During the year ended December 31, 2009, we incurred other-than-temporary impairment charges of $7.7 million pre-tax on seven of our trust preferred securities holdings and one collateralized mortgage obligation. For the year ended December 31, 2008, we incurred other-than-temporary impairment charges of $1.5 million pre-tax on our holding of Freddie Mac perpetual preferred stock. If in future periods we determine that a significant impairment has occurred, we would be

required to charge against earnings the credit-related portion of the other-than-temporary impairment, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the periods in which the write-offs occur.

Our pooled trust preferred securities are particularly vulnerable to the performance of the issuer of the subordinated debentures that are collateral for the trust preferred securities. Deterioration of these trust preferred securities can occur because of defaults by the issuer of the collateral or because of deferrals of dividend payments on the securities. Numerous financial institutions have failed and their parent bank holding companies have filed for bankruptcy, which has led to defaults in the subordinated debentures that collateralize the trust preferred securities. Further, increased regulatory pressure has been placed on financial institutions to maintain capital ratios above the required minimum to be well-capitalized, which often results in restrictions on dividends, and leads to deferrals of dividend payments on the trust preferred securities. More specifically, the Federal Reserve has stated that a bank holding company should eliminate, defer or significantly reduce dividends if (i) its net income available to shareholders for the past four quarters, net of dividends paid, is not sufficient to fully fund the dividends, (ii) its prospective rate of earnings retention is not consistent with its capital needs or (iii) it is in danger of not meeting its minimum regulatory capital adequacy ratios. Additional defaults in the underlying collateral or deferrals of dividend payments for these securities could lead to additional charges on these securities and/or other-than-temporary impairment charges on other trust preferred securities we own.

33
The failure of other financial institutions could adversely affect us.

In addition to the risk to our pooled trust preferred securities discussed above, our ability to engage in routine funding transactions could be adversely affected by the actions and potential failures of other financial institutions. Financial institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty and other relationships. We have exposure to many different industries and counterparties, and we routinely execute transactions with a variety of counterparties in the financial services industry. As a result, defaults by, or even rumors or concerns about, one or more financial institutions with whom we do business, or the financial services industry generally, have led to market-wide liquidity problems and could lead to losses or defaults by us or by other institutions. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of default of our counterparty or client. In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral we hold cannot be sold at prices that are sufficient for us to recover the full amount of our exposure. Any such losses could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

If the goodwill that we recorded in connection with business acquisitions becomes impaired, it could have a negative impact on our profitability.

Goodwill represents the amount of acquisition cost over the fair value of net assets we acquired in the purchase of another entity. We review goodwill for impairment at least annually, or more frequently if events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying value of the asset might be impaired. Examples of those events or circumstances include the following:

significant adverse changes in business climate;

significant changes in credit quality;

●significant adverse changes in business climate;

significant unanticipated loss of customers;

significant loss of deposits or loans; or

●significant changes in credit quality;

significant reductions in profitability.

●significant unanticipated loss of customers;
●significant loss of deposits or loans; or
●significant reductions in profitability.
We determine impairment by comparing the implied fair value of the reporting unit goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit goodwill exceeds the implied fair value of that goodwill, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal to that excess. Any such adjustments are reflected in our results of operations in the periods in which they become known. As of December 31, 2010,

2011, our goodwill totaled $8.7$9.2 million. While we have recorded no such impairment charges since we initially recorded the goodwill, there can be no assurance that our future evaluations of goodwill will not result in findings of impairment and related write-downs, which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

If our nonperforming assets increase, our earnings will suffer.

SNBV

Southern National experienced a significant increase in non-covered nonperforming assets from December 31, 20082009 to December 31, 2010,2011, resulting in increases to our provision for loan losses.  At December 31, 2010,2011, our non-covered nonperforming assets (which consist of nonaccrual loans, loans past due 90 days and accruing and other real estate owned (“OREO”)) totaled $13.5$18.2 million, or 3.63%4.29% of total non-covered loans and OREO, which is an increase of $5.0$4.7 million or 58.1%34.9% compared with non-covered nonperforming assets at December 31, 2009.2010. At December 31, 2008,2009, our non-covered non-performing assets were $4.8$8.5 million, or 1.59%2.42% of totalnon-covered loans and OREO.

34
Until economic and market conditions improve, we may continue to incur losses relating to an increase in nonperforming assets. Our nonperforming assets adversely affect our net income in various ways. We do not record interest income on nonaccrual loans or OREO, thereby adversely affecting our net interest income, and increasing loan administration costs. When we take collateral in foreclosures and similar proceedings, we are required to mark the related loan to the then fair value of the collateral, which may ultimately result in a loss.  We must reserve for probable losses, which is established through a current period charge to the provision for loan losses as well as from time to time, as appropriate, write down the value of properties in our OREO portfolio to reflect changing market values. Additionally, there are legal fees associated the resolution of problem assets as well as carrying costs such as taxes, insurance and maintenance related to our OREO.  Further, the resolution of nonperforming assets requires the active involvement of management, which can distract them from more profitable activity. Finally, an increase in the level of nonperforming assets increases our regulatory risk profile.  There can be no assurance that we will not experience future increases in nonperforming assets.

A significant amount of our loans are secured by real estate and the continued economic slowdown and depressed residential real estate market in our primary markets could be detrimental to our financial condition and results of operations.

Real estate lending (including commercial, construction, land development, and residential loans) is a large portion of our loan portfolio, constituting $380.2$398.8 million, or approximately 82.8%81.1% of our total loan portfolio, as of December 31, 2010.2011. Total real estate loans covered under the FDIC loss sharing agreement amount to $91.0$80.4 million. The residential and commercial real estate sectors of the U.S. economy experienced an economic slowdown that has continued into 2010. Specifically, the values of residential and commercial real estate located in our market areas have declined, and these declines may continue in the future. If the loans that are collateralized by real estate become troubled during a time when market conditions are declining or have declined, then we may not be able to realize the full value of the collateral that we anticipated at the time of originating the loan, which could require us to increase our provision for loan losses and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Current market conditions include an over-supply of land, lots, and finished homes in many markets, including those where we do business. As of December 31, 2010, $139.62011, $119.1 million, or approximately 30.3%24.2% of our total loans, were secured by single-family residential real estate. This includes $88.8$74.6 million in residential 1-4 family loans and $50.8$44.5 million in home equity lines of credit. Total single-family residential real estate loans covered under the FDIC loss sharing agreement amount to $70.2$60.7 million. If housing markets in our market areas continue to deteriorate, we may experience a further increase in nonperforming loans, provisions for loan losses and charge-offs. While it is difficult to predict how long these conditions will exist and which markets, products or other segments of our loan and securities portfolio might ultimately be affected, these factors could adversely affect our ability to grow our earning assets or affect our results of operations.

If the value of real estate in our market areas were to decline materially, a significant portion of our loan portfolio could become under-collateralized, which could have a material adverse effect on our asset quality, capital structure and profitability.

35
As of December 31, 2010,2011, a significant portion of our loan portfolio was comprised of loans secured by commercial real estate. In the majority of these loans, real estate was the primary collateral component. In some cases, and out of an abundance of caution, we take real estate as security for a loan even when it is not the primary component of collateral. The real estate collateral that provides the primary or an alternate source of repayment in the event of default may deteriorate in value during the term of the loan as a result of changes in economic conditions, fluctuations in interest rates and the availability of loans to potential purchasers, changes in tax and other laws and acts of nature. If we are required to liquidate the collateral securing a loan to satisfy the debt during a period of reduced real estate values, which we have seen and continue to experience, our earnings and capital could be adversely affected. We are subject to increased lending risks in the form of loan defaults as a result of the high concentration of real estate lending in our loan portfolio should the real estate market in Virginia and our market area maintain its depressed levels. A continued weakening of the real estate market in our primary market areas could have an adverse effect on the demand for new loans, the ability of borrowers to repay outstanding loans, the value of real estate and other collateral securing the loans and the value of real estate owned by us. If real estate values decline further, it is also more likely that we would be required to increase our allowance for loan losses, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to risks related to our concentration of construction and land development and commercial real estate loans.

As of December 31, 2010,2011, we had $40.6$42.4 million of construction loans, of which $1.1$2.9 million are covered loans under the FDIC loss sharing agreement. Construction loans are subject to risks during the construction phase that are not present in standard residential real estate and commercial real estate loans. These risks include:

the viability of the contractor;

the value of the project being subject to successful completion;

●the viability of the contractor;

the contractor’s ability to complete the project, to meet deadlines and time schedules and to stay within cost estimates; and

concentrations of such loans with a single contractor and its affiliates.

●the value of the project being subject to successful completion;

●the contractor’s ability to complete the project, to meet deadlines and time schedules and to stay within cost estimates; and
●concentrations of such loans with a single contractor and its affiliates.
Real estate construction loans may involve the disbursement of substantial funds with repayment dependent, in part, on the success of the ultimate project rather than the ability of a borrower or guarantor to repay the loan and also present risks of default in the event of declines in property values or volatility in the real estate market during the construction phase. Our practice, in the majority of instances, is to secure the personal guaranty of individuals in support of our real estate construction loans which provides us with an additional source of repayment. As of December 31, 2010,2011, we had non-covered nonperforming construction and development loans in the amount of $2.3$1.1 million and $2.8$4.6 million of non-covered assets that have been foreclosed. If one or more of our larger borrowers were to default on their construction and development loans, and we did not have alternative sources of repayment through personal guarantees or other sources, or if any of the aforementioned risks were to occur, we could incur significant losses.

36
As of December 31, 2010,2011, we had $200.0$237.3 million of commercial real estate loans including multi-family residential loans and loans secured by farmland, of which $19.7$16.7 million is covered by the FDIC loss sharing agreement. Commercial real estate lending typically involves higher loan principal amounts and the repayment is dependent, in large part, on sufficient income from the properties securing the loan to cover operating expenses and debt service. Federal bank regulatory authorities issued the Interagency Guidance on Concentrations in Commercial Real Estate Lending in December of 2006 to provide guidance regarding significant concentrations of commercial real estate loans within bank loan portfolios. The FDIC reiterated this guidance in a letter to financial institutions dated March 17, 2008 (FIL-22-2008) titled “Managing Commercial Real Estate Concentrations in a Challenging Environment” to remind banks that their risk management practices and capital

levels should be commensurate with the level and nature of their commercial real estate concentration risk. In October 2009, the federal banking agencies issued additional guidance on commercial real estate lending that emphasizes these considerations and also supports prudent loan workouts for financial institutions working with commercial real estate borrowers who are experiencing diminished operating cash flows, depreciated collateral values, or prolonged delays in selling or renting commercial properties. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act contains provisions that may impact the Bank’s business by reducing the amount of our commercial real estate lending and increasing the cost of borrowing, including rules relating to risk retention of securitized assets. Section 941 of the Dodd-Frank Act requires, among other things, that a loan originator or a securitizer of asset-backed securities retain a percentage of the credit risk of securitized assets. The banking agencies have jointly issued a proposed rule to implement these requirements but have yet to issue final rules.  Banks with higher levels of commercial real estate loans are expected to implement improved underwriting, internal controls, risk management policies and portfolio stress testing, as well as higher levels of allowances for loan losses and capital levels as a result of commercial real estate lending growth and exposures. Sonabank’s commercial real estate loans are below the thresholds identified as significant by the regulatory guidance. If there is deterioration in our commercial real estate portfolio or if regulatory authorities conclude that we have not implemented appropriate risk management policies and practices, it could adversely affect our business and result in a requirement of increased capital levels, and such capital may not be available at that time.

The benefits of our FDIC loss-sharing agreements may be reduced or eliminated.eliminated

.

In connection with Sonabank’s assumption of the banking operations of Greater Atlantic Bank, the Bank entered into the Agreement, which contains loss-sharing provisions. Our decisions regarding the fair value of assets acquired, including the FDIC loss-sharing assets (referred to herein as the “covered assets”), could be inaccurate which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and future prospects. Management makes various assumptions and judgments about the collectability of the acquired loans, including the creditworthiness of borrowers and the value of the real estate and other assets serving as collateral for the repayment of secured loans. In the Greater Atlantic Bank acquisition, we recorded a loss-sharing asset that reflects our estimate of the timing and amount of future losses that are anticipated to occurwe anticipate occurring in, and used to value, the acquired loan portfolio. In determining the size of the loss-sharing asset, we analyzed the loan portfolio based on historical loss experience, volume and classification of loans, volume and trends in delinquencies and nonaccruals, local economic conditions, and other pertinent information.

If our assumptions related to the timing or amount of expected losses are incorrect, there could be a negative impact on our operating results. Increases in the amount of future losses in response to different economic conditions or adverse developments in the acquired loan portfolio may result in increased credit loss provisions. Changes in our estimate of the timing of those losses, specifically if those losses are to occur beyond the applicable loss-sharing periods, may result in impairments of the FDIC indemnification asset.

Our ability to obtain reimbursement under the loss-sharing agreements on covered assets depends on our compliance with the terms of the loss-sharing agreements.

Management must certify to the FDIC on a quarterly basis our compliance with the terms of the FDIC loss-sharing agreements as a prerequisite to obtaining reimbursement from the FDIC for realized losses on covered assets. The agreements contain specific, detailed and cumbersome compliance, servicing, notification and reporting requirements, and failure to comply with any of the requirements and guidelines could result in a specific asset or group of assets permanently losing their loss-sharing coverage. Additionally, management may decide to forgo loss-share coverage on certain assets to allow greater flexibility over the management of certain assets. As of December 31, 2010, $92.82011, $82.6 million, or 16%13.5%, of SNBV’sour assets were covered by the FDIC loss-sharing agreements.

Under the terms of the FDIC loss-sharing agreements, the assignment or transfer of a loss-sharing agreement to another entity generally requires the written consent of the FDIC. In addition, the Bank may not assign or otherwise transfer a loss-sharing agreement during its term without the prior written consent of the FDIC.  Our failure to comply with the terms of the loss-sharing agreements or to manage the covered assets in such a way as to maintain loss-share coverage on all such assets may cause individual loans or large pools of loans to lose eligibility for loss share payments from the FDIC.  This could result in material losses that are currently not anticipated.

37
Changes to government guaranteed loan programs could affect our SBA business.

Sonabank relies on originating government guaranteed loans, in particular those guaranteed by the SBA. As of December 31, 2010,2011, Sonabank had $29.3$45.2 million of SBA loans.loans, $31.9 million of which is guaranteed and $13.3 million is non-guaranteed. Sonabank originated $34.9 million, $12.6 million,

$17.7 million and $11.0$17.7 million in SBA loans in the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 2009 and 2008,2009, respectively. Sonabank sold the guaranteed portions of some of its SBA loans in the secondary market in 20082011 and 2009 and intends to continue such sales, which are a source of non-interest income for Sonabank, when market conditions are favorable. We can provide no assurance that Sonabank will be able to continue originating these loans, that it will be able to sell the loans in the secondary market or that it will continue to realize premiums upon any sale of SBA loans.

SBA lending is a federal government created and administered program. As such, legislative and regulatory developments can affect the availability and funding of the program. This dependence on legislative funding and regulatory restrictions from time to time causes limitations and uncertainties with regard to the continued funding of such loans, with a resulting potential adverse financial impact on our business. Currently, the maximum limit on individual 7(a) loans which the SBA will permit is $2.0$5.0 million. Any reduction in this level could adversely affect the volume of our business. As of December 31, 2010,2011, our SBA business constitutes 6.4%9.2% of our total loans. The periodic uncertainty of the SBA program relative to availability, amounts of funding and the waiver of associated fees creates greater risk for our business than do more stable aspects of our business.

The federal government presently guarantees 75% to 90% of the principal amount of each qualifying SBA loan under the 7(a) program. We can provide no assurance that the federal government will maintain the SBA program, or if it does, that such guaranteed portion will remain at its current funding level. Furthermore, it is possible that Sonabank could lose its preferred lender status which, subject to certain limitations, allows it to approve and fund SBA loans without the necessity of having the loan approved in advance by the SBA. It is also possible the federal government could reduce the amount of loans which it guarantees. In addition, we are dependent on the expertise of our personnel who make SBA loans in order to continue to originate and service SBA loans. If we are unable to retain qualified employees in the future, our income from the origination of SBA loans could be substantially reduced.

We are subject to credit quality risks and our credit policies may not be sufficient to avoid losses.
We are subject to the risk of losses resulting from the failure of borrowers, guarantors and related parties to pay interest and principal amounts on their loans.  Although we maintain credit policies and credit underwriting and monitoring and collection procedures, these policies and procedures may not prevent losses, particularly during periods in which the local, regional or national economy suffers a general decline.  If borrowers fail to repay their loans, our financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected.
38
Financial services companies depend on the accuracy and completeness of information about customers and counterparties.
In deciding whether to extend credit or enter into other transactions, we may rely on information furnished by or on behalf of customers and counterparties, including financial statements, credit reports and other financial information.  We may also rely on representations of those customers, counterparties or other third parties, such as independent auditors, as to the accuracy and completeness of that information.  Reliance on inaccurate or misleading financial statements, credit reports or other financial information could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
If our allowance for loan losses is not adequate to cover actual loan losses, our earnings will decrease.

As a lender, we are exposed to the risk that our loan clients may not repay their loans according to the terms of these loans, and the collateral securing the payment of these loans may be insufficient to assure repayment. We make various assumptions and judgments about the collectibility of our loan portfolio, including the creditworthiness of the borrowers and the value of the real estate and other assets serving as collateral for the repayment of many of our loans. We maintain an allowance for loan losses to cover any probable incurredinherent loan losses in the loan portfolio. In determining the size of the allowance, we rely on a periodic analysis of our loan portfolio, our historical loss experience and our evaluation of general economic conditions. If our assumptions prove to be incorrect or if we experience significant loan losses, our current allowance may not be sufficient to cover actual loan losses and adjustments may be necessary to allow for different economic conditions or adverse developments in our loan portfolio. A material addition to the allowance for loan losses could cause our earnings to decrease. Due to the relatively unseasoned nature of our loan portfolio, we cannot assure you that we will not experience an increase in delinquencies and losses as these loans continue to mature.

In addition, federal regulators periodically review our allowance for loan losses and may require us to increase our provision for loan losses or recognize further charge-offs, based on judgments different than those of our management. Any significant increase in our allowance for loan losses or charge-offs required by these regulatory agencies could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

Our business strategy includes strategic growth, and our financial condition and results of operations could be negatively affected if we fail to grow or fail to manage our growth effectively.

We completed the acquisition of the Midlothian Branch in Richmond, Virginia on October 1, 2011, the acquisition and assumption of certain assets and liabilities of Greater Atlantic Bank from the FDIC on December 4, 2009, the acquisition of a branch of Millennium Bank in Warrenton, Virginia on September 28, 2009, the acquisition of the Leesburg branch location from Founders Corporation which opened

on February 11, 2008, the acquisition of 1st Service Bank in December of 2006 and the acquisition of the Clifton Forge branch of First Community Bancorp, Inc. in December of 2005. We intend to continue pursuing a growth strategy for our business. Our prospects must be considered in light of the risks, expenses and difficulties frequently encountered by growing companies such as the continuing need for infrastructure and personnel, the time and costs inherent in integrating a series of different operations and the ongoing expense of acquiring and staffing new banks or branches. We may not be able to expand our presence in our existing markets or successfully enter new markets and any expansion could adversely affect our results of operations. Failure to manage our growth effectively 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 business strategy. Our ability to grow successfully will depend on a variety of factors, including the continued availability of desirable business opportunities, the competitive responses from other financial institutions in our market areas and our ability to manage our growth. There can be no assurance of success or the availability of branch or bank acquisitions in the future.

39
Future growth or operating results may require us to raise additional capital, but that capital may not be available or it may be dilutive.

We and Sonabank are each required by the Federal Reserve to maintain adequate levels of capital to support our operations. In the event that our future operating results erode capital, if Sonabank is required to maintain capital in excess of well-capitalized standards, or if we elect to expand through loan growth or acquisitions, we may be required to raise additional capital. Our ability to raise capital will depend on conditions in the capital markets, which are outside our control, and on our financial performance. Accordingly, we cannot be assured of our ability to raise capital on favorable terms when needed, or at all. If we cannot raise additional capital when needed, we will be subject to increased regulatory supervision and the imposition of restrictions on our growth and business. These outcomes could negatively impact our ability to operate or further expand our operations through acquisitions or the establishment of additional branches and may result in increases in operating expenses and reductions in revenues that could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, in order to raise additional capital, we may need to issue shares of our common stock that would dilute the book value of our common stock and reduce our current shareholders’ percentage ownership interest to the extent they do not participate in future offerings.

An investment in our common stock is not an insured deposit.
Our common stock is not a bank deposit and, therefore, is not insured against loss by the FDIC, any other deposit insurance fund or by any other public or private entity.  Investment in our common stock is inherently risky for the reasons described in this “Risk Factors” section and elsewhere in this report and is subject to the same market forces that affect the price of common stock in any company.  As a result, if you acquire our common stock, you may lose some or all of your investment.
Our stock price can be volatile.
Stock price volatility may make it more difficult for you to resell your common stock when you want and at prices you find attractive.  Our stock price can fluctuate significantly in response to a variety of factors including, among other things:
●
actual or anticipated variations in quarterly results of operations;
●
recommendations by securities analysts;
●
operating and stock price performance of other companies that investors deem comparable to us;
●
news reports relating to trends, concerns and other issues in the financial services industry;
●
perceptions in the marketplace regarding us and/or our competitors;
●
new technology used, or services offered, by competitors;
●
significant acquisitions or business combinations, strategic partnerships, joint ventures or capital commitments by or involving us or our competitors;
40
●
failure to integrate acquisitions or realize anticipated benefits from acquisitions;
●
changes in government regulations; and
●
geopolitical conditions such as acts or threats of terrorism or military conflicts.
General market fluctuations, industry factors and general economic and political conditions and events, such as economic slowdowns or recessions, interest rate changes or credit loss trends, could also cause our stock price to decrease regardless of operating results.
Our business is subject to interest rate risk and variations in interest rates may negatively affect our financial performance.

The majority of our assets and liabilities are monetary in nature and subject us to significant risk from changes in interest rates. Fluctuations in interest rates are not predictable or controllable. Like most financial institutions, changes in interest rates can impact our net interest income as well as the valuation of our assets and liabilities, which is the difference between interest earned from interest-earning assets, such as loans and investment securities, and interest paid on interest-bearing liabilities, such as deposits and borrowings. We expect that we will periodically experience “gaps” in the interest rate sensitivities of our assets and liabilities, meaning that either our interest-bearing liabilities will be more sensitive to changes in market interest rates than our interest-earning assets, or vice versa. In either event, if market interest rates should move contrary to our position, this “gap” will negatively impact our earnings. Many factors impact interest rates, including governmental monetary policies, inflation, recession, changes in unemployment, the money supply, and international disorder and instability in domestic and foreign financial markets.

Based on our analysis of the interest rate sensitivity of our assets, an increase in the general level of interest rates may negatively affect the market value of the portfolio equity, but will positively affect our net interest income since most of our assets have floating rates of interest that adjust fairly quickly to changes in market rates of interest. Additionally, an increase in interest rates may, among other things, reduce the demand for loans and our ability to originate loans. A decrease in the general level of interest rates may affect us through, among other things, increased prepayments on our loan and mortgage-backed securities portfolios and increased competition

for deposits. Accordingly, changes in the level of market interest rates affect our net yield on interest-earning assets, loan origination volume, loan and mortgage-backed securities portfolios, and our overall results. Although our asset liability management strategy is designed to control our risk from changes in market interest rates, it may not be able to prevent changes in interest rates from having a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

We may be required to pay significantly higher FDIC deposit insurance premiums and assessments in the future.

Recent insured depository institution failures, as well as deterioration in banking and economic conditions, have significantly depleted the FDIC’s DIF, resulting in a decline in the ratio of reserves to insured deposits to historical lows. The FDIC anticipates that additional insured depository institutions are likely to fail in the foreseeable future so the reserve ratio may continue to decline. In addition, the deposit insurance limit on FDIC deposit insurance coverage generally has increased to $250,000. These developments have caused the premiums assessed on us by the FDIC to increase and materially increase our noninterest expense.

41
On February 7, 2011, the FDIC approved a final rule that amendsamended its existing DIF restoration plan and implementsimplemented certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.  EffectiveThis rule, which took effect April 1, 2011, changed the FDIC’s assessment base will be determined usingsystem from one based on domestic deposits to one based on the average consolidated total assets of a bank minus its average tangible equity rather thanduring each quarter. Under the current assessment base of adjusted domestic deposits. Since the change will result in a much larger assessment base, theFebruary 7, 2011 final rule, also lowers the total base assessment rates will vary depending on the DIF reserve ratio.  For example, for banks in order to keepthe best risk category, the total amount collected from financial institutions relatively unchanged frombase assessment rate will be between 2.5 and 9 basis points when the amounts currently being collected.DIF reserve ratio is below 1.15 percent, between 1.5 and 7 basis points when the DIF reserve ratio is between 1.15 percent and 2 percent, between 1 and 6 basis points when the DIF reserve ratio is between 2 percent and 2.5 percent and between 0.5 and 5 basis points when the DIF reserve ratio is 2.5 percent or higher.  The new assessment rates calculated on the revised assessment base, will generally range from 2.5 to 9 basis points for Risk Category I institutions, 9 to 24 basis points for Risk Category II institutions, 18 to 33 basis points for Risk Category III institutions, and 30 to 45 basis points for Risk Category IV institutions. The new assessment rates will bewere calculated for the quarter beginning April 1, 2011 and reflected in invoices for assessments due September 30, 2011.

It is possible that our FDIC assessments could increase under these final regulations and could have an adverse impact on our results of operations.

For the year ended December 31, 2010,2011, our FDIC insurance related costs were $705$522 thousand compared with $755$705 thousand and $211$755 thousand for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009. The FDIC insurance related costs for 2010 and 2009 and 2008.included special assessments.  We are unable to predict the impact in future periods; including whether and when additional special assessments will occur, in the event the economic crisis continues.

A loss of our executive officers could impair our relationship with our customers and adversely affect our business.

Many community banks attract customers based on the personal relationships that the banks’ officers and customers establish with each other and the confidence that the customers have in the officers. We depend on the performance of Ms. Georgia S. Derrico, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and R. Roderick Porter, President, of our company and Sonabank. Ms. Derrico is a well-known banker in our market areas, having operated a successful financial institution there for more than 18 years prior to founding our company and Sonabank. We do not have an employment agreement with either individual. The loss of the services of either of these officers or their failure to perform management functions in the manner anticipated by our Board of Directors could have a material adverse effect on our business. Our success will be dependent upon the Board’s ability to attract and retain quality personnel, including these officers. We have attempted to reduce our risk by entering into a change in control agreement that includes a non-competition covenant with Ms. Derrico and Mr. Porter.

Our profitability depends significantly on local economic conditions in the areas where our operations and loans are concentrated.

Our profitability depends on the general economic conditions in our market areas of Northern Virginia, Maryland, Washington D.C., Charlottesville and Clifton Forge (Alleghany County), Front Royal, New Market, Richmond and

the surrounding areas. Unlike larger banks that are more geographically diversified, we provide banking and financial services to clients primarily in our market areas. As of December 31, 2010,2011, substantially all of our commercial real estate, real estate construction and residential real estate loans were made to borrowers in our market area. The local economic conditions in this area have a significant impact on our commercial, real estate and construction and consumer loans, the ability of the borrowers to repay these loans and the value of the collateral securing these loans. In addition, if the population or income growth in this region slows, stops or declines, income levels, deposits and housing starts could be adversely affected and could result in the curtailment of our expansion, growth and profitability. In the last several years, economic conditions in our market area have declined and if this continues for a prolonged period of time, we would likely experience significant increases in nonperforming loans, which could lead to operating losses, impaired liquidity and eroding capital.

Additionally, political conditions could impact our earnings. Acts or threats of war, terrorism, an outbreak of hostilities or other international or domestic calamities, or other factors beyond our control could impact these local economic conditions and could negatively affect the financial results of our banking operations.

42
The properties that we own and our foreclosed real estate assets could subject us to environmental risks and associated costs.

There is a risk that hazardous substances or wastes, contaminants, pollutants or other environmentally restricted substances could be discovered on our properties or our foreclosed assets (particularly in the case of real estate loans). In this event, we might be required to remove the substances from the affected properties or to engage in abatement procedures at our sole cost and expense. Besides being liable under applicable federal and state statutes for our own conduct, we may also be held liable under certain circumstances for actions of borrowers or other third parties on property that collateralizes one or more of our loans or on property that we own. Potential environmental liability could include the cost of remediation and also damages for any injuries caused to third-parties. We cannot assure you that the cost of removal or abatement will not substantially exceed the value of the affected properties or the loans secured by those properties, that we would have adequate remedies against prior owners or other responsible parties or that we would be able to resell the affected properties either prior to or following completion of any such removal or abatement procedures. If material environmental problems are discovered prior to foreclosure, we generally will not foreclose on the related collateral or will transfer ownership of the loan to a subsidiary. It should be noted, however, that the transfer of the property or loans to a subsidiary may not protect us from environmental liability. Furthermore, despite these actions on our part, the value of the property as collateral will generally be substantially reduced and, as a result, we may suffer a loss upon collection of the loan.

The small to medium-sized businesses we lend to may have fewer resources to weather a downturn in the economy, which may impair a borrower’s ability to repay a loan to us that could materially harm our operating results.

We make loans to professional firms and privately owned businesses that are considered to be small to medium-sized businesses. Small to medium-sized businesses frequently have smaller market shares than their competition, may be more vulnerable to economic downturns, often need substantial additional capital to expand or compete and may experience substantial volatility in operating results, any of which may impair a borrower’s ability to repay a loan. In addition, the success of a small and medium-sized business often depends on the management talents and efforts of one or two persons or a small group of persons, and the death, disability or resignation of one or more of these persons could have a material adverse impact on the business and its ability to repay our loan. A continued economic downturn and other events that negatively impact our target markets could cause us to incur substantial loan losses that could materially harm our operating results.

We are heavily regulated by federal and state agencies; changes in laws and regulations or failures to comply with such laws and regulations may adversely affect our operations and our financial results.

We and Sonabank are subject to extensive regulation, supervision and examination by federal and state banking authorities. Any change in applicable regulations or federal or state legislation could have a substantial

impact on us and Sonabank, and our respective operations. Additional legislation and regulations may be enacted or adopted in the future that could significantly affect our powers, authority and operations or the powers, authority and operations of Sonabank, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Further, bank regulatory authorities have the authority to bring enforcement actions against banks and their holding companies for unsafe or unsound practices in the conduct of their businesses or for violations of any law, rule or regulation, any condition imposed in writing by the appropriate bank regulatory agency or any written agreement with the agency. Possible enforcement actions against us could include the issuance of a cease-and-desist order that could be judicially enforced, the imposition of civil monetary penalties, the issuance of directives to increase capital or enter into a strategic transaction, whether by merger or otherwise, with a third party, the appointment of a conservator or receiver, the termination of insurance of deposits, the issuance of removal and prohibition orders against institution-affiliated parties, and the enforcement of such actions through injunctions or restraining orders. The exercise of this regulatory discretion and power may have a negative impact on us.

43
As a regulated entity, Sonabank must maintain certain required levels of regulatory capital that may limit our operations and potential growth.

We and Sonabank are subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by the Federal Reserve. 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 Sonabank’s and our company’s consolidated financial statements. Under capital adequacy guidelines and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action, Sonabank must meet specific capital guidelines that involve quantitative measures of Sonabank’s assets, liabilities and certain off-balance sheet commitments as calculated under these regulations.

Quantitative measures established by regulation to ensure capital adequacy require Sonabank to maintain minimum amounts and defined ratios of total and Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets and of Tier 1 capital to adjusted total assets, also known as the leverage ratio. For Sonabank, Tier 1 capital consists of shareholders’ equity excluding unrealized gains and losses on certain securities, less a portion of its mortgage servicing asset and deferred tax asset that is disallowed for capital. For Sonabank, total capital consists of Tier 1 capital plus the allowance for loan and lease loss less a deduction for low level recourse obligations.

As of December 31, 2010,2011, Sonabank exceeded the amounts required to be well capitalized with respect to all three required capital ratios. To be well capitalized, a bank must generally maintain a leverage ratio of at least 5%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of at least 6% and a total risk-based capital ratio of at least 10%. However, the Federal Reserve could require Sonabank to increase its capital levels. For example, regulators have recently required certain banking companies to maintain a leverage ratio of at least 8% and a total risk-based capital ratio of at least 12%. As of December 31, 2010,2011, Sonabank’s leverage, Tier 1 risk-based capital and total risk-based capital ratios were 14.64%14.31%, 19.74%18.62% and 20.99%19.87%, respectively.

Many factors affect the calculation of Sonabank’s risk-based assets and its ability to maintain the level of capital required to achieve acceptable capital ratios. For example, changes in risk weightings of assets relative to capital and other factors may combine to increase the amount of risk-weighted assets in the Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio and the total risk-based capital ratio. Any increases in its risk-weighted assets will require a corresponding increase in its capital to maintain the applicable ratios. In addition, recognized loan losses in excess of amounts reserved for such losses, loan impairments, impairment losses on securities and other factors will decrease Sonabank’s capital, thereby reducing the level of the applicable ratios.

Sonabank’s failure to remain well capitalized for bank regulatory purposes could affect customer confidence, our ability to grow, our costs of funds and FDIC insurance costs, our ability to pay dividends on our capital stock, our ability to make acquisitions, and on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Under FDIC rules, if Sonabank ceases to be a well capitalized institution for bank regulatory purposes, the interest rates that it pays on deposits and its ability to accept, renew or rollover brokered deposits may be restricted. As of December 31, 2010,2011, we had $37.2$10.2 million of brokered deposits, which represented 8.6%2.2% of our total deposits.

44
We may become subject to increased regulatory capital requirements.
The capital requirements applicable to Southern National and the Bank are subject to change as a result of the Dodd-Frank Act, the international regulatory capital initiative known as Basel III and any other future government actions.  In particular, the Dodd-Frank Act eliminates Tier 1 capital treatment for most trust preferred securities after a three-year phase-in period that begins January 1, 2013.  Furthermore, Basel III also eliminates trust preferred securities from the definition of Tier 1 capital, but calls for a 10 year phase out of this Tier 1 capital qualification. However, Basel III has not yet been implemented by US regulators.  It is anticipated that the capital requirements for most bank and financial holding companies, as well as for most insured depository institutions, will increase, although the nature and amounts of the increase have not yet been specified.  Complying with any higher capital requirements mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act and new capital standards brought about by Basel III implementation may affect our operations, including our asset portfolios and financial performance.
We may not be able to successfully compete with others for business.

The metropolitan statistical area in which we operate is considered highly attractive from an economic and demographic viewpoint, and is a highly competitive banking market. We compete for loans, deposits and investment dollars with numerous regional and national banks, online divisions of out-of-market banks and other community banking institutions, as well as other kinds of financial institutions and enterprises, such as securities firms, insurance companies, savings associations, credit unions, mortgage brokers and private lenders. Many competitors have substantially greater resources than us, and operate under less stringent regulatory environments. The differences in resources and regulations may make it harder for us to compete profitably, reduce the rates that we can earn on loans and investments, increase the rates we must offer on deposits and other funds and adversely affect our overall financial condition and earnings.

The recent repeal of federal prohibitions on payment of interest on demand deposits could increase our interest expense.

All federal prohibitions on the ability of financial institutions to pay interest on demand deposit accounts were repealed as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. As a result, beginning on July 21, 2011, financial institutions could commence offering interest on demand deposits to compete for clients. We do not yet know what interest rates other institutions may offer. Our interest expense will increase and our net interest margin will decrease if we begin offering interest on demand deposits to attract additional customers or maintain current customers, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to transaction risk, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operation.

We, like all businesses, are subject to transaction risk, which is the risk of loss resulting from human error, fraud or unauthorized transactions due to inadequate or failed internal processes and systems, and external events that are wholly or partially beyond our control (including, for example, computer viruses or electrical or telecommunications outages). Transaction risk also encompasses compliance risk, which is the risk of loss from violations of, or noncompliance with, laws, rules, regulations, prescribed practices or ethical standards. Although we seek to mitigate transaction risk through a system of internal controls, there can be no assurance that we will not suffer losses from transaction risks in the future that may be material in amount. Any losses resulting from transaction risk could take the form of explicit charges, increased operational costs, litigation costs, harm to reputation or forgone opportunities, any and all of which could have a material adverse effect on business, financial condition and results of operations.

45
We must respond to rapid technological changes and these changes may be more difficult or expensive than anticipated.

If competitors introduce new products and services embodying new technologies, or if new industry standards and practices emerge, our existing product and service offerings, technology and systems may become obsolete. Further, if we fail to adopt or develop new technologies or to adapt our products and services to emerging industry standards, we may lose current and future customers, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The financial services industry is changing rapidly and in order to remain competitive, we must continue to enhance and improve the functionality and features of our products, services and technologies. These changes may be more difficult or expensive than we anticipate.

The impact of financial reform legislation is uncertain.

The recently enacted Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act institutes a wide range of reforms that will have an impact on all financial institutions.  The Act includes, among other things, changes to the deposit insurance and financial regulatory systems, enhanced bank capital requirements and new requirements designed to protect consumers in financial transactions.  Many of these provisions are subject to rule making procedures and studies that will be conducted in the future and the full effects of the legislation on SNBVSouthern National cannot yet be determined.  However, these provisions, or any other aspects of current proposed regulatory or legislative changes to laws applicable to the financial industry, if enacted or adopted, may impact the profitability of our business activities or change certain of our business practices, including our ability to offer new products, obtain financing, attract deposits, make loans, and achieve satisfactory interest spreads, and could expose SNBVus to additional costs, including increased compliance costs.  These changes also may require SNBVSouthern National to invest significant management attention and resources to make any necessary changes to our operations in order to comply, and could therefore also materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

We currently do not intend to pay dividends on our common stock. In addition,stock; however, our future ability to pay dividends is subject to restrictions.

We have not paid any dividends to our holders of common stock in the past, andbut we currently do not intend to pay any dividendshave declared the first cash dividend on our common stock in the foreseeable future. In the event that we decide to pay dividends, thereFebruary 2012. There are a number of restrictions on our ability to pay dividends. It is the policy of the Federal Reserve that bank holding companies should pay cash dividends on common stock only out of income available over the past year and only if prospective earnings retention is consistent with the organization’s expected future needs and financial condition. The policy provides that bank holding companies should not maintain a level of cash dividends that undermines the bank holding company’s ability to serve as a source of strength to its banking subsidiaries.

Our principal source of funds to pay dividends on our common stock will be cash dividends that we receive from Sonabank. The payment of dividends by Sonabank to us is subject to certain restrictions imposed by federal banking laws, regulations and authorities. The federal banking statutes prohibit federally insured banks from making any capital distributions (including a dividend payment) if, after making the distribution, the institution would be “under capitalized” as defined by statute. In addition, the relevant federal regulatory agencies have authority to prohibit an insured bank from engaging in an unsafe or unsound practice, as determined by the agency, in conducting an activity. The payment of dividends could be deemed to constitute such an unsafe or unsound practice, depending on the financial condition of Sonabank. Regulatory authorities could impose administratively stricter limitations on the ability of Sonabank to pay dividends to us if such limits were deemed appropriate to preserve certain capital adequacy requirements.

46
Severe weather, natural disasters, climate change, acts of war or terrorism and other external events could significantly impact our business.
Severe weather, natural disasters, climate change, acts of war or terrorism and other adverse external events could have a significant impact on our ability to conduct business.  Such events could affect the stability of our deposit base, impair the ability of borrowers to repay outstanding loans, impair the value of collateral securing loans, cause significant property damage, result in loss of revenue and/or cause us to incur additional expenses. Although management has established disaster recovery policies and procedures, there can be no assurance of the effectiveness of such policies and procedures, and the occurrence of any such event could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We are subject to claims and litigation pertaining to fiduciary responsibility.
From time to time, customers make claims and take legal action pertaining to our performance of our fiduciary responsibilities.  Whether customer claims and legal action related to our performance of our fiduciary responsibilities are founded or unfounded, defending claims is costly and diverts management’s attention, and if such claims and legal actions are not resolved in a manner favorable to us, they may result in significant financial liability and/or adversely affect our market perception and products and services as well as impact customer demand for those products and services.  Any financial liability or reputation damage could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our information systems may experience an interruption or breach in security.
We rely heavily on communications and information systems provided both internally and externally to conduct our business. Any failure, interruption or breach in security of these systems (such as a spike in transaction volume, a cyber-attack or other unforeseen events) could result in failures or disruptions in our customer relationship management, general ledger, deposit, loan and other systems. While we have policies and procedures and service level agreements designed to prevent or limit the effect of the failure, interruption or security breach of our information systems, there can be no assurance that any such failures, interruptions or security breaches will not occur or, if they do occur, that they will be adequately addressed. While we maintain an insurance policy which we believe provides sufficient coverage at a manageable expense for an institution of our size and scope with similar technological systems, However, we cannot assure that this policy would be sufficient to cover all related financial losses and damages should we experience any one or more of our or a third party’s systems failing or experiencing a cyber-attack.  The occurrence of any failures, interruptions or security breaches of our information systems could damage our reputation, result in a loss of customer business, subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny, or expose us to civil litigation and possible financial liability, including remediation costs and increased protection costs, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Item 1B.—Unresolved Staff Comments

SNBV

Southern National does not have any unresolved staff comments to report for the year ended December 31, 2010.

2011.

47
Item 2.— – Properties

The following table sets forth the date opened or acquired, ownership status and the total deposits, not including brokered deposits, for each of our banking locations, as of December 31, 2010:

Location

  Date Opened
or Acquired		   Owned or
Leased		  Deposits
(in thousands)		 

Home Office and Branch:

      

6830 Old Dominion Drive

   December 2006    Leased  $49,074  

McLean, Virginia 22101

      

Branch Offices:

      

511 Main Street

   December 2005    Owned  $39,554  

Clifton Forge, Virginia 24442

      

1770 Timberwood Boulevard

   April 2005    Leased  $27,416  

Charlottesville, Virginia 22911

      

11527 Sunrise Valley Drive

   December 2006    Leased  $30,219  

Reston, Virginia 20191

      

10855 Fairfax Boulevard

   December 2006    Leased  $12,872  

Fairfax, Virginia 22030

      

550 Broadview Avenue

   April 2007    Leased  $17,801  

Warrenton, Virginia 20186

      

1 East Market Street

   April 2008    Leased  $18,839  

Leesburg, Virginia 20176

      

11 Main Street

   September 2009    Leased  $26,346  

Warrenton, Virginia 20186

      

11834 Rockville Pike

   December 2009    Leased  $76,976  

Rockville, Maryland 20852

      

1 South Front Royal Avenue

   December 2009    Owned  $44,893  

Front Royal, Virginia 22630

      

9484 Congress Street

   December 2009    Owned  $37,869  

New Market, Virginia 22844

      

43086 Peacock Market Plaza

   December 2009    Leased  $11,958  

South Riding, Virginia 20152

      

Loan Production Offices:

      

230 Court Square

   March 2005    Leased   NA  

Charlottesville, Virginia 22902

      

2217 Princess Anne Street

   April 2005    Leased   NA  

Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401

      

550 Broadview Avenue

   September 2005    Leased   NA  

Warrenton, Virginia 20186

      

2805 McRae Road, Suite 5A

   July 2007    Leased   NA  

Richmond, Virginia 23235

      

Executive Offices:

      

1002 Wisconsin Avenue

   April 2005    Leased   NA  

Washington, D.C. 20007

      

2011:

  Date Opened Owned or Deposits 
Location or Acquired Leased (in thousands) 
Home Office and Branch:       
6830 Old Dominion Drive December 2006 Leased $44,832 
McLean, Virginia 22101        
         
Branch Offices:        
511 Main Street December 2005 Owned $40,377 
Clifton Forge, Virginia 24442        
         
1770 Timberwood Boulevard April 2005 Leased $26,544 
Charlottesville, Virginia 22911        
         
11527 Sunrise Valley Drive December 2006 Leased $33,649 
Reston, Virginia 20191        
         
10855 Fairfax Boulevard December 2006 Leased $16,450 
Fairfax, Virginia 22030        
         
550 Broadview Avenue April 2007 Leased $29,232 
Warrenton, Virginia 20186        
         
1 East Market Street April 2008 Leased $21,800 
Leesburg, Virginia 20176        
         
11 Main Street September 2009 Leased $28,465 
Warrenton, Virginia 20186        
         
11834 Rockville Pike December 2009 Leased $64,822 
Rockville, Maryland 20852        
         
1 South Front Royal Avenue December 2009 Owned $45,844 
Front Royal, Virginia 22630        
         
9484 Congress Street December 2009 Owned $42,158 
New Market, Virginia 22844        
         
43086 Peacock Market Plaza December 2009 Leased $13,700 
South Riding, Virginia 20152        
48
Date OpenedOwned orDeposits
Locationor AcquiredLeased(in thousands)
10 West Washington StreetMay 2011Leased4,497
Middleburg, Virginia 20117
13804 Hull Street RoadOctober 2011Owned38,564
Midlothian, Virginia 23112
Loan Production Offices:
230 Court SquareMarch 2005LeasedNA
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
2217 Princess Anne StreetApril 2005LeasedNA
Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401
550 Broadview AvenueSeptember 2005LeasedNA
Warrenton, Virginia 20186
Executive Offices:
1002 Wisconsin AvenueApril 2005LeasedNA
Washington, D.C. 20007
Item 3.— - Legal Proceedings

SNBV

Southern National and Sonabank may, from time to time, be a party to various legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business.  Sonabank is a party to two small lawsuits considered to be in the ordinary course business. There are no other proceedings pending, or to management’s knowledge, threatened, against SNBVSouthern National or Sonabank as of December 31, 2010.

