•         An increase in the minimum Tier 1 capital ratio from 4.00% to 6.00% of risk-weighted assets.

•         A new category and a required 4.50% of risk-weighted assets ratio is established for “common equity Tier 1” as a subset of Tier 1 capital limited to common equity.

•         A minimum non-risk-based leverage ratio is set at 4.00% eliminating a 3.00% exception for higher rated banks.

•         Changes in the permitted composition of Tier 1 capital to exclude trust preferred securities (other than certain grandfathered trust preferred securities)securities issued), mortgage servicing rights and certain deferred tax assets and include unrealized gains and losses on available for sale debt and equity securities.

WithoutUnder the capital rules, after taking into account the capital conservation buffer, the new capital rules requireBancorp and the Bank must maintain the following minimum ratios: (i) a Tier 1 leverage ratio of 4.0%;, (ii) a common equity Tier 1 risk-based capitalcapital ratio of 4.5%, plus the capital conservation buffer, effectively resulting in a minimum common equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 7.0%, (iii) a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6%6.0%, plus the capital conservation buffer, effectively resulting in a minimum common equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 8.5%, and (iv) a total risk-based capital ratio of 8.0%, plus the capital conservation buffer, effectively resulting in a minimum total risk-based capital ratio of 10.5%. To be considered “well capitalized,” a bank holding company or bank would be required tomust have the following minimum ratios: (i) a Tier 1 leverage ratio of 5.0%;, (ii) a common equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6.5%, (iii) a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 8.0%, and (iv) a total risk-based capital ratio of 10.0%. The implementation of the new capital conservation buffer requirements began on January 1, 2016 at 0.625% of risk-weighted assets, increasing each year by 0.625% until fully implemented in January 2019 at 2.50% of risk-weighted assets.

Failure to meet statutorily mandated capital guidelines or more restrictive ratios separatelyseparately established for a financial institution could subject a bank or bank holding company to a variety of enforcement remedies, including issuance of a capital directive, the termination of deposit insurance by the FDIC, a prohibition on accepting or renewing brokered deposits, limitations on the rates of interest that the institution may pay on its deposits and other restrictions on its business. Significant additional restrictions can be imposed on FDIC-insured depository institutions that fail to meet applicable capital requirements under the regulatory agencies’ prompt corrective action authority.

At DecemberDecember 31, 2017,2020, (i) the Bancorp’s and the Bank’s common equity Tier 1 capital ratios were 12.19%13.53% and 13.46%13.83%, respectively; (ii) their total risk-based capital ratios were, respectively, 14.11%15.47% and 14.46%14.99%; (iii) their Tier 1 risk-based capital ratios were, respectively, 12.19%13.53% and 13.46%13.83%; and (iv) their leverage capital ratios were, respectively, 10.35%10.94% and 11.82%11.19%, all of which ratios exceeded the minimum percentage requirements to be deemed “well-capitalized” for regulatory purposes.

While the new capital rules set higher regulatory capital standards for the Bancorp and the Bank bank regulators may also continue their past policies of expecting banks toto maintain additional capital beyond the new minimum requirements.requirements of the capital rules. The federal banking agencies may also require banks and bank holding companies subject to enforcement actions to maintain capital ratios in excess of the minimum ratios otherwise required to be deemed “well-capitalized. The implementation of the new capital rules or more stringent requirements to maintain higher levels of capital or to maintain higher levels of liquid assets could adversely impact the Bancorp’s net income and return on equity, restrict the ability of the Bank and/or the Bancorp to pay dividends or executive bonuses and require the raising of additional capital.

As of December 31, 2017, the Bancorp and the Bank met all applicable capital requirements under the new capital rules on a fully phased-in basis if such requirements were currently in effect.

 In September 2017, the federal bank regulators proposed revisions to the regulatory capital treatment for mortgage servicing assets, certain deferred tax assets, investments in the capital instruments of unconsolidated financial institutions, and minority interests. These changes would both simplify the calculations and have the impact of increasing regulatory capital ratios for some non-advanced approaches banking organizations. In November 2017, the federal banking regulators revised the Basel III Capital Rules to extend the current transitional treatment of these items for non-advanced approaches banking organizations until the September 2017 proposal is finalized. The September 2017 proposal would also change the capital treatment of certain commercial real estate loans under the standardized approach used to calculate capital ratios.

In December 2017, the Basel Committee published “Basel“Basel IV” standards to finalize the Basel III regulatory reforms. According to the Basel Committee, Basel IV is intended to, among other things, reduce variability in risk weighted assets by implementing a standardized approach for operation risk and credit risk to replace model-based approaches for certain categories of risk weighted assets, and by reducing the scope of model-based parameters and implementing exposure-level parameter floors where model-based approaches remain available. Under the Basel framework, these standards will generally be effective on January 1, 2022,2023, with an aggregate output floor phasing in through January 1, 2027.2028. The impact of Basel IV on us will depend on the manner in which it is implemented by the federal bank regulators.

Prompt Corrective Action Provisions

The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (the “FDI Act”) requires the federal bank regulatory agencies to take “prompt corrective action” with respect to a depository institution if that institution does not meet certain capital adequacy standards, including requiring the prompt submission of an acceptable capital restoration plan. Depending on the bank’s capital ratios, the agencies’ regulations define five categories in which an insured depository institution will be placed: well-capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized, and critically undercapitalized. At each successive lower capital category, an insured bank is subject to more restrictions, including restrictions on the bank's activities, operational practices or the ability to pay dividends. Based upon its capital levels, a bank that is classified as well-capitalized, adequately capitalized, or undercapitalized may be treated as though it were in the next lower capital category if the appropriate federal banking agency, after notice and opportunity for hearing, determines that an unsafe or unsound condition, or an unsafe or unsound practice, warrants such treatment. A bank’s capital category is determined solely for the purpose of applying the prompt corrective action regulations and the capital category may not constitute an accurate representation of the bank’s overall financial condition or prospects for other purposes.

The FDI Act generally prohibits a depository institution from making any capital distributions (including payment of a dividend) or paying any management fee to its parent holding company, if the depository institution would thereafter be “undercapitalized.” “Undercapitalized” institutions are subject to growth limitations and are required to submit capital restoration plans. If a depository institution fails to submit an acceptable plan, it is treated as if it is “significantly undercapitalized.” “Significantly undercapitalized” depository institutions may be subject to a number of requirements and restrictions, including orders to sell sufficient voting stock to become “adequately capitalized,” requirements to reduce total assets, and cessation of receipt of deposits from correspondent banks. “Critically undercapitalized” institutions are subject to the appointment of a receiver or conservator. The capital classification of a bank holding company and a bank affects the frequency of regulatory examinations, the bank holding company’s and the bank’s ability to engage in certain activities and the deposit insurance premium paid by the bank.

As of December 31, 2020, the Bancorp and the Bank met all requirements to be considered well-capitalized under the capital rules.

Volcker Rule

In December 2013, the federal bank regulatory agencies adopted final rules that implementimplement a part of the Dodd-Frank Act commonly referred to as the “Volcker Rule.” Under theseIn the fall of 2019, the federal banking regulatory agencies adopted revised rules to simplify and tailor the Volcker Rules. The revised rules became effective on January 1, 2020, with a compliance date of January 1, 2021. The revised rules continue to restrict banking entities subject to certain exceptions, banking entities,the Volcker Rule, including the Bancorp and the Bank and its subsidiaries, are restricted from engaging in activities that are considered proprietary trading and from sponsoring or investing in certain entities, including hedge or private equity funds that are considered “covered funds,” subject to certain exceptions. The revised rules provide regulatory relief by tailoring application of the Volcker Rule based on the level of trading assets and liabilities, simplifying certain standards and requirements, and reducing compliance burden. In June 2020, the federal bank regulatory agencies finalized amendments to the Volcker Rule covered funds regulations, effective October 1, 2020. The amendments modified the provisions for certain existing covered fund exclusions, including loan securitizations and public welfare and small business funds, and added certain additional covered fund exclusions, including credit funds and venture capital funds.” The Federal Reserve granted an extension until July 21, 2022 of the conformance period for the Bancorp to divest ownership in certain legacy investment funds that are prohibited under the rule. 

Except for divesting some investmentsinvestments aggregating less than $2.6$1.0 million as of December 31, 2017,2020, we believe that the Volcker Rule will not require any material changes in our operations or business or security holdings.

CFPB Actions

The Dodd-Frank Act provided for the creation of the CFPBCFPB as an independent entity within the Federal Reserve with broad rulemaking, supervisory, and enforcement authority over consumer financial products and services, including deposit products, residential mortgages, home-equity loans and credit cards. The CFPB’s functions include investigating consumer complaints, conducting market research, rulemaking, supervising and examining bank consumer transactions, and enforcing rules related to consumer financial products and services. CFPB regulations and guidance apply to all financial institutions and banks with $10$10.0 billion or more in assets, which are also subject to examination by the CFPB. As the Bank has more than $10$10.0 billion in assets, it is now examined for compliance with CFPB regulation by the CFPB in addition to examinations of the Bank by the FDIC and the DBO.DFPI.

The CFPB has enforcement authority over unfair, deceptive or abusive act and practices (“UDAAP”). UDAAP is considered one of the most far reaching new enforcement tools at the disposal of the CFPB and covers all consumer and small business financial products or services such as deposit and lending products or services such as overdraft programs and third-party payroll card vendors. It is a wide-ranging regulatory net that potentially picks up the gaps not included in other consumer laws, rules and regulations. Violations of UDAAP can be found in many areas and can include advertising and marketing materials, the order of processing and paying items in a checking account or the design of client overdraft programs. The scope of coverage includes not only direct interactions with clients and prospects but also actions by third-party service providers. The Dodd-Frank Act does not prevent states from adopting stricter consumer protection standards. State regulation of financial products and potential enforcement actions could also adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Additionally, in 2014, the CFPB adopted revisions to Regulation Z, which implement the Truth in Lending Act, pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, and apply to all consumer mortgages (except home equity lines of credit, timesharetimeshare plans, reverse mortgages, or temporary loans). The revisions mandate specific underwriting criteria for home loans in order for creditors to make a reasonable, good faith determination of a consumer's ability to repay and establish certain protections from liability under this requirement for “qualified mortgages” meeting certain standards. In particular, it will prevent banks from making “no doc” and “low doc” home loans, as the rules require that banks determine a consumer’s ability to pay based in part on verified and documented information. We do originate certain “low doc” loans that meet specific underwriting criteria.  Given the small volume of such loans, we do not believe that this regulation will have a significant impact on our operations.

Enhanced Prudential StandardsRisk Committee Framework

Pursuant to Federal Reserve Board regulations promulgated under authority of the Dodd-Frank Act, as originally adopted, as a publicly traded bank holding company with $10$10.0 billion or more (but less than $50 billion) in assets, we arewere required and have established and maintained a risk committee responsible for enterprise-wide risk management practices, comprised of an independent chairman and at least one risk management expert. Additional stress testing isWe expect to maintain our risk committee, although we are no longer required for banking organizations having $50to have a risk committee under the Growth Act unless and until we reach $50.0 billion or more ofin assets. The risk committee approves and periodically reviews the risk-management policies of the bank holding company’s global operations and oversees the operations of its risk-management framework. The bank holding company’s risk-management framework must be commensurate with its structure, risk profile, complexity, activities and size. At a minimum, the framework must include policies and procedures establishing risk-management governance and providing for adequate risk-control infrastructure for the bank holding company’s operations. In addition, the framework must include processes and systems to monitor compliance with the foregoing policies and procedures, including processes and systems designed to identify and report risk-management risks and deficiencies; ensure effective implementation of actions to address emerging risks and risk-management deficiencies; designate managerial and staff responsibility for risk management; ensure the independence of the risk-management function; and integrate risk-management and associated controls with management goals and the management compensation structure.

Stress Testing

As a bank holding company with more than $10 billion in assets, we are also required under the Dodd-Frank Act to conduct annual stress tests using various scenarios established by the Federal Reserve, including a baseline, adverse and severely adverse economic conditions (known as “Dodd Frank Act Stress Tests” or “DFAST”). The stress tests are designed to determine whether our capital planning, assessment of capital adequacy and risk management practices adequately protect the Bancorp and its affiliates in the event of an economic downturn. The Bancorp must establish adequate internal controls, documentation, policies and procedures to ensure the annual stress adequately meets these objectives. The Board of Directors must review our policies and procedures at least annually. We are required to report the results of our annual stress tests to the Federal Reserve by July 31 of each year, using data as of December 31 of the preceding year, publish a summary of the results between October 15 and October 31, and consider the results of our stress tests as part of our capital planning and risk management practices. We reported the results of our 2017 annual stress test to the Federal Reserve on July 28, 2017, and published a summary of the results in a Form 8-K furnished with the SEC on October 25, 2017.

Interchange Fees

Under the Durbin Amendment to the Dodd-Frank Act, the FederalFederal Reserve adopted rules establishing standards for assessing whether the interchange fees that may be charged with respect to certain electronic debit transactions are “reasonable and proportional” to the costs incurred by issuers for processing such transactions.

Interchange fees, or “swipe”“swipe” fees, are charges that merchants pay to us and other card-issuing banks for processing electronic payment transactions. Under the final rules, the maximum permissible interchange fee is equal to no more than 21 cents plus 5 basis points of the transaction value for many types of debit interchange transactions. The Federal Reserve also adopted a rule to allow a debit card issuer to recover 1 cent per transaction for fraud prevention purposes if the issuer complies with certain fraud-related requirements required by the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve also has rules governing routing and exclusivity that require issuers to offer two unaffiliated networks for routing transactions on each debit or prepaid product.

Anti-Money Laundering and OFAC RegulationRegulations

A major focus of governmental policy on financial institutions in recent years has been aimed at combating money laundering and terrorist financing through AML and OFAC regulations. AML laws and regulations, including the Bank Secrecy Act and the U.S.A. Patriot Act, require us to assist U.S. government agencies in detecting and preventing money laundering and other illegal acts by maintaining policies, procedures and controls designed to detect and report money laundering, terrorist financing, and other suspicious activity. The AML program must include, at a minimum, a designated compliance officer, written policies, procedures and internal controls, training of appropriate personnel and independent testing of the program, and a customer identification program.

