UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 20112012

or

Commission file number: 000-49883

PLUMAS BANCORP

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (530) 283-7305

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

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    x  No

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

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.    x  Yes    ¨  No

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

Indicated 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.    ¨x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule12b-2 of the Exchange Act:

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    ¨  Yes    x  No

As of June 30, 2011,2012, the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the Registrant was approximately $10.5$13.3 million, based on the closing price reported to the Registrant on that date of $2.42$3.12 per share.

Shares of Common Stock held by each officer and director have been excluded in that such persons may be deemed to be affiliates. This determination of the affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.

The number of shares of Common Stock of the registrant outstanding as of March 22, 20122013 was 4,776,339.

Documents Incorporated by Reference: Portions of the definitive proxy statement for the 20122013 Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to SEC Regulation 14A are incorporated by reference in Part III, Items 10-14.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

Forward-Looking Information

This Annual Report on Form 10-K includes forward-looking statements and information is subject to the “safe harbor” provisions of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These forward-looking statements (which involve Plumas Bancorp’s (the “Company’s”) plans, beliefs and goals, refer to estimates or use similar terms) involve certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the following factors:

The Company undertakes no obligation to revise or publicly release the results of any revision to these forward-looking statements.

ITEM 1.

BUSINESS

General

The Company. Plumas Bancorp (the “Company”) is a California corporation registered as a bank holding company under theBank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, and is headquartered in Quincy, California. The Company was incorporated in January 2002 and acquired all of the outstanding shares of Plumas Bank (the “Bank”) in June 2002. The Company’s principal subsidiary is the Bank, and the Company exists primarily for the purpose of holding the stock of the Bank and of such other subsidiaries it may acquire or establish. At the present time, the Company’s only other subsidiaries are Plumas Statutory Trust I and Plumas Statutory Trust II, which were formed in 2002 and 2005 solely to facilitate the issuance of trust preferred securities.

The Company’s principal source of income is dividends from the Bank, but the Company may explore supplemental sources of income in the future. The Bank cannot currently pay dividends without the prior approval of its primary regulators. The cash outlays of the Company, including (but not limited to) the payment of dividends to shareholders, if and when declared by the Board of Directors, costs of repurchasing Company common stock, the cost of servicing debt and preferred stock dividends, will generally be paid from dividends paid to the Company by the Bank. The Company cannot currently pay dividends without the prior approval of its primary regulators.

At December 31, 2011,2012, the Company had consolidated assets of $455$478 million, deposits of $391$412 million, other liabilities of $24 million and shareholders’ equity of $40$42 million. The Company’s liabilities include $10.3 million in junior subordinated deferrable interest debentures issued in conjunction with the trust preferred securities issued by Plumas Statutory Trust I (the “Trust I”) in September 2002 and Plumas Statutory Trust II (the “Trust II”) in September 2005. Both Trust I and Trust II are further discussed in the section titled “Trust Preferred Securities.” Shareholders’ equity includes $11.8$11.9 million in preferred stock issued pursuant to the U.S. government’s Capital Purchase Program which is discussed in the section titled “Capital"Capital Purchase Program—TARP—Preferred Stock and Stock Warrant.”"

References herein to the “Company,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Plumas Bancorp and its consolidated subsidiary, unless the context indicates otherwise. Our operations are conducted at 35 South Lindan Avenue, Quincy, California. Our annual, quarterly and other reports, required under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, (the “SEC”) are posted and are available at no cost on the Company’s website,www.plumasbank.com, as soon as reasonably practicable after the Company files such documents with the SEC. These reports are also available through the SEC’s website atwww.sec.gov.

The Bank. The Bank is a California state-chartered bank that was incorporated in July 1980 and opened for business in December 1980. The Bank is not a member of the Federal Reserve System. The Bank’s Administrative Office is located at 35 South Lindan Avenue, Quincy, California. At December 31, 20112012 the Bank had approximately $454$476 million in assets, $287$310 million in net loans and $392$412 million in deposits (including deposits of $0.7$0.5 million from the Bancorp). It is currently the largest independent bank headquartered in Plumas County. The Bank’s deposit accounts are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) up to maximum insurable amounts.

The Bank’s primary service area covers the Northeastern portion of California, with Lake Tahoe to the South and the Oregon border to the North. The Bank, through its eleven branch network, serves the seven contiguous California counties of Plumas, Nevada, Sierra, Placer, Lassen, Modoc and Shasta. The branches are located in the communities of Quincy, Portola, Greenville, Truckee, Fall River Mills, Alturas, Susanville, Chester, Tahoe City, Kings Beach and Redding. The Bank maintains fifteen automated teller machines (“ATMs”) tied in with major statewide and national networks. In addition to its branch network, the Bank operates a lending office specializing in government-guaranteed lending in Auburn, California. The Bank’s primary business is servicing the banking needs of these communities. Its marketing strategy stresses its local ownership and commitment to serve the banking needs of individuals living and working in the Bank’s primary service areas.

With a predominant focus on personal service, the Bank has positioned itself as a multi-community independent bank serving the financial needs of individuals and businesses within the Bank’s geographic footprint. Our principal retail lending services include consumer, automobile and home equity loans. Our principal commercial lending services include term real estate, commercial and industrial term loans. In addition, we provide government-guaranteed and agricultural loans as well as credit lines. We provide land development and construction loans on a limited basis.

The Bank’s Government-guaranteed lending center, headquartered in Auburn, California with additional personnel in Truckee, provides Small Business Administration and USDA Rural Development loans to qualified borrowers throughout Northern California and Northern Nevada. During 2007 the Bank was granted nationwide Preferred Lender status with the U.S. Small Business Administration and we expect government-guaranteed lending to continue to be an important part of our overall lending operation. During 20102012 proceeds from the sale of government-guaranteed loans totaled $14.9$20.1 million and we generated a gain on sale of $1.1$1.3 million. In 2011 proceeds from the sale of government guaranteed loans totaled $23.4 million and we generated a gain on sale of $1.9 million.

The Agricultural Credit Centers located in Susanville and Alturas provide a complete line of credit services in support of the agricultural activities which are key to the continued economic development of the communities we serve. “Ag lending” clients include a full range of individual farming customers, small- to medium-sized business farming organizations and corporate farming units.

As of December 31, 2011,2012, the principal areas to which we directed our lending activities, and the percentage of our total loan portfolio comprised by each, were as follows: (i) commercial real estate – 40.6%44.3%; (ii) commercial and industrial loans – 10.3%9.4%; (iii) consumer loans (including residential equity lines of credit) – 16.8%19.2%; (iv) agricultural loans (including agricultural real estate loans) – 13.2%11.1%; (v) residential real estate – 13.3%11.0%; and (vi) construction and land development – 5.8%5.0% .

In addition to the lending activities noted above, we offer a wide range of deposit products for the retail and commercial banking markets including checking, interest-bearing checking, business sweep, public funds sweep, savings, time deposit and retirement accounts, as well as remote deposit, telephone and mobile banking and internet banking with bill-pay options. Interest bearing deposits include high yield sweep accounts designed for our commercial customers and for public entities such as municipalities. In addition we offer a premium interest bearing checking account for our consumer customers. As of December 31, 2011,2012, the Bank had 30,997 deposit accounts with balances totaling approximately $412 million, compared to 29,359 deposit accounts with balances totaling approximately $392 million compared to 30,372 deposit accounts with balances totaling approximately $425 million at December 31, 2010.2011. We attract deposits through our customer-oriented product mix, competitive pricing, convenient locations, extended hours, remote deposit operations and drive-up banking, all provided with a high level of customer service.

Most of our deposits are attracted from individuals, business-related sources and smaller municipal entities. This mix of deposit customers resulted in a relatively modest average deposit balance of approximately $13,000 at December 31, 2011.2012. However, it makes us less vulnerable to adverse effects from the loss of depositors who may be seeking higher yields in other markets or who may otherwise draw down balances for cash needs.

We also offer a variety of other products and services to complement the lending and deposit services previously reviewed. These include cashier’s checks, bank-by-mail, ATMs, night depository, safe deposit boxes, direct deposit, electronic funds transfers, on-line banking, remote deposit, mobile banking and other customary banking services.

In order to provide non-deposit investment options, we have developed a strategic alliance with Financial Network Investment Corporation (“FNIC”). Through this arrangement, certain employees of the Bank are also licensed representatives of FNIC. These employees provide our customers throughout our branch network with convenient access to annuities, insurance products, mutual funds, and a full range of investment products.

Through our offering of a Remote Deposit product our customers are able to make non-cash deposits remotely from their physical location. With this product, we have extended our service area and can now meet the deposit needs of customers who may not be located within a convenient distance of one of our branch offices.

Additionally, the Bank has devoted a substantial amount of time and capital to the improvement of existing Bank services, during 2009 we replaced our on-line banking service with a new state of the art product that greatly expands the features available to our customers. In addition we utilized this platform to add mobile banking services during the first quarter of 2010. During 2010 Plumas Bank began offering a new Green Account which promotes protecting the environment, reducing clutter and making life simpler for the customer through technological advancements such as eStatements, online banking, and debit card usage while providing the customer with the opportunity to grow their savings through monthly monetary rewards for green behavior. In 2011, we introduced a new product for our larger business customers which use repurchase agreements as an alternative to interest-bearing deposits. The balance in this product at December 31, 20112012 was $8.3$7.4 million. Interest paid on this product is similar to that which can be earned on the Bank’s premium money market account; however, these are not deposits and are not FDIC insured. During the first quarter of 2012 we replaced our ATMs with new state of the art machines that are capable of accepting check and cash deposits without a deposit envelope.

