FIRST NORTHERN COMMUNITY BANCORP
For the period ended Dec 31, 2025. Filed Mar 13, 2026.
View on SEC.govAbout this filing
A company's yearly report to the SEC, with audited financial statements. It is the fullest account a company gives of its business, its finances and the risks it sees.
FY2025 · Filed Mar 13, 2026
FNRN$17.01-4.9%Stored close · as of Nov 6, 2026
What changed in Risk Factors?
Read the current filingPrevious report: 10-K
Period ended 2024-12-31; filed 2025-03-07.
0001140361-25-007622
Item 1A. Risk FactorsCurrent report: 10-K
Period ended 2025-12-31; filed 2026-03-13.
0001437749-26-008040
Item 1A. Risk FactorsThe baseline is this issuer’s latest earlier reporting period of the same form that was filed before the current report. A previous 10-Q is a different quarter, not a year-over-year comparison. Amendments are excluded.
Compared 96 previous paragraphs and 98 current paragraphs.
67 unchanged; 25 reworded; 6 added; 4 removed; 0 previous and 0 current paragraphs rearranged.
Tables are not compared: 0 previous and 0 current tables excluded. Dates, whitespace, punctuation and numbering changes are ignored; changes to financial figures remain significant.
A changed paragraph is not evidence that risk increased or decreased. An unchanged paragraph does not establish that risk stayed the same.
Added paragraphs (6)
Current report
Changes in U.S. and Foreign Government Policies, Including the Imposition of or Further Increases in Tariffs and Changes to Existing Trade Agreements, Could Have a Material Adverse Effect on the Bank’s Customers, Which, in Turn, Could Adversely Affect Our Business, Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Current report
In February 2025, the Trump Administration announced that it would be imposing increases in tariffs on goods imported to the U.S. from Canada, Mexico, and China, and, in April 2025, the Administration announced the imposition of increased tariffs on goods imported to the U.S. from other countries. As a consequence, other countries, in retaliation to the U.S.’s tariff measures, announced the imposition of increased levels of tariffs on goods exported to such countries by companies in the U.S. The Trump Administration has announced agreements in principle regarding tariffs with certain significant trading partners of the United States, including (among others) the European Union, the United Kingdom, Japan and South Korea. It remains uncertain whether such agreements in principle will lead to definitive agreements with such trading partners and, if so, on what terms and whether agreements with other trading partners will eventually be consummated. More recently, the U.S. government has introduced new tariffs and tariff-related measures and has indicated that other potential tariff measures and modifications to existing tariffs continue to be under consideration. President Trump imposed many of these tariffs by invoking authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that President Trump could not invoke the IEEPA to unilaterally set tariffs on imports, thereby invalidating those tariffs implemented using IEEPA. The Trump Administration responded by announcing the imposition of new tariffs under alternative legal authorities to replace the IEEPA tariffs, including an executive order imposing a global surcharge on most imports (initially 10%, with an announcement on February 21, 2026, that the tariff rate would be 15%), effective for 150 days. The tariff environment continues to remain highly dynamic, and the specific tariffs applicable to goods imported into the U.S. continue to evolve, as do import tariffs charged by other countries. These tariffs could be of particular concern to U.S. companies operating in the agricultural sector who export agricultural goods to other countries. The Company’s customers include a number of agricultural businesses, which could be negatively affected.
Current report
As a result of these changes to U.S. and foreign government trade policies, there may be changes to existing trade agreements, greater restrictions on free trade generally, the imposition of or significant further increases in tariffs on goods imported into the U.S., and adverse responses by foreign governments to U.S. trade policies, among other possible changes. The extent and duration of any tariffs, and the resulting impact on economic conditions generally and on our customers’ businesses in particular are uncertain and depend on various factors, such as negotiations between the U.S. and other countries, the responses of such countries, and exemptions or exclusions that may be granted. A significant trade disruption or the establishment or further increase of any tariffs, trade protection measures or restrictions could result in lost sales, adversely impacting our banking customers and their businesses, including our agricultural business customers. In addition, international trade disputes, including those related to tariffs, could result in inflationary pressures and/or adversely impact global supply chains, which could increase the costs of doing business for our banking customers. Changes in U.S. social, political, regulatory and economic conditions or in laws and policies governing foreign trade, manufacturing, development and investment in the countries where our banking customers currently sell products, including agricultural products, and any resulting negative sentiments towards the U.S. and U.S. businesses as a result of such changes, could also have a material adverse effect on our banking customers’ business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. If these events negatively affect our banking clients, or general economic conditions nationally, in California, or in the markets we serve, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.
Current report
As noted previously, the Trump Administration recently imposed increased tariffs on goods imported to the U.S. from other countries. As a consequence, other countries, in retaliation to the U.S.’s tariff measures, announced the imposition of increased levels of tariffs on goods exported to such countries by companies in the U.S. More recently, the U.S. government has introduced agreements in principle regarding tariffs with certain trading partners of the United States, new tariffs and tariff-related measures and has indicated that other potential tariff measures and modifications to existing tariffs continue to be under consideration. President Trump imposed many of these tariffs by invoking authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that President Trump could not invoke the IEEPA to unilaterally set tariffs on imports, thereby invalidating those tariffs implemented using IEEPA. The Trump Administration responded by announcing the imposition of new tariffs under alternative legal authorities to replace the IEEPA tariffs, including an executive order imposing a global surcharge on most imports (initially 10%, with an announcement on February 21, 2026, that the tariff rate would be 15%), effective for 150 days. The tariff environment continues to remain highly dynamic, and the specific tariffs applicable to goods imported into the U.S. continue to evolve, as do import tariffs charged by other countries. See “Changes in U.S. and Foreign Government Policies, Including the Imposition of or Further Increases in Tariffs and Changes to Existing Trade Agreements, Could Have a Material Adverse Effect on the Bank’s Customers, Which, in Turn, Could Adversely Affect Our Business, Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” above in these “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. International trade disputes, including those related to tariffs, could result in inflationary pressures and/or adversely impact global supply chains, which could increase the costs of doing business for our banking customers. Political tensions as a result of trade policies could reduce trade volume, investment, technological exchange, and other economic activities between major international economies, resulting in a material adverse effect on global economic conditions and the stability of global financial markets, which could have resulting material adverse effects on general economic conditions nationally, in California, or in our local markets. Some economists have predicted that the Administration’s steep new tariffs could curtail growth and result in price increases for American consumers, ultimately increasing the likelihood of a U.S. recession. Additionally, financial markets may be adversely affected by the current or anticipated impact of military conflict, including the recent military actions in Iran and the Middle East, escalating military tension between Russia and Ukraine, t…
Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.