OFAC administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions against targeted foreign countries and regimes, under authority of various laws, including designated foreign countries, nationals and others. OFAC publishespublishes lists of specially designated targets and countries. We and our bank are responsible for, among other things, blocking accounts of, and transactions with, such targets and countries, prohibiting unlicensed trade and financial transactions with them and reporting blocked transactions after their occurrence.

Regulatory authorities routinely examine financial institutions for compliance with these obligations, and any failure by us to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing, or to comply with all of the relevant laws or regulations, could have serious legal and reputational consequences, including causing applicable bank regulatory authorities not to approve merger or acquisition transactions when regulatory approval is required or to prohibit such transactions even if approval is not required. Regulatory authorities have imposed cease and desist orders and civil money penalties against institutions found to be violating these obligations.

Additional Restrictions on Bancorp and Bank Activities

Subject to prior notice or Federal Reserve approval, bank holding companies may generally engage in, or acquire shares of companies engaged in, activities determined by the Federal Reserve to be so closely relatedrelated to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. Bank holding companies which elect and retain “financial holding company” status pursuant to the GLB Act may engage in these nonbanking activities and broader securities, insurance, merchant banking and other activities that are determined to be “financial in nature” or are incidental or complementary to activities that are financial in nature without prior Federal Reserve approval. Pursuant to the GLB Act and the Dodd-Frank Act, in order to elect and retain financial holding company status, a bank holding company and all depository institution subsidiaries of a bank holding company must be well capitalized and well managed, and, except in limited circumstances, depository subsidiaries must be in satisfactory compliance with the CRA. Failure to sustain compliance with these requirements or correct any non-compliance within a fixed time period could lead to divestiture of subsidiary banks or require all activities to conform to those permissible for a bank holding company. The Bancorp has not elected financial holding company status and does not believe it has engaged in any activities determined by the Federal Reserve to be financial in nature or incidental or complementary to activities that are financial in nature, which would, in the absence of financial holding company status, require notice or Federal Reserve approval.

Pursuant to the Federal Deposit InsuranceFDI Act (“FDI Act”) and the California Financial Code, California state chartered commercial banks may generally engage in any activity permissible for national banks. Therefore, the Bank may form subsidiaries to engage in the many so-called “closely related to banking” or “nonbanking” activities commonly conducted by national banks in operating subsidiaries or subsidiaries of bank holding companies. Further, pursuant to the GLB Act, California banks may conduct certain “financial” activities in a subsidiary to the same extent as a national bank, provided the bank is and remains “well-capitalized,” “well-managed” and in satisfactory compliance with the CRA. The Bank currently has no financial subsidiaries.

Source of Strength

Federal Reserve policy and federal law require bank holding companies to act as a source of financialfinancial and managerial strength to their subsidiary banks. Under this requirement, Bancorp is expected to commit resources to support the Bank, including at times when Bancorp may not be in a financial position to provide such resources, and it may not be in Bancorp’s, or Bancorp’s stockholders’ or creditors’, best interests to do so. In addition, any capital loans Bancorp makes to the Bank are subordinate in right of payment to depositors and to certain other indebtedness of the Bank. In the event of Bancorp’s bankruptcy, any commitment by Bancorp to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of the Bank will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to priority of payment.

Enforcement Authority

The federal and California regulatory structurestructure gives the bank regulatory agencies extensive discretion in connection with their supervisory and enforcement activities and examination policies, including policies with respect to the classification of assets and the establishment of adequate loan loss reserves for regulatory purposes. The regulatory agencies have adopted guidelines to assist in identifying and addressing potential safety and soundness concerns before an institution’s capital becomes impaired. The guidelines establish operational and managerial standards generally relating to: (i) internal controls, information systems, and internal audit systems; (ii) loan documentation; (iii) credit underwriting; (iv) interest-rate exposure; (v) asset growth and asset quality; (vi) loan concentration; and (vii) compensation, fees, and benefits. Further, the regulatory agencies have adopted safety and soundness guidelines for asset quality and for evaluating and monitoring earnings to ensure that earnings are sufficient for the maintenance of adequate capital and reserves.

The federal and California regulatory structure subjects the Bancorp and the Bank to regular examination by their respective regulatory agencies, which results in examination reports and ratings that, although not publicly available, can affect the conduct and growth of our businesses. These examinations consider not only compliance with applicable laws and regulations, but also capital levels, asset quality and risk, management ability and performance, earnings, liquidity, and various other factors. If, as a result of an examination, the DBODFPI or the FDIC should determine that the financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, earnings prospects, management, liquidity, or other aspects of the Bank’s operations are unsatisfactory or that the Bank or its management is violating or has violated any law or regulation, the DBODFPI and the FDIC have residual authority to:

The Federal Reserve has similar enforcement authority over bank holding companies and commonly takes parallel actionaction in conjunction with actions taken by a subsidiary bank’s regulators.

In the exercise of their supervisory and examination authority, the regulatory agencies have recently emphasized corporate governance, stress testing, enterprise risk management andand other board responsibilities; anti-money laundering compliance and enhanced high riskhigh-risk customer due diligence; vendor management; cyber security and fair lending and other consumer compliance obligations.

Deposit Insurance

The FDIC is an independent federalfederal agency that insures deposits, up to prescribed statutory limits, of federally insured banks and savings institutions and safeguards the safety and soundness of the banking and savings industries. The FDIC insures our customer deposits through the Deposit Insurance Fund (the “DIF”) up to prescribed limits of $250,000$250 thousand for each depositor pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act. The amount of FDIC assessments paid by each DIF member institution is based on its relative risk of default as measured by regulatory capital ratios and other supervisory factors. As an institution with $10$10.0 billion or more in assets, the FDIC uses a performance score and a loss-severity score to calculate an initial assessment rate for the Bank. In calculating these scores, the FDIC uses the Bank’s capital level and regulatory supervisory ratings and certain financial measures to assess the Bank’s ability to withstand asset-related stress and funding-related stress. The FDIC also has the ability to make discretionary adjustments to the total score based upon significant risk factors that are not adequately captured in the calculations. In addition to ordinary assessments described above, the FDIC has the ability to impose special assessments in certain instances.

All FDIC-insured institutionsinstitutions are also required to pay assessments to the FDIC to fund interest payments on bonds issued by the Financing Corporation (“FICO"), an agency of the federal government established to recapitalize the predecessor to the DIF. These assessments will continue until the FICO bonds mature in 2017 through 2019.

Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC has established 2.0% as the designated reserve ratio (DRR), that is, the ratio of the DIF to insured deposits. The FDIC has adopted a plan under which it will meetmet the statutory minimum DRR of 1.35% (formerly 1.15%) bybefore September 30, 2020, the deadline imposed by the Dodd-Frank Act. The Dodd-Frank Act requiresAccording to the FDIC, to offset the effectDRR reached 1.36% of the increase in the statutory minimum DRR to 1.35% on institutions with assets less than $10 billion. Beginning with the third quartertotal deposits as of the 2016 assessment period, large banks will pay quarterly surcharges in addition to their lower regular risk-based assessments. The final rule imposes a surcharge of 4.5 basis points on the assessment base of large banks. The surcharges are to begin the quarter after the reserve ratio first reaches or surpasses 1.15%. The FDIC expects that surcharges will last eight quarters or through the quarter in which the reserve ratio first meets or exceeds 1.35%. The surcharge is applied to the Bank’s total liabilities in excess of $10 billion. To determine an institution’s quarterly assessment surcharge, the FDIC will take a bank’s standard assessment base, calculated as average consolidated total assets less average tangible equity, minus $10 billion multiplied by 1.125 basis points.September 30, 2018.

We are generally unable to control the amount of assessments that we are required to pay for FDIC insurance. If there are additional bank or financial institution failuresfailures or if the FDIC otherwise determines, we may be required to pay even higher FDIC assessments than the recently increased levels. These increases in FDIC insurance assessments may have a material and adverse effect on our earnings and could have a material adverse effect on the value of, or market for, our common stock.

Under the FDI Act, the FDIC may terminate deposit insurance upon a finding that the institution has engaged in unsafe and unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continuecontinue operations, or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, order or condition imposed by the FDIC.

Prompt Corrective Action Provisions

The FDI Act requires the federal bank regulatory agencies to take “prompt corrective action” with respect to a depository institution if that institution does not meet certain capital adequacy standards, including requiring the prompt submission

Dividends

Holders of the Bancorp’sBancorp’s common stock are entitled to receive dividends as and when declared by the board of directors out of funds legally available therefore under the laws of the State of Delaware. Delaware corporations such as the Bancorp may make distributions to their stockholders out of their surplus, or in case there is no surplus, out of their net profits for the fiscal year in which the dividend is declared and/or the preceding fiscal year. However, dividends may not be paid out of a corporation’s net profits if, after the payment of the dividend, the corporation’s capital would be less than the capital represented by the issued and outstanding stock of all classes having a preference upon the distribution of assets.

It is the Federal Reserve’sReserve’s policy that bank holding companies should generally pay dividends on common stock only out of income available over the past year, and only if prospective earnings retention is consistent with the organization’s expected future needs and financial condition. It is also the Federal Reserve’s policy that bank holding companies should not maintain dividend levels that undermine their ability to be a source of strength to their banking subsidiaries. The Federal Reserve also discourages dividend policy payment ratios that are at maximum allowable levels unless both asset quality and capital are very strong.

The terms of our Junior Subordinated Notes also limit our ability to pay dividends on our common stock. If we are not current on our payment of interest on our Junior Subordinated Notes, we may not pay dividends on our common stock. The amountamount of future dividends by the Bancorp will depend on our earnings, financial condition, capital requirements and other factors, and will be determined by our board of directors in accordance with the capital management and dividend policy.

The Bank is a legallegal entity that is separate and distinct from its holding company. The Bancorp is dependent on the performance of the Bank for funds which may be received as dividends from the Bank for use in the operation of the Bancorp and the ability of the Bancorp to pay dividends to stockholders. Future cash dividends by the Bank will also depend upon management’s assessment of future capital requirements, contractual restrictions, and other factors. When phased in, the newThe capital rules will restrict dividends by the Bank if the capital conservation buffer is not achieved.

The power of the board of directors of the Bank to declare cash dividends to the Bancorp is subject to California law, which restricts the amount available for cash dividends to the lesser of a bank’s retained earnings or net income for its last three fiscal years (less any distributions to stockholders made during such period). Where the above test is not met, cash dividends may still be paid, with the prior approval of the DBO,DFPI, in an amount not exceeding the greatest of (i) retained earnings of the Bank; (ii) the net income of the Bank for its last fiscal year; or (iii) the net income of the Bank for its current fiscal year. Future cash dividends by the Bank will also depend upon management’s assessment of future capital requirements, contractual restrictions, and other factors.

Operations,, Consumer and Privacy Compliance Laws

The Bank must comply with numerous federal and state anti-money laundering and consumer protection statutes and implementingimplementing regulations, including the USA Patriot Act, the Bank Secrecy Act, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, the CRA, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as amended by the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the National Flood Insurance Act, the California Homeowner Bill of Rights and various federal and state privacy protection laws. The Bank and the Company are also subject to federal and state laws prohibiting unfair or fraudulent business practices, untrue or misleading advertising, and unfair competition. Some of these laws are further discussed below:

The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA)(“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, 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 (TILA)(“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 resultresult 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.

The Fair HousingHousing Act (FH Act)(“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 (HMDA)(“HMDA”) grew out of public concern over creditcredit shortages in certain urban neighborhoods and provides public information that will help show 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” 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.

Finally, the Real Estate SettlementSettlement Procedures Act (RESPA)(“RESPA”) requires lenders to provide 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 under the above laws may include fines, reimbursements and other civil money penalties.

Due to heightened regulatory concern related to compliance with the CRA, TILA, FH Act, ECOA, HMDA and RESPA generally, the Bank may incur additionaladditional compliance costs or be required to expend additional funds for investments in its local community.

The Federal Reserve and other bank regulatory agencies also have adopted guidelines for safeguarding confidential, personal customer information. These guidelines require financial institutions to create, implement and maintain a comprehensive written information security program designed to ensure the security and confidentiality of customer information, protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such information and protect against unauthorized access to or use of such information that could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer. Financial institutions are also required to implement policies and procedures regarding the disclosure of nonpublic personal information about consumers to non-affiliated third parties. In general, financial institutions must provide explanations to consumers on policies and procedures regarding the disclosure of such nonpublic personal information and, except as otherwise required by law, prohibits disclosing such information. The Bank has adopted a customer information security and privacy program to comply with such requirements.

Operations, consumer and privacy compliancecompliance laws and regulations also mandate certain disclosure and reporting requirements and regulate the manner in which financial institutions must deal with customers when taking deposits, making loans, collecting loans, and providing other services. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations can subject the Bank to lawsuits and penalties, including enforcement actions, injunctions, fines or criminal penalties, punitive damages to consumers, and the loss of certain contractual rights.

In addition, privacy and data protection are areas of increasing state legislative focus, and several states have recently enacted consumer privacy laws that impose compliance obligations with respect to personal information. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (the “CCPA”), which became effective on January 1, 2020, applies to for-profit businesses that conduct business in California and meet certain revenue or data collection thresholds. The CCPA gives consumers the right to request disclosure of information collected about them, and whether that information has been sold or shared with others, the right to request deletion of personal information (subject to certain exceptions), the right to opt out of the sale of the consumer’s personal information, and the right not to be discriminated against for exercising these rights. The CCPA contains several exemptions, including for information that is collected, processed, sold or disclosed pursuant to the GLB Act. In November 2020, California voters approved the California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”), a ballot measure that amends and supplements the CCPA by creating the California Privacy Protection Agency, a watchdog privacy agency to be appointed shortly after the CPRA’s enactment. The CPRA also modifies the CCPA by expanding both the scope of businesses covered by the law and certain rights relating to personal information and its use, collection, and disclosure by covered businesses.