The officers and employees of the Bank are continually engaged in marketing activities, including the evaluation and development of new products and services, to enable the Bank to retain and improve its competitive position in its service area.

We hold no patents or licenses (other than licenses required by appropriate bank regulatory agencies or local governments), franchises, or concessions. Our business has a modest seasonal component due to the heavy agricultural and tourism orientation of some of the communities we serve. As our branches in less rural areas such as Truckee have expanded and with the opening of our Auburn commercial lending office, the agriculture-related base has become less significant. We are not dependent on a single customer or group of related customers for a material portion of our deposits, nor are a material portion of our loans concentrated within a single industry or group of related industries. There has been no material effect upon our capital expenditures, earnings, or competitive position as a result of federal, state, or local environmental regulation.

Commitment to our Communities.The Board of Directors and Management believe that the Company plays an important role in the economic well being of the communities it serves. Our Bank has a continuing responsibility to provide a wide range of lending and deposit services to both individuals and businesses. These services are tailored to meet the needs of the communities served by the Company and the Bank.

We offer various loan products which promote home ownership and affordable housing, encourage job growth and support community economic development. Types of loans offered range from personal and commercial loans to real estate, construction, agricultural, and government-guaranteed community infrastructure loans. Many banking decisions are made locally with the goal of maintaining customer satisfaction through the timely delivery of high quality products and services.

Capital Purchase Program—TARP—Preferred Stock and Stock Warrant. On January 30, 2009 the Company entered into a Letter Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) with the United States Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”), pursuant to which the Company issued and sold (i) 11,949 shares of the Company’s Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A (the “Series A Preferred Stock”) and (ii) a warrant (the “Warrant”) to purchase 237,712 shares of the Company’s common stock, no par value (the “Common Stock”), for an aggregate purchase price of $11,949,000 in cash.

The Series A Preferred Stock qualifies as Tier 1 capital and pays cumulative dividends quarterly at a rate of 5% per annum for the first five years, and 9% per annum thereafter. The Company may redeem the Series A Preferred Stock at its liquidation preference ($1,000 per share) plus accrued and unpaid dividends under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, subject to the Treasury’s consultation with the Company’s appropriate federal regulator.

The Warrant has a 10-year term and was immediately exercisable with an exercise price, subject to antidilution adjustments, equal to $7.54 per share of the Common Stock. Treasury has agreed not to exercise voting power with respect to any shares of Common Stock issued upon exercise of the Warrant.

Prior to January 30, 2012, unless the Company has redeemed the Series A Preferred Stock, or the Treasury has transferred the Series A Preferred Stock to a third party, the consent of the Treasury will be required for the Company to: (1) declare or pay any dividend or make any distribution on shares of the Common Stock (other than regular quarterly cash dividends of not more than $0.04 per share or regular semi-annual cash dividends of not more than $0.08 per share); or (2) redeem, purchase or acquire any shares of Common Stock or other equity or capital securities, other than in connection with benefit plans consistent with past practice and certain other circumstances specified in the Purchase Agreement. At the request of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (FRB), Plumas Bancorp suspended quarterly cash dividend payments on its Series A Preferred Stock. As of December 31, 20112012 the amount of the arrearage on the dividend payments of the Series A Preferred Stock is $1,046,000$1,643,000 representing seveneleven quarterly payments.

Trust Preferred Securities.During the third quarter of 2002, the Company formed a wholly owned Connecticut statutory business trust, Plumas Statutory Trust I (the “Trust I”). On September 26, 2002, the Company issued to the Trust I, Floating Rate Junior Subordinated Deferrable Interest Debentures due 2032 (the “Debentures”) in the aggregate principal amount of $6,186,000. In exchange for these debentures the Trust I paid the Company $6,186,000. The Trust I funded its purchase of debentures by issuing $6,000,000 in floating rate capital securities (“trust preferred securities”), which were sold to a third party. These trust preferred securities qualify as Tier I capital under current Federal Reserve Board guidelines. The Debentures are the only asset of the Trust I. The interest rate and terms on both instruments are substantially the same. The rate is based on the three-month LIBOR (London Interbank Offered Rate) plus 3.40%, not to exceed 11.9%, adjustable quarterly. The proceeds from the sale of the Debentures were primarily used by the Company to inject capital into the Bank.

During the third quarter of 2005, the Company formed a wholly owned Connecticut statutory business trust, Plumas Statutory Trust II (the “Trust II”). On September 28, 2005, the Company issued to the Trust II, Floating Rate Junior Subordinated Deferrable Interest Debentures due 2035 (the “Debentures”) in the aggregate principal amount of $4,124,000. In exchange for these debentures the Trust II paid the Company $4,124,000. The Trust II funded its purchase of debentures by issuing $4,000,000 in floating rate capital securities (“trust preferred securities”), which were sold to a third party. These trust preferred securities qualify as Tier I capital under current Federal Reserve Board guidelines. The Debentures are the only asset of the Trust II. The interest rate and terms on both instruments are substantially the same. The rate is based on the three-month LIBOR (London Interbank Offered Rate) plus 1.48%, adjustable quarterly. The proceeds from the sale of the Debentures were primarily used by the Company to inject capital into the Bank.

The Debentures and trust preferred securities accrue and pay distributions quarterly based on the floating rate described above on the stated liquidation value of $1,000 per security. The Company has entered into contractual agreements which, taken collectively, fully and unconditionally guarantee payment of: (1) accrued and unpaid distributions required to be paid on the capital securities; (2) the redemption price with respect to any capital securities called for redemption by either Trust I or Trust II, and (3) payments due upon voluntary or involuntary dissolution, winding up, or liquidation of either Trust I or Trust II.

The trust preferred securities are mandatorily redeemable upon maturity of the Debentures on September 26, 2032 for Trust I and September 28, 2035 for Trust II, or upon earlier redemption as provided in the indenture.

Neither Trust I nor Trust II are consolidated into the Company’s consolidated financial statements and, accordingly, both entities are accounted for under the equity method and the junior subordinated debentures are reflected as debt on the consolidated balance sheet. At the request of the FRB, Plumas Bancorp deferred its regularly scheduled quarterly interest payments on its outstanding junior subordinated debentures relating to its two trust preferred securities. As of December 31, 20112012 the amount of the arrearage on the payments on the subordinated debt associated with the trust preferred securities is $569,000$906,000 representing seveneleven quarterly payments. On March 15, 2013, with the approval of the FRB, the Company made all current and deferred interest payments on its trust preferred securities.

Recent Developments. Effective in March, 2011, in connection with the Bank’s regularly scheduled 2010 Joint FDIC and California Department of Financial Institutions (“DFI”) examination, the Bank entered into a Consent Order (“Order”) with the FDIC and the DFI. The FDIC and DFI in the Order, required certain actions to be taken by the Bank including among others: continue to reduce certain classified asset balances, maintain strong capital ratios, improve lending policies and practices, and retain qualified management as stated in the terms of the Order. On February 15,8, 2012, the FDIC and DFI terminated this Order. While the Bank is no longer subject to an Order, the Bank has entered into an informal agreement with the FDIC and DFI which, among other things, requests that the Bank continue to maintain a Tier 1 Leverage Capital Ratio of 9% which is in excess of that required for well capitalized institutions and continue to reduce its level of classified asset balances that were outstanding as of September 30, 2011 to not more than 50% of Tier 1 Capital plus the allowance for loan losses. At December 31, 20112012 this ratio was 68%32% and the Bank’s Tier 1 Leverage Capital Ratio was 9.8%10.4%. The FDIC and DFI terminated the informal agreement effective January 24, 2013.

The lifting of the Order reflects the progress made by the Bank’s management and board of directors in reducing classified asset balances, increasing capital ratios, improving lending policies and practices, and retaining qualified management as stated in the terms of the Order.

On July 28, 2011 the Company entered into an agreement with the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (the “FRB Agreement”"FRB Agreement"). Under the terms of the FRB Agreement, Plumas Bancorp has agreed to take certain actions that are designed to maintain its financial soundness so that it may continue to serve as a source of strength to the Bank. Among other things, the FRB Agreement requires prior written approval related to the payment or taking of dividends and distributions, making any distributions of interest, principal or other sums on subordinated debentures or trust preferred securities, incurrence of debt, and the purchase or redemption of stock. In addition, the FRB Agreement requires Plumas Bancorp to submit, within 60 days of the FRB Agreement, a written statement of Plumas Bancorp’s planned sources and uses of cash for debt service, operating expense and other purposes (“Cash Flow Statement”) for the remainder of 2011 and annually thereafter. The Company submitted the Cash Flow Statements within the required time frames.

See Note 2 – “Regulatory Matters” of the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 – Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Annual Report on Form 10K for additional information related to the Order and FRB Agreement.

Business Concentrations. No individual or single group of related customer accounts is considered material in relation to the Banks’Banks' assets or deposits, or in relation to our overall business. However, at December 31, 20112012 approximately 81%78% of the Bank’sBank's total loan portfolio consisted of real estate-secured loans, including real estate mortgage loans, real estate construction loans, consumer equity lines of credit, and agricultural loans secured by real estate. Moreover, our business activities are currently focused in the California counties of Plumas, Nevada, Placer, Lassen, Modoc, Shasta and Sierra and Washoe County in Nevada. Consequently, our results of operations and financial condition are dependent upon the general trends in these economies and, in particular, the residential and commercial real estate markets. In addition, the concentration of our operations in these areas of California and Nevada exposes us to greater risk than other banking companies with a wider geographic base in the event of catastrophes, such as earthquakes, fires and floods in these regions in California and Nevada.