Current report
As noted previously, the Trump Administration recently imposed increased tariffs on goods imported to the U.S. from other countries. As a consequence, other countries, in retaliation to the U.S.’s tariff measures, announced the imposition of increased levels of tariffs on goods exported to such countries by companies in the U.S. More recently, the U.S. government has introduced agreements in principle regarding tariffs with certain trading partners of the United States, new tariffs and tariff-related measures and has indicated that other potential tariff measures and modifications to existing tariffs continue to be under consideration. President Trump imposed many of these tariffs by invoking authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that President Trump could not invoke the IEEPA to unilaterally set tariffs on imports, thereby invalidating those tariffs implemented using IEEPA. The Trump Administration responded by announcing the imposition of new tariffs under alternative legal authorities to replace the IEEPA tariffs, including an executive order imposing a global surcharge on most imports (initially 10%, with an announcement on February 21, 2026, that the tariff rate would be 15%), effective for 150 days. The tariff environment continues to remain highly dynamic, and the specific tariffs applicable to goods imported into the U.S. continue to evolve, as do import tariffs charged by other countries. Such tariffs could be of particular concern to U.S. companies operating in the agricultural sector who export agricultural goods to other countries. The Company’s customers include a number of agricultural businesses, which could be negatively affected. See “Changes in U.S. and Foreign Government Policies, Including the Imposition of or Further Increases in Tariffs and Changes to Existing Trade Agreements, Could Have a Material Adverse Effect on the Bank’s Customers, Which, in Turn, Could Adversely Affect Our Business, Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” above in these “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Removed paragraphs (4)
Previous report
In response, various significant economic and monetary stimulus measures were implemented by the U.S. government. The FRB also pursued a highly accommodative monetary policy aimed at keeping interest rates at historically low levels. The more recent tightening of the Federal Reserve’s monetary policies, including repeated and aggressive increases in target range for the federal funds rate as well as the conclusion of the Federal Reserve’s tapering of asset purchases, together with ongoing economic and geopolitical instability, increases the risk of an economic recession. The Federal Reserve has signaled caution in easing monetary policy citing strong robust GDP growth, and persistent inflation as reasons to delay rate cuts.
Previous report
In February 2025, the new Trump Administration announced that it would be imposing increases in tariffs on goods imported to the U.S. from Canada, Mexico, and China and has also indicated that tariffs may be imposed at increased levels on imports to the U.S. from other countries. If other countries, in retaliation to the U.S.’s tariff measures, were to impose increased levels of tariffs on goods exported to such countries by companies in the U.S. such tariff increases may negatively impact companies in the U.S. whose business involves exports to other countries. This could be of particular concern to U.S. companies operating in the agricultural sector who export to other countries. The Company’s customers included a number of agricultural business, which could be negatively affected. Preliminary indications have been that the new Trump Administration tariff increases to Canada and Mexico may be delayed or decreased if such countries adopt various policies urged by the U.S., such as enhanced border security and control measures. The outcome of this process cannot be predicted with any certainty at this time.
Previous report
In recent years, the federal banking agencies have increased their focus on climate-related risks impacting the operations of banks, the communities they serve and the broader financial system. Accordingly, the agencies have begun to enhance their supervisory expectations regarding the climate risk management practices of larger banking organizations, including by encouraging such banks to: ensure that management of climate-related risk exposures has been incorporated into existing governance structures; evaluate the potential impact of climate-related risks on the bank’s financial condition, operations and business objectives as part of its strategic planning process; account for the effects of climate change in stress testing scenarios and systemic risk assessments; revise expectations for credit portfolio concentrations based on climate-related factors; consider investments in climate-related initiatives and lending to communities disproportionately impacted by the effects of climate change; evaluate the impact of climate change on the bank’s borrowers and consider possible changes to underwriting criteria to account for climate-related risks to mortgaged properties; incorporate climate-related financial risk into the bank’s internal reporting, monitoring and escalation processes; and prepare for the transition risks to the bank associated with the adjustment to a low-carbon economy and related changes in laws, regulations, governmental policies, technology, and consumer behavior and expectations. The FDIC has indicated that all banks, regardless of their size, may have material exposures to climate-related financial and other risks that require prudent management. As climate-related supervisory guidance is formalized, and relevant risk areas and corresponding control expectations are further refined, we may be required to expend significant capital and incur compliance, operating, maintenance and remediation costs in order to conform to such requirements.
Reworded paragraphs (25)
Previous wording
Recent Negative Developments in the Banking Industry, and any Legislative and/or Bank Regulatory Actions that may Result, Could Adversely Affect our Business Operations, Results of Operations and Financial Condition.
Current wording
Negative Developments in the Banking Industry, and any Legislative and/or Bank Regulatory Actions that may Result, Could Adversely Affect our Business Operations, Results of Operations and Financial Condition.
Previous wording
While we currently do not anticipate liquidity constraints of the kind that caused these other financial services institutions to fail or require external support, constraints on our liquidity could occur as a result of customers choosing to maintain their deposits with larger financial institutions or to invest in higher yielding short-term fixed income securities, which could materially adversely impact our liquidity, cost of funding, loan funding capacity, net interest margin, capital and results of operations. If we were required to sell a portion of our securities portfolio to address liquidity needs, we may incur losses, including as a result of the negative impact of rising interest rates on the value of our securities portfolio, which could negatively affect our earnings and our capital. While the Company has taken actions to maintain adequate and diversified sources of funding and management believes that its liquidity measures are reasonable in light of the nature of the Bank’s customer base, there can be no assurance that such actions will be sufficient in the event of a sudden liquidity crisis.
Current wording
While we currently do not anticipate liquidity constraints of the kind that caused these other financial services institutions to fail or require external support, constraints on our liquidity could occur as a result of customers choosing to maintain their deposits with larger financial institutions or to invest in higher yielding short-term fixed income securities, which could materially adversely impact our liquidity, cost of funding, loan funding capacity, net interest margin, capital and results of operations. If we were required to sell a portion of our securities portfolio to address liquidity needs, we may incur losses, including as a result of the negative impact of rising interest rates on the value of our securities portfolio, which could negatively affect our earnings and our capital. While the Company has taken actions which aim to maintain adequate and diversified sources of funding and management believes that its liquidity measures are reasonable in light of the nature of the Bank’s customer base, there can be no assurance that such actions will be sufficient in the event of a sudden liquidity crisis.