2011.

Item 4.—Reserved

Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not applicable
PART II

Item 5.— - Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Common Stock Market Prices

On November 6, 2006, SNBVSouthern National closed on the initial public offering of its common stock, $0.01 par value.  The shares of common stock sold in the offering were registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended on a Registration Statement (Registration No. 333-136285) that was declared effective by the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 31, 2006.  The shares of common stock were sold at a price to the public of $14.00 per share (equivalent to $12.73 after the stock dividend declared in May 2007).

SNBV

49
Southern National completed a public offering of its common stock in an underwritten public offering. FIG Partners, LLC acted as the sole manager for the offering. SNBVSouthern National closed on the offering on November 4, 2009, selling 4,791,665 shares of common stock, including 624,999 shares sold pursuant to an over-allotment option granted to the underwriter, at a price of $6.00 per share.  The gross proceeds from the shares sold were $28.7 million.  The net proceeds to SNBVSouthern National from the offering were approximately $26.9 million after deducting $1.3 million in underwriting commission and an estimated $486 thousand in other expenses incurred in connection with the offering.

SNBV’s

Southern National’s common stock is traded on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “SONA”.  Our common stock began trading on the Nasdaq Capital Market in November 2006, and the exchange listing was upgraded to the Nasdaq Global Market at the open of trading on December 18, 2007.

There were 11,590,212 shares of our common stock outstanding at the close of business on March 2, 2011,April  12, 2012, which were held by 169160 shareholders of record.

The following table presents the high and low intra-day sales prices for quarterly periods during 20102011 and 2009:

   Market Values 
  2010   2009 
  High   Low   High   Low 

First Quarter

  $8.62    $7.18    $7.50    $3.25  

Second Quarter

   8.50     7.15     8.90     5.50  

Third Quarter

   7.79     6.81     8.45     7.00  

Fourth Quarter

   8.05     7.04     7.97     6.00  

2010:

  Market Values 
  2011  2010 
  High  Low  High  Low 
First Quarter $7.92  $7.14  $8.62  $7.18 
Second Quarter  7.23   6.38   8.50   7.15 
Third Quarter  7.11   6.19   7.79   6.81 
Fourth Quarter  6.25   5.81   8.05   7.04 
Dividend Policy

Dividends are paid at the discretion of our board of directors. While we paid a nonrecurring 10% stock dividend to our holders of common stock in 2007, we have nevernot paid a cash dividend on our common stock andin the past until our board of directors does not intend to paydeclared a cash or stock dividend for the foreseeable future.on February 7, 2012. The amount and frequency of dividends, if any, will be determined by our board of directors after consideration of our earnings, capital requirements, our financial condition and our ability to service any equity or debt obligations senior to our common stock, and will depend on cash dividends paid to us by our subsidiary bank. As a result, our ability to pay future dividends will depend on the earnings of Sonabank, its financial condition and its need for funds.

There are a number of restrictions on our ability to pay cash dividends. It is the policy of the FRB that bank holding companies should pay cash dividends on common stock only out of net income available over the past year and only if prospective earnings retention is consistent with the organization’s expected future needs and financial condition. The policy provides that bank holding companies should not maintain a level of cash

dividends that undermines the bank holding company’s ability to serve as a source of financial strength to its banking subsidiary. For a foreseeable period of time, our principal source of cash will be dividends paid by our subsidiary bank with respect to its capital stock. There are certain restrictions on the payment of these dividends imposed by federal and state banking laws, regulations and authorities.

Regulatory authorities could administratively impose limitations on the ability of our subsidiary bank to pay dividends to us if such limits were deemed appropriate to preserve certain capital adequacy requirements or in the interests of “safety and soundness.”

50
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

None

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans

As of December 31, 2010, the Company2011, Southern National had outstanding stock options granted under its Stock Option Plan, which is approved by the Company’sits shareholders.  The following table provides information as of December 31, 20102011 regarding the Company’sSouthern National’s equity compensation plans under which the Company’sour equity securities are authorized for issuance:

Plan category

  Number of securities  to
be issued upon exercise
of outstanding options,
warrants and rights
(a)		   Weighted-average
exercise price of
outstanding options
(b)		   Number of securities
remaining available for
future issuance under
equity compensation
plans (excluding
securities reflected in
column (a))
(c)		 

Equity compensation plans approved by security holders

   312,675    $8.35     689,825  

Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders

   —       —       —    
               

Total

   312,675    $8.35     689,825  
               

 Plan category 
Number of securities to
be issued upon exercise
of outstanding options,
warrants and rights
(a)
  
Weighted-average
exercise price of
outstanding options,
warrants and rights
(b)
  
Number of securities
remaining available for
future issuance under
equity compensation
plans (excluding
securities reflected in
column (a))
(c)
 
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders  415,325  $8.06   587,175 
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders  —   —   — 
         Total  415,325  $8.06   587,175 
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

None

Performance Graph

The following chart compares the cumulative total shareholder return on SNBVSouthern National common stock for the period from November 1, 2006, when the common stock was registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and first listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market, to December 31, 2010,2011, with the cumulative total return of the Russell 2000 Index and the SNL Bank and Thrift Index for the same period. Dividend reinvestment has been assumed. This comparison assumes $100 invested on November 1, 2006 in SNBVSouthern National common stock, the Russell 2000 Index and the SNL Bank and Thrift Index. The historical stock price performance for SNBVSouthern National common stock shown on the graph below is not necessarily indicative of future stock performance.

Index

  Period Ending 
  11/01/06   12/31/06   12/31/07   12/31/08   12/31/09   12/31/10 

Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc.

   100.00     108.14     64.50     42.57     51.60     54.46  

Russell 2000

   100.00     104.98     103.34     68.42     87.01     110.38  

SNL Bank and Thrift Index

   100.00     104.72     79.86     45.93     45.31     50.58  

51
  11/1/06  12/31/06  12/31/07  12/31/08  12/31/09  12/31/10  12/31/11 
Southern National Bancorp of Virginia  100.00   108.14   64.50   42.57   51.60   54.46   43.71 
Russell 2000  100.00   104.98   103.34   68.42   87.01   110.38   105.77 
SNL Bank and Thrift Index  100.00   104.72   79.86   45.93   45.31   50.58   39.33 
52

Item 6.— - Selected Financial Data

The following table sets forth selected financial data for SNBVSouthern National as of December 31, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008 2007 and 2006,2007, and for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008, and 2007, and 2006:

   2010  2009  2008  2007  2006 
  (in thousands, except per share amounts) 

Results of Operations:

      

Interest income

  $33,173   $23,406   $24,401   $21,795   $10,814  

Interest expense

   8,513    8,077    11,983    11,086    4,860  
                     

Net interest income

   24,660    15,329    12,418    10,709    5,954  

Provision for loan losses

   9,025    6,538    1,657    1,290    546  
                     

Net interest income after provision for loan losses

   15,635    8,791    10,761    9,419    5,408  

Noninterest income (loss)

   1,375    5,574    (129)   311    219  

Noninterest expenses

   14,511    11,062    9,109    7,886    4,618  
                     

Income before income taxes

   2,499    3,303    1,523    1,844    1,009  

Income tax expense

   698    947    315    108    —    
                     

Net income

  $1,801   $2,356   $1,208   $1,736   $1,009  
                     

Per Share Data (1):

      

Earnings per share—Basic

  $0.16   $0.31   $0.18   $0.26   $0.24  

Earnings per share—Diluted

  $0.16   $0.31   $0.18   $0.25   $0.23  

Book value per share

  $8.55   $8.38   $10.12   $10.19   $10.04  

Tangible book value per share

  $7.55   $7.30   $8.37   $8.34   $7.83  

Weighted average shares outstanding—Basic

   11,590,212    7,559,962    6,798,547    6,798,547    4,244,957  

Weighted average shares outstanding—Diluted

   11,592,865    7,559,962    6,798,547    6,875,559    4,323,620  

Shares outstanding at end of period

   11,590,212    11,590,212    6,798,547    6,798,547    6,798,547  

Selected Performance Ratios and Other Data:

      

Return on average assets

   0.29%   0.52%   0.29%   0.54%   0.65% 

Return on average equity

   1.81%   3.24%   1.75%   2.51%   2.74% 

Yield on earning assets

   6.03%   5.60%   6.45%   7.47%   7.31% 

Cost of funds

   1.79%   2.27%   3.70%   4.75%   4.44% 

Cost of funds including non-interest bearing deposits

   1.68%   2.12%   3.49%   4.42%   4.15% 

Net interest margin

   4.48%   3.66%   3.28%   3.67%   4.03% 

Efficiency ratio (2)

   54.85%   66.36%   67.05%   68.94%   74.81% 

Net charge-offs to average loans

   1.87%   1.65%   0.32%   0.24%   0.21% 

Allowance for loan losses to total non-covered loans

   1.52%   1.48%   1.40%   1.33%   1.33% 

Stockholders’ equity to total assets

   16.78%   15.88%   15.92%   18.36%   23.48% 

Financial Condition:

      

Total assets

  $590,824   $610,674   $431,924   $377,283   $290,574  

Total loans, net of unearned income

   459,437    462,287    302,266    261,407    204,544  

Total deposits

   430,974    455,791    309,460    265,469    215,804  

Stockholders’ equity

   99,114    97,124    68,776    69,275    68,227  

2007:
  2011  2010  2009  2008  2007 
     (As Restated)  (As Restated)       
  (in thousands, except per share amounts)    
Results of Operations:               
    Interest income $33,423  $36,290  $23,906  $24,401  $21,795 
    Interest expense  6,087   8,513   8,077   11,983   11,086 
    Net interest income  27,336   27,777   15,829   12,418   10,709 
    Provision for loan losses  8,492   9,025   6,538   1,657   1,290 
    Net interest income after provision for loan losses  18,844   18,752   9,291   10,761   9,419 
    Noninterest income (loss)  2,145   1,375   (5,586)  (129)  311 
    Noninterest expenses  14,896   14,197   11,062   9,109   7,886 
    Income (loss) before income taxes  6,093   5,930   (7,357)  1,523   1,844 
    Income tax expense (benefit)  1,692   1,876   (2,677)  315   108 
        Net income (loss) $4,401  $4,054  $(4,680) $1,208  $1,736 
                     
Per Share Data (1):                    
Earnings per share - Basic $0.38  $0.35  $(0.62) $0.18  $0.26 
Earnings per share - Diluted $0.38  $0.35  $(0.62) $0.18  $0.25 
Book value per share $8.55  $8.14  $7.77  $10.12  $10.19 
Tangible book value per share $7.58  $7.13  $6.69  $8.37  $8.34 
Weighted average shares outstanding - Basic  11,590,212   11,590,212   7,559,962   6,798,547   6,798,547 
Weighted average shares outstanding - Diluted  11,591,156   11,592,865   7,559,962   6,798,547   6,875,559 
Shares outstanding at end of period  11,590,212   11,590,212   11,590,212   6,798,547   6,798,547 
                     
Selected Performance Ratios and Other Data:                    
Return on average assets  0.74%  0.67%  -1.02%  0.29%  0.54%
Return on average equity  4.51%  4.31%  -6.43%  1.75%  2.51%
Yield on earning assets  6.20%  6.57%  5.71%  6.45%  7.47%
Cost of funds  1.31%  1.79%  2.27%  3.70%  4.75%
Cost of funds including non-interest bearing deposits  1.22%  1.68%  2.12%  3.49%  4.42%
Net interest margin  5.06%  5.03%  3.78%  3.28%  3.67%
Efficiency ratio (2)  51.52%  48.01%  64.43%  67.05%  68.94%
Net charge-offs to average loans  1.63%  1.86%  1.65%  0.32%  0.24%
Allowance for loan losses to total non-covered loans  1.54%  1.52%  1.48%  1.40%  1.33%
Stockholders’ equity to total assets
  16.20%  16.08%  14.91%  15.92%  18.36%
                     
Financial Condition:                    
Total assets $611,373  $586,654  $604,224  $431,924  $377,283 
Total loans, net of deferred fees  491,768   463,054   462,787   302,266   261,407 
Total deposits  461,095   430,974   455,791   309,460   265,469 
Stockholders’ equity  99,051   94,331   90,088   68,776   69,275 
(1)Reflects 10% stock dividend declared April 19, 2007.
(2)Efficiency ratio is calculated by dividing noninterest expense by the sum of net interest income plus noninterest income, excluding any gains/losses on sales of securities, gains/write-downs on OREO, gains on acquisitions and gains on sale of loans.

53
Item 7.— – Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

As part of ongoing accounting of the acquisition of Greater Atlantic Bank, we have identified errors in the purchase accounting related to that acquisition.  The most significant adjustment involves the initial estimate of the fair value of the FDIC indemnification asset.  The financial information for the years ending December 31, 2010 and 2009 provided in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations has been restated to reflect the correction of the errors.  For more information, see the explanatory note in Part 1, Item 1 and Note 2 – Restatement of Consolidated Financial Statements and the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Management’s discussion and analysis is presented to aid the reader in understanding and evaluating the financial condition and results of operations of SNBV.Southern National.  This discussion and analysis should be read with the consolidated financial statements, the footnotes thereto, and the other financial data included in this report.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains statements about future expectations, activities and events that constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of, and subject to the protection of, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. Forward-looking statements are based on our beliefs, assumptions and expectations of our future financial and operating performance and growth plans, taking into account the information currently available to us. These statements are not statements of historical fact. The words “believe,” “may,” “forecast,” “should,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “continue,” “would,” “could,” “hope,” “might,” “assume,” “objective,” “seek,” “plan,” “strive” or similar words, or the negatives of these words, identify forward-looking statements.

Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that may cause our actual results to differ materially from the expectations of future results we express or imply in any forward-looking statements. In addition to the other factors discussed in the “Risk Factors” section of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, factors that could contribute to those differences include, but are not limited to:

our limited operating history;

changes in the strength of the United States economy in general and the local economies in our market areas adversely affect our customers and their ability to transact profitable business with us, including the ability of our borrowers to repay their loans according to their terms or a change in the value of the related collateral;

changes in the availability of funds resulting in increased costs or reduced liquidity;

our reliance on brokered deposits;

a deterioration or downgrade in the credit quality and credit agency ratings of the securities in our securities portfolio;

impairment concerns and risks related to our investment portfolio of collateralized mortgage obligations, agency mortgage-backed securities and pooled trust preferred securities;

the incurrence and possible impairment of goodwill associated with an acquisition and possible adverse short-term effects on our results of operations;

increased credit risk in our assets and increased operating risk caused by a material change in commercial, consumer and/or real estate loans as a percentage of our total loan portfolio;

the concentration of our loan portfolio in loans collateralized by real estate;

our level of construction and land development and commercial real estate loans;

changes in the levels of loan prepayments and the resulting effects on the value of our loan portfolio;

the failure of assumptions underlying the establishment of and provisions made to the allowance for loan losses;

our ability to expand and grow our business and operations, including the establishment of additional branches and acquisition of additional branches and banks, and our ability to realize the cost savings and revenue enhancements we expect from such activities;

changes in interest rates and market prices, which could reduce our net interest margins, asset valuations and expense expectations;

increased competition for deposits and loans adversely affecting rates and terms;

the continued service of key management personnel;

the potential payment of interest on demand deposit accounts to effectively compete for customers;

potential environmental liability risk associated with lending activities;

increased asset levels and changes in the composition of assets and the resulting impact on our capital levels and regulatory capital ratios;

our ability to acquire, operate and maintain cost effective and efficient systems without incurring unexpectedly difficult or expensive but necessary technological changes; and

fiscal and governmental policies of the United States federal government.

Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance or results. A forward-looking statement may include a statement of the assumptions or bases underlying the forward-looking statement. We believe we have chosen these assumptions or bases in good faith and that they are reasonable. We caution you, however, that assumptions or bases almost always vary from actual results, and the differences between assumptions or bases and actual results can be material. When considering forward-looking statements, you should keep in mind the risk factors and other cautionary statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. These statements speak only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K (or an earlier date to the extent applicable). Except as required by applicable law, we undertake no obligation to update publicly these statements in light of new information or future events.

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Our accounting policies are in accordance with U. S. generally accepted accounting principles and with general practices within the banking industry. Management makes a number of estimates and assumptions relating to reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during periods presented. Different assumptions in the application of these methods or policies could result in material changes in our financial statements. As such, the following policies are considered “critical accounting policies” for us.

Allowance for Loan Losses

The allowance for loan losses is a valuation allowance for probable incurred credit losses.  Loan losses are charged against the allowance when management believes the collection of the principal is unlikely.  Recoveries of amounts previously charged-off are credited to the allowance.   Management’s determination of the adequacy of the allowance is based on a three year historical average net loss experience for each portfolio segment adjusted for current industry and economic conditions (referred to as “current factors”) and estimates of their affect on loan collectability. While management uses available information to estimate losses on loans, future additions to the allowance may be necessary based on changes in economic conditions, particularly those affecting real estate values.

The allowance consists of specific and general components.  The specific component relates to loans that are individually classified as impaired.  The general component provides for estimated losses in unimpaired loans and is based on historical loss experience adjusted for current factors.

A loan is considered impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that SNBVSouthern National will be unable to collect the scheduled payments of principal or interest when due according to the terms of the loan documentation. Factors considered by management in determining impairment include payment status, collateral value, and the probability of collecting scheduled principal and interest payments when due. Loans that experience insignificant payment delays and payment shortfalls generally are not classified as impaired. Management determines the significance of payment delays and payment shortfalls on a case-by-case basis, taking into

consideration all of the circumstances surrounding the loan and the borrower, including the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the borrower’s prior payment record, and the amount of the shortfall in relation to the principal and interest owed. Impairment is measured on a loan by loan basis for commercial and construction loans by either the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate, the loan’s obtainable market price, or the fair value of the collateral if the loan is collateral dependent. Individual consumer and residential loans are evaluated for impairment based on regulatory guidelines.

54
The general component covers non-impaired loans and is based on historical loss experience adjusted for current factors.  The historical loss experience is determined by portfolio segment and is based on the actual net loss history experienced by SNBVSouthern National over the most recent 3three years.  This actual loss experience is supplemented with other economicadjusted for current factors based on the risks present for each portfolio segment.  These economiccurrent factors include consideration of the following:  levels of and trends in delinquencies and impaired loans; levels of and trends in charge-offs and recoveries; trends in volume and terms of loans; effects of any changes in risk selection and underwriting standards; other changes in lending policies, procedures, and practices; experience, ability, and depth of lending management and other relevant staff; national and local economic trends and conditions; industry conditions; and effects of changes in credit concentrations.  The following portfolio segments have been identified:  Owner Occupied Commercial Real Estate, Non-owner Occupied Commercial Real Estate, Constructionowner occupied commercial real estate, non-owner occupied commercial real estate, construction and Land Development, Commercial Loans, Closed End Residentialland development, commercial loans, residential 1-4 family, multi-family residential, loans secured by farmland, home equity lines of credit (HELOC) and Other Consumer.consumer.  While underwriting practices in this environment are more stringent, the bank estimates the effect of internal factors on future net loss experience to be negligible.  Management’s estimate of the effect of current external economic environmental conditions on future net loss experience is significant in all loan segments and particularly on loans secured by real estate including single family 1-4, non-owner occupied commercial real estate and construction and land development loans.  These factors include excess inventory, generally less demand driven in part by fewer qualified borrowers and buyers.  These considerations have played a significant role in management’s estimate of the adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses.

FDIC Indemnification Asset

Southern National filed a Form 8-K on February 7, 2012, disclosing that it will restate its financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2009, the interim quarterly periods and year ended December 31, 2010 and the interim quarterly periods through September 30, 2011.  In December 2009, we acquired Greater Atlantic Bank from the FDIC.  We have identified errors in the purchase accounting related to that acquisition.  The most significant adjustment involves the initial estimate of the fair value of the FDIC indemnification asset.  An external vendor assisted with the calculation of the estimated fair value of the indemnification asset.  We have corrected the accounting for an error made in the initial fair value calculation, and  historical amounts set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as applicable, reflect the restatement of previously issued financial statements discussed above.
The acquisition of Greater Atlantic Bank on December 4, 2009 was accounted for under the acquisition method of accounting, and the assets and liabilities were recorded at their estimated fair values.  Such fair values were preliminary estimates and subject to adjustment for up to one year after the acquisition date. The FDIC indemnification asset iswas measured separately from each of the covered asset categories as it is not contractually embedded in any of the covered asset categories. We have completed the analysisA revised calculation of the acquisition accounting estimatesestimated fair value of the indemnification asset as of the acquisition date has been completed, and we have revisedrestated the FDIC indemnification asset accordingly. The revised fair value of the indemnification asset as of the acquisition date in the amount of $18.9$8.8 million represented the present value of the estimated cash payments expected to be received from the FDIC for future losses on covered assets based on the credit adjustment estimated for each covered asset and the loss sharing percentages at the acquisition date.  The revised estimated gross cash flows associated with this receivable were $23.4$9.3 million. These cash flows were then discounted at a market-based rate to reflect the uncertainty of the timing and receipt of the loss sharing reimbursement from the FDIC.  The ultimate collectability of this asset is dependent upon the performance of the underlying covered assets, the passage of time and claims paid by the FDIC. The difference between the gross cash flows and the fair value of the indemnification assets, $4.5 million,$489 thousand, will be accreted on an accelerated basisthrough the statement of operations over the estimated loss period of the loans.

55
Other than Temporary Impairment (“OTTI”) of Investment Securities

Securities are monitored to determine whether a decline in their value is other than temporary.  Management utilizes criteria outlined in ASC 320-10-65, ASC 820-10 and ASC 325-40, such as the probability of collecting amounts due per the contractual terms of the investment security agreement, to determine whether the loss in value is other than temporary.  The term “other than temporary” is not intended to indicate that the decline in value is permanent.  It indicates that the prospects for a near-term recovery of value are not necessarily favorable,

or that there is a lack of evidence to support fair values equal to, , or greater than, the carrying value of the investment.  Once a decline in value is determined to be other than temporary, the value of the security is reduced and a corresponding charge to earnings is recognized.

Management has evaluated each

An evaluation of the trust preferred securitiesportfolio for potentialother than temporary impairment under ASC 325.is performed at each reporting period.  In performing a detailed cash flow analysis of each trust preferred security, managementSonabank works with independent third parties to identify the most reflective estimate of the cash flow estimated to be collected. If this estimate results in a present value of expected cash flows that is lessand assist with the evaluation of other than the amortized cost basis of a security (that is, credit loss exists), an OTTI is considered to have occurred. If there is no credit loss, any impairment is considered temporary.temporary impairment. The cash flow analysis weanalyses performed included the following assumptions:

We assume that .5% of the remaining performing collateral will default or defer per annum.

We assume recoveries of 25% with a two year lag on all defaults and deferrals.

We assume no prepayments for 10 years and then 1% per annum for the remaining life of the security.

Additionally banks with assets over $15 billion will no longer be allowed to count down streamed trust preferred proceeds as Tier 1 capital (although it will still be counted as Tier 2 capital). That will incent the large banks to prepay their trust preferred securities if they can or if it is economically desirable. As a consequence we have projected in all of our pools that 25% of the collateral issued by banks with assets over $15 billion will prepay in 2013.

Our securities have been modeled using the above assumptions by independent third parties using the forward LIBOR curve plus original spread to discount projected cash flows to present values.

These assumptions resulted in OTTI charges related to credit on two of the trust preferred securities inincluded the amount of $151 thousand during the year ended December 31, 2010, compared to OTTI charges related to credit on the trust preferred securities totaling $7.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2009.

We also own a residential collateralized mortgage obligation. After a series of downgrades this security has been evaluated for potential impairment. Based on the review of the trustee report, shock analysis, and current information regarding delinquencies, nonperforming loans, and credit support, it has been determined that an OTTI charge for credit exists for the year ended December 31, 2010. The assumptions used in the analysis included a 7% prepayment speed, 15% default rate, a 55% loss severity (which is roughly equivalent to the cumulative severity of the past 12 months) and an accounting yield of 3.60%. We recorded OTTI charges for credit on this security of $137 thousand in 2010 and $139 thousand during 2009.

following assumptions:

●
.5% of the remaining performing collateral will default or defer per annum.
●Recoveries ranging from 25% to 47% with a two year lag on all defaults and deferrals.
●No prepayments for 10 years and then 1% per annum for the remaining life of the security.
●Additionally banks with assets over $15 billion will no longer be allowed to count down stream trust preferred proceeds as Tier 1 capital (although it will still be counted as Tier 2 capital). We project that this will incent the large banks to prepay their trust preferred securities if they can or if it is economically desirable. As a consequence, we have projected in all of our pools that 25% of the collateral issued by banks with assets over $15 billion will prepay in 2013.
●Our securities have been modeled using the above assumptions by independent third parties using the forward LIBOR curve to discount projected cash flows to present values.
Goodwill and Intangible Assets

Management is required to assess goodwill and other intangible assets annually for impairment or more often if certain factors are identified which could imply potential impairment.  This assessment involves preparing analyses of market multiples for similar operations, and estimating the fair value of the reporting unit to which the goodwill is allocated.  If the analysis results in an estimate of fair value materially less than the carrying value SNBVwe would be required to take a charge against earnings to write down the asset to the lower fair value.  Based on itsour assessment completed with the help of an outside investment banking firm, SNBV believes itswe believe the goodwill of $8.7$9.2 million and other identifiable intangibles of $2.9$2.0 million are not impaired and are properly recorded in the consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2010.

2011.

Valuation of Deferred Tax Asset

Income

The provision for income taxes are provided forreflects the tax effects of the transactions reported in the financial statements, and consist ofincluding taxes currently due plusas well as changes in deferred taxes related primarily to differences between the basis of the net operating losses carryforward and allowance for loan losses. The deferredtaxes. Deferred tax assets and liabilities

represent estimates of the future tax return consequences of thosetemporary differences which will either be taxable or deductible when thebetween carrying amounts and tax bases of assets and liabilities are recovered or settled.liabilities.  Deferred tax assets and liabilities are reflected atcomputed by using currently enacted income tax rates applicableand applying those rates to the periodperiods in which the deferred tax assets or liabilities are expected to be realized or settled.  As changes in tax laws or rates are enacted, deferred tax assets and liabilities are adjusted through the provision for income taxes.

SNBV adopted the guidance issued by the FASB with respect to accounting for uncertainty in income taxes as of January 1, 2007. A tax position is recognized as a benefit only if it is “more likely than not” that the tax position would be sustained in a tax examination, with a tax examination being presumed to occur. The amount recognized is the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized on examination. The effect of adopting this new guidance had no effect on our consolidated financial statements. We have no unrecognized tax benefits and do not anticipate any increase in unrecognized benefits during the next twelve months. Should the accrual of any interest or penalties relative to unrecognized tax benefits be necessary, it is our policy to record such accruals in our income tax accounts; no such accruals exist as As of December 31, 2010. SNBV2011 and its subsidiary file a consolidated U. S. federal2010, management concluded that it is more likely than not that Southern National will generate sufficient taxable income to fully utilize our deferred tax return and a Virginia state income tax return. These returns are subject to examination by taxing authorities for all years after 2006.

assets.

56
OVERVIEW

Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. (“SNBV”Southern National”) is a corporation formed on July 28, 2004 under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia and is the holding company for Sonabank (“Sonabank”) a Virginia state bank. Sonabank was originally chartered as a national bank under the laws of the United States of Americawhich commenced operations on April 14, 2005.  On January 1, 2009,The principal activities of Sonabank converted from a nationally chartered bankare to a state chartered bankattract deposits and moved its headquarters from Charlottesville tooriginate loans as permitted under applicable banking regulations.  Sonabank operates 14 branches in Virginia located in Fairfax County (Reston, McLean Virginia. Sonabank is now regulated by the State Corporation Commission of Virginia and the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. Sonabank conducts full-service banking operationsFairfax), in Charlottesville, Warrenton (2), Loudoun County (Middleburg, Leesburg (2), and South Riding), Front Royal, New Market, Richmond and Clifton Forge, Leesburg, Warrenton, New Market, Front Royal, South Riding and Fairfax County in Virginia andwe also have a branch in Rockville, Maryland. We also have loan production offices in Charlottesville, Fredericksburg, Warrenton and Richmond in Virginia.  We have administrative offices in Warrenton and an executive office in Georgetown, Washington, D.C where senior management is located.

On September 28, 2009, Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. completed the purchase of the Warrenton branch office, acquired at fair value selected loans in the amount of $23.8 million and assumed at fair value approximately $26.8 million of deposits from Millennium Bank, N.A.  No premium was paid in this transaction.

SNBV

Southern National completed a public offering of its common stock in an underwritten public offering. FIG Partners, LLC acted as the sole manager for the offering. SNBVSouthern National closed on the offering on November 4, 2009, selling 4,791,665 shares of common stock, including 624,999 shares sold pursuant to an over-allotment option granted to the underwriter, at a price of $6.00 per share.  The gross proceeds from the shares sold were $28.7 million.  The net proceeds to SNBVSouthern National from the offering were approximately $26.9 million after deducting $1.3 million in underwriting commission and an estimated $486 thousand in other expenses incurred in connection with the offering.

Effective December 4, 2009, Sonabank assumed certain deposits and liabilities and acquired certain assets of Greater Atlantic from the FDIC as receiver for Greater Atlantic Bank, pursuant to the terms of a purchase and assumption agreement entered into by the Bank and the FDIC on December 4, 2009 (the “Agreement”).  On December 5, 2009, the former Greater Atlantic offices, located in Reston, New Market, Front Royal and South Riding, Virginia and Rockville, Maryland opened as Sonabank branches.

Under the terms of the Agreement, the Bank acquired substantially all of the assets of Greater Atlantic Bank, including all loans at a fair value of $113.6 million, and assumed substantially all of its liabilities, including the insured and uninsured deposits. Based on the closing with the FDIC as of December 4, 2009, the Bank (a) acquireddeposits at fair value

$113.6 million in loans, $1.0 million in foreclosed assets, $28.1 million in securities available-for-sale and $73.0 million in cash and other assets, and (b) assumed ata fair value $178.7 million in deposits, $25.4 million in borrowings and $407 thousand in other liabilities and recorded a deferred tax liability of $3.8 million. The Bank also recorded a core deposit intangible asset in the amount of $1.2 million and recorded a pre-tax gain on the transaction of $11.2$178.7 million.  In connection with the Greater Atlantic acquisition, the FDIC made a cash payment to the Bank of approximately $27.0 million. The terms of the Agreement provide for the FDIC to indemnify the Bank against claims with respect to liabilities of Greater Atlantic not assumed by the Bank and certain other types of claims listed in the Agreement.

57
The Bank paid no cash or other consideration to acquire Greater Atlantic Bank.  As part of the Greater Atlantic acquisition, the Bank and the FDIC entered into a loss sharing agreement (the “loss sharing agreement”) on approximately $143.4 million (cost basis) of Greater Atlantic Bank’s assets.  The Bank will share in the losses on the loans and foreclosed loan collateral with the FDIC as specified in the loss sharing agreement; we refer to these assets collectively as “covered assets.” Pursuant to the terms of the loss sharing agreement, the FDIC is obligated to reimburse the Bank for 80% of losses of up to $19 million with respect to the covered assets.  The FDIC will reimburse the Bank for 95% of losses in excess of $19 million with respect to the covered assets.  The Bank will reimburse the FDIC for 80% of recoveries with respect to losses for which the FDIC paid the Bank 80% reimbursement under the loss sharing agreement, and for 95% of recoveries with respect to losses for which the FDIC paid the Bank 95% reimbursement under the loss sharing agreement.

On October 1, 2011, we completed the acquisition of the Midlothian Branch of the Bank of Hampton Roads.  We assumed deposits in the amount of $42.2 million.  Goodwill in the amount of $437 thousand and a premium on time deposits of $303 thousand were recorded.   No core deposit intangible asset was recorded.  We also acquired the office building, furniture and equipment in the amount of $1.7 million.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Subsequent to the release of our financial results for the fourth quarter and year ended December 31, 2010,2011, we foreclosed on the Kluge related development property discussed in the press release and received additional information which caused us to adjust the valuation of that loanfour loans to the same borrower downward by $500 thousand.$1.7 million.  As a result, for the fourth quarter of 2010,2011, we recorded an additional charge-offimpairment of $500 thousand,$1.7 million.  Given the financial condition of this borrower, we have concurrently recognized a charge off for the amount of impairment, and total charge-offs of $5.2$3.2 million were recorded during the quarter and $8.8$8.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2010. The provision for loan losses was increased by $500 thousand to cover the charge-off.2011.  After the additional charge-off, net income for the year ended December 31, 20102011 was $1.8$4.4 million compared with the net income $2.1$5.5 million previously reported. The charge-off alsoreported in our earnings release furnished in Form 8-K.  This loan impairment reduced shareholders’ equity and total assets as of December 31, 20102011 by the $330 thousand$1.1 million after-tax decrease in net income.

Net Income

Net income for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $4.4 million, up from $4.1 million (as restated) for the year ended December 31, 2010.  Net income during 2010 was adversely affected by a fourth quarter loan loss provision of $5.3 million and corresponding charge-offs on two related loans
Net income for the year ended December 31, 2010 was $1.8$4.1 million down from $2.4(as restated), compared to a loss of $4.7 million (as restated) for the year ended December 31, 2009. During 2009 we recognized a gain of $11.2 million on the Greater Atlantic acquisition as well as a gain on the Millennium Warrenton branch acquisition in the amount of $423 thousand.  Other than temporary impairment (OTTI) charges on investment securities related to credit were $7.7 million in 2009. OTTI charges on investment securities related to credit were $288 thousand in 2010. During 2009 we recognized a bargain purchase gain of $424 thousand on the Millennium Warrenton branch acquisition. Net interest income for 2010 was $24.7$27.8 million (as restated) compared to $15.3$15.8 million in 2009, attributable primarily to the acquisition of Greater Atlantic Bank late in the fourth quarter of 2009.

Net income for the year ended December 31, 2009 was $2.4 million, up from $1.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2008. During 2009 we recognized the gain of $11.2 million on the Greater Atlantic acquisition as well as a gain on the Millennium Warrenton branch acquisition in the amount of $423 thousand. OTTI charges were $7.7 million in 2009 compared to $1.5 million in 2008.

Net Interest Income

Our operating results depend primarily on our net interest income, which is the difference between interest and dividend income on interest-earning assets such as loans and investments, and interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities such as deposits and borrowings.

58
Net interest income was $24.7$27.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2011, compared to $27.8 million (as restated) during the prior year. Average interest-earning assets for the year ended December 31, 2011 decreased $12.6 million compared to the same period in 2010 (as restated). Average loans during 2011 were $477.6 million compared to $463.3 million (as restated) last year. Average investment securities decreased by $17.4 million in the year ended December 31, 2011, compared to the same period in 2010. During 2011, we did not acquire any securities as we were unable to identify investment securities that met our yield and stability thresholds. The average yield on average earning assets decreased from 6.57% (as restated) in 2010 to 6.19% in 2011. The Greater Atlantic Bank loan discount accretion contributed $3.3 million during 2011, compared to $5.9 million (as restated) during 2010.  Average interest-bearing liabilities for the year ended December 31, 2011 decreased $11.1 million compared to the same period in 2010. Average interest-bearing deposits decreased by $15.7 million, while average borrowings increased by $4.5 million compared to 2010.  The average cost of interest-bearing liabilities decreased from 1.79% in 2010 to 1.31% in 2011. The average cost of interest-bearing deposits decreased from 1.71% in 2010, to 1.23% in 2011, primarily because of the reduction in the average cost of money market accounts from 1.71% to .87% and time deposits from 1.83%  to 1.55%. The interest rate spread for the year ended December 31, 2011 increased from 4.78% (as restated) to 4.88% compared to the same period last year. The net interest margin was 5.06% in 2011, up from 5.03% (as restated) in 2010.
Net interest income was $27.8 million (as restated) during the year ended December 31, 2010, compared to $15.3$15.8 million (as restated) during the prior year. Average interest-earning assets for the year ended December 31, 2010 increased $131.5$134.2 million (as restated) over the same period in 2009. Average loans during 2010 were $460.6$463.3 million (as restated) compared to $339.1 million last year.during 2009. Average investment securities increased by $5.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, compared to the same period in 2009. The average yield on average earning assets increased from 5.60%5.71% in 2009 to 6.03%6.57% (as restated) in 2010. The Greater Atlantic Bank loan discount accretion contributed $2.8$5.9 million (as restated) during 2010, of which $2.3 million was related to HELOCs. The yield on securities is expected to remain flat as we proceed through 2011. The yield on portfolio loans which declined in late 2010 as a result of fixed rate loans rolling into floating rates that are customarily subject to floors in today’s market, but were not four or five years ago should continue to decline slightly in 2011.when the loans were originated. On the other hand, we had paid rates in excess of market on large money market accounts for former Greater Atlantic Bank customers to retain them, and, as of the beginning of January, we have adjusted those rates to current market rates.  Average interest-bearing liabilities for the year ended December 31, 2010 increased $120.3 million compared to the same period in 2009. Average interest-bearing deposits increased by $116.0 million, while average borrowings increased by $4.4 million compared to 2009.  The average cost of interest-bearing liabilities decreased from 2.27% in 2009 to 1.79% in 2010. The average cost of interest-bearing deposits decreased from 2.22% in 2009, to 1.71% in 2010, primarily because of the reduction in the average cost of time deposits from 2.44% to 1.83%. The interest rate spread for the year ended December 31, 2010 increased from 3.33%3.44% to 4.24%4.78% (as restated) compared to the same period last year. The net interest margin was 4.48%5.03% (as restated) for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to 3.66%3.78% for the year ended December 31, 2009.

Net interest income for the year ended December 31, 2009 was $15.3 million compared to $12.4 million for the same period in the prior year. Average interest-earning assets for the year ended December 31, 2009 increased $40.1 million over the same period in 2008. Approximately $51.9 million of this growth was an increase in average loans outstanding. Average investment securities decreased by $15.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2009, compared to the same period in 2008. The average yield on interest-earning assets decreased from 6.45% in 2008 to 5.60% in 2009. Average interest-bearing liabilities for the year ended December 31, 2009 increased $32.3 million compared to the same period in 2008. Average interest-bearing deposits increased by $27.6 million, while average borrowings increased by $4.7 million compared to 2008. The average cost of interest-bearing liabilities decreased from 3.70% in 2008 to 2.27% in 2009. The interest rate spread for the year ended December 31, 2009 increased from 2.75% to 3.33% compared to the same period in the prior year. The net interest margin for the year ended December 31, 2009 increased to 3.66% from 3.28% compared to the same period in 2008. The net interest margin improved in each quarter of the year ended December 31, 2009 as a result of reduced funding costs.

59
The following tables detail average balances of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, the amount of interest earned/paid on such assets and liabilities, and the yield/rate for the periods indicated:

Average Balance Sheets and Net Interest

Analysis For the Years

Ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

  2010  2009  2008 
  Average
Balance		  Interest
Income/
Expense		  Yield/
Rate		  Average
Balance		  Interest
Income/
Expense		  Yield/
Rate		  Average
Balance		  Interest
Income/
Expense		  Yield/
Rate		 
  (Dollar amounts in thousands) 

Assets

         

Interest-earning assets:

         

Loans, net of unearned income (1) (2)

 $460,558   $30,333    6.59%  $339,113   $20,540    6.06%  $287,249   $19,875    6.92% 

Investment securities

  68,236    2,635    3.86%   62,509    2,701    4.32%   78,227    4,194    5.36% 

Other earning assets

  21,048    205    0.97%   16,687    165    0.99%   12,698    332    2.61% 
                           

Total earning assets

  549,842    33,173    6.03%   418,309    23,406    5.60%   378,174    24,401    6.45% 
                  

Allowance for loan losses

  (5,757)     (4,608)     (3,943)   

Intangible assets

  12,132      11,581      12,244    

Other non-earning assets

  55,828      31,314      29,143    
                  

Total assets

 $612,045     $456,596     $415,618    
                  

Liabilities and stockholders’ equity

         

Interest-bearing liabilities:

         

NOW accounts

 $15,447    44    0.28%  $8,048    16    0.19%  $6,356    14    0.22% 

Money market accounts

  165,211    2,820    1.71%   58,462    970    1.66%   52,803    1,226    2.32% 

Savings accounts

  5,056    33    0.65%   2,505    14    0.55%   2,186    5    0.23% 

Time deposits

  233,831    4,275    1.83%   234,540    5,728    2.44%   214,624    9,271    4.32% 
                           

Total interest-bearing deposits

  419,545    7,172    1.71%   303,555    6,728    2.22%   275,969    10,516    3.81% 

Borrowings

  56,920    1,341    2.36%   52,565    1,349    2.57%   47,865    1,467    3.06% 
                           

Total interest-bearing liabilities

  476,465    8,513    1.79%   356,120    8,077    2.27%   323,834    11,983    3.70% 
                  

Noninterest-bearing liabilities:

         

Demand deposits

  31,415      24,001      19,992    

Other liabilities

  4,612      3,678      2,723    
                  

Total liabilities

  512,492      383,799      346,549    

Stockholders’ equity

  99,553      72,797      69,069    
                  

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity

 $612,045     $456,596     $415,618    
                  

Net interest income

  $24,660     $15,329     $12,418   
                  

Interest rate spread

    4.24%     3.33%     2.75% 

Net interest margin

    4.48%     3.66%     3.28% 

                            
  
Average  Balance Sheets and Net Interest
Analysis  For the Years
Ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009
 
          
  2011  2010  2009 
     Interest        Interest        Interest    
  Average  Income/  Yield/  Average  Income/  Yield/  Average  Income/  Yield/ 
  Balance  Expense  Rate  Balance  Expense  Rate  Balance  Expense  Rate 
           (Dollar amounts in thousands)    
           (As Restated)  (As Restated) 
Assets                           
Interest-earning assets:                           
Loans, net of deferred fees (1) (2) $477,635  $31,278   6.55% $463,265  $33,450   7.22% $339,113  $21,040   6.20%
Investment securities  50,833   1,914   3.77%  68,236   2,635   3.86%  62,509   2,701   4.32%
Other earning assets  11,525   231   2.00%  21,048   205   0.97%  16,687   165   0.99%
                                     
Total earning assets  539,993   33,423   6.19%  552,549   36,290   6.57%  418,309   23,906   5.71%
Allowance for loan losses  (6,263)          (5,757)          (4,608)        
Intangible assets  11,276           12,132           11,581         
Other non-earning assets  52,610           48,140           31,314         
Total assets $597,616          $607,064          $456,596         
                                     
Liabilities and stockholders’ equity                                    
Interest-bearing liabilities:                                    
NOW accounts $15,898   43   0.27% $15,447   44   0.28% $8,048   16   0.19%
Money market accounts  148,569   1,288   0.87%  165,211   2,820   1.71%  58,462   970   1.66%
Savings accounts  6,035   36   0.59%  5,056   33   0.65%  2,505   14   0.55%
Time deposits  233,387   3,613   1.55%  233,831   4,275   1.83%  234,540   5,728   2.44%
Total interest-bearing deposits  403,889   4,980   1.23%  419,545   7,172   1.71%  303,555   6,728   2.22%
Borrowings  61,458   1,107   1.80%  56,920   1,341   2.36%  52,565   1,349   2.57%
Total interest-bearing liabilities  465,347   6,087   1.31%  476,465   8,513   1.79%  356,120   8,077   2.27%
Noninterest-bearing liabilities:                                    
  Demand deposits  31,642           31,415           24,001         
  Other liabilities  3,039           5,215           3,678         
Total liabilites  500,028           513,095           383,799         
Stockholders’ equity  97,588           93,969           72,797         
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
 $597,616          $607,064          $456,596         
Net interest income     $27,336          $27,777          $15,829     
Interest rate spread          4.88%          4.78%          3.44%
Net interest margin          5.06%          5.03%          3.78%
(1)Includes loan fees in both interest income and the calculation of the yield on loans.
(2)Calculations include non-accruing loans in average loan amounts outstanding.

60
The following table summarizes changes in net interest income (as restated) attributable to changes in the volume of interest-bearing assets and liabilities compared to changes in interest rates.  The change in interest, due to both rate and volume, has been proportionately allocated between rate and volume.