Competition. With respect to commercial bank competitors, the business is largely dominated by a relatively small number of major banks with many offices operating over a wide geographical area. These banks have, among other advantages, the ability to finance wide-ranging and effective advertising campaigns and to allocate their resources to regions of highest yield and demand. Many of the major banks operating in the area offer certain services that we do not offer directly but may offer indirectly through correspondent institutions. By virtue of their greater total capitalization, such banks also have substantially higher lending limits than we do. For customers whose loan demands exceed our legal lending limit, we attempt to arrange for such loans on a participation basis with correspondent or other banks.

In addition to other banks, our competitors include savings institutions, credit unions, and numerous non-banking institutions such as finance companies, leasing companies, insurance companies, brokerage firms, and investment banking firms. In recent years, increased competition has also developed from specialized finance and non-finance companies that offer wholesale finance, credit card, and other consumer finance services, including on-line banking services and personal financial software. Strong competition for deposit and loan products affects the rates of those products as well as the terms on which they are offered to customers. Mergers between financial institutions have placed additional competitive pressure on banks within the industry to streamline their operations, reduce expenses, and increase revenues. Competition has also intensified due to federal and state interstate banking laws enacted in the mid-1990’s, which permit banking organizations to expand into other states. The relatively large California market has been particularly attractive to out-of-state institutions. The Financial Modernization Act, which became effective March 11, 2000, has made it possible for full affiliations to occur between banks and securities firms, insurance companies, and other financial companies, and has also intensified competitive conditions.

Currently, within the Bank’s branch service area there are 5563 banking branch offices of competing institutions, including 30 branches of 8 major banks. As of June 30, 2011,2012, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) estimated the Bank’s market share of insured deposits within the communities it serves to be as follows: Chester 68%65%, Quincy 59%, Portola 55%56%, Alturas 47%45%, Fall River Mills 36%, Susanville 33%, Kings Beach 32%31%, Susanville 24%,Truckee 15%, Tahoe City 5%8%, Redding less than 1% and 100% in Greenville. Redding is the location of our most recently opened branch, which became operational in June 2007.

Technological innovations have also resulted in increased competition in financial services markets. Such innovation has, for example, made it possible for non-depository institutions to offer customers automated transfer payment services that previously were considered traditional banking products. In addition, many customers now expect a choice of delivery systems and channels, including telephone, mail, home computer, mobile, telephone, ATMs, mail, full-service branches and/or in-store branches. The sources of competition in such products include traditional banks as well as savings associations, credit unions, brokerage firms, money market and other mutual funds, asset management groups, finance and insurance companies, internet-only financial intermediaries, and mortgage banking firms.

For many years we have countered rising competition by providing our own style of community-oriented, personalized service. We rely on local promotional activity, personal contacts by our officers, directors, employees, and shareholders, automated 24-hour banking, and the individualized service that we can provide through our flexible policies. This approach appears to be well-received by our customers who appreciate a more personal and customer-oriented environment in which to conduct their financial transactions. To meet the needs of customers who prefer to bank electronically, we offer telephone banking, mobile banking, remote deposit, and personal computer and internet banking with bill payment capabilities. This high tech and high touch approach allows the customers to tailor their access to our services based on their particular preference.

Employees.At December 31, 2011,2012, the Company and its subsidiary employed 156151 persons. On a full-time equivalent basis, we employed 142138 persons. None of the Company’s employees are represented by a labor union, and management considers its relations with employees to be good.

Code of Ethics. The Board of Directors has adopted a code of business conduct and ethics for directors, officers (including Plumas Bancorp’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer) and financial personnel, known as the Corporate Governance Code of Ethics. This Code of Ethics Policy is available on Plumas Bancorp’s website at www.plumasbank.com. Shareholders may request a free copy of the Code of Ethics Policy from Plumas Bancorp, Ms. Elizabeth Kuipers, Investor Relations, 35 S. Lindan Avenue, Quincy, California 95971.

Supervision and Regulation

General. We are extensively regulated under federal and state law. These laws and regulations are generally intended to protect depositors and customers, not shareholders. To the extent that the following information describes statutory or regulatory provisions, it is qualified in its entirety by reference to the particular statute or regulation. Any change in applicable laws or regulations may have a material effect on our business and prospects. Our operations may be affected by legislative changes and by the policies of various regulatory authorities. We cannot accurately predict the nature or the extent of the effects on our business and earnings that fiscal or monetary policies, or new federal or state legislation may have in the future. The Company is subject to the disclosure and regulatory requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, both as administered by the Securities and Exchange Commission. As a listed company on NASDAQ, the Company is subject to NASDAQ rules for listed companies.

Holding Company Regulation. We are a registered bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act, and are subject to the supervision of, and regulation by, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve”). As a bank holding company, we are examined by and file reports with the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve expects a bank holding company to serve as a source of financial and managerial strength to its subsidiary bank and, under appropriate circumstances, to commit resources to support the subsidiary bank.

Federal and State Bank Regulation. The Bank, as a state chartered bank with deposits insured by the FDIC, is primarily subject to the supervision and regulation of the California Department of Financial Institutions, the FDIC, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). These agencies may prohibit the Bank from engaging in what they believe constitute unsafe or unsound banking practices. The California Department of Financial Institutions regularly examines the Bank or participates in joint examinations with the FDIC.

The Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) requires that, in connection with examinations of financial institutions within its jurisdiction, the FDIC evaluate the record of the financial institutions in meeting the credit needs of their local communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, consistent with the safe and sound operation of those institutions. These factors are also considered in evaluating mergers, acquisitions and applications to open a branch or new facility. A less than “Satisfactory” rating would result in the suspension of any growth of the Bank through acquisitions or opening de novo branches until the rating is improved. As of the most recent CRA examination the Bank’s CRA rating was “Satisfactory.”

Banks are also subject to certain restrictions imposed by the Federal Reserve Act on extensions of credit to executive officers, directors, principal shareholders or any related interest of such persons. Extensions of credit must be made on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral as, and follow credit underwriting procedures that are not less stringent than, those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with persons not affiliated with the bank, and must not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features. Banks are also subject to certain lending limits and restrictions on overdrafts to such persons. A violation of these restrictions may result in the assessment of substantial civil monetary penalties on the affected bank or any officer, director, employee, agent or other person participating in the conduct of the affairs of that bank, the imposition of a cease and desist order, and other regulatory sanctions.

The Federal Reserve Act and related Regulation W limit the amount of certain loan and investment transactions between the Bank and its affiliates, require certain levels of collateral for such loans, and limit the amount of advances to third parties that may be collateralized by the securities of the Company or its subsidiaries. Regulation W requires that certain transactions between the Bank and its affiliates be on terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable to the Bank, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with or involving nonaffiliated companies or, in the absence of comparable transactions, on terms and under circumstances, including credit standards, that in good faith would be offered to or would apply to nonaffiliated companies. The Company and its subsidiaries have adopted an Affiliate Transactions Policy and have entered into various affiliate agreements in compliance with Regulation W.

The Federal Reserve and the FDIC have adopted non-capital safety and soundness standards for institutions. These standards cover internal controls, information and internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, compensation, fees and benefits, and standards for asset quality, earnings and stock valuation. An institution that fails to meet these standards must develop a plan acceptable to the agency, specifying the steps that it will take to meet the standards. Failure to submit or implement such a plan may subject the institution to regulatory sanctions. We believe that the Bank is in compliance with these standards.

Federal Deposit Insurance. Substantially all deposits with the Bank are insured up to applicable limits by the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) of the FDIC and are subject to deposit insurance assessments to maintain the DIF.

The FDIC usesutilizes a risk-based assessment system that imposesto set quarterly insurance premiumspremium assessments which categorizes banks into four risk categories based on capital levels and supervisory “CAMELS” ratings and names them Risk Categories I, II, III and IV. The CAMELS rating system is based upon a bank’s capital levelan evaluation of the six critical elements of an institution’s operations: Capital adequacy, Asset quality, Management, Earnings, Liquidity, and Sensitivity to risk.

This rating system is designed to take into account and reflect all significant financial and operational factors financial institution examiners assess in their evaluation of an institution’s performance. The following table sets forth these four Risk Categories:

Within Risk Category I, the assessment system combines supervisory ratings.ratings with other risk measures to differentiate risk. For most institutions, the assessment system combines CAMELS component ratings with financial ratios to determine an institution’s assessment rate. The base assessment rates under the Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Actas of 2005 (“Reform Act”), enactedApril 1, 2011 (which are still in February 2006, ranged from $0.02 to $0.40effect as of December 31, 2012) are as follows (expressed in terms of cents per $100 of deposits annually. The FDIC could increase or decrease the assessment rate schedule five basis points (annualized) higher or lower than the base rates in order to manage the DIF to prescribed statutory target levels.insured deposits):

In December 2008, the FDIC adopted a rule that amended the system for risk-based assessments and changed assessment rates in attempt to restore targeted reserve ratios in the DIF. Effective January 1, 2009, the risk-based assessment rates were uniformly raised by seven basis points (annualized). On February 27, 2009, the FDIC further modified the risk-based assessment system, effective April 1, 2009, to effectively require larger risk institutions to pay a larger share of the assessment. Characteristics of larger risk institutions include a significant reliance on secured liabilities or brokered deposits, particularly when combined with rapid asset growth. The rule also provided incentives for institutions to hold long-term unsecured debt and, for smaller institutions, high levels of Tier 1 capital. The initial base assessment rates range from $0.12 to $0.45 per $100 of deposits annually. The Bank’s assessment rate for 2010 fell at the middle of this range.