In May 2018, the European Union ("EU") adopted a comprehensive general data privacy regulation ("GDPR") that, among other things, implements greater review of data processing activities and higher fines and sanctions for non-compliance with data protection legislation. The GDPR also extends the territory of EU privacy rules to non-EU organizations that offer goods or services to or monitor EU citizen behaviors and sets forth compliance obligations and penalties for non-compliance. We believe the applicability of the GDPR to us is minimal since we do not offer good or services to EU residents or monitor their behaviors. Other foreign, federal, state or local governments, including in states and countries which we do business, may try to implement similar or other privacy legislation, which, among other effects, could result in different privacy standards for different geographical regions, restrict our ability to do business and increase our costs of doing business.

Cybersecurity

Federal regulators have issued multiple statements regarding cybersecurity and that financial institutions need to design multiple layers of security controls to establish lines of defense and to ensure that their risk management processes also address the risk posed by compromised customer credentials, including security measures to reliably authenticate customers accessing internet-based services of the financial institution. In addition, a financial institution’s management is expected to maintain sufficient business continuity planning processes to ensure the rapid recovery, resumption and maintenance of the institution’s operations in the event of a cyber-attack. A financial institution is also expected to develop appropriate processes to enable recovery of data and business operations and address rebuilding network capabilities and restoring data if the institution or its critical service providers fall victim to a cyber-attack. If we fail to observe the regulatory guidance, we could be subject to various regulatory sanctions, including financial penalties.

State regulators have also been increasingly active in implementing privacy and cybersecurity standards and regulations. Recently, several states, notably including California where our banking business is concentrated, have adopted laws and/or regulations requiring certain financial institutions to implement cybersecurity programs and providing detailed requirements with respect to these programs, including data encryption requirements. Many such states (including California) have also recently implemented or modified their data breach notification and data privacy requirements. We expect this trend of state-level activity in those areas to continue, and we continue to monitor relevant legislative and regulatory developments in California where most of our customers are located.

In the ordinary course of business, we rely on electronic communications and information systems to conduct our operations and to store sensitive data. We employ a layered, defensive approach that leverages people, processes and technology to manage and maintain cybersecurity controls. We employ a variety of preventative and detective tools to monitor, block, and provide alerts regarding suspicious activity, as well as to report on any suspected advanced persistent threats. Notwithstanding the strength of our defensive measures, the threat from cyber-attacks is severe, attacks are sophisticated and increasing in volume, and attackers respond rapidly to changes in defensive measures. While to date we have not detected a significant compromise, significant data loss or any material financial losses related to cybersecurity attacks, our systems and those of our customers and third-party service providers are under constant threat and it is possible that we could experience a significant event in the future. Risks and exposures related to cybersecurity attacks are expected to remain high for the foreseeable future due to the rapidly evolving nature and sophistication of these threats, as well as due to the expanding use of Internet banking, mobile banking and other technology-based products and services by us and our customers. See Item 1A. Risk Factors for a further discussion of risks related to cybersecurity.

Environmental Regulations

In the course of the Bank’s business, the Bank may foreclose and take title to real estate and could be subject to environmental liabilities with respect to these properties. The Bank may be held liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation and clean-up costs incurred by these parties in connection with environmental contamination, or may be required to investigate or clear up hazardous or toxic substances, or chemical releases at a property. The costs associated with investigation or remediation activities could be substantial. See Item 1A. Risk Factors for a further discussion of risks related to environmental regulations and liabilities.

Federal Home Loan Bank System

The Bank is a member of the FHLB of San Francisco. Among other benefits, each FHLB serves as a reserve or central bank for its members within its assigned region. Each FHLB is financed primarily from the sale of consolidated obligations of the FHLB system. Each FHLB makes available loans or advances to its members in compliance with the policies and procedures established by the board of directors of the individual FHLB. Each member of the FHLB of San Francisco is required to own stock in an amount equal to the greater of (i) a membership stock requirement with an initial cap of $15$15.0 million (100% of “membership asset value” as defined), or (ii) an activity based stock requirement (based on a percentage of outstanding advances). There can be no assurance that the FHLB will pay dividends at the same rate it has paid in the past, or that it will pay any dividends in the future.

Impact of Monetary Policies

The earnings and growth of the Bank are largely dependent on its ability to maintain a favorable differential or spread between the yield on its interest-earning assets and the rates paid on its deposits and other interest-bearing liabilities. As a result, the Bank’s performance is influenced by general economic conditions, both domestic and foreign, the monetary and fiscal policies of the federal government, and the policies of the regulatory agencies. The Federal Reserve implements national monetary policies (with objectives such as seeking to curb inflation and combat recession) by its open-market operations in U.S. government securities, by adjusting the required level of reserves for financial institutions subject to its reserve requirements, and by varying the discount rate applicable to borrowings by banks from the Federal Reserve Banks. The actions of the Federal Reserve in these areas influence the growth of bank loans, investments and deposits, and also affect interest rates charged on loans and deposits. The nature and impact of any future changes in monetary policies cannot be predicted.

Securities and Corporate Governance

The Bancorp 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 SEC. As a companycompany listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market, the Company is subject to NASDAQ listing standards for listed companies. The Bancorp is also subject to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, and other federal and state laws and regulations which address, among other issues,matters, required executive certification of financial presentations, corporate governance requirements for board audit and compensation committees and their members, and disclosure of controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting, auditing and accounting, executive compensation, and enhanced and timely disclosure of corporate information. NASDAQ has also adopted corporate governance rules, which are intended to allow stockholders and investors to more easily and efficiently monitor the performance of companies and their directors. Under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, management and the Bancorp’s independent registered public accounting firm are required to assess the effectiveness of the Bancorp’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017.2020. These assessments are included in Part II — Item 9A — “Controls and Procedures.”

Federal Banking Agency Compensation Guidelines

Guidelines adopted by the federal banking agencies pursuant to the FDI Act prohibit excessive compensation as an unsafe and unsound practice and describe compensation as excessive when the amounts paid are unreasonable or disproportionate to the services performed by an executive officer, employee, director or principal stockholder. In June 2010, the federalFederal banking agencies have also issued comprehensive guidance on incentive compensation policies intended to ensure that the incentive compensation policies of banking organizations do not undermine the safety and soundness of such organizations by encouraging excessive risk-taking.

In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act requires the federal bank regulatory agencies and the SEC to establish joint regulations or guidelines prohibiting certain incentive-based payment arrangements. These regulatorsregulators must establish regulations or guidelines requiring enhanced disclosure to regulators of incentive-based compensation arrangements. The agencies proposed such regulations in April 2011, but the regulations have not been finalized. In April 2016, the agencies published a notice of proposed rulemaking further revising the incentive-based compensation standards originally proposed in 2011. Similar to the 2011 proposed rule, the 2016 proposed rule would prohibit financial institutions with at least $1$1.0 billion in consolidated assets from establishing or maintaining incentive-based compensation arrangements that encourage inappropriate risk by providing any executive officer, employee, director or principal shareholder who is a covered person with excessive compensation, fees or benefits or that could lead to material financial loss to the covered institution. It cannot be predicted whether, or in what form, any such proposed compensation rules may be enacted, particularly in lightenacted.

The scope, content and application of the U.S. banking regulators’regulators’ policies on incentive compensation continue to evolve. It cannot be determined at this time whether compliance with such policies willDepending upon the outcome of the rule making process, the application of any final compensation-related regulations to us could require us to revise our compensation strategy, increase our administrative costs and adversely affect theour ability of the Bancorpto recruit and the Bank to hire, retain and motivate keyqualified employees.

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

Audit Requirements

The Bank is required to have an annual independent audit, alone or as a part of its bank holding company’scompany’s audit, and to prepare all financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The Bank and the Bancorp are also each required to have an audit committee comprised entirely of independent directors. As required by NASDAQ, the Bancorp has certified that its audit committee has adopted formal written charters and meets the requisite number of directors, independence, and other qualification standards. As such, among other requirements, the Bancorp must maintain an audit committee that includes members with banking or related financial management expertise, has access to its own outside counsel, and does not include members who are large customers of the Bank. In addition, because the Bank has more than $3 billion in total assets, it is subject to the FDIC requirements for audit committees of large institutions.

Regulation of Non-Bank Subsidiaries

Non-bank subsidiaries are subject to additional or separate regulation and supervision by other state, federal and self-regulatory bodies. Additionally, any foreign-based subsidiariessubsidiaries would also be subject to foreign laws and regulations.

Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017

On December 22, 2017, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (“Tax Reform Act”) was signed into law. The Tax Reform Act included a number of provisions that impact us, including the following:

CARES Act and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (the “CAA”) was signed into law on March 27, 2020 and December 27, 2020, respectively. Among other things, the CARES Act and the CAA include the following provisions impacting financial institutions like the Company:

Pending Legislation and Future Initiatives

Certain pending legislation, and future initiatives that may be proposed or introduced before Congress, the California Legislature, and other governmental bodies, if enacted, may further alter the structure, regulation, and competitive relationship among financial institutions and may subject us to increased supervision and disclosure and reporting requirements. In addition, the various bank regulatory agencies often adopt new rules and regulations and policies to implement and enforce existing legislation. It cannot be predicted whether, or in what form, any such legislation or regulatory changes in policy may be enacted or the extent to which the business of the Bank would be affected thereby. The outcome of examinations, any litigation, or any investigations initiated by state or federal authorities also may result in necessary changes in our operations and increased compliance costs.

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

We describeOwnership of our common stock involves certain risks. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the material risks that management believes affect or could affect us.only ones we face. Understanding these risks is important to understanding any statement in thisthis Annual Report and to evaluating an investment in our common stock.Report. You should carefully read and consider the risks and uncertainties described below together with all of the other information included or incorporated by reference in this Annual Report before you makeReport. Further, to the extent that any decision regarding an investment in our common stock. You should also considerof the information set forth above under “Forward Looking Statements.”in this report, or in other reports we file with the SEC, constitutes forward-looking statements, the risk factors below are cautionary statements identifying important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements made by us or on our behalf. See "Forward-Looking Statements" and "Risk Factors Summary." The risks described below are not the only ones facing our business. Additional risks that management is not aware of or focused on or that management currently deems immaterial may also impair our business operations. This Annual Report is qualified in its entirety by these risk factors.

If any of the following risks actually occur, our business,business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. If this were to happen, the value of our common stock could significantly decline, and you could lose some or all of your investment.

Market and Economic Risks

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a significant global economic downturn, which has, and is expected to continue to, adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Global health and economic concerns relating to the COVID-19 pandemic and government actions taken to reduce the spread of the virus have had a material adverse impact on the macroeconomic environment, and the pandemic has significantly increased economic uncertainty. The pandemic has resulted in federal, state and local authorities, including those who govern the markets in which we operate, implementing numerous measures to try to contain the virus. Such measures have included travel bans and restrictions, curfews, quarantines, shelter in place or total lock-down orders and business limitations and shutdowns. Such measures have significantly contributed to rising unemployment and negatively impacted consumer and business spending. The United States government has taken steps to attempt to mitigate some of the more severe anticipated economic effects of the virus, including the passage of the CARES Act and the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, and vaccination programs have commenced. There can be no assurance, however, that such steps will be effective or achieve their desired results in the near future.

The pandemic has adversely impacted and is likely to continue to adversely impact our workforce and operations and the operations of our customers and business partners. In particular, we may experience financial losses due to a number of operational factors impacting us or our customers or business partners, including but not limited to the following:

Although we have established a pandemic response plan and procedures, our workforce has been, is, and may continue to be impacted by COVID-19. We are taking precautions to protect the safety and well-being of our employees and customers, but no assurance can be given that our actions will be adequate or appropriate, nor can we predict the level of disruption which will occur to our employees’ ability to provide customer support and service. The spread could also negatively impact availability of key personnel and employee productivity, as well as the business and operations of third-party service providers who perform critical services for us, which could adversely impact our ability to deliver products and services to our customers.

These and other factors may exist for an extended period of time and may continue to adversely affect our business, financial condition and operations even after the COVID-19 pandemic has subsided. The extent to which the pandemic impacts our business, financial condition and operations will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and are difficult to predict, including, but not limited to, the pandemic’s duration and severity, the actions to contain it or treat its impact (including the speed and effectiveness of vaccination programs), and how quickly and to what extent normal economic and operating conditions can resume. Even after the pandemic has subsided, we may continue to experience materially adverse impacts to our business as a result of its economic impact, including the availability of credit, adverse impacts on our liquidity and any recession that has occurred or may occur in the future. Additionally, future outbreaks of COVID-19, or other viruses, may occur.

There are no comparable recent events that provide guidance as to the effect the spread of COVID-19 as a global pandemic may have, and, as a result, the ultimate impact of the pandemic is highly uncertain and subject to change. We do not yet know the full extent of the impacts on our business, our operations or the global economy as a whole. Therefore, the risk factors discussed in this Annual Report on Form 10-K could be heightened, changed or be added to in the future.

Unfavorable or uncertain economiceconomic and market conditionscan adversely affect our industry and business.

Our financial performance generally, andas well as the ability of borrowers to pay interest on and repay the principal of outstanding loans andmake loan payments, the value of the collateral securing those loans, as well asand the demand for loans and our other products and services, we offer, isare highly dependent upon the business and economic conditions in the markets in which we operate and in the United States as a whole. Unfavorable or uncertain economic and market conditions, including conditions triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic, could lead to credit quality concerns related to repayment ability and collateral protection as well as reduced demand for theour products and services we offer. In recent years thereservices. The uncertainties triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic has been gradual improvement in the U.S. economy as evidenced by a rebound in the housing market, lower unemployment and higher equities markets; however,slowed economic growth has been uneven,and business spending, increased financial market volatility, and opinions vary on when the strengthenU.S. economy will recover from the COVID-19 pandemic and directionthe rate of the economy.economic growth following recovery. Uncertainties also have arisen regarding the potential foras a reversal or renegotiationresult of international trade agreements and for comprehensive tax reform under the administration of U.S. President Donald J. Trump, and the impact such actionsincreased tariffs and other changes to U.S. trade policies of the new administration may have on economic and market conditions.reactions to such changes by China and other U.S. trading partners as further discussed below. In addition, concerns about the performance ofeconomic growth in international economies, especiallymarkets also appears to be slowing, particularly in Europe and emerging markets, and economic conditions in Asia, particularly the economies of China and Taiwan, canEurope, which also may impact the economy and financial markets here in the United States. TheseWhile we have no banking operations in Europe, the impact of Great Britain’s exit from the Europe Union on British and European businesses, financial markets, and related businesses in the United States could also adversely affect financial markets generally. Our business also could be adversely affected directly by the default of another institution or if the financial services industry experiences significant market-wide liquidity and credit problems.