Previous wording
These recent events may also result in potentially adverse changes to laws or regulations governing banks and bank holding companies, enhanced regulatory supervision and examination policies and priorities, and/or the imposition of restrictions through regulatory supervisory or enforcement activities, including higher capital requirements and/or an increase in the Bank’s deposit insurance assessments. The FDIC has proposed that Congress consider various changes in the FDIC insurance program, including possible increases in the deposit insurance limit for certain types of accounts, such as business payment accounts. Although these legislative and regulatory actions cannot be predicted with certainty, any of these potential legislative or regulatory actions could, among other things, subject us to additional costs, limit the types of financial services and products we may offer, and reduce our profitability, any of which could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations or financial condition.
Current wording
These bank failures may also result in potentially adverse changes to laws or regulations governing banks and bank holding companies, enhanced regulatory supervision and examination policies and priorities, and/or the imposition of restrictions through regulatory supervisory or enforcement activities, including higher capital requirements and/or an increase in the Bank’s deposit insurance assessments. The FDIC has proposed that Congress consider, and legislation has been introduced in Congress proposing, various changes in the FDIC insurance program, including possible increases in the deposit insurance limit for certain types of accounts, such as business payment accounts. Although these legislative and regulatory actions cannot be predicted with certainty, any of these potential legislative or regulatory actions could, among other things, subject us to additional costs, limit the types of financial services and products we may offer, and reduce our profitability, any of which could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations or financial condition.
Previous wording
Following the financial crisis of 2008, adverse financial and economic developments impacted U.S. and global economies and financial markets and presented challenges for the banking and financial services industry and for us. These developments included a general recession both globally and in the U.S. accompanied by substantial volatility in the financial markets.
Current wording
Following the financial crisis of 2008, adverse financial and economic developments impacted U.S. and global economies and financial markets and presented challenges for the banking and financial services industry and for us. These developments included a general recession both globally and in the U.S. accompanied by substantial volatility in the financial markets. In response, various significant economic and monetary stimulus measures were implemented by the U.S. government. The FRB also pursued a highly accommodative monetary policy aimed at keeping interest rates at historically low levels, In January 2022, due to elevated levels of inflation and corresponding pressure to raise interest rates, the FRB began slowing the pace of its bond purchasing and increasing the target range for the federal funds rate over time, before beginning to reduce interest rates in 2024, which reductions continued in 2025. Despite these rate cuts, the FRB has signaled caution in easing monetary policy. At its January 2026 meeting, the FRB, citing continued elevated uncertainty about the economic outlook, low job gains, and inflation that remains somewhat elevated, determined to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 3‑1/2 to 3‑3/4 percent. Monetary policy has contributed to and may continue to result in elevated market interest rates and a flat and/or inverted yield curve. Changes to monetary policy may adversely impact U.S. economic activity and have adverse consequences on our customers’ and our earnings and operations. During his second term, President Trump has regularly pushed for the FRB to cut short-term interest rates, threatened to fire the FRB Chairman, and taken steps to remove another member of the FRB’s governing board, and, in January 2026, the U.S. attorney’s office in the District of Columbia opened a criminal investigation into the FRB Chairman over the central bank’s renovation of its Washington headquarters. These actions have the potential to threaten the independence of the FRB, and the outcome of these actions, and their impact on interest rates, financial markets, borrowing costs and the U.S. economy in general, cannot be predicted at this time. A prolonged federal government shutdown, as well as broader issues surrounding the federal budgeting process and governance, may also contribute to market volatility and disruptions and recessionary risk.
Previous wording
The U.S. government continues to face significant fiscal and budgetary challenges which, if not resolved, could result in renewed adverse U.S. economic conditions. These challenges may be intensified over time if federal budget deficits were to increase and Congress and the Administration cannot effectively work to address them. The overall level of the federal government's debt, the extensive political disagreements regarding the government's statutory debt limit and the continuing substantial federal budget deficits led to a downgrade from “AAA” to “AA+” of the long-term sovereign credit rating of United States debt by one credit rating agency in 2023. This risk could be exacerbated over time.
Current wording
The U.S. government continues to face significant fiscal and budgetary challenges which, if not resolved, could result in renewed adverse U.S. economic conditions. These challenges may be intensified over time if federal budget deficits were to increase and Congress and the Administration cannot effectively work to address them. The overall level of the federal government's debt, the extensive political disagreements regarding the government's statutory debt limit and the continuing substantial federal budget deficits led to a downgrade from “AAA” to “AA+” of the long-term sovereign credit rating of United States debt by one credit rating agency in 2023. In May 2025, Moody’s lowered the U.S. government’s long-term issuer and senior unsecured ratings from “Aaa” to “Aa1”. This downgrade means that all three major credit rating agencies have downgraded the U.S. credit rating below their top rating. This risk could be exacerbated over time.
Previous wording
If substantial federal budget deficits were to continue or increase in the years ahead, further downgrades by the credit rating agencies with respect to the obligations of the U.S. federal government could occur. Any such further downgrades could increase over time the U.S. federal government’s cost of borrowing, which may worsen its fiscal challenges, as well as generate further upward pressure on interest rates generally in the U.S. which could, in turn, have adverse consequences for borrowers and the level of business activity. The long-term impact of this situation, including the impact to the Bank's investment securities portfolio and other assets, cannot be predicted.
Current wording
If substantial federal budget deficits were to continue or increase in the years ahead, further downgrades by the credit rating agencies with respect to the obligations of the U.S. federal government could occur. A prolonged federal government shutdown, as well as broader issues surrounding the federal budgeting process and governance, may further contribute to the possibility of a downgrade of the U.S. sovereign credit rating. Any such further downgrades could increase over time the U.S. federal government’s cost of borrowing, which may worsen its fiscal challenges, as well as generate further upward pressure on interest rates generally in the U.S. which could, in turn, have adverse consequences for borrowers and the level of business activity. The long-term impact of this situation, including the impact on the Bank's investment securities portfolio and other assets, cannot be predicted.
Previous wording
The Bank’s allowance for credit losses on loans was approximately $15.9 million, or 1.49% of total loans, at December 31, 2024, compared to $16.6 million, or 1.55% of total loans, at December 31, 2023, and 143.5% of total non-performing loans net of guaranteed portions at December 31, 2024, compared to 199.1% of total non-performing loans, net of guaranteed portions at December 31, 2023. Reversal of provision for credit losses totaled $0.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, and provision for credit losses totaled $1.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The reversal of provision for credit losses in 2024 was primarily due to decreases in loans outstanding and unfunded commitments.
Current wording
The Bank’s allowance for credit losses on loans was approximately $14.5 million, or 1.36% of total loans, at December 31, 2025, compared to $15.9 million, or 1.49% of total loans, at December 31, 2024, and 285.7% of total non-performing loans net of guaranteed portions at December 31, 2025, compared to 143.5% of total non-performing loans, net of guaranteed portions at December 31, 2024. No provision for credit losses was recorded for the year ended December 31, 2025, and a reversal of provision for credit losses totaled $0.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2024.