*	Initial base rates that were not the minimum or maximum rates will vary between these rates.

After potentialapplying all possible adjustments, related to unsecured debt, secured liabilitiesminimum and brokered deposit balances, the finalmaximum total assessment rates range from $0.07 to $0.775 per $100 of deposits annually. Initial base assessment rates for well managed, well capitalizedeach Risk Category are as follows:

The Dodd-Frank Act requires the FDIC to take such steps as necessary to increase the reserve ratio of the Deposit Insurance Fund from 1.15% to 1.35% of insured deposits by 2020. In setting the assessments, the FDIC is required to offset the effect of the higher reserve ratio against insured depository institutions ranged from $0.12 to $0.16 per $100with total consolidated assets of deposits annually.less than $10 billion. The Dodd-Frank Act also broadens the base for FDIC insurance assessments so that assessments will be based on the average consolidated total assets less average tangible equity capital of a financial institution rather than on its insured deposits.

In October 2010, the FDIC adopted a new DIF restoration plan to ensure that the fund reserve ratio reaches 1.35% by September 30, 2020, as required by the Dodd-Frank Act. Under the new restoration plan, the FDIC will forego the uniform three-basis point increase in initial assessment rates schedules for January 1, 2011 and maintain the current schedule of assessment rates. At least semi-annually, the FDICon a semi-annual or more frequent basis will update its loss and income projections for the DIF and, if needed, increase or decrease assessment rates. On February 7, 2011, the FDIC adopted a final rule modifying the risk-based assessment system from a domestic deposit base to a scorecard based assessment system, effective April 1, 2011. Effective as of April 1, 2011, the Bank was categorized as a small institution as the Bank has less than $10 billion in assets. The initial base assessment rates range from five to 35 basis points. After potential adjustments related to unsecured debt and brokered deposit balances, the final total assessment rates range from 2.5 to 45 basis points. Initial base assessment rates for large institutions ranged from five to 35 basis points. The Bank’s assessment rate for 2011 fell at the middle of this range. Further increases in the assessment rate could have a material adverse effect on our earnings, depending upon the amount of the increase.

In 2006, the Reform Act increased the deposit insurance limit for certain retirement plan deposit accounts from $100,000 to $250,000. The basic insurance limit for other deposits, including individuals, joint account holders, businesses, government entities, and trusts, remained at $100,000. The Reform Act also provided for the merger of the two deposit insurance funds administered by the FDIC, the Bank Insurance Fund (“BIF”) and the Savings Association Insurance Fund (“SAIF”), into the DIF. On October 3, 2008, the EESA temporarily raised the basic limit on federal deposit insurance coverage from $100,000 to $250,000 per depositor. While the basic deposit insurance limit was to have returned to $100,000 after December 31, 2009, the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act extended the temporary increase in the standard maximum deposit insurance amount to $250,000 per depositor through December 31, 2013, and the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act also permanently raised the current standard maximum federal deposit insurance amount from $100,000 to $250,000 per qualified deposit account.

In November 2008, the FDIC approved the final ruling establishing the Transaction Account Guarantee Program (“TAGP”) as part of the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (“TLGP”). Under this program, all non-interest bearing transaction accounts became fully guaranteed by the FDIC for the entire amount in the account. This unlimited coverage also extended to NOW (interest bearing deposit accounts) earning an interest rate no greater than 0.50% and all IOLTAs (lawyers’ trust accounts). TAGP was extended with the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act providesproviding for unlimited deposit insurance for noninterest bearing transactions accounts (excluding NOW, but including IOLTAs) expiring on December 31, 2012.

The FDIC may terminate the deposit insurance of any insured depository institution if it determines that the institution has engaged in or is engaging in unsafe and unsound banking practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition or has violated any applicable law, regulation or order or any condition imposed in writing by, or pursuant to, any written agreement with the FDIC. The termination of deposit insurance for the Bank could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations due to the fact that the Bank’s liquidity position would likely be affected by deposit withdrawal activity.

Capital Adequacy. The FDIC has risk-based capital adequacy guidelines intended to provide a measure of capital adequacy that reflects the degree of risk associated with a banking organization’s operations for both transactions reported on the balance sheet as assets, and transactions, such as letters of credit and recourse arrangements, which are reported as off-balance-sheet items. Under these guidelines, nominal dollar amounts of assets and credit equivalent amounts of off-balance-sheet items are multiplied by one of several risk adjustment percentages, which range from 0% for assets with low credit risk, such as certain U.S. government securities, to 100% for assets with relatively higher credit risk, such as business loans.

A banking organization’s risk-based capital ratios are obtained by dividing its qualifying capital by its total risk-adjusted assets and off-balance-sheet items. The regulators measure risk-adjusted assets and off-balance-sheet items against both total qualifying capital (the sum of Tier 1 capital and limited amounts of Tier 2 capital) and Tier 1 capital. Tier 1 capital consists of common stock, retained earnings, noncumulative perpetual preferred stock and minority interests in certain subsidiaries, less most other intangible assets. Tier 2 capital may consist of a limited amount of the allowance for loan and lease losses and certain other instruments with some characteristics of equity. The inclusion of elements of Tier 2 capital is subject to certain other requirements and limitations of the federal banking agencies. Since December 31, 1992, the FRB and the FDIC have required a minimum ratio of qualifying total capital to risk-adjusted assets and off-balance-sheet items of 8%, and a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-adjusted assets and off-balance-sheet items of 4%.

In addition to the risk-based guidelines, the FRB requires banking organizations to maintain a minimum amount of Tier 1 capital to average total assets, referred to as the leverage ratio. For a banking organization rated in the highest of the five categories used by regulators to rate banking organizations, the minimum leverage ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets is 3%. It is improbable; however, that an institution with a 3% leverage ratio would receive the highest rating by the regulators since a strong capital position is a significant part of the regulators’ ratings. For all banking organizations not rated in the highest category, the minimum leverage ratio is at least 100 to 200 basis points above the 3% minimum. Thus, the effective minimum leverage ratio, for all practical purposes, is at least 4% or 5%. In addition to these uniform risk-based capital guidelines and leverage ratios that apply across the industry, the FRB and FDIC have the discretion to set individual minimum capital requirements for specific institutions at rates significantly above the minimum guidelines and ratios.

A bank that does not achieve and maintain the required capital levels may be issued a capital directive by the FRB and/or DFI to ensure the maintenance of required capital levels. As discussed above, the Company and the Bank are required to maintain certain levels of capital, as is the Bank. The regulatory capital guidelines as well as the actual capitalization for the Bank and Bancorp as of December 31, 20112012 follow:

Management believes that the Company and the Bank met all of the above capital adequacy requirements as of December 31, 20112012 and 2010.2011.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”) requires federal banking regulators to take “prompt corrective action” with respect to a capital-deficient institution, including requiring a capital restoration plan and restricting certain growth activities of the institution. The Company could be required to guarantee any such capital restoration plan required of the Bank if the Bank became undercapitalized. Pursuant to FDICIA, regulations were adopted defining five capital levels: well capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, severely undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized. Under the regulations, the Bank is considered “Well Capitalized” as of December 31, 2011.

If capital falls below the minimum levels established by these regulatory capital guidelines, a holding company or a bank may be denied approval to acquire or establish additional banks or non-bank businesses or to open new facilities.

Banks with capital ratios below the required minimums are subject to certain administrative actions, including prompt corrective action, the termination of deposit insurance upon notice and hearing, or a temporary suspension of insurance without a hearing.

New Proposed Capital Rules. During 2012 the federal bank regulatory agencies issued joint proposed rules that implement Basel III regulatory capital reforms and changes required by the Reform Act. "Basel III" refers to two consultative documents released by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision in December 2009, the rules text released in December 2010 and loss absorbency rules issued in January 2011, which include significant changes to bank capital, leverage and liquidity requirements. The proposed rules received extensive comments. In a joint press release issued in November 2012, the agencies stated that they do not expect any of the proposed rules to become effective on the original target date of January 1, 2013. Industry participants are expecting further guidance in early 2013. Management has completed a preliminary assessment of the impact of the proposed rules and believes Plumas Bank's ratios would be in compliance with the requirements of the proposed rules if they were presently in effect.

Effects of Government Monetary Policy. Our earnings and growth are affected not only by general economic conditions, but also by the fiscal and monetary policies of the federal government, particularly the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve implements national monetary policy for such purposes as curbing inflation and combating recession, through its open market operations in U.S. Government securities, control of the discount rate applicable to borrowings from the Federal Reserve, and establishment of reserve requirements against certain deposits. These activities influence growth of bank loans, investments and deposits, and also affect interest rates charged on loans or paid on deposits. The nature and impact of future changes in monetary policies and their impact on us cannot be predicted with certainty.

Consumer Protection Laws and Regulations.The banking regulatory agencies are focusing greater attention on compliance with consumer protection laws and their implementing regulations. Examination and enforcement have become more intense in nature, and insured institutions have been advised to monitor carefully compliance with such laws and regulations. The Company is subject to many federal and state consumer protection and privacy statutes and regulations, some of which are discussed below.

The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (the “ECOA”) generally prohibits discrimination in any credit transaction, whether for consumer or business purposes, on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age (except in limited circumstances), receipt of income from public assistance programs, or good faith exercise of any rights under the Consumer Credit Protection Act.