Factors related to inflation, recession, unemployment, volatile interest rates, changes in tariffs and trade policies, international conflicts, real estate values, energy prices, state and local municipal budget deficits, consumer confidence level, government spending and any government shutdowns, the U.S. national debt, natural disasters, geopolitical events, public health crises (such as the COVID-19 pandemic) and other factors outside of our control also may assert economic pressures on consumers and businesses may continue toand adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and stock price. In particular, we

We may face the following risks, among others, in connection with these events:

Economic conditions in California and the other markets in which we operate may adversely affect our business.

Our banking operations are concentrated primarily in California, and secondarily in New York, Texas, Massachusetts, Washington, Illinois, Texas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, Maryland, Nevada, and Hong Kong. The economic conditions in these local markets may be different from, and in some instances worse than, the economic conditions in the United States as a whole. Adverse economic conditions in these regions in particular could impair borrowers’ ability to service their loans, decrease the level and duration of deposits by customers, decrease demand for our loans and other services and erode the value of loan collateral. These conditions include the effects of the general decline in real estate sales and prices in many markets across the United States; declines in economic growth, business activity or investor or business confidence; limitations on the availability or increases in the cost of credit and capital; increases in inflation or interest rates; high unemployment; natural disasters;disasters, pandemics and health crises (such as the COVID-19 pandemic), and geopolitical events; state or local government insolvency;insolvency or budget disputes; changes in taxes, tariffs, trade policies and other government regulations and polices; or a combination of these or other factors. These conditions could increase the amount of our non-performing assets and have an adverse effect on our efforts to collect our non-performing loans or otherwise liquidate our non-performing assets (including other real estate owned) on terms favorable to us, if at all, and could also cause a decline in demand for our products and services, or a lack of growth or a decrease in deposits, any of which may cause us to incur losses, adversely affect our capital, and hurt our business. 

Our loan portfolio is largely secured by real estate, and a downturn in the real estate market may adversely affect our results of operations.

The real estate collateral securing our borrowers’ obligations is principally located in California, and to a lesser extent, in New York, Washington, Illinois, Texas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, and New Jersey. The value of such collateral depends upon conditions in the relevant real estate markets. These include general or local economic conditions and neighborhood characteristics, unemployment rates, real estate tax rates, the cost of operating the properties, governmental regulations and fiscal policies, acts of nature including earthquakes, floods, and hurricanes (which may result in uninsured losses), and other factors beyond our control. The direction of real estate sales and prices in many markets across the United States is not currently predictable and reductions in the value of our real estate collateral could cause us to have to foreclose on the real estate. If we are not able to realize a satisfactory amount upon foreclosure sales, we may have to own the properties, subjecting us to exposure to the risks and expenses associated with ownership. Any continued declines in real estate sales and prices coupled with any weakness in the economy and continued high unemployment will result in higher than expected loan delinquencies or problem assets, additional loan charge-offs and provisions for loan losses, a decline in demand for our products and services, or a lack of growth or a decrease in deposits, which may cause us to incur losses, adversely affect our capital, and hurt our business. 

Adverse conditions in Asia and elsewhere could adversely affect our business.

A substantial number of our customers have economic and cultural ties to Asia and, as a result, we are likely to feel the effects of adverse economic and political conditions in Asia, including the effects of rising inflation or slowing growth and volatility in the real estate and stock markets in China and other regions. Additionally, we maintain a branch in Hong Kong. U.S. and global economic and trade policies, military tensions, and unfavorable global economic conditions may adversely impact the Asian economies. In addition, pandemics and other public health crises, including the occurrence of a contagious disease or illness or concerns over the possibility of such crises could create economic, market and financial disruptions in the region. For example, the ongoing coronavirus outbreak emanating from China at the beginning of 2020 has resulted in massive city-wide quarantines in China, extended shutdown of businesses in the region and increased travel restrictions.

A significant deterioration of economic conditions in Asia could expose us to, among other things, economic and transfer risk, and we could experience an outflow of deposits by those of our customers with connections to Asia. Transfer risk may result when an entity is unable to obtain the foreign exchange needed to meet its obligations or to provide liquidity. This may adversely impact the recoverability of investments with or loans made to such entities. Adverse economic conditions in Asia, and in China or Taiwan in particular, may also negatively impact asset values and the profitability and liquidity of our customers who operate in this region. 

The soundness of other financial institutions could adversely affect us.

Financial institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty or other relationships. We have exposure to many different industries and counterparties, and we routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial industry, including brokers and dealers, commercial banks, investment banks, and other institutions. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of default of our counterparty. In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral held by us cannot be realized upon or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the financial instrument exposure due us. The failure of financial institutions can also result in increased FDIC assessments for the Deposit Insurance Fund. Any such losses or increased assessments could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Credit, Interest Rate and Liquidity Risks

We may be required to make additional provisions for loan losses and charge off additional loans in the future, which could adversely affect our resultsresults of operations.

At December 31, 2017,2020, our allowance for loan losses totaled $123.3$166.5 million and we had net recoveriescharge-offs of $6.8$14.2 million for 2017.2020. Although economic conditions in the real estate market in portions of Los Angeles, San Diego, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties and the Central Valley of California where many of our commercial real estate and construction loan customers are based, have improved,continue to improve, the economic recovery in these areas of California is uneven and in some areas rather slow, with relatively high and persistent unemployment.unemployment, and economic growth appears to have slowed. Moreover, rising interest rates may adversely affect real estate sales.sales and the refinancing of existing real estate loans. As of December 31, 2017,2020, we had approximately $7.2$8.2 billion in commercial real estate and construction loans. Any deterioration in the real estate market generally and in the commercial real estate and residential building segments in particular could result in additional loan charge-offs and provisions for loan losses in the future, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, net income, and capital. In addition, a recent change in accounting standards will result in a significant change in how we recognize credit losses as further disclosed in the risk factor below entitled, “Our financial results could be adversely affected by changes in accounting standards or tax laws and regulations.”

The allowance for credit losses is an estimate of probable credit losses. Actual credit losses in excess of the estimate could adversely affect our results of operations and capital.

A significant source of risk arises from the possibility that we could sustain losses because borrowers, guarantors, and related parties may fail to perform in accordance with the terms of their loans and leases. The underwriting and credit monitoring policies and procedures that we have adopted to address this risk may not prevent unexpected losses that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. The allowance for credit losses is based on management’s estimate of the probable losses from our credit portfolio. If actual losses exceed the estimate, the excess losses could adversely affect our results of operations and capital. Such excess losses could also lead to larger allowances for credit losses in future periods, which could in turn adversely affect results of operations and capital in those periods. If economic conditions differ substantially from the assumptions used in the estimate or adverse developments arise with respect to our credits, future losses may occur, and increases in the allowance may be necessary. In addition, various regulatory agencies, as an integral part of their examination process, periodically review the adequacy of our allowance. These agencies may require us to establish additional allowances based on their judgment of the information available at the time of their examinations. No assurance can be given that we will not sustain credit losses in excess of present or future levels of the allowance for credit losses.

We areOur business is subject to extensive laws, regulationsinterest rate risk, and supervision, and may become subject to additional laws, regulations and supervision that may be enacted and thatfluctuations in interest rates could limit or restrictreduce our activities, hamper our ability to increase our assets and earnings, and materiallynet interest income and adversely affect our profitability.business.

We operate in a highly regulated industry and are or may become subject to regulation by federal, state, and local governmental authorities and various laws, regulations, regulatory guidelines, and judicial and administrative decisions imposing requirements or restrictions on part or allA substantial portion of our operations, capitalization, payment of dividends, mergersincome is derived from the differential, or “spread,” between the interest earned on loans, investment securities, and acquisitions, investments, loansother interest-earning assets, and the interest rates charged, interest rates paid on deposits, borrowings, and locationsother interest-bearing liabilities. The interest rate risk inherent in our lending, investing, and deposit taking activities is a significant market risk to us and our business. Income associated with interest earning assets and costs associated with interest-bearing liabilities may not be affected uniformly by fluctuations in interest rates. The magnitude and duration of offices. We also must comply with numerous federal anti-money laundering, tax withholding and reporting, and consumer protection statutes and regulations. A considerable amount of management time and resources have been devoted to the oversight of, and the development and implementation of controls and procedures relating to, compliance with these laws and regulations, and we expect that significant time and resources will be devoted to compliancechanges in the future. These laws and regulations mandate certain disclosure and reporting requirements and regulate the manner ininterest rates, events over which we must deal with our customers when taking deposits, making loans, collecting loans,have no control, may have an adverse effect on net interest income. Prepayment and providing other services. Weearly withdrawal levels, which are also are, or may become subject to, examination, supervision, and additional comprehensive regulationimpacted by various federal, state, and local authorities with regard to compliance with these laws and regulations.

Because our business is highly regulated, the laws, rules, regulations, and supervisory guidance and policies applicable to us are subject to regular modification and change. Perennially, various laws, rules and regulations are proposed, which, if adopted, could impact our operations, increase our capital requirements or substantially restrict our growth and adverselychanges in interest rates, can significantly affect our ability to operate profitably by making compliance much more difficult or expensive, restricting our ability to originate or sell loans, or further restricting the amount ofassets and liabilities. Increases in interest or other charges or fees earned on loans or other products. In addition, further regulation could increase the assessment rate we are required to pay to the FDIC,rates may adversely affecting our earnings. Furthermore, recent changes to Regulation Z promulgated by the CFPB may make it more difficult for us to underwrite consumer mortgages and to compete with large national mortgage service providers. It is very difficult to predict the competitive impact that any such changes would have on the banking and financial services industry in general or on our business in particular. Such changes may, among other things, increase the cost of doing business, limit permissible activities, or affect the competitive balance between banks and other financial institutions. The Dodd-Frank Act instituted major changes to the banking and financial institutions regulatory regimes in light of the recent performance of and government intervention in the financial services sector. Other changes to statutes, regulations, or regulatory policies, including changes in interpretation or implementation of statutes, regulations, or policies, could affect us in substantial and unpredictable ways. Such changes could, among other things, subject us to additional costs, limit the types of financial services and products we may offer, and/or increase the ability of non-banksour floating rate borrowers to offer competing financial services and products. Failure to comply with laws, regulations, or policies could result in sanctions by regulatory agencies, civil money penalties, and/or reputation damage,meet their higher payment obligations, which could have a materialin turn lead to an increase in non-performing assets and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of our common stock. See Part I — Item 1 — “Business — Regulation and Supervision.”net charge-offs. 

Additional requirements imposed byGenerally, the Dodd-Frank Actinterest rates on our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities do not change at the same rate, to the same extent, or on the same basis. Even assets and liabilities with similar maturities or periods of re-pricing may react in different degrees to changes in market interest rates. Interest rates on certain types of assets and liabilities may fluctuate in advance of changes in general market interest rates, while interest rates on other types of assets and liabilities may lag behind changes in general market rates. Certain assets, such as fixed and adjustable rate mortgage loans, have features that limit changes in interest rates on a short-term basis and over the life of the asset. Therefore, as interest rates begin to increase, if our floating rate interest-earning assets do not reprice faster than our interest-bearing liabilities in a rising rate environment, our net interest income and, in turn, our profitability, could be adversely affect us.affected.

Recent government effortsWe seek to strengthenminimize the U.S. financial systemadverse effects of changes in interest rates by structuring our asset-liability composition to obtain the maximum spread. We use interest rate sensitivity analysis and a simulation model to assist us in estimating the optimal asset-liability composition. However, such management tools have resulted ininherent limitations that impair their effectiveness. Moreover, the imposition of additional regulatory requirements, including expansive financial services regulatory reform legislation. The Dodd-Frank Act provided for sweeping regulatory changes and the establishment of strengthened capital and liquidity requirements for banks and bank holding companies, including minimum leverage and risk-based capital requirements no less than the strictest requirements in effect for depository institutions aslong-term effects of the dateFederal Reserve’s unprecedented quantitative easing and tapering off are unknown, and while interest rates have begun to increase, they remain at historically low levels. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in minimizing the adverse effects of enactment; the requirement that bank holding companies serve as a source of financial strength for their depository institution subsidiaries; enhanced regulation of financial markets, including the derivative and securitization markets, and the elimination of certain proprietary trading activities by banks; additional corporate governance and executive compensation requirements; enhanced financial institution safety and soundness regulations; revisionschanges in FDIC insurance assessment fees; the implementation of the qualified mortgage and ability-to-repay rules for mortgage loans; and the establishment of new regulatory bodies, such as the CFPB and the Financial Services Oversight Counsel, to identify emerging systemic risks and improve interagency cooperation. In addition, we are required to conduct stress testing based on certain macroeconomic scenarios to reflect the impact on our income, revenues, balance sheets, and capital levels, the results of which could require us to take certain actions, including being required to raise additional capital. Current and future legal and regulatory requirements, restrictions, and regulations, including those imposed under the Dodd-Frank Act, may adversely impact our profitability, make it more difficult to attract and retain key executives and other personnel, may have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of our common stock, and may require us to invest significant management attention and resources to evaluate and make any changes required by the legislation and related regulations.interest rates. 

We are subject to stringent capital requirements, including those required by Basel III. Inflation and deflation may adversely affect our financial performance. 