Previous wording
The Bank’s primary lending focus has historically been commercial (including agricultural), construction, and real estate mortgage. At December 31, 2024, real estate mortgage (excluding loans held-for-sale) and construction loans (residential and other) comprised approximately 90% and 3%, respectively, of the total loans in the Bank’s portfolio. At December 31, 2024, all of the Bank’s real estate mortgage and construction loans and approximately 1% of its commercial loans were secured fully or in part by deeds of trust on underlying real estate. The Company’s dependence on real estate increases the risk of loss in both the Bank’s loan portfolio and its holdings of other real estate owned if economic conditions in Northern California were to deteriorate. Deterioration of the real estate market in Northern California would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Current wording
The Bank’s primary lending focus has historically been commercial (including agricultural), construction, and real estate mortgage. At December 31, 2025, loans secured by real estate, including construction loans (residential and other), comprised approximately 84% of the total loans in the Bank’s portfolio. At December 31, 2025, all of the Bank’s real estate mortgage and construction loans and approximately 1% of its commercial loans were secured fully or in part by deeds of trust on underlying real estate. The Company’s dependence on real estate increases the risk of loss in both the Bank’s loan portfolio and its holdings of other real estate owned if economic conditions in Northern California were to deteriorate. Deterioration of the real estate market in Northern California would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Previous wording
The Bank is subject to certain industry-specific economic factors. For example, a portion of the Bank’s total loan portfolio is related to residential and commercial real estate, especially in California. Increases in residential mortgage loan interest rates could have an adverse effect on the Bank’s operations by depressing new mortgage loan originations, which in turn could negatively impact the Bank’s title and escrow deposit levels. Additionally, a downturn in the residential real estate and housing industries in California could have an adverse effect on the Bank’s operations and the quality of its real estate and construction loan portfolio. Although the Bank does not engage in subprime or negative amortization lending, we are not immune to volatility in the real estate market. Real estate valuations are influenced by demand, and demand is driven by economic factors such as employment rates and interest rates, which have been, and may continue to be, affected by the pandemic. These factors could adversely impact the quality of the Bank’s residential construction, residential mortgage and construction related commercial portfolios in various ways, including by decreasing the value of the collateral for our loans, and thereby negatively affecting the Bank’s overall loan portfolio.
Current wording
The Bank is subject to certain industry-specific economic factors. For example, a portion of the Bank’s total loan portfolio is related to residential and commercial real estate, especially in California. Increases in residential mortgage loan interest rates could have an adverse effect on the Bank’s operations by depressing new mortgage loan originations, which in turn could negatively impact the Bank’s title and escrow deposit levels. Additionally, a downturn in the residential real estate and housing industries in California could have an adverse effect on the Bank’s operations and the quality of its real estate and construction loan portfolio. Although the Bank does not engage in subprime or negative amortization lending, we are not immune to volatility in the real estate market. Real estate valuations are influenced by demand, and demand is driven by economic factors such as employment rates and interest rates. These factors could adversely impact the quality of the Bank’s residential construction, residential mortgage and construction related commercial portfolios in various ways, including by decreasing the value of the collateral for our loans, and thereby negatively affecting the Bank’s overall loan portfolio.
Previous wording
The Bank provides financing to, and receives deposits from, businesses in a number of other industries that may be particularly vulnerable to industry-specific economic factors, including the home building, commercial real estate, retail, agricultural, industrial, and commercial industries. Following the financial crisis of 2008, the home building industry in California was especially adversely impacted by the deterioration in residential real estate markets, which lead the Bank to take additional provisions and charge-offs against credit losses in this portfolio. The recessionary economic and market conditions resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic also significantly affected the commercial and residential real estate markets in the U.S. generally, and in California in particular, decreasing property values, increasing the risk of defaults and reducing the value of real estate collateral. Continued volatility in fuel prices and energy costs and drought conditions in California could also adversely affect businesses in several of these industries.
Current wording
The Bank provides financing to, and receives deposits from, businesses in a number of other industries that may be particularly vulnerable to industry-specific economic factors, including the home building, commercial real estate, retail, agricultural, industrial, and commercial industries. Following the financial crisis of 2008, the home building industry in California was especially adversely impacted by the deterioration in residential real estate markets, which lead the Bank to take additional provisions and charge-offs against credit losses in this portfolio. The recessionary economic and market conditions resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic also significantly affected the commercial and residential real estate markets in the U.S. generally, and in California in particular, decreasing property values, increasing the risk of defaults and reducing the value of real estate collateral. Continued volatility in fuel prices and energy costs and return of drought conditions in California could also adversely affect businesses in several of these industries.
Previous wording
In recent years, wildfires across California and in our market areas resulted in significant damage and destruction of property and equipment. The fire damage caused resulted in adverse economic impacts to those affected markets and beyond and on the Bank's customers. In addition, the major electric utility company in our region has adopted programs of electrical power shut-offs, often for multiple days, in wide areas of Northern California during periods of high winds and high fire danger. Shut-offs of power by this utility have adversely impacted the business of some of our customers and also have resulted in some of our branches being temporarily closed. It can be expected that these events will continue to occur from time to time in the areas served by the Bank, and that the consequences of these natural disasters, including programs of public utility public safety power outages when weather conditions and fire danger warrant, may adversely affect the Bank’s business and that of its customers. It is also possible that climate change may be increasing the severity or frequency of adverse weather conditions, thus increasing the impact of these types of natural disasters on our business and that of our customers. For additional information, see "Our Operations, Business and Customers Could be Materially Adversely Affected by the Physical Effects of Climate Change, as well as Governmental and Societal Responses to Climate Change," below in these "Risk Factors" in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Current wording
In recent years, wildfires across California and in our market areas resulted in significant damage and destruction of property and equipment. The fire damage resulted in adverse economic impacts to those affected markets and beyond and on the Bank's customers. In addition, the major electric utility company in our region has adopted programs of electrical power shut-offs, often for multiple days, in wide areas of Northern California during periods of high winds and high fire danger. Shut-offs of power by this utility have adversely impacted the business of some of our customers and also have resulted in some of our branches being temporarily closed. It can be expected that these events will continue to occur from time to time in the areas served by the Bank, and that the consequences of these natural disasters, including programs of public utility public safety power outages when weather conditions and fire danger warrant, may adversely affect the Bank’s business and that of its customers. It is also possible that climate change may be increasing the severity or frequency of adverse weather conditions, thus increasing the impact of these types of natural disasters on our business and that of our customers. For additional information, see "Our Operations, Business and Customers Could be Materially Adversely Affected by the Physical Effects of Climate Change, as well as Governmental and Societal Responses to Climate Change," below in these "Risk Factors" in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Previous wording
At December 31, 2024, loans secured by real estate comprised approximately 87% of the total loans in the Bank’s portfolio. At December 31, 2024, all of the Bank’s real estate mortgage and construction loans were secured fully or in part by deeds of trust on underlying real estate. Most of the Company’s customers, including its loan customers, are located in the State of California.
Current wording
At December 31, 2025, loans secured by real estate comprised approximately 84% of the total loans in the Bank’s portfolio. At December 31, 2025, all of the Bank’s real estate mortgage and construction loans were secured fully or in part by deeds of trust on underlying real estate. Most of the Company’s customers, including its loan customers, are located in the State of California.
Previous wording
Recently, several of California’s largest home insurance providers, including State Farm, Allstate, Farmers, USAA, Travelers, Nationwide and Chubb, have either paused or severely limited their issuance of new policies, or their renewal of existing policies, in the state. Mounting claims from wildfire damages, the increasing cost of building and repairing homes in California, and a steep increase in reinsurance premiums, as well as state insurance regulations that make it difficult for insurers to adjust premiums in response to the evolving risk landscape, have challenged the capacity of insurance companies to sustainably and profitably offer home insurance in California. The result of these actions has been to significantly limit the availability of home insurance in California, where homeowners already face escalating property values and high wildfire, seismic, severe weather and other risks. The recent catastrophic fires in Southern California, with preliminary estimates of resulting property damage and other claims exceeding $30 billion, are expected to further exacerbate these challenges.
Current wording
Recently, several of California’s largest home insurance providers, including State Farm, Allstate, Farmers, USAA, Travelers, Nationwide and Chubb, have either paused or severely limited their issuance of new policies, or their renewal of existing policies, in the state. Mounting claims from wildfire damages, the increasing cost of building and repairing homes in California, and a steep increase in reinsurance premiums, as well as state insurance regulations that make it difficult for insurers to adjust premiums in response to the evolving risk landscape, have challenged the capacity of insurance companies to sustainably and profitably offer home insurance in California. The result of these actions has been to significantly limit the availability of home insurance in California, where homeowners already face escalating property values and high wildfire, seismic, severe weather and other risks. The catastrophic fires in Southern California in January 2025, with resulting property damage and other claims estimated to be as high as $53.8 billion, are expected to further exacerbate these challenges.
Previous wording
The California Department of Insurance enforces some safeguards to temporarily shield homeowners from the cancellation or non-renewal of home insurance policies in high-risk areas, particularly those prone to wildfires. In addition, the California Fair Access to Insurance Requirements (FAIR) Plan, a state-established risk pool, operates as an insurer of last resort, providing temporary coverage for California homeowners unable to obtain (generally at increased premium cost) such coverage from a traditional insurance carrier; however, enrollment in the FAIR Plan as a percentage of the total number of residential insurance policies in California has steadily increased over the past five years, particularly in counties with the highest wildfire risk, threatening the ongoing stability of the Plan. In late 2023, following the California Governor’s declaration of a State of Emergency regarding property insurance, the Insurance Commissioner of the State of California introduced a comprehensive package of executive actions aimed at insurance reform. In December 2024, the California Department of Insurance adopted regulations intended to cause insurance companies to write more policies in wildfire distressed areas of California as a condition for using forward-looking wildfire modeling designed to more accurately assess wildfire risks and to reverse FAIR Plan growth. There can be no assurance that these regulatory actions, or other proposed legislation, will increase insurance availability or stabilize and strengthen California’s insurance market. particularly in light of the recent catastrophic fires in Southern California.
Current wording
The California Department of Insurance enforces some safeguards to temporarily shield homeowners from the cancellation or non-renewal of home insurance policies in high-risk areas, particularly those prone to wildfires. In addition, the California Fair Access to Insurance Requirements (FAIR) Plan, a state-established risk pool, operates as an insurer of last resort, providing temporary coverage for California homeowners unable to obtain (generally at increased premium cost) such coverage from a traditional insurance carrier; however, enrollment in the FAIR Plan as a percentage of the total number of residential insurance policies in California has steadily increased over the past five years, particularly in counties with the highest wildfire risk, threatening the ongoing stability of the Plan. In late 2023, following the California Governor’s declaration of a State of Emergency regarding property insurance, the Insurance Commissioner of the State of California introduced a comprehensive package of executive actions aimed at insurance reform. In December 2024, the California Department of Insurance adopted regulations intended to cause insurance companies to write more policies in wildfire distressed areas of California as a condition for using forward-looking wildfire modeling designed to more accurately assess wildfire risks and to reverse FAIR Plan growth. In October 2025, the California Governor signed legislation to strengthen the FAIR Plan with new financing mechanisms to more quickly pay claims, better oversight, improved policyholder experience, and added coverage for manufactured homes, and the California Insurance Commissioner continues to advance a comprehensive reform package of the FAIR Plan, including temporary expansion of FAIR Plan coverage for certain high-value commercial properties. There can be no assurance that these regulatory actions, or other proposed legislation, will increase insurance availability or stabilize and strengthen California’s insurance market. particularly in light of the catastrophic fires in Southern California in January 2025.
Previous wording
The GSEs remain in federal government conservatorship at this time and proposals for the reform of their role are not being actively pursued in Congress. However, this could change at any time, particularly since GSE reform was a priority during the first Trump Administration. GSE reform could again become a subject under active consideration and if adopted, could well have a substantial impact on the mortgage market and could reduce our income from mortgage originations by increasing mortgage costs or lowering originations. GSE reforms could also reduce real estate prices, which could reduce the value of collateral securing outstanding mortgage loans. This reduction of collateral value could negatively impact the value or perceived collectability of these mortgage loans and may increase our allowance for credit loan losses. Such reforms may also include changes to the Federal Home Loan Bank System, which could adversely affect a significant source of term funding for lending activities by the banking industry, including the Bank. These reforms may also result in higher interest rates on residential mortgage loans, thereby reducing demand, which could have an adverse impact on our residential mortgage lending business.