The Truth in Lending Act (the “TILA”) is designed to ensure that credit terms are disclosed in a meaningful way so that consumers may compare credit terms more readily and knowledgeably. As a result of the TILA, all creditors must use the same credit terminology to express rates and payments, including the annual percentage rate, the finance charge, the amount financed, the total of payments and the payment schedule, among other things. As a result of Dodd Frank, Regulation Z promulgated under TILA includes new limits on loan originator compensation for all closed-end mortgages. These changes include, prohibiting certain payments to a mortgage broker or loan officer based on the transaction’s terms or conditions, prohibiting dual compensation, and prohibiting a mortgage broker or loan officer from ‘‘steering’’ consumers to transactions not in their interest, to increase mortgage broker or loan officer compensation.

The Fair Housing Act (the “FH Act”) regulates many practices, including making it unlawful for any lender to discriminate in its housing-related lending activities against any person because of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, handicap or familial status. A number of lending practices have been found by the courts to be, or may be considered, illegal under the FH Act, including some that are not specifically mentioned in the FH Act itself.

The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (the “HMDA”), in response to public concern over credit shortages in certain urban neighborhoods, requires public disclosure of information that shows whether financial institutions are serving the housing credit needs of the neighborhoods and communities in which they are located. The HMDA also includes a “fair lending”"fair lending" aspect that requires the collection and disclosure of data about applicant and borrower characteristics as a way of identifying possible discriminatory lending patterns and enforcing anti-discrimination statutes.

TheRight to Financial Privacy Act (the “RFPA”) imposes a new requirement for financial institutions to provide new privacy protections to consumers. Financial institutions must provide disclosures to consumers of its privacy policy, and state the rights of consumers to direct their financial institution not to share their nonpublic personal information with third parties.

Finally, theReal Estate Settlement Procedures Act (the “RESPA”) requires lenders to provide noncommercial borrowers with disclosures regarding the nature and cost of real estate settlements. Also, RESPA prohibits certain abusive practices, such as kickbacks, and places limitations on the amount of escrow accounts.

Penalties for noncompliance or violations under the above laws may include fines, reimbursement and other penalties. Due to heightened regulatory concern related to compliance with CRA, ECOA, TILA, FH Act, HMDA, RFPA and RESPA generally, the Company may incur additional compliance costs or be required to expend additional funds for investments in its local communities.

Recent Legislation and Other Changes.Federal and state laws affecting banking are enacted from time to time, and similarly federal and state regulations affecting banking are also adopted from time to time. The following include some of the recent laws and regulations affecting banking.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”), signed into law in July, 2010, will significantly change the current bank regulatory structure and affect the lending, investment, trading and operating activities of financial institutions and their holding companies. The Dodd-Frank Act creates of a new interagency council, the Financial System Oversight Council that is charged with identifying and monitoring the systemic risk to the U.S. economy posed by systemically significant, large financial companies, including bank holding companies and non-bank financial companies. The Office of Thrift Supervision will be eliminated and its powers distributed among the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC. The legislation also establishes a floor for capital of insured depository institutions that cannot be lower than the standards in effect today, and directs the federal banking regulators to implement new leverage and capital requirements within 18 months that take into account off-balance sheet activities and other risks, including risks relating to securitized products and derivatives.

The Dodd-Frank Act additionally creates a new independent federal regulator to administer federal consumer protection laws. The Dodd-Frank Act is expected to have a significant impact on our banks’ operations as its provisions take effect. Among the provisions that may affect the Bank are the following:

Deposit Insurance

The Dodd-Frank Act permanently increases the maximum deposit insurance amount for banks, savings institutions and credit unions to $250,000 per depositor, retroactive to January 1, 2009, and extends unlimited deposit insurance to non-interest bearing transaction accounts and interest on lawyers trust accounts through December 31, 2012. The Dodd-Frank Act also creates a new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with broad powers to supervise and enforce consumer protection laws. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has broad rulemaking authority for a wide range of consumer protection laws that apply to all banks and savings institutions such as the Bank, including the authority to prohibit “unfair, deceptive or abusive” acts and practices. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has examination and enforcement authority over all banks and savings institutions with more than $10 billion in assets. Banks and savings institutions with $10 billion or less in assets will be examined by their applicable bank regulators. The new legislation also weakens the federal preemption available for national banks and federal savings associations, and gives state attorneys general the ability to enforce applicable federal consumer protection laws.

The legislation also broadensbroadened the base for FDIC insurance assessments. Assessments willare now be based on the average consolidated total assets less tangible equity capital of a financial institution. The Dodd-Frank Act also repealsrequires the FDIC to increase the reserve ratio of the Deposit Insurance Fund from 1.15% to 1.35% of insured deposits by 2020 and eliminates the requirement that the FDIC pay dividends to insured depository institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds certain thresholds. The Dodd-Frank Act eliminates the federal statutory prohibition onagainst the payment of interest on demand deposits.business checking accounts.

Interstate Branching

The Dodd-Frank Act authorizes national and state banks to establish branches in other states to the same extent as a bank chartered by that state would be permitted to branch. Previously, banks could only establish branches in other states if the host state expressly permitted out-of-state banks to establish branches in that state. Accordingly, banks will be able to enter new markets more freely.

Limits on Derivatives

The Dodd-Frank Act prohibits state chartered banks from engaging in derivatives transactions unless the loans to one borrower limits of the state in which the bank is chartered takes into consideration credit exposure to derivatives transactions. For this purpose, derivative transactions include any contract, agreement, swap, warrant, note or option that is based in whole or in part on the value of, any interest in, or any quantitative measure or the occurrence of any event relating to, one or more commodities securities, currencies, interest or other rates, indices or other assets.

Transactions with Affiliates and Insiders

The Dodd-Frank Act expands the definition of “affiliate” for purposes of quantitative and qualitative limitations of Section 61323A of the Federal Reserve Act to include mutual funds advised by a depository institution or its affiliates. The Dodd-Frank Act applies Section 23A and Section 22(h) of the Federal Reserve Act (governing transactions with insiders) to derivative transactions, repurchase agreements and securities lending and borrowing transactions that create credit exposure to an affiliate or an insider. Any such transactions with affiliates must be fully secured. The current exemption from Section 23A for transactions with financial subsidiaries will be eliminated. The Dodd-Frank Act will additionally prohibit an insured depository institution from purchasing an asset from or selling an asset to an insider unless the transaction is on market terms and, if representing more than 10% of capital, is approved in advance by disinterested directors.

Debit Card Interchange Fees

The Dodd-Frank Act requires that the amount of any interchange fee charged by a debit card issuer with respect to a debit card transaction must be reasonable and proportional to the cost incurred by the issuer. The Federal Reserve Board (“FRB”) has established standards for reasonable and proportional fees which take into account the costs of preventing fraud. The restrictions on interchange fees, however, do not apply to banks that, together with their affiliates, have assets of less than $10 billion, such as the Bank.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

The Dodd-Frank Act creates a new, independent federal agency called the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), which is granted broad rulemaking, supervisory and enforcement powers under various federal consumer financial protection laws, including the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Truth in Lending Act, Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, Fair Credit Reporting Act, Fair Debt Collection Act, the Consumer Financial Privacy provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and certain other statutes. The CFPB has examination and primary enforcement authority with respect to depository institutions with $10 billion or more in assets. Smaller institutions will be subject to rules promulgated by the CFPB but will continue to be examined and supervised by federal banking regulators for consumer compliance purposes. The CFPB will have authority to prevent unfair, deceptive or abusive practices in connection with the offering of consumer financial products. The Dodd-Frank Act authorizes the CFPB to establish certain minimum standards for the origination of residential mortgages including a determination of the borrower’s ability to repay. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act eliminates interstate branching restrictionswill allow borrowers to raise certain defenses to foreclosure if they receive any loan other than a “qualified mortgage” as defined by the CFPB. The Dodd-Frank Act permits states to adopt consumer protection laws and standards that wereare more stringent than those adopted at the federal level and, in certain circumstances, permits state attorneys general to enforce compliance with both the state and federal laws and regulations.

The Electronic Funds Transfer Act (the “EFTA”) provides a basic framework for establishing the rights, liabilities, and responsibilities of consumers who use electronic funds transfer (“EFT”) systems. The EFTA is implemented as partby the Federal Reserve's Regulation E, which governs transfers initiated through ATMs, point-of-sale terminals, payroll cards, automated clearinghouse (ACH) transactions, telephone bill-payment plans, or remote banking services. Regulation E was amended in January 2010 to require consumers to opt in (affirmatively consent) to participation in the Bank’s overdraft service program for ATM and one-time debit card transactions before overdraft fees may be assessed on the consumer’s account. Notice of the Riegle-Neal Interstate Bankingopt-in right must be provided to all existing and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994, and removes many restrictions on de novo interstate branching by national and state-chartered banks. The FDICnew customers who are consumers, and the OCC nowcustomer’s affirmative consent must be obtained, before charges may be assessed on the consumer’s account for paying such overdrafts.

The new rule provides bank customers with an ongoing right to revoke consent to participation in an overdraft service program for ATM and one-time debit card transactions, as opposed to being automatically enrolled in such a program. The new rule also prohibits banks from conditioning the payment of overdrafts for checks, ACH transactions, or other types of transactions that overdraw the consumer’s account on the consumer’s opting into an overdraft service for ATM and one-time debit card transactions. For customers who do not affirmatively consent to overdraft service for ATM and one-timedebit card transactions, a bank must provide those customers with the same account terms, conditions, and features that it provides to consumers who do affirmatively consent, except for the overdraft service for ATM and one-time debit card transactions.