The U.S. federal bank regulatorsConsolidated Financial Statements and related financial data presented in this report have jointly adopted new capital requirements on banksbeen prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. These principles require the measurement of financial position and bank holding companies as required byoperating results in terms of historical dollars, without considering changes in the Dodd-Frank Act, which became effective on January 1, 2015, incorporate the elementsrelative purchasing power of Basel Committee’s Basel III accords and have the effect of raising our capital requirements and imposing new capital requirements beyond those previously required.  Increased regulatory capital requirements (and the associated compliance costs) whethermoney over time due to the adoptioninflation or deflation. The primary impact of new laws and regulations, changes in existing laws and regulations, or more expansive or aggressive interpretations of existing laws and regulations, may require us to raise additional capital, or impact our ability to pay dividends or pay compensation to our executives, which could have a material and adverse effectinflation on our business, financial condition, results of operations is reflected in increased operating costs. Conversely, deflation will tend to erode collateral values and the valuediminish loan quality. Virtually all of our common stock.  If we do not meet minimum capital requirements, we will be subject to prompt corrective action by federal bank regulatory agencies. Prompt corrective action can include progressively more restrictive constraints on operations, managementassets and capital distributions. For additional discussion regarding our capital requirements, please see “Item 1. Business – Regulation and Supervision – Capital Adequacy Requirements” above.

We may become subject to supervisory action by bank supervisory authorities that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and the value of our common stock.

Under federal and state laws and regulations pertaining to the safety and soundness of financial institutions, the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (the “FRB SF”) has authority over the Bancorp and separately the DBO and FDIC have authority over the Bank to compel or restrict certain actions if the Bancorp or the Bank should violate any laws or regulations, if its capital should fall below adequate capital standards as a result of operating losses, or if these regulators otherwise determine that the Bancorp or the Bank have engagedliabilities are monetary in unsafe or unsound practices, including failure to exercise proper risk oversight over the many areas of the Bancorp’s and the Bank’s operations. These regulators, as well as the CFPB, also have authority over the Bancorp’s and the Bank’s compliance with various statutes and consumer protection and other regulations. Among other matters, the corrective actions that may be required of the Bancorp or the Bank following the occurrence of any of the foregoing may include, but are not limited to, requiring the Bancorp and/or the Bank to enter into informal or formal enforcement orders, including board resolutions, memoranda of understanding, written agreements, supervisory letters, commitment letters, and consent or cease and desist orders to take corrective action and refrain from unsafe and unsound practices; removing officers and directors; assessing civil monetary penalties; and taking possession of, closing and liquidating the Bank. If we are unable to meet the requirements of any corrective actions, we could become subject to supervisory action. The terms of any such supervisory action could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of our common stock.

We face a risk of noncompliance and enforcement action with the Bank Secrecy Act and other anti-money laundering statutes and regulations.

        The Bank Secrecy Act, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, and other laws and regulations require financial institutions, among other duties, to institute and maintain an effective anti-money laundering program and file suspicious activity and currency transaction reports as appropriate. The federal Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is authorized to impose significant civil money penalties for violations of those requirements and has recently engaged in coordinated enforcement efforts with federal banking regulators, as well as with the U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, and Internal Revenue Service. We are also subject to increased scrutiny of compliance with the rules enforced by the Office of Foreign Assets Control and compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. In addition, our Hong Kong Branch is subject to the anti-money laundering laws and regulations of Hong Kong. If our policies, procedures and systems are deemed deficient, we would be subject to liability, including fines and regulatory actions, which may include restrictions on our ability to pay dividends and the necessity to obtain regulatory approvals to proceed with certain aspects of our business plan, including our acquisition plans. Failure to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing could also have serious reputational consequences for us. Any of these results could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of our common stock.

We are subject to the CRA, fair lending and other laws and regulations, and our failure to comply with these laws and regulations could lead to material penalties.

The CRA, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act and other fair lending laws and regulations impose nondiscriminatory lending and other requirements on financial institutions. The U.S. Department of Justice and other federal agencies, including the FDIC and CFPB, are responsible for enforcing these laws and regulations. A successful challenge to an institution’s performance under the CRA, fair lending and other compliance laws and regulations could result in a wide variety of sanctions, including the required payment of damages and civil money penalties, injunctive relief, imposition of restrictions on mergers and acquisitions activity and restrictions on expansion. Private parties may also have the ability to challenge an institution’s performance under fair lending laws in private class action litigation. The costs of defending, and any adverse outcome from, any such challenge could damage our reputation or could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our stress testing processes rely on analytical and forecasting models that may prove to be inadequate or inaccurate, which could adversely affect the effectiveness of our strategic planning and our ability to pursue corporate goals.

In accordance with the Dodd‐Frank Act and the Federal Reserve’s regulations thereunder, banking organizations with $10 billion to $50 billion in assets are required to perform annual capital stress tests. The results of our capital stress tests may require us to increase our regulatory capital, raise additional capital or take or decline to take certain other capital‐related actions under certain circumstances. Our stress testing processes also rely on our use of analytical and forecasting models. These models reflect assumptions that may not be accurate, particularly in times of market stress or other unforeseen circumstances. Furthermore, even if our assumptions are accurate predictors of future performance, the models they are based on may prove to be inadequate or inaccurate because of other flaws in their design or implementation. Also, the assumptions we utilize for our stress tests may not be met with regulatory approval, which could result in our stress tests receiving a failing grade. In addition to adversely affecting our reputation, failing our stress tests would likely preclude or delay our growth through acquisition, and would limit our ability to pay any cash dividends

Our deposit insurance premiums could increase in the future, which could have a material adverse impact on future earnings and financial condition.

The FDIC insures deposits at FDIC-insured financial institutions, including the Bank. The FDIC charges insured financial institutions premiums to maintain the Deposit Insurance Fund ("DIF") at a specific level. Unfavorable economic conditions, increased bank failures and additional failures decreased the DIF. In order to restore the DIF to its statutorily mandated minimum of 1.35% of total deposits by September 30, 2020, the FDIC may need to increase deposit insurance premium rates. Insured institutions with assets of $10 billion or more will be responsible for funding this increase. The FDIC has issued regulations to implement these provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. It has, in addition, established a higher reserve ratio of 2% as a long term goal which goes beyond what is required by statute. There is no implementation deadline for the 2% ratio. The FDIC may increase the assessment rates or impose additional special assessments in the future to keep the DIF at the statutory target level. Any increase in the Bank's FDIC premiums could have an adverse effect on its financial condition and results of operations.

Our use of third party vendors and our other ongoing third party business relationships are subject to increasing regulatory requirements and attention.

We regularly use third party vendors as part of our business. We also have substantial ongoing business relationships with other third parties. These types of third party relationships are subject to increasingly demanding regulatory requirements and attention by our federal bank regulators. Recent regulation requires us to enhance our due diligence, ongoing monitoring and control over our third party vendors and other ongoing third party business relationships. In certain cases we may be required to renegotiate our agreements with these vendors to meet these enhanced requirements, which could increase our costs. We expect that our regulators will hold us responsible for deficiencies in our oversight and control of our third party relationships and in the performance of the parties with which we have these relationships.nature. As a result, if our regulators conclude that we have not exercised adequate oversight and control over our third party vendors or other ongoing third party business relationships or that such third parties have not performed appropriately, we could be subject to enforcement actions, including civil money penalties or other administrative or judicial penalties or fines as well as requirements for customer remediation, any of which couldinterest rates generally have a material adverse effectmore significant impact on our business, financial conditionperformance than the general levels of inflation or resultsdeflation. Interest rates do not necessarily move in the same direction or in the same magnitude as the price of operations.

We may experience goodwill impairment.

Goodwill is initially recorded at fair valuegoods and is not amortized, but is reviewed at least annually or more frequently if events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be fully recoverable. If our estimates of goodwill fair value change, we may determine that impairment charges are necessary. Estimates of fair value are determined based on a complex model using cash flows and company comparisons. If management’s estimates of future cash flows are inaccurate, the fair value determined could be inaccurate and impairment may not be recognized in a timely manner.services. 

Liquidity risk could impair our ability to fund operations and jeopardize our financial condition. 

Liquidity is essential to our business. An inability to raise funds through deposits, FHLB advances and other borrowings,, the sale of loans, the issuance of securities and other sources could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity. Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance our activities could be impaired by factors that affect us specifically or the financial services industry in general. Factors that could detrimentally impact our access to liquidity sources include a decrease in the level of our business activity due to a market downturn or adverse regulatory action against us. Deposit balances can decrease when customers perceive alternative investments as providing a better risk/return tradeoff. If customers move money out of bank deposits and into other investments, we would lose a relatively low-cost source of funds, increasing our funding costs and reducing our net interest income and net income. Our ability to acquire deposits or borrow could also be impaired by factors that are not specific to us, such as a severe disruption of the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the financial services industry as a whole.  

Based on past experience, we believe that our deposit accounts are relatively stable sources of funds. If we increase interest rates paid to retain deposits, our earnings may be adversely affected, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Any decline in available funding could adversely impact our ability to originate loans, invest in securities, meet our expenses, pay dividends to our stockholders or to fulfill obligations such as repaying our borrowings or meeting deposit withdrawal demands, any of which could have a material adverse impact on our liquidity, business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our business is subjectIf the Company’s goodwill were determined to interest rate risk,be impaired, it would result in and fluctuations charge against earnings and thus a reduction in interest rates could reduce our net interest income and adversely affect our business.stockholders’ equity. 

A substantial portionThe Company tests goodwill for impairment on an annual basis, or more frequently, if necessary. Quoted market prices in active markets are the best evidence of our income is derived fromfair value and are to be used as the differential,basis for measuring impairment, when available. Other acceptable valuation methods include present value measurements based on multiples of earnings or “spread,” betweenrevenues, or similar performance measures. If the interest earnedCompany were to determine that the carrying amount of the goodwill exceeded its implied fair value, the Company would be required to write down the value of the goodwill on loans, investment securities, and other interest-earning assets, and the interest paid on deposits, borrowings, and other interest-bearing liabilities. The interest rate risk inherent in our lending, investing, and deposit taking activities is a significant market risk to us and our business. Income associated with interest earning assets and costs associated with interest-bearing liabilities may not be affected uniformly by fluctuations in interest rates. The magnitude and duration of changes in interest rates, events over which we have no control, may have an adverse effect on net interest income. Prepayment and early withdrawal levels, which are also impacted by changes in interest rates, can significantly affect our assets and liabilities. Increases in interest rates maybalance sheet, adversely affect the ability of our floating rate borrowers to meet their higher payment obligations, which could in turn lead to an increase in non-performing assets and net charge-offs. affecting earnings as well as capital. 

Generally, the interest rates on our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities do not change at the same rate, to the same extent, or on the same basis. Even assets and liabilities with similar maturities or periods of re-pricing may react in different degrees to changes in market interest rates. Interest rates on certain types of assets and liabilities may fluctuate in advance of changes in general market interest rates, while interest rates on other types of assets and liabilities may lag behind changes in general market rates. Certain assets, such as fixed and adjustable rate mortgage loans, have features that limit changes in interest rates on a short-term basis and over the life of the asset. Therefore, as interest rates begin to increase, if our floating rate interest-earning assets do not reprice faster than our interest-bearing liabilities in a rising rate environment, our net interest income and, in turn, our profitability, could be adversely affected.

We seek to minimize the adverse effects of changes in interest rates by structuring our asset-liability composition to obtain the maximum spread. We use interest rate sensitivity analysis and a simulation model to assist us in estimating the optimal asset-liability composition. However, such management tools have inherent limitations that impair their effectiveness. Moreover, the long-term effects of the Federal Reserve’s unprecedented quantitative easing and tapering off are unknown, and while interest rates have begun to increase, they remain at historically low levels. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in minimizing the adverse effects of changes in interest rates.Operational Risks

We have engaged in expansion through acquisitionsmay incur significant losses as a result of ineffective risk management processes and may consider additional acquisitions in the future, which could negatively affect our business and earnings.strategies.

We have engaged in expansionare exposed to many types of operational risks, including liquidity risk, credit risk, market risk, interest rate risk, legal and compliance risk, strategic risk, information security risk, and reputational risk. We are also reliant upon our employees, and our operations are subject to the risk of fraud, theft or malfeasance by our employees, vendors and others. We seek to monitor and control our risk exposure through acquisitionsa risk and control framework encompassing a variety of separate but complementary financial, credit, operational and compliance systems, and internal control and management review processes. However, these systems and review processes and the judgments that accompany their application may consider other acquisitionsnot be effective and, as a result, we may not anticipate every economic and financial outcome in all market environments or the specifics and timing of such outcomes, particularly in the future. There areevent of the kinds of dislocations in market conditions experienced during the recession, which highlight the limitations inherent in using historical data to manage risk. If those systems and review processes prove to be ineffective in identifying and managing risks, associated with any such expansion. These risks include, among others, incorrectly assessing the asset quality of a bank acquired in a particular transaction, encountering greater than anticipated costs in integrating acquired businesses, facing resistance from customers or employees, and being unable to profitably deploy assets acquired in the transaction. Additional country- and region-specific risks are associated with transactions outside the United States, including in China. To the extent we issue capital stock in connection with additional transactions, if any, these transactions and related stock issuances may have a dilutive effect on earnings per share and share ownership. 

Our earnings,our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects after a merger or acquisition depend in part onthe value of our ability to successfully integrate the operations of the acquired company.common stock could be materially and adversely affected. We may be unable to integrate operations successfully or to achieve expected cost savings. Any cost savings which are realized may be offset by losses in revenues or other charges to earnings. As with any acquisition of financial institutions, there also may be business disruptions that cause us to lose customers or cause customers to remove their accounts from us and move their business to competing financial institutions.

In addition, our ability to grow may be limited if we cannot make acquisitions. We compete with other financial institutions with respect to proposed acquisitions. We cannot predict if or when we will be able to identify and attract acquisition candidates or make acquisitions on favorable terms. suffer severe reputational damage.

Concentration of risk increases the potential for significant losses.