  Year Ended December 31, 2010 vs. 2009  Year Ended December 31, 2009 vs. 2008 
 Increase (Decrease) Due to Change in:  Increase (Decrease) Due to Change in: 
     Volume          Rate          Net Change          Volume          Rate          Net Change     
 (in thousands) 

Interest-earning assets:

      

Loans, net of unearned income

 $7,873   $1,920   $9,793   $2,146   $(1,481)  $665  

Investment securities

  411    (477)   (66)   (760)   (733)   (1,493) 

Other earning assets

  42    (2)   40    171    (338)   (167) 
                        

Total interest-earning assets

  8,326    1,441    9,767    1,557    (2,552)   (995) 
                        

Interest-bearing liabilities:

      

NOW accounts

  19    9    28    4    (2)   2  

Money market accounts

  1,821    29    1,850    154    (410)   (256) 

Savings accounts

  16    3    19    1    8    9  

Time deposits

  (17)   (1,436)   (1,453)   961    (4,504)   (3,543) 
                        

Total interest-bearing deposits

  1,839    (1,395)   444    1,120    (4,908)   (3,788) 

Borrowings

  (769)   761    (8)   180    (298)   (118) 
                        

Total interest-bearing liabilities

  1,070    (634)   436    1,300    (5,206)   (3,906) 
                        

Change in net interest income

 $7,256   $2,075   $9,331   $257   $2,654   $2,911  
                        

  Year Ended December 31, 2011 vs. 2010  Year Ended December 31, 2010 vs. 2009 
  Increase (Decrease)  Increase (Decrease) 
  Due to Change in:  Due to Change in: 
        Net        Net 
  Volume  Rate  Change  Volume  Rate  Change 
          (in thousands)        
Interest-earning assets:                  
Loans, net  of deferred fees $1,087  $(3,259) $(2,172) $8,575  $3,835  $12,410 
Investment securities  (657)  (64)  (721)  411   (477)  (66)
Other earning assets  (19)  45   26   42   (2)  40 
                         
Total interest-earning assets  411   (3,278)  (2,867)  9,028   3,356   12,384 
                         
Interest-bearing liabilities:                        
NOW accounts  1   (2)  (1)  19   9   28 
Money market accounts  (260)  (1,271)  (1,531)  1,821   29   1,850 
Savings accounts  6   (3)  3   16   3   19 
Time deposits  (8)  (654)  (662)  (17)  (1,436)  (1,453)
Total interest-bearing deposits  (261)  (1,930)  (2,191)  1,839   (1,395)  444 
Borrowings  120   (354)  (234)  (769)  761   (8)
Total interest-bearing liabilities  (141)  (2,284)  (2,425)  1,070   (634)  436 
                         
Change in net interest income $552  $(994) $(442) $7,958  $3,990  $11,948 
Provision for Loan Losses

The provision for loan losses is a current charge to earnings made in order to increase the allowance for loan losses to a level deemed appropriate by managementfor inherent probable losses in the loan portfolio based on an evaluation of the loan portfolio, current economic conditions, changes in the nature and volume of lending, historical loan experience and other known internal and external factors affecting loan collectability.  Our loan loss allowance is calculated by segmenting the loan portfolio by loan type and applying risk factors to each segment.  The risk factors are determined by considering peer data, as well as applying management’s judgment.

The provision for loan losses charged to operations for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 and 2008 was $8.5 million, $9.0 million, $6.5 million, and $1.7$6.5 million, respectively.  We had charge-offs totaling $8.0 million during 2011, $8.8 million during 2010, and $5.7 million during 2009, and charge-offs during 2008 were $923 thousand.2009.  There were recoveries totaling $199 thousand during 2011, $167 thousand during 2010 and $157 thousand during 20092009. The loan impairments were elevated in 2011 because of the four related loans discussed above, and $8 thousand during 2008. The increase in the provision for loan losses during 2010 was due to charge offs and adverse economic factors.

the loans previously mentioned.

Our provision for loan losses for the fourth quarter of 2011 was $3.4 million. In the fourth quarter of 2010 it was $5.3 million and was primarily related to charge-offsimpairment of a similar amount on two Kluge related loans, one a development loan and one a residential mortgage on a house in the development. The development loan was made to an LLC, which was partIn the fourth quarter of a large complex which2011 we sold two of the tracts included in the Kluge Winery. Another creditor foreclosed on the Kluge Winery on December 8, 2010. As a consequence we charged down the development loan to net realizable value as indicated by a December 2010 appraisal. We also charged down the residential loan (which was less than 90 days past due at the end of the year) based on our most reflective estimate using the most recent appraisal in file since our most recent appraisal is approximately a year old. Both loans have been placed on non-accrual. We are proceeding toward foreclosure on the development property and are actively pursuing all avenues to potential recovery.

loan.

During the fourth quarter of 2009 our provision for loan losses was $4.3 million with charge-offsimpairment of $4.0 million. One of the charge offsloan impairments was related to a $1.8 million commercial and industrial loan caused by a fraud

perpetrated on the Bank. The borrower was apprehended, convicted and is now in prison. We have pursued all available avenues for recovery thus far to no avail. We believe our losses follow a fact pattern that would make the loss collectible under our insurance policy. We continue to evaluate opportunities for recovery of this loan through our insurance carrier.

61
Noninterest Income

The following table presents the major categories of noninterest income for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 2009 and 20082009 (in thousands):

   2010  2009  Change 

Account maintenance and deposit service fees

  $900   $676   $224  

Income from bank-owned life insurance

   554    579    (25) 

Bargain purchase gain on acquisitions

   —      11,584    (11,584) 

Gain on sale of SBA loans

   —      206    (206) 

Net gain (loss) on other assets

   (274)   (214)   (60) 

Net credit impairment losses recognized in earnings

   (288)   (7,714)   7,426  

Gain on sale of securities available for sale

   142    371    (229) 

Other

   341    86    255  
             

Total noninterest income

  $1,375   $5,574   $(4,199) 
             
   2009  2008  Change 

Account maintenance and deposit service fees

  $676   $499   $177  

Income from bank-owned life insurance

   579    588    (9) 

Bargain purchase gain on acquisitions

   11,584    —      11,584  

Gain on sale of SBA loans

   206    107    99  

Net gain (loss) on other assets

   (214)   (136)   (78) 

Net credit impairment losses recognized in earnings

   (7,714)   (1,536)   (6,178) 

Gain on sale of securities available for sale

   371    269    102  

Other

   86    80    6  
             

Total noninterest income (loss)

  $5,574   $(129)  $5,703  
             

  2011  2010  Change 
          
Account maintenance and deposit service fees $833  $900  $(67)
Income from bank-owned life insurance  1,336   554   782 
Gain on sale of SBA loans  395   -   395 
Net loss on other assets  (297)  (274)  (23)
Net impairment losses recognized in earnings  (329)  (288)  (41)
Gain on sale of securities available for sale  -   142   (142)
Other  207   341   (134)
    Total noninterest income $2,145  $1,375  $770 
             
   2010   2009  Change 
   (As Restated) 
             
Account maintenance and deposit service fees $900  $676  $224 
Income from bank-owned life insurance  554   579   (25)
Bargain purchase gain on acquisition  -   424   (424)
Gain on sale of SBA loans  -   206   (206)
Net loss on other assets  (274)  (214)  (60)
Net impairment losses recognized in earnings  (288)  (7,714)  7,426 
Gain on sale of securities available for sale  142   371   (229)
Other  341   86   255 
    Total noninterest income (loss) $1,375  $(5,586) $6,961 
             
Noninterest income decreasedincreased to $2.1 million during 2011 from $1.4 million in 2010. The increase was largely attributable to an $800 thousand insurance benefit resulting from the death of an officer covered by bank-owned life insurance in the second quarter of 2011 and the sale of SBA loans during the fourth quarter of 2011which resulted in a gain of $395 thousand. This was partially offset by an OTTI charge for credit on trust preferred securities in the amount of $329 thousand.
Noninterest income was $1.4 million during 2010 fromcompared to noninterest loss of  $5.6 million (as restated) in 2009.  During the year ended December 31, 2009, there were OTTI charges related to credit of $7.7 million compared to $288 thousand for 2010.  In addition to the gain on the Greater Atlantic acquisition of $11.2 million, weWe recorded a gain of $423$424 thousand on the Millennium Warrenton Branch acquisition in the third quarter of 2009. Noninterest income for 2010 included account maintenance and deposit service fees of $900 thousand compared to $676 thousand for 2009 with the increases resulting from the Greater Atlantic Bank and Millennium Branch acquisitions.

Noninterest income was $5.6 million during 2009, compared to a loss of $129 thousand during 2008. During 2009 we recognized the gain of $11.2 million on the Greater Atlantic acquisition as well as a gain on the Millennium Warrenton branch acquisition in the amount of $423 thousand. OTTI charges related to credit were $7.7 million in 2009 compared to $1.5 million in 2008. We recognized impairment charges of $7.6 million related to our holdings of trust preferred securities and an impairment charge of $139 thousand related to a private label CMO during 2009, and we recognized impairment charges of $1.5 million related to FHLMC preferred stock in 2008. Income from account maintenance fees increased in 2009 due to an increase in the number of accounts.

62
Noninterest Expense

The following table presents the major categories of noninterest expense for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 2009 and 20082009 (in thousands):

   2010   2009   Change 

Salaries and benefits

  $6,186    $4,461    $1,725  

Occupancy expenses

   2,101     1,615     486  

Furniture and equipment expenses

   591     516     75  

Amortization of core deposit intangible

   943     731     212  

Virginia franchise tax expense

   735     562     173  

FDIC assessment

   705     755     (50) 

Data processing expense

   587     339     248  

Telephone and communication expense

   403     283     120  

Decrease in FDIC indemnification asset

   281     —       281  

Acquisition expenses

   —       499     (499) 

Other operating expenses

   1,979     1,301     678  
               

Total noninterest expense

  $14,511    $11,062    $3,449  
               
   2009   2008   Change 

Salaries and benefits

  $4,461    $4,016    $445  

Occupancy expenses

   1,615     1,494     121  

Furniture and equipment expenses

   516     484     32  

Amortization of core deposit intangible

   731     727     4  

Virginia franchise tax expense

   562     549     13  

FDIC assessment

   755     211     544  

Data processing expense

   339     260     79  

Telephone and communication expense

   283     256     27  

Acquisition expenses

   499     —       499  

Other operating expenses

   1,301     1,112     189  
               

Total noninterest expense

  $11,062    $9,109    $1,953  
               

  2011  2010  Change 
     (As Restated)    
          
 Salaries and benefits $6,787  $6,186  $601 
 Occupancy expenses  2,240   2,101   139 
 Furniture and equipment expenses  556   591   (35)
 Amortization of core deposit intangible  919   943   (24)
 Virginia franchise tax expense  686   735   (49)
 FDIC assessment  522   705   (183)
 Data processing expense  546   587   (41)
 Telephone and communication expense  392   403   (11)
 Change in FDIC indemnification asset  (99)  (60)  (39)
 Other operating expenses  2,347   2,006   341 
    Total noninterest expense $14,896  $14,197  $699 
             
   2010   2009  Change 
  (As Restated)         
             
 Salaries and benefits $6,186  $4,461  $1,725 
 Occupancy expenses  2,101   1,615   486 
 Furniture and equipment expenses  591   516   75 
 Amortization of core deposit intangible  943   731   212 
 Virginia franchise tax expense  735   562   173 
 FDIC assessment  705   755   (50)
 Data processing expense  587   339   248 
 Telephone and communication expense  403   283   120 
 Change in FDIC indemnification asset  (60)  -   (60)
 Acquisition expenses  -   499   (499)
 Other operating expenses  2,006   1,301   705 
    Total noninterest expense $14,197  $11,062  $3,135 
Noninterest expense was $14.9 million in 2011 compared to $14.2 million (as restated) in 2010. Legal expense increased by $260 thousand during 2011 compared to 2010.  There was noninterest expense of approximately $82 thousand related to the Midlothian Branch which was acquired in October 2011. As of December 31, 2011 we had 112 full-time equivalent employees compared to 107 at the end of 2010.
Noninterest expenses were $14.5$14.2 million (as restated) during the year ended December 31, 2010, compared to $11.1 million during 2009. A net change in the FDIC indemnification asset resulting from the netting of accretion of the FDIC indemnification asset and decreases resulting from loans identified with evidence of credit deterioration at acquisition that paid off in 2010 increased noninterest expense by $281 thousand for the year ended December 31, 2010. The amortization of the Greater Atlantic Bank core deposit intangible added $200 thousand during the year ending December 31, 2010. The remaining increases were primarily attributable to the costs of operating a thirteen branch system rather than an eight branch system, partially offset by the reversal of bonus accruals totaling $111 thousand for the year. As of December 31, 2010 we had 107 full-time equivalent employees compared to 103 at the end of 2009.

Despite the costs associated with the Greater Atlantic and Millennium acquisitions, the new branch and drive-through facility we opened in Leesburg in 2008, the increased FDIC assessments and costs to support other organic growth of Sonabank, noninterest expenses were well controlled and rose 21.4% from $9.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 to $11.1 million for 2009. Southern National’s efficiency ratio improved from 67.1% for the year ended December 31, 2008 to 66.4% for the year ended December 31, 2009, excluding the impairment charges, gains on sales of securities, gains on acquisitions, gains on sales of loans and gains/write-downs on OREO. As of December 31, 2009 we had 103 full-time equivalent employees compared to 65 at the end of 2008. We had thirteen branches and the Leesburg drive-through facility at year end 2009 compared to seven branches and the Leesburg drive-through facility at the end of 2008. The increase in occupancy expense

was due primarily to the new branches acquired, inflationary increases in rent expense and one additional month of rent expense for the Leesburg branch compared to 2008. The acquisition expenses of $499 thousand are related to the Greater Atlantic transaction. The increase in the FDIC assessment was due to the special assessment in the third quarter of 2009 in the amount of $190 thousand, increases in the assessment rates and an increase in the deposits that make up the assessment base.

63
FINANCIAL CONDITION

Total assets were $590.8$611.4 million as of December 31, 2010, down2011, up from $610.7$586.7 million (as restated) as of December 31, 2009.2010. Total loans declined slightlyincreased from $462.3$463.1 million (as restated) at the end of December 2010 to $491.8 million at December 31, 2011. The increase in the loan portfolio was achieved despite continuing repayments in the covered portfolio and the sale of $4.3 million in SBA loans during the fourth quarter. We continued to experience repayments on the covered portfolio. The covered portfolio decreased from $95.8 million (as restated) at the end of 2010 to $82.6 at the end of 2011. Loan closings in the non-covered portfolio were a robust $46.6 million during the fourth quarter of 2011, only a portion of which was reflected in increased outstanding balances.  Non-covered loans were up to $409.2 million at the end of December 2009 to $459.4 million at December 31, 2010. An increase in the non-covered portfolio by $17.0 million2011 compared to $367.3 million was offset by a $19.8 million decrease inat the covered portfolio. Loan demand was reasonably firm but there were significant payoffs in both the covered and non-covered portfolios.

end of 2010.

Loan Portfolio

As part of the Greater Atlantic acquisition, the Bank and the FDIC entered into a loss sharing agreement on approximately $143.4 million (cost basis) of Greater Atlantic Bank’s assets.  The Bank will share in the losses on the loans and foreclosed loan collateral with the FDIC as specified in the loss sharing agreement; we refer to these assets collectively as “covered assets.”  Loans that are not covered in the loss sharing agreement are referred to as “non-covered loans.”

Non-covered Loans

Non-covered loans, net of unearned income,deferred fees, grew from $350.3 million at the end of 2009 to $367.3 million at the end of 2010.2010 to $409.2 million at the end of 2011. Owner-occupied commercial real estate loans grew 6%1% from $76.8$81.5 million at year end 20092010 to $81.5$82.5 million at the end of 2010.2011.  Non owner-occupied commercial real estate loans grew 21%54% from $63.1$76.1 million at year end 20092010 to $76.1$117.1 million at the end of 2010.2011. Non-real estate commercial loans increased 8%17% from $70.8 million at the end of 2009 to $76.6 million at the end of 2010. Construction and land loans decreased 18% from $48.02010 to $89.9 million at the end of 20092011.  Construction and land loans increased slightly from $39.5 million at the end of 2010 to $39.5$39.6 million at year end 2010.

2011.

Our residential mortgage loan portfolio decreased from $61.0 million at December 31, 2009, to $58.9 million at December 31, 2010. Sonabank is not in the retail residential mortgage origination business, but in2010, to $49.3 million at December 31, 2011. In the ordinary course of business does provideSonabank provides residential mortgage financing to its business clients.

Our commercial real estate lending program includes both loans closed under the Small Business Administration (“SBA”)  7(a) and 504 loan programs and loans closed outside of the SBA programs that serve both the investor and owner-occupied facility market. The 504 loan program is used to finance long-term fixed assets, primarily real estate and heavy equipment and gives borrowers access to up to 90% financing for a project.  SBA 7(a) loans may be used for the purchase of real estate, construction, renovation or leasehold improvements, as well as machinery, equipment, furniture, fixtures, inventory and in some instances, working capital and debt refinancing.  The SBA guarantees up to 85% of the loan balance in the 7(a) program, and start-up businesses are eligible to participate in the program.  During 2011 we closed loans totaling $21.9 million through the SBA’s 7(a) program and $13.0 million under the SBA’s 504 program. During 2010 we closed loans totaling $9.8 million through the SBA’s 7(a) program and $2.9 million under the SBA’s 504 program. During 2009 we closed loans totaling $14.2 million through the SBA’s 7(a) program and $3.4 million under the SBA’s 504 program.

64
Covered Loans

We refer to the loans acquired in the Greater Atlantic acquisition as “covered loans” as we will be reimbursed by the FDIC for a substantial portion of any future losses on them under the terms of the loss sharing agreement. At the December 4, 2009 acquisition date, we estimated the fair value of the Greater Atlantic loan portfolio at $113.6 million, which represents the expected cash flows from the portfolio discounted at a market-based rate. In estimating such fair value, we (a) calculated the contractual amount and timing of undiscounted

principal and interest payments (the “undiscounted contractual cash flows”) and (b) estimated the amount and timing of undiscounted expected principal and interest payments (the “undiscounted expected cash flows”). The discount rate applied to the cash flows contemplates an element for illiquidity in the loan portfolio and other market-based elements. The amount by which the undiscounted expected cash flows exceeded the estimated fair value (the “accretable yield”) totaled $12.1$18.3 million and will be accreted into interest income over the life of the loans. The difference between the undiscounted contractual cash flows and the undiscounted expected cash flows is the nonaccretable difference. The nonaccretable difference totaled $15.9$9.7 million and represents an estimate of the credit risk in the Greater Atlantic loan portfolio at the acquisition date.

Covered loans decreased by $19.8$13.2 million from $112.0$95.8 million (as restated) at December 31, 2010, to $82.6 million at December 31, 2009, to $92.2 million at December 31, 20102011, because there were significant payoffs.

The following table summarizes the composition of our loans, net of unearned income at the dates indicated:

        Total
2010		        Total
2009		  Non-covered 
  2010   2009   2008  2007  2006 (1) 
  Covered  Non-covered  Amount  Percent  Covered  Non-covered  Amount  Percent  Amount  Percent  Amount  Percent  Amount  Percent 
  (in thousands) 

Mortgage loans on real estate:

              

Commercial real estate—owner-occupied

 $5,246   $81,487   $86,733    18.9%  $6,613   $76,765   $83,378    18.0%  $54,412    18.0%  $34,340    13.1%  $69,338    33.8% 

Commercial real estate—non-owner-occupied

  13,898    76,068    89,966    19.6%   17,881    63,059    80,940    17.5%   44,425    14.7%   49,772    19.0%   —      0.0% 

Secured by farmland

  —      3,522    3,522    0.8%   —      6,471    6,471    1.4%   6,029    2.0%   3,038    1.2%   1,215    0.6% 

Construction and land development

  1,098    39,480    40,578    8.7%   3,498    48,000    51,498    11.1%   56,588    18.7%   50,510    19.3%   34,607    16.9% 

Residential 1-4 family

  29,935    58,900    88,835    19.3%   33,815    61,024    94,839    20.5%   60,376    19.9%   51,862    19.8%   63,141    30.8% 

Multi- family residential

  563    19,177    19,740    4.3%   2,570    10,726    13,296    2.9%   5,581    1.8%   8,273    3.2%   3,720    1.8% 

Home equity lines of credit

  40,287    10,532    50,819    11.0%   44,235    10,532    54,767    11.9%   11,509    3.8%   8,428    3.2%   10,509    5.1% 
                                                        

Total real estate loans

  91,027    289,166    380,193    82.6%   108,612    276,577    385,189    83.2%   238,920    78.9%   206,223    78.8%   182,530    89.0% 

Commercial loans

  998    76,644    77,642    16.9%   3,184   ��70,757    73,941    16.0%   60,820    20.1%   53,208    20.3%   19,581    9.6% 

Consumer loans

  146    2,010    2,156    0.5%   193    3,528    3,721    0.8%   3,074    1.0%   2,476    0.9%   2,861    1.4% 
                                                        

Gross loans

  92,171    367,820    459,991    100.0%   111,989    350,862    462,851    100.0%   302,814    100.0%   261,907    100.0%   204,972    100.0% 

Less unearned income on loans

  —      (554)   (554)    —      (564)   (564)    (548)    (500)    (428)  
                                         

Loans, net of unearned income

 $92,171   $367,266   $459,437    $111,989   $350,298   $462,287    $302,266    $261,407    $204,544   
                                         

(1)The commercial real estate loans were not categorized as owner-occupied and non-owner-occuped in 2006.

        Total        Total        Total  Non-covered 
  2011  2011  2010  2010  2009  2009  2008  2007 
  Covered  Non-
covered		  Amount  Percent  Covered  Non-
covered		  Amount  Percent  Covered  Non-
covered		  Amount  Percent  Amount  Percent  Amount  Percent 
                             (in thousands)                
             (As Restated)                                 
 Mortgage loans on real estate:                                                
    Commercial real estate - owner-occupied $4,854  $82,450  $87,304   17.7% $5,427  $81,487  $86,914   18.7% $6,613  $76,765  $83,378   18.0% $54,412   18.0% $34,340   13.1%
    Commercial real estate - non-owner-occupied  11,243   117,059   128,302   26.0%  14,502   76,068   90,570   19.5%  18,006   63,059   81,065   17.5%  44,425   14.7%  49,772   19.0%
    Secured by farmland  -   1,506   1,506   0.3%  -   3,522   3,522   0.8%  -   6,471   6,471   1.4%  6,029   2.0%  3,038   1.2%
    Construction and land development  2,883   39,565   42,448   8.6%  3,249   39,480   42,729   9.2%  3,498   48,000   51,498   11.1%  56,588   18.7%  50,510   19.3%
    Residential 1-4 family  25,307   49,288   74,595   15.1%  28,733   58,900   87,633   18.9%  33,815   61,024   94,839   20.5%  60,376   19.9%  51,862   19.8%
    Multi- family residential  629   19,553   20,182   4.1%  629   19,177   19,806   4.3%  2,570   10,726   13,296   2.9%  5,581   1.8%  8,273   3.2%
    Home equity lines of credit  35,442   9,040   44,482   9.0%  40,662   10,532   51,194   11.0%  44,610   10,532   55,142   11.9%  11,509   3.8%  8,428   3.2%
     Total real estate loans  80,358   318,461   398,819   80.9%  93,202   289,166   382,368   82.5%  109,112   276,577   385,689   83.2%  238,920   79.0%  206,223   78.7%
                                                                 
 Commercial loans  2,122   89,939   92,061   18.7%  2,443   76,644   79,087   17.1%  3,184   70,757   73,941   16.0%  60,820   20.1%  53,208   20.3%
 Consumer loans  108   1,868   1,976   0.4%  143   2,010   2,153   0.4%  193   3,528   3,721   0.8%  3,074   1.0%  2,476   0.9%
      Gross loans  82,588   410,268   492,856   100.0%  95,788   367,820   463,608   100.0%  112,489   350,862   463,351   100.0%  302,814   100.0%  261,907   100.0%
                                                                 
 Less deferred fees  -   (1,088)  (1,088.00)      -   (554)  (554)      -   (564)  (564)      (548)      (500)    
 Loans, net of deferred fees $82,588  $409,180  $491,768      $95,788  $367,266  $463,054      $112,489  $350,298  $462,787      $302,266      $261,407     
As of December 31, 2010,2011, substantially all of ournon-covered and covered loans were to customers located in Virginia and Maryland.  We are not dependent on any single customer or group of customers whose insolvency would have a material adverse effect on our operations.

At December 31, 20102011 we had $86.7$87.3 million in covered and non-covered owner-occupied commercial real estate loans, and we had $113.2$150.0 million in covered and non-covered non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans including multi-family residential loans and loans secured by farmland.

New authoritative accounting guidance under ASC Topic 310, “Receivables,” amended prior guidance to provide a greater level of disaggregated information about the credit quality of loans and leases and the Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses (the “Allowance”). The new authoritative guidance also requires additional disclosures related to credit quality indicators, past due information, and information related to loans modified in a troubled debt restructuring. For more detailed information about our loan portfolio refer to Item 8—Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Footnote 3.

65
The following table sets forth the contractual maturity ranges of the covered and non-covered commercial business and construction loan portfolio and the amount of those loans with fixed and floating interest rates in each maturity range as of December 31, 20102011 (in thousands):

       After 1 Year
Through 5 Years		   After 5 Years     
   One Year
or Less		   Fixed
Rate		   Floating
Rate		   Fixed
Rate		   Floating
Rate		   Total 

Real estate construction

  $28,511    $11,624    $—      $—      $443    $40,578  

Commercial and industrial

   30,106     18,993     3,365     409     24,769     77,642  
                              

Total

  $58,617    $30,617    $3,365    $409    $25,212    $118,220  
                              

     After 1 Year          
     Through 5 Years  After 5 Years    
  One Year  Fixed  Floating  Fixed  Floating    
  or Less  Rate  Rate  Rate  Rate  Total 
                   
Real estate construction $27,739  $7,740  $-  $6,460  $509  $42,448 
Commercial and industrial  41,187   13,233   12,516   1,823   23,302   92,061 
Total $68,926  $20,973  $12,516  $8,283  $23,811  $134,509 
Past Due Loans and Nonperforming Assets

We will generally place a loan on nonaccrual status when it becomes 90 days past due.  Loans will also be placed on nonaccrual status in cases where we are uncertain whether the borrower can satisfy the contractual terms of the loan agreement.  Cash payments received while a loan is categorized as nonaccrual will be recorded as a reduction of principal as long as doubt exists as to future collections.

We maintain appraisals on loans secured by real estate, particularly those categorized as nonperforming loans and potential problem loans.  In instances where appraisals reflect reduced collateral values, we make an evaluation of the borrower’s overall financial condition to determine the need, if any, for possible specific allocationsimpairment or write-down to their net realizable values.  If foreclosure occurs, we record other real estate owned at the lower of our recorded investment in the loan or fair value less our estimated costs to sell.

Our loss and delinquency experience on our loan portfolio has been limited by a number of factors, including our underwriting standards and the relatively short period of time since the loans were originated.  Whether our loss and delinquency experience in the area of our portfolio will increase significantly depends upon the value of the real estate securing loans and economic factors such as the overall economy of the region.

The following table presents a comparison of non-covered nonperforming assets as of December 31, (in thousands):

   2010  2009  2008  2007  2006 

Nonaccrual loans

  $9,585   $5,734   $1,233   $371   $—    

Loans past due 90 days and accruing interest

   —      —      135    —      —    
                     

Total nonperforming loans

   9,585    5,734    1,368    371    —    

Other real estate owned

   3,901    2,796    3,434    3,648    —    
                     

Total nonperforming assets

  $13,486   $8,530   $4,802   $4,019   $—    
                     

SBA guaranteed amounts included in nonaccrual loans

  $1,410   $1,544   $100   $—     $—    

Allowance for loan losses to nonaccrual loans

   58.41%   90.20%   308.33%   936.93%   na  

Allowance for loan losses to total non-covered loans

   1.52%   1.48%   1.40%   1.33%   1.33% 

Nonperforming assets to total non-covered assets

   2.71%   1.72%   1.11%   1.07%   na  

Nonperforming assets excluding SBA guaranteed loans to total non-covered assets

   2.43%   1.41%   1.09%   1.07%   na  

Nonperforming assets to total non-covered loans and OREO

   3.63%   2.42%   1.59%   1.54%   na  

Nonperforming assets excluding SBA guaranteed loans to total non-covered loans and OREO

   3.25%   1.98%   1.56%   1.54    na  

  2011  2010  2009  2008  2007 
     (As Restated)  (As Restated)       
Nonaccrual loans $4,541  $9,585  $5,734  $1,233  $371 
Loans past due 90 days and accruing interest  32   -   -   135   - 
    Total nonperforming loans  4,573   9,585   5,734   1,368   371 
Other real estate owned  13,620   3,901   2,796   3,434   3,648 
    Total nonperforming assets $18,193  $13,486  $8,530  $4,802  $4,019 
                     
SBA guaranteed amounts included in nonaccrual loans $2,462  $1,410  $1,544  $100  $- 
                     
Allowance for loan losses to nonperforming loans  137.66%  58.41%  90.20%  308.33%  936.93%
Allowance for loan losses to total non-covered loans  1.54%  1.52%  1.48%  1.40%  1.33%
Nonperforming assets to total non-covered assets  3.44%  2.75%  1.74%  1.11%  1.07%
Nonperforming assets excluding SBA guaranteed loans                    
    to total non-covered assets  2.98%  2.46%  1.42%  1.09%  1.07%
Nonperforming assets to total non-covered loans and OREO  4.30%  3.63%  2.42%  1.59%  1.54%
Nonperforming assets excluding SBA guaranteed loans                    
    to total non-covered loans and OREO  3.72%  3.25%  1.98%  1.56%  1.54%
Covered nonperforming assets are not included in the table above because the carrying value includes a component for credit losses (the nonaccretable yield).

66
At December 31, 20102011, we had three restructured loans includedone loan modified in impaired loansa troubled debt restructuring totaling $6.6 million with borrowers who experienced deterioration$1.1 million.  This modification occurred in financial condition. These loans are secured by single-family residential properties or commercial real estate properties. There were no restructured loans as of December 31, 2009. Management believes these loans are well secured and the borrowers have the ability to repay the loans2010.  The loan is paying in accordance with the renegotiated terms. These restructured loans were on accrual status as payments were being made accordingmodified terms and does not involve any additional commitment to the restructured loan terms.

SNBV allocated $70 thousand of specific reserves to customers whose loan terms have been modified in troubled debt restructurings as of December 31, 2010, and no commitments have been made to lend additional funds to these customers.

lend.

It is Sonabank’s practice to concurrently charge off collateral dependent loans to recoverable value rather than establish a specific reserve.at the time loan impairment is recognized.  Charge offs on loans individually evaluated for impairment totaled approximately $8.3$3.8 million during 2010.

2011.

The following table presents covered nonperforming assets as of December 31, (in thousands):

   2010   2009 

Nonaccrual loans

  $2,048    $5,080  

Loans past due 90 days and accruing interest

   234     —    
          

Total nonperforming loans

   2,282     5,080  

Other real estate owned

   676     740  
          

Total nonperforming assets

  $2,958    $5,820  
          

  2011  2010  2009 
Nonaccrual loans $3,340  $2,048  $5,080 
Loans past due 90 days and accruing interest  136   234   - 
    Total nonperforming loans  3,476   2,282   5,080 
Other real estate owned  636   676   740 
    Total nonperforming assets $4,112  $2,958  $5,820 
Allowance for Loan Losses

We are very focused on the asset quality of our loan portfolio, both before and after the loan is made.  We have established underwriting standards that have proven to bewe believe are effective in maintaining high credit quality in our loan portfolio.  We have experienced loan officers who take personal responsibility for the loans they underwrite, a standing credit committee that reviews each loan application carefully, and a requirement that loans that are 60% or more of our legal lending limit must be approved by three executive members of our standing credit committee and the full Board of Directors or two outside directors.  We have implemented standardized underwriting and credit analysis.

Our allowance for loan losses is established through charges to earnings in the form of a provision for loan losses.  Management evaluates the allowance at least quarterly.  In addition, on a quarterly basis our board of directors reviews our loan portfolio, evaluates credit quality, reviews the loan loss provision and the allowance for loan and lease losses and makes changes as may be required.  In evaluating the allowance, management and the Board of directors consider the growth, composition and industry diversification of the portfolio, historical loan loss experience, current delinquency levels and all other known factors affecting loan collectability.

The allowance for loan losses represents management’s estimate of an amount appropriate to provide for probable incurred losses in the loan portfolio in the normal course of business.  This estimate is based on average historical losses within the various loan types that compose our portfolio as well as an estimate of the effect that other known factors such as the economic environment within our market area will have on net losses. We have established an unallocated portion of the allowance based on our evaluation of these factors, which management believes is prudent and consistent with regulatory requirements.  Due the uncertainty of risks in the loan portfolio, management’s judgment of the amount necessary to absorb loan losses is approximate.  The allowance is also subject to regulatory examinations and determination by the regulatory agencies as to the appropriate level of the allowance.

Our loan review program is conducted by the Chief Risk Officer and a third party consultant who reports directly to the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors. In 2010,2011, more than 50% of the non-consumer and non-residential loan portfolio outstanding as of December 31, 20092010 was reviewed. In 20112012 we plan to review at least 60% of the non-consumer and non-residential loan portfolio outstanding as of December 31, 2010.2011. The purpose of loan review is to validate management’s assessment of risk of the individual loans in the portfolio and to determine whether the loan was approved, underwritten and is being monitored in accordance with the bank’s credit policy and regulatory guidance.  Management’s risk assessment of individual loans takes into consideration among other factors, the estimated value of the underlying collateral, the borrower’s ability to repay, the borrower’s payment history and current payment status.

67
The following table presents an analysis of the allowance for loan losses for the periods indicated (in thousands):

   For the Year
Ended
December 31,
2010		  For the Year
Ended
December 31,
2009		  For the Year
Ended
December 31,
2008		  For the Year
Ended
December 31,
2007		  For the Year
Ended
December 31,
2006		 

Balance, beginning of period

  $5,172   $4,218   $3,476   $2,726   $1,020  

Allowance from acquired bank

   —      —      —      —      1,374  

Provision charged to operations

   9,025    6,538    1,657    1,290    546  

Recoveries credited to allowance

   167    157    8    —      —    
                     

Total

   14,364    10,913    5,141    4,016    2,940  

Loans charged off:

      

Real estate—commercial

   1,650    790    65    50    —    

Real estate—construction, land and other

   3,718    —      —      400    200  

Real estate—residential 1-4 family

   2,038    1,086    738    75    —    

Commercial

   1,278    3,852    120    —      —    

Consumer

   81    13    —      15    14  
                     

Total loans charged off

   8,765    5,741    923    540    214  
                     

Balance, end of period

  $5,599   $5,172   $4,218   $3,476   $2,726  
                     

Net charge-offs to average loans, net of unearned income

   1.87%   1.65%   0.32%   0.24%   0.21% 

  For the Year Ended  For the Year Ended  For the Year Ended  For the Year Ended  For the Year Ended 
  December 31, 2011  December 31, 2010  December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008  December 31, 2007 
     (As Restated)          
Balance, beginning of period $5,599  $5,172  $4,218  $3,476  $2,726 
Provision charged to operations  8,492   9,025   6,538   1,657   1,290 
Recoveries credited to allowance  199   167   157   8   - 
         Total  14,290   14,364   10,913   5,141   4,016 
Loans charged off:                    
    Real estate - commercial  1,163   1,650   790   65   50 
    Real estate - construction, land and                    
        other  460   3,718   -   -   400 
    Real estate - residential 1-4 family  2,341   2,038   1,086   738   75 
    Commercial  3,975   1,278   3,852   120   - 
    Consumer  56   81   13   -   15 
    Total loans charged off  7,995   8,765   5,741   923   540 
Balance, end of period $6,295  $5,599  $5,172  $4,218  $3,476 
                     
Net charge-offs to average loans, net                    
    of unearned income  1.63%  1.86%  1.65%  0.32%  0.24%
The provision for loan losses charged to operations for the year ended December 31, 2010 increased significantly2011 decreased to $8.5 million from $9.0 million from $6.5 million in 2009.2010.  We had charge-offs totaling $8.0 million during 2011 compared to $8.8 million during 2010 compared to $5.7 million in 2009. The increase in the2010.
In 2011, our provision for loan losses during 2009 was affected by $1.7 million in impairment and subsequent charge offs which occurred on four related loans in a receivables-based financing when it became apparent that much of the receivables were not collectible due to overall growtha dispute between our client and the primary contractor. This had been in litigation until near the loan portfolio, charge offs and adverse economic factors.

end of the first quarter of 2012.

Our provision for loan losses for the fourth quarter of 2010 was $5.3 millionaffected by impairment and was primarily related to charge-offs of a similar amount$5.1 million on two related loans, one a development loan and one a residential mortgage on a house in the development. The development loan was made to an LLC, which was part of a large complex which included the Kluge Winery. Another creditor foreclosed on the Kluge Winery on December 8, 2010. As a consequence we charged downrecognized impairment of the development loan to net realizable value as indicated by a December 2010 appraisal. We also charged downrecognized impairment of the residential loan (which was less than 90 days past due at the end of the year) based on our most reflective estimate using the most recent appraisal in file since our most recent appraisal is approximately a year old. BothWe have foreclosed on both loans and have been placed on non-accrual. We are proceeding toward foreclosure onsold two of the tracts included in the Kluge development property and are actively pursuing all avenues to potential recovery.

loan.

Please refer to Item 8.“Item 8 –. Financial StatementsStatements” and Supplementary Data, Note 3,Footnote 4, for information regarding the allocation of the allowance for loan losses among various categories of loans.

We believe that the allowance for loan losses at December 31, 20102011 is sufficient to absorb probable incurred credit losses in our loan portfolio based on our assessment of all known factors affecting the collectability of our loan portfolio.  Our assessment involves uncertainty and judgment; therefore, the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses cannot be determined with precision and may be subject to change in future periods.  In addition, bank regulatory authorities, as part of their periodic examination, may require additional charges to the provision for loan losses in future periods if the results of their reviews warrant additions to the allowance for loan losses.

68
Investment Securities

Our securities portfolio provides us with required liquidity and securities to pledge as required collateral for certain governmental deposits and borrowed funds.

Our securities portfolio is managed by our president and our treasurer, both of whom have significant experience in this area, with the concurrence of our Asset/Liability Committee. In addition to our president (who is chairman of the Asset/Liability Committee) and our treasurer, this committee is comprised of two outside directors. Investment management is performed in accordance with our investment policy, which is approved annually by the Asset/Liability Committee and the board of directors. Our investment policy addresses our investment strategies, approval process, approved securities dealers and authorized investments. Our investment policy authorizes us to invest in:

Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA), Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC) mortgage-backed securities (MBS)

Collateralized mortgage obligations

●Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA), Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC) mortgage-backed securities (MBS)

Treasury securities

●Collateralized mortgage obligations

SBA guaranteed loan pools

●Treasury securities

Agency securities

●SBA guaranteed loan pools

Pooled trust preferred securities comprised of a minimum of 80% bank collateral with an investment grade rating or a minimum of 60% bank collateral with a AAA rating at purchase

●Agency securities

Other corporate debt securities rated Aa3/AA- or better at purchase

●Pooled trust preferred securities comprised of a minimum of 80% bank collateral with an investment grade rating or a minimum of 60% bank collateral with a AAA rating at purchase

●Other corporate debt securities rated Aa3/AA- or better at purchase
Mortgage-backed securities are securities that have been developed by pooling a number of real estate mortgages and which are principally issued by government sponsored entities (GSE’s) such as the GNMA, FNMA and FHLMC. These securities are deemed to have high credit ratings, and minimum regular monthly cash flows of principal and interest are guaranteed by the issuing agencies.

Unlike U.S. Treasury and U.S. government agency securities, which have a lump sum payment at maturity, mortgage-backed securities provide cash flows from regular principal and interest payments and principal prepayments throughout the lives of the securities. Mortgage-backed securities which are purchased at a premium will generally suffer decreasing net yields as interest rates drop because homeowners tend to refinance their mortgages. Thus, the premium paid must be amortized over a shorter period. Conversely, mortgage-backed securities purchased at a discount will obtain higher net yields in a decreasing interest rate environment. As interest rates rise, the opposite will generally be true. During a period of increasing interest rates, fixed rate mortgage-backed securities do not tend to experience heavy prepayments of principal, and consequently the average life of these securities will be lengthened. If interest rates begin to fall, prepayments will increase.

Collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs) are bonds that are backed by pools of mortgages. The pools can be GNMA, FNMA or FHLMC pools or they can be private-label pools. The CMOs are designed so that the mortgage collateral will generate a cash flow sufficient to provide for the timely repayment of the bonds. The

mortgage collateral pool can be structured to accommodate various desired bond repayment schedules, provided that the collateral cash flow is adequate to meet scheduled bond payments. This is accomplished by dividing the bonds into classes to which payments on the underlying mortgage pools are allocated. The bond’s cash flow, for example, can be dedicated to one class of bondholders at a time, thereby increasing call protection to bondholders. In private-label CMOs, losses on underlying mortgages are directed to the most junior of all classes and then to the classes above in order of increasing seniority, which means that the senior classes have enough credit protection to be given the highest credit rating by the rating agencies.

SNBV’s

69
Southern National’s corporate bonds consist of pooled trust preferred securities issued by banks, thrifts and insurance companies.  The collateral pools of these  trust preferred securities are generally at least 80% banks or thrifts.  If the rating is Aaa/AAA, the collateral pool must be at least 60% banks or thrifts.  These securities generally have a long term (25 years or more), allow early redemption by the issuers, make periodic variable interest payments and mature at face value.  Trust preferred securities allow the deferral of interest payments for up to five years.

We classify our securities as either: “held-to-maturity” or “available-for-sale.” Debt securities that SNBVSouthern National has the positive intent and ability to hold to maturity are classified as held-to-maturity and carried at amortized cost. Securities classified as available for sale are those debt and equity securities that may be sold in response to changes in interest rates, liquidity needs or other similar factors.  Securities available for sale are carried at fair value, with unrealized gains or losses net of deferred taxes, included in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) in stockholders’ equity. Securities totaling $44.9$35.1 million were in the held-to-maturity portfolio at December 31, 2010,2011, compared to $57.7$44.9 million at December 31, 2009.2010. Securities totaling $11.1$9.9 million were in the available-for-sale portfolio at December 31, 2010,2011, compared to $18.5$11.1 million at December 31, 2009.

2010.

After the Greater Atlantic transaction on December 4, 2009, we sold all of their securities except for their SBA guaranteed loan pools which have a fair value of $11.0$9.8 million at December 31, 2010.2011.  We believe that these pools provide good coverage in a rising interest rate environment and sit well within our asset liability management strategy.

As of December 31, 2010,2011, we owned pooled trust preferred securities as follows (in thousands):

Security

 Tranche
Level		  Ratings When
Purchased		  Current
Ratings		  Par
Value		  Book
Value		  Estimated
Fair
Value		  Current
Defaults
and
Deferrals		  % of
Current
Defaults
and
Deferrals
to
Current
Collateral		  Previously
Recognized
Cumulative
Other
Comprehensive
Loss (1)		    
  Moody’s  Fitch  Moody’s  Fitch        
       (in thousands)      

ALESCO VII A1B

  Senior    Aaa    AAA    Baa3    BB   $7,873   $7,029   $4,395   $184,056    31%  $316   

MMCF II B

  Senior Sub    A3    AA-    Baa2    BB    496    456    465    34,000    29%   40   

MMCF III B

  Senior Sub    A3    A-    Ba1    CC    656    641    410    37,000    32%   15   
                        
       9,025    8,126    5,270     $371   
                        
                                Cumulative
Other
Comprehensive
Loss (2)		  Cumulative
OTTI Related
to Credit
Loss (2)		 

Other Than Temporarily Impaired:

            

TPREF FUNDING II

  Mezzanine    A1    A-    Caa3    C    1,500    517    517    125,100    36%   738   $245  

TRAP 2007-XII C1

  Mezzanine    A3    A    C    C    2,051    126    399    137,705    28%   1,345    579  

TRAP 2007-XIII D

  Mezzanine    NR    A-    NR    C    2,032    —      27    220,250    29%   —      2,032  

MMC FUNDING XVIII

  Mezzanine    A3    A-    Ca    C    1,043    85    113    111,682    34%   488    470  

ALESCO V C1

  Mezzanine    A2    A    Ca    C    2,062    456    456    115,942    36%   945    661  

ALESCO XV C1

  Mezzanine    A3    A-    C    C    3,089    29    102    266,100    40%   501    2,559  

ALESCO XVI C

  Mezzanine    A3    A-    Ca    C    2,058    114    379    149,900    30%   764    1,180  
                           
       13,835    1,327    1,993     $4,781   $7,726  
                           

Total

      $22,860   $9,453   $7,263      
                     

                           Previously    
                           Recognized    
                           Cumulative    
   Ratings              Estimated  Current  Other    
 Tranche When Purchased  Current Ratings        Fair  Defaults and  Comprehensive    
SecurityLevel Moody’s  Fitch  Moody’s  Fitch  Par Value  Book Value  Value  Deferrals  Loss (1)    
               (in thousands)             
ALESCO VII  A1BSenior Aaa  AAA  Baa3  BB  $7,075  $6,348  $3,733  $107,400  $303    
MMCF III BSenior Sub A3  A-  Ba1  CC   437   427   303   37,000   10    
                  7,512   6,775   4,036      $313    
                                       
                                 Cumulative  Cumulative 
                                 Other Comprehensive  OTTI Related to 
Other Than Temporarily Impaired:                                Loss (2)  Credit Loss (2) 
TPREF FUNDING IIMezzanine A1  A-  Caa3  C   1,500   383   364   134,100   763  $354 
TRAP 2007-XII C1Mezzanine A3  A  C  C   2,081   128   230   157,205   1,374   579 
TRAP 2007-XIII DMezzanine NR  A-  NR  C   2,039   -   31   218,750   7   2,032 
MMC FUNDING XVIIIMezzanine A3  A-  Ca  C   1,057   32   32   121,682   335   690 
ALESCO V C1Mezzanine A2  A  C  C   2,104   465   383   90,000   978   661 
ALESCO XV C1Mezzanine A3  A-  C  C   3,135   29   262   246,100   547   2,559 
ALESCO XVI  CMezzanine A3  A-  C  C   2,087   116   424   82,400   791   1,180 
                    14,003   1,153   1,726      $4,795  $8,055 
                                          
Total                  $21,515  $7,928  $5,762             
(1)Pre-tax, and represents unrealized losses at date of transfer from available-for-sale to held-to-maturity, net of accretion
(2)Pre-tax

Each of these securities has been evaluated for potential impairment under ASC 325.  In performing a detailed cash flow analysis of each security, Sonabank works with independent third parties to identify the most reflective estimate of the cash flow estimated to be collected. If this estimate results in a present value of expected cash flows that is less than the amortized cost basis of a security (that is, credit loss exists), an OTTI is considered to have occurred. If there is no credit loss, any impairment is considered temporary.