The Bank’s compliance with the new Regulation E amendments may have authority to approve applications by insured state nonmember banksan impact on the Bank’s revenue from overdraft service fees and national banks, respectively, to establish de novo branches in states other than the bank’s home state if “the law of the State in which the branch is located, or is to be located, would permit establishment of the branch, if the bank were a State bank chartered by such State.” The enactment of this section may significantly increase interstate banking by community banks in western states, where barriers to entry were previously high.non-sufficient funds (“NSF”) charges.

Many of the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act will not take effect for at least a year, and the legislation requiresare still pending various federal agencies to promulgate numerous and extensive implementing regulations over the next several years. Although the substance and scope of these regulations cannot be determined at this time, it is expected that the legislation and implementing regulations, particularly those provisions relating to the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, will increase the Bank’s operating and compliance costs as it is likely that the Bank’s existing regulatory agencies will adopt the same or similar consumer protections as the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau will adopt.

On June 21, 2010, the federal banking agencies issued final guidance on incentive compensation. The final guidance is largely unchanged from the FRB’s preliminary guidance published in 2009, with the exception of a few adjustments/clarifications in response to feedback the FRB received during the open comment period. The guidance became effective on June 25, 2010 (the date published in the Federal Register, and applies to all banks. Except for the largest banking organizations, enforcement of this guidance will be handled through the supervisors’ regular risk-focused examination process. The guidance is principles-based, rather than prescriptive, and also identifies expectations of large banking organizations that go beyond what will be expected of community banks, and emphasizes that the application of the guidance should be scaled appropriately for the complexity of the organization and the extent to which incentive arrangements are utilized. The employees covered by the final guidance are senior executives and others who are responsible for oversight of the organization’s firm-wide activities or material business lines; individual employees, including non-executive employees, whose activities may expose the organization to material amounts of risk; and groups of employees who are subject to the same or similar incentive compensation arrangements and who, in the aggregate, may expose the organization to material amounts of risk, even if no individual employee is likely to expose the organization to material risk. The guidance provides for three principles for safe and sound incentive compensation arrangements:

The Electronic Funds Transfer Act (the “EFTA”) provides a basic framework for establishing the rights, liabilities, and responsibilities of consumers who use electronic funds transfer (“EFT”) systems. The EFTA is implemented by the Federal Reserve’s Regulation E, which governs transfers initiated through ATMs, point-of-sale terminals, payroll cards, automated clearinghouse (“ACH”) transactions, telephone bill-payment plans, or remote banking services. Regulation E was amended in January 2010 to require consumers to opt in (affirmatively consent) to participation in the Bank’s overdraft service program for ATM and one-time debit card transactions before overdraft fees may be assessed on the consumer’s account. Notice of the opt-in right must be provided to all existing and new customers who are consumers, and the customer’s affirmative consent must be obtained, before charges may be assessed on the consumer’s account for paying such overdrafts.

The new rule provides bank customers with an ongoing right to revoke consent to participation in an overdraft service program for ATM and one-time debit card transactions, as opposed to being automatically enrolled in such a program. The new rule also prohibits banks from conditioning the payment of overdrafts for checks, ACH transactions, or other types of transactions that overdraw the consumer’s account on the consumer’s opting into an overdraft service for ATM and one-time debit card transactions. For customers who do not affirmatively consent to overdraft service for ATM and one-time debit card transactions, a bank must provide those customers with the same account terms, conditions, and features that it provides to consumers who do affirmatively consent, except for the overdraft service for ATM and one-time debit card transactions.

The mandatory compliance date for the Regulation E amendments is July 1, 2010 provided that the Bank may continue to assess overdraft service fees or charges on existing customer accounts prior to August 15, 2010, without obtaining the consumer’s affirmative consent. The Bank’s compliance with the new Regulation E amendments may have an impact on the Bank’s revenue from overdraft service fees and non-sufficient funds (“NSF”) charges.

In May 2009 the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009 was enacted to help consumers avoid mortgage foreclosures on their homes through certain loss mitigation actions including special forbearance, loan modification, pre-foreclosure sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, support for borrower housing counseling, subordinate lien resolution, and borrower relocation. The new law permits the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), for mortgages either in default or facing imminent default, to: (1) authorize the modification of such mortgages; and (2) establish a program for payment of a partial claim to a mortgagee who agrees to apply the claim amount to payment of a mortgage on a 1- to 4-family residence. In implementing the law, the Secretary of HUD is authorized to (1) provide compensation to the mortgagee for lost income on monthly mortgage payments due to interest rate reduction; (2) reimburse the mortgagee from a guaranty fund in connection with activities that the mortgagee is required to undertake concerning repayment by the mortgagor of the amount owed to HUD; (3) make payments to the mortgagee on behalf of the borrower, under terms defined by HUD; and (4) make mortgage modification with terms extended up to 40 years from the modification date. The new law also authorizes the Secretary of HUD to: (1) reassign the mortgage to the mortgagee; (2) act as a Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA, or Ginnie Mae) issuer, or contract with an entity for such purpose, in order to pool the mortgage into a Ginnie Mae security; or (3) resell the mortgage in accordance with any program established for purchase by the federal government of insured mortgages. The new law also amends the Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008, with respect to emergency assistance for the redevelopment of abandoned and foreclosed homes (neighborhood stabilization), to authorize each state that has received certain minimum allocations and has fulfilled certain requirements, to distribute any remaining amounts to areas with homeowners at risk of foreclosure or in foreclosure without regard to the percentage of home foreclosures in such areas.

Also in May 2009, the Credit Card Act of 2009 was enacted to help consumers and ban certain practices of credit card issuers. The new law allows interest rate hikes on existing balances only under limited conditions, such as when a promotional rate ends, there is a variable rate or if the cardholder makes a late payment. Interest rates on new transactions can increase only after the first year. Significant changes in terms on accounts cannot occur without 45 days’days' advance notice of the change. The new law bans raising interest rates on customers based on their payment records with other unrelated credit issuers (such as utility companies and other creditors) for existing credit card balances, though card issuers would still be allowed to use universal default on future credit card balances if they give at least 45 days’days' advance notice of the change. The new law allows consumers to opt out of certain significant changes in terms on their accounts. Opting out means cardholders agree to close their accounts and pay off the balance under the old terms. They have at least five years to pay the balance. Credit card issuers will be banned from issuing credit cards to anyone under 21, unless they have adult co-signers on the accounts or can show proof they have enough income to repay the card debt.

The new law requires card issuers to give card account holders “a"a reasonable amount of time”time" to make payments on monthly bills. That means payments would be due at least 21 days after they are mailed or delivered. Credit card issuers would no longer be able to set early morning or other arbitrary deadlines for payments. When consumers have accounts that carry different interest rates for different types of purchases payments in excess of the minimum amount due must go to balances with higher interest rates first. Consumers must “opt in”"opt in" to over-limit fees. Those who opt out would have their transactions rejected if they exceed their credit limits, thus avoiding over-limit fees. Fees charged for going over the limit must be reasonable. Finance charges on outstanding credit card balances would be computed based on purchases made in the current cycle rather than going back to the previous billing cycle to calculate interest charges. Fees on credit cards cannot exceed 25 percent of the available credit limit in the first year of the card.

On February 17, 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (“ARRA”) was enacted to provide stimulus to the struggling US economy. ARRA authorizes spending of $787 billion, including about $288 billion for tax relief, $144 billion for state and local relief aid, and $111 billion for infrastructure and science. In addition, ARRA includes additional executive compensation restrictions for recipients of funds from the US Treasury under the Troubled Assets Relief Program of the Emergency Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 (“EESA”).

EESA was amended by ARRA to provide additional incentive compensation restrictions for financial institutions receiving TARP funds and also require additional corporate governance provisions with respect to limiting golden parachutes, lavish expenditures and requiring officer certifications of compliance and clawbacks for improperly earned incentive compensation at such institutions.

In addition, EESA as amended by ARRA provides that for any TARP recipient, its annual meeting materials shall include a nonbinding shareholder approval proposal of executive compensation for shareholders to vote.

ARRA also provides $730 million to the SBA and makes changes to the agency’s lending and investment programs so that they can reach more small businesses that need help. The funding includes:

In October 2008, the President signed the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”), in response to the global financial crisis of 2008 authorizing the United States Secretary of the Treasury with authority to spend up to $700 billion to purchase distressed assets, especially mortgage-backed securities, under the Troubled Assets Relief Program (“TARP”) and make capital injections into banks under the Capital Purchase Program. EESA gives the government the unprecedented authority to buy troubled assets on balance sheets of financial institutions under the Troubled Assets Relief Program. Some of the other provisions of EESA are as follows:

On January 1, 2012, SB 664 (Committee on Banking and Financial Institutions, Chapter 243, Statutes of 2011) became operative. While some substantive changes were included in this legislation due to the passage of the Dodd-Frank federal legislation and some technical corrections that resulted from earlier amendments to the Code, the majority of the work involved in SB 664 was to reorder the section numbering in the Code. Among other things, the law requires a bank that establishes a branch office in this state in accordance with the National Bank Act, as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act to provide a specified notice to the Commissioner of DFI within 10 days of the establishment, relocation, or redesignation of offices.

In 2010, California SB 931 was enacted and provides that the first lien holder of a California residential loan accepts as full payment and satisfaction of such lien after the successful completion of the short sale of such residence, and furthermore such lender is prevented from pursuing a deficiency against the noncorporate borrower. In 2011, the benefits of SB 931 was extended to such borrowers with a second or subordinate lien in SB458 where such lien holder agreed to the short sale.