Current wording
The GSEs remain in federal government conservatorship at this time and proposals for the reform of their role are not being actively pursued in Congress. However, recent developments suggest that the Trump Administration may be exploring plans to sell the government’s stakes in the GSEs through an initial public offering (IPO), and comprehensive GSE reform bills have been introduced in Congress in recent months. GSE reform, if adopted, could well have a substantial impact on the mortgage market and could reduce our income from mortgage originations by increasing mortgage costs or lowering originations. GSE reforms could also reduce real estate prices, which could reduce the value of collateral securing outstanding mortgage loans. This reduction of collateral value could negatively impact the value or perceived collectability of these mortgage loans and may increase our allowance for credit loan losses. Such reforms may also include changes to the Federal Home Loan Bank System, which could adversely affect a significant source of term funding for lending activities by the banking industry, including the Bank. These reforms may also result in higher interest rates on residential mortgage loans, thereby reducing demand, which could have an adverse impact on our residential mortgage lending business.
Previous wording
Fluctuations in market rates and other market disruptions are neither predictable nor controllable and may adversely affect our financial condition and earnings. Since 2022, inflationary pressures have affected many aspects of the U.S. economy, including gasoline and fuel prices, and global and domestic supply-chain issues have also had a disruptive effect on many industries, including the agricultural industry. In January 2022, due to elevated levels of inflation and corresponding pressure to raise interest rates, the FRB announced after several periods of historically low federal funds rates and yields on Treasury notes that it would be slowing the pace of its bond purchasing and increasing the target range for the federal funds rate over time. The FOMC increased the target range 525 basis points from March 2022 through July 2023. The target range remained unchanged through much of 2024 until the FOMC decreased the rate 100 basis points during the last four months of the year. As of December 31, 2024, the target range for the federal funds rate had been decreased to 4.25% to 4.50%. It remains uncertain whether the FOMC will further decrease the target range for the federal funds rate to attain a monetary policy sufficiently restrictive to return inflation to more normalized levels, further reduce the federal funds rate or leave the rate at its current elevated level for a lengthy period of time. As noted previously, the new Trump Administration has taken steps to increase tariffs on goods imported to the U.S. from certain countries. Retaliation by such countries through the imposition of higher tariffs on exports from the U.S. appears to be a possibility. The imposition of increased tariffs on imports and exports is believed by some economists to entail the possibility of increased inflationary pressures on the U.S. economy. The impact of these developments on the business of our clients and on our business cannot be predicted with certainty but could present challenges in 2025 and beyond.
Current wording
Fluctuations in market rates and other market disruptions are neither predictable nor controllable and may adversely affect our financial condition and earnings. Since 2022, inflationary pressures have affected many aspects of the U.S. economy, including gasoline and fuel prices, and global and domestic supply-chain issues have also had a disruptive effect on many industries, including the agricultural industry. In January 2022, due to elevated levels of inflation and corresponding pressure to raise interest rates, the FRB announced after several periods of historically low federal funds rates and yields on Treasury notes that it would be slowing the pace of its bond purchasing and increasing the target range for the federal funds rate over time. The FOMC increased the target range 525 basis points from March 2022 through July 2023. The target range remained unchanged through much of 2024 until the FOMC decreased the rate 100 basis points, to a target range of 4.25% to 4.50%, during the last four months of 2024. In 2025, the FOMC implemented three consecutive 25-basis-point interest rate cuts starting in September, lowering the federal funds rate to a range of 3.5% to 3.75% by December 2025. It remains uncertain whether the FOMC will further decrease the target range for the federal funds rate to attain a monetary policy sufficiently restrictive to return inflation to more normalized levels, begin to increase the federal funds rate or leave the rate at its current elevated level for a lengthy period of time. Factors such as inflation, productivity, oil prices, unemployment rates, and global demand play a role in the FOMC's consideration of future rate adjustments. As noted previously, the Trump Administration recently imposed increased tariffs on goods imported to the U.S. from other countries. As a consequence, other countries, in retaliation to the U.S.’s tariff measures, announced the imposition of increased levels of tariffs on goods exported to such countries by companies in the U.S. More recently, the U.S. government has introduced agreements in principle regarding tariffs with certain trading partners of the United States, new tariffs and tariff-related measures and has indicated that other potential tariff measures and modifications to existing tariffs continue to be under consideration. President Trump imposed many of these tariffs by invoking authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that President Trump could not invoke the IEEPA to unilaterally set tariffs on imports, thereby invalidating those tariffs implemented using IEEPA. The Trump Administration responded by announcing the imposition of new tariffs under alternative legal authorities to replace the IEEPA tariffs, including an executive order imposing a global surcharge on most imports (initially 10%, with an announcement on February 21, 2026, that the tariff rate would be 15%), effective for 150 da…
Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.
Previous wording
Beginning in 2021, the U.S. economy exhibited relatively rapid rates of increase in the consumer price index and other economic indices. If the U.S. economy encounters a significant, prolonged rate of inflation, this could pose higher relative risks to the banking industry and our business. Such inflationary periods have historically corresponded with relatively weaker earnings and higher credit losses for banks. In the past, inflationary environments have caused financing conditions to tighten and have increased borrowing costs for some marginal borrowers which, in turn, has impacted bank credit quality and loan growth. Additionally, a sustained period of inflation well above the FRB’s long-term target could prompt broad-based selling of longer-duration, fixed-rate debt, which could have negative implications for equity and real estate markets. Lower interest rates enable less credit-worthy borrowers to more readily meet their debt obligations. Small businesses and leveraged loan borrowers can be challenged in a materially higher-rate environment. Higher interest rates can also present challenges for commercial real estate projects, pressuring valuations and loan-to-value ratios. The FRB initiated a series of significant interest rate increases in response to the recent economic developments. For additional information, see "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Results of Operations - Net Interest Income" below in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Current wording
Beginning in 2021, the U.S. economy exhibited relatively rapid rates of increase in the consumer price index and other economic indices. If the U.S. economy encounters a significant, prolonged rate of inflation, this could pose higher relative risks to the banking industry and our business. Such inflationary periods have historically corresponded with relatively weaker earnings and higher credit losses for banks. In the past, inflationary environments have caused financing conditions to tighten and have increased borrowing costs for some marginal borrowers which, in turn, has impacted bank credit quality and loan growth. Additionally, a sustained period of inflation well above the FRB’s long-term target could prompt broad-based selling of longer-duration, fixed-rate debt, which could have negative implications for equity and real estate markets. Lower interest rates enable less credit-worthy borrowers to more readily meet their debt obligations. Small businesses and leveraged loan borrowers can be challenged in a materially higher-rate environment. Higher interest rates can also present challenges for commercial real estate projects, pressuring valuations and loan-to-value ratios. See “Economic Conditions in the U.S. May Soften or Become Recessionary with Resultant Adverse Consequences for the U.S. Financial Services Industry and for the Bank,” above in these “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Previous wording
In addition, the war between Russia and Ukraine and global reactions thereto have increased U.S. domestic and global energy prices. Oil supply disruptions related to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and sanctions and other measures taken by the U.S. or its allies, could lead to higher costs for gas, food and goods in the U.S. and exacerbate the inflationary pressures on the economy. As noted previously, the new Trump Administration has taken steps to increase tariffs on goods imported to the U.S. from certain countries. The imposition of increased tariffs on imports and exports is believed by some economists to entail the possibility of increased inflationary pressures on the U.S. economy. The impact of these developments cannot be predicted with certainty, but they could have potentially adverse impacts on our customers and on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Current wording
In addition, the war between Russia and Ukraine and global reactions thereto have increased U.S. domestic and global energy prices. Oil supply disruptions related to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and sanctions and other measures taken by the U.S. or its allies, could lead to higher costs for gas, food and goods in the U.S. and exacerbate the inflationary pressures on the economy. As noted previously, the Trump Administration recently imposed increased tariffs on goods imported to the U.S. from other countries. As a consequence, other countries, in retaliation to the U.S.’s tariff measures, announced the imposition of increased levels of tariffs on goods exported to such countries by companies in the U.S. More recently, the U.S. government has introduced agreements in principle regarding tariffs with certain trading partners of the United States, new tariffs and tariff-related measures and has indicated that other potential tariff measures and modifications to existing tariffs continue to be under consideration. President Trump imposed many of these tariffs by invoking authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that President Trump could not invoke the IEEPA to unilaterally set tariffs on imports, thereby invalidating those tariffs implemented using IEEPA. The Trump Administration responded by announcing the imposition of new tariffs under alternative legal authorities to replace the IEEPA tariffs, including an executive order imposing a global surcharge on most imports (initially 10%, with an announcement on February 21, 2026, that the tariff rate would be 15%), effective for 150 days. The tariff environment continues to remain highly dynamic, and the specific tariffs applicable to goods imported into the U.S. continue to evolve, as do import tariffs charged by other countries. Such tariffs could result in increased inflationary pressures on the U.S. economy. These developments could adversely affect our banking customers’ businesses, which, in turn, could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. See “Economic Conditions in the U.S. May Soften or Become Recessionary with Resultant Adverse Consequences for the U.S. Financial Services Industry and for the Bank,” above in these “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Previous wording
In California generally, and in the Bank’s primary market area specifically, major banks dominate the commercial banking industry. By virtue of their larger capital bases, such institutions have substantially greater lending limits than those of the Bank. Competition is likely to further intensify as a result of the recent and increasing level of consolidation of financial services companies, particularly in our market area resulting from various economic and market conditions. In obtaining deposits and making loans, the Bank competes with these larger commercial banks and other financial institutions, such as savings and loan associations, credit unions and member institutions of the Farm Credit System, which offer many services that traditionally were offered only by banks. Using the financial holding company structure, insurance companies and securities firms may compete more directly with banks and bank holding companies. In addition, the Bank competes with other institutions such as mutual fund companies, brokerage firms, and even retail stores seeking to penetrate the financial services market. Current federal law has also made it easier for out-of-state banks to enter and compete in the states in which we operate. Competition in our principal markets has further intensified as a result of the Dodd-Frank Act which, among other things, permitted out-of-state de novo branching by national banks, state banks and foreign banks from other states. We also experience competition, especially for deposits, from internet-based banking institutions and other non-traditional financial services firms, such as financial technology companies, which do not always have a physical presence in our market footprint and have grown rapidly in recent years. Also, technology and other changes increasingly allow parties to complete financial transactions electronically, and in many cases, without banks. For example, consumers can pay bills andtransfer funds over the internet and by telephone without banks. Non-bank financial service providers may have lower overhead costs, are subject to fewer regulatory constraints and continue to expand their offerings of services traditionally provided by financial institutions. Further, the new Trump Administration is expected to seek to promote innovation across financial services through a regulatory environment that is favorable to cryptocurrencies, digital assets, open banking initiatives and financial technology companies, which has the potential to further increase competition within the banking industry. If consumers do not use banks to complete their financial transactions, we could potentially lose fee income, deposits and income generated from those deposits. During periods of declining interest rates, competitors with lower costs of capital may solicit the Bank’s customers to refinance their loans. Furthermore, during periods of economic slowdown or recession, the Bank’s borrowers may face financial difficulties and …
Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.
Current wording
In California generally, and in the Bank’s primary market area specifically, major banks dominate the commercial banking industry. By virtue of their larger capital bases, such institutions have substantially greater lending limits than those of the Bank. Competition is likely to further intensify as a result of the recent and increasing level of consolidation of financial services companies, particularly in our market area resulting from various economic and market conditions. In obtaining deposits and making loans, the Bank competes with these larger commercial banks and other financial institutions, such as savings and loan associations, credit unions and member institutions of the Farm Credit System, which offer many services that traditionally were offered only by banks. Using the financial holding company structure, insurance companies and securities firms may compete more directly with banks and bank holding companies. In addition, the Bank competes with other institutions such as mutual fund companies, brokerage firms, and even retail stores seeking to penetrate the financial services market. Current federal law has also made it easier for out-of-state banks to enter and compete in the states in which we operate. Competition in our principal markets has further intensified as a result of the Dodd-Frank Act which, among other things, permitted out-of-state de novo branching by national banks, state banks and foreign banks from other states. We also experience competition, especially for deposits, from internet-based banking institutions and other non-traditional financial services firms, such as financial technology companies, which do not always have a physical presence in our market footprint and have grown rapidly in recent years. Also, technology and other changes increasingly allow parties to complete financial transactions electronically, and in many cases, without banks. For example, consumers can pay bills and transfer funds over the internet and by telephone without banks. Non-bank financial service providers may have lower overhead costs, are subject to fewer regulatory constraints and continue to expand their offerings of services traditionally provided by financial institutions. Further, the current Trump Administration has taken a number of actions to promote innovation across financial services through a regulatory environment that is favorable to cryptocurrencies, digital assets, open banking initiatives and financial technology companies, which has the potential to further increase competition within the banking industry. In 2025, the OCC announced its conditional approval of five national trust bank charter applications to either newly charter or convert existing institutions into national trust banks that propose to offer digital asset products and services. While national trust banks generally do not take insured deposits or engage in commercial lending, these new non-traditional trust banks offer deposit-like products, …
Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.
Previous wording
Our success depends upon the ability to attract and retain highly motivated, well-qualified personnel. We face significant competition in the recruitment and retention of qualified employees. Executive compensation in the financial services sector has been controversial and the subject of regulation. The FDIC has proposed rules which would increase deposit premiums for institutions with compensation practices deemed to increase risk to the institution. Over time, this guidance and the proposed rules, upon their adoption, could have the effect of making it more difficult for banks to attract and retain skilled personnel.