70
The analyses resulted in OTTI charges related to credit on two of the trust preferred securities in the amount of $151$329 thousand during the year ended December 31, 2010,2011, compared to OTTI charges related to credit on the trust preferred securities totaling $7.6 million$151 thousand for the year ended December 31, 2009.

2010.

We also own a residential collateralized mortgage obligation which has been evaluated for potential impairment. We recorded no OTTI charges for credit on this security during 2011. We recorded OTTI charges for credit on this security of $137 thousand in 2010 and $139 thousand during 2009.

2010.

For additional information regarding investment securities refer to Item 8—“Item 8 –. Financial StatementsStatements” and Supplementary Data, Footnote 2.

3.

The fair value of available for sale securities and the related gross unrealized gains and losses recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) were as follows (in thousands):

   Amortized
Cost		   Gross Unrealized  Fair
Value		 
     Gains   Losses  

December 31, 2010

       

SBA guaranteed loan pools

  $10,822    $216    $—      11,038  

FHLMC preferred stock

   16     14     —      30  
                   

Total

  $10,838    $230    $—     $11,068  
                   
   Amortized
Cost		   Gross Unrealized  Fair
Value		 
     Gains   Losses  

December 31, 2009

       

Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities

  $4,967    $—      $(53)  $4,914  

SBA guaranteed loan pools

   13,412     151     (13)   13,550  

FHLMC preferred stock

   16     25     —      41  
                   

Total

  $18,395    $176    $(66)  $18,505  
                   

  Amortized  Gross Unrealized Fair 
December 31, 2011 Cost  Gains  Losses  Value 
 SBA guaranteed loan pools $9,557  $280  $-   9,837 
 FHLMC preferred stock  16   52   -   68 
      Total $9,573  $332  $-  $9,905 
                 
  Amortized  Gross Unrealized Fair 
December 31, 2010 Cost  Gains  Losses  Value 
 SBA guaranteed loan pools $10,822  $216  $-   11,038 
 FHLMC preferred stock  16   14   -   30 
      Total $10,838  $230  $-  $11,068 
The carrying amount, unrecognized gains and losses, and fair value of securities held to maturity were as follows (in thousands):

   Amortized
Cost		   Gross Unrecognized  Fair
Value		 
     Gains   Losses  

December 31, 2010

       

Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities

  $34,088    $1,247    $—     $35,335  

Residential government-sponsored collateralized mortgage obligations

   188     8     —      196  

Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations

   1,166     5     —      1,171  

Trust preferred securities

   9,453     675     (2,865)   7,263  
                   
  $44,895    $1,935    $(2,865)  $43,965  
                   
   Amortized
Cost		   Gross Unrecognized  Fair
Value		 
     Gains   Losses  

December 31, 2009

       

Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities

  $45,369    $1,173    $(169)  $46,373  

Residential government-sponsored collateralized mortgage obligations

   398     21     —      419  

Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations

   1,577     —       —      1,577  

Trust preferred securities

   10,352     —       (880)   9,472  
                   
  $57,696    $1,194    $(1,049)  $57,841  
                   

  Amortized Gross Unrecognized Fair 
December 31, 2011 Cost  Gains  Losses  Value 
 Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities $26,105  $1,710      $27,815 
 Residential government-sponsored collateralized mortgage obligations  85   2       87 
 Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations  957   -   (157)  800 
 Trust preferred securities  7,928   674   (2,840)  5,762 
  $35,075  $2,386  $(2,997) $34,464 
                 
  Amortized Gross Unrecognized Fair 
December 31, 2010 Cost  Gains  Losses  Value 
 Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities $34,088  $1,247  $-  $35,335 
 Residential government-sponsored collateralized mortgage obligations  188   8   -   196 
 Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations  1,166   5   -   1,171 
 Trust preferred securities  9,453   675   (2,865)  7,263 
  $44,895  $1,935  $(2,865) $43,965 
The following table sets forth the amortized cost and estimated fair value of our investment securities by contractual maturity at December 31, 2010.2011.  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 (in thousands).

   Securities Available for Sale 
   Amortized
Cost		   Estimated
Fair Value		   Weighted
Average
Yield		 

SBA guaranteed loan pools

      

Due in one to five years

   200     201     2.65% 

Due in five to ten years

   1,378     1,405     2.27% 

Due after ten years

   9,244     9,432     2.44% 
            

Total SBA guaranteed loan pools

   10,822     11,038     2.42% 

FHLMC preferred stock

   16     30     0.00% 
            
  $10,838    $11,068     2.42% 
            
   Securities Held to Maturity 
   Amortized
Cost		   Estimated
Fair Value		   Weighted
Average
Yield		 

Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities

      

Due after ten years

  $34,088    $35,335     4.00% 
            

Residential government-sponsored collateralized mortgage obligations

      

Due after five years through ten years

   188     196     5.96% 

Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations

      

Due after ten years

   1,166     1,171     2.60% 
            

Total collateralized mortgage obligations

   1,354     1,367     3.07% 
            

Trust preferred securities

      

Due after ten years

   9,453     7,263     3.44% 
            
  $44,895    $43,965     3.85% 
            

71
  Securities Available for Sale 
        Weighted 
  Amortized  Estimated  Average 
  Cost  Fair Value  Yield 
 SBA guaranteed loan pools         
     Due in one to five years  260   264   2.89%
     Due in five to ten years  946   971   2.13%
     Due after ten years  8,351   8,602   2.47%
 Total SBA guaranteed loan pools  9,557   9,837   2.45%
             
 FHLMC preferred stock  16   68   0.00%
             
  $9,573  $9,905   2.42%
             
  Securities Held to Maturity 
          Weighted 
  Amortized  Estimated  Average 
  Cost  Fair Value  Yield 
 Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities            
      Due after five years through ten years $914  $1,001   5.95%
     Due after ten years  25,191   26,814   3.79%
 Total residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities $26,105  $27,815   3.87%
             
 Residential government-sponsored collateralized mortgage obligations            
      Due after five years through ten years  85   87   6.00%
 Other residential  collateralized mortgage obligations            
     Due after ten years  957   800   2.47%
 Total collateralized mortgage obligations  1,042   887   2.76%
             
 Trust preferred securities            
      Due after ten years  7,928   5,762   1.75%
  $34,161  $33,463   3.45%
Deposits and Other Borrowings

The market for deposits is competitive. We offer a line of traditional deposit products that currently includesinclude non-interest-bearing and interest-bearing checking (or NOW accounts), commercial checking, money market accounts, savings accounts and certificates of deposit. We compete for deposits through our banking branches with competitive pricing, advertising and online banking. We use deposits as a principal source of funding for our lending, purchasing of investment securities and for other business purposes.

Non-interest bearing

Total deposits increased from $33.3were $461.1 million at December 31, 2009,2011 compared to $34.5$431.0 million at December 31, 2010.

Interest bearing We completed the assumption of $42.2 million of deposits decreasedof the Midlothian Branch of the Bank of Hampton Roads in October 2011. Certificates of deposit increased $50.7 million during 2011, including $32.2 million from $422.5the Midlothian Branch acquisition.  This was partially offset by a decrease in money market accounts of $20.9 million during 2011.  We assumed money market deposits totaling $9.3 million from the Midlothian Branch acquisition. We had no brokered certificates of deposit at December 31, 2009, to $396.4 million as of December 31, 2010. Brokered certificates of deposit declined from $70.0 million at the end of 20092011, compared to $27 million as of December 31, 2010, while other certificates2010. Noninterest-bearing deposits were $32.6 million at December 31, 2011 and $34.5 million at December 31, 2010. We assumed noninterest-bearing deposits totaling $550 thousand from the Midlothian Branch acquisition.  The total of deposit decreased by $22.3 million. Money market accounts increased $39.7 million during 2010, partially as a result of former Greater Atlantic Bank customers shifting from certificates of deposit into money market accounts.

We utilize brokered certificates of deposit and brokered money marketnoninterest-bearing deposits and will continue to utilize these sources for deposits when they can be cost-effective. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, these brokered

deposits constituted approximately 9% and 21% of our total deposits, respectively. The brokered certificates of deposit we typically obtain have terms to maturity of three months to two years. These deposits generally have the effect of slightly increasing our cost of funds and slightly decreasing our net interest margin when compared to our local deposit base. During 2010, we only issued three brokered certificates of deposit totaling $22.0NOW accounts was $50.1 million with an average cost of 0.77%. We issued these brokered certificates of deposit because the rates and terms were significantly more attractive than those available in the retail market. We also had maturities of brokered certificates of deposit totaling $65.0 million with an average cost of 1.70% during 2010. Asas of December 31, 2010, brokered deposits, which include brokered certificates2011, compared to $50.5 million at the end of deposit and brokered money market deposits, amounted to $37.2 million with an average cost of 1.02%, a decrease of $59.8 million, or 61.6%, compared with brokered certificates of deposit and brokered money market deposits of $97.0 million with an average cost of 1.85% at December 31, 2009. The changes in brokered deposits along with other certificates of deposit maturing and rolling over at lower rates contributed to reducing our cost of deposits from 2.22% during 2009 to 1.71% during 2010.

72
The following table sets forth the average balance and average rate paid on each of the deposit categories for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008:

   2010  2009  2008 
   Average
Balance		   Average
Rate		  Average
Balance		   Average
Rate		  Average
Balance		   Average
Rate		 
   (in thousands) 

Noninterest-bearing deposits

  $31,415     $24,001     $19,992    

Interest-bearing deposits:

          

Savings accounts

   5,056     0.65%   2,505     0.55%   2,186     0.23% 

Money market accounts

   165,211     1.71%   58,462     1.66%   52,803     2.32% 

NOW accounts

   15,447     0.28%   8,048     0.19%   6,356     0.22% 

Time deposits

   233,831     1.83%   234,540     2.44%   214,624     4.32% 
                   

Total interest-bearing deposits

   419,545     1.71%   303,555     2.22%   275,969     3.81% 
                   

Total deposits

  $450,960     $327,556     $295,961    
                   

The following table sets forth the maturities of certificates of deposit of $100 thousand and over as of December 31, 2010 (in thousands):

Within 3 Months

  3 to 6 Months   6 to 12 Months   Over 12 Months   Total 
$7,571  $24,948    $17,447    $59,905    $109,871  

  2011  2010  2009 
  Average  Average  Average  Average  Average  Average 
  Balance  Rate  Balance  Rate  Balance  Rate 
  (in thousands) 
Noninterest-bearing deposits $31,642     $31,415     $24,001    
Interest-bearing deposits:                     
    Savings accounts  6,035   0.59%  5,056   0.65%  2,505   0.55%
    Money market accounts  148,569   0.87%  165,211   1.71%  58,462   1.66%
    NOW accounts  15,898   0.27%  15,447   0.28%  8,048   0.19%
    Time deposits  233,387   1.55%  233,831   1.83%  234,540   2.44%
    Total interest-bearing deposits  403,889   1.23%  419,545   1.71%  303,555   2.22%
Total deposits $435,531      $450,960      $327,556     
The variety of deposit accounts we offered has allowed us to be competitive in obtaining funds and in responding to the threat of disintermediation (the flow of funds away from depository institutions such as banking institutions into direct investment vehicles such as government and corporate securities). Our ability to attract and maintain deposits, and the effect of such retention on our cost of funds, has been, and will continue to be, significantly affected by the general economy and market rates of interest.

We use borrowed funds, primarily on a short term basis, to support our liquidity needs and to temporarily satisfy our funding needs from increased loan demand and for other shorter term purposes. One source of these borrowed funds is securities sold under agreements to repurchase, which are reflected at the amount of cash received in connection with the transactions, and may require additional collateral based on the fair value of the underlying securities pledged. We engage in these transactions with retail customers and with established third parties, primarily large securities brokerage firms. We also are a member of the FHLB and are authorized to obtain advances from the FHLB from time to time to as needed. The FHLB has a credit program for members with different maturities and interest rates, which may be fixed or variable. We are required to collateralize our borrowings from the FHLB with our FHLB stock and other collateral acceptable to the FHLB. At December 31, 20102011 and 2009,2010, total FHLB borrowings were $35$33.5 million and $30.0$35.0 million, respectively. At December 31, 2010

2011 we had $99.1$101.4 million of unused and available FHLB lines of credit. For additional detail regarding borrowed funds, refer to Item 8—“Item 8 –. Financial StatementsStatements” and Supplementary Data, Footnotes 910 and 10.

11.

Interest Rate Sensitivity and Market Risk

We are engaged primarily in the business of investing funds obtained from deposits and borrowings into interest-earning loans and investments.  Consequently, our earnings depend to a significant extent on our net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income on loans and other investments and the interest expense on deposits and borrowing.  To the extent that our interest-bearing liabilities do not reprice or mature at the same time as our interest-earning assets, we are subject to interest rate risk and corresponding fluctuations in net interest income.  We have employed asset/liability management policies that seek to manage our interest income, without having to incur unacceptable levels of credit or investment risk.

73
We use a duration gap of equity approach to manage our interest rate risk, and we review quarterly interest sensitivity reports prepared for us by FTN Financial using the Sendero ALM Analysis System.  This approach uses a model which generates estimates of the change in our market value of portfolio equity (MVPE) over a range of interest rate scenarios.  MVPE is the present value of expected cash flows from assets, liabilities and off-balance sheet contracts using standard industry assumptions about estimated loan prepayment rates, reinvestment rates and deposit decay rates.

The following tables are based on an analysis prepared by FTN Financial setting forth an analysis of our interest rate risk as measured by the estimated change in MVPE resulting from instantaneous and sustained parallel shifts in the yield curve (plus 400 basis points or minus 200 basis points, measured in 100 basis point increments) as of December 31, 2011 and (plus or minus 300 basis points, measured in 100 basis point increments) as of December 31, 2010, and 2009, and all changes are within our ALM Policy guidelines:

    Sensitivity of Market Value of Portfolio Equity
As of December 31, 2010		 

Change in Interest Rates in Basis Points (Rate Shock)

  Market Value of Portfolio Equity  Market Value of
Portfolio Equity as a % of		 
  Amount   $ Change
From Base		  % Change
From Base		  Total Assets  Portfolio
Equity
Book Value		 
   (Dollar amounts in thousands) 

Up 300

  $99,642    $(1,643)   -1.62%   16.86%   100.20% 

Up 200

   100,576     (709)   -0.70%   17.01%   101.14% 

Up 100

   100,578     (707)   -0.70%   17.01%   101.14% 

Base

   101,285     —      0.00%   17.13%   101.85% 

Down 100

   97,672     (3,613)   -3.57%   16.52%   98.22% 

Down 200

   93,048     (8,237)   -8.13%   15.74%   93.57% 

Down 300

   90,390     (10,895)   -10.76%   15.29%   90.90% 
    Sensitivity of Market Value of Portfolio Equity
As of December 31, 2009		 

Change in Interest Rates in Basis Points (Rate Shock)

  Market Value of Portfolio Equity  Market Value of
Portfolio Equity as a % of		 
  Amount   $ Change
From Base		  % Change
From Base		  Total Assets  Portfolio
Equity
Book Value		 
   (Dollar amounts in thousands) 

Up 300

  $91,216    $(4,877)   -5.08%   14.92%   93.92% 

Up 200

   93,099     (2,994)   -3.12%   15.23%   95.86% 

Up 100

   94,666     (1,427)   -1.49%   15.48%   97.47% 

Base

   96,093     —      0.00%   15.72%   98.94% 

Down 100

   94,855     (1,238)   -1.29%   15.51%   97.66% 

Down 200

   92,570     (3,523)   -3.67%   15.14%   95.31% 

Down 300

   89,569     (6,524)   -6.79%   14.65%   92.22% 

  Sensitivity of Market Value of Portfolio Equity 
  As of December 31, 2011 
                
           Market Value of 
Change in Market Value of Portfolio Equity  Portfolio Equity as a % of 
Interest Rates             Portfolio 
in Basis Points    $ Change  % Change  Total  Equity 
(Rate Shock) Amount  From Base  From Base  Assets  Book Value 
  (Dollar amounts in thousands) 
                
Up 400 $94,069  $(6,103)  -6.09%  15.39%  94.97%
Up 300  95,562   (4,610)  -4.60%  15.63%  96.48%
Up 200  97,934   (2,238)  -2.23%  16.02%  98.87%
Up 100  98,965   (1,207)  -1.20%  16.19%  99.91%
Base  100,172   -   0.00%  16.38%  101.13%
Down 100  96,052   (4,120)  -4.11%  15.71%  96.97%
Down 200  94,524   (5,648)  -5.64%  15.46%  95.43%
74
  Sensitivity of Market Value of Portfolio Equity 
  As of December 31, 2010 
                
           Market Value of 
Change in Market Value of Portfolio Equity  Portfolio Equity as a % of 
Interest Rates             Portfolio 
in Basis Points    $ Change  % Change  Total  Equity 
(Rate Shock) Amount  From Base  From Base  Assets  Book Value 
  (Dollar amounts in thousands) 
                
Up 300 $99,642  $(1,643)  -1.62%  16.98%  105.63%
Up 200  100,576   (709)  -0.70%  17.14%  106.62%
Up 100  100,578   (707)  -0.70%  17.14%  106.62%
Base  101,285   -   0.00%  17.26%  107.37%
Down 100  97,672   (3,613)  -3.57%  16.65%  103.54%
Down 200  93,048   (8,237)  -8.13%  15.86%  98.64%
Down 300  90,390   (10,895)  -10.76%  15.41%  95.82%
Our interest rate sensitivity is also monitored by management through the use of a model run by FTN Financial that generates estimates of the change in the net interest income over a range of interest rate scenarios.  Net interest income depends upon the relative amounts of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities and the interest rates earned or paid on them.  In this regard, the model assumes that the composition of our interest sensitive assets and liabilities existing at December 31, 20102011 and December 31, 20092010 remains constant over the period being measured and also assumes that a particular change in interest rates is reflected uniformly across the yield curve regardless of the duration to maturity or repricing of specific assets and liabilities. All changes are within our ALM Policy guidelines.

    Sensitivity of Net Interest Income
As of December 31, 2010		 

Change in Interest Rates in Basis Points (Rate Shock)

  Adjusted Net Interest Income   Net Interest Margin 
      Amount       $ Change
    From Base    		   Percent  % Change
From Base		 
   (Dollar amounts in thousands) 

Up 300

  $27,668    $3,361     5.09%   0.61% 

Up 200

   26,466     2,159     4.87%   0.39% 

Up 100

   25,193     886     4.64%   0.16% 

Base

   24,307     —       4.48%   0.00% 

Down 100

   24,670     363     4.55%   0.07% 

Down 200

   24,676     369     4.55%   0.07% 

Down 300

   24,747     440     4.56%   0.08% 
    Sensitivity of Net Interest Income
As of December 31, 2009		 

Change in Interest Rates in Basis Points (Rate Shock)

  Adjusted Net Interest Income   Net Interest Margin 
  Amount   $ Change
From Base		   Percent  % Change
From Base		 
   (Dollar amounts in thousands) 

Up 300

  $26,288    $2,814     4.45%   0.47% 

Up 200

   25,358    $1,884     4.30%   0.32% 

Up 100

   24,392    $918     4.14%   0.16% 

Base

   23,474    $—       3.98%   0.00% 

Down 100

   24,214    $740     4.11%   0.13% 

Down 200

   24,240    $766     4.11%   0.13% 

Down 300

   24,208    $734     4.11%   0.13% 

  Sensitivity of Net Interest Income 
  As of December 31, 2011 
             
Change in Adjusted Net Interest Income  Net Interest Margin 
Interest Rates            
in Basis Points    $ Change     % Change 
(Rate Shock) Amount  From Base  Percent  From Base 
  (Dollar amounts in thousands) 
             
Up 400 $28,323  $2,593   5.16%  0.46%
Up 300  27,654   1,924   5.04%  0.34%
Up 200  27,021   1,291   4.93%  0.23%
Up 100  26,286   556   4.80%  0.10%
Base  25,730   -   4.70%  0.00%
Down 100  26,408   678   4.82%  0.12%
Down 200  26,405   675   4.82%  0.12%
75
  Sensitivity of Net Interest Income 
  As of December 31, 2010 
          
Change in Adjusted Net Interest Income  Net Interest Margin 
Interest Rates            
in Basis Points    $ Change     % Change 
(Rate Shock) Amount  From Base  Percent  From Base 
  (Dollar amounts in thousands) 
             
Up 300 $27,668  $3,361   5.09%  0.61%
Up 200  26,466  $2,159   4.87%  0.39%
Up 100  25,193  $886   4.64%  0.16%
Base  24,307  $-   4.48%  0.00%
Down 100  24,670  $363   4.55%  0.07%
Down 200  24,676  $369   4.55%  0.07%
Down 300  24,747  $440   4.56%  0.08%
Certain shortcomings are inherent in the methodology used in the above interest rate risk measurements.  Modeling changes in MVPE requires the making of certain assumptions that may or may not reflect the manner in which actual yields and costs respond to changes in market interest rates.  Accordingly, although the MVPE tables and Sensitivity of Net Interest Income (NII) tables provide an indication of our interest rate risk exposure at a particular point in time, such measurements are not intended to, and do not, provide a precise forecast of the effect of changes in market interest rates on our net worth and net interest income.

  Sensitivity of MVPE and NII are modeled using different assumptions and approaches.  In the low interest rate environment that currently exists, limitations on downward adjustments for interest rates, particularly as they apply to deposits, can and do result in anomalies in scenarios that are unlikely to occur due to the current low interest rate environment.

Liquidity and Funds Management

The objective of our liquidity management is to assure the ability to meet our financial obligations. These obligations include the payment of deposits on demand or at maturity, the repayment of borrowings at maturity and the ability to fund commitments and other new business opportunities. We obtain funding from a variety of sources, including customer deposit accounts, customer certificates of deposit and payments on our loans and investments. Historically, our level of core deposits has been insufficient to fully fund our lending activities. As a result, we have sought funding from additional sources, including institutional certificates of deposit and available-for-sale investment securities. In addition, we maintain lines of credit from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta and utilize securities sold under agreements to repurchase and reverse repurchase agreement

borrowings from approved securities dealers.  For additional information about borrowings and anticipated principal repayments refer to the discussion about Contractual Obligations below and Item 8—“Item 8 –. Financial StatementsStatements” and Supplementary Data, Footnotes 910 and 10.

11.

We prepare a monthly cash flow report which forecasts weekly cash needs and availability for the coming three months, based on forecasts of loan closings from our pipeline report and other factors.

76
During the year ended December 31, 2010,2011, we funded our financial obligations with deposits, securities sold under agreements to repurchase and borrowings from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta. At December 31, 2010,2011, we had $104.9$106.6 million of unfunded lines of credit and undisbursed construction loan funds. Our approved loan commitments were $35.0 million$690 thousand at December 31, 2010.2011. The amount of certificate of deposit accounts maturing in 20112012 is $110.8$157.7 million as of December 31, 2010.2011. Management anticipates that funding requirements for these commitments can be met from the normal sources of funds.

Capital Resources

Capital management consists of providing equity to support both current and future operations. We are subject to capital adequacy requirements imposed by the Federal Reserve and the Bank is subject to capital adequacy requirements imposed by the FDIC. The Federal Reserve and the FDIC have adopted risk-based capital requirements for assessing bank holding company and member bank capital adequacy. These standards define capital and establish minimum capital requirements in relation to assets and off-balance sheet exposure, adjusted for credit risk. The risk-based capital standards currently in effect are designed to make regulatory capital requirements more sensitive to differences in risk profiles among bank holding companies and banks, to account for off-balance sheet exposure and to minimize disincentives for holding liquid assets. Assets and off-balance sheet items are assigned to broad risk categories, each with appropriate relative risk weights. The resulting capital ratios represent capital as a percentage of total risk-weighted assets and off-balance sheet items.

The risk-based capital standards issued by the Federal Reserve require all bank holding companies to have “Tier 1 capital” of at least 4.0% and “total risk-based” capital (Tier 1 and Tier 2) of at least 8.0% of total risk-adjusted assets. “Tier 1 capital” generally includes common stockholders’ equity and qualifying perpetual preferred stock together with related surpluses and retained earnings, less deductions for goodwill and various other intangibles. “Tier 2 capital” may consist of a limited amount of intermediate-term preferred stock, a limited amount of term subordinated debt, certain hybrid capital instruments and other debt securities, perpetual preferred stock not qualifying as Tier 1 capital, and a limited amount of the general valuation allowance for loan losses. The sum of Tier 1 capital and Tier 2 capital is “total risk-based capital.”

The Federal Reserve has also adopted guidelines which supplement the risk-based capital guidelines with a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to average total consolidated assets, or “leverage ratio,” of 3.0% for institutions with well diversified risk, including no undue interest rate exposure; excellent asset quality; high liquidity; good earnings; and that are generally considered to be strong banking organizations, rated composite 1 under applicable federal guidelines, and that are not experiencing or anticipating significant growth. Other banking organizations are required to maintain a leverage ratio of at least 4.0%. These rules further provide that banking organizations experiencing internal growth or making acquisitions will be expected to maintain capital positions substantially above the minimum supervisory levels and comparable to peer group averages, without significant reliance on intangible assets.

Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991,FDICIA, each federal banking agency revised its risk-based capital standards to ensure that those standards take adequate account of interest rate risk, concentration of credit risk and the risks of nontraditional activities, as well as reflect the actual performance and expected risk of loss on multifamily mortgages. Under that statute, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has promulgated regulations setting the levels at which an insured institution such as the bank would be considered “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized” and “critically undercapitalized.” The bank is classified “well capitalized” for purposes of the FDIC’s prompt corrective action regulations. See “Supervision and Regulation—Capital Requirements.”

77
The following table provides a comparison of our leverage and risk-weighted capital ratios and the leverage and risk-weighted capital ratios of SNBVSouthern National and the Bank at the periods indicated to the minimum and well-capitalized regulatory standards:

   Minimum
Required for
Capital
Adequacy
Purposes		  To Be Categorized
as Well Capitalized		  Actual Ratio at
December 31,		 
         2010          2009     

SNBV

     

Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio

   4.00%   6.00%   20.52%   17.32% 

Total risk-based capital ratio

   8.00%   10.00%   21.77%   18.34% 

Leverage ratio

   4.00%   5.00%   15.23%   17.37% 

Sonabank

     

Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio

   4.00%   6.00%   19.74%   16.63% 

Total risk-based capital ratio

   8.00%   10.00%   20.99%   17.66% 

Leverage ratio

   4.00%   5.00%   14.64%   16.68% 

  Minimum          
  Required for       
  Capital     Actual Ratio at 
  Adequacy  To Be Categorized  December 31, 
  Purposes  as Well Capitalized  2011  2010 
           (As Restated) 
Southern National            
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio  4.00%  6.00%  19.37%  19.75%
Total risk-based capital ratio  8.00%  10.00%  20.61%  20.99%
Leverage ratio  4.00%  5.00%  14.89%  14.52%
Sonabank                
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio  4.00%  6.00%  18.62%  18.96%
Total risk-based capital ratio  8.00%  10.00%  19.87%  20.20%
Leverage ratio  4.00%  5.00%  14.31%  13.93%
Impact of Inflation and Changing Prices

The financial statements and related financial data presented in this Annual Report on Form 10-K concerning SNBVSouthern National have been prepared in accordance with U. S. generally accepted accounting principles, which require the measurement of financial position and operating results in terms of historical dollars, without considering changes in the relative purchasing power of money over time due to inflation. The primary impact of inflation on our operations is reflected in increased operating costs. Unlike most industrial companies, substantially all of the assets and liabilities of a financial institution are monetary in nature. As a result, changes in interest rates have a more significant impact on our performance than do the effects of changes in the general rate of inflation and changes in prices. Interest rates do not necessarily move in the same direction or in the same magnitude as the prices of goods and services.

Many factors impact interest rates, including governmental monetary policies, inflation, recession, changes in unemployment, the money supply, and international disorder and instability in domestic and foreign financial markets. Like most financial institutions, changes in interest rates can impact our net interest income as well as the valuation of our assets and liabilities, which is the difference between interest earned from interest-earning assets, such as loans and investment securities, and interest paid on interest-bearing liabilities, such as deposits and borrowings.

Our interest rate risk management is the responsibility of Sonabank’s Asset/Liability Management Committee (the Asset/Liability Committee). The Asset/Liability Committee has established policies and limits for management to monitor, measure and coordinate our sources, uses and pricing of funds. The Asset/Liability Committee makes reports to the board of directors on a quarterly basis.

Seasonality and Cycles

We do not consider our commercial banking business to be seasonal.

78
Contractual Obligations

The following table reflects the contractual maturities of our term liabilities as of December 31, 2010.2011.  The amounts shown do not reflect anycontractual interest, early withdrawal or prepayment assumptions.

   Contractual Obligations 
   Less Than
One Year		   One to
Three Years		   Three to
Five Years		   More Than
Five Years		   Total 
   (in thousands) 

Certificates of deposit (1)

  $110,812    $71,450    $22,871    $—      $205,133  

Securities sold under agreements to repurchase

   23,908     —       —       —       23,908  

FHLB long-term advances

   5,000     30,000     —       —       35,000  

Operating leases

   1,405     2,186     1,414     —       5,005  
                         

Total

  $141,125    $103,636    $24,285    $—      $269,046  
                         

(1)Certificates of deposit give customers rights to early withdrawal. Early withdrawals may be subject to penalties. The penalty amount depends on the remaining time to maturity at the time of early withdrawal.

  Contractual Obligations 
  Less Than  One to  Three to  More Than    
  One Year  Three Years  Five Years  Five Years  Total 
  (in thousands) 
Certificates of deposit (1) $157,703  $77,334  $20,684  $63  $255,784 
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase  14,236   -   -   -   14,236 
FHLB overnight advances  3,500   -   -   -   3,500 
FHLB long-term advances  5,000   25,000   -   -   30,000 
Operating leases  1,365   2,204   1,002   504   5,075 
Total $181,804  $104,538  $21,686  $567  $308,595 
(1)  Certificates of deposit give customers rights to early withdrawal.  Early withdrawals may be subject to penalties. The penalty amount depends on the remaining time to maturity at the time of early withdrawal.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

SNBV

Southern National is a party to financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk in the normal course of business to meet the financing needs of its customers.  These financial instruments include commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit.  These instruments involve elements of credit and funding risk in excess of the amount recognized in the consolidated balance sheet.  Letters of credit written are conditional commitments issued by SNBVSouthern National to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party.  The credit risk involved in issuing letters of credit is essentially the same as that involved in extending loans to customers.  We had letters of credit outstanding totaling $2.4$6.5 million and $3.8$2.4 million as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, and 2009, respectively.

Our exposure to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by the other party to the financial instruments for commitments to extend credit and letters of credit is based on the contractual amount of these instruments.  We use the same credit policies in making commitments and conditional obligations as we do for on-balance sheet instruments. Unless noted otherwise, we do not require collateral or other security to support financial instruments with credit risk.

Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a customer as long as there is no violation of any condition established in the contract.  Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses and may require payment of a fee.  Since many of the commitments may expire without being completely drawn upon, the total commitment amounts do not necessarily represent future cash requirements.  We evaluate each customer’s creditworthiness on a case-by-case basis.  At December 31, 20102011 and 2009,2010, we had unfunded loan commitments approximating $107.3 million and $139.9 million, and $122.6 million, respectively.

Item 7A.— - Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

This information is incorporated herein by reference from Item 7,“Item 7-. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,Operations”, on pages 4273 through 6876 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

79

Item 8.— – Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc.:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. (“the Company”)(the Company) as of December 31, 20102011 and 2009,2010, and the related consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income (loss), stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2010. 2011. 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.
The consolidated financial statements of the Company as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, were audited by other auditors whose report dated March 15, 2011, expressed an unqualified opinion on those statements, before the restatement described in note 2 to the consolidated financial statements.
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 the Company  as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, and the results of its  operations and its  cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2011, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
We also have audited, in accordance with the Company’sstandards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc.’s  internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010,2011, based on criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated April 16, 2012 expressed an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
/s/ KPMG LLP
McLean, Virginia
April 16, 2012
80
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc.:
We have audited Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc.’s (the Company) internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2011, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting presented under Item 9A.(Item 9A(2)). Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and an opinion on the company’sCompany’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audits.

audit.

We conducted our auditsaudit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the auditsaudit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our auditsaudit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provideaudit provides a reasonable basis for our opinions.

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.

81
A material weakness is a deficiency, or a 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. The followingA material weakness related to the design and operating effectiveness of management’s controls over the review and assessment of the accounting for non-routine transactions has been identified and included in management’s report. Theassessment. We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company did not maintain effective internal controls over financial reportingAccounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. as it relates toof December 31, 2011 and 2010, and the evaluationrelated consolidated statements of Subsequent Events.income and comprehensive income (loss), stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2011. This material weakness was considered in determining the nature, timing, and extent of audit tests applied in our audit of the 20102011 consolidated financial statements. This matterstatements, and this report does not affect our report dated April 16, 2012, which expressed an unqualified opinion on these 2010those consolidated financial statements.

In our opinion, because of the effectseffect of the aforementioned material weakness described above,on the achievement of the objectives of the control criteria, Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc.  has not maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010,2011, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).”

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

Atlanta, Georgia

March 15, 2011

Commission.

KPMG LLP
McLean, Virginia
April 16, 2012
82
SOUTHERN NATIONAL BANCORP OF VIRGINIA, INC.

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

   December 31,
2010		  December 31,
2009		 

ASSETS

   

Cash and cash equivalents:

   

Cash and due from financial institutions

  $2,180   $2,858  

Interest-bearing deposits in other financial institutions

   7,565    5,212  
         

Total cash and cash equivalents

   9,745    8,070  
         

Securities available for sale, at fair value

   11,068    18,505  
         

Securities held to maturity, at amortized cost (fair value of $43,965 and $57,841, respectively)

   44,895    57,696  
         

Covered loans

   92,171    111,989  

Non-covered loans

   367,266    350,298  
         

Total loans

   459,437    462,287  

Less allowance for loan losses

   (5,599)   (5,172) 
         

Net loans

   453,838    457,115  
         

Stock in Federal Reserve Bank and Federal Home Loan Bank

   6,350    5,940  

Bank premises and equipment, net

   4,659    3,225  

Goodwill

   8,713    8,713  

Core deposit intangibles, net

   2,915    3,858  

FDIC indemnification asset

   18,536    19,408  

Bank-owned life insurance

   14,568    14,014  

Other real estate owned

   4,577    3,537  

Deferred tax assets, net

   3,782    4,559  

Other assets

   7,178    6,034  
         

Total assets

  $590,824   $610,674  
         

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

   

Noninterest-bearing demand deposits

  $34,529   $33,339  

Interest-bearing deposits:

   

NOW accounts

   15,961    17,499  

Money market accounts

   169,861    130,131  

Savings accounts

   5,490    4,398  

Time deposits

   205,133    270,424  
         

Total interest-bearing deposits

   396,445    422,452  
         

Total deposits

   430,974    455,791  
         

Securities sold under agreements to repurchase and other short-term borrowings

   23,908    22,020  

Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) advances

   35,000    30,000  

Other liabilities

   1,828    5,739  
         

Total liabilities

   491,710    513,550  
         

Commitments and contingencies (see note 15)

   —      —    

Stockholders’ equity:

   

Preferred stock, $.01 par value. Authorized 5,000,000 shares; no shares issued and outstanding

   —      —    

Common stock, $.01 par value. Authorized 45,000,000 shares; issued and outstanding, 11,590,212 shares at December 31, 2010 and 2009

   116    116  

Additional paid in capital

   96,478    96,444  

Retained earnings

   5,854    4,053  

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

   (3,334)   (3,489) 
         

Total stockholders’ equity

   99,114    97,124  
         

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity

  $590,824   $610,674  
         


       
  December 31,  December 31, 
  2011  2010 
     (As Restated) 
ASSETS
      
Cash and cash equivalents:      
Cash and due from financial institutions $2,432  $2,180 
Interest-bearing deposits in other financial institutions  2,603   7,565 
Total cash and cash equivalents  5,035   9,745 
         
Securities available for sale, at fair value  9,905   11,068 
         
Securities held to maturity, at amortized cost (fair value of $34,464 and  $43,965, respectively)
  35,075   44,895 
         
Covered loans  82,588   95,788 
Non-covered loans  409,180   367,266 
Total loans  491,768   463,054 
Less allowance for loan  losses  (6,295)  (5,599)
Net loans  485,473   457,455 
         
Stock in Federal Reserve Bank and Federal Home Loan Bank  6,653   6,350 
Bank premises and equipment, net  6,350   4,659 
Goodwill  9,160   8,723 
Core deposit intangibles, net  1,995   2,915 
FDIC indemnification asset  7,537   8,293 
Bank-owned life insurance  17,575   14,568 
Other real estate owned  14,256   4,577 
Deferred tax assets, net  6,255   5,937 
Other assets  6,104   7,469 
         
Total assets $611,373  $586,654 
         
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY        
         
Noninterest-bearing demand deposits $32,582  $34,529 
Interest-bearing deposits:        
NOW accounts  17,497   15,961 
Money market accounts  148,959   169,861 
Savings accounts  6,273   5,490 
Time deposits  255,784   205,133 
Total interest-bearing deposits  428,513   396,445 
Total deposits  461,095   430,974 
         
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase and other short-term borrowings
  17,736   23,908 
Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) advances  30,000   35,000 
Other liabilities  3,491   2,441 
Total liabilities  512,322   492,323 
         
Commitments and contingencies (see note 15)  -   - 
         
Stockholders’ equity:
        
Preferred stock, $.01 par value.  Authorized 5,000,000 shares; no shares issued and outstanding
  -   - 
Common stock, $.01 par value.  Authorized 45,000,000 shares; issued and outstanding, 11,590,212  shares at December 31, 2011 and  2010
  116   116 
Additional paid in capital  96,645   96,478 
Retained earnings  5,472   1,071 
Accumulated other comprehensive loss  (3,182)  (3,334)
Total stockholders’ equity  99,051   94,331 
         
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $611,373  $586,654 
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

83
SOUTHERN NATIONAL BANCORP OF VIRGINIA, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

   For the Years Ended
December 31,		 
   2010  2009  2008 

Interest and dividend income:

    

Interest and fees on loans

  $30,333   $20,540   $19,875  

Interest and dividends on taxable securities

   2,635    2,701    4,194  

Interest and dividends on other earning assets

   205    165    332  
             

Total interest and dividend income

   33,173    23,406    24,401  
             

Interest expense:

    

Interest on deposits

   7,172    6,728    10,516  

Interest on borrowings

   1,341    1,349    1,467  
             

Total interest expense

   8,513    8,077    11,983  
             

Net interest income

   24,660    15,329    12,418  
             

Provision for loan losses

   9,025    6,538    1,657  
             

Net interest income after provision for loan losses

   15,635    8,791    10,761  
             

Noninterest income:

    

Account maintenance and deposit service fees

   900    676    499  

Income from bank-owned life insurance

   554    579    588  

Gain on sale of SBA loans

   —      206    107  

Bargain purchase gain on acquisitions

   —      11,584    —    

Net loss on other assets

   (274)   (214)   (136) 

Total other-than-temporary impairment losses

   (288)   (12,698)   (1,536) 

Portion of loss recognized in other comprehensive income

   —      4,984    —    
             

Net credit impairment losses recognized in earnings

   (288)   (7,714)   (1,536) 

Gain on sales of securities available for sale

   142    371    269  

Other

   341    86    80  
             

Total noninterest income (loss)

   1,375    5,574    (129) 
             

Noninterest expenses:

    

Salaries and benefits

   6,186    4,461    4,016  

Occupancy expenses

   2,101    1,615    1,494  

Furniture and equipment expenses

   591    516    484  

Amortization of core deposit intangible

   943    731    727  

Virginia franchise tax expense

   735    562    549  

FDIC assessment

   705    755    211  

Data processing expense

   587    339    260  

Telephone and communication expense

   403    283    256  

Decrease in FDIC indemnification asset

   281    —      —    

Acquisition expenses

   —      499    —    

Other operating expenses

   1,979    1,301    1,112  
             

Total noninterest expenses

   14,511    11,062    9,109  
             

Income before income taxes

   2,499    3,303    1,523  

Income tax expense

   698    947    315  
             

Net income

  $1,801   $2,356   $1,208  
             

Other comprehensive income (loss):

    

Unrealized gain on available for sale securities

  $261   $303   $(1) 

Realized amount on securities sold, net

   (142)   (371)   1,267  

Unrealized loss on securities transferred from available-for-sale to held-to-maturity, net of recovery

   —      —      (3,974) 

Non-credit component of other-than-temporary impairment on held-to-maturity securities

   238    (4,984)   —    

Accretion of amounts previously recorded upon transfer to held-to-maturity from available-for sale

   (123)   3,561    —    
             

Net unrealized gain (loss)

   234    (1,491)   (2,708) 

Tax effect

   79    (507)   (921) 
             

Other comprehensive income (loss)

   155    (984)   (1,787) 
             

Comprehensive income (loss)

  $1,956   $1,372   $(579) 
             

Earnings per share, basic

  $0.16   $0.31   $0.18  
             

Earnings per share, diluted

  $0.16   $0.31   $0.18  
             


  
For the Years Ended
December 31,
 
  2011  2010  2009 
     (As Restated)  (As Restated) 
Interest and dividend income:         
Interest and fees on loans $31,278  $33,450  $21,040 
Interest and dividends on taxable securities  1,914   2,635   2,701 
Interest and dividends on other earning assets  231   205   165 
Total interest and dividend income  33,423   36,290   23,906 
Interest expense:            
Interest on deposits  4,980   7,172   6,728 
Interest on borrowings  1,107   1,341   1,349 
Total interest expense  6,087   8,513   8,077 
             
Net interest income  27,336   27,777   15,829 
             
Provision for loan losses  8,492   9,025   6,538 
Net interest income after provision for loan losses
  18,844   18,752   9,291 
             
Noninterest income (loss):            
Account maintenance and deposit service fees  833   900   676 
Income from bank-owned life insurance  1,336   554   579 
Gain on sale of SBA loans  395   -   206 
Bargain purchase gain on acquisitions  -   -   424 
Net loss on other assets  (297)  (274)  (214)
Total other-than-temporary impairment losses (OTTI)  (329)  (288)  (12,698)
Portion of OTTI recognized in other comprehensive income (before taxes)
  -   -   4,984 
Net credit related OTTI recognized in earnings  (329)  (288)  (7,714)
Gain on sales of securities available for sale  -   142   371 
Other  207   341   86 
             
Total noninterest income (loss)  2,145   1,375   (5,586)
             
Noninterest expenses:            
Salaries and benefits  6,787   6,186   4,461 
Occupancy expenses  2,240   2,101   1,615 
Furniture and equipment expenses  556   591   516 
Amortization of core deposit intangible  919   943   731 
Virginia franchise tax expense  686   735   562 
FDIC assessment  522   705   755 
Data processing expense  546   587   339 
Telephone and communication expense  392   403   283 
Change in FDIC indemnification asset  (99)  (60)  - 
Acquisition expenses  -   -   499 
Other operating expenses  2,347   2,006   1,301 
Total noninterest expenses  14,896   14,197   11,062 
Income (loss) before income taxes  6,093   5,930   (7,357)
Income tax expense (benefit)  1,692   1,876   (2,677)
Net income (loss) $4,401  $4,054  $(4,680)
Other comprehensive income (loss):            
Unrealized gain on available for sale securities $103  $261  $303 
Realized amount on securities sold, net  -   (142)  (371)
Non-credit component of other-than-temporary impairment on held-to-maturity securities
  133   238   (4,984)
Accretion of amounts previously recorded upon transfer to held-to-maturity from available-for sale
  (5)  (123)  3,561 
Net unrealized gain (loss)  231   234   (1,491)
Tax effect  79   79   (507)
Other comprehensive income (loss)  152   155   (984)
Comprehensive income (loss) $4,553  $4,209  $(5,664)
Earnings per share, basic and diluted $0.38  $0.35  $(0.62)
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

84

SOUTHERN NATIONAL BANCORP OF VIRGINIA, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2011, 2010 2009 AND 2008

2009

(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

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

Balance—January 1, 2008

 $68   $69,436   $489   $(718)   $69,275  

Comprehensive loss:

      

Net income

    1,208    $1,208    1,208  

Change in unrealized loss on securities available for sale
(net of tax, $921)

     (1,787)   (1,787)   (1,787) 
         

Total comprehensive loss

     $(579)  
         

Stock-based compensation expense

   29       29  

Issuance of warrants

   51       51  
                     

Balance—December 31, 2008

  68    69,516    1,697    (2,505)    68,776  

Comprehensive income:

      

Net income

    2,356    $2,356    2,356  

Change in unrealized loss on securities available for sale
(net of tax, $23)

     (45)   (45)   (45) 

Change in unrecognized loss on securities held to maturity for which a portion of OTTI has been recognized (net of tax, $484 and accretion, $28 and amounts recorded into other comprehensive income at transfer)

     (939)   (939)   (939) 
         

Total comprehensive income

     $1,372   
         

Stock-based compensation expense

   57       57  

Issuance of common stock (4,791,665 shares), net

  48    26,871       26,919  
                     

Balance—December 31, 2009

  116    96,444    4,053    (3,489)    97,124  

Comprehensive income:

      

Net income

    1,801    $1,801    1,801  

Change in unrealized loss on securities available for sale
(net of tax, $40)

     79    79    79  

Change in unrecognized loss on securities held to maturity for which a portion of OTTI has been recognized (net of tax, $39 and accretion, $123 and amounts recorded into other comprehensive income at transfer)

     76    76    76  
         

Total comprehensive income

     $1,956   
         

Stock-based compensation expense

   82       82  

Additional cost of 2009 common stock issuance

   (48)      (48) 
                     

Balance—December 31, 2010

 $116   $96,478   $5,854   $(3,334)   $99,114  
                     

                
           Accumulated    
     Additional     Other    
  Common  Paid in  Retained  Comprehensive    
  Stock  Capital  Earnings  Loss  Total 
                
Balance - January 1, 2009 $68  $69,516  $1,697  $(2,505) $68,776 
Comprehensive loss:                    
Net loss          (4,680)      (4,680)
Change in unrealized loss on securities available for sale (net of tax, $23)
              (45)  (45)
Change in unrecognized loss on securities held to maturity for which a portion of OTTI has been recognized (net of tax, $484 and accretion, $28 and amounts recorded into other comprehensive income at transfer)
              (939)  (939)
Total comprehensive loss                  (5,664)
Stock-based compensation expense      57           57 
Issuance of common stock (4,791,665 shares), net  48   26,871           26,919 
                     
Balance - December 31, 2009 (As Restated)  116   96,444   (2,983)  (3,489)  90,088 
Comprehensive income:                    
Net income          4,054       4,054 
Change in unrealized loss on securities available for sale (net of tax, $40)
              79   79 
Change in unrecognized loss on sceurities held to maturity for which a portion of OTTI has been recognized (net of tax, $39 and accretion, $123 and amounts recorded into other comprehensive income at transfer)
              76   76 
Total comprehensive income                  4,209 
Stock-based compensation expense      82           82 
Additional cost of 2009 common stock issuance      (48)          (48)
                     
Balance - December 31, 2010 (As Restated)  116   96,478   1,071   (3,334)  94,331 
Comprehensive income:                    
Net income          4,401       4,401 
Change in unrealized loss on securities available for sale (net of tax, $35)              68   68 
Change in unrecognized loss on sceurities held to maturity for which a portion of OTTI has been recognized (net of tax, $44 and accretion, $5 and amounts recorded into other comprehensive income at transfer)
              84   84 
Total comprehensive income                  4,553 
Stock-based compensation expense      167           167 
                     
Balance - December 31, 2011                    
  $116  $96,645  $5,472  $(3,182) $99,051 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

85
SOUTHERN NATIONAL BANCORP OF VIRGINIA, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(dollars in thousands)

   For the Years Ended
December 31,		 
   2010  2009  2008 

Operating activities:

    

Net income

  $1,801   $2,356   $1,208  

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash and cash equivalents provided by operating activities:

    

Depreciation

   537    520    529  

Amortization of core deposit intangible

   943    731    727  

Other amortization, net

   109    42    (153) 

Decrease in FDIC indemnification asset

   281    —      —    

Provision for loan losses

   9,025    6,538    1,657  

Earnings on bank-owned life insurance

   (554)   (579)   (588) 

Stock based compensation expense

   82    57    29  

Gain on sale of loans

   —      (206)   (107) 

Impairment on securities

   288    7,714    1,536  

Gain on sales of securities

   (142)   (371)   (269) 

Gain on branch acquisition

   —      (423)   —    

Gain on Greater Atlantic acquisition

   —      (11,161)   —    

Net loss on other real estate owned

   274    274    136  

Net (increase) decrease in other assets

   (113)   (1,874)   (477) 

Net increase (decrease) in other liabilities

   (3,912)   2,490    310  
             

Net cash and cash equivalents provided by operating activities

   8,619    6,108    4,538  
             

Investing activities:

    

Purchases of securities available-for-sale

   —      (10,333)   (19,824) 

Proceeds from sales of securities available for sale

   4,728    34,012    15,525  

Proceeds from paydowns, maturities and calls of securities available for sale

   2,857    1,816    6,421  

Purchases of securities held to maturity

   —      (19,897)   (20,405) 

Proceeds from paydowns, maturities and calls of securities held to maturity

   12,892    12,637    14,658  

Loan originations and payments, net

   (9,633)   (31,877)   (43,879) 

Proceeds from sale of SBA loans

   —      2,835    1,895  

Net cash received in branch acquisition

   —      3,119    —    

Net cash received in Greater Atlantic acquisition

   —      50,213    —    

Net increase in stock in Federal Reserve Bank and Federal Home Loan Bank

   (410)   (386)   (133) 

Proceeds from sale of other real estate owned

   2,570    1,655    408  

Purchases of bank premises and equipment

   (1,971)   (100)   (130) 
             

Net cash and cash equivalents provided by (used in) investing activities

   11,033    43,694    (45,464) 
             

Financing activities:

    

Net increase (decrease) in deposits

   (24,817)   (59,186)   43,991  

Proceeds from Federal Home Loan Bank advances

   5,000    —      5,000  

Repayment of Federal Home Loan Bank advances

   —      (25,357)   —    

Net increase in securities sold under agreement to repurchase and other short-term borrowings

   1,888    1,130    5,389  

Issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs

   —      26,919    —    

Additional cost of 2009 common stock issuance

   (48)   —      —    
             

Net cash and cash equivalents provided by (used in) financing activities

   (17,977)   (56,494)   54,380  
             

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   1,675    (6,692)   13,454  

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   8,070    14,762    1,308  
             

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $9,745   $8,070   $14,762  
             

Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Information

    

Cash payments for:

    

Interest

  $8,851   $8,746   $11,814  

Income taxes

   1,557    380    1,120  

Supplemental schedule of noncash investing and financing activities

    

Transfer from securities available-for-sale to securities held-to-maturity

   —      —      19,125  

Transfer from non-covered loans to other real estate owned

   3,209    1,043    317  

Transfer from covered loans to other real estate owned

   676    —      —    

Acquisition of fixed assets related to Leesburg Branch

   —      —      501  


    
  For the Years Ended 
  December 31, 
  2011  2010  2009 
     (As Restated)  (As Restated) 
Operating activities:         
Net income (loss) $4,401  $4,054  $(4,680)
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash and cash equivalents provided  by operating activities:
            
Depreciation  540   537   520 
Amortization of core deposit intangible  919   943   731 
Other amortization, net  33   109   42 
Accretion of loan discount  (3,272)  (5,781)  (565)
Decrease (increase) in FDIC indemnification asset  (99)  (60)  - 
Provision for loan losses  8,492   9,025   6,538 
Earnings on bank-owned life insurance  (536)  (554)  (579)
Stock based compensation expense  167   82   57 
Gain on sale of loans  (395)  -   (206)
Impairment on securities  329   288   7,714 
Gain on sales of securities  -   (142)  (371)
Gain on branch acquisition  -   -   (424)
Net loss on other real estate owned  297   274   274 
Provision for deferred income taxes  (400)  (1,724)  (2,428)
Net (increase) decrease in other assets  1,661   (328)  (3,071)
Net increase (decrease) in other liabilities  1,017   (3,885)  1,991 
Net cash and cash equivalents provided by operating activities  13,154   2,838   5,543 
Investing activities:            
Purchases of securities available-for-sale  -   -   (10,333)
Proceeds from sales of securities available for sale  -   4,728   34,012 
Proceeds from paydowns, maturities and calls of securities available for sale  1,215   2,857   1,816 
Purchases of securities held to maturity  -   -   (19,897)
Proceeds from paydowns, maturities and calls of securities held to maturity  9,911   12,892   12,637 
Loan originations and payments, net  (49,184)  (3,852)  (31,312)
Proceeds from sale of SBA loans  4,252   -   2,835 
Purchase of bank-owned life insurance  (3,000)  -   - 
Net cash received in branch acquisition  40,400   -   3,119 
Net cash received in Greater Atlantic acquisition  -   -   50,213 
Net increase in stock in Federal Reserve Bank and Federal Home Loan Bank  (303)  (410)  (386)
Payments received on FDIC indemnification asset  855   -   - 
Proceeds from sale of other real estate owned  2,075   2,570   1,655 
Purchases of bank premises and equipment  (522)  (1,971)  (100)
Net cash and cash equivalents provided by investing activities  5,699   16,814   44,259 
Financing activities:            
Net decrease in deposits  (12,391)  (24,817)  (59,186)
Proceeds from Federal Home Loan Bank advances  -   5,000   - 
Repayment of Federal Home Loan Bank advances  (5,000)  -   (25,357)
Net increase (decrease) in securities sold under agreement to repurchase and other short-term borrowings
  (6,172)  1,888   1,130 
Issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs  -   -   26,919 
Additional cost of 2009 common stock issuance  -   (48)  - 
Net cash and cash equivalents used in financing activities  (23,563)  (17,977)  (56,494)
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents  (4,710)  1,675   (6,692)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period  9,745   8,070   14,762 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $5,035  $9,745  $8,070 
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information            
Cash payments for:            
Interest $6,139  $8,851  $8,746 
Income taxes  1,435   1,557   380 
Supplemental schedule of noncash investing and financing activities            
Transfer from non-covered loans to other real estate owned  12,007   3,209   1,043 
Transfer from covered loans to other real estate owned  82   676   - 
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

1.ORGANIZATION AND SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

86

1.       ORGANIZATION AND SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. (“SNBV”Southern National”) is a corporation formed on July 28, 2004 under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia and is the holding company for Sonabank (“Sonabank” or “the Bank”) a Virginia state chartered bank which commenced operations on April 14, 2005.  The principal activities of Sonabank are to attract deposits and originate loans as permitted under applicable banking regulations.  Sonabank operates 1214 branches in Virginia located in Fairfax County (Reston, McLean and Fairfax), in Charlottesville, Warrenton (2), Loudoun County (Middleburg, Leesburg (2), and South Riding,Riding), Front Royal, New Market, Richmond and Clifton Forge, and we also have a branch in Rockville, Maryland.

On


Southern National filed a Form 8-K on February 7, 2012, disclosing that it will restate its financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2009, the interim quarterly periods and year ended December 31, 2010 and the interim quarterly periods through September 28, 2009, Sonabank assumed approximately $26.6 million30, 2011.   Errors have been identified in deposits of the Old Town Warrenton branch of Millennium Bank, N.A. and purchased $23.6 million of selected loans from Millennium Bank, N.A. Refer to Footnote 19purchase accounting for additional information.

Effective December 4, 2009, Sonabank assumed certain deposits and liabilities and acquired certain assetsthe acquisition of Greater Atlantic from the FDIC as receiver for Greater Atlantic Bank pursuantin December 2009.  (Please refer to the terms of a purchase and assumption agreement entered into by the Bank and the FDIC on December 4, 2009 (the “Agreement”)Footnote 2). On December 5, 2009, the former Greater Atlantic offices, located in Reston, New Market, Front Royal and South Riding, Virginia and Rockville, Maryland opened as Sonabank branches. Refer to Footnotes 1, 3, 7 and 18 for additional information.


The accounting policies and practices of SNBVSouthern National and subsidiary conform to U. S. generally accepted accounting principles and to general practice within the banking industry.  Major policies and practices are described below:


Principles of Consolidation


The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of SNBVSouthern National and its wholly owned subsidiary.  SNBVSouthern National is a bank holding company that owns all of the outstanding common stock of its banking subsidiary, Sonabank.   All material intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.


Use of Estimates


The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with U. S. generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.  Material estimates that are particularly susceptible to significant change in the near term relate toinclude: the determination of the allowance for loan losses, the fair value of investment securities, other than temporary impairment of investment securities, the valuation of goodwill and intangible assets, the FDIC indemnification asset, mortgage servicing rights, other real estate owned and deferred tax assets.


Investment Securities


Debt securities that SNBVSouthern National has the positive intent and ability to hold to maturity are classified as held-to-maturity and carried at amortized cost.


Securities classified as available for sale are those debt and equity securities that may be sold in response to changes in interest rates, liquidity needs or other similar factors.  Securities available for sale are carried at fair value, with unrealized gains or losses net of deferred taxes, included in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) in stockholders’ equity.

87

Purchased premiums and discounts are recognized in interest income using the interest method over the terms of the securities without anticipating prepayments, except for mortgage-backed securities where prepayments are anticipated. Gains and losses on the sale of securities are recorded on the tradesettlement date and are determined using the specific identification method.

SNBV


Southern National purchases amortizing investment securities in which the underlying assets are residential mortgage loans subject to prepayments.  The actual principal reduction on these assets varies from the expected contractual principal reduction due to principal prepayments resulting from the borrowers’ election to refinance the underlying mortgage based on market and other conditions.  The purchase premiums and discounts associated with these assets are amortized or accreted to interest income over the estimated life of the related assets.  The estimated life is calculated by projecting future prepayments and the resulting principal cash flows until maturity.  Prepayment rate projections utilize actual prepayment speed experience and available market information on like-kind instruments.  The prepayment rates form the basis for income recognition of premiums and discounts on the related assets.  Changes in prepayment estimates may cause the earnings recognized on these assets to vary over the term that the assets are held, creating volatility in the net interest margin.  Prepayment rate assumptions are monitored and updated monthly to reflect actual activity and the most recent market projections.


Management evaluates securities for other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) on at least a quarterly basis, and more frequently when economic or market conditions warrant such an evaluation.  For securities in an unrealized loss position, management considers the extent and duration of the unrealized loss, and the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer.  Management also assesses whether it intends to sell, or it is more likely than not that it will be required to sell, a security in an unrealized loss position before recovery of its amortized cost basis. If either of the criteria regarding intent or requirement to sell is met, the entire difference between amortized cost and fair value is recognized as impairment through earnings.  For debt securities that do not meet the aforementioned criteria, the amount of impairment is split into two components as follows: 1) OTTI related to credit loss, which must be recognized in the income statement and 2) OTTI related to other factors, which is recognized in other comprehensive income.  The credit loss is defined as the difference between the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected and the amortized cost basis. For equity securities, the entire amount of impairment is recognized through earnings.


In order to determine OTTI for purchased beneficial interests that, on the purchase date, were not highly rated, the Company compares the present value of the remaining cash flows as estimated at the preceding evaluation date to the current expected remaining cash flows.  OTTI is deemed to have occurred if there has been an adverse change in the remaining expected future cash flows.


Loans

SNBV


Southern National provides mortgage, commercial and consumer loans to customers.  A substantial portion of the loan portfolio is represented by non-residential mortgage loans throughout its market area.  The ability of SNBV’sSouthern National’s debtors to honor their contracts is in varying degrees dependent upon the real estate market conditions and general economic conditions in this area.


Loans that management has the intent and ability to hold for the foreseeable future or until maturity or pay-off are reported at their outstanding unpaid principal balances adjusted for the allowance for loan losses, purchase premiums and discounts and any deferred loan fees or costs on originated loans.  Interest income is accrued on the unpaid principal balance.  Loan origination fees, net of certain direct origination costs, are deferred and recognized as an adjustment of the related loan yield using the interest method without anticipating prepayments.

88

As part of the Greater Atlantic acquisition, the Bank and the FDIC entered into a loss sharing agreement on approximately $143.4 million (cost basis) of Greater Atlantic Bank’s assets.  The Bank will share in the losses on the loans and foreclosed loan collateral with the FDIC as specified in the loss sharing agreement; we refer to these assets collectively as “covered assets.”  Loans that are not covered in the loss sharing agreement are referred to as “non-covered loans.”


The accrual of interest on all loans is discontinued at the time the loan is 90 days delinquent unless the credit is well secured and in process of collection. In all cases, loans are placed on nonaccrual status or charged-off at an earlier date if collection of principal and interest is considered doubtful.


All interest accrued but not collected for loans that are placed on nonaccrual status or charged-off is reversed against interest income.  The interest on these loans is accounted for on the cash-basis or cost-recovery method, until qualifying for return to accrual.  Loans are returned to accrual status when all the principal and interest amounts contractually due are brought current and future payments are reasonably assured.


Most of SNBV’sSouthern National’s business activity is with customers located within Virginia and Maryland.  Therefore, our exposure to credit risk is significantly affected by changes in the economy in those areas. We are not dependent on any single customer or group of customers whose insolvency would have a material adverse effect on operations.

SNBV


Southern National has purchased, primarily through acquisitions, individual loans and groups of loans, some of which have shown evidence of credit deterioration since origination.  These purchased loans are recorded at the amount paid, such that there is no carryover of the seller’s allowance for loan losses.  After acquisition, losses are recognized by an increase in the allowance for loan losses.


Such purchased loans are accounted for individually or aggregated into pools of loans based on common risk characteristics such as, credit score, loan type, and date of origination.  SNBVSouthern National estimates the amount and timing of expected cash flows for each purchased loan or pool, and the expected cash flows in excess of the amount paid are recorded as interest income over the remaining life of the loan or pool (accretable yield).  The excess of the loans’ or pool’s contractual principal and interest over expected cash flows is not recorded (nonaccretable difference).


Over the life of the loan or pool, expected cash flows continue to be estimated.  If the present value of expected cash flows is less than the carrying amount, a loss is recorded.  If the present value of expected cash flows is greater than the carrying amount, it is recognized as part of future interest income.


In accordance with Accounting Standards Codification 310-30, and based on current information and events, if it becomes probable that there is a significant increase in cash flows previously expected to be collected or if actual cash flows are significantly greater than cash flows previously expected, the Bank will recalculate the amount of accretable yield for the acquired loans as the excess of the revised cash flows expected to be collected over the sum of (1) the initial investment in the loans less (2) cash collected less (3) write downs, if any plus (4) the amount of yield accreted to date.  The amount of accretable yield will be adjusted by reclassification from non-accretable yield.  This adjustment would be accounted for as a change in estimate with the amount of periodic accretion adjusted over the remaining life of the loans.

Through December 31, 2011, we do not feel that there has been a significant increase or improvement in expected cash flows or actual cash flows.  We continuously monitor the portfolio of acquired loans for indications of significant improvement.
89

Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses (ALLL)


The allowance for loan losses is a valuation allowance for probable incurred credit losses.  Loan losses are charged against the allowance when management believes the collection of the principal is unlikely.  Recoveries of amounts previously charged-off are credited to the allowance.   Management’s determination of the adequacy of the allowance is based on a three year historical average net loss experience for each portfolio segment adjusted for current industry and economic conditions and estimates of their affect on loan collectability. While management uses available information to estimate losses on loans, future additions to the allowance may be necessary based on changes in economic conditions, particularly those affecting real estate values.


The allowance consists of specific and general components.  The specific component relates to loans that are individually classified as impaired.  The general component provides for estimated losses in unimpaired loans and is based on historical loss experience adjusted for current factors.


A loan is considered impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that SNBVSouthern National will be unable to collect the scheduled payments of principal or interest when due according to the terms of the loan documentation. Factors considered by management in determining impairment include payment status, collateral value, and the probability of collecting scheduled principal and interest payments when due. Loans that experience insignificant payment delays and payment shortfalls generally are not classified as impaired. Management determines the significance of payment delays and payment shortfalls on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration all of the circumstances surrounding the loan and the borrower, including the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the borrower’s prior payment record, and the amount of the shortfall in relation to the principal and interest owed. Impairment is measured on a loan by loan basis for commercial and construction loans by either the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate, the loan’s obtainable market price, or the fair value of the collateral if the loan is collateral dependent. Individual consumer and residential loans are evaluated for impairment based on regulatory guidelines.


The general component covers non-impaired loans and is based on historical loss experience adjusted for current factors.  The historical loss experience is determined by portfolio segment and is based on the actual net loss history experienced by SNBVSouthern National over the most recent 3three years.  This actual loss experience is supplemented with other economic factors based on the risks present for each portfolio segment.  These economic factors include consideration of the following:  levels of and trends in delinquencies and impaired loans; levels of and trends in charge-offs and recoveries; trends in volume and terms of loans; effects of any changes in risk selection and underwriting standards; other changes in lending policies, procedures, and practices; experience, ability, and depth of lending management and other relevant staff; national and local economic trends and conditions; industry conditions; and effects of changes in credit concentrations.  The following portfolio segments have been identified:  owner occupied commercial real estate, non-owner occupied commercial real estate, construction and land development, commercial loans, closed end residential 1-4 family residential, and other consumer.  While underwriting practices in this environment are more stringent, the bank estimates the effect of internal factors on future net loss experience to be negligible.  Management’s estimate of the effect of current external economic environmental conditions on future net loss experience is significant in all loan segments and particularly on loans secured by real estate including single family 1-4, non-owner occupied commercial real estate and construction and land development loans.  These factors include excess inventory, generally less demand driven in part by fewer qualified borrowers and buyers.  These considerations have played a significant role in management’s estimate of the adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses.

90

Commercial real estate consists of borrowings secured by owner-occupied and non-owner-occupied commercial real estate.  Repayment of these loans is dependent upon rental income or the subsequent sale of the property for loans secured by non-owner-occupied commercial real estate and by cash flows from business operations for owner-occupied commercial real estate.  Loans for which the source of repayment is rental income are primarily impacted by local economic conditions which dictate occupancy rates and the amount of rent charged.  Commercial real estate loans that are dependent on cash flows from operations can also be adversely affected by current market conditions for their product or service.


Construction and land development primarily consist of borrowings to purchase and develop raw land into residential and non-residential properties.  Construction loans are extended to individuals as well as corporations for the construction of an individual or multiple properties and are secured by raw land and the subsequent improvements.  Repayment of the loans to real estate developers is dependent upon the sale or lease of properties to third parties in a timely fashion upon completion.  Should there be delays in construction or a downturn in the market for those properties, there may be significant erosion in value which may be absorbed by SNBV. In 2010, a significant portion of SNBV’s loan charge-offs were on 1-4 family development properties. Consequently, SNBV has allocated the highest percentage of allowance for loan losses as a percentage of loans compared to the other identified loan portfolio segments.

Southern National. 


Commercial loans consist of borrowings for commercial purposes to individuals, corporations, partnerships, sole proprietorships, and other business enterprises.  Commercial loans are generally secured by business assets such as equipment, accounts receivable, inventory, or any other asset excluding real estate and generally made to finance capital expenditures or operations.  SNBV’sSouthern National’s risk exposure is related to deterioration in the value of collateral securing the loan should foreclosure become necessary.  Generally, business assets used or produced in operations do not maintain their value upon foreclosure which may require SNBVSouthern National to write-down the value significantly to sell.

Closed end residential


Residential real estate loans consist of loans to individuals for the purchase of primary residences with repayment primarily through wage or other income sources of the individual borrower.  SNBV’sSouthern National’s loss exposure to these loans is dependent on local market conditions for residential properties as loan amounts are determined, in part, by the fair value of the property at origination.

Other consumer


Consumer loans are comprised of loans to individuals both unsecured and secured and open-end home equity loans secured by real estate, with repayment dependent on individual wages and other income.  The risk of

loss on consumer loans is elevated as the collateral securing these loans, if any, rapidly depreciate in value or may be worthless and/or difficult to locate if repossession is necessary.  Losses in this portfolio are generally relatively low, however, due to the small individual loan size and the balance outstanding as a percentage of SNBV’sSouthern National’s entire portfolio.


Transfers of Financial Assets


Transfers of financial assets are accounted for as sales, when control over the assets has been relinquished.  Control over transferred assets is deemed to be surrendered when the assets have been isolated from SNBV,Southern National, the transferee obtains the right (free of conditions that constrain it from taking advantage of that right) to pledge or exchange the transferred assets, and SNBVSouthern National does not maintain effective control over the transferred assets through an agreement to repurchase them before their maturity.

Bank Premises and Equipment


Land is carried at cost.  Premises and equipment are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation.  Buildings and related components are depreciated using the straight-linestraight line method with useful lives of 30 years. Furniture, fixtures and equipment are depreciated using the straight-line method with useful lives ranging from 3 to 10 years. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of their estimated useful lives or the lease term.

91

Goodwill and Intangible Assets


Goodwill resulting from business combinations prior to January 1, 2009 represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the net assets of businesses acquired.  Goodwill resulting from business combinations after January 1, 2009, is generally determined as the excess of the fair value of the consideration transferred, plus the fair value of any noncontrolling interests in the acquiree, over the fair value of the net assets acquired and liabilities assumed as of the acquisition date.  Goodwill and intangible assets acquired in a purchase business combination and determined to have an indefinite useful life are not amortized, but tested for impairment at least annually. SNBVSouthern National has selected August 31 as the date to perform the annual impairment test.  Intangible assets with definite useful lives are amortized over their estimated useful lives to their estimated residual values. Goodwill is the only intangible asset with an indefinite life on our balance sheet.


Other intangible assets consist of core deposit intangible assets arising from whole bank and branch acquisitions and are amortized over their estimated useful lives, which range from 7 to 15 years.


Stock Based Compensation


Compensation cost is recognized for stock options issued to employees, based on the fair value of these awards at the date of grant. A Black-Scholes model is utilized to estimate the fair value of stock options. Compensation cost is recognized over the required service period, generally defined as the vesting period. For awards with graded vesting, compensation cost is recognized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for the entire award.


Bank-owned Life Insurance

SNBV


Southern National has purchased life insurance policies on certain key executives.  Bank-owned life insurance is recorded at the amount that can be realized under the insurance contract at the balance sheet date, which is the cash surrender value adjusted for other charges or other amounts due that are probable at settlement.

Foreclosed Assets


Other Real Estate Owned

Assets acquired through or instead of foreclosure are initially recorded at fair value less costs to sell when acquired, establishing a new cost basis.  If fair value declines subsequent to foreclosure, a valuation allowance is recorded through expense.  Operating costs after acquisition are expensed.


Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Stock


The Bank is a member of the FHLB system.  Members are required to own a certain amount of stock based on the level of borrowings and other factors, and may invest in additional amounts.  FHLB stock is carried at cost, classified as a restricted security, and periodically evaluated for impairment based on ultimate recovery of par value.  Both cash and stock dividends are reported as income.

Long-term Assets


Premises and equipment, core deposit intangible assets, the FDIC indemnification asset 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.

92

FDIC Indemnification Asset


The acquisition of Greater Atlantic Bank on December 4, 2009 was accounted for under the acquisition method of accounting, and the assets and liabilities were recorded at their estimated fair values.  Such fair values were preliminary estimates and subject to adjustment for up to one year after the acquisition date. The FDIC indemnification asset iswas measured separately from each of the covered asset categories as it is not contractually embedded in any of the covered asset categories. Management has completed the analysisSee Footnote 2 for a discussion of the acquisition accounting estimates as of the acquisition date, and has revised the FDIC indemnification asset accordingly. The revised fair valuerestatement of the indemnification asset. The indemnification asset in the amount of $18.9 million representedrepresents the present value of the estimated cash paymentsflows expected to be received from the FDIC for future losses on covered assets based on the credit adjustment estimated for each covered asset and the loss sharing percentages at the acquisition date.  The revised estimated gross cash flows associated with this receivable were $23.4 million.$9.3 million, and the present value of the cash flows was restated to be $8.8 million as of December 4, 2009. These cash flows were then discounted at a market-based rate to reflect the uncertainty of the timing and receipt of the loss sharing reimbursement from the FDIC.  The ultimate collectability of this asset is dependent upon the performance of the underlying covered assets, the passage of time and claims paid by the FDIC. The difference between the gross cash flows and the fair value of the indemnification assets, $4.5 million,asset, $489 thousand, will be accreted on an accelerated basisand recognized as a change in the FDIC indemnification asset in our statements of income over the estimated loss period of the loans. Net cash flows related to the FDIC indemnification asset are presented in the net change in other assets in operating activities in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.


Retirement Plans


Employee 401(k) plan expense is the amount of matching contributions.  Supplemental retirement plan expense allocates the benefits over years of service.


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.  Management does not believe there now are such matters that will have a material effect on the financial statements.


Dividend Restriction


Banking regulations require maintaining certain capital levels and may limit the dividends paid by the bank to the holding company or by the holding company to shareholders.


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.



Operating Segments


While the chief decision-makers monitor the revenue streams of the various products and services, operations are managed and financial performance is evaluated on a company-wide basis.  Discrete financial information is not available other than on a company-wide basis.  Accordingly, all of the financial service operations are considered by management to be aggregated in one reportable operating segment.


Reclassifications


Some items in the prior year financial statements were reclassified to conform to the current presentation.

93

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, if needed, reduces deferred tax assets to the amount expected to be realized.


A tax position is recognized as a benefit only if it is “more likely than not” that the tax position would be sustained in a tax examination, with a tax examination being presumed to occur.  The amount recognized is the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized on examination.  For tax positions not meeting the “more likely than not” test, no tax benefit is recorded.

SNBV Southern National recognizes interest and/or penalties related to income tax matters in income tax expense.


We adopted the guidance issued by the FASB with respect to accounting for uncertainty in income taxes as of January 1, 2007.  A tax position is recognized as a benefit only if it is “more likely than not” that the tax position would be sustained in a tax examination, with a tax examination being presumed to occur.  The amount recognized is the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized on examination. The effect of adopting this new guidance had no effect on our consolidated financial statements. We have no unrecognized tax benefits and do not anticipate any increase in unrecognized benefits during the next twelve months.  Should the accrual of any interest or penalties relative to unrecognized tax benefits be necessary, it is our policy to record such accruals in our income tax accounts; no such accruals exist as of December 31, 2011.  Southern National and its subsidiary file a consolidated U. S. federal tax return and a Virginia state income tax return.  These returns are subject to examination by taxing authorities for all years after 2007.
Restrictions on Cash


Cash on hand or on deposit with the Federal Reserve Bank was required to meet regulatory reserve and clearing requirements in the amount of $1.2 million and $794 thousand at December 31, 20102011 and 2009, respectively.2010.  These balances do not earn interest.


Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows


For purposes of reporting cash flows, SNBVSouthern National defines cash and cash equivalents as cash due from banks and interest-bearing deposits in other banks with maturities less than 90 days.  Net cash flows are reported for customer loan and deposit transactions and short-term borrowings.


Earnings Per Share


Basic earnings per share (“EPS”) are computed by dividing net income by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the year. Diluted earnings per share reflect additional common shares that would have been outstanding if dilutive potential common shares had been issued, as well as any adjustment to income that would result from the assumed issuance.  Potential common shares that may be issued by SNBV relate solely to outstanding stock options and warrants and are determined using the treasury stock method.

94

Comprehensive Income (Loss)


Comprehensive income (loss) consists of net income and other comprehensive income (loss).  Other comprehensive income (loss) includes unrealized gains and losses on securities available for sale and the non-credit component of other than temporary impairment of securities held-to-maturity which are also recognized as a separate component of equity.


Off Balance Sheet Credit Related Financial Instruments


In the ordinary course of business, SNBVSouthern National has entered into commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit.  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.


Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-042, Receivables (Topic 310: A Creditor’s Determination of Whether a Restructuring Is a Troubled Debt Restructuring

ASC Topic 860, “Transfers and Servicing.” New authoritative accounting. This amendment clarifies the guidance under ASC Topic 860, “Transfers and Servicing,” amends prior accounting guidance to enhance reporting about transfers of financial assets, including securitizations, and where companies have continuing exposure toon the risks related to transferred financial assets. The new authoritative accounting guidance eliminates the concept ofevaluation made by a “qualifying special-purpose entity” and changes the requirements for derecognizing financial assets. The new authoritative accounting guidance also requires additional disclosures about all continuing involvements with transferred financial assets including information about gains and losses resulting from transfers during the period. SNBV adopted the provisions of the new authoritative accounting guidance under ASC Topic 860creditor on January 1, 2010. Adoption of the new guidance did not havewhether a significant impact on SNBV’s financial statements.

ASC Topic 310 “Receivables.” New authoritative accounting guidance under ASC Topic 310, “Receivables,” amended prior guidance to provide a greater level of disaggregated information about the credit quality of loans and leases and the Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses (“ALLL”). The new authoritative guidance also requires additional disclosures related to credit quality indicators, past due information, and information related to loans modified inrestructuring constitutes a troubled debt restructuring.  It clarifies the guidance related to a creditor’s evaluation of whether it has granted a concession to a debtor and also clarifies the guidance on a creditor’s evaluation of whether the debtor is experiencing financial difficulties.  The amendment is effective for public entities for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011, and was applied retrospectively to the beginning of the annual period of adoption.  The related disclosure requirements were also effective for interim and annual periods beginning on or after June 15, 2011.  We have adopted this guidance for purposes of evaluating our modifications as troubled debt restructurings.


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. This ASU was issued concurrently with IFRS 13, Fair Value Measurements, to provide largely identical guidance about fair value measurement and disclosure requirements.  The new authoritativestandards do not extend the use of fair value but, rather, provide guidance amends onlyabout how fair value should be applied where it already is required or permitted under IFRS or U.S. GAAP, most of the disclosure requirementschanges are clarifications of existing guidance or wording changes to align with IFRS 13.  A public entity is required to apply the ASU prospectively for loansinterim and leasesannual periods after December 15, 2011.  Early adoption is not permitted to a public entity.  In the period of adoption, a reporting entity will be required to disclose a change, if any, in valuation technique and related inputs that result from applying the ASU and to quantify the total effect, if practical.  The adoption of his standard will not have a material impact on our consolidated financial condition or operations.

The FAB issued ASU No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income. This ASU increases the prominence of other comprehensive income in financial statements.  Under this ASU, an entity will have the option to present the components of net income and comprehensive income in either one or two consecutive financial statements.  The ASU eliminates the option in U.S. GAAP to present other comprehensive income in the statement of changes in equity.  An entity should apply the ASU retrospectively, and is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011.  We currently prepare a separate statement of comprehensive income, and therefore, have early adopted this standard as permitted.
95

In September 2011, The FASB issued ASU No. 2011-08, Testing Goodwill for Impairment. This ASU permits an entity to make a qualitative assessment of whether it is more likely than not that a reporting unit’s fair value is less than its carrying amount before applying the two-step goodwill impairment test. If an entity concludes it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, it need not perform the two-step impairment test.   The ASU is effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011.   The adoption of this standard is not expected to have a material impact on our consolidated financial condition or results of operation.

2.     CORRECTION OF ERRORS RELATED TO PURCHASE ACCOUNTING

In December 2009, we acquired Greater Atlantic Bank from the FDIC.  We have identified errors in the purchase accounting related to that acquisition.  We had utilized the services of a valuation consultant to assist with the identification and estimation of the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed.   We identified an error in the calculation of the FDIC indemnification asset, and on February 7, 2012, we filed a Form 8-K disclosing that we will restate our financial statements for year ended December 31, 2009, the interim quarterly periods and year ended December 31, 2010 and the allowance. SNBV adoptedinterim quarterly periods through September 30, 2011.

Specifically, a redundant credit loss assumption was applied to the period end disclosures provisionsacquired residential and home equity loan portfolios for purposes of calculating the expected credit losses for these portfolios recoverable from the FDIC.  This error resulted in an overstatement of the new authoritative guidance under ASC Topic 310FDIC indemnification asset.   The correction of the error resulted in the reporting period endingremoval of the gain of $11.2 million as reported, as well as adjustments to other amounts originally reported in 2009.  We engaged a different advisor to assist with calculating the correct initial fair value of the indemnification asset; accretion of the acquired loan discount; calculation of estimated amounts due back to the FDIC in the event that losses do not achieve a specified level (the clawback liability); and other purchase accounting adjustments. Correcting the 2009 purchase accounting entries required adjustments to certain reported amounts in 2010 and 2011.

Footnote 18 presents the assets acquired and liabilities assumed on an as reported and as adjusted basis.

Restatement of the quarterly condensed financial information was also necessary.  See Footnote 22 to the consolidated financial statements.

Notes (a) through (f) below describe the restatement adjustments to the consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2010. Adoption of2010 and 2009, and the new guidance did not have an impact on SNBV’sconsolidated statements of income and financial condition. The disclosures about activity that occurs will be effectivecomprehensive income (loss), changes in stockholders’, and cash flows for reporting periods after January 1, 2011, and will have no impact on SNBV’s statements of income and financial condition.

FASB ASC 310 Receivables, Sub-Topic 310-30 Loans and Debt Securities Acquired with Deteriorated Credit Quality (“Subtopic 310-30”) was amended to clarify that modifications of loans that are accounted for within a pool under Subtopic 310-30 do not resultthe two years ended December 31, 2010 presented in the removal of those loans from the pool even if the modification would otherwise be considered a troubled debt restructuring. The amendments do not affect the accounting for loans under the scope of Subtopic 310-30 that are not accounted for within pools. Loans accounted for individually under Subtopic 310-30 continue to be subject to the troubled debt restructuring accounting provisions within ASC 310 Subtopic 310-40 Troubled Debt Restructurings by Creditors. The new authoritative accounting guidance under Subtopic 310-30 became effective in the third quarter of 2010 and did not have an impact on SNBV’s financial statements.

following tables.


2.SECURITIES(a)Correct the initial fair value of the FDIC indemnification asset as of the date of acquisition in 2009, the carrying amount as of December 31, 2010 and the related accretion.


(b)Correct the accretion amounts for the accretable discount on the acquired loans. On the statement of cash flows as reported, the accretion of the loan discount was included in loan originations and payments, net with investing activities.

(c)Reverse the amount recorded for the bargain purchase gain on the Greater Atlantic Bank acquisition of $11.2 million, and correct the related tax effects. Recognize goodwill of $10 thousand.

(d)Record a liability for amounts expected to be paid to the FDIC at the maturity of the indemnification agreement as credit losses are not expected to reach levels established in the Purchase and Assumption Agreement for the acquisition of Greater Atlantic Bank.  This liability was reflected at the net present value of expected cash outflows of $586 thousand, and is accreted through other operating expenses to the expected cash disbursement.
96
(e)Record the tax effects for the impact of the adjustments.

(f)Corrections to the statement of cash flows to reflect the impact of the aforementioned adjustments as well as to present the accretion of the loan discount in operating activities.
  Impact on Consolidated Balance Sheets  
  December 31, 2010   December 31, 2009 
  As Previously         As Previously        
  Reported  As Restated  Adjustment   Reported  As Restated  Adjustment  
ASSETS                    
Cash and cash equivalents:                    
Cash and due from financial institutions $2,180  $2,180  $-   $2,858  $2,858  $-  
Interest-bearing deposits in other financial institutions  7,565   7,565   -    5,212   5,212   -  
Total cash and cash equivalents  9,745   9,745   -    8,070   8,070   -  
                           
Securities available for sale, at fair value  11,068   11,068   -    18,505   18,505   -  
                           
Securities held to maturity, at amortized cost (fair value of $34,464,  $43,965 and $57,841, respectively)
  44,895   44,895   -    57,696   57,696   -  
Covered loans  92,171   95,788   3,617 b  111,989   112,489   500 b
Non-covered loans  367,266   367,266   -    350,298   350,298   -  
Total loans  459,437   463,054   3,617    462,287   462,787   500  
Less allowance for loan  losses  (5,599)  (5,599)  -    (5,172)  (5,172)  -  
Net loans  453,838   457,455   3,617    457,115   457,615   500  
                           
Stock in Federal Reserve Bank and Federal Home Loan Bank  6,350   6,350   -    5,940   5,940   -  
Bank premises and equipment, net  4,659   4,659   -    3,225   3,225   -  
Goodwill  8,713   8,723   10 c   8,713   8,723   10 c
Core deposit intangibles, net  2,915   2,915   -    3,858   3,858   -  
FDIC indemnification asset  18,536   8,293   (10,243)a  19,408   8,824   (10,584)a
Bank-owned life insurance  14,568   14,568   -    14,014   14,014   -  
Other real estate owned  4,577   4,577   -    3,537   3,537   -  
Deferred tax assets, net  3,782   6,602   2,820 e  4,559   8,183   3,624 e
Other assets  7,178   6,804   (374)e  6,034   6,034   -  
           -            -  
Total assets $590,824  $586,654   (4,170)  $610,674  $604,224   (6,450) 
                           
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
                          
                           
Noninterest-bearing demand deposits $34,529  $34,529  $-   $33,339  $33,339  $-  
Interest-bearing deposits:                          
NOW accounts  15,961   15,961   -    17,499   17,499   -  
Money market accounts  169,861   169,861   -    130,131   130,131   -  
Savings accounts  5,490   5,490   -    4,398   4,398   -  
Time deposits  205,133   205,133   -    270,424   270,424   -  
Total interest-bearing deposits  396,445   396,445   -    422,452   422,452   -  
Total deposits  430,974   430,974   -    455,791   455,791   -  
                           
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase and other short-term borrowings
  23,908   23,908   -    22,020   22,020   -  
Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) advances  35,000   35,000   -    30,000   30,000   -  
Other liabilities  1,828   2,441   613 d  5,739   6,325   586 d
Total liabilities  491,710   492,323   613    513,550   514,136   586  
                           
Commitments and contingencies (see note 15)  -   -        -   -      
                           
Stockholders’ equity:
                          
Preferred stock, $.01 par value.  Authorized 5,000,000 shares; no shares issued and outstanding
  -   -        -   -      
Common stock, $.01 par value.  Authorized 45,000,000 shares; issued and outstanding, 11,590,212  shares at December 31, 2010 and 2009
  116   116   -    116   116   -  
Additional paid in capital  96,478   96,478   -    96,444   96,444   -  
Retained earnings  5,854   1,071   (4,783)   4,053   (2,983)  (7,036) 
Accumulated other comprehensive loss  (3,334)  (3,334)  -    (3,489)  (3,489)  -  
Total stockholders’ equity
  99,114   94,331   (4,783)   97,124   90,088   (7,036) 
                           
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
 $590,824  $586,654  $(4,170)  $610,674  $604,224  $(6,450) 
97
  Impact on Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income (Loss) 
  For the Years Ended 
  December 31, 2010  December 31, 2009 
  As Previously        As Previously       
  Reported  As Restated  Adjustment  Reported  As Restated  Adjustment 
Interest and dividend income:                  
Interest and fees on loans $30,333  $33,450  $3,117 b $20,540  $21,040  $500 b
Interest and dividends on taxable securities  2,635   2,635   -   2,701   2,701   - 
Interest and dividends on other earning assets  205   205   -   165   165   - 
Total interest and dividend income  33,173   36,290   3,117   23,406   23,906   500 
Interest expense:                        
Interest on deposits  7,172   7,172   -   6,728   6,728   - 
Interest on borrowings  1,341   1,341   -   1,349   1,349   - 
Total interest expense  8,513   8,513   -   8,077   8,077   - 
                         
Net interest income  24,660   27,777   3,117   15,329   15,829   500 
                         
Provision for loan losses  9,025   9,025   -   6,538   6,538   - 
Net interest income after provision for loan losses  15,635   18,752   3,117   8,791   9,291   500 
                         
Noninterest income (loss):                        
Account maintenance and deposit service fees  900   900   -   676   676   - 
Income from bank-owned life insurance  554   554   -   579   579   - 
Gain on sale of SBA loans  -   -   -   206   206   - 
Bargain purchase gain on acquisitions  -   -   -   11,584   424   (11,160) c
Net loss on other assets  (274)  (274)  -   (214)  (214)  - 
Total other-than-temporary impairment losses (OTTI)  (288)  (288)  -   (12,698)  (12,698)  - 
Portion of OTTI recognized in other comprehensive income (before taxes)
  -   -   -   4,984   4,984   - 
Net credit related OTTI recognized in earnings  (288)  (288)  -   (7,714)  (7,714)  - 
Gain on sales of securities available for sale  142   142   -   371   371   - 
Other  341   341   -   86   86   - 
                         
Total noninterest income (loss)  1,375   1,375   -   5,574   (5,586)  (11,160)
                         
Noninterest expenses:                        
Salaries and benefits  6,186   6,186   -   4,461   4,461   - 
Occupancy expenses  2,101   2,101   -   1,615   1,615   - 
Furniture and equipment expenses  591   591   -   516   516   - 
Amortization of core deposit intangible  943   943   -   731   731   - 
Virginia franchise tax expense  735   735   -   562   562   - 
FDIC assessment  705   705   -   755   755   - 
Data processing expense  587   587   -   339   339   - 
Telephone and communication expense  403   403   -   283   283   - 
Change in FDIC indemnification asset  281   (60)  (341) a  -   -   - 
Acquisition expenses  -   -   -   499   499   - 
Other operating expenses  1,979   2,006   27 d  1,301   1,301   - 
Total noninterest expenses  14,511   14,197   (314)  11,062   11,062   - 
Income (loss) before income taxes  2,499   5,930   3,431   3,303   (7,357)  (10,660)
Income tax expense (benefit)  698   1,876   1,178 e  947   (2,677)  (3,624) e
Net income (loss) $1,801  $4,054  $2,253  $2,356  $(4,680) $(7,036)
Other comprehensive income (loss):                        
Unrealized gain on available for sale securities $261  $261  $-  $303  $303  $- 
Realized amount on securities sold, net  (142)  (142)  -   (371)  (371)  - 
Non-credit component of other-than-temporary impairment on held-to-maturity securities
  238   238   -   (4,984)  (4,984)  - 
Accretion of amounts previously recorded upon transfer to held-to-maturity from available-for sale
  (123)  (123)  -   3,561   3,561   - 
Net unrealized gain (loss)  234   234   -   (1,491)  (1,491)  - 
Tax effect  79   79   -   (507)  (507)  - 
Other comprehensive income (loss)  155   155   -   (984)  (984)  - 
Comprehensive income (loss) $1,956  $4,209  $2,253  $1,372  $(5,664) $(7,036)
Earnings per share, basic and diluted $0.16  $0.35  $0.19  $0.31  $(0.62) $(0.93)
98
  Impact on Consolidated Statements 
  
of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity
 
  As Previously       
  Reported  As Restated  Adjustment 
          
Balance - January 1, 2009 $68,776  $68,776  $- 
Comprehensive loss:            
Net income (loss)  2,356   (4,680)  (7,036)
Change in unrealized loss on securities available for sale (net of tax, $23)  (45)  (45)  - 
Change in unrecognized loss on securities held to maturity for which a portion of OTTI has been recognized (net of tax, $484 and accretion, $28 and amounts recorded into other comprehensive income at transfer)
  (939)  (939)  - 
Total comprehensive loss  1,372   (5,664)  (7,036)
Stock-based compensation expense  57   57   - 
Issuance of common stock (4,791,665 shares), net  26,919   26,919   - 
             
Balance - December 31, 2009  97,124   90,088   (7,036)
Comprehensive income:            
Net income  1,801   4,054   2,253 
Change in unrealized loss on securities available for sale (net of tax, $40)
  79   79   - 
Change in unrecognized loss on securities held to maturity for which a portion of OTTI has been recognized (net of tax, $39 and accretion, $123 and amounts recorded into other comprehensive income at transfer)
  76   76   - 
Total comprehensive income  1,956   4,209   2,253 
Stock-based compensation expense  82   82   - 
Additional cost of 2009 common stock issuance  (48)  (48)  - 
             
Balance - December 31, 2010 $99,114  $94,331  $(4,783)
99
  Impact on Consolidated Statements Cash Flows 
  For the Years Ended 
  December 31, 2010  December 31, 2009 
  As Previously        As Previously       
  Reported  As Restated  Adjustment  Reported  As Restated  Adjustment 
Operating activities:                  
Net income (loss) $1,801  $4,054  $2,253  $2,356  $(4,680) $(7,036)
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash and cash equivalents provided  by operating activities:
                        
Depreciation  537   537   -   520   520   - 
Amortization of core deposit intangible  943   943   -   731   731   - 
Other amortization, net  109   109   -   42   42   - 
Accretion of loan discount  -   (5,781)  (5,781) b  -   (565)  (565) b
Decrease (increase) in FDIC indemnification asset  281   (60)  (341) a  -   -   - 
Provision for loan losses  9,025   9,025   -   6,538   6,538   - 
Earnings on bank-owned life insurance  (554)  (554)  -   (579)  (579)  - 
Stock based compensation expense  82   82   -   57   57   - 
Gain on sale of loans  -   -   -   (206)  (206)  - 
Impairment on securities  288   288   -   7,714   7,714   - 
Gain on sales of securities  (142)  (142)  -   (371)  (371)  - 
Gain on branch acquisition  -   -   -   (424)  (424)  - 
Gain on Greater Atlantic acquisition  -   -   -   (11,160)  -   11,160 c
Net loss on other real estate owned  274   274   -   274   274   - 
Provision for deferred income taxes  -   (1,724)  (1,724) f  -   (2,428)  (2,428) f
Net (increase) decrease in other assets  (113)  (328)  (215) f  (1,874)  (3,071)  (1,197) f
Net increase (decrease) in other liabilities  (3,912)  (3,885)  27 f  2,490   1,991   (499) f
Net cash and cash equivalents provided by operating activities  8,619   2,838   (5,781)  6,108   5,543   (565)
Investing activities:                        
Purchases of securities available-for-sale  -   -       (10,333)  (10,333)  - 
Proceeds from sales of securities available for sale  4,728   4,728   -   34,012   34,012   - 
Proceeds from paydowns, maturities and calls of securities available for sale  2,857   2,857   -   1,816   1,816   - 
Purchases of securities held to maturity  -   -   -   (19,897)  (19,897)  - 
Proceeds from paydowns, maturities and calls of securities held to maturity  12,892   12,892   -   12,637   12,637   - 
Loan originations and payments, net  (9,633)  (3,852)  5,781 b  (31,877)  (31,312)  565 b
Proceeds from sale of SBA loans  -   -   -   2,835   2,835   - 
Net cash received in branch acquisition  -   -   -   3,119   3,119   - 
Net cash received in Greater Atlantic acquisition  -   -   -   50,213   50,213   - 
Net increase in stock in Federal Reserve Bank and Federal Home Loan Bank  (410)  (410)  -   (386)  (386)  - 
Proceeds from sale of other real estate owned  2,570   2,570   -   1,655   1,655   - 
Purchases of bank premises and equipment  (1,971)  (1,971)  -   (100)  (100)  - 
Net cash and cash equivalents provided by investing activities  11,033   16,814   5,781   43,694   44,259   565 
Financing activities:                        
Net decrease in deposits  (24,817)  (24,817)  -   (59,186)  (59,186)  - 
Proceeds from Federal Home Loan Bank advances  5,000   5,000   -   -   -   - 
Repayment of Federal Home Loan Bank advances  -   -   -   (25,357)  (25,357)  - 
Net increase (decrease) in securities sold under agreement to repurchase and other short-term borrowings
  1,888   1,888   -   1,130   1,130   - 
Issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs  -   -   -   26,919   26,919   - 
Additional cost of 2009 common stock issuance  (48)  (48)  -   -   -   - 
Net cash and cash equivalents used in financing activities  (17,977)  (17,977)  -   (56,494)  (56,494)  - 
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents  1,675   1,675   -   (6,692)  (6,692)  - 
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period  8,070   8,070   -   14,762   14,762   - 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $9,745  $9,745  $-  $8,070  $8,070  $- 
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information                        
Cash payments for:                        
Interest $8,851  $8,851   -  $8,746  $8,746  $- 
Income taxes  1,557   1,557   -   380   380   - 
Supplemental schedule of noncash investing and financing activities                        
Transfer from non-covered loans to other real estate owned  3,209   3,209   -   1,043   1,043   - 
Transfer from covered loans to other real estate owned  676   676   -   -   -   - 
100
3.       SECURITIES

The amortized cost and fair value of available for sale securities and the related gross unrealized gains and losses recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) were as follows (in thousands):

   Amortized
Cost		   Gross Unrealized  Fair
Value		 
      Gains   Losses  

December 31, 2010

       

SBA guaranteed loan pools

  $10,822    $216    $—     $11,038  

FHLMC preferred stock

   16     14     —      30  
                   

Total

  $10,838    $230    $—     $11,068  
                   
   Amortized
Cost		   Gross Unrealized  Fair
Value		 
     Gains   Losses  

December 31, 2009

       

Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities

  $4,967    $—      $(53)  $4,914  

SBA guaranteed loan pools

   13,412     151     (13)   13,550  

FHLMC preferred stock

   16     25     —      41  
                   

Total

  $18,395    $176    $(66)  $18,505  
                   


  Amortized  Gross Unrealized  Fair 
December 31, 2011 Cost  Gains  Losses  Value 
 SBA guaranteed loan pools $9,557  $280  $-   9,837 
 FHLMC preferred stock  16   52   -   68 
      Total $9,573  $332  $-  $9,905 
                 
  Amortized  Gross Unrealized  Fair 
December 31, 2010 Cost  Gains  Losses  Value 
 SBA guaranteed loan pools $10,822  $216  $-   11,038 
 FHLMC preferred stock  16   14   -   30 
      Total $10,838  $230  $-  $11,068 
The amortized cost, unrecognized gains and losses, and fair value of securities held to maturity were as follows (in thousands):

   Amortized
Cost		   Gross Unrecognized  Fair
Value		 
      Gains   Losses  

December 31, 2010

       

Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities

  $34,088    $1,247    $—     $35,335  

Residential government-sponsored collateralized mortgage obligations

   188     8     —      196  

Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations

   1,166     5     —      1,171  

Trust preferred securities

   9,453     675     (2,865)   7,263  
                   
  $44,895    $1,935    $(2,865)  $43,965  
                   
   Amortized
Cost		   Gross Unrecognized  Fair
Value		 
     Gains   Losses  

December 31, 2009

       

Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities

  $45,369    $1,173    $(169)  $46,373  

Residential government-sponsored collateralized mortgage obligations

   398     21     —      419  

Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations

   1,577     —       —      1,577  

Trust preferred securities

   10,352     —       (880)   9,472  
                   
  $57,696    $1,194    $(1,049)  $57,841  
                   

  Amortized  Gross Unrecognized  Fair 
December 31, 2011 Cost  Gains  Losses  Value 
Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities $26,105  $1,710     $27,815 
Residential government-sponsored collateralized mortgage obligations  85   2      87 
Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations  957   -   (157)  800 
Trust preferred securities  7,928   674   (2,840)  5,762 
  $35,075  $2,386  $(2,997) $34,464 
                 
  Amortized  Gross Unrecognized  Fair 
December 31, 2010 Cost  Gains  Losses  Value 
Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities $34,088  $1,247  $-  $35,335 
Residential government-sponsored collateralized mortgage obligations  188   8   -   196 
Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations  1,166   5   -   1,171 
Trust preferred securities  9,453   675   (2,865)  7,263 
  $44,895  $1,935  $(2,865) $43,965 
During 2011, we sold no securities. During 2010, we sold $4.7 million of available-for-sale mortgage-backed securities resulting in gross gains of $142 thousand.  During the year ended December 31, 2009, we sold $34.0 million of available-for-sale mortgage-backed securities and 25,000 shares of FHLMC preferred stock resulting in gross gains of $371 thousand.  During

the year ended December 31, 2008, we sold $15.5 million of available-for-sale mortgage-backed securities resulting in gross gains of $269 thousand. The tax provision related to these realized gains was $48 thousand $126 thousand and $91$126 thousand for 2010 and 2009, and 2008, respectively.


The fair value and amortized cost, if different, of debt securities as of December 31, 20102011 by contractual maturity were as follows (in thousands).  Securities not due at a single maturity date, primarily mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations, are shown separately.

   Held to Maturity   Available for Sale 
   Amortized
Cost		   Fair
Value		   Amortized
Cost		   Fair
Value		 

Due in one to five years

  $—      $—      $200    $201  

Due in five to ten years

   —       —       1,378     1,405  

Due after ten years

   9,453     7,263     9,244     9,432  

Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities

   34,088     35,335     —       —    

Residential government-sponsored collateralized mortgage obligations

   188     196     —       —    

Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations

   1,166     1,171     —       —    
                    

Total

  $44,895    $43,965    $10,822    $11,038  
                    


  Held to Maturity  Available for Sale 
  Amortized     Amortized    
  Cost  Fair Value  Cost  Fair Value 
Due in one to five years $-  $-  $260  $264 
Due in five to ten years  -   -   946   971 
Due after ten years  7,928   5,762   8,351   8,602 
Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities  26,105   27,815   -   - 
Residential government-sponsored collateralized mortgage obligations  85   87   -   - 
Other residential  collateralized mortgage obligations  957   800   -   - 
      Total $35,075  $34,464  $9,557  $9,837 
Securities with a carrying amount of approximately $45.3$36.0 million and $40.1$45.3 million at December 31, 20102011 and 2009,2010, respectively, were pledged to secure public deposits, repurchase agreements and a line of credit for advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (“FHLB”).

SNBV

101
Southern National monitors the portfolio which is subject to liquidity needs, market rate changes and credit risk changes to see if adjustments are needed.for indicators of other than temporary impairment.  At December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, and 2009, somecertain securities’ fair values were below cost. As outlined in the table below, there were securities with stated maturitiesfair values totaling approximately $4.8$5.6 million in the portfolio that are considered temporarily impaired at December 31, 2010. 2011. The following tables present information regarding securities in a continuous unrealized loss position as of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 (in thousands) by duration of time in a loss position:

December 31, 2011                  
  Less than 12 months  12 Months or More  Total 
Held to Maturity Fair value  Unrecognized Losses  Fair value  Unrecognized Losses  Fair value  Unrecognized Losses 
Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations $800  $(157) $-  $-  $800  $(157)
 Trust preferred securities  -   -   4,783   (2,840)  4,783   (2,840)
  $800  $(157) $4,783  $(2,840) $5,583  $(2,997)
                         
December 31, 2010                        
  Less than 12 months  12 Months or More  Total 
Held to Maturity Fair value  Unrecognized Losses  Fair value  Unrecognized Losses  Fair value  Unrecognized Losses 
 Trust preferred securities $-  $-  $4,805  $(2,865) $4,805  $(2,865)

As of December 31, 2011, we owned pooled trust preferred securities as follows (in thousands):

                            Previously    
                            Recognized    
                            Cumulative    
    Ratings              Estimated  Current  Other    
  Tranche When Purchased  Current Ratings     Fair  Defaults and  Comprehensive    
Security Level 
Moody’s
  Fitch  Moody’s  Fitch  Par Value  Book Value  Value  Deferrals  Loss (1)    
                (in thousands)          
ALESCO VII  A1B Senior Aaa  AAA  Baa3  BB  $7,075  $6,348  $3,733  $107,400  $303    
MMCF III B Senior Sub A3  A-  Ba1  CC   437   427   303   37,000   10    
                 7,512   6,775   4,036      $313    
                                      
                                Cumulative  Cumulative 
                                Other Comprehensive  OTTI Related to 
Other Than Temporarily Impaired:                               Loss (2)  Credit Loss (2) 
TPREF FUNDING II Mezzanine A1  A-  Caa3  C   1,500   383   364   134,100   763  $354 
TRAP 2007-XII C1 Mezzanine A3  A  C  C   2,081   128   230   157,205   1,374   579 
TRAP 2007-XIII D Mezzanine NR  A-  NR  C   2,039   -   31   218,750   7   2,032 
MMC FUNDING XVIII Mezzanine A3  A-  Ca  C   1,057   32   32   121,682   335   690 
ALESCO V C1 Mezzanine A2  A  C  C   2,104   465   383   90,000   978   661 
ALESCO XV C1 Mezzanine A3  A-  C  C   3,135   29   262   246,100   547   2,559 
ALESCO XVI  C Mezzanine A3  A-  C  C   2,087   116   424   82,400   791   1,180 
                 14,003   1,153   1,726      $4,795  $8,055 
                                       
Total               $21,515  $7,928  $5,762             
(1)  Pre-tax, and represents unrealized losses at date of transfer from available-for-sale to held-to-maturity, net of accretion
(2)  Pre-tax

Each of these securities has been evaluated for other than temporary impairment.  In performing a detailed cash flow analysis of each security, Sonabank works with independent third parties to estimate expected cash flows and assist with the evaluation of other than temporary impairment. The cash flow analyses performed included the following assumptions:

●
.5% of the remaining performing collateral will default or defer per annum.
●
Recoveries ranging from 25% to 47% with a two year lag on all defaults and deferrals.
●
No prepayments for 10 years and then 1% per annum for the remaining life of the security.
●
Additionally banks with assets over $15 billion will no longer be allowed to count down streamed trust preferred proceeds as Tier 1 capital (although it will still be counted as Tier 2 capital). That will incent the large banks to prepay their trust preferred securities if they can or if it is economically desirable. As a consequence, we have projected in all of our pools that 25% of the collateral issued by banks with assets over $15 billion will prepay in 2013.
●
Our securities have been modeled using the above assumptions by independent third parties using the forward LIBOR curve to discount projected cash flows to present values.

Because the decline in fair value is attributable to changes in interest rates and illiquidity, and not credit quality, and because we do not have the intent to sell these securities and it is more likely than not that we will not be required to sell the securities before their anticipated recovery, management does not consider these securities to be other-than-temporarily impaired as ofduring the year ended December 31, 2010. The following tables present information regarding securities in a continuous unrealized loss position as of December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009 (in thousands) by duration of time in a loss position:

December 31, 2010

   Less than 12 months  12 Months or More  Total 

Held to Maturity

 ��Fair value   Unrecognized
Losses		  Fair value   Unrecognized
Losses		  Fair value   Unrecognized
Losses		 

Trust preferred securities

  $—      $—     $4,805    $(2,865)  $4,805    $(2,865) 
                            

December 31, 2009

          
   Less than 12 months  12 Months or More  Total 

Available for Sale

  Fair value   Unrealized
Losses		  Fair value   Unrealized
Losses		  Fair value   Unrealized
Losses		 

Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities

  $4,914    $(53)  $—      $—     $4,914    $(53) 

SBA guaranteed loan pools

   819     (13)   —       —      819     (13) 
                            
  $5,733    $(66)  $—      $—     $5,733    $(66) 
                            

   Less than 12 months  12 Months or More  Total 

Held to Maturity

  Fair
value		   Unrecognized
Losses		  Fair
value		   Unrecognized
Losses		  Fair
value		   Unrecognized
Losses		 

Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities

  $14,039    $(169)  $—      $—     $14,039    $(169) 

Trust preferred securities

   —       —      8,094     (880)   8,094     (880) 
                            
  $14,039    $(169)  $8,094    $(880)  $22,133    $(1,049) 
                            

As of December 31, 2010, we owned pooled trust preferred securities as follows (in thousands):

  Tranche
Level		  Ratings When
Purchased		  Current
Ratings		  Par
Value		  Book
Value		  Estimated
Fair
Value		  Current
Defaults
and
Deferrals		  % of
Current
Defaults
and
Deferrals
to
Current
Collateral		  Previously
Recognized
Cumulative
Other
Comprehensive
Loss (1)		    

Security

  Moody’s  Fitch  Moody’s  Fitch        
                 (in thousands)             

ALESCO VII A1B

  Senior    Aaa    AAA    Baa3    BB   $7,873   $7,029   $4,395   $184,056    31%  $316   

MMCF II B

  Senior Sub    A3    AA-    Baa2    BB    496    456    465    34,000    29%   40   

MMCF III B

  Senior Sub    A3    A-    Ba1    CC    656    641    410    37,000    32%   15   
                        
       9,025    8,126    5,270     $371   
                        
                                 Cumulative
Other
Comprehensive
Loss (2)		  Cumulative
OTTI
Related to
Credit
Loss (2)		 

Other Than Temporarily Impaired:

            

TPREF FUNDING II

  Mezzanine    A1    A-    Caa3    C    1,500    517    517    125,100    36%   738   $245  

TRAP 2007-XII C1

  Mezzanine    A3    A    C    C    2,051    126    399    137,705    28%   1,345    579  

TRAP 2007-XIII D

  Mezzanine    NR    A-    NR    C    2,032    —      27    220,250    29%   —      2,032  

MMC FUNDING XVIII

  Mezzanine    A3    A-    Ca    C    1,043    85    113    111,682    34%   488    470  

ALESCO V C1

  Mezzanine    A2    A    Ca    C    2,062    456    456    115,942    36%   945    661  

ALESCO XV C1

  Mezzanine    A3    A-    C    C    3,089    29    102    266,100    40%   501    2,559  

ALESCO XVI C

  Mezzanine    A3    A-    Ca    C    2,058    114    379    149,900    30%   764    1,180  
                           
       13,835    1,327    1,993     $4,781   $7,726  
                           

Total

      $22,860   $9,453   $7,263      
                     

(1)Pre-tax, and represents unrealized losses at date of transfer from available-for-sale to held-to-maturity, net of accretion
(2)Pre-tax

Each of these securities has been evaluated for potential impairment under ASC 325. In performing a detailed cash flow analysis of each security, Sonabank works with independent third parties to identify the most reflective estimate of the cash flow estimated to be collected. If this estimate results in a present value of expected cash flows that is less than the amortized cost basis of a security (that is, credit loss exists), an OTTI is considered to have occurred. If there is no credit loss, any impairment is considered temporary. The cash flow analyses performed included the following assumptions:

We assume that .5% of the remaining performing collateral will default or defer per annum.

We assume recoveries of 25% with a two year lag on all defaults and deferrals.

We assume no prepayments for 10 years and then 1% per annum2011, except for the remaining life of the security.

MMC Funding XVIII and TPREF Funding II securities.

Additionally banks with assets over $15 billion will no longer be allowed to count down streamed trust preferred proceeds as Tier 1 capital (although it will still be counted as Tier 2 capital). That will incent the large banks to prepay their trust preferred securities if they can or if it is economically desirable. As a consequence we have projected in all of our pools that 25% of the collateral issued by banks with assets over $15 billion will prepay in 2013.

102
Our securities have been modeled using the above assumptions by independent third parties using the forward LIBOR curve plus original spread to discount projected cash flows to present values.

These assumptionsanalyses resulted in OTTI charges related to credit on two of the trust preferred securities in the amount of $151$329 thousand during the year ended December 31, 2010,2011, compared to OTTI charges related to credit on the trust preferred securities totaling $151 thousand and $7.6 million for the yearyears ended December 31, 2009.

2010 and 2009, respectively.


We also own $1.2 million$957 thousand of SARM 2005-22 1A2. This residential collateralized mortgage obligation was originally rated AAA by Standard and Poors. After a series of downgrades, this security has been evaluated for potential impairment. Basedother than temporarily impaired in past reporting periods. For the fourth quarter of 2011 and based on our review of the trustee report, shock analysis and current information regarding delinquencies, nonperforming loans and credit support it has been determined that anno OTTI charge for credit existswas required for the yearquarter ended December 31, 2010.2011.  The assumptions used in the analysis included a 7%3.3% prepayment speed, 15%12% default rate, a 55%48% loss severity and an accounting yield of 3.60%2.47%.We recorded no OTTI charges for credit on this security during 2011. We recorded OTTI charges for credit on this security of $137 thousand in 2010 and $139 thousand during 2009. There were no OTTI charges for credit on this security in 2008.


The following table presents a roll forward of the credit losses recognized in earnings for the periods ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 (in thousands):

   2010   2009 

Amount of cumulative other-than-temporary impairment related to credit loss prior to January 1

  $7,714    $—    

Amounts related to credit loss for which an other-than-temporary impairment was not previously recognized

   —       7,714  

Amounts related to credit loss for which an other-than-temporary impairment was previously recognized

   288     —    
          

Amount of cumulative other-than-temporary impairment related to credit loss as of December 31, 2010

  $8,002    $7,714  
          

3.LOANS

  2011  2010  2009 
          
Amount of cumulative other-than-temporary impairment related to credit loss prior to January 1
 $8,002  $7,714  $- 
Amounts related to credit loss for which an other-than-temporary impairment was not previously recognized
  -   -   7,714 
Amounts related to credit loss for which an other-than-temporary impairment was previously recognized
  329   288   - 
Reductions due to realized losses  (54)  -   - 
Amount of cumulative other-than-temporary impairment related to credit loss as of December 31
 $8,277  $8,002  $7,714 
103
4.           LOANS

Loans, net of unearned income, consist of the following at year end (in thousands):

   December 31, 2010  December 31, 2009 
   Covered
Loans		   Non-covered
Loans		  Total
Loans		  Covered
Loans		   Non-covered
Loans		  Total
Loans		 

Mortgage loans on real estate:

         

Commercial real estate—owner-occupied

  $5,246    $81,487   $86,733   $6,613    $76,765   $83,378  

Commercial real estate—non-owner-occupied

   13,898     76,068    89,966    17,881     63,059    80,940  

Secured by farmland

   —       3,522    3,522    —       6,471    6,471  

Construction loans to residential builders

   —       —      —      —       5,436    5,436  

Other construction and land loans

   1,098     39,480    40,578    3,498     42,564    46,062  

Residential 1-4 family

   29,935     58,900    88,835    33,815     61,024    94,839  

Multi- family residential

   563     19,177    19,740    2,570     10,726    13,296  

Home equity lines of credit

   40,287     10,532    50,819    44,235     10,532    54,767  
                           

Total real estate loans

   91,027     289,166    380,193    108,612     276,577    385,189  

Commercial loans

   998     76,644    77,642    3,184     70,757    73,941  

Consumer loans

   146     2,010    2,156    193     3,528    3,721  
                           

Gross loans

   92,171     367,820    459,991    111,989     350,862    462,851  

Less unearned income on loans

   —       (554)   (554)   —       (564)   (564) 
                           

Loans, net of unearned income

  $92,171    $367,266   $459,437   $111,989    $350,298   $462,287  
                           

  Covered  Non-covered  Total  Covered  Non-covered  Total 
  Loans  Loans  Loans  Loans  Loans  Loans 
  December 31, 2011  December 31, 2010 
Mortgage loans on real estate:                  
Commercial real estate - owner-occupied $4,854  $82,450  $87,304  $5,427  $81,487  $86,914 
Commercial real estate - non-owner-occupied  11,243   117,059   128,302   14,502   76,068   90,570 
Secured by farmland  -   1,506   1,506   -   3,522   3,522 
Construction and land loans  2,883   39,565   42,448   3,249   39,480   42,729 
Residential 1-4 family  25,307   49,288   74,595   28,733   58,900   87,633 
Multi- family residential  629   19,553   20,182   629   19,177   19,806 
Home equity lines of credit  35,442   9,040   44,482   40,662   10,532   51,194 
Total real estate loans  80,358   318,461   398,819   93,202   289,166   382,368 
                         
Commercial loans  2,122   89,939   92,061   2,443   76,644   79,087 
Consumer loans  108   1,868   1,976   143   2,010   2,153 
Gross loans  82,588   410,268   492,856   95,788   367,820   463,608 
                         
Less deferred fees on loans  -   (1,088)  (1,088)  -   (554)  (554)
Loans, net of deferred fees $82,588  $409,180  $491,768  $95,788  $367,266  $463,054 

As part of the Greater Atlantic acquisition, the Bank and the FDIC entered into a loss sharing agreement on approximately $143.4 million (contractual basis) of Greater Atlantic Bank’s assets.  The Bank will share in the losses on the loans and foreclosed loan collateral with the FDIC as specified in the loss sharing agreement; we refer to these assets collectively as “covered assets.”  Loans that are not covered in the loss sharing agreement are referred to as “non-covered loans.”

The covered loans acquired in the Greater Atlantic transaction are and will continue to be subject to our internal and external credit review. As a result, if and when credit deterioration is noted subsequent to the acquisition date, such deterioration will be measured through our allowance for loan loss calculation methodology and a provision for credit losses will be charged to earnings with a partially offsetting noninterest expense item reflecting the change to the FDIC indemnification asset. There has been no provision recorded on covered loans since acquisition.

Credit-impaired covered loans are those loans showing evidence of credit deterioration since origination and it is probable, at the date of acquisition, that SNBVSouthern National will not collect all contractually required principal and interest payments. Generally, acquired loans that meet SNBV’sSouthern National’s definition for nonaccrual status fall within the definition of credit-impaired covered loans.

104
Impaired loans were as follows (in thousands):

   2010   2009 
   Covered
Loans		   Non-covered
Loans		   Total   Covered
Loans		   Non-covered
Loans		   Total 

Year end impaired loans with allocated allowance for loan losses

  $—      $6,575    $6,575    $—      $4,190    $4,190  

Year end impaired loans without allocated allowance for loan losses

  $3,473     15,237     18,710     4,933     —       4,933  
                              

Total

  $3,473    $21,812    $25,285    $4,933    $4,190    $9,123  
                              

Amount of the allowance for loan losses allocated

  $—      $446    $446    $—      $554    $554  
                              

   2010   2009   2008 
   Covered
Loans		   Non-covered
Loans		   Total   Covered
Loans		   Non-covered
Loans		   Total   Non-covered
Loans		 

Average of impaired loans during the year

  $4,943    $6,082    $11,025    $365    $2,153    $2,518    $1,031  

Interest income recognized during impairment

   160     165     325     —       4     4     17  

Cash-basis interest income recognized

   157     118     275     —       4     4     17  


                   
December 31, 2011 Covered Loans  Non-covered Loans  Total Loans 
     Allowance     Allowance     Allowance 
  Recorded  for Loan  Recorded  for Loan  Recorded  for Loan 
  Investment  Losses Allocated  Investment (1)  Losses Allocated (3)  Investment  Losses Allocated 
With no related allowance recorded                  
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $235  $-  $4,739  $-  $4,974  $- 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (2)  1,831   -   3,294   -   5,125   - 
Construction and land development  1,062   -   4,825   -   5,887   - 
Commercial loans  213   -   10,704   -   10,917   - 
Residential 1-4 family  1,355   -   375   -   1,730   - 
Other consumer loans  -   -   -   -   -   - 
                         
Total $4,696  $-  $23,937  $-  $28,633  $- 
                         
With an allowance recorded                        
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $-  $-  $-  $-  $-  $- 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (2)  -   -   -   -   -   - 
Construction and land development  -   -   1,765   989   1,765   989 
Commercial loans  -   -   452   50   452   50 
Residential 1-4 family  -   -   -   -   -   - 
Other consumer loans  -   -   -   -   -   - 
                         
Total $-  $-  $2,217  $1,039  $2,217  $1,039 
Grand total $4,696  $-  $26,154  $1,039  $30,850  $1,039 
                         
(1) Recorded investment is after charge offs of $5.6 million and includes SBA guarantees of $2.5 million. 
(2) Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans.  
(3) The Bank generally recognizes loan impairment and concurrently records a charge off to the allowance for loan losses.  
                         
December 31, 2010 Covered Loans  Non-covered Loans  Total Loans 
      Allowance      Allowance      Allowance 
  Recorded  for Loan  Recorded  for Loan  Recorded  for Loan 
  Investment  Losses Allocated  Investment (1)  Losses Allocated (3)  Investment  Losses Allocated 
With no related allowance recorded                        
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $141  $-  $358  $-  $499  $- 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (2)  1,807   -   5,508   -   7,315   - 
Construction and land development  1,055   -   4,844   -   5,899   - 
Commercial loans  285   -   1,558   -   1,843   - 
Residential 1-4 family  185   -   2,969   -   3,154   - 
Other consumer loans  -   -   -   -   -   - 
                         
Total $3,473  $-  $15,237  $-  $18,710  $- 
                         
With an allowance recorded                        
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $-  $-  $-  $-  $-  $- 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (2)  -   -   1,076   50   1,076   50 
Construction and land development  -   -   -   -   -   - 
Commercial loans  -   -   935   376   935   376 
Residential 1-4 family  -   -   4,564   20   4,564   20 
Other consumer loans  -   -   -   -   -   - 
                         
Total $-  $-  $6,575  $446  $6,575  $446 
Grand total $3,473  $-  $21,812  $446  $25,285  $446 
                         
(1) Recorded investment is after charge offs of $8.3 million and includes SBA guarantees of $1.7 million. 
(2) Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans. 
(3) The Bank generally recognizes loan impairment and concurrently records a charge off to the allowance for loan losses. 
105
The following table presents the average recorded investment and interest income for impaired loans individually evaluated for impairmentrecognized by class of loans as offor the year ended December 31, 2011 (in thousands):

  Covered Loans  Non-covered Loans  Total Loans 
  Average  Interest  Average  Interest  Average  Interest 
  Recorded  Income  Recorded  Income  Recorded  Income 
  Investment  Recognized  Investment  Recognized  Investment  Recognized 
With no related allowance recorded                  
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $187  $19  $2,708  $192  $2,895  $211 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (2)  1,788   84   3,294   180   5,082   264 
Construction and land development  1,080   103   4,361   241   5,441   344 
Commercial loans  216   23   6,980   421   7,196   444 
Residential 1-4 family  654   16   287   8   941   24 
Other consumer loans  -   -   -   -   -   - 
                         
Total $3,925  $245  $17,630  $1,042  $21,555  $1,287 
                         
With an allowance recorded                        
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $-  $-  $-  $-  $-  $- 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (2)  -   -   -   -   -   - 
Construction and land development  -   -   965   30   965   30 
Commercial loans  -   -   344   40   344   40 
Residential 1-4 family  -   -   -   -   -   - 
Other consumer loans  -   -   -   -   -   - 
                         
Total $-  $-  $1,309  $70  $1,309  $70 
Grand total $3,925  $245  $18,939  $1,112  $22,864  $1,357 
                         
(2) Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans.     

The following table presents the average recorded investment and interest income for impaired loans for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 (in thousands):

   Covered Loans   Non-covered Loans   Total Loans 
   Recorded
Investment		   Allowance
for Loan
Losses
Allocated		   Recorded
Investment (1)		   Allowance
for Loan
Losses
Allocated		   Recorded
Investment		   Allowance
for Loan
Losses
Allocated		 

With no related allowance recorded

            

Commercial real estate—owner occupied

  $141    $—      $358    $—      $499    $—    

Commercial real estate—non-owner occupied (2)

   1,807     —       5,508     —       7,315     —    

Construction and land development

   1,055     —       4,844     —       5,899     —    

Commercial loans

   285     —       1,558     —       1,843     —    

Residential 1-4 family

   108     —       2,969     —       3,077     —    

Other consumer loans

   77     —       —       —       77     —    
                              

Total

  $3,473    $—      $15,237    $—      $18,710    $—    
                              

With an allowance recorded

            

Commercial real estate—owner occupied

  $—      $—      $—      $—      $—      $—    

Commercial real estate—non-owner occupied (2)

   —       —       1,076     50     1,076     50  

Construction and land development

   —       —       —       —       —       —    

Commercial loans

   —       —       935     376     935     376  

Residential 1-4 family

   —       —       4,564     20     4,564     20  

Other consumer loans

   —       —       —       —       —       —    
                              

Total

  $—      $—      $6,575    $446    $6,575    $446  
                              

(1)Recorded investment is after charge offs of $7.8 million and includes SBA guarantees of $1.7 million.
(2)Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans.

Nonaccrual loans and loans past due 90 days and still on accrual were as follows (in thousands):

   2010   2009 
   Covered
Loans		   Non-covered
Loans		   Total   Covered
Loans		   Non-covered
Loans		   Total 

Loans past due 90 days or more and still on accrual

  $234    $—      $234    $—      $—      $—    

Nonaccrual loans

   2,048     9,585     11,633     5,080     5,734     10,814  

SBA guaranteed amounts included in nonaccrual loans

  $—      $1,410    $1,410    $—      $1,544    $1,544  

Nonaccrual loans and loans past due 90 days and still accruing include both smaller balance homogeneous loans that are collectively evaluated for impairment and individually classified impaired loans.


  2010  2009 
  Covered  Non-covered     Covered  Non-covered    
  Loans  Loans  Total  Loans  Loans  Total 
Average of impaired loans during the year $4,943  $6,082  $11,025  $365  $2,153  $2,518 
Interest income recognized during impairment  160   165   325   -   4   4 

The following table presentstables present the recorded investment in nonaccrual and loans past due over 90 days and still accruing by class of loans as of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 (in thousands):

  Covered Loans  Non-covered Loans  Total Loans 
  Nonaccrual
Loans		  Loans Past Due
90 Days or More
Still on Accrual		  Nonaccrual
Loans		  Loans Past Due
90 Days or More
Still on Accrual		  Nonaccrual
Loans		  Loans Past Due
90 Days or More
Still on Accrual		 

Commercial real estate—owner occupied

 $—     $—     $358   $—     $358   $—    

Commercial real estate—non-owner occupied (1)

  1,796    —      2,600    —      4,396    —    

Construction and land development

  —      —      2,304    —      2,304    —    

Commercial loans

  67    —      1,516    —      1,583    —    

Residential 1-4 family

  108    —      2,807    —      2,915    —    

Other consumer loans

  77    234    —      —      77    234  
                        

Total

 $2,048   $234   $9,585   $—     $11,633   $234  
                        

(1)Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans.


                   
December 31, 2011 Covered Loans  Non-covered Loans  Total Loans 
     Loans Past Due     Loans Past Due     Loans Past Due 
  Nonaccrual  90 Days or More  Nonaccrual  90 Days or More  Nonaccrual  90 Days or More 
  Loans  Still on Accrual  Loans  Still on Accrual  Loans  Still on Accrual 
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $-  $-  $-  $-  $-  $- 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (1)  1,985   136   625   -   2,610   136 
Construction and land development  -   -   1,087   -   1,087   - 
Commercial loans  -   -   2,772   -   2,772   - 
Residential 1-4 family  1,355   -   57   32   1,412   32 
Other consumer loans  -   -   -   -   -   - 
                         
Total $3,340  $136  $4,541  $32  $7,881  $168 
                         
December 31, 2010 Covered Loans  Non-covered Loans  Total Loans 
      Loans Past Due      Loans Past Due      Loans Past Due 
  Nonaccrual  90 Days or More  Nonaccrual  90 Days or More  Nonaccrual  90 Days or More 
  Loans  Still on Accrual  Loans  Still on Accrual  Loans  Still on Accrual 
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $-  $-  $358  $-  $358  $- 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (1)  1,796   -   2,600   -   4,396   - 
Construction and land development  -   -   2,304   -   2,304   - 
Commercial loans  67   -   1,516   -   1,583   - 
Residential 1-4 family  185   -   2,807   -   2,992   - 
Other consumer loans  -   234   -   -   -   234 
                         
Total $2,048  $234  $9,585  $-  $11,633  $234 
                         
(1) Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans.     
Non-covered nonaccrual loans include SBA guaranteed amounts totaling $2.5 million and $1.4 million at December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.
106
The following table presents the aging of the recorded investment in past due loans by class of loans as of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 (in thousands):

   30 - 59
Days
Past Due		   60 - 89
Days
Past Due		   90 Days
or More		   Total
Past Due		   Nonaccrual
Loans		   Loans Not
Past Due		   Total
Loans		 

Covered loans:

              

Commercial real estate—owner occupied

  $316    $412    $—      $728    $—      $4,518    $5,246  

Commercial real estate—non-owner occupied (1)

   436     —       —       436     1,796     12,229     14,461  

Construction and land development

   —       —       —       —       —       1,098     1,098  

Commercial loans

   —       —       —       —       67     931     998  

Residential 1-4 family

   —       134     —       134     108     29,693     29,935  

Other consumer loans

   —       39     234     273     77     40,083     40,433  
                                   

Total

  $752    $585    $234    $1,571    $2,048    $88,552    $92,171  
                                   

Non-covered loans:

              

Commercial real estate—owner occupied

  $551    $719    $—      $1,270    $358    $79,859    $81,487  

Commercial real estate—non-owner occupied (1)

   868     —       —       868     2,600     95,299     98,767  

Construction and land development

   30     —       —       30     2,304     37,146     39,480  

Commercial loans

   1,646     30     —       1,676     1,516     73,452     76,644  

Residential 1-4 family

   3,739     32     —       3,771     2,807     52,322     58,900  

Other consumer loans

   10     134     —       144     —       12,398     12,542  
                                   

Total

  $6,844    $915    $—      $7,759    $9,585    $350,476    $367,820  
                                   

Total loans:

              

Commercial real estate—owner occupied

  $867    $1,131    $—      $1,998    $358    $84,377    $86,733  

Commercial real estate—non-owner occupied (1)

   1,304     —       —       1,304     4,396     107,528     113,228  

Construction and land development

   30     —       —       30     2,304     38,244     40,578  

Commercial loans

   1,646     30     —       1,676     1,583     74,383     77,642  

Residential 1-4 family

   3,739     166     —       3,905     2,915     82,015     88,835  

Other consumer loans

   10     173     234     417     77     52,481     52,975  
                                   

Total

  $7,596    $1,500    $234    $9,330    $11,633    $439,028    $459,991  
                                   

(1)Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans.

December 31, 2011 30 - 59  60 - 89                
  Days  Days  90 Days  Total  Nonaccrual  Loans Not  Total 
  Past Due  Past Due  or More  Past Due  Loans  Past Due  Loans 
Covered loans:                       
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $-  $303  $-  $303  $-  $4,551  $4,854 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (1)  -   -   136   136   1,985   9,751   11,872 
Construction and land development  -   -   -   -   -   2,883   2,883 
Commercial loans  -   -   -   -   -   2,122   2,122 
Residential 1-4 family  269   16   -   285   1,355   59,109   60,749 
Other consumer loans  5   -   -   5   -   103   108 
                             
Total $274  $319  $136  $729  $3,340  $78,519  $82,588 
                             
Non-covered loans:                            
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $847  $-  $-  $847  $-  $81,603  $82,450 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (1)  140   -   -   140   625   137,353   138,118 
Construction and land development  290   39   -   329   1,087   38,149   39,565 
Commercial loans  1,022   585   -   1,607   2,772   85,560   89,939 
Residential 1-4 family  953   840   32   1,825   57   56,446   58,328 
Other consumer loans  2   -   -   2   -   1,866   1,868 
                             
Total $3,254  $1,464  $32  $4,750  $4,541  $400,977  $410,268 
                             
Total loans:                            
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $847  $303  $-  $1,150  $-  $86,154  $87,304 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (1)  140   -   136   276   2,610   147,104   149,990 
Construction and land development  290   39   -   329   1,087   41,032   42,448 
Commercial loans  1,022   585   -   1,607   2,772   87,682   92,061 
Residential 1-4 family  1,222   856   32   2,110   1,412   115,555   119,077 
Other consumer loans  7   -   -   7   -   1,969   1,976 
                             
Total $3,528  $1,783  $168  $5,479  $7,881  $479,496  $492,856 
                             
December 31, 2010 30 - 59  60 - 89                     
  Days  Days  90 Days  Total  Nonaccrual  Loans Not  Total 
  Past Due  Past Due  or More  Past Due  Loans  Past Due  Loans 
Covered loans:                            
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $316  $412  $-  $728  $-  $4,699  $5,427 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (1)  436   -   -   436   1,796   12,899   15,131 
Construction and land development  -   -   -   -   -   3,249   3,249 
Commercial loans  -   -   -   -   67   2,376   2,443 
Residential 1-4 family  -   173   234   407   185   68,803   69,395 
Other consumer loans  -   -   -   -   -   143   143 
                             
Total $752  $585  $234  $1,571  $2,048  $92,169  $95,788 
                             
Non-covered loans:                            
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $551  $719  $-  $1,270  $358  $79,859  $81,487 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (1)  868   -   -   868   2,600   95,299   98,767 
Construction and land development  30   -   -   30   2,304   37,146   39,480 
Commercial loans  1,646   30   -   1,676   1,516   73,452   76,644 
Residential 1-4 family  3,739   157   -   3,896   2,807   62,729   69,432 
Other consumer loans  10   9   -   19   -   1,991   2,010 
                             
Total $6,844  $915  $-  $7,759  $9,585  $350,476  $367,820 
                             
Total loans:                            
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $867  $1,131  $-  $1,998  $358  $84,558  $86,914 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (1)  1,304   -   -   1,304   4,396   108,198   113,898 
Construction and land development  30   -   -   30   2,304   40,395   42,729 
Commercial loans  1,646   30   -   1,676   1,583   75,828   79,087 
Residential 1-4 family  3,739   330   234   4,303   2,992   131,532   138,827 
Other consumer loans  10   9   -   19   -   2,134   2,153 
                             
Total $7,596  $1,500  $234  $9,330  $11,633  $442,645  $463,608 
                             
(1) Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans. 
107
Activity in the allowance for loan and lease losses by class of loan for the years ended December 31, 2010, 20092011 and 20082010 is summarized below (in thousands):

   2010   2009   2008 

Balance, beginning of period

  $5,172    $4,218    $3,476  

Provision charged to operations

   9,025     6,538     1,657  

Recoveries credited to allowance

   167     157     8  
               

Total

   14,364     10,913     5,141  

Loans charged off

   8,765     5,741     923  
               

Balance, end of period

  $5,599    $5,172    $4,218  
               


  Commercial  Commercial                   
  Real Estate  Real Estate  Construction        Other       
  Owner  Non-owner  and Land  Commercial  1-4 Family  Consumer       
Year ended December 31, 2011 Occupied  Occupied (1)  Development  Loans  Residential  Loans  Unallocated  Total 
Allowance for loan losses:                        
Beginning balance $562  $1,265  $326  $2,425  $999  $9  $13  $5,599 
Charge offs  (113)  (1,050)  (460)  (3,975)  (2,341)  (56)  -   (7,995)
Recoveries  3   6   5   128   54   3   -   199 
Provision  175   790   1,496   3,649   2,309   86   (13)  8,492 
Ending balance $627  $1,011  $1,367  $2,227  $1,021  $42  $-  $6,295 
                                 
Year ended December 31, 2010                                
Allowance for loan losses:                                
Beginning balance $948  $1,068  $1,177  $992  $274  $103  $610  $5,172 
Charge offs  (650)  (1,000)  (3,718)  (1,278)  (2,038)  (81)  -   (8,765)
Recoveries  -   12   -   128   25   2   -   167 
Provision  264   1,185   2,867   2,583   2,738   (15)  (597)  9,025 
Ending balance $562  $1,265  $326  $2,425  $999  $9  $13  $5,599 
                                 
(1) Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans.      
The following table presents the balance in the allowance for loan losses and the recorded investment in non-covered loans by portfolio segment and based on impairment method as of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 (in thousands):

  Commercial
Real Estate
Owner
Occupied		  Commercial
Real Estate
Non-owner
Occupied (1)		  Construction
and Land
Development		  Commercial
Loans		  1-4 Family
Residential		  Other
Consumer
Loans		  Unallocated  Total 

Allowance for loan losses:

 $562   $1,265   $326   $2,425   $905   $103   $13   $5,599  

Ending allowance balance attributable to loans:

        

Individually evaluated for impairment

 $—     $50   $—     $376   $20   $—     $—     $446  

Collectively evaluated for impairment

  562    1,215    326    2,049    885    103    13    5,153  
                                

Total ending allowance

 $562   $1,265   $326   $2,425   $905   $103   $13   $5,599  
                                

Loans:

        

Individually evaluated for impairment

 $358   $6,584   $4,844   $2,493   $7,533   $—     $—     $21,812  

Collectively evaluated for impairment

  81,129    92,183    34,636    74,151    51,367    12,542    —      346,008  
                                

Total ending loan balances

 $81,487   $98,767   $39,480   $76,644   $58,900   $12,542   $—     $367,820  
                                

(1)Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans.

It is Sonabank’s practice to charge off collateral dependent loans to recoverable value rather than establish a specific reserve. Charge offs on loans individually evaluated for impairment totaled approximately $8.3 million during 2010.


  Commercial  Commercial                   
  Real Estate  Real Estate  Construction        Other       
  Owner  Non-owner  and Land  Commercial  1-4 Family  Consumer       
  Occupied  Occupied (1)  Development  Loans  Residential  Loans  Unallocated  Total 
December 31, 2011                        
Ending allowance balance attributable to loans:                        
Individually evaluated for impairment $-  $-  $989  $50  $-  $-  $-  $1,039 
Collectively evaluated for impairment  627   1,011   378   2,177   1,021   42   -   5,256 
Total ending allowance $627  $1,011  $1,367  $2,227  $1,021  $42  $-  $6,295 
                                 
Loans:                                
Individually evaluated for impairment $4,739  $3,294  $6,590  $11,156  $375  $-  $-  $26,154 
Collectively evaluated for impairment  77,711   134,824   32,975   78,783   57,953   1,868   -   384,114 
Total ending loan balances $82,450  $138,118  $39,565  $89,939  $58,328  $1,868  $-  $410,268 
                                 
December 31, 2010                                
Ending allowance balance attributable to loans:                                
Individually evaluated for impairment $-  $50  $-  $376  $20  $-  $-  $446 
Collectively evaluated for impairment  562   1,215   326   2,049   979   9   13   5,153 
Total ending allowance $562  $1,265  $326  $2,425  $999  $9  $13  $5,599 
                                 
Loans:                                
Individually evaluated for impairment $358  $6,584  $4,844  $2,493  $7,533  $-  $-  $21,812 
Collectively evaluated for impairment  81,129   92,183   34,636   74,151   61,899   2,010   -   346,008 
Total ending loan balances $81,487  $98,767  $39,480  $76,644  $69,432  $2,010  $-  $367,820 
                                 
(1) Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans.   
Troubled Debt Restructurings

At December 31, 2010 we had three restructured loans included


A modification is classified as a troubled debt restructuring (“TDR”) if both of the following exist: (1) the borrower is experiencing financial difficulty and (2) the Bank has granted a concession to the borrower.  The Bank determines that a borrower may be experiencing financial difficulty if the borrower is currently in impaired loans totaling $6.6 million with borrowers who experienced deterioration in financial condition. These loans are secured by single-family residential propertiesdefault on any of its debt, or commercial real estate properties. There were no restructured loans as of December 31, 2009. Management believes these loans are well secured andif the borrowers haveBank is concerned that the abilityborrower may not be able to repay the loansperform in accordance with the renegotiated terms. These restructured loans were on accrual statuscurrent terms of the loan agreement in the foreseeable future.  Many aspects of the borrower’s financial situation are assessed when determining whether they are experiencing financial difficulty, particularly as payments were being made accordingit relates to commercial borrowers due to the complex nature of the loan structure, business/industry risk and borrower/guarantor structures.  Concessions may include the reduction of an interest rate at a rate lower than current market rate for a new loan with similar risk, extension of the maturity date, reduction of accrued interest, or principal forgiveness.  When evaluating whether a concession has been granted, the Bank also considers whether the borrower has provided additional collateral or guarantors and whether such additions adequately compensate the Bank for the restructured terms, or if the revised terms are consistent with those currently being offered to new loan terms.

SNBV allocated $70 thousandcustomers.  The assessments of specific reserveswhether a borrower is experiencing (or is likely to customers whoseexperience) financial difficulty and whether a concession has been granted is subjective in nature and management’s judgment is required when determining whether a modification is a TDR.

108
Although each occurrence is unique to the borrower and is evaluated separately, for all portfolio segments, TDRs are typically modified through reduction in interest rates, reductions in payments, changing the payment terms from principal and interest to interest only, and/or extensions in term maturity.

At December 31, 2011, we had one loan terms have been modified in a troubled debt restructurings as of December 31, 2010,restructuring totaling $1.1 million.  This modification occurred in 2010.  The loan is paying in accordance with the modified terms and no commitments have been madedoes not involve any additional commitment to lend additional funds to these customers.

lend.


Credit Quality Indicators


Through its system of internal controls SNBVSouthern National evaluates and segments loan portfolio credit quality on a quarterly basis using regulatory definitions for Special Mention, Substandard and Doubtful.  Special Mention loans are considered to be criticized.  Substandard and Doubtful loans are considered to be classified.  SNBVSouthern National has no loans classified Doubtful.


Special Mention loans are loans that have a potential weakness that deserves management’s close attention.  If left uncorrected, these potential weaknesses may result in deterioration of the repayment prospects for the loan or of the institution’s credit position.


Substandard loans are inadequately protected by the current net worth and paying capacity of the obligor or of the collateral pledged if any.  Loans so classified have a well-defined weakness or weaknesses that jeopardize the liquidation of the debt.  They are characterized by the distinct possibility that the institution will sustain some loss if the deficiencies are not corrected.


Doubtful loans have all the weaknesses inherent in those classified as substandard, with the added characteristic that the weaknesses make collection or liquidation in full, on the basis of currently existing facts, conditions, and values, highly questionable and improbable.

109
As of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, and based on the most recent analysis performed, the risk category of loans by class of loans iswas as follows (in thousands):

  Covered Loans  Non-covered Loans  Total Loans 
  Classified/
Criticized		  Pass  Total  Classified/
Criticized		  Pass  Total  Classified/
Criticized		  Pass  Total 

Commercial real estate—owner occupied

 $141   $5,105   $5,246   $915   $80,572   $81,487   $1,056   $85,677   $86,733  

Commercial real estate—non-owner occupied (1)

  1,807    12,654    14,461    7,452    91,315    98,767    9,259    103,969    113,228  

Construction and land development

  1,055    43    1,098    4,844    34,636    39,480    5,899    34,679    40,578  

Commercial loans

  285    713    998    2,725    73,919    76,644    3,010    74,632    77,642  

Residential 1-4 family

  108    29,827    29,935    7,533    51,367    58,900    7,641    81,194    88,835  

Other consumer loans

  77    40,356    40,433    40    12,502    12,542    117    52,858    52,975  
                                    

Total

 $3,473   $88,698   $92,171   $23,509   $344,311   $367,820   $26,982   $433,009   $459,991  
                                    

(1)Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans.


December 31, 2011 Covered Loans  Non-covered Loans  Total Loans 
  Classified/        Special           Classified/       
  Criticized (1)  Pass  Total  Mention  Substandard (3)  Pass  Total  Criticized  Pass  Total 
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $235  $4,619  $4,854  $1,404  $4,739  $76,307  $82,450  $6,378  $80,926  $87,304 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (2)  1,831   10,041   11,872   -   3,294   134,824   138,118   5,125   144,865   149,990 
Construction and land development  1,062   1,821   2,883   -   6,590   32,975   39,565   7,652   34,796   42,448 
Commercial loans  213   1,909   2,122   33   11,156   78,750   89,939   11,402   80,659   92,061 
Residential 1-4 family  1,355   59,394   60,749   40   375   57,913   58,328   1,770   117,307   119,077 
Other consumer loans      108   108   -   -   1,868   1,868   -   1,976   1,976 
                                         
Total $4,696  $77,892  $82,588  $1,477  $26,154  $382,637  $410,268  $32,327  $460,529  $492,856 
                                         
December 31, 2010 Covered Loans  Non-covered Loans  Total Loans 
  Classified/          Special              Classified/         
  Criticized (1)  Pass  Total  Mention  Substandard (3)  Pass  Total  Criticized  Pass  Total 
Commercial real estate - owner occupied $141  $5,286  $5,427  $557  $358  $80,572  $81,487  $1,056  $85,858  $86,914 
Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (2)  1,807   13,324   15,131   867   6,585   91,315   98,767   9,259   104,639   113,898 
Construction and land development  1,055   2,194   3,249   -   4,844   34,636   39,480   5,899   36,830   42,729 
Commercial loans  285   2,158   2,443   233   2,492   73,919   76,644   3,010   76,077   79,087 
Residential 1-4 family  185   69,210   69,395   40   7,533   61,859   69,432   7,758   131,069   138,827 
Other consumer loans  -   143   143   -   -   2,010   2,010   -   2,153   2,153 
                                         
Total $3,473  $92,315  $95,788  $1,697  $21,812  $344,311  $367,820  $26,982  $436,626  $463,608 
                                         
(1) Credit quality is enhanced by a loss sharing agreement with the FDIC in the covered portfolio. The same credit quality indicators used in the non-covered portfolio are combined.
(2) Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans. 
(3) Includes SBA guarantees of $2.5 million and $1.7 million as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

Purchased Loans

SNBV


Southern National purchased impaired loans in the Greater Atlantic transaction, for which there was, at acquisition, evidence of deterioration of credit quality since origination and it was probable, at acquisition, that all contractually required payments would not be collected.  The carrying amount of those loans at December 31, 2011 and 2010 and 2009 was $4.1$3.3 million and $6.2$3.5 million, respectively. The contractual amount of these loans as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 and 2009 was $7.7$7.1 million and $10.5$7.7 million, respectively. These loans primarily consisted of commercial real estate and construction loans. The discount on these loans, which is nonaccretable, was $3.6$3.2 million and $4.3$3.6 million at December 31, 20102011 and 2009,2010, respectively.  There was no allowance for loan losses on these loans as of December 31, 20102011 and 2009.2010.  All of these loans were acquired in 2009; there were no purchased loans acquired in 2008 or2011 and 2010.  There were no reclassifications from nonaccretable difference to accretable yield in 20102011 or 2009.

SNBV2010.


Southern National also purchased performing loans in the Greater Atlantic transaction, for which there was at acquisition, no evidence of deterioration of credit quality since origination.  The carrying amount of these loans at December 31, 2011 and 2010 and 2009 was $88.1$79.3 million and $105.7$91.7 million (as restated), respectively.  The total discount on these loans was $20.9$14.1 million and $23.7$17.2 million (as restated) at December 31, 20102011 and 2009,2010, respectively.  The amount of accretable discount was $10.9$8.8 million and $13.7$12.1 million (as restated) at December 31, 20102011 and 2009,2010, respectively.  The nonaccretable discount was $10.0$5.3 million and $5.1 million (as restated) at December 31, 2011 and 2010, and 2009.respectively.  Accretion of $2.8$3.3 million, $5.7 million (as restated) and $500 thousand (as restated) was recognized in income during 2010.

4.FAIR VALUE

2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.


5.            FAIR VALUE

ASC 820-10 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 (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that the entity has the ability to access as of the measurement date


Level 2: Significant other 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

110
Level 3: Significant unobservable inputs that reflect a reporting entity’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability

The following is a description of the valuation methodologies used for instruments measured at fair value, as well as the general classification of such instruments pursuant to the valuation hierarchy:

Securities Available for Sale

Where quoted prices are available in an active market, securities are classified within levelLevel 1 of the valuation hierarchy.  Level 1 securities would include highly liquid government bonds, mortgage products and exchange traded equities.  If quoted market prices are not available, then fair values are estimated by using pricing models, quoted prices of securities with similar characteristics, or discounted cash flow.  Level 2 securities would include U. S. agency securities, mortgage-backed securities, obligations of states and political subdivisions and certain corporate, asset-backed and other securities.  In certain cases where there is limited activity or less transparency around inputs to the valuation, securities are classified within levelLevel 3 of the valuation hierarchy.  Currently, all of SNBV’sSouthern National’s available-for-sale debt securities are considered to be levelLevel 2 securities.

Assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis are summarized below:

       Fair Value Measurements Using 

(dollars in thousands)

  Total at
December 31,
2010		   Quoted Prices
in Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)		   Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)		   Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)		 

Financial assets:

        

Available for sale securities

        

SBA guaranteed loan pools

  $11,038    $—      $11,038    $—    

FHLMC preferred stock

   30     30     —       —    
                    

Total available-for-sale securities

  $11,068    $30    $11,038    $—    
                    
       Fair Value Measurements Using 

(dollars in thousands)

  Total at
December 31,
2009		   Quoted Prices
in Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)		   Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)		   Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)		 

Financial assets:

        

Available for sale securities

        

Residential government-sponsored mortgage-backed securities

  $4,914    $—      $4,914    $—    

SBA guaranteed loan pools

   13,550     —       13,550     —    

FHLMC preferred stock

   41     —       41     —    
                    

Total available-for-sale securities

  $18,505    $—      $18,505    $—    
                    

FHLMC preferred stock in the amount of $41 thousand was transferred from the level 2 valuation hierarchy to level 1 during 2010.

     Fair Value Measurements Using 
        Significant    
     Quoted Prices in  Other  Significant 
     Active Markets for  Observable  Unobservable 
  Total at  Identical Assets  Inputs  Inputs 
(dollars in thousands) December 31, 2011  (Level 1)  (Level 2)  (Level 3) 
Financial assets:            
  Available for sale securities            
    SBA guaranteed loan pools $9,837  $-  $9,837  $- 
    FHLMC preferred stock  68   68   -   - 
Total available-for-sale securities $9,905  $68  $9,837  $- 
     Fair Value Measurements Using 
        Significant    
     Quoted Prices in  Other  Significant 
     Active Markets for  Observable  Unobservable 
  Total at  Identical Assets  Inputs  Inputs 
(dollars in thousands) December 31, 2010  (Level 1)  (Level 2)  (Level 3) 
Financial assets:            
  Available for sale securities            
    SBA guaranteed loan pools $11,038  $-  $11,038  $- 
    FHLMC preferred stock  30   30   -   - 
Total available-for-sale securities $11,068  $30  $11,038  $- 
Assets and Liabilities Measured on a Non-recurring Basis:

Trust Preferred Securities Classified as Held-to-Maturity

Management utilized guidance in ASC 820-10 to value these securities.

The base input in calculating fair value is a Bloomberg Fair Value Index yield curve for single issuer trust preferred securities which correspond to the ratings of the securities we own.  We also use composite rating indices to fill in the gaps where the bank rating indices did not correspond to the ratings in our portfolio.  When a bank index that matches the rating of our security is not available, we used the bank index that most closely matches the rating, adjusted by the spread between the composite index that most closely matches the security’s rating and the composite index with a rating that matches the bank index used.  Then, we use the adjusted index yield, which is further adjusted by a liquidity premium, as the discount rate to be used in the calculation of the present value of the same cash flows used to evaluate the securities for OTTI.  The liquidity premiums were derived in consultation with a securities advisor. The liquidity premiums we used ranged from 2% to 5%, and the adjusted discount rates ranged from 10.08%10.07% to 15.22%15.67%.   Due to current market conditions as well as the limited trading activity of these securities, the market value of the securities is highly sensitive to assumption changes and market volatility.  We have determined that our trust preferred securities are classified within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.

Based on our analyses during 2010, we recorded OTTI charges related to credit on trust preferred securities in the amount of $151 thousand. There were OTTI charges related to credit on trust preferred securities totaling $7.6 million during 2009, and there were none in 2008.

111
Other Residential Collateralized Mortgage Obligation Classified as Held-to Maturity

The fair value was estimated within Level 2 fair value hierarchy, as the fair value is based on either pricing models, quoted market prices of securities with similar characteristics, or discounted cash flows.  We have evaluated this security for potential impairment and, based on our review of the trustee report, shock analysis and current information regarding delinquencies, nonperforming loans and credit support, it has been determined that anno OTTI charge for credit exists for the year ended December 31, 2010.2011.  The assumptions used in the analysis included a 7%3.3% prepayment speed, 15%12% default rate, a 55%48% loss severity and an accounting yield of 3.60%2.47%. We recorded OTTI charges
Impaired Loans
Generally, we measure the impairment for credit on this security of $137 thousand in 2010 and $139 thousand during 2009. There were no OTTI charges for credit on this security in 2008.

Other Securities Classified as Held-to-Maturity

Where quoted prices are available in an active market, securities are classified within level 1 of the valuation hierarchy. Level 1 securities would include highly liquid government bonds, mortgage products and exchange traded equities. If quoted market prices are not available, then fair values are estimated by using pricing models, quoted prices of securities with similar characteristics, or discounted cash flow. Level 2 securities would include U. S. agency securities, mortgage-backed securities, obligations of states and political subdivisions and certain corporate, asset-backed and other securities. In certain cases where there is limited activity or less transparency around inputs to the valuation, securities are classified within level 3 of the valuation hierarchy. Currently, all of SNBV’s other securities classified as held-to-maturity are considered to be level 2 securities.

Impaired Loans

ASC 820-10 applies toimpaired loans measured for impairment using the practical expedients permitted by ASC 310 atconsidering the fair value of the loan’s collateral (if the loan is collateral dependent).  Fair value of the loan’s collateral when the loan is dependent on collateral, is determined by appraisals or independentother valuation which is then adjusted for the cost related to liquidation of the collateral.  Fair value is classified as Level 3 in the fair value

hierarchy. Non-covered loans identified as impaired in accordance with ASC 310 totaled $21.8$26.2 million (including SBA guarantees of $2.5 million) as of December 31, 20102011 with an allocated allowance for loan losses totaling $1.0 million compared to a carrying amount of $21.8 million (including SBA guarantees of $1.7 million) with an allocated allowance for loan losses totaling $446 thousand compared to a carrying amount of $4.2 million with an allocated allowance for loan losses totaling $554 thousand at December 31, 2009. Provision expense2010.  Charge offs related to the impaired loans at December 31, 20102011 totaled $7.5$3.8 million duringfor the year ended December 31, 2010. Provision expense related2011 compared to impaired loans totaled$7.5 million and $1.2 million duringfor the yearyears ended December 31, 2009.

2010 and 2009, respectively.

Other Real Estate Owned (OREO)

OREO is evaluated at the time of acquisition and recorded at fair value as determined by independent appraisal or internal market evaluation less cost to sell.  OREO is further evaluated quarterly for any additional impairment.  Fair value is classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.  TheAt December 31, 2011, the total amount of OREO was $14.3 million, of which $13.6 million was non-covered and $636 thousand was covered.
At December 31, 2010, the total amount of OREO was $4.6 million, at December 31, 2010. At December 31, 2010, the amount of non-covered OREO waswhich $3.9 million was non-covered and covered OREO$676 thousand was $676 thousand. There were write-downs of non-covered OREO and covered OREO totaling $18 thousand during 2010.

The total amount of OREO was $3.5 million at December 31, 2009. At December 31, 2010, the amount of non-covered OREO was $2.8 million and covered OREO was $740 thousand. There were write-downs of non-covered OREO $400 thousand during 2009.

covered.

112
Assets measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis are summarized below:

     Fair Value Measurements Using 

(dollars in thousands)

 Total at
December 31, 2010		  Quoted Prices
in Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)		  Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)		  Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)		 

Trust preferred securities, held to maturity

 $973   $—     $—     $973  

Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations

  1,171    —      1,171   $—    

Impaired non-covered loans:

    

Commercial real estate—owner occupied

  358    —      —      358  

Commercial real estate—non-owner occupied (2)

  6,534    —      —      6,534  

Construction and land development

  4,844    —      —      4,844  

Commercial loans

  2,117    —      —      2,117  

Residential 1-4 family

  7,513    —      —      7,513  

Impaired covered loans:

    

Commercial real estate—owner occupied

  141    —      —      141  

Commercial real estate—non-owner occupied (2)

  1,807    —      —      1,807  

Construction and land development

  1,055    —      —      1,055  

Commercial loans

  285    —      —      285  

Residential 1-4 family

  108    —      —      108  

Other consumer loans

  77    —      —      77  

Non-covered other real estate owned:

    

Commercial real estate—owner occupied

  578    —      —      578  

Construction and land development

  2,797    —      —      2,797  

Residential 1-4 family

  526    —      —      526  

Covered other real estate owned:

    

Commercial real estate—owner occupied

  597    —      —      597  

Commercial

  79    —      —      79  

     Fair Value Measurements Using 

(dollars in thousands)

 Total at
December 31,
2009		  Quoted Prices
in Active
Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)		  Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)		  Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)		 

Trust preferred securities, held to maturity

 $1,378   $—     $—     $1,378  

Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations

  1,577    —      1,577    —    

Impaired non-covered loans:

    

Commercial real estate—owner occupied

  179    —      —      179  

Commercial real estate—non-owner occupied (2)

  1,823    —      —      1,823  

Commercial loans

  1,279    —      —      1,279  

Residential 1-4 family

  355    —      —      355  

Impaired covered loans:

    

Commercial real estate—owner occupied

  597    —      —      597  

Commercial real estate—non-owner occupied (2)

  1,805    —      —      1,805  

Construction and land development

  2,198    —      —      2,198  

Commercial loans

  227    —      —      227  

Residential 1-4 family

  106    —      —      106  

Non-covered other real estate owned:

    

Construction and land development

  2,797    —      —      2,797  

Covered other real estate owned:

    

Commercial real estate—non-owner occupied (2)

  481    —      —      481  

Residential 1-4 family

  259    —      —      259  

(2)Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans.

     Fair Value Measurements Using 
        Significant    
     Quoted Prices in  Other  Significant 
     Active Markets for  Observable  Unobservable 
  Total at  Identical Assets  Inputs  Inputs 
(dollars in thousands) December 31, 2011  (Level 1)  (Level 2)  (Level 3) 
Trust preferred securities, held to maturity $32          $32 
Impaired non-covered loans:                
    Commercial real estate - owner occupied  4,739           4,739 
    Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (2)  3,294           3,294 
    Construction and land development  5,601           5,601 
    Commercial loans  11,106           11,106 
    Residential 1-4 family  375           375 
Impaired covered loans:                
    Commercial real estate - owner occupied  235           235 
    Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (2)  1,831           1,831 
    Construction and land development  1,062           1,062 
    Commercial loans  213           213 
    Residential 1-4 family  1,355           1,355 
Non-covered other real estate owned:                
    Commercial real estate - owner occupied  1,414           1,414 
    Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (2)  1,519           1,519 
    Construction and land development  4,614           4,614 
    Residential 1-4 family  6,073           6,073 
Covered other real estate owned:                
    Commercial real estate - owner occupied  557           557 
    Commercial  79           79 
     Fair Value Measurements Using 
        Significant    
     Quoted Prices in  Other  Significant 
     Active Markets for  Observable  Unobservable 
  Total at  Identical Assets  Inputs  Inputs 
(dollars in thousands) December 31, 2010  (Level 1)  (Level 2)  (Level 3) 
Trust preferred securities, held to maturity $973  $-  $-  $973 
Other residential collateralized mortgage obligations  1,171   -   1,171  $- 
Impaired non-covered loans:                
    Commercial real estate - owner occupied  358   -   -   358 
    Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (2)  6,534   -   -   6,534 
    Construction and land development  4,844   -   -   4,844 
    Commercial loans  2,117   -   -   2,117 
    Residential 1-4 family  7,513   -   -   7,513 
Impaired covered loans:                
    Commercial real estate - owner occupied  141   -   -   141 
    Commercial real estate - non-owner occupied (2)  1,807   -   -   1,807 
    Construction and land development  1,055   -   -   1,055 
    Commercial loans  285   -   -   285 
    Residential 1-4 family  185   -   -   185 
Non-covered other real estate owned:                
    Commercial real estate - owner occupied  578   -   -   578 
    Construction and land development  2,797   -   -   2,797 
    Residential 1-4 family  526   -   -   526 
Covered other real estate owned:                
    Commercial real estate - owner occupied  597   -   -   597 
    Commercial  79   -   -   79 
(2) Includes loans secured by farmland and multi-family residential loans.
113
Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The carrying amount and estimated fair values of financial instruments were as follows at year end (in thousands):

   December 31, 2010   December 31, 2009 
   Carrying   Fair   Carrying   Fair 
   Amount   Value   Amount   Value 

Financial assets:

        

Cash and cash equivalents

  $9,745    $9,745    $8,070    $8,070  

Securities available for sale

   11,068     11,068     18,505     18,505  

Securities held to maturity

   44,895     43,965     57,696     57,841  

Stock in Federal Reserve Bank and Federal Home Loan Bank

   6,350     n/a     5,940     n/a  

Net non-covered loans

   361,667     360,016     345,126     348,978  

Net covered loans

   92,171     91,661     111,989     111,989  

Accrued interest receivable

   2,141     2,141     2,167     2,167  

FDIC indemnification asset

   18,536     18,536     19,408     19,408  

Financial liabilities:

        

Deposits:

        

Demand deposits

   50,490     50,490     50,838     50,838  

Money market and savings accounts

   175,351     175,351     134,529     134,529  

Certificates of deposit

   205,133     207,221     270,424     272,073  

Securities sold under agreements to repurchase and other short-term borrowings

   23,908     23,908     22,020��    22,020  

FHLB advances

   35,000     36,458     30,000     30,441  

Accrued interest payable

   415     415     753     753  


  December 31, 2011  December 31, 2010 
  Carrying  Fair  Carrying  Fair 
  Amount  Value  Amount  Value 
        (As Restated)  (As Restated) 
Financial assets:            
Cash and cash equivalents $5,035  $5,035  $9,745  $9,745 
Securities available for sale  9,905   9,905   11,068   11,068 
Securities held to maturity  35,075   34,464   44,895   43,965 
Stock in Federal Reserve Bank and Federal Home Loan Bank
  6,653   n/a   6,350   n/a 
Net non-covered loans  402,885   400,777   361,667   360,037 
Net covered loans  82,588   82,079   95,788   95,257 
Accrued interest receivable  2,118   2,118   2,355   2,355 
FDIC indemnification asset  7,537   7,537   8,293   8,293 
Financial liabilities:                
Deposits:                
Demand deposits  50,079   50,079   50,490   50,490 
Money market and savings accounts  155,232   155,232   175,351   175,351 
Certificates of deposit  255,784   258,928   205,133   207,221 
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase and other short-term borrowings
  17,736   17,736   23,908   23,908 
FHLB advances  30,000   31,293   35,000   36,458 
Accrued interest payable  363   363   415   415 
Carrying amount is the estimated fair value for cash and cash equivalents, accrued interest receivable and payable, demand deposits, savings accounts, money market accounts, short-term debt, and variable rate loans that reprice frequently and fully.  For fixed rate loans or deposits and for variable rate loans with infrequent repricing or repricing limits, fair value is based on discounted cash flows using current market rates applied to the estimated life. It was not practicable to determine the fair value of Federal Reserve Bank and Federal Home Loan Bank stock due to restrictions placed on its transferability.  Fair value of long-term debt is based on current rates for similar financing.  The carrying value of the FDIC indemnification asset equates to thewas measured at estimated fair value.value on the date of acquisition.  The fair value was determined on the date of acquisition by discounting estimated future cash flows using the long-term risk free rate plus a premium.  Subsequent additions to the asset are valued at par as it is anticipated that these amounts will be shortly received. The fair value of off-balance-sheet items is not considered material.

5.BANK PREMISES AND EQUIPMENT

  The fair value of loans is not presented on an exit price basis.

114
6.       BANK PREMISES AND EQUIPMENT
Bank premises and equipment as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 and 2009 arewere as follows (in thousands):

   2010   2009 

Land

  $531    $38  

Building and improvements

   2,612     1,555  

Leasehold improvements

   1,631     1,618  

Furniture and equipment

   2,334     1,938  
          
   7,108     5,149  

Less accumulated depreciation and amortization

   2,449     1,924  
          

Bank premises and equipment, net

  $4,659    $3,225  
          

   2011  2010 
Land $1,520  $ 531 
Building and improvements     3,346      2,612 
Leasehold improvements     1,867      1,631 
Furniture and equipment  2,607   2,334 
      9,340      7,108 
Less accumulated depreciation and amortization     2,990      2,449 
Bank premises and equipment, net $6,350  $ 4,659 
Future minimum rental payments required under non-cancelable operating leases for bank premises that have initial or remaining terms in excess of one year as of December 31, 20102011 are as follows (in thousands):

2011

  $1,405  

2012

   1,188  

2013

   998  

2014

   811  

2015

   603  
     
  $5,005  
     


2012 $1,365 
2013  1,195 
2014  1,009 
2015  802 
2016  200 
Thereafter  504 
  $5,075 
The leases contain options to extend for periods of 2 to 6 years. Rental expense for 2011, 2010 and 2009 and 2008 was $1.5 million, $1.4 million and $1.1 million, respectively.
7.           GOODWILL AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS
Goodwill
Goodwill is evaluated for impairment on an annual basis or more frequently if events or circumstances warrant.  Goodwill is primarily related to the 2006 acquisition of 1st Service Bank.  Our annual assessment timing is during the third calendar quarter.   We performed the annual review of goodwill with the assistance of a third-party advisor that provides valuation and $1.0 million, respectively.

6.GOODWILL AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS

Goodwill

investment banking services to community banks.  Metrics employed in the estimation of fair value of the reporting unit were derived from recent community bank M&A transactions.  No impairment was indicated in 2011 or 2010.

The change in the balance for goodwill during the year2011 and 2010 follows (in thousands):

   2010   2009 

Balance at the end of year

  $8,713    $8,713  
          

  2011  2010 
     (As Restated) 
Balance as of January 1 $8,723  $8,723 
Midlothian branch acquistion  437   - 
         
Balance as of December 31 $9,160  $8,723 
115
Acquired Intangible Assets

Acquired intangible assets were as follows at year end (in thousands):

   December 31, 2010 
   Gross
Carrying
Value		   Accumulated
Amortization		  Net
Carrying
Value		 

Amortizable core deposit intangibles

  $6,537    $(3,622)  $2,915  
   December 31, 2009 
   Gross
Carrying
Value		   Accumulated
Amortization		  Net
Carrying
Value		 

Amortizable core deposit intangibles

  $6,537    $(2,679)  $3,858  


  December 31, 2011 
  Gross Carrying  Accumulated  Net Carrying 
  Value  Amortization  Value 
          
Amortizable core deposit intangibles $6,537  $(4,542) $1,995 
             
  December 31, 2010 
  Gross Carrying  Accumulated  Net Carrying 
  Value  Amortization  Value 
             
Amortizable core deposit intangibles $6,537  $(3,622) $2,915 
Estimated amortization expense of intangibles for the years ended December 31 follows (in thousands):

2011

  $919  

2012

   862  

2013

   423  

2014

   136  

2015

   122  

Thereafter

   453  
     
  $2,915  
     

7.FDIC INDEMNIFICATION ASSET


2012 $862 
2013  423 
2014  136 
2015  122 
2016  109 
Thereafter  343 
  $1,995 
8.       FDIC INDEMNIFICATION ASSET
The acquisitionindemnification asset represents our estimate of Greater Atlantic Bank on December 4, 2009 was accounted forfuture expected recoveries under the acquisition method of accounting, and the assets and liabilities were recorded at theirFDIC loss sharing arrangement for covered loans.  The estimated fair values. Such fair values were preliminary estimates and were subject to adjustment for up to one year after the acquisition date. The FDIC indemnification asset is measured separately from each of the covered asset categories as it is not contractually embedded in any of the covered asset categories. Management has completed the analysis of the

acquisition accounting estimates as of the acquisition date, and has revised the FDIC indemnification asset accordingly. The revised fair value of the indemnification asset inwas $8.8 million at December 4, 2009, the amountdate of $18.9 million representedacquisition.   During 2010 and 2011, the presentcarrying value of the estimatedindemnification asset is increased for accretion amounts of $60 thousand and $47 thousand respectively, and decreased for cash payments expected to be received from the FDIC of approximately $800 thousand in 2011.  During 2010, and in connection with finalizing the purchase accounting for future losses on covered assets based on the credit adjustment estimated for each coveredGreater Atlantic Bank, we reduced the indemnification asset and the loss sharing percentages at the acquisition date. The revised estimated gross cash flows associated with this receivable were $23.4 million. These cash flows were then discounted at a market-based rateby $591 thousand to reflect the uncertaintyresolution of the timing and receipt of the loss sharing reimbursement other amounts due to/from the FDIC. The discount rate ranged from 5.21%FDIC and other activity related to 5.55%. The defaults were derived by a combination of the traditional defaults embeddedpurchase transaction in the interest rates/discount rates (2.09%) and unsystematic credit risk not embedded in the interest rates. The ultimate collectability of this asset is dependent upon the performance of the underlying covered assets, the passage of time and claims paid by the FDIC. The difference between the gross cash flows and the fair value of the indemnification assets, $4.5 million, will be accreted on an accelerated basis over the estimated loss period of the loans.

The following table presents changes in the FDIC indemnification asset for the period indicated (in thousands):

   FDIC
Indemnification
Asset		 

Balance as of January 1, 2010

  $19,408  

Adjustments to fair value

   (1,700) 

Accretion

   828  
     

Balance as of December 31, 2010

  $18,536  
     

8.DEPOSITS

2009.

116
9.       DEPOSITS
The aggregate amount of time deposits in denominations of $100,000 or more at December 31, 2011 and 2010 and 2009 was $109.9$180.5 million and $101.0$109.9 million, respectively.  At December 31, 2010,2011, the scheduled maturities of time deposits are as follows (in thousands):

2011

  $110,812  

2012

   46,752  

2013

   24,698  

2014

   5,473  

2015

   17,398  
     
  $205,133  
     

9.SECURITIES SOLD UNDER AGREEMENTS TO REPURCHASE AND OTHER SHORT-TERM BORROWINGS

2012 $157,703 
2013  61,741 
2014  15,593 
2015  17,729 
2016  2,955 
2017  63 
  $255,784 
The following table sets forth the maturities of certificates of deposit of $100 thousand and over as of December 31, 2011 (in thousands):
Within  3 to 6  6 to 12  Over 12    
3 Months  Months  Months  Months  Total 
$19,818  $40,267  $55,371  $65,061  $180,517 
At December 31, 2011, we had no brokered certificates of deposit and brokered money market deposits of $10.2 million compared to $27.0 million in brokered certificates of deposit and $10.2 million in brokered money market deposits at December 31, 2010.
10.    SECURITIES SOLD UNDER AGREEMENTS TO REPURCHASE AND OTHER SHORT-TERM BORROWINGS
Other short-term borrowings can consist of Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) overnight advances, federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase that mature within one year, which are secured transactions with customers or broker/dealers.  Other short-term borrowings consist of the following (in thousands):

   2010  2009  2008 

Securities sold under agreements to repurchase

  $23,908   $22,020   $20,890  

Weighted average interest rate at year end

   0.76%   0.85%   0.54% 

For the periods ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008:

    

Average outstanding balance

  $22,249   $22,428   $18,179  

Average interest rate during the year

   0.95%   0.74%   1.82% 

Maximum month-end outstanding balance

  $25,932   $26,520   $23,007  

  2011  2010  2009 
          
FHLB overnight advances $3,500  $-  $- 
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase  14,236   23,908   22,020 
Total $17,736  $23,908  $22,020 
             
Weighted average interest rate at year end  0.62%  0.76%  0.85%
             
For the periods ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009:            
Average outstanding balance $20,472  $22,249  $22,428 
Average interest rate during the year  0.74%  0.95%  0.74%
             
Maximum month-end outstanding balance $34,652  $25,932  $26,520 
117
Investment securities in the amount of $32.2$24.7 million and $32.1$32.2 million were pledged as collateral for securities sold under agreements to repurchase at December 31, 2011 and 2010, and 2009, respectively.

10.FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK ADVANCES

11.        FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK ADVANCES
At year end, advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank were as follows (in thousands):

   2010   2009 

FHLB fixed rate advance maturing January 2010 with a rate of 2.82%

  $—      $5,000  

FHLB fixed rate advance maturing July 2011 with a rate of 0.835%

   5,000    

FHLB fixed rate advance maturing January 2012 with a rate of 1.20%

   5,000    

FHLB convertible advances maturing from August 2012 through October 2012 with fixed rates from 3.86% to 4.20%, and a weighted average interest rate of 4.05% (1)

   25,000     25,000  
          

Total FHLB advances

  $35,000    $30,000  
          

(1)These advances have a five year maturity and are currently convertible to adjustable rate advances at the option of the FHLB of Atlanta. If converted, the adjustable rate advances will be priced at a spread to 3-month LIBOR.

  2011  2010 
       
FHLB fixed rate advance maturing January 2012 with a rate of 1.20% $5,000  $5,000 
FHLB fixed rate advance maturing July 2011 with a rate of 0.835%  -   5,000 
FHLB fixed rate advance maturing September 2013 with a rate of 3.25%  5,000   - 
FHLB fixed rate advance maturing September 2013 with a rate of 3.22%  5,000   - 
FHLB fixed rate advance maturing March 2014 with a rate of 3.20%  5,000   - 
FHLB fixed rate advance maturing March 2014 with a rate of 3.13%  5,000   - 
FHLB fixed rate advance maturing September 2014 with a rate of 3.16%  5,000   - 
         
FHLB convertible advances maturing from August 2012 through October 2012 with fixed rates from 3.86% to 4.20%, and a weighted  average interest rate of 4.05% (1)  -   25,000 
         
Total FHLB advances $30,000  $35,000 
         
(1) These advances had a five year maturity and were convertible to adjustable rate advances at the option of the FHLB of Atlanta. In March 2011, the convertible advances were extinguished and replaced with $25 million of fixed-rate, non-callable advances.        
Each FHLB advance is payable at its maturity date, with a prepayment penalty for fixed rate advances paid off earlier than maturity.  Residential 1-4 family mortgage loans in the amount of approximately $88.2$75.1 million and $59.5$88.2 million were pledged as collateral for Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (“FHLB”) advances as of December 31, 20102011 and 2009,2010, respectively.  Home equity lines of credit (HELOCs) in the amount of approximately $53.1 million and $61.3 million were pledged as collateral for FHLB advances at December 31, 2010; there were no HELOCs pledged as of December 31, 2009.2011 and 2010, respectively; Commercial mortgage loans in the amount of approximately $84.7$107.8 million and $70.7$84.7 million were pledged as collateral for FHLB advances as of December 31, 20102011 and 2009,2010, respectively. Investment securities in the amount of $11.0$8.3 million and $5.0$11.0 million were pledged as collateral for FHLB advances at December 31, 2011 and 2010, and 2009, respectively.

At December 31, 2010,2011, Sonabank had available collateral to borrow an additional $99.1$101.4 million from the FHLB.

11.INCOME TAXES

118
12.       INCOME TAXES
Net deferred tax assets consist of the following components as of December 31, 2011and 2010 and 2009 (in thousands):

   2010   2009 

Deferred tax assets:

    

Allowance for loan losses

  $1,126    $894  

Organization costs

   232     259  

Unearned loan fees and other

   189     192  

Net operating loss carryover

   698     901  

Purchase accounting

   288     432  

Other real estate owned write-downs

   210     204  

Other than temporary impairment charge

   2,492     3,085  

Net unrealized loss on securities available for sale

   1,711     1,790  

Other

   206     329  
          

Total deferred tax assets

   7,152     8,086  
          

Deferred tax liabilities:

    

Deferred gain on acquisition

   3,308     3,299  

Core deposit intangible amortization

   —       156  

Depreciation

   62     72  
          

Total deferred tax liabilities

   3,370     3,527  
          

Net deferred tax assets

  $3,782    $4,559  
          


  2011  2010 
     (Restated) 
       
Deferred tax assets:      
Allowance for loan losses $1,557  $1,141 
Organization costs  208   235 
Unearned loan fees and other  375   191 
Net operating loss carryover  496   698 
Other real estate owned write-downs  578   492 
FDIC loss share  4,361   5,002 
Other than temporary impairment charge  2,639   2,526 
Net unrealized loss on securities available for sale  1,632   1,711 
Other  327   245 
Total deferred tax assets  12,173   12,241 
Deferred tax liabilities:        
FDIC indemnification asset  3,193   3,159 
FDIC gain  2,207   2,649 
Purchase accounting  355     429 
Depreciation  163   67 
         
Total deferred tax liabilities  5,918   6,304 
Net deferred tax assets $6,255  $5,937 
No valuation allowance was deemed necessary on deferred tax assets in 2011, 2010 or 2009.  Management believes that the realization of the deferred tax assets is more likely than not based on the expectation that SNBVSouthern National will generate the necessary taxable income in future periods.

At December 31, 2010, SNBV2011, Southern National had net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $2.1$1.5 million which expire in 2026. We have no unrecognized tax benefits and do not anticipate any increase in unrecognized benefits during the next twelve months.  Should the accrual of any interest or penalties relative to unrecognized tax benefits be necessary, it is our policy to record such accruals in our income tax accounts; no such accruals existed as of December 31, 2011, 2010 2009 or 2008. SNBV2009.  Southern National and its subsidiary file a consolidated U. S. federal tax return, and SNBVSouthern National files a Virginia state income tax return.  These returns are subject to examination by taxing authorities for all years after 2006.

2007.

119
The provision for income taxes consists of the following for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 2009 and 20082009 (in thousands):

   2010   2009   2008 

Current tax expense

  $—      $193    $731  

Deferred tax expense (benefit)

   698     754     (416) 
               

Income tax expense

  $698    $947    $315  
               

  2011  2010  2009 
     (Restated)  (Restated) 
Current tax expense (benefit)         
    Federal $2,049  $3,600  $(249)
    State  43   -   - 
Total current tax expense (benefit)  2,092   3,600   (249)
             
Deferred tax benefit            
    Federal  (388)  (1,724)  (2,428)
    State  (12)  -   - 
Total deferred tax benefit  (400)  (1,724)  (2,428)
             
Total income tax expense (benefit) $1,692  $1,876  $(2,677)
The income tax expense differed from the amount of income tax determined by applying the U.S. Federal income tax rate of 34% to pretax income for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 2009 and 20082009 due to the following (in thousands):

   2010  2009  2008 

Computed expected tax expense

  $850   $1,123   $518  

Reduction in tax expense resulting from:

    

Income from bank-owned life insurance

   (188)   (197)   (200) 

Other, net

   36    21    (3) 
             

Income tax expense

  $698   $947   $315  
             

12.EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

SNBV

  2011  2010  2009 
      (Restated)  (Restated) 
             
Computed expected tax expense (benefit) $2,072  $2,016  $(2,501)
Reduction in tax expense resulting from:            
   Income from bank-owned life insurance  (460)  (188)  (197)
   Other, net  80   48   21 
             
Income tax expense (benefit) $1,692  $1,876  $(2,677)
13.       EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
Southern National has a 401(k) plan that allows employees to make pre-tax contributions for retirement.  The 401(k) plan provides for discretionary matching contributions by SNBV.Southern National.  Expense for 2011 was $78 thousand. There was no expense for 2010. Expense for 2009 and 2008 was $95 thousand and $60 thousand, respectively.

thousand.

A deferred compensation plan that covers two executive officers was established in 2007.  Under the plan, the Bank pays each participant, or their beneficiary, the amount of compensation deferred plus accrued interest over 10 years, beginning with the individual’s retirement.  A liability is accrued for the obligation under these plans.  The expense incurred for the deferred compensation in 2011, 2010 and 2009 and 2008 was $223 thousand, $209 thousand $168 thousand and $160$168 thousand, respectively. The deferred compensation liability was $603$826 thousand and $394$603 thousand as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, and 2009, respectively.

13.STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION

120
14.          STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION
In 2004, the Board of Directors adopted a stock option plan that authorized the reservation of up to 302,500 shares of common stock and provided for the granting of stock options to certain directors, officers and employees.  As of December 31, 2009,2011, options to purchase an aggregate of 281,675302,500 shares of common stock were outstanding and 20,825no shares remained available for issuance. The 2010 Stock Awards and Incentive Plan was approved by the Board of Directors in January 2010 and approved by the stockholders at the Annual Meeting in April 2010. The 2010 plan authorized the reservation of 700,000 shares of common stock for the granting of stock awards. The options granted to officers and employees are incentive stock options and the options granted to non-employee directors are non-qualified stock options.  The purpose of the plan is to afford key employees an incentive to remain in the employ of SNBVSouthern National and to assist in the attracting and retaining of non- employeenon-employee directors by affording them an opportunity to share in SNBV’sSouthern National’s future success.  Under the plan, the option’s price cannot be less than the fair market value of the stock on the grant date.  The maximum term of the options is ten years and options granted may be subject to a graded vesting schedule.

Southern National granted 103,750 options during 2011. The fair value of each option granted is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes options-pricing model.  The following weighted-average assumptions were used to value options granted:

   2010  2009  2008 

Dividend yield

   0.00%   0.00%   0.00% 

Expected life

   10 years    10 years    10 years  

Expected volatility

   42.47%   25.17%   19.17% 

Risk-free interest rate

   3.13%   3.09%   3.51% 

Weighted average fair value per option granted

  $4.08   $2.75   $3.51  

We have paid no dividends.

Due to SNBV’s short existence and lack of trading volume, the volatility was estimated using historical volatility of comparative publicly traded financial institutionsgranted in the Virginia market combined with that of SNBV for periods approximating the expected option life.

year ended December 31, 2011:

The risk-free interest rate was developed using the U. S. Treasury yield curve for periods equal to the expected life of the options on the grant date. An increase in the risk-free interest rate will increase stock compensation expense on future option grants.

  2011  2010  2009 
Dividend yield  0.00%  0.00%  0.00%
Expected life 10 years  10 years  10 years 
Expected volatility  46.13%  42.47%  25.17%
Risk-free interest rate  3.34%  3.13%  3.09%
Weighted average fair value per option granted $4.39  $4.08  $2.75 
●
We have paid no dividends.
●
Due to Southern National’s short existence, the volatility was estimated using historical volatility of comparative publicly traded financial institutions in the Virginia market combined with that of Southern National.
●
The risk-free interest rate was developed using the U. S. Treasury yield curve for periods equal to the expected life of the options on the grant date.  An increase in the risk-free interest rate will increase stock compensation expense on future option grants.
A summary of the activity in the stock option plan for 20102011 follows:

   Shares  Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price		   Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term		   Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value		 

Options outstanding, beginning of period

   281,675   $8.56      

Granted

   48,250    7.09      

Forfeited

   (17,250)   8.32      

Exercised

   —      —        
          

Options outstanding, end of period

   312,675   $8.35     6.3    $109  
                   

Vested or expected to vest

   312,675   $8.35     6.3    $109  

Exercisable at end of period

   191,065   $9.00     5.9    $17  


        Weighted    
     Weighted  Average    
     Average  Remaining  Aggregate 
     Exercise  Contractual  Intrinsic 
  Shares  Price  Term  Value 
Options outstanding, beginning of period  312,675  $8.35       
Granted  103,750   7.20       
Forfeited  (1,100)  9.09       
Exercised  -   -       
Options outstanding, end of period  415,325  $8.06   6.3  $24 
                 
Vested or expected to vest  415,325  $8.06   6.3  $24 
                 
Exercisable at end of period  220,545  $8.80   4.4  $9 
Stock-based compensation expense was $167 thousand, $82 thousand $57 thousand and $29$57 thousand for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, and 2008, respectively.

121
As of December 31, 2010,2011, unrecognized compensation expense associated with stock options was $340$605 thousand which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 3.7 years.

14.WARRANTS

As part of the purchase price of the fixed assets related to the Leesburg branch, SNBV issued 61,000 warrants for the purchase of its common stock at an exercise price of $12.73 per share during the first quarter of 2008. The warrants originally were to expire in three years, but have been extended until February 2012. The fair value of each warrant issued was estimated using the Black-Scholes options-pricing model. As a result of issuing the warrants, $51 thousand was recorded as additional paid in capital. The following weighted-average assumptions were used to value the warrants:

Dividend yield

   0.00% 

Expected life

   3 years  

Expected volatility

   19.17% 

Risk-free interest rate

   2.11% 

Weighted average fair value per warrant

  $0.84  

15.FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS WITH OFF-BALANCE SHEET RISK

SNBV

15.           FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS WITH OFF-BALANCE SHEET RISK
Southern National is a party to financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk in the normal course of business to meet the financing needs of its customers.  These financial instruments include commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit.  These instruments involve elements of credit and funding risk in excess of the amount recognized in the consolidated balance sheet.  Letters of credit are written conditional commitments issued by SNBVSouthern National to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party.  The credit risk involved in issuing letters of credit is essentially the same as that involved in extending loans to customers.  We had letters of credit outstanding totaling $2.4$6.5 million and $3.8$2.4 million as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, and 2009, respectively.

Our exposure to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by the other party to the financial instruments for commitments to extend credit and letters of credit is based on the contractual amount of these instruments.  We

use the same credit policies in making commitments and conditional obligations as we do for on-balance sheet instruments. Unless noted otherwise, we do not require collateral or other security to support financial instruments with credit risk.

Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a customer as long as there is no violation of any condition established in the contract.  Commitments are made predominately for adjustable rate loans, and generally have fixed expiration dates of up to three months or other termination clauses and usually require payment of a fee.  Since many of the commitments may expire without being completely drawn upon, the total commitment amounts do not necessarily represent future cash requirements.  We evaluate each customer’s creditworthiness on a case-by-case basis.

At December 31, 20102011 and 2009,2010, we had unfunded lines of credit and undisbursed construction loan funds totaling $104.9$106.6 million and $121.7$104.9 million, respectively. Our approved loan commitments were $690 thousand and $35.0 million and $850 thousand at December 31, 20102011 and 2009,2010, respectively.  Virtually all of our unfunded lines of credit, undisbursed construction loan funds and approved loan commitments are variable rate.

16.EARNINGS PER SHARE

122
16.           EARNINGS PER SHARE
The following is a reconciliation of the denominators of the basic and diluted EPS computations for 2011, 2010 2009 and 20082009 (in thousands, except per share data):

   Income
(Loss)
(Numerator)		   Weighted
Average
Shares
(Denominator)		   Per Share
Amount		 

For the year ended December 31, 2010

      

Basic EPS

  $1,801     11,590    $0.16  

Effect of dilutive stock options and warrants

   —       3     —    
               

Diluted EPS

  $1,801     11,593    $0.16  
               

For the year ended December 31, 2009

      

Basic EPS

  $2,356     7,560    $0.31  

Effect of dilutive stock options and warrants

   —       —       —    
               

Diluted EPS

  $2,356     7,560    $0.31  
               

For the year ended December 31, 2008

      

Basic EPS

  $1,208     6,799    $0.18  

Effect of dilutive stock options and warrants

   —       —       —    
               

Diluted EPS

  $1,208     6,799    $0.18  
               

     Weighted    
     Average    
  Income (Loss)  Shares  Per Share 
  (Numerator)  (Denominator)  Amount 
For the year ended December 31, 2011         
Basic EPS $4,401   11,590  $0.38 
Effect of dilutive stock options and warrants  -   1   - 
Diluted EPS $4,401   11,591  $0.38 
             
For the year ended December 31, 2010            
Basic EPS (as restated) $4,054   11,590  $0.35 
Effect of dilutive stock options and warrants  -   3   - 
Diluted EPS $4,054   11,593  $0.35 
             
For the year ended December 31, 2009            
Basic EPS (as restated) $(4,680)  7,560  $(0.62)
Effect of dilutive stock options and warrants  -   -   - 
Diluted EPS $(4,680)  7,560  $(0.62)
There were 558,981 anti-dilutive options and warrants during 2011. There were 453,522 anti-dilutive options and warrants during 2010. There2010, and there were 425,175 anti-dilutive options and warrants during 2009, and there were 356,425 anti-dilutive options and warrants during 2008.

17.REGULATORY MATTERS

SNBV2009.

17.       REGULATORY MATTERS
Southern National and its subsidiary bank are subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by the federal banking agencies. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory—mandatory - and possibly additional discretionary—discretionary - actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a direct material effect on SNBV’sour financial statements. Under capital adequacy guidelines and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action (PCA), SNBVwe must meet specific capital guidelines that involve quantitative measures of theirour assets, liabilities and certain off-balance sheet items as calculated under regulatory accounting practices. The capital amounts and classification are also subject to qualitative judgments by the regulators about components, risk weightings and other factors.  At December 31, 20102011 and 2009,2010, the most recent regulatory notifications categorized the Bank as well capitalized under regulatory framework for prompt corrective action.

Quantitative measures established by regulation to ensure capital adequacy require SNBVSouthern National to maintain minimum amounts and ratios of Total and Tier I capital (as defined in the regulations) to average assets (as defined). Management believes, as of December 31, 2010,2011, that SNBVSouthern National meets all capital adequacy requirements to which it is subject.

123
The capital amounts and ratios for SNBVSouthern National and Sonabank at year end are presented in the following table (in thousands):

   Actual  Required
For Capital
Adequacy Purposes		  To Be Categorized as
Well Capitalized		 
     Amount       Ratio      Amount       Ratio      Amount       Ratio   

2010

          

SNBV

          

Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio

  $90,214     20.52%  $17,585     4.00%  $26,377     6.00% 

Total risk-based capital ratio

   95,689     21.77%   35,169     8.00%   43,961     10.00% 

Leverage ratio

   90,214     15.23%   23,701     4.00%   29,626     5.00% 

Sonabank

          

Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio

  $86,757     19.74%  $17,580     4.00%  $26,370     6.00% 

Total risk-based capital ratio

   92,231     20.99%   35,160     8.00%   43,950     10.00% 

Leverage ratio

   86,757     14.64%   23,701     4.00%   29,626     5.00% 

2009

          

SNBV

          

Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio

  $87,208     17.32%  $20,146     4.00%  $30,219     6.00% 

Total risk-based capital ratio

   92,380     18.34%   40,292     8.00%   50,366     10.00% 

Leverage ratio

   87,208     17.37%   20,084     4.00%   25,105     5.00% 

Sonabank

          

Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio

  $83,764     16.63%  $20,143     4.00%  $30,214     6.00% 

Total risk-based capital ratio

   88,936     17.66%   40,286     8.00%   50,357     10.00% 

Leverage ratio

   83,764     16.68%   20,084     4.00%   25,105     5.00% 

SNBV’s

        Required    
        For Capital  To Be Categorized as 
  Actual  Adequacy Purposes  Well Capitalized 
  Amount  Ratio  Amount  Ratio  Amount  Ratio 
2011                  
Southern National                  
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio $90,718   19.37% $18,738   4.00% $28,107   6.00%
Total risk-based capital ratio  96,560   20.61%  37,476   8.00%  46,845   10.00%
Leverage ratio  90,718   14.89%  24,367   4.00%  30,459   5.00%
Sonabank                        
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio $87,176   18.62% $18,729   4.00% $28,094   6.00%
Total risk-based capital ratio  93,015   19.87%  37,459   8.00%  46,823   10.00%
Leverage ratio  87,176   14.31%  24,367   4.00%  30,459   5.00%
                         
2010 (as restated)                        
Southern National                        
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio $85,421   19.75% $17,301   4.00% $25,952   6.00%
Total risk-based capital ratio  90,808   20.99%  34,602   8.00%  43,253   10.00%
Leverage ratio  85,421   14.52%  23,536   4.00%  29,420   5.00%
Sonabank                        
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio $81,964   18.96% $17,297   4.00% $25,945   6.00%
Total risk-based capital ratio  87,350   20.20%  34,583   8.00%  43,241   10.00%
Leverage ratio  81,964   13.93%  23,536   4.00%  29,420   5.00%
Southern National’s principal source of funds for dividend payments is dividends received from the Bank.  Banking regulations limit the amount of dividends that may be paid without prior approval of regulatory agencies.  Under these regulations, the amount of dividends that may be paid in any calendar year is limited to the current year’s net profits, combined with the retained net profits of the preceding two years, subject to the capital requirements described above.  During 2011,2012, the Bank could, without prior approval, declare dividends of approximately $4.3$5.5 million plus any 20112012 net profits retained to the date of the dividend declaration.

18.FDIC-ASSISTED ACQUISITION

18.       FDIC-ASSISTED ACQUISITION
On December 4, 2009, the Bank acquired certain assets and assumed certain liabilities of Greater Atlantic Bank pursuant to the Agreement at a discount bid (negative) in the amount of $20.8 million.  A significant element of the Greater Atlantic acquisition is the loss sharing agreement between the Bank and the FDIC. Under the loss sharing agreement with the FDIC, the FDIC will reimburse the Bank for a substantial portion of any future losses on loans and other real estate owned. We refer to the acquired assets subject to the loss sharing agreement collectively as “covered assets.” Under the terms of such loss sharing agreement, the FDIC will absorb 80% of losses and share in 80% of loss recoveries on the first $19 million of losses on the covered assets and absorb 95% of losses and share in 95% of loss recoveries with respect to losses exceeding $19 million. The loss sharing arrangement for non-residential and residential loans is in effect for 5 years and 10 years, respectively, from the December 4, 2009 acquisition date and the loss recovery provisions are in effect for 8 years and 10 years, respectively, from the acquisition date.

This was not simply a financial transaction but an opportunity to broaden and deepen our deposit franchise. Greater Atlantic’s branches in Rockville, Front Royal, New Market and South Riding have been integrated into the Sonabank branch system. The Greater Atlantic branch in Reston has been combined into Sonabank’s existing Reston branch which is less than two miles away.

away. 

124
The Greater Atlantic acquisition has been accounted for under the acquisition method of accounting. The assets and liabilities, both tangible and intangible, were recorded at their estimated fair values as of the December 4, 2009 acquisition date. The operations of Greater Atlantic Bank are included in our operating results from December 4, 2009. Such fair values are preliminary estimates and are subject to adjustment for up to one-year after the acquisition date. We have completedidentified errors in the analysispurchase accounting related to that acquisition.  The most significant adjustment involves the initial estimate of the acquisition accounting estimates as of the acquisition date, and we have revised the FDIC indemnification asset accordingly. The revised fair value of the FDIC indemnification assetasset.  Based on current estimates, we believe the as reported amount of $19.4 million at December 31, 2009 was overstated by approximately $10.6 million.  The restatement resulted in the amount of $18.9 million represented the present valuereversal of the estimated cash payments expected to be received from the FDIC for future losses on covered assets based on the credit adjustment estimated for each covered asset and the loss sharing percentages at the acquisition date. The revised estimated gross cash flows associated with this receivable were $23.4 million. The application of the acquisition method of accounting resulted in aentire gain of $11.2 million. Such gain representsmillion recognized during the excessfourth quarter of the estimated fair value of the assets acquired over the estimated fair value of the liabilities assumed. 2009.  Acquisition related costs totaling $499 thousand were expensed as incurred in 2009.  A summary of the net assets acquired and liabilities assumed follows (in thousands):

   December 4, 2009 

Assets

  

Cash and cash equivalents

  $23,222  

Cash received from FDIC

   26,991  

Securities available-for-sale

   28,051  

Covered loans

   113,564  

Federal Home Loan Bank stock

   1,513  

Covered other real estate owned

   989  

Core deposit intangible

   1,205  

FDIC indemnification asset

   19,408  

Other assets

   657  
     

Total assets acquired

  $215,600  
     

Liabilities

  

Noninterest-bearing deposits

  $9,168  

Interest-bearing deposits

   169,508  
     

Total deposits

   178,676  

FHLB advances

   25,357  

Other liabilities

   407  
     

Total liabilities

  $204,440  
     

Net assets acquired

  $11,160  

Deferred tax impact

   3,794  
     

Net assets acquired, including deferred tax

  $7,366  
     


  December 4, 2009  December 4, 2009    
  As Reported  As Restated  Adjustment 
Assets         
  Cash and cash equivalents $23,222  $23,222  $- 
  Cash received from FDIC  26,991   26,991   - 
  Securities available-for-sale  28,051   28,051   - 
  Covered loans  113,564   113,564   - 
  Federal Home Loan Bank stock  1,513   1,513   - 
  Covered other real estate owned  989   989   - 
  Core deposit intangible  1,205   1,205   - 
  FDIC indemnification asset  19,408   8,824   (10,584)
  Other assets  657   657   - 
             
    Total assets acquired $215,600  $205,016  $(10,584)
             
Liabilities            
  Noninterest-bearing deposits $9,168  $9,168  $- 
  Interest-bearing deposits  169,508   169,508   - 
    Total deposits  178,676   178,676   - 
  FHLB advances  25,357   25,357   - 
  Other liabilities  407   993   586 
             
    Total liabilities $204,440  $205,026  $586 
             
Net assets acquired (Goodwill) $11,160  $(10) $(11,170)
The following table presents pro forma information as if the acquisition had occurred at the beginning of 2009 and 2008.2009.  The pro forma information includes adjustments for interest income on acquired loans and securities, amortization of intangibles arising from the transaction, interest expense on deposits acquired, and the related income tax effects.  The pro forma financial information is not necessarily indicative of the results of operations as they would have been had the transaction been effected on the assumed dates.

   2009  2008 

(in thousands, except per share data)

   

Net interest income

  $16,918   $16,141  

Net income (loss)

  $(5,433)  $(10,329) 

Basic earnings (loss) per share

  $(0.72)  $(1.52) 

19.BRANCH ACQUISITION

  2009 
(in thousands, except per share data)   
Net interest income $16,918 
     
Net income (loss) $(5,433)
     
Basic earnings (loss) per share $(0.72)
125
19.       BRANCH ACQUISITIONS ACCOUNTED FOR UNDER THE ACQUISTION METHOD
On October 1, 2011, we completed the acquisition of the Midlothian Branch of the Bank of Hampton Roads.  We assumed deposits in the amount of $42.2 million.  Goodwill in the amount of $437 thousand and a premium on time deposits of $303 thousand were recorded.   No core deposit intangible asset was recorded.  We also acquired the office building, furniture and equipment in the amount of $1.7 million.
On September 28, 2009, Sonabank assumed approximately $26.6 million in depositsSouthern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. completed the purchase of the Old Town Warrenton branch office, acquired at fair value selected loans in the amount of Millennium Bank, N.A.$23.8 million and purchased $23.6assumed at fair value approximately $26.8 million of selected loansdeposits from Millennium Bank, N.A.  CashNo premium was paid in the amount of $3.1 million was received in thethis transaction. The fair value of the loans acquired was approximately $23.8 million, and the fair value of the deposits assumed was approximately $26.8 million. A core deposit intangible in the amount of $243 thousand was recorded and will be amortized over 15 years. Furniture and equipment with a fair value of approximately $47 thousand was also acquired. A gain of $423 thousand was recorded on the transaction in accordance with ASC 805.

20.PUBLIC OFFERING

SNBV completed a public offering of its common stock in an underwritten public offering. SNBV closed on the offering on November 4, 2009, selling 4,791,665 shares of common stock, including 624,999 shares sold pursuant to an over-allotment option granted to the underwriter, at a price of $6.00 per share. The gross proceeds from the shares sold were $28.7 million. The net proceeds to SNBV from the offering were approximately $26.9 million after deducting $1.3 million in underwriting commission and an estimated $486 thousand in other expenses incurred in connection with the offering.

SNBV expects to use the net proceeds from the offering to provide capital to Sonabank to support its anticipated organic growth, to support potential future acquisitions of branches or whole banks, including the possible acquisitions of failed financial institutions in FDIC assisted transactions, and for other general corporate purposes.

21.PARENT COMPANY FINANCIAL INFORMATION

20.       PARENT COMPANY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Condensed financial information of Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. follows (in thousands):

CONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS

DECEMBER 31,

   2010  2009 

ASSETS

   

Cash

  $3,342   $3,359  

Investment in subsidiary

   95,658    93,679  

Other assets

   114    86  
         

Total assets

  $99,114   $97,124  
         

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

   

Stockholders’ equity:

   

Common stock

  $116   $116  

Additional paid in capital

   96,478    96,444  

Retained earnings

   5,854    4,053  

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

   (3,334)   (3,489) 
         

Total stockholders’ equity

   99,114    97,124  
         

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity

  $99,114   $97,124  
         


  2011  2010 
     (As Restated) 
ASSETS      
Cash $3,324  $3,342 
Investment in subsidiary  95,510   90,875 
Other assets  217   114 
Total assets $99,051  $94,331 
         
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
        
Stockholders’ equity:
        
Common stock $116  $116 
Additional paid in capital  96,645   96,478 
Retained earnings  5,472   1,071 
Accumulated other comprehensive loss  (3,182)  (3,334)
Total stockholders’ equity
  99,051   94,331 
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
 $99,051  $94,331 
126
CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF INCOME

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2011, 2010 2009 AND 2008

2009

(in thousands)

   2010  2009  2008 

Equity in undistributed net income of subsidiary

  $1,872   $2,408   $1,273  

Other operating expenses

   108    79    99  
             

Income before income taxes

   1,764    2,329    1,174  

Income tax benefit

   (37)   (27)   (34) 
             

Net income

  $1,801   $2,356   $1,208  
             


  2011  2010  2009 
     (As Restated)  (As Restated) 
          
Equity in undistributed net income  of subsidiary $4,483  $4,125  $(4,628)
             
Other operating expenses  125   108   79 
             
Income before income taxes  4,358   4,017   (4,707)
             
Income tax benefit  (43)  (37)  (27)
             
Net  income $4,401  $4,054  $(4,680)
CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2011, 2010 2009 AND 2008

2009

(in thousands)

   2010  2009  2008 

Operating activities:

    

Net income

  $1,801   $2,356   $1,208  

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash and cash equivalents provided by (used in) operating activities:

    

Equity in undistributed net income of subsidiary

   (1,872)   (2,408)   (1,273) 

Other, net

   54    27    74  
             

Net cash and cash equivalents provided by (used in) operating activities

   (17)   (25)   9  
             

Investing activities:

    

Investment in subsidiary

   48    (25,919)   —    
             

Net cash and cash equivalents provided by (used in) investing activities

   48    (25,919)   —    
             

Financing activities:

    

Issuance of common stock

   —      26,919    —    

Additional cost of 2009 common stock issuance

   (48)   —      —    
             

Net cash and cash equivalents provided by (used in) financing activities

   (48)   26,919    —    
             

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   (17)   975    9  

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   3,359    2,384    2,375  
             

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $3,342   $3,359   $2,384  
             

22.OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)

  2011  2010  2009 
     (As Restated)  (As Restated) 
Operating activities:         
Net income $4,401  $4,054  $(4,680)
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash and cash equivalents provided by (used in) operating activities:            
Equity in undistributed net income  of subsidiary  (4,483)  (4,125)  4,628 
Other, net  64   54   27 
Net cash and cash equivalents used in operating activities  (18)  (17)  (25)
Investing activities:            
Investment in subsidiary  -   48   (25,919)
Net cash and cash equivalents provided by (used in) investing activities  -   48   (25,919)
Financing activities:            
Issuance of common stock  -   -   26,919 
Additional cost of 2009 common stock issuance  -   (48)  - 
Net cash and cash equivalents provided by (used in) financing activities  -   (48)  26,919 
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents  (18)  (17)  975 
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period  3,342   3,359   2,384 
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $3,324  $3,342  $3,359 
21.         OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
The following is a summary of the accumulated other comprehensive loss balances, net of tax (in thousands):

   Balance at
December 31, 2009		  Current Period
Change		  Balance at
December 31, 2010		 

Unrealized gains (losses) on securities available for sale

  $73   $79   $152  

Unrecognized loss on securities held to maturity for which other than temporary impairment charges have been taken

   (3,289)   157    (3,132) 

Unrealized loss on securities available for sale transferred to held to maturity

   (273)   (81)   (354) 
             

Total

  $(3,489)  $155   $(3,334) 
             

  Balance at  Current Period  Balance at 
  December 31, 2010  Change  December 31, 2011 
Unrealized gains (losses) on securities available for sale $152  $68  $220 
Unrecognized loss on securities held to maturity for which other than temporary impairment charges have been taken  (3,132)  87   (3,045)
Unrealized loss on securities available for sale transferred to held to maturity  (354)  (3)  (357)
             
Total $(3,334) $152  $(3,182)
127
22.          QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA (UNAUDITED)
On February 8, 2012, our Audit Committee determined, after discussions with management, that the previously-issued financial statements as of and for the quarters ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, June 30, 2011 and 2010 and September 30, 2011 and 2010 (referred to in the following tables as first quarter, second quarter and third quarter, respectively) should no longer be relied upon because of errors in the purchase accounting for the Greater Atlantic Bank acquisition in December 2009.  Specifically, there was an error in the calculation of the estimated fair value of the FDIC indemnification asset and the amount of the accretable discount on the acquired covered loans.  Other corrections to reported amounts were also necessary. Southern National has restated its unaudited interim financial statements to correct the effects of these errors.  Footnotes to the balance sheet amounts and statement of operations amounts describe the nature of the error correction.
The following interim unaudited condensed consolidated financial information has been prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP for interim financial information and with the instructions to SEC form 10-Q and Article 10 of SEC Regulation S-X. In our opinion, this information has been prepared on a basis consistent with that of our audited consolidated financial statements and all necessary material adjustments, consisting of normal recurring accruals and adjustments, have been included to present fairly the unaudited quarterly and year-to-date financial data. Our quarterly results of operations for these periods are not necessarily indicative of future results of operations. They do not include all the information and footnotes required by U.S. GAAP for complete financial statements. Therefore, these condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and note thereto for the year ended December 31, 2011 included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Balance Sheet Information (Unaudited)
The table below reflects the as reported and as restated amounts for certain balance sheet accounts as of the end of each quarter referenced.
Goodwill was restated and increased by $10 thousand as of December 4, 2009.  Therefore, the goodwill balance as restated will be $10 thousand greater for all periods presented.   This adjustment is reflected in the adjustment to Total Assets in the table below.
128
     FDIC  Deferred           Total Liabilities 
  Covered  Indemnification  Tax Asset  Total  Other  Total  
and Stockholders’
 
  Loans (a)  Asset (b)  Net, ( c )  Assets  Liabilities (d)  Liabilities  Equity (e) 
  (dollars in thousands) 
2011                     
First quarter (as reported) $85,490  $17,999  $3,734  $590,433  $2,842  $490,081  $590,433 
First quarter (as restated)  89,017   7,615   6,634   586,476   3,462   490,701   586,476 
First quarter (adjustment)  3,527   (10,384)  2,900   (3,957)  620   620   (3,957)
                             
Second quarter (as reported)  82,935   18,088   4,128   601,387   2,128   499,587   601,387 
Second quarter (as restated)  86,811   7,569   6,867   597,483   2,755   500,214   597,483 
Second quarter (adjustment)  3,876   (10,519)  2,739   (3,904)  627   627   (3,904)
                             
Third quarter (as reported)  80,398   18,226   4,440   605,378   2,377   502,311   605,378 
Third quarter (as restated)  84,567   7,580   6,963   601,424   3,011   502,945   601,424 
Third quarter (adjustment)  4,169   (10,646)  2,523   (3,954)  634   634   (3,954)
                             
Fourth quarter  82,588   7,537   6,255   611,373   3,491   512,322   611,373 
                             
2010                            
First quarter (as reported)  104,204   19,164   4,523   611,679   7,956   513,426   611,679 
First quarter (as restated)  105,802   8,794   7,938   606,322   8,549   514,019   606,322 
First quarter (adjustment)  1,598   (10,370)  3,415   (5,357)  593   593   (5,357)
                             
Second quarter (as reported)  101,492   18,758   4,514   613,170   2,725   513,814   613,170 
Second quarter (as restated)  103,970   8,838   7,622   608,836   3,325   514,414   608,836 
Second quarter (adjustment)  2,478   (9,920)  3,108   (4,334)  600   600   (4,334)
                             
Third quarter (as reported)  99,009   18,951   4,577   618,741   2,589   518,333   618,741 
Third quarter (as restated)  102,143   8,858   7,677   614,882   3,196   518,940   614,882 
Third quarter (adjustment)  3,134   (10,093)  3,100   (3,859)  607   607   (3,859)
                             
Fourth quarter (as reported)  92,171   18,536   3,782   590,824   1,828   491,710   590,824 
Fourth quarter (as restated)  95,788   8,293   5,937   586,654   2,441   492,323   586,654 
Fourth quarter (adjustment)  3,617   (10,243)  2,155   (4,170)  613   613   (4,170)
23.QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA (UNAUDITED)(a)Correct the accretion amounts for the accretable discount on the acquired loans.

   Interest
Income		   Net  Interest
Income		   Income (Loss)
Before Taxes		  Net
Income
(Loss)		  Earnings (Loss) Per Share 
              Basic            Diluted      
   (dollars in thousands) 

2010

         

First quarter

  $8,391    $6,260    $1,522   $1,041   $0.09   $0.09  

Second quarter

   8,561     6,441     1,499    1,025    0.09    0.09  

Third quarter

   8,255     6,087     1,622    1,105    0.10    0.10  

Fourth quarter (1)

   7,966     5,872     (2,144)   (1,370)   (0.12)   (0.12) 

2009

         

First quarter

  $5,426    $3,046    $727   $526   $0.08   $0.08  

Second quarter (2)

   5,571     3,490     (31)   23    —      —    

Third quarter (2)

   5,778     3,951     67    88    0.01    0.01  

Fourth quarter (3) (4)

   6,631     4,842     2,540    1,719    0.18    0.18  

(1)In(b)Correct the fourthcarrying value of the FDIC indemnification asset, including the effects of period accretion
(c)Correct deferred tax assets associated with the temporary differences.
(d)Recognize the carrying value of the clawback liability adjusted for periodic accretion
(e)Adjusted for the effects of the restatement entries on total liabilities and retained earnings
129
Income Statement Information (Unaudited)
            Net       
  Interest  Net Interest  Income (Loss)   Income  Earnings (Loss) Per Share 
  Income (a)  Income (a)  Before Taxes (b)   (Loss)(d)  Basic  Diluted 
  (dollars in thousands) 
2011                   
    First quarter (as reported) $7,729  $6,134  $1,648   $1,120  $0.10  $0.10 
    First quarter (as restated)  8,139   6,544   1,908    1,290   0.11   0.11 
    First quarter (adjustment)  410   410   260    170   0.01   0.01 
                          
    Second quarter (as reported)  7,743   6,227   1,533    1,311   0.11   0.11 
    Second quarter (as restated)  8,092   6,576   1,741    1,448   0.12   0.12 
    Second quarter (adjustment)  349   349   208    137   0.01   0.01 
                          
    Third quarter (as reported)  8,394   6,905   1,941    1,303   0.11   0.11 
    Third quarter (as restated)  8,688   7,199   2,100    1,408   0.12   0.12 
    Third quarter (adjustment)  294   294   159    105   0.01   0.01 
                          
    Fourth quarter  8,504   7,017   344    255   0.02   0.02 
                          
2010                         
    First quarter (as reported)  8,391   6,260   1,522    1,041   0.09   0.09 
    First quarter (as restated)  9,489   7,358   3,071    2,058   0.18   0.18 
    First quarter (adjustment)  1,098   1,098   1,549 ( c )  1,017   0.09   0.09 
                          
    Second quarter (as reported)  8,561   6,441   1,499    1,025   0.09   0.09 
    Second quarter (as restated)  9,441   7,321   3,037    2,035   0.18   0.18 
    Second quarter (adjustment)  880   880   1,538 ( c )  1,010   0.09   0.09 
                          
    Third quarter (as reported)  8,255   6,087   1,622    1,105   0.10   0.10 
    Third quarter (as restated)  8,911   6,743   1,639    1,117   0.10   0.10 
    Third quarter (adjustment)  656   656   17    12   -   - 
                          
    Fourth quarter  (as reported)  7,966   5,872   (2,144)   (1,370)  (0.12)  (0.12)
    Fourth quarter  (as restated)  8,449   6,355   (1,817)   (1,156)  (0.10)  (0.10)
    Fourth quarter  (adjustment)  483   483   327    214   0.02   0.02 
(a)Adjustments to interest income and net interest income are related to the corrected accretion of the accretable discount for the acquired loans.
(b)Adjustments to income (loss) before taxes include the effects of the adjustments in (a) above coupled with the impact of correcting the accretion on the FDIC indemnification asset (presented as change in FDIC indemnification asset in non-interest expense) and the effects of accreting the FDIC clawback liability (presented as other operating expenses in non-interest expense).
(c)Includes the effects of adjustments of approximately $450 thousand in the first quarter of 2010 the provision for loan losses was $5.3 million compared to $1.0 millionand $650 thousand in the thirdsecond quarter of 2010.2010 to reverse amounts erroneously reported as change in FDIC indemnification asset (included in non-interest expense).
(2)In(d)Includes the second and third quarterstax effects of 2009 management recognized other than temporary impairment charges on trust preferred securities in the amounts of $863 thousand and $1.2 million, respectively.aforementioned entries at the estimated annualized effective income tax rate applied during the respective reporting periods.
(3)In the fourth quarter of 2009 management recognized other than temporary impairment charges on trust preferred securities and a collateralized mortgage obligation in the amount of $5.6 million. Management also recognized a gain on the Greater Atlantic acquisition in the amount of $11.2 million.
(4)On November 4, 2009, SNBV completed a public offering of its common stock, selling 4,791,665 shares of common stock. This caused dilution in earnings per share compared to prior quarters.

Cash Flow Information (Unaudited)
For the interim periods in 2011 and 2010, accretion of the discount on the acquired covered loans (the accretable discount) was presented in the line item “loan originations and payments, net” within Investing Activities.   This presentation has been restated and the accretion is reflected as a reconciling item to net income included in Operating Activities.
130
As reported and as restated amounts for certain cash flow line items for each of the quarterly periods referenced in the table below.
  Accretion of  Total Operating  Loan Originations  Total Investing 
  Loan Discount  Activities  and Payments, Net  Activities 
  (dollars in thousands) 
2011            
First quarter (as reported) $-  $3,707  $(8,045) $(3,227)
First quarter (as restated)  (970)  2,737   (7,075)  (2,257)
First quarter (adjustment)  (970)  (970)  970   970 
                 
Second quarter (as reported)  -   2,117   (18,623)  (16,233)
Second quarter (as restated)  (775)  1,342   (17,848)  (15,458)
Second quarter (adjustment)  (775)  (775)  775   775 
                 
Third quarter (as reported)  -   5,493   (4,998)  (4,597)
Third quarter (as restated)  (807)  4,686   (4,191)  (3,790)
Third quarter (adjustment)  (807)  (807)  807   807 
                 
Fourth quarter  (720)  4,389   (20,070)  27,204 
                 
2010                
First quarter (as reported)  -   4,686   9,625   10,531 
First quarter (as restated)  (1,736)  2,950   11,361   12,267 
First quarter (adjustment)  (1,736)  (1,736)  1,736   1,736 
                 
Second quarter (as reported)  -   (3,353)  (15,565)  (12,115)
Second quarter (as restated)  (1,721)  (5,074)  (13,844)  (10,394)
Second quarter (adjustment)  (1,721)  (1,721)  1,721   1,721 
                 
Third quarter (as reported)  -   3,290   (1,591)  6,890 
Third quarter (as restated)  (1,244)  2,046   (347)  8,134 
Third quarter (adjustment)  (1,244)  (1,244)  1,244   1,244 
                 
Fourth quarter (as reported)  -   3,996   (2,102)  5,727 
Fourth quarter (as restated)  (1,080)  2,916   (1,022)  6,807 
Fourth quarter (adjustment)  (1,080)  (1,080)  1,080   1,080 
131
Item 9.— - Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

On March 9, 2011, the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc., a Virginia corporation (the “Company”), informed Crowe Horwath LLP (“Crowe”) that Crowe will be dismissed as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm effective as of the filing of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.  The decision to change the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm was approved by the Company’s Audit Committee and the Board of Directors.

Additionally, based on the Audit Committee’s approval, on March 9, 2011, the Company selected KPMG LLP (“KPMG”) as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

Item 9A.— – Controls and Procedures

(1)Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures.SNBVSouthern National maintains “disclosure controls and procedures,” as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”).  In designing and evaluating its disclosure controls and procedures, management recognizedrecognizes that disclosure controls and procedures, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the disclosure controls and procedures are met. Additionally, in designing disclosure controls and procedures, management necessarily   was required to applyapplies its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible disclosure controls and procedures.  The design of any disclosure controls and procedures also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions.  Based onupon their evaluation as of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as well as the material weakness described below, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that SNBV’sSouthern National’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective.not effective as of December 31, 2011.


(2)Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting.The management of Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. (“SNBV”Southern National”) is responsible for the preparation, integrity, and fair presentation of SNBV’sSouthern National’s annual consolidated financial statements. All information has been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles and, as such, includes certain amounts that are based on management’s best estimates and judgments.


Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting presented in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. 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 SNBV;Southern National; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of SNBVSouthern National are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of SNBV;Southern National; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of SNBV’sSouthern National’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Two


Because of the objectives ofinherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.  In addition, the extension of any evaluation of control effectiveness to future periods are subject to provide reasonable assurance to management and the Boardrisk that internal controls may become inadequate because of Directors that transactions are properly authorized and recordedchanges in SNBV’s financial records, andconditions, or that the preparationdegree of SNBV’s financial statements and other financial reporting is done in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. There are inherent limitations in the effectiveness of internal control, including the possibility of human error and the circumvention or overriding of controls. Accordingly, even effective internal control can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to reliability of financial statements. Furthermore, internal control can vary with changes in circumstances.

compliance may change.

132
Management has made its ownan assessment of the effectiveness of SNBV’sSouthern National’s internal control ofover financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, in relation to2011, using the criteria described in the report,Internal Control-IntegratedControl- Integrated Framework,issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”).  Based onupon its assessment, management believes that, as of December 31, 2011, Southern National did not have effective internal control over financial reporting because of the existence of a material weakness described below.

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 annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.   As a result of its assessment, management identified a material weakness in the design and operation of controls over the accounting for  non-routine transactions. Specifically, we did not have adequate controls in place or the requisite knowledge to evaluate the accounting for non-routine transactions. As a result, there were material misstatements to the reported interim and annual financial statements as described in Notes 2 and 22 in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.
KPMG LLP, an independent registered accounting firm that audited our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, has issued an audit report on its assessment of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2011. That report is included in Item 8.

(3)Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting.  Other than the aforementioned changes to internal control related to the unremediated material weakness described above and the remediated material weakness described below, there have been no other changes in Southern National’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 2011 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, Southern National’s internal control over financial reporting.

(4)Background and Management’s Remediation Plans
As disclosed in our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on February 7, 2012, we have determined that our audited financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2010, and the reviewed financial statements for the interim quarterly periods during the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2011, contained material errors.  Specifically, we have identified errors in the financial statements related to a non-routine transaction entered into by the bank - specifically, the acquisition of Greater Atlantic Bank in December 2009 (an FDIC-assisted transaction).  To assist with the purchase accounting associated with the Greater Atlantic acquisition, management engaged a valuation consultant in 2009 to assist with the valuation of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed, and to provide follow-up services in subsequent reporting periods.  The errors were identified in connection with executing the financial reporting process for the year ended December 31, 2011.  The 2010 and 2009 annual amounts, and the quarterly amounts for 2011 and 2010, set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, reflect the restatement of previously issued financial statements. We acknowledge that management cannot rely on an external advisor’s analysis without assessing the accuracy and appropriateness of the methods, assumptions and conclusions, and we maintain full responsibility for the errors in our financial statements.      
133
We operate as a community bank, and complex or unusual non-routine transactions, such as an FDIC-assisted acquisition, have historically been infrequent.  However, we may engage in additional such transactions in the future.  Our controls and procedures for future complex or unusual transactions, such as an acquisition, will be strengthened to provide assurances that material errors will be prevented and/or detected on a timely basis.  Specifically, our remediation plans include –

●
When appropriate, we will engage consultants and advisors that possess the requisite experience and knowledge to assist with valuation and purchase accounting matters, or other complex or unusual transactions.   Management engaged a new advisor late in 2011 and believes that this aspect of our remediation plan has been completed. Further, management will be working with the new advisor going forward to properly apply purchase accounting for the Greater Atlantic acquisition, and to assist with the related asset and liability valuation, based upon the bank's experience to date, as well as management’s projections. The new advisor also will assist in the development of internal control standards to determine whether the previously established standards for remediation have been met.

●
We will develop and implement a documented internal review process that will include more formal management and audit committee oversight of the methods and assumptions used for the valuation and other calculations, and the accounting conclusions reached.

●
Our financial reporting team will prepare detailed documentation of the internal review procedures performed along with the rationale for the conclusions.

We are continually evaluating our system of controls and may institute other remediation steps as well.  There is no assurance that the remedial steps we have undertaken will be sufficient and additional steps may be necessary to remediate the material weakness identified above.

(5)Remediation of Previously Disclosed Material Weakness
As reported in our Form 10-K filed in March 2011, and as of December 31, 2010, there was a control deficiency with respect to the identification of a subsequent event that constituted a material weakness and that there were no other deficiencies that constituted a material weakness as of December 31, 2010.weakness.  Subsequent to the notification by SNBVSouthern National to Crowe Horwath of their termination as SNBV’sSouthern National’s auditors, management was informed by Crowe Horwath that a material weakness existed in SNBV’sSouthern National’s internal controls related to subsequent event evaluation.  Specifically, SNBVSouthern National did not have a control activity in place to assess the impact of subsequent events on estimates and assumptions made relative to identified impaired loans.  Southern National took an additional $500,000 charge on a nonperforming loan in March 2011 based on an offer made in February 2011 for the property that secured the loan following SNBV’sSouthern National’s foreclosure on the loan.  The offer was below the appraised value of the loan.  The additional charge should have been recorded in SNBV’sSouthern National’s financial statements as of December 31, 2010, and has been so recorded. SNBV has begun, and plans to continue, remediating this control deficiency through

During 2011, we implemented enhanced subsequent event reviews.

Crowe Horwath LLP has provided its report on the effectiveness of SNBV’s internal control over financial reporting in their report dated March 15, 2011.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Other than the identification of thereview controls and procedures to address this material weakness.  Management concluded that this material weakness related to the misidentificationhas been remediated as of a subsequent event described above, there have been no other changes in SNBV’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 2010 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, SNBV’s internal control over financial reporting.

2011.

134
Item 9B.— – Other Information

None.

135
PART III

Item 10.  Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

The information under the captions “Election of Directors”, “Continuing Directors and Executive Officers,” “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance”, “Corporate Governance—Governance — Committees of the Board—Board of Directors— Audit Committee”,Committee, “Corporate Governance—Governance —  Director Nominations Process” and “Corporate Governance—Governance — Code of Ethics” in the Company’s definitive Proxy Statement for its 20112012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after December 31, 20102011 pursuant to Regulation 14A under the Exchange Act (the “2011 Proxy Statement”), is incorporated herein by reference in response to this item.

Item 11.  Executive Compensation

The information under the captions “Executive Compensation and Other Matters”Matters,” “Director Compensation” and “Director“Board Compensation Committee Report on Executive Compensation” in the 20112012 Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference in response to this item.

Item 12.  Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Shareholder Matters

The information under the caption “Beneficial Ownership of Common Stock by Management of the Company and Principal Stockholders” in the 20112012 Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference in response to this item.

Item 13.  Certain Relationships, Related Transactions and Director Independence

The information under the captions “Corporate Governance—Governance — Director Independence” and “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions” in the 20112012 Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference in response to this item.

The information required by this Item concerning securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans is incorporated herein by reference to Part II, Item 5 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Item 14.  Principal Accounting Fees and Services

The information under the caption “Fees and Services of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in the 20112012 Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference in response to this item.

136
PART IV

Item 15.— – Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

The following documents are filed as part of this report:

 (a)(1)Financial Statements
The following consolidated financial statements and reports of independent registered public accounting firm are in Part II, Item 8 on pages 80 through 142
Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Consolidated Balance Sheets - December 31, 2011 and 2010
Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income (Loss) - Years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity - Years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows -Years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(a)(2)Financial Statement Schedules
All schedules are omitted since they are not required, are not applicable, or the required information is shown in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto.

The following consolidated financial statements and reports of independent registered public accounting firm are in Part II, Item 8 on pages 69 through 110

Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Consolidated Balance Sheets—December 31, 2010 and 2009

Consolidated Statements of Income—Years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity—Years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows—Years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

137
 (a)(2)(3)Financial Statement SchedulesExhibits

All schedules are omitted since they are not required, are not applicable, or the required information is shown in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto.

 (a)(3)ExhibitsThe following are filed or furnished, as noted below, as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and this list includes the Exhibit Index.

The following are filed or furnished, as noted below, as part of this Form 10-K and this list includes the Exhibit Index.

Exhibit No.

 

Description

 3.1 Articles of Incorporation (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-136285))
 3.2 Certificate of Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation dated January 31, 2005 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-136285))
 3.3 Certificate of Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation dated April 13, 2006 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.3 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-136285))
 3.4 Amended and Restated Bylaws (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.4 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006)
 3.5 
Amendment No. 1 to Amended and Restated Bylaws (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 14, 2009)
 
4.1 Specimen Stock Certificate of SNBVSouthern National (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-136285))
 4.2 Form of Warrant Agreement (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to SNBV’s4.2to Southern National’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-136285))
 4.3 Form of Amendment to Warrant Agreement (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-136285))
10.1+ Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. 2004 Stock Option Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-136285)333- 136285))
10.2+ Form of Change in Control Agreement with Georgia S. Derrico and R. Roderick Porter (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-136285)333- 136285))
10.3+ 
Form of Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. Incentive Stock Option Agreement (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-162467))
10.4+ 
Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan for Georgia Derrico (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Registration Statement on Form S-1  (Registration No. 333-162467))
138
10.5+ 
Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan for Rod Porter (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-162467))
10.6+ Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. 2010 Stock Awards and Incentive Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-166511)333- 166511))
10.7+ 
Form of Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. Incentive Stock Option Agreement (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to SNBV’sSouthern National’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-166511)333- 166511))
11.0 Statement re: Computation of Per Share Earnings (incorporated by reference to Note 1615 of the notes to consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K

Exhibit No.

 

Description

21.0* Subsidiaries of the Registrant
23.1* Consent of Crowe HorwathKPMG LLP
31.1* Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
31.2* Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
32.1** Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

+Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement
*Filed herewith
**Furnished herewith

  +Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement
  *Filed herewith
**Furnished herewith
Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc. will furnish, upon written request, a copy of any exhibit listed above upon the payment of a reasonable fee covering the expense of furnishing the copy. Requests should be directed to:
William H. Lagos, Sr. Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc.
550 Broadview Avenue, Suite LL1
Warrenton, Virginia 20186
139
SIGNATURES
SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc.
By:
Southern National Bancorp of Virginia, Inc.

By:

/s/ GEORGIAGeorgia S. DERRICO        

Derrico Date:  March 15, 2011April 16, 2012
Georgia S. Derrico 
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive 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 indicatedand on March x, 2011.

the dates indicated.
Date: April 16, 2012.

Signature

 

Title

/s/ GEORGIA S. DERRICO        

Georgia S. Derrico

 Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
Georgia S. Derrico

/s/ R. RODERICK PORTER        

R. Roderick Porter

 President and Director
R. Roderick Porter

/s/ NEIL J. CALL        

Neil J. Call

 Director
Neil J. Call

/s/ CHARLES A. KABASH        

Charles A. Kabash

Kabbash		 Director
Charles A. Kabbash

/s/ FREDERICK L. BOLLERER        

Frederick L. Bollerer

 Director
Frederick L. Bollerer

/s/ ROBIN R. SHIELD        

Robin R. Shield

John J. Forch		 Director

/s/    JOHN J. FORCH        

John J. Forch

/s/ W. Bruce Jennings Director
W. Bruce Jennings

/s/ WILLIAM H. LAGOS        

William H. Lagos

 Sr. Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
William H. Lagos

117

140