In California, the enactment of AB329 in 2009, the Reverse Mortgage Elder Protection Act of 2009 prohibits a lender or any other person who participates in the origination of the mortgage from participation in, being associated with, or employing any party that participates in or is associated with any other financial or insurance activity or referring a prospective borrower to anyone for the purchase of other financial or insurance products; and imposes certain disclosure requirements on the lender.

The enactment of AB1160 in 2009, requires a supervised financial institution in California that negotiates primarily in any of a number of specified languages in the course of entering into a contract or agreement for a loan or extension of credit secured by residential real property, to deliver, prior to the execution of the contract or agreement, and no later than 3 business days after receiving the written application, a specified form in that language summarizing the terms of the contract or agreement; provides for administrative penalties for violations; and requires the California Department of Corporations and the Department of Financial Institutions to create a form for providing translations and make it available in Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese and Korean. The statute becomes operative on July 1, 2010, or 90 days after issuance of the form, whichever occurs later.

The enactment of AB 1291 in 2009 makes changes to the California Unclaimed Property Law including (among other things): allowing electronic notification to customers who have consented to electronic notice; requiring that notices contain certain information and allow the holder to provide electronic means to enable the owner to contact the holder in lieu of returning the prescribed form to declare the owner’s intent; authorizing the holder to give additional notices; and requiring, beginning January 1, 2011, a banking or financial organization to provide a written notice regarding escheat at the time a new account or safe deposit box is opened.

The enactment of SB306 makes specified changes to clarify existing law related to filing a notice of default on residential real property in California, including (among other things): clarifying that the provisions apply to mortgages and deeds of trust recorded from January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2007, secured by owner-occupied 3 4 residential real property containing no more than 4 dwelling units; revising the declaration to be filed with the notice of default; specifying how the loan servicers have to maximize net present value under their pooling and servicing agreements applies to certain investors; specifying how and when the notice to residents of property subject to foreclosure is to be mailed; and extending the time during which the notice of sale must be recorded from 14 to 20 days. The bill also makes certain changes related to short-pay agreements and short-pay demand statements.

On February 20, 2009, Governor Schwarzenegger signed ABX2 7 and SBX2 7, which established the California Foreclosure Prevention Act. The California Foreclosure Prevention Act modifies the foreclosure process to provide additional time for borrowers to work out loan modifications while providing an exemption for mortgage loan servicers that have implemented a comprehensive loan modification program. Civil Code Section 2923.52 requires an additional 90 day period beyond the period already provided before a Notice of Sale can be given in order to allow all parties to pursue a loan modification to prevent foreclosure of loans meeting certain criteria identified in that section.

A mortgage loan servicer who has implemented a comprehensive loan modification program may file an application for exemption from the provisions of Civil Code Section 2923.52. Approval of this application provides the mortgage loan servicer an exemption from the additional 90-day period before filing the Notice of Sale when foreclosing on real property covered by the new law.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

See Note 3 – “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies – Adoption of New Accounting Standards” of the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 – Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Annual Report on Form 10K for information related to recent accounting pronouncements.

As a smaller reporting company we are not required to provide the information required by this item.

ITEM 1B.

UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

No comments have been submitted to the registrant by the staff of the Securities Exchange Commission.

Of the Company’s eleven depository branches, ten are owned and one is leased. The Company also leases one lending office and one administrative office, and owns four administrative facilities.

Total rental expenses under all leases, including premises, totaled $153,000, $150,000 and $20,000, in 2012, 2011 and $317,000, in 2011, 2010 and 2009 respectively. The decline in rental expense during 2010 resulted from the purchase of our Redding branch building on March 31, 2010. Previously we had leased this building. Under the terms of the lease agreement we were provided free rent for a period of time; however, in accordance with accounting principalsprinciples we recognized monthly rent expense equal to the total payments required under the lease dividend by the term of the lease in months. At the time of the purchase we reversed this accrual recognizing a $184 thousand reduction in rental expense. The expiration dates of the leases vary, with the first such lease expiring during 2012 and the last such lease expiring during 2015.

Future minimum lease payments in thousands of dollars are as follows:

Year Ending December 31,
2013		$	91,000
2014			60,000
2015			31,000
		$	182,000

The Company maintains insurance coverage on its premises, leaseholds and equipment, including business interruption and record reconstruction coverage. The branch properties and non-branch offices are adequate, suitable, in good condition and have adequate parking facilities for customers and employees. The Company and Bank are limited in their investments in real property under Federal and state banking laws. Generally, investments in real property are either for the Company and Bank use or are in real property and real property interests in the ordinary course of the Bank’s business.

From time to time, the Company and/or its subsidiary are a party to claims and legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of the Company’sCompany's management, the amount of ultimate liability with respect to such proceedings will not have a material adverse effect on the financial condition or results of operations of the Company taken as a whole.

Not applicable.

PART II

The Company’s common stock is quoted on the NASDAQ Capital Market under the ticker symbol “PLBC”"PLBC". As of December 31, 2011,2012, there were 4,776,339 shares of the Company’s stock outstanding held by approximately 1,640 shareholders of record as of the same date. The following table shows the high and low sales prices for the common stock, for each quarter as reported by Yahoo Finance.

Dividends paid to shareholders by the Company are subject to restrictions set forth in California General Corporation Law, which provides that a corporation may make a distribution to its shareholders if retained earnings immediately prior to the dividend payout are at least equal to the amount of the proposed distribution. As a bank holding company without significant assets other than its equity position in the Bank, the Company’s ability to pay dividends to its shareholders depends primarily upon dividends it receives from the Bank.

It is the policy of the Company to periodically distribute excess retained earnings to the shareholders through the payment of cash dividends. Such dividends help promote shareholder value and capital adequacy by enhancing the marketability of the Company’s stock. All authority to provide a return to the shareholders in the form of a cash or stock dividend or split rests with the Board of Directors (the “Board). The Board will periodically, but on no regular schedule and in accordance with regulatory restrictions, if any, review the appropriateness of a cash dividend payment. No common cash dividends were paid in 20102012 or 2011 and none are anticipated to be paid in 2012.2013.

The Company is subject to various restrictions on the payment of dividends. See Note 2 “Regulatory Matters” and Note 13 “Shareholders’ Equity – Dividend Restrictions” of the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 – Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Annual Report on Form 10K.

On January 30, 2009, under the Capital Purchase Program, the Company entered into a Letter Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) with the United States Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”), pursuant to which the Company issued and sold (i) 11,949 shares of the Company’s Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A (the “Preferred Shares”) and (ii) a ten-year warrant to purchase up to 237,712 shares of the Company’s common stock, no par value at an exercise price, subject to anti-dilution adjustments, of $7.54 per share, for an aggregate purchase price of $11,949,000 in cash. The Series A Preferred Stock and the Warrant were issued in a private placement exempt from registration pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. As described in the following paragraph the Purchase Agreement contains provisions that restrict the payment of dividends on Plumas Bancorp common stock and restrict the Company’s ability to repurchase Plumas Bancorp common stock.

Under the Purchase Agreement, prior to January 30, 2012, unless the Company has redeemed the Preferred Shares, or the Treasury has transferred the Preferred Shares to a third party, the consent of the Treasury will be required for the Company to: (1) declare or pay any dividend or make any distribution on shares of the Common Stock (other than regular quarterly cash dividends of not more than $0.04 per share or regular semi-annual cash dividends of not more than $0.08 per share); or (2) redeem, purchase or acquire any shares of Common Stock or other equity or capital securities, other than in connection with benefit plans consistent with past practice and certain other circumstances specified in the Purchase Agreement.

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans.The following table sets forth securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2011.2012.

For additional information related to the above plans see Note 13 of the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 – Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Annual Report on Form 10K.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.There were no purchases of Plumas Bancorp common stock by the Company during 2011.2012.

ITEM 6.

SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The following table presents a summary of selected financial data and should be read in conjunction with the Company’s consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included under Item 8 – Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

ITEM 7.

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

General

We are a bank holding company for Plumas Bank, a California state-chartered commercial bank. We derive our income primarily from interest received on real estate related, commercial and consumer loans and, to a lesser extent, interest on investment securities, fees received in connection with servicing deposit and loan customers and fees from the sale of loans. Our major operating expenses are the interest we pay on deposits and borrowings and general operating expenses. We rely on locally-generated deposits to provide us with funds for making loans.

We are subject to competition from other financial institutions and our operating results, like those of other financial institutions operating in California, are significantly influenced by economic conditions in California, including the strength of the real estate market. In addition, both the fiscal and regulatory policies of the federal and state government and regulatory authorities that govern financial institutions and market interest rates also impact the Bank’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Critical Accounting Policies

Our accounting policies are integral to understanding the financial results reported. Our most complex accounting policies require management’s judgment to ascertain the valuation of assets, liabilities, commitments and contingencies. We have established detailed policies and internal control procedures that are intended to ensure valuation methods are applied in an environment that is designed and operating effectively and applied consistently from period to period. The following is a brief description of our current accounting policies involving significant management valuation judgments.

Allowance for Loan Losses.The allowance for loan losses is an estimate of credit losses inherent in the Company’sCompany's loan portfolio that have been incurred as of the balance-sheet date. The allowance is established through a provision for loan losses which is charged to expense. Additions to the allowance are expected to maintain the adequacy of the total allowance after credit losses and loan growth. Credit exposures determined to be uncollectible are charged against the allowance. Cash received on previously charged off amounts is recorded as a recovery to the allowance. The overall allowance consists of two primary components, specific reserves related to impaired loans and general reserves for inherent losses related to loans that are collectively evaluated for impairment.