Current wording
Our success depends upon the ability to attract and retain highly motivated, well-qualified personnel. We face significant competition in the recruitment and retention of qualified employees. Executive compensation in the financial services sector has been controversial and the subject of regulation. Over time, changing guidance and newly-adopted rules regarding compensation practices could have the effect of making it more difficult for banks to attract and retain skilled personnel.
Previous wording
Advances and changes in technology can significantly impact the business and operations of the Company. The financial services industry is undergoing rapid technological change which regularly involves the introduction of new products and services based on new or enhanced technologies. Examples include cloud computing, artificial intelligence and machine learning, biometric authentication and data protection enhancements, as well as increased online and mobile device interaction with customers and increased demand for providing computer access to Bank accounts and the systems to perform banking transactions electronically. The Company’s merchant processing services require the use of advanced computer hardware and software technology and rapidly changing customer and regulatory requirements. The Company’s ability to compete effectively depends on its ability to continue to adapt its technology on a timely and cost-effective basis to meet these requirements. Our continued success and the maintenance of our competitive position depends, in part, upon our ability to meet the needs of our customers through the application of new technologies. If we fail to maintain or enhance our competitive position with regard to technology, whether because we fail to anticipate customer needs and expectations or because our technological initiatives fail to perform as desired or are not timely implemented, we may lose market share or incur additional expense. Our ability to execute our core operations and to implement technology and other important initiatives may be adversely affected if our resources are insufficient or if we are unable to allocate available resources effectively.
Current wording
Advances and changes in technology can significantly impact the business and operations of the Company. The financial services industry is undergoing rapid technological change which regularly involves the introduction of new products and services based on new or enhanced technologies. Examples include cloud computing, artificial intelligence and machine learning, biometric authentication and data protection enhancements, as well as increased online and mobile device interaction with customers and increased demand for providing computer access to Bank accounts and the systems to perform banking transactions electronically. The Company’s merchant processing services require the use of advanced computer hardware and software technology and rapidly changing customer and regulatory requirements. The Company’s ability to compete effectively depends on its ability to continue to adapt its technology on a timely and cost-effective basis to meet these requirements. Our continued success and the maintenance of our competitive position depends, in part, upon our ability to meet the needs of our customers through the application of new technologies. Furthermore, the widespread adoption of new technologies by competitors, including artificial intelligence, could require us to make additional substantial investments to modify or adapt our existing products and services or alter the way we conduct business. These and other capital investments in the Company's business may not produce the growth in earnings anticipated at the time of the expenditure, and 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. If we fail to maintain or enhance our competitive position with regard to technology, whether because we fail to anticipate customer needs and expectations or because our technological initiatives fail to perform as desired or are not timely implemented, we may lose market share or incur additional expense. Our ability to execute our core operations and to implement technology and other important initiatives may be adversely affected if our resources are insufficient or if we are unable to allocate available resources effectively.
Previous wording
In addition, the Company’s business and operations are susceptible to negative impacts from computer system failures, communication and power disruption, and unethical individuals with the technological ability to cause disruptions or failures of the Company’s data processing systems.
Current wording
In addition, the Company’s business and operations are susceptible to negative impacts from computer system failures, communication and power disruption, and unethical individuals with the technological ability to cause disruptions or failures of the Company’s data processing systems. Implementation of certain new technologies, such as those related to artificial intelligence, automation and algorithms, also may have unintended consequences, including fraud or cybersecurity risk, due to their limitations, potential manipulation, or our failure to use them effectively.
Previous wording
Changes in the U.S. Tax Laws Have Impacted Our Business and Results of Operations in a Variety of Ways, Some of Which Are Positive, and Others Which May Be Negative
Current wording
Changes in the U.S. Tax Laws Have Impacted, and May Impact, Our Business and Results of Operations in a Variety of Ways, Some of Which Are Positive, and Others Which May Be Negative
Previous wording
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“TCJA”), signed into law on December 22, 2017, enacted sweeping changes to the U.S. federal tax laws generally effective January 1, 2018. These changes have impacted our business and results of operations in a variety of ways, some of which are positive and others which are negative. The TCJA reduced the corporate tax rate to 21% from 35%, which resulted in a net reduction in our annual income tax expense and which has also benefited many of our corporate and other small business borrowers. However, our ability to utilize tax credits, such as those arising from low-income housing and alternative energy investments, is constrained by the lower tax rate. Increases in the U.S. corporate tax rate could adversely impact our profitability and that of our business and commercial customers.
Current wording
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“TCJA”), signed into law on December 22, 2017, enacted sweeping changes to the U.S. federal tax laws generally effective January 1, 2018. These changes have impacted our business and results of operations in a variety of ways, some of which are positive and others which are negative. The TCJA reduced the corporate tax rate to 21% from 35%, which resulted in a net reduction in our annual income tax expense and which has also benefited many of our corporate and other small business borrowers. However, our ability to utilize tax credits, such as those arising from low-income housing and alternative energy investments, is constrained by the lower tax rate. Increases in the U.S. corporate tax rate could adversely impact our profitability and that of our business and commercial customers. On July 4, 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act was enacted into law, which included certain modifications to U.S. tax law. The Company has evaluated the provisions of this Act and has concluded that they do not have any material impact on our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2025.
Previous wording
Additional legislation and regulatory requirements and changes in consumer preferences, including those associated with the transition to a low-carbon economy, could increase expenses of, or otherwise adversely impact, the Company, its businesses or its customers. We and our customers may face cost increases, asset value reductions, operating process changes, reduced availability of insurance, and the like, as a result of governmental actions or societal responses to climate change. New and/or more stringent regulatory requirements relating to climate change or environmental sustainability could materially affect the Company’s results of operations by increasing our compliance costs. Regulatory changes or market shifts to low-carbon products could also impact the creditworthiness of some of our customers or reduce the value of assets securing loans, which may require the Company to adjust our lending portfolios and business strategies.
Current wording
Legislation and regulatory requirements and changes in consumer preferences, including those associated with the transition to a low-carbon economy, could increase expenses of, or otherwise adversely impact, the Company, its businesses or its customers. We and our customers may face cost increases, asset value reductions, operating process changes, reduced availability of insurance, and the like, as a result of governmental actions or societal responses to climate change. New and/or more stringent regulatory requirements relating to climate change or environmental sustainability could materially affect the Company’s results of operations by increasing our compliance costs. Regulatory changes or market shifts to low-carbon products could also impact the creditworthiness of some of our customers or reduce the value of assets securing loans, which may require the Company to adjust our lending portfolios and business strategies.