We have naturally developed concentrated exposures to those markets and asset classes in which we have specific knowledge or competency. In particular, we primarily operate in California markets with a concentration of Chinese-American individuals and businesses, and commercial and commercial real estate loans constitute a significant portion of our loan portfolio. In management's judgment, our extensive experience within these concentration areas helps us to better evaluate underwriting and other associated risks with extending credit. However, the presence of similar exposures concentrated in certain asset classes leaves us exposed to the risk of a focused downturn within a concentration area. Thus, our concentration in the California markets increases our exposure to materially higher credit losses if there is a deterioration in the economic conditions, housing conditions or real estate values in the California markets. Our concentration in commercial and commercial real estate lending also increases our exposure to risks generally associated with such lending. Our commercial and commercial real estate loans may have a greater risk of loss than residential mortgage loans, in part because these loans are generally larger or more complex to underwrite and are characterized by having a limited supply of real estate at commercially attractive locations, long delivery time frames for development and high interest rate sensitivity. Unexpected deterioration in the credit quality of our commercial or commercial real estate loan portfolios would require us to increase our provision for loan losses, which would reduce our profitability and could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Moreover, with respect to commercial real estate loans, federal and state banking regulators are examining commercial real estate lending activity with heightened scrutiny and may require banks with higher levels of commercial real estate loans to implement more stringent underwriting, internal controls, risk management policies and portfolio stress testing, as well as possibly higher levels of allowances for losses and capital levels as a result of commercial real estate lending growth and exposures.

As we expandCOVID-19 could have negative effects on our businesshospitality and CRE loans, including loans to hotels/motels, restaurants and the retail industry, which are dependent for repayment on the successful operation and management of the CRE, the strength of the CRE industry broadly and other factors outside of California markets, we will encounter risks that could adversely affect us. the borrower’s control.

We primarily operateIn response to COVID-19, many state and local governments have ordered certain restrictions on non-essential businesses and residents. Certain industries have been particularly hard hit, including the retail industry, the restaurant industry and the travel and hospitality industry. At December 31, 2020, we had outstanding loans to retail businesses/properties of $1.7 billion, or 11% of total loans, hotels & resorts of $298.9 million, or 2% of total loans, and restaurants of $160.3 million, or 1% of total loans. Our CRE loans are dependent on the profitable operation and management of the property securing the loan and its cash flows. The continued spread of COVID-19 could result in California markets with a concentrationfurther reduction of Chinese-American individualsdemand for hotel rooms and businesses; however, one ofrelated lodging and entertainment services in general, reduction in business and personal travel, reduction in discretionary spending by our strategies isborrowers’ customers, increases in employee health related costs for our customers, operational cost increases due to expand beyond California intopotential labor, food, energy, water, transportation shortages, government forced closures and travel restrictions, or other domestic markets that have concentrations of Chinese-American individuals and businesses. We currently have operations in eight other states (New York, Texas, Washington, Massachusetts, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, and Nevada) and in Hong Kong. In the course of this expansion, we will encounter significant risks and uncertainties thatunanticipated costs related to such force majeure events like COVID-19. These conditions could have a significant adverse impact, which could be material adverse effect onto our operations. These risksborrowers, by reducing the revenue and uncertainties include increased expenses and operational difficulties arising from, among other things,cash flows of our borrowers, impacting the borrowers’ ability to attract sufficient businessrepay the loan, increasing the risk of default by our borrowers and/or reducing the foreclosure value of CRE that serves as collateral for certain of our loans. These conditions can also lead to a decline in new markets, to manage operations in noncontiguous market areas, to comply with allproperty sales prices and related assets and properties planned for development. Loans may also be secured by depreciating assets where any repossessed collateral for a defaulted loan may not provide an adequate source of repayment of the various local lawsoutstanding loan balance.

Any of the foregoing could negatively impact our borrowers, and regulations,their financial results, which, in turn, could adversely affect our financial condition and to anticipate events or differences in markets in which we have no current experience. results of operations.

Our commercial loan, commercial real estate loan and construction loan portfolios expose us to risks that may be greater than the risks related to our other loans.

Our loan portfolio includes commercial loans and commercialcommercial real estate loans, which are secured by hotels and motels, shopping/retail centers, service station and car wash, industrial and warehouse properties, and other types of commercial properties. Commercial and commercial real estate loans may carry more risk as compared to other types of lending, because they typically involve larger loan balances often concentrated with a single borrower or groups of related borrowers. This may result in larger charge-offs on commercial and commercial real estate loans on a per loan basis than those incurred with our residential or consumer loan portfolios. These loans also may expose a lender to greater credit risk than loans secured by residential real estate. The payment experience on commercial real estate loans that are secured by income producing properties are typically dependent on the successful operation of the related real estate project and thus, may subject us to adverse conditions in the real estate market or to the general economy. The collateral securing these loans typically cannot be liquidated as easily as residential real estate. If we foreclose on these loans, our holding period for the collateral typically is longer than residential properties because there are fewer potential purchasers of the collateral.

Additionally, manymany of the Bank’s commercial real estate and commercial business loans are made to small to medium sized businesses that may have a heightened vulnerability to economic conditions. Moreover, a portion of these loans have been made by us in recent years and the borrowers may not have experienced a complete business or economic cycle. Furthermore, the deterioration of our borrowers’ businesses may hinder their ability to repay their loans with us, which could adversely affect our results of operations. Any unexpected deterioration in the credit quality of our commercial or commercial real estate loan portfolios would require us to increase our provision for loan losses, which would reduce our profitability and could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Moreover,, federal and state banking regulators are examining commercial real estate lending activity with heightened scrutiny and may require banks with higher levels of commercial real estate loans to implement more stringent underwriting, internal controls, risk management policies and portfolio stress testing, as well as possibly higher levels of allowances for losses and capital levels as a result of commercial real estate lending growth and exposures. Because a significant portion of our loan portfolio is comprised of commercial real estate loans, the banking regulators may require us to maintain higher levels of capital than we would otherwise be expected to maintain, which could limit our ability to leverage our capital and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, thethe risks inherent in construction lending may continue to affect adversely our results of operations. Such risks include, among other things, the possibility that contractors may fail to complete, or complete on a timely basis, construction of the relevant properties; substantial cost overruns in excess of original estimates and financing; market deterioration during construction; and lack of permanent take-out financing. Loans secured by such properties also involve additional risk because they have no operating history. In these loans, loan funds are advanced upon the security of the project under construction (which is of uncertain value prior to completion of construction) and the estimated operating cash flow to be generated by the completed project. There is no assurance that such properties will be sold or leased so as to generate the cash flow anticipated by the borrower. A general decline in real estate sales and prices across the United States or locally in the relevant real estate market, a decline in demand for residential real estate, economic weakness, high rates of unemployment, and reduced availability of mortgage credit, are some of the factors that can adversely affect the borrowers’ ability to repay their obligations to us and the value of our security interest in collateral, and thereby adversely affect our results of operations and financial results. 

Our investments and/or financings in certain tax-advantaged projects may not generate returns as anticipated and may have an adverse impact on our financial results.

We invest in and/or finance certain tax-advantaged projects promoting affordable housing and renewable energy sources. Our investments in these projects are designed to generate a return primarily through the realization of federal and state income tax credits, and other tax benefits, over specified time periods. We are subject to the risk that previously recorded tax credits, which remain subject to recapture by taxing authorities based on compliance features required to be met at the project level, will fail to meet certain government compliance requirements and will not be able to be fully realized. The possible inability to realize these tax credits and other tax benefits can have a negative impact on our financial results. The risk of not being able to realize the tax credits and other tax benefits depends on many factors outside of our control, including changes in the applicable provisions of the tax code and the ability of the projects to be completed and properly managed. 

Our use of appraisals in deciding whether to make a loan on or secured by real property does not ensure the value of the real property collateral. 

In considering whether to make a loan secured by real property, we typically require an appraisal of the property. However, an appraisal is only an estimate of the value of the property at the time the appraisal is made. If the appraisal does not reflect the amount that may be obtained upon any sale or foreclosure of the property, we may not realize an amount equal to the indebtedness secured by the property.

Liabilities from environmental regulationsOur use of third party vendors and our other ongoing third party business relationships are subject to increasing regulatory requirements and attention.

We regularly use third party vendors as part of our business. We also have substantial ongoing business relationships with other third parties. These types of third party relationships are subject to increasingly demanding regulatory requirements and attention by our federal bank regulators. Recent regulation requires us to enhance our due diligence, ongoing monitoring and control over our third party vendors and other ongoing third party business relationships. In certain cases we may be required to renegotiate our agreements with these vendors to meet these enhanced requirements, which could materiallyincrease our costs. We expect that our regulators will hold us responsible for deficiencies in our oversight and adversely affectcontrol of our third party relationships and in the performance of the parties with which we have these relationships. As a result, if our regulators conclude that we have not exercised adequate oversight and control over our third party vendors or other ongoing third party business relationships or that such third parties have not performed appropriately, we could be subject to enforcement actions, including civil money penalties or other administrative or judicial penalties or fines as well as requirements for customer remediation, any of which could have a material adverse effect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our deposit insurance premiums could increase in the future, which could have a material adverse impact on future earnings and financial condition.

The FDIC insures deposits at FDIC-insured financial institutions, including the Bank. The FDIC charges insured financial institutions premiums to maintain the Deposit Insurance Fund ("DIF") at a specific level. Unfavorable economic conditions, increased bank failures and additional failures decreased the DIF. According to the FDIC, the DIF reserve ratio reached 1.36% of total deposits as of September 30, 2018, exceeding the statutorily required minimum reserved ratio of 1.35% ahead of the September 30, 2020 deadline imposed by the Dodd-Frank Act. The FDIC has, in addition, established a higher reserve ratio of 2% as a long term goal which goes beyond what is required by statute. There is no implementation deadline for the 2% ratio. The FDIC may increase the assessment rates or impose additional special assessments in the future to keep the DIF at the statutory target level. Any increase in the Bank's FDIC premiums could have an adverse effect on its financial condition and results of operations.

As we expand our business outside of California markets, including through acquisitions, we will encounter risks that could adversely affect our business and earnings.

We primarily operate in California markets with a concentration of Chinese-American individuals and businesses; however, one of our strategies is to expand beyond California into other domestic markets that have concentrations of Chinese-American individuals and businesses. We currently have operations in eight other states (New York, Washington, Illinois, Texas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, and New Jersey) and in Hong Kong. In the course of this expansion, we will encounter significant risks and uncertainties that could have a material adverse effect on our operations. These risks and uncertainties include increased expenses and operational difficulties arising from, among other things, our ability to attract sufficient business in new markets, to manage operations in noncontiguous market areas, to comply with all of the Bank’svarious local laws and regulations, and to anticipate events or differences in markets in which we have no current experience.

We have engaged in expansion through acquisitions and may consider other acquisitions in the future. There are risks associated with any such expansion. These risks include, among others, incorrectly assessing the asset quality of a bank acquired in a particular transaction, encountering greater than anticipated costs in integrating acquired businesses, facing resistance from customers or employees, and being unable to profitably deploy assets acquired in the transaction. Additional country- and region-specific risks are associated with transactions outside the United States, including in China. To the extent we issue capital stock in connection with additional transactions, if any, these transactions and related stock issuances may have a dilutive effect on earnings per share and share ownership. 

Our earnings, financial condition, and prospects after a merger or acquisition depend in part on our ability to successfully integrate the operations of the acquired company. We may be unable to integrate operations successfully or to achieve expected cost savings. Any cost savings which are realized may be offset by losses in revenues or other charges to earnings. As with any acquisition of financial institutions, there also may be business the Bankdisruptions that cause us to lose customers or cause customers to remove their accounts from us and move their business to competing financial institutions.

In addition, our ability to grow may foreclose and take title to real estate, and could be subject to environmental liabilitieslimited if we cannot make acquisitions. We compete with other financial institutions with respect to these properties. The Bank mayproposed acquisitions. We cannot predict if or when we will be held liableable to a governmental entityidentify and attract acquisition candidates or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation and clean-up costs incurred by these parties in connection with environmental contamination, or may be required to investigate or clear up hazardous or toxic substances, or chemical releases at a property. The costs associated with investigation or remediation activities could be substantial. In addition, as the owner or former owner of any contaminated site, the Bank may be subject to common law claims by third parties basedmake acquisitions on damages, and costs resulting from environmental contamination emanating from the property. If the Bank ever becomes subject to significant environmental liabilities, its business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of our common stock could be materially and adversely affected.  favorable terms.

We face substantial competition fromfrom our competitors. 

We face substantial competition for deposits, loans, and for other banking services, as well as acquisitions, throughout our market area from the major banks and financial institutions that dominate the commercial banking industry. ThisThis may cause our cost of funds to exceed that of our competitors. These banks and financial institutions, including those with foreign ownership, may have greater resources than we do, including the ability to finance advertising campaigns and allocate their investment assets to regions of higher yield and demand and make acquisitions and invest in new banking technology. By virtue of their larger capital bases, theyour larger competitors have substantially greater lending limits than we do and perform certain functions, including trust services, which are not presently offered by us. We also compete for loans and deposits, as well as other banking services, such as payment services, with savings and loan associations, savings banks, brokerage houses, insurance companies, mortgage companies, credit unions, credit card companies and other financial and non-financial institutions and entities. These factors and ongoing consolidation among insured institutions in the financial services industry may materially and adversely affect our ability to market our products and services. Significant increases in the costs of monitoring and ensuring compliance with new banking regulations and the necessary costs of upgrading information technology and data processing capabilities can have a disproportionate impact on our ability to compete with larger institutions.

We are dependent on key personnel and the loss of one or more of those key personnel may materially and adversely affect our prospects. 

Competition for qualified employees and personnel in the banking industry is intense and we believe there are a limited number of qualified persons with knowledge of, and experience in, the communities that we serve. The process of recruiting personnel with the combination of skills and attributes required to carry out our strategies is often lengthy. Our success depends to a significant degree upon our ability to attract and retain qualified management, loan origination, finance, customer service, administrative, marketing, and technical personnel and upon the continued contributions of our management and personnel. In particular, our success has been and continues to be highly dependent upon the abilities of key executives and certain other employees, including, but not limited to, our Executive Chairman of the Board, Dunson K. Cheng, our Chief Executive Officer, Pin Tai,Chang M. Liu, and our Chief Financial Officer, Heng W. Chen.

Our compensation practices are subject to review and oversight by the FDIC, the DBO,DFPI, the Federal Reserve and other regulators. We may be subject to limitations on compensation practices, which may or may not affect our competitors,competitors, by the FDIC, the DBO,DFPI, the Federal Reserve or other regulators. These limitations could further affect our ability to attract and retain our executive officers and other key personnel. In April 2011 and April 2016, the Federal Reserve, other federal banking agencies and the SEC jointly published proposed rules designed to implement provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act prohibiting incentive compensation arrangements that would encourage inappropriate risk taking at covered financial institutions, which includes a bank or bank holding company with $1 billion or more of assets, such as the Bancorp and the Bank. It cannot be determined at this time whether or when a final rule will be adopted and whether compliance with such a final rule will substantially affect the manner in which we structure compensation for our executives and other employees. Depending on the nature and application of the final rules, we may not be able to successfully compete with certain financial institutions and other companies that are not subject to some or all of the rules to retain and attract executives and other high performing employees. If this were to occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected, perhaps materially.

Managing reputational risk is important to attracting and maintaining customers, investors, and employees.

Threats to our reputation can come from many sources, including adverse sentiment about financial institutions generally, unethical practices, employee misconduct, failure to deliver minimum standards of service or quality, compliance deficiencies, failure to protect confidential client information and questionable, illegal, or fraudulent activities of our customers. We have policies and procedures in place that seek to protect our reputation and promote ethical conduct, but these policies and procedures may not be fully effective. Negative publicity regarding our business, employees, or customers, with or without merit, may result in the loss of customers, investors, and employees, costly litigation, a decline in revenues, and increased governmental regulation.

Natural disasters, geopolitical events, public health crises and geopoliticalother catastrophic events beyond our control could adversely affect us. 

Natural disasters such as earthquakes, landslides, wildfires, extreme weather conditions, hurricanes, floods, and other acts of nature, and geopolitical events such as those involving civil unrest, changes in government regimes, terrorism or military conflict, climate change related events and pandemics and other public health crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, and other catastrophic events could, among other things, (i) adversely affect our business operations and those of our customers, counterparties and service providers; (ii) cause substantial damage and loss to real and personal property. These natural disasters and geopolitical events couldproperty; (iii) impair our borrowers’ ability to service their loans,loans; (iv) decrease the level and duration of deposits by customers,customers; (v) erode the value of loan collateral, andcollateral; (vi) result in an increase in the amount of our non-performing loans and a higher level of non-performing assets (including real estate owned), net charge-offs, and provision for loan losses, whichlosses; or (vii) lead to other operational difficulties and impair our ability to manage our business. We also could materiallybe adversely affected if our key personnel or a significant number of our employees were to become unavailable due to a public health crisis (such as another outbreak of a contagious disease), natural disaster, war, act of terrorism, accident, or other reason. Natural disasters, geopolitical events, public health crises and other catastrophic events could also negatively affect our customers, counterparties and service providers, as well as result in disruptions in general economic activity and the financial and real estate markets.

Societal responses to climate change could adversely affect our business financial condition, resultsand performance, including indirectly through impacts on our customers.

Concerns over the long-term impacts of operationsclimate change have led and will continue to lead to governmental efforts around the world to mitigate those impacts. Consumers and businesses also may change their behavior on their own as a result of these concerns. We and our customers will need to respond to new laws and regulations as well as consumer and business preferences resulting from climate change concerns. We and our customers may face cost increases, asset value reductions, operating process changes, and the like. The impact on our loan and other customers will likely vary depending on their specific attributes, including reliance on or role in carbon intensive activities and the impact of rising sea levels and other effects of climate change. Among the impacts to us could be a drop in demand for our products and services, particularly in certain sectors. In addition, we could face reductions in creditworthiness on the part of some customers or in the value of assets securing loans. Our efforts to take these risks into account in making lending and other decisions, including by increasing our common stock. business with climate-friendly companies, may not be effective in protecting us from the negative impact of new laws and regulations or changes in consumer or business behavior.

Adverse conditions in AsiaInformation, Information Technology and elsewhere could adversely affect our business.

A substantial number of our customers have economic and cultural ties to Asia and, as a result, we are likely to feel the effects of adverse economic and political conditions in Asia, including the effects of rising inflation or slowing growth and volatility in the real estate and stock markets in China and other regions. Additionally, we maintain a branch in Hong Kong. U.S. and global economic policies, military tensions, and unfavorable global economic conditions may adversely impact the Asian economies. In addition, pandemics and other public health crises or concerns over the possibility of such crises could create economic and financial disruptions in the region. A significant deterioration of economic conditions in Asia could expose us to, among other things, economic and transfer risk, and we could experience an outflow of deposits by those of our customers with connections to Asia. Transfer risk may result when an entity is unable to obtain the foreign exchange needed to meet its obligations or to provide liquidity. This may adversely impact the recoverability of investments with or loans made to such entities. Adverse economic conditions in Asia, and in China or Taiwan in particular, may also negatively impact asset values and the profitability and liquidity of our customers who operate in this region.Privacy Risks

We depend on the accuracy and completenesscompleteness of information about customers.

In deciding whether to extend credit,, open a bank account or enter into other transactions with customers, we may rely on information furnished to us by or on behalf of customers, including financial statements and other financial information. We also may rely on representations of customers as to the accuracy and completeness of that information and, with respect to financial statements, on reports of independent auditors. We may further rely on invoices, contracts, and other supporting documentation provided by our customers, as well as our customers' representations that their financial statements conform to U.S. GAAP (or other applicable accounting standards in foreign markets) and present fairly, in all material respects, the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the customer. We also may rely on customer representations and certifications, or other audit or accountants' reports, with respect to the business and financial condition of our clients. Our financial condition, results of operations, financial reporting or reputation could be negatively affected if we rely on materially misleading, false, inaccurate or fraudulent information.

Our information systems may experience failures, interruptions,interruptions, or breaches in security, which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of our common stock. 

We rely heavily on communications and information systems to conduct our business.business. Any failure, interruption, or breach or threatened breach of these systems could result in failures or disruptions in our customer relationship management, general ledger, deposit, loan, and other systems. In the course of providing financial services, we store personally identifiable data concerning customers and employees of customers. While we have policies and procedures designed to prevent or limit the effect of the failure, interruption, or breaches of our information systems, there can be no assurance that any such failures, interruptions, or breaches will not occur or, if they do occur, that they will be adequately addressed. Privacy laws and regulations are matters of growing public concern and are continually changing in the states in which we operate.

In recent periods, there has been a rise in electronic fraudulent activity, security breaches, and cyber-attacks within the financial services industry, especially in the banking sector. Fraudulent activity can take many forms and has evolved and escalated as more tools for accessing financial services emerge. Some financial institutions have reported breaches of theirtheir websites and systems, some of which have involved sophisticated and targeted attacks intended to misappropriate sensitive or confidential information, destroy or corrupt data, disable or degrade service, disrupt operations or sabotage systems. These breaches can remain undetected for an extended period of time. Other examples include debit card/credit card fraud, check fraud, mechanical devices attached to ATM machines, social engineering and phishing attacks to obtain personal information, impersonation of our clients through the use of falsified or stolen credentials, employee fraud, information theft and other malfeasance.

The secure maintenance and transmission of confidential information, as well as the secure execution of transactions over our systems, are essential to protect us and our customers against fraud and security breaches and to maintain our customers’ confidence. Increases in criminal activity levels and sophistication, advances in computer capabilities, and other developments could result in a compromise or breach of the technology, processes, and controls that we use to prevent fraudulent transactions or to protect data about us, our customers, and underlying transactions, as well as the technology used by our customers to access our systems. Cyber security risks may also occur with our third-party service providers, and may interfere with their ability to fulfill their contractual obligations to us, with attendant potential for financial loss or liability that could adversely affect our financial condition or results of operations. These risks will likely continue to increase in the future as we continue to increase our offerings of mobile services and other Internet or web-based products.

The occurrence of any failures, interruptions, fraudulent activities or breaches could damage our reputation, result in a loss of customers,customers, cause us to incur additional costs (including remediation and cyber security protection costs), disrupt our operations, affect our ability to grow our online and mobile banking services, subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny, or expose us to civil litigation and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of our common stock. 

Our need to continue to adapt our information technology systemssystems to allow us to provide new and expanded service could present operational issues, require significant capital spending, and disrupt our business. 

The financial services market, including banking services, is undergoingcontinuing to undergo rapid changes with frequent introductionsintroductions of new technology-driven products and services. In addition to better serving customers, the effective use of technology increases efficiency and may enable us to reduce costs. Our future success may depend, in part, on our ability to use technology to provide products and services that provide convenience to customers and to create additional efficiencies in our operations. As we continue to offer Internet banking and other online and mobile services to our customers, and continue to expand our existing conventional banking services, we will need to adapt our information technology systems to handle these changes in a way that meets constantly changing industry and regulatory standards. This can be very expensive and may require significant capital expenditures. In addition, our success will depend on, among other things, our ability to provide secure and reliable services, anticipate changes in technology, and efficiently develop and introduce services that are accepted by our customers and cost effective for us to provide. Some of our competitors have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements than we currently have. We may not be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services or be successful in marketing these products and services to our customers. As a result, our ability to effectively compete to retain or acquire new business may be impaired, and our business, financial condition or results of operations, may be adversely affected.

Managing reputational risk is important to attracting and maintaining customers, investors, and employees.

Threats to our reputation can come from many sources, including adverse sentiment about financial institutions generally, unethical practices, employee misconduct, failure to deliver minimum standards of service or quality, compliance deficiencies, failure to protect confidential client information and questionable, illegal, or fraudulent activities of our customers. We have policies and procedures in place that seek to protect our reputation and promote ethical conduct, but these policies and procedures may incur significant losses asnot be fully effective. Negative publicity regarding our business, employees, or customers, with or without merit, may result in the loss of customers, investors, and employees, costly litigation, a resultdecline in revenues, and increased governmental regulation. 

Regulations relating to privacy, information security and strategies.data protection could increase our costs, affect or limit how we collect and use personal information and adversely affect our business opportunities.

We are exposed to many types of operational risks, including liquidity risk, credit risk, market risk, interest rate risk, legal and compliance risk, strategic risk, information security risk, and reputational risk. We are also reliant upon our employees, and our operations are subject to various privacy, information security and data protection laws, including requirements concerning security breach notification, and we could be negatively impacted by these laws. For example, our business is subject to the riskGramm-Leach-Bliley Act of fraud, theft or malfeasance1999 which, among other things: (i) imposes certain limitations on our ability to share nonpublic personal information about our customers with nonaffiliated third parties; (ii) requires that we provide certain disclosures to customers about our information collection, sharing and security practices and afford customers the right to “opt out” of any information sharing by us with nonaffiliated third parties (with certain exceptions); and (iii) requires we develop, implement and maintain a written comprehensive information security program containing safeguards appropriate based on our employees. We seek to monitorsize and controlcomplexity, the nature and scope of our risk exposure through a risk and control framework encompassing a variety of separate but complementary financial, credit, operational and compliance systems, and internal control and management review processes. However, these systems and review processesactivities, and the judgments that accompany their application may not be effectivesensitivity of customer information we process, as well as plans for responding to data security breaches. Various state and as a result, we may not anticipate every economicfederal banking regulators and financial outcomestates have also enacted data security breach notification requirements with varying levels of individual, consumer, regulatory or law enforcement notification in all market environments or the specifics and timing of such outcomes, particularlycertain circumstances in the event of a security breach. Moreover, legislators and regulators in the kindsUnited States are increasingly adopting or revising privacy, information security and data protection laws that potentially could have a significant impact on our current and planned privacy, data protection and information security-related practices, our collection, use, sharing, retention and safeguarding of dislocations in market conditions experienced duringconsumer or employee information, and some of our current or planned business activities. This could also increase our costs of compliance and business operations and could reduce income from certain business initiatives. This includes increased privacy-related enforcement activity at the recession, which highlightfederal level, by the limitations inherent in using historicalFederal Trade Commission, as well as at the state level, such as with regard to mobile applications.

Compliance with current or future privacy, data protection and information security laws (including those regarding security breach notification) affecting customer or employee data to manage risk. If those systemswhich we are subject could result in higher compliance and review processes provetechnology costs and could restrict our ability to provide certain products and services, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial conditions or results of operations. Our failure to comply with privacy, data protection and information security laws could result in potentially significant regulatory or governmental investigations or actions, litigation, fines, sanctions and damage to our reputation, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Regulatory, Compliance and Legal Risks

The banking industry is highly regulated, and the regulatory framework, together with any future legislative or regulatory changes, could limit or restrict our activities, hamper our ability to increase our assets and earnings, and materially and adversely affect our profitability.

We operate in a highly regulated industry and are or may become subject to regulation by federal, state, and local governmental authorities and various laws, regulations, regulatory guidelines, and judicial and administrative decisions imposing requirements or restrictions on part or all of our operations, capitalization, payment of dividends, mergers and acquisitions, investments, loans and interest rates charged, interest rates paid on deposits, and locations of offices. We also must comply with numerous federal anti-money laundering, tax withholding and reporting, and consumer protection statutes and regulations. A considerable amount of management time and resources has been devoted to the oversight of, and the development and implementation of controls and procedures relating to, compliance with these laws and regulations, and we expect that significant time and resources will be ineffectivedevoted to compliance in identifyingthe future. These laws and managing risks,regulations mandate certain disclosure and reporting requirements and regulate the manner in which we must deal with our customers when taking deposits, making loans, collecting loans, and providing other services. We also are, or may become subject to, examination, supervision, and additional comprehensive regulation by various federal, state, and local authorities with regard to compliance with these laws and regulations. Failure to comply with laws, regulations, or policies could result in sanctions by regulatory agencies, civil money penalties, and/or reputation damage, which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of our common stockstock.

Because our business is highly regulated, the laws, rules, regulations, and supervisory guidance and policies applicable to us are subject to regular modification and change. Perennially, various laws, rules and regulations are proposed, which, if adopted, could impact our operations, increase our capital requirements or substantially restrict our growth and adversely affect our ability to operate profitably by making compliance much more difficult or expensive, restricting our ability to originate or sell loans, or further restricting the amount of interest or other charges or fees earned on loans or other products. The Dodd-Frank Act, for example, instituted major changes to the banking and financial institutions regulatory regimes, such as changes to Regulation Z promulgated by the CFPB that may make it more difficult for us to underwrite consumer mortgages and to compete with large national mortgage service providers. Further regulation could increase the assessment rate we are required to pay to the FDIC, adversely affecting our earnings. Other changes to statutes, regulations, or regulatory policies, including changes in interpretation or implementation of statutes, regulations, or policies, could affect us in substantial and unpredictable ways. It is very difficult to predict the competitive impact that any such changes would have on the banking and financial services industry in general or on our business in particular. Such changes may, among other things, increase the cost of doing business, limit permissible activities, or affect the competitive balance between banks and other financial institutions. See Part I — Item 1 — “Business — Regulation and Supervision.”

We are subject to stringent capital requirements, including those required by Basel III.

The U.S. federal bank regulators have jointly adopted capital requirements on banks and bank holding companies as required by the Dodd-Frank Act, which incorporate the elements of Basel Committee’s Basel III accords and have the effect of raising our capital requirements and imposing new capital requirements beyond those previously required.  Increased regulatory capital requirements (and the associated compliance costs) whether due to the adoption of new laws and regulations, changes in existing laws and regulations, or more expansive or aggressive interpretations of existing laws and regulations, may require us to raise additional capital, or impact our ability to pay dividends or pay compensation to our executives, which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of our common stock.  If we do not meet minimum capital requirements, we will be subject to prompt corrective action by federal bank regulatory agencies. Prompt corrective action can include progressively more restrictive constraints on operations, management and capital distributions. For additional discussion regarding our capital requirements, please see “Item 1. Business – Regulation and Supervision – Capital Adequacy Requirements” above.

We may become subject to supervisory action by bank supervisory authorities that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and the value of our common stock.

Under federal and state laws and regulations pertaining to the safety and soundness of financial institutions, the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (the “FRB SF”) has authority over the Bancorp and separately the DFPI and FDIC have authority over the Bank to compel or restrict certain actions if the Bancorp or the Bank should violate any laws or regulations, if its capital should fall below adequate capital standards as a result of operating losses, or if these regulators otherwise determine that the Bancorp or the Bank have engaged in unsafe or unsound practices, including failure to exercise proper risk oversight over the many areas of the Bancorp’s and the Bank’s operations. These regulators, as well as the CFPB, also have authority over the Bancorp’s and the Bank’s compliance with various statutes and consumer protection and other regulations. Among other matters, the corrective actions that may be required of the Bancorp or the Bank following the occurrence of any of the foregoing may include, but are not limited to, requiring the Bancorp and/or the Bank to enter into informal or formal enforcement orders, including board resolutions, memoranda of understanding, written agreements, supervisory letters, commitment letters, and consent or cease and desist orders to take corrective action and refrain from unsafe and unsound practices; removing officers and directors; restricting expansion activities; assessing civil monetary penalties; and taking possession of, closing and liquidating the Bank. If we are unable to meet the requirements of any corrective actions, we could become subject to supervisory action. The terms of any such supervisory action could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of our common stock.

We face a risk of noncompliance and enforcement action with the Bank Secrecy Act and other anti-money laundering statutes and regulations.

The Bank Secrecy Act, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, and other laws and regulations require financial institutions, among other duties, to institute and maintain an effective anti-money laundering program and file suspicious activity and currency transaction reports as appropriate. The federal Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is authorized to impose significant civil money penalties for violations of those requirements and has recently engaged in coordinated enforcement efforts with federal banking regulators, as well as with the U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, and Internal Revenue Service. We are also subject to increased scrutiny of compliance with the rules enforced by the Office of Foreign Assets Control and compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. In addition, our Hong Kong Branch is subject to the anti-money laundering laws and regulations of Hong Kong. If our policies, procedures and systems are deemed deficient, we would be subject to liability, including fines and regulatory actions, which may include restrictions on our ability to pay dividends and the necessity to obtain regulatory approvals to proceed with certain aspects of our business plan, including our acquisition plans. Failure to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing could also have serious reputational consequences for us. Any of these results could materially and adversely affected. affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of our common stock.

We are subject to the CRA, fair lending and other laws and regulations, and our failure to comply with these laws and regulations could lead to material penalties.

The CRA, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act and other fair lending laws and regulations impose nondiscriminatory lending and other requirements on financial institutions. The U.S. Department of Justice and other federal agencies, including the FDIC and CFPB, are responsible for enforcing these laws and regulations. A successful challenge to an institution’s performance under the CRA, fair lending and other compliance laws and regulations could result in a wide variety of sanctions, including the required payment of damages and civil money penalties, injunctive relief, imposition of restrictions on mergers and acquisitions activity and restrictions on expansion. Private parties may also suffer severe reputational damage.have the ability to challenge an institution’s performance under fair lending laws in private class action litigation. The costs of defending, and any adverse outcome from, any such challenge could damage our reputation or could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Reforms to and uncertainty regarding LIBOR may adversely affect our business.

On July 27, 2017, the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”), which regulates LIBOR, announced that it will no longer persuade or compel banks to submit rates for the calculation of LIBOR after 2021. While Intercontinental Exchange Inc., the company that administers LIBOR plans to continue publishing LIBOR, liquidity in the interbank markets that those LIBOR estimates are based upon has been declining. Accordingly, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the publication of such rates beyond 2021. In April 2018, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in conjunction with the Alternative Reference Rates Committee, a steering committee comprised of large U.S. financial institutions, announced the replacement of U.S. LIBOR with a new index calculated by short-term repurchase agreements, backed by U.S. Treasury securities called the SOFR. The first publication of SOFR was released in April 2018. Whether or not SOFR attains market traction as a LIBOR replacement tool remains in question and the future of LIBOR at this time is uncertain. The uncertainty as to the nature and effect of such reforms and actions and the political discontinuance of LIBOR may adversely affect the value of and return on our financial assets and liabilities that are based on or are linked to LIBOR, our results of operations or financial condition. In addition, these reforms may also require extensive changes to the contracts that govern these LIBOR based products, as well as our systems and processes.

Governmental monetary policies and intervention to stabilize the U.S. financial system may affect our business and are beyond our control.

The business of banking is affected significantly by the fiscal and monetary policies of the Federal government and its agencies. Such policies are beyond our control. We are particularly affected by the policies established by the Federal Reserve in relation to the supply of money and credit in the United States. The instruments of monetary policy available to the Federal Reserve can be used in varying degrees and combinations to directly affect the availability of bank loans and deposits, as well as the interest rates charged on loans and paid on deposits, and this can and does have a material effect on our business.

Our business and financial results could be impacted materially by adverse results in legal proceedings.proceedings.

Various aspects of our operations involve the risk of legal liability. We have been, and expect to continue to be, named or threatened to be named as defendants in legal proceedings arising from our business activities. We establish accruals for legallegal proceedings when information related to the loss contingencies represented by those proceedings indicates both that a loss is probable and that the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated, but we do not have accruals for all legal proceedings where we face a risk of loss. In addition, amounts accrued may not represent the ultimate loss to us from those legal proceedings. Thus, our ultimate losses may be higher or lower, and possibly significantly so, than the amounts accrued for loss contingencies arising from legal proceedings, and these losses could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of our common stock.

Certain provisions of our charter and bylaws could make the acquisition of our company more difficult.

Certain provisions of our restated certificate of incorporation, as amended, and our restated bylaws, as amended, could make the acquisition of our company more difficult. These provisions include authorized but unissued shares of preferred and common stock that may be issued without stockholder approval; three classes of directors serving staggered terms; special requirements for stockholder proposals and nominations for director; and super-majority voting requirements in certain situations including certain types of business combinations. 

OurLiabilities from environmental regulations could materially and adversely affect our business and financial resultscondition.

In the course of the Bank’s business, the Bank may foreclose and take title to real estate, and could be subject to environmental liabilities with respect to these properties. The Bank may be held liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation and clean-up costs incurred by these parties in connection with environmental contamination, or may be required to investigate or clear up hazardous or toxic substances, or chemical releases at a property. The costs associated with investigation or remediation activities could be substantial. In addition, as the owner or former owner of any contaminated site, the Bank may be subject to common law claims by third parties based on damages, and costs resulting from environmental contamination emanating from the property. If the Bank ever becomes subject to significant environmental liabilities, its business, financial condition, results of operations and the value of our common stock could be materially and adversely affected by changesaffected.  

Changes in accounting standards or tax laws and regulations.regulations could adversely affect our financial results.

From time to time, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”) and the SECSEC will change the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of our financial statements. In addition, from time to time, federal and state taxing authorities will change the tax laws and regulations, and their interpretations. These changes and their effects can be difficult to predict and can materially and adversely impact how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations.  

For example, the FASB recently issued an accounting standard update that will result in a significant change in how we recognize credit losses and may have a material impact on our financial condition or results of operations. This accounting standard update, “Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326), Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments,” replaces the incurred loss impairment methodology under GAAP with a methodology that reflects lifetime expected credit losses (“CECL”) and requires consideration of a broader range of reasonable and supportable information for credit loss estimates. Under the CECL model, we are required to present certain financial assets carried at amortized cost, such as loans held for investment and held-to-maturity debt securities, at the net amount expected to be collected. The measurement of expected credit losses is to be based on information about past events, including historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts that affect the collectability of the reported amount. This measurement takes place at the time the financial asset is first added to the balance sheet and periodically thereafter. This differs significantly from the “incurred loss” model required under GAAP, which delays recognition until it is probable a loss has been incurred. Accordingly, we expect that the adoption of the CECL model will affect how we determine our allowance for loan losses and could require us to significantly increase our allowance. Moreover, the CECL model may create more volatility in the level of our allowance for loan losses. If we are required to materially increase our level of allowance for loan losses for any reason, such increase could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

ChangesAs permitted by the CARES Act, and as extended by the CAA, we have chosen to continue to defer the adoption of the CECL model until the earlier of (i) the beginning of our fiscal year that begins after the date the COVID-19 national emergency comes to an end or (ii) January 1, 2022. We are continuing to evaluate the impact the CECL model will have on our accounting, but we expect to recognize a one-time cumulative-effect adjustment to our allowance for loan losses as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the new standard is effective. Under the final interagency rule released on December, 21, 2018, banking organizations that experience a reduction in retained earnings due to the adoption of CECL at the beginning of the fiscal year in which it is adopted may elect to phase in the regulatory capital impact of adopting CECL over a three-year transition period. 

In addition, changes to tax law could increase our effective tax rates. These law changes may be retroactive to previous periods and as a result could negatively affect our current and future financial performance. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the full impact of which is subject to further evaluation and analysis, is likely to have both positive and negative effects on our financial performance. For example, the new legislation will resultrecent changes in the tax laws may have an adverse effect on the market for, and valuation of, residential properties, and on the demand for such loans in the future, and could make it harder for borrowers to make their loan payments. In addition, these recent changes may also have a reductiondisproportionate effect on taxpayers in states with high residential home prices and high state and local taxes. If home ownership becomes less attractive, demand for mortgage loans could decrease. The value of the properties securing loans in our federal corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% beginning in 2018, which will have a favorable impact on our earnings and capital generation abilities. However, the new legislation also enacted limitations on certain deductions, such as the deduction of FDIC deposit insurance premiums, which will partially offset the anticipated increase in net earnings from the lower tax rate. In addition, fourth quarter and full-year 2017 results included $23.4 million of additional tax expense related to the revaluation of the Company's deferred tax assets and a $2.6 million pretax write-down of low income housing tax credit investments, bothloan portfolio may be adversely impacted as a result of the lower corporate tax rate enacted by the Tax Cutschanging economics of home ownership, which could require an increase in our provision for loan losses, which would reduce our profitability and Jobs Act. The impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act may differ from the foregoing, possiblycould materially due to changes in interpretations or in assumptions that we have made, guidance or regulations that may be promulgated, and other actions that we may take as a result of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Similarly, the Bank’s customers are likely to experience varying effects from both the individual and business tax provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and such effects, whether positive or negative, may have a corresponding impact onadversely affect our business, financial condition and the economy as a whole.results of operations.

Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock

The price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly, and this may make it difficult for you to sell shares of common stock owned by you at times or at prices you find attractive. 

The trading price of our common stock may fluctuate widely as a result of a number of factors, many of which are outside our control. In addition, the stock market is subject to fluctuations in the share prices and trading volumes that affect the market prices of the shares of many companies. These broad market fluctuations could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. Among the factors that could affect our stock price are: 

The stock market and, in particular, the market for financial institution stocks, has experienced significant volatility. As a result, the market price of our common stock may be volatile. In addition, the trading volume in our common stock may fluctuate more than usual and cause significant price variations to occur. The trading price of the shares of our common stock and the value of our other securities will depend on many factors, which may change from time to time, including, without limitation, our financial condition, performance, creditworthiness and prospects, future sales of our equity or equity related securities, and other factors identified above in “Forward-Looking Statements,” and in this Item 1A — “Risk Factors.” The capital and credit markets can experience volatility and disruption. Such volatility and disruption can reach unprecedented levels, resulting in downward pressure on stock prices and credit availability for certain issuers without regard to their underlying financial strength. A significant decline in our stock price could result in substantial losses for individual stockholders and could lead to costly and disruptive securities litigation.

An investment in our common stock isis not an insured deposit.

Our common stock is not a bank deposit and, therefore, is not insured against loss by the FDIC, any other deposit insurance fund or by any other public or private entity. Investment in our common stock is inherently risky for the reasons described in this “Risk Factors” section and elsewhere in this report and is subject to the same market forces that affect the price of common stock in any company. As a result, if you acquire our common stock, you could lose some or all of your investment.

Statutory restrictions and restrictions by our regulators on dividends and other distributions from the Bank may adversely impact us by limiting the amount of distributions the Bancorp may receive. Statutory and contractual restrictions and our regulatorsregulators may also restrict the Bancorp’sBancorp’s ability to pay dividends. 

The ability of the Bank to pay dividends to us is limited by various regulations and statutes, including California law, and our ability to pay dividends on our outstanding stock is limitedlimited by various regulations and statutes, including Delaware law.