We evaluate our allowance for loan losses quarterly. We believe that the allowance for loan losses is a “critical accounting estimate” because it is based upon management’s assessment of various factors affecting the collectibilitycollectability of the loans, including current economic conditions, past credit experience, delinquency status, the value of the underlying collateral, if any, and a continuing review of the portfolio of loans.

We cannot provide you with any assurance that economic difficulties or other circumstances which would adversely affect our borrowers and their ability to repay outstanding loans will not occur which would be reflected in increased losses in our loan portfolio, which could result in actual losses that exceed reserves previously established.

Other Real Estate Owned.Other real estate owned (OREO) represents properties acquired through foreclosure or physical possession. OREO is initially recorded at fair value less costs to sell when acquired. Write-downs to fair value at the time of transfer to OREO is charged to allowance for loan losses. Subsequent to foreclosure, we periodically evaluate the value of OREO held for sale and record a valuation allowance for any subsequent declines in fair value less selling costs. Subsequent declines in value are charged to operations. Fair value is based on our assessment of information available to us at the end of a reporting period and depends upon a number of factors, including our historical experience, economic conditions, and issues specific to individual properties. Our evaluation of these factors involves subjective estimates and judgments that may change.

Income Taxes.The Company files its income taxes on a consolidated basis with its subsidiary. The allocation of income tax expense (benefit) represents each entity’sentity's proportionate share of the consolidated provision for income taxes.

Deferred income taxes reflect the estimated future tax effects of temporary differences between the reported amount of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and such amounts as measured by tax laws and regulations. We use an estimate of future earnings to support our position that the benefit of our deferred tax assets will be realized. A valuation allowance is recognized if, based on the weight of available evidence, management believes it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. If future income should prove non-existent or less than the amount of the deferred tax assets within the tax years to which they may be applied, the asset may not be realized and our net income will be reduced.

When tax returns are filed, it is highly certain that some positions taken would be sustained upon examination by the taxing authorities, while others are subject to uncertainty about the merits of the position taken or the amount of the position that would be ultimately sustained. The benefit of a tax position is recognized in the financial statements in the period during which, based on all available evidence, management believes it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained upon examination, including the resolution of appeals or litigation processes, if any. Tax positions taken are not offset or aggregated with other positions. Tax positions that meet the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold are measured as the largest amount of tax benefit that is more than 50 percent likely of being realized upon settlement with the applicable taxing authority. The portion of the benefits associated with tax positions taken that exceeds the amount measured as described above is reflected as a liability for unrecognized tax benefits in the accompanying balance sheet along with any associated interest and penalties that would be payable to the taxing authorities upon examination.

The following discussion is designed to provide a better understanding of significant trends related to the Company’sCompany's financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and capital. It pertains to the Company’sCompany's financial condition, changes in financial condition and results of operations as of December 31, 20112012 and 20102011 and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2011.2012. The discussion should be read in conjunction with the Company’sCompany's audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto and the other financial information appearing elsewhere herein.

Overview

The Company recorded net income of $941 thousand for the year ended December 31, 2011, a slight decrease from net income of $971 thousand during the year ended December 31, 2010 but up $10.1 million over 2009’s net loss of $9.1 million. Excluding a $1.4 million gain ($0.8 million net of tax) in 2010 on sale of the Bank’s merchant card portfolio, net income would have increased by $0.8 million over 2010.

Net interest income declined by $713 thousand from $17.5 million during 2010 to $16.8$1.95 million for the year ended December 31, 2011. This decrease in2012, a 107% increase over net interest income was mostly related to a $21 million decline in average loan balances. During the year ended December 31, 2011 non-interest income decreased by $1.3 million to $7.2 million, from $8.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2010. This decrease was related to a $1.4 million gain on the sale of our merchant processing portfolio in 2010. Additionally, gain on sale of investment securities declined by $494 thousand from $1.2 million in 2010 to $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2011. Partially offsetting these declines in non-interest income was an $884 thousand increase in gain on sale of government guaranteed loans from $1.1 million in 2010 to $1.9 million in 2011. Non-interest expense increased by $105 thousand from $19.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2010 to $19.2 million during the current twelve month period. While we have achieved savings in many categories of non-interest expense these were offset in the current year by an increase of $649 thousand in loss on sale of OREO.

The most significant expense reduction was a $2.0 million decrease in our provision for loan losses from $5.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 to $3.5 million during 2011. The $3.5 million provision recorded for the year ended December 31, 2011 primarily relates to net charge-offs during the twelve month period. We have experienced a $3.8 million decrease in net charge-offs during the comparison years. Net charge-offs declined from $7.7 million during 2010 to $3.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2011. Net charge-offs as percentage of average loans decreased significantly from 2.39% during the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 to 1.29% during the current year.

The provision for income taxes declined from $389 thousand in 2010 to $295$941 thousand during the year ended December 31, 2011.

Net interest income increased by $331 thousand from $16.8 million during 2011 to $17.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2012. This increase in net interest income resulted from a decrease in interest expense of $574 thousand partially offset by a decrease in interest income of $243 thousand. The provision for loan losses declined by $1.1 million from $3.5 million during 2011 to $2.4 million during 2012 resulting in an increase in net interest income after provision for loan losses of $1.5 million.

During the year ended December 31, 2012 non-interest income decreased by $566 thousand to $6.6 million, from $7.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2011. This decrease was related to declines of $615 thousand in gain on sale of loans and $263 thousand in gain on sale of securities partially offset by an increase of $140 thousand in service charge income and a net increase in all other categories of non-interest income totaling $172 thousand.

We continue to achieve savings in many categories of non-interest expense resulting in a reduction in non-interest expense of $869 thousand from $19.2 million during the twelve months ended December 31, 2011 to $18.4 million during 2012. Reductions of $227 thousand in salary and benefits expense, $486 thousand in FDIC insurance, $590 thousand in loss on sale of OREO, $235 thousand in OREO expense, and $86 thousand in postage were partially offset by an increase in the provision for changes in valuation of OREO of $328 thousand, an increase in outside service fees of $233 thousand, an increase in professional fees of $145 thousand and an increase in insurance expense of $78 thousand.

The provision for income taxes increased from $295 thousand in 2011 to $1.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2012.

Net income allocable to common shareholders decreased slightlyincreased by $1 million from $287$257 thousand during the year ended December 31, 20102011 to $257 thousand$1.3 million during 2011.2012. Income allocable to common shareholders is calculated by subtracting dividends and discount amortized on preferred stock from net income.

Total assets at December 31, 2011 decreased $29.12012 were $478 million, or 6% toan increase of $22.5 million from $455 million. Decreases include $5.1 million in investment securities, $19.7 million in net loans, $1.6 million in cash and due from banks and $2.7 million in all other assets. Net loans decreased by 6% from $307 million at December 31, 2010 to $287 million at December 31, 2011. This declineIncreases included $23.0 million in investments and $22.8 million in net loans was mostly relatedloans. These were partially offset by declines of $18.4 million in cash, $3.3 million in OREO and $1.6 million in other assets.

Core deposit growth has been strong in 2012 as evidenced by increases of $17.7 million in demand deposits and $11.1 million in savings and money market accounts. Time deposits declined by $9.8 million, much of which we attribute to normal pay downsmigration into other types of deposits given the low rates and prepayments, loan charge-offs, real estate acquired through foreclosure and our continued efforts to reduce the levellack of construction and land development loan balances. At December 31, 2011 investment securities totaled $57.9liquidity associated with time deposits.

Shareholders’ equity increased by $2.2 million compared to $63.0from $39.6 million at December 31, 2010. Investment securities are composed of debt securities issued by agencies sponsored by the U.S. Government.

Total deposits were $3912011 to $41.8 million as of December 31, 2011, a decrease of $33.7 million, or 8%, from the December 31, 2010 balance of $425 million. The decline in deposits was primarily related to maturities from a higher rate promotional time deposit product we began offering in June, 2009 and continued to offer until April 30, 2010. Core deposit growth was strong with increases in non-interest bearing deposits of $14.1 million and savings deposits of $10.8 million. Non-interest bearing deposits as a percentage of total deposits increased from 26.3% at December 31, 2010 to 32.2% at December 31, 2011.

Shareholders’ equity as of December 31, 2011 increased by $1.6 million to $39.6 million up from $38.0 million as of December 31, 2010.2012. This increase was mostlyincludes the $1.95 million earned in 2012, a $171 thousand increase in unrealized gain on investment securities and a $95 thousand increase in common stock related to earnings during the period, the reversal of $524 thousand in accrued preferred stock dividends and an increase of $210 thousand in accumulated other comprehensive income/loss from a loss of $52 thousand at December 31, 2010 to accumulated other comprehensive income of $158 thousand at December 31, 2011.stock-based compensation expense.

The return on average assets was 0.42% for 2012, up from 0.20% for 2011, up from 0.19% for 2010.2011. The return on average common equity was 4.3% for 2012, up from 0.9% for 2011, down from 1.1% for 2010.2011.

Results of Operations

Net Interest Income

The following table presents, for the years indicated, the distribution of consolidated average assets, liabilities and shareholders’shareholders' equity. Average balances are based on average daily balances. It also presents the amounts of interest income from interest-earning assets and the resultant yields expressed in both dollars and yield percentages, as well as the amounts of interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities and the resultant cost expressed in both dollars and rate percentages. Nonaccrual loans are included in the calculation of average loans while nonaccrued interest thereon is excluded from the computation of yields earned:

The following table sets forth changes in interest income and interest expense, for the years indicated and the amount of change attributable to variances in volume, rates and the combination of volume and rates based on the relative changes of volume and rates: