Carter Bankshares Inc

NOTE 1 –BASIS OF PRESENTATION

Principles of Consolidation: The interim Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of Carter Bankshares, Inc. (the “Company”) and its wholly owned subsidiary, Carter Bank & Trust (the “Bank”). CB&T Investment Company (the “Investment Company”) is a subsidiary of the Bank. All significant intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Basis of Presentation: The accompanying unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) in the United States for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by GAAP for complete financial statements and should be read in conjunction with the audited Consolidated Financial Statements included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), on March 8, 2024. In management’s opinion, the accompanying interim financial information reflects all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring adjustments, necessary to present fairly our financial position and the results of operations for each of the interim periods presented. Results of operations for interim periods are not necessarily indicative to the results of operations that may be expected for a full year or any future period.

Reclassification: Amounts in prior periods financial statements and footnotes are reclassified whenever necessary to conform to the current period presentation. Reclassifications had no material effect on prior periods net income or shareholders’ equity.

Use of Estimates: To prepare financial statements in conformity with GAAP, management makes estimates and assumptions based on available information. These estimates and assumptions affect the amounts reported in the Consolidated Financial Statements and the disclosures provided, and actual results could differ from those estimates.

Accounting Standards Adopted in 2024

On June 30, 2022, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU 2022-03, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Fair Value Measurement of Equity Securities Subject to Contractual Sale Restrictions. The FASB issued this ASU to (1) clarify the guidance in Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement, when measuring the fair value of an equity security subject to contractual restrictions that prohibit the sale of an equity security, (2) amend a related illustrative example, and (3) introduce new disclosure requirements for equity securities subject to contractual sale restrictions that are measured at fair value in accordance with Topic 820. The amendments in this ASU clarify that a contractual restriction on the sale of an equity security is not considered part of the unit of account of the equity security and, therefore, is not considered in measuring fair value. The amendments also clarify that an entity cannot, as a separate unit of account, recognize and measure a contractual sale restriction. The amendments in this ASU also require the following disclosures for equity securities subject to contractual sale restrictions: (1) the fair value of equity securities subject to contractual sale restrictions reflected in the balance sheet; (2) the nature and remaining duration of the restriction(s); and (3) the circumstances that could cause a lapse in the restriction(s). For public business entities, the amendments in this ASU are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2023, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The adoption of this ASU was effective for the Company on March 31, 2024 but was first applied on June 30, 2024, concurrent with the purchase of equity securities, and did not have a significant impact to our Consolidated Financial Statements.

Accounting Standards Issued but Not Yet Adopted

On March 29, 2024 the FASB issued ASU 2024-02, Codification Improvements— Amendments to Remove References to the Concepts Statements, which amends the Codification to remove references to various concepts statements and impacts a variety of topics in the Codification. The amendments apply to all reporting entities within the scope of the affected accounting guidance, but in most instances the references removed are extraneous and not required to understand or apply the guidance. Generally, the amendments in ASU 2024-02 are not intended to result in significant accounting changes for most entities. The ASU is effective January 1, 2025 and is not expected to have a significant impact on the Company’s financial statements.

NOTE 1 – BASIS OF PRESENTATION – (continued)

On December 14, 2023, the FASB issued ASU 2023-09, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Improvements to Income Tax Disclosures, which enhances the required disclosures primarily related to the income tax rate reconciliation and income taxes paid. The ASU requires an entity’s income tax rate reconciliation to provide additional information for reconciling items meeting a quantitative threshold, and to disclose certain selected categories within the income tax rate reconciliation. The ASU also requires entities to disclose the amount of income taxes paid, disaggregated by federal, state and foreign taxes. The ASU is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2024, though early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its Consolidated Financial Statements.

On November 27, 2023, the FASB issued ASU 2023-07. Segment Reporting (Topic 280): Improvements to Reportable Segment Disclosures, which changes disclosures relating to reportable segments. The ASU expands the disclosure requirements relating to reportable segments, including requiring entities to disclose information about a reportable segment’s significant expenses, among other changes. The ASU does not change how an entity identifies reportable segments or the accounting for segments. The ASU is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2023, and interim periods within annual periods beginning after December 15, 2024, with early adoption permitted. The Company hasone reporting segment therefore, will not impact our Consolidated Financial Statements; however, this ASU requires disclosure of the title and position of the chief operating decision maker and an explanation of how resources are allocated.

Recently Issued Disclosure Rules

In March 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") adopted final rules under SEC Release No. 33-11275, “The Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors”. This rule will require registrants to disclose certain climate-related information in registration statements and annual reports. In April 2024, the SEC issued an order staying this rule pending the outcome of the federal court litigation challenging the rule. Subject to the outcome of this litigation, the disclosure requirements of the final rule will start to phase-in commencing with the Company's fiscal year beginning January 1, 2026.

NOTE 2 –EARNINGS PER SHARE

Basic earnings per common share is calculated by dividing net income allocated to common shareholders by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Diluted earnings per common share reflects the potential dilution that could occur if securities or other contracts to issue common stock were exercised or converted into common stock or resulted in the issuance of common stock that then shared in the earnings of the entity.

The following table reconciles the numerators and denominators of basic and diluted earnings per common share calculations for the periods presented:

All outstanding unvested restricted stock awards are considered participating securities for the earnings per share calculation. As such, these shares have been allocated to a portion of net income and are excluded from the diluted earnings per common share calculation.

NOTE 3 -INVESTMENT SECURITIES

The following tables present the amortized cost and fair value of available-for-sale securities as of the dates presented:

The Company didnot have securities classified as held-to-maturity at June 30, 2024 or December 31, 2023.

The following table shows the composition of gross and net realized gains and losses for the periods presented:

Gains or losses are recognized in earnings on the trade date using the amortized cost of the specific security sold. The net realized gains (losses) above reflect reclassification adjustments in the calculation of Other Comprehensive Income (Loss). The net realized gains (losses) are included in noninterest income as gains (losses) on sales of securities, net in the Consolidated Statements of Income. The tax impact is included in income tax provision in the Consolidated Statements of Income.

The amortized cost and fair value of available-for-sale debt securities are shown below by contractual maturity as of the date presented. Expected maturities may differ from contractual maturities if borrowers have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties. Securities not due at a single maturity date are shown separately.

NOTE 3 – INVESTMENT SECURITIES (continued)

At June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, there were no holdings of securities of any one issuer, other than those securities issued by the U.S. Government and its Agencies, in an amount greater than 10% of shareholders’ equity. The carrying value of securities pledged for various regulatory and legal requirements was $308.1 million at June 30, 2024 and $215.5 million at December 31, 2023.

Available-for-sale securities with unrealized losses at June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, aggregated by investment category and length of time the individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position, were as follows:

NOTE 3 – INVESTMENT SECURITIES (continued)

The Company didnot record an allowance for credit losses, (“ACL”), on its investment securities during the quarter ended June 30, 2024 or the year ended December 31, 2023 as there wasno related impairment. The Company regularly reviews debt securities for expected credit loss using both qualitative and quantitative criteria, as necessary, based on the composition of the portfolio at period end.

As of June 30, 2024, management does not intend to sell any security in an unrealized loss position and it is not more than likely that it will be required to sell any such security before the recovery of its amortized cost basis. The unrealized losses on debt securities are primarily the result of interest rate changes, credit spread fluctuations, general financial market uncertainty and market volatility. These conditions should not prohibit the Company from receiving its contractual principal and interest payments on its debt securities. The fair value is expected to recover as the securities approach their maturity date or repricing date. It should be noted that we may occasionally sell securities to take advantage of market opportunities or as part of a strategic initiative.

As of June 30, 2024, the Company determined the unrealized losses detailed in the table above are not related to credit; therefore, no ACL has been recognized on the Company’s securities. Should the impairment of any of these securities become credit related, the impairment will be recognized by establishing an ACL through provision for credit losses in the period the credit related impairment is identified, while any non-credit loss will be recognized in accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of applicable taxes. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2024 and June 30, 2023, the Company had no credit related net investment impairment losses.

Equity Securities

During the second quarter of 2024, the Company purchased $5.0 million of equity securities with carrying value totaling $5.1 million at June 30, 2024. These securities are separately reported as “equity securities” on the Company’s consolidated balance sheet.The equity securities consist of our investment in a market-rate bond mutual fund that invests in high quality fixed income bonds, mainly government agency securities whose proceeds are designed to positively impact community development throughout the United States. The mutual fund focuses exclusively on providing affordable housing to low- and moderate-income borrowers and renters, including those in Majority Minority Census Tracts. The Company’s investment in the mutual fund is eligible for investment credit under the Community Reinvestment Act.

During the three months ended June 30, 2024, we recognized an unrealized fair value gain of $63.3 thousand on these equity securities. This unrealized fair value gain is recorded in Other Income on the Consolidated Statements of Income.

NOTE 4 –LOANS

The composition of the loan portfolio by dollar amount is shown in the table below:

NOTE 4 – LOANS (continued)

Loan Restructurings

The Company evaluates all loan restructurings in accordance with ASU 2022-02 for loan modifications to determine if the restructuring results in a new loan or a continuation of the existing loan. Loan modifications to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty that result in a direct change in the timing or amount of contractual cash flows include situations where there is principal forgiveness, interest rate reductions, other-than-insignificant payment delays, term extensions, and combinations of the listed modifications. Therefore, the disclosures related to loan restructurings are only for modifications that directly affect cash flows.

A loan that is considered a restructured loan may be subject to the individually evaluated loan analysis if the commitment is $1.0 million or greater and/or based on management’s discretion; otherwise, the restructured loan remains in the appropriate segment in the ACL model. For a discussion with respect to reserve calculations regarding individually evaluated loans refer to the “Nonrecurring Basis” section in Note 6, Fair Value Measurements, in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 1 of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

The following table shows the amortized cost basis as of June 30, 2024 for loans restructured during the three and six months ended June 30, 2024 to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty, disaggregated by portfolio segment:

There were no loans to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty restructured during the three and six months ended June 30, 2023.

The Company closely monitors the performance of the loans that are modified to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty to understand the effectiveness of its modification efforts.

NOTE 4 – LOANS (continued)

The following table presents the aging analysis of modifications to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty in the last 12 months as of June 30, 2024:

The following table presents the amortized cost of loans to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty by portfolio segment and type of modification during the periods presented.

The following table describes the effect of loan modifications made to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty during the periods presented:

At June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, the Bank had no commitments to lend any additional funds on restructured loans. At June 30, 2024 and June 30, 2023, the Bank had no loans that defaulted during the period and had been modified preceding the payment default when the borrower was experiencing financial difficulty at the time of modification. For purposes of this disclosure, a default occurs when, within 12 months of the original modification, either a full or partial charge-off occurs or the loan becomes 90 days or more past due.

As of June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, the Bank had $0.1 million and $2.0 million, respectively, of residential real estate loans in the process of foreclosure. The Company also hadno residential real estate loans included in other real estate owned (“OREO”) at June 30, 2024 and $62 thousand at December 31, 2023.

NOTE 5 –ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES

The Company maintains an ACL at a level determined to be adequate to absorb expected credit losses associated with the Company’s financial instruments over the life of those instruments as of the balance sheet date. The Company develops and documents a systematic ACL methodology based on the following portfolio segments: 1) Commercial Real Estate (“CRE”), 2) Commercial and Industrial, (“C&I”), 3) Residential Mortgages, 4) Other Consumer, 5) Construction and 6) Other. The Company’s loan portfolio is segmented by homogeneous loan types that behave similarly to economic cycles. The following is a discussion of the key risks by portfolio segment that management assesses in preparing the ACL.

CRE loans are secured by commercial purpose real estate, including both owner occupied properties and investment properties, for various purposes such as hotels, strip malls and apartments. Operations of the individual projects as well as global cash flows of the debtors are the primary sources of repayment for these loans. The condition of the local economy is an important indicator of risk, but there are also more specific risks depending on the collateral type as well as the business.

C&I loans are made to operating companies or manufacturers for the purpose of production, operating capacity, accounts receivable, inventory or equipment financing. Cash flow from the operations of the borrower is the primary source of repayment for these loans. The condition of the local economy is an important indicator of risk, but there are also more specific risks depending on the industry of the borrower. Collateral for these types of loans often do not have sufficient value in a distressed or liquidation scenario to satisfy the outstanding debt. These loans are also made to local and state municipalities for various purposes including refinancing existing obligations, infrastructure up-fit and expansion, or to purchase new equipment. These loans may be secured by general obligations from the municipal authority or revenues generated by infrastructure and equipment financed by the Company. The primary repayment source for these loans include the tax base of the municipality, specific revenue streams related to the infrastructure financed, and other business operations of the municipal authority. The health and stability of state and local economies directly impacts each municipality’s tax basis and are important indicators of risk for this segment. The ability of each municipality to increase taxes and fees to offset debt service requirements give this type of loan a very low risk profile in the continuum of the Company’s loan portfolio.

Residential Mortgages are loans secured by first and second liens such as home equity loans, home equity lines of credit and 1-4 family residential mortgages, including purchased money mortgages. The primary source of repayment for these loans is the income of the borrower. The condition of the local economy, in particular the unemployment rate, is an important indicator of risk for this segment. The state of the local housing market can also have a significant impact on this segment because low demand and/or declining home values can limit the ability of borrowers to sell a property and satisfy the debt.

Other Consumer loans are made to individuals and may be either secured by assets other than 1-4 family residences or unsecured. This segment includes auto loans and unsecured loans and lines. The primary source of repayment for these loans is the income and assets of the borrower. The condition of the local economy, in particular the unemployment rate, is an important indicator of risk for this segment. The value of the collateral, if there is any, is less likely to be a source of repayment due to less certain collateral values.

Construction loans include both commercial and consumer. Commercial loans are made to finance construction of buildings or other structures, as well as to finance the acquisition and development of raw land for various purposes. While the risk of these loans is generally confined to the construction period, if there are problems, the project may not be completed, and as such, may not provide sufficient cash flow on its own to service the debt or have sufficient value in a liquidation to cover the outstanding principal. The condition of the local economy is an important indicator of risk, but there are also more specific risks depending on the type of project and the experience and resources of the developer. Consumer loans are made for the construction of residential homes for which a binding sales contract exists and generally are for a period of time sufficient to complete construction. Residential construction loans to individuals generally provide for the payment of interest only during the construction phase. Credit risk for residential real estate construction loans can arise from construction delays, cost overruns, failure of the contractor to complete the project to specifications and economic conditions that could impact demand for or supply of the property being constructed.

Other loans, which includes the Company’s largest lending relationship, has unique risk attributes considered inconsistent with our current underwriting standards. The ACL reserve for the Other segment is based on a discounted cash flow methodology and reserves will fluctuate based on expected cash flow changes in the future. These inconsistencies may include, but are not limited to i) transaction and/or relationship sizes that exceed limits established in 2018, ii) overreliance on secondary, tertiary or guarantor cash flow, iii) land acquisition loans without a defined source of amortization, iv) loan structures on operating lines of credit dependent on the value of real estate rather than trading assets, and v) indirect liabilities of certain guarantees resulting from the nonpayment of financial obligations. Management continuously assesses underwriting standards, but significantly enhanced these standards in 2018.

Current Expected Credit Losses (“CECL”) Model

The CECL model is based on our best estimate of facts known with the most current information. Certain portions of the CECL model are inherently subjective and include, but are not limited to estimates with respect to: prepayment speeds, the timing of prepayments, potential losses given default, discount rates and the timing of future cash flows. Management utilizes widely published economic forecasts as the basis for the regression analysis used to estimate the probability of default in the baseline model. The peaks and troughs of these forecasts serve as guardrails for potential subjective adjustments. In addition to considering the outcomes based on the range of forecasts, management recognizes that the assumptions used in economic forecasts may not perfectly align with our market area, risk profile or unique attributes of our portfolio along with other important considerations. Severe changes in forecasts can also create significant variability and management must assess not only the absolute balance of reserves but also consider the appropriateness of the velocity of change. Therefore, management developed a framework to assess the tolerance and reasonableness of the CECL modeling process by challenging certain elements of the forecasts, when appropriate. These outcomes, known as “challenger models,” provide opportunities to examine and subjectively adjust the CECL model output and are designed to be counter cyclical, thereby reducing variability.

Credit Quality Indicators:

The Company’s portfolio grading analysis estimates the capability of the borrower to repay the contractual obligations of the loan agreements as scheduled or at all. The Company’s internal credit risk grading system is based on debt service coverage, collateral values and other subjective factors. Mortgage and consumer loans are defaulted to a pass grade until a loan migrates to past due status.

The Company has a loan review policy and annual scope report that details the level of loan review for loans in a given year. The annual loan review provides the Credit Risk Committee with an independent analysis of the following: 1) credit quality of the loan portfolio, 2) compliance with the loan policy, 3) adequacy of documentation in credit files and 4) validity of risk ratings. Since 2020 and continuing through 2024, the Company used a five step approach for loan review in the following categories:

•Individual reviews of the toptwenty large loan relationships (“LLRs”), which are defined as any individual commercial loan or aggregate commercial relationship totaling $2.0 million or more;

•A sampling of small LLRs, which are defined as individual commercial loans or relationships with aggregate exposure of $2.0 million or more but not included in the top twenty LLRs;

•A sampling review of Executive Loan Committee modifications, including new and existing loans to provide perspective on the appropriateness of the modification in relation to established policies and procedures;

•A sampling review of non-organic commercial loans and those commercial loans approved outside of the Executive Loan Committee; and

•Focus reviews of various segments to evaluate emerging risk rather than individual loan risk. Focus reviews are performed annually on a rotational basis.

The Company’s internally assigned grades are as follows:

Pass– The Company uses six grades of pass, including its watch rating. Generally, a pass rating indicates that the loan is currently performing and is of high quality.

Special Mention – Assets with potential weaknesses that warrant management’s close attention and if left uncorrected, these potential weaknesses may result in deterioration of the repayment prospects for the asset or in the institution’s credit position at some future date.

Substandard –Assets that are inadequately protected by the current sound worth and paying capacity of the obligor or by the collateral pledged, if any. Assets so classified have a well-defined weakness, or weaknesses that jeopardize the liquidation of the debt. Such assets are characterized by the distinct possibility that the institution will sustain some loss if the deficiencies are not corrected.

Doubtful – Assets with all the weaknesses inherent in one classified substandard with the added characteristic that the weaknesses make collection or liquidation in full, on the basis of currently known facts, conditions, and values, highly questionable and improbable.

Loss – Assets considered of such little value that its continuance on the books is not warranted. This classification does not mean that the asset has absolutely no recovery or salvage value, but rather it is not practical or desirable to defer writing off this basically worthless asset even though partial recovery may be affected in the future.

The ability of borrowers to repay commercial loans is dependent upon the success of their business and general economic conditions. Due to the greater potential for loss within our commercial portfolio, we monitor the commercial loan portfolio through an internal risk rating system. Loan risk ratings are assigned based upon the creditworthiness of the borrower and are reviewed on an ongoing basis according to our internal policies. Loans rated special mention or substandard have potential or well-defined weaknesses not generally found in high quality, performing loans, and require attention from management to limit loss.

The following table presents loan balances by year of origination and internally assigned risk rating for our portfolio segments as of the periods presented:

The following table presents portfolio loan balances by year of origination and performing and nonperforming status for our portfolio segments as of the periods presented:

The following tables include an aging analysis of the recorded investment of past due portfolio loans as the periods presented:

The Company hadno loans past due 90 days or more and still accruing at June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023. Loans past due 90 days are automatically transferred to nonaccrual status. Loans past due 30 to 89 days and still accruing decreased $4.3 million to $1.7 million at June 30, 2024 compared to December 31, 2023. Construction past due loans decreased $3.4 million partly due to a delinquent construction loan totaling $1.5 million that went permanent to a residential mortgage and is now current in the second quarter of 2024. In addition, a second construction loan in the amount of $1.1 million paid off in the first quarter of 2024. Residential mortgages decreased $1.0 million during the second quarter of 2024.

The following table presents loans on nonaccrual status and loans past due 90 days or more and still accruing by portfolio segment for the periods presented:

Nonperforming loans remained significantly elevated at June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023 due to the aggregate nonperforming loan balance that was reduced from $301.9 million as of March 31, 2024 to $294.1 million as of June 30, 2024 associated with the Bank’s largest lending relationship, that was placed on nonaccrual status during the second quarter of 2023. During the second quarter of 2024, the Bank received payment of $7.8 million, which reduced the Bank’s amortized cost associated with these loans, pursuant to the pathway of curtailment and payoff of the outstanding nonperforming loan agreed between the relevant borrowers and the Bank.

There wereno nonaccrual or past due loans related to loans held-for-sale at June 30, 2024 or December 31, 2023.

A loan is considered nonperforming when we transfer the interest methodology from accrual to nonaccrual. Nonaccrual status recognizes that the collection in full of both principal and interest is unlikely. Without applying additional scrutiny at a granular level, management believes delinquency to be a leading indicator with respect to the likelihood of collection in full of both principal and interest. Accordingly, management automatically transfers loans to nonaccrual status if they are 90 or more days’ delinquent. Management reserves the right to exercise discretion at the individual loan level. For example, we may elect to transfer a loan to nonaccrual regardless of the delinquency status if we believe the collection in full of both principal and interest to be unlikely. We may also elect to retain a loan that is 90 or more days’ delinquent in accrual status if we believe the loan is well secured and in the process of collection. Nonaccrual loans, and loans that have been characterized as Restructured Loans may be individually evaluated for credit losses in the Allowance for Credit Losses model if the loan commitment is $1.0 million or greater and/or based on management’s discretion; unless we elect to maintain the loan in the general pool. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2024 and June 30, 2023, respectively, no material amount of interest income was recognized on nonperforming loans subsequent to their classification as nonperforming loans.

The following table presents the amortized cost basis of individually evaluated loans as of the periods presented. Changes in the fair value of the types of collateral and discounted cash flow modeling for individually evaluated loans are reported as provision for credit loss on loans in the period of change.

The following tables present activity in the ACL for the periods presented:

NOTE 6 –FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS

The Company uses fair value measurements when recording and disclosing certain financial assets and liabilities. Securities available-for-sale, equity securities and derivative financial instruments are recorded at fair value on a recurring basis. Additionally, from time to time, we may be required to record other assets at fair value on a nonrecurring basis, such as loans held-for-sale, individually evaluated loans, OREO, and certain other assets.

Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in the principal or most advantageous market in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. An orderly transaction is a transaction that assumes exposure to the market for a period prior to the measurement date to allow for marketing activities that are usual and customary for transactions involving such assets or liabilities; it is not a forced transaction. In determining fair value, we use various valuation approaches, including market, income and cost approaches. The fair value standard establishes a hierarchy for inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs by requiring that observable inputs be used when available. Observable inputs are inputs that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability, which are developed based on market data we have obtained from independent sources. Unobservable inputs reflect our estimates of assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability, which are developed based on the best information available in the circumstances.

The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted market prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurement) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurement). There are three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair values:

Level 1: Quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that an entity has the ability to access as of the measurement date, or observable inputs.

Level 2: Significant other observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, quoted prices in markets that are not active, and other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data.

Level 3: Significant unobservable inputs that reflect an entity’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability.

A financial instrument’s level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. We recognize transfers between any of the fair value hierarchy levels at the end of the reporting period in which the transfer occurred.

The following are descriptions of the valuation methodologies that the Company uses for financial instruments recorded at fair value on either a recurring or nonrecurring basis.

Recurring Basis

Securities Available-for-Sale: The fair values of securities available-for-sale are determined by obtaining quoted prices on nationally recognized securities exchanges, if available. This valuation method is classified as Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy. For securities where quoted prices are not available, fair values are calculated on market prices of similar securities, or matrix pricing, which is a mathematical technique, used widely in the industry to value debt securities without relying exclusively on quoted prices for the specific securities but rather by relying on the securities’ relationship to other benchmark quoted securities. Matrix pricing relies on the securities’ relationship to similarly traded securities, benchmark curves, and the benchmarking of like securities. Matrix pricing utilizes observable market inputs such as benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes, issuer spreads, two-sided markets, benchmark securities, bids, offers, reference data, and industry and economic events. In instances where broker quotes are used, these quotes are obtained from market makers or broker-dealers recognized to be market participants. This valuation method is classified as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. For securities where quoted prices or market prices of similar securities are not available, fair values are calculated using discounted cash flows or other market indicators. This valuation method is classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.

Equity Securities: The fair values of equity securities are determined by obtaining quoted prices on nationally recognized or foreign securities exchanges, if available. This valuation method is classified as Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy. As of June 30, 2024, Level 1 fair values are available for each of the Company’s equity securities.

Derivative Financial Instruments and Hedging Activities: The Company uses derivative instruments such as interest rate swaps for commercial loans with our customers. Upon entering into swaps with the borrower, the Company entered into offsetting positions with counterparties to minimize risk to the Company. The back-to-back swaps qualify as derivatives, but are not designated as hedging instruments. Interest rate swap contracts involve the risk of dealing with borrower and counterparties and their ability to meet contractual terms. We calculate the fair value for derivatives using accepted valuation techniques, including discounted cash flow analysis on the expected cash flows of each derivative. Each valuation considers the contractual terms of the derivative, including the period to maturity, and uses observable market-based inputs, such as interest rate curves and implied volatilities. When the fair value of a derivative instrument contract is positive, this generally indicates that the counterparty or customer owes the Company, and results in credit risk to the Company. When the fair value of a derivative instrument contract is negative, the Company owes the customer or counterparty, and, therefore, has no risk. Accordingly, interest rate swaps for commercial loans are classified as Level 2.

The Company also enters into commitments to originate mortgage loans whereby the interest rate on the loan is determined prior to funding (rate lock commitments). Rate lock commitments on mortgage loans to be held-for-sale are considered to be derivatives. The period of time between issuance of a loan commitment and closing and sale of the loan generally ranges from 15 to 90 days. The Company protects itself from changes in interest rates through the use of best efforts forward delivery commitments, whereby the Company commits to sell a loan at the time the borrower commits to an interest rate with the intent that the buyer has assumed interest rate risk on rate lock commitments due to changes in interest rates.

Nonrecurring Basis

Individually Evaluated Loans: Individually evaluated loans with commitments of $1.0 million or greater and/or based on management’s discretion are evaluated for potential specific reserves and adjusted, if a shortfall exists, to fair value less costs to sell. Fair value is measured based on the value of the underlying collateral securing the loan if repayment is expected solely from the sale or operation of the collateral or present value of estimated future cash flows discounted at the loan’s contractual interest rate if the loan is not determined to be collateral dependent. All loans with a specific reserve are classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.

Fair value for individually evaluated loans is determined using several methods. Generally, the fair value of real estate is determined based on appraisals by qualified licensed appraisers. These appraisals may utilize a single valuation approach or a combination of approaches including comparable sales and the income approach. Adjustments are routinely made in the appraisal process by the appraisers to adjust for differences between the comparable sales and income data available. These routine adjustments are made to adjust the value of a specific property relative to comparable properties for variations in qualities such as location, size, and income production capacity relative to the subject property of the appraisal. Such adjustments are typically significant and result in a Level 3 classification of the inputs for determining fair value.

Subsequent to the initial impairment date, existing individually evaluated loans are reevaluated quarterly for additional impairment and adjustments to fair value less costs to sell are made, where appropriate. For individually evaluated loans, the first stage of our impairment analysis involves inspection of the property in question to affirm the condition has not deteriorated since the previous impairment analysis date. Management also engages in conversations with local real estate professionals and market participants to determine the likely marketing time and value range for the property. The second stage involves an assessment of current trends in the regional market. After thorough consideration of these factors, management will order a new appraisal.

For non-collateral dependent loans, the fair value is determined by updating the present value of estimated future cash flows using the loan’s existing rate to reflect the payment schedule for the remaining life of the loan.

OREOis evaluated at the time of acquisition and is recorded at fair value as determined by an appraisal or evaluation, less costs to sell. After acquisition, most OREO assets are revalued every twelve months, or more frequently when deemed necessary by management based upon changes in market or collateral conditions. For smaller OREO assets with existing carrying values less than $0.5 million, management may elect to re-value the assets, at minimum, once every twenty-four months based on the size of the exposure. Fair value, when recorded, is generally based upon appraisals by approved, independent state certified appraisers. Appraisals on OREO may be discounted based on our historical knowledge, changes in market conditions from the time of appraisal or other information available to us. OREO and other repossessed assets marked to fair value are classified as Level 3. At June 30, 2024 OREO assets were in compliance with the OREO policy as set forth above, and substantially all of the assets were listed for sale with credible third-party real estate brokers.

Financial assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis are summarized below for the periods presented:

We have invested in subordinated debt of other financial institutions. We havetwo securities totaling $7.5 million that are considered to be Level 3 securities at June 30, 2024 andtwo totaling $7.3 million at December 31, 2023, attributable to the calculated change in fair value of $0.2 million. The Level 3 fair value is benchmarked to other securities that have observable market values in Level 2 using comparable financial ratio analysis specific to the industry in which the underlying company operates. The underwriting includes considerations of capital adequacy, asset quality trends, management’s ability to continue efficient and profitable operations, the institution’s core earnings ability, liquidity management platform and current on and off-balance sheet interest rate risk exposures.

Financial assets measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis are summarized below for the periods presented:

The Company had $0.6 million in individually evaluated loans measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis as of June 30, 2024 andzero at December 31, 2023. The Company’s largest lending relationship is classified at June 30, 2024 as an individually evaluated loan with a net carrying amount totaling $241.2 million. The Company utilized various cash flow and discounting assumptions in the alternative modeling, instead of fair value, which resulted in a valuation allowance of $52.9 million at June 30, 2024. When evaluating the net carrying value of this credit relationship at June 30, 2024, the Company utilized discounted cash flow valuation techniques to estimate the timing and magnitude of potential recoveries resulting from various collection processes.

OREO, which is measured at the lower of carrying or fair value less costs to sell, had a net carrying amount of $2.5 million as of June 30, 2024 and at December 31, 2023, primarily due to sales offset by transfers to OREO from loans. The Company hadno write-downs recorded on OREO for the six months ended June 30, 2024 or for the same period in 2023.

The following table summarizes the Company’s assets that were measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis for the periods presented:

A baseline discount rate has been established for impairment measurement. This baseline discount rate was back tested against historical OREO sales, and; therefore, represents an average recovery rate based on the transaction sizes and asset types in the population examined. Management considers the unique attributes and characteristics of each specific individually evaluated loan and may use judgment to adjust the baseline discount rate when appropriate.

The carrying values and estimated fair values of our financial instruments at June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023 are presented in the following tables. Fair values for June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023 are estimated under the exit price notion in accordance with ASU 2016-01, “Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities.”

GAAP requires disclosure of fair value information about financial instruments carried at book value on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. In cases where quoted market prices are not available, fair values are based on estimates using present value or other valuation techniques. Those techniques are significantly affected by the assumptions used, including the discount rate and estimates of future cash flows. In that regard, the derived fair value estimates cannot be substantiated by comparison to independent markets and, in many cases, could not be realized in immediate settlement of the instruments. Accordingly, the aggregate fair value amounts presented do not represent the underlying value of the Company.

NOTE 7 –DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND HEDGING ACTIVITIES

In accordance with applicable accounting guidance for derivatives and hedging, all derivatives are recognized as either assets or liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet at fair value. Interest rate swaps are contracts in which a series of interest rate flows (fixed and variable) are exchanged over a prescribed period. The notional amounts on which the interest payments are based are not exchanged. These derivative positions relate to transactions in which the Company enters into an interest rate swap with a commercial customer while at the same time entering into an offsetting interest rate swap with another financial institution, or counterparty. In connection with each transaction, the Company originates a floating rate loan to the customer at a notional amount. In turn, the customer contracts with the counterparty to swap the stream of cash flows associated with the floating interest rate loan with the Company for a stream of fixed interest rate cash flows based on the same notional amount as the Company’s loan. The transaction allows the customer to effectively convert a variable rate loan to a fixed rate loan with the Company receiving a variable rate. These agreements could have floors or caps on the contracted interest rates.

Pursuant to agreements with various financial institutions, the Company may receive collateral or may be required to post collateral based upon mark-to-market positions. Beyond unsecured threshold levels, collateral in the form of cash or securities may be made available to counterparties of interest rate swap transactions. Based upon current positions and related future collateral requirements relating to them, management believes any effect on our cash flow or liquidity position to be immaterial.

Derivatives contain an element of credit risk, the possibility that the Company will incur a loss because a counterparty, which may be a financial institution or a customer, fails to meet its contractual obligations. All derivative contracts with financial institutions may be executed only with counterparties approved by the Asset and Liability Committee (“ALCO”) and all derivatives with customers are approved by a team of members from senior management who have been trained to understand the risk associated with interest rate swaps and have past industry experience. Interest rate swaps are considered derivatives but are not accounted for using hedge accounting. As such, changes in the estimated fair value of the derivatives are recorded in current earnings in the Consolidated Statements of Income.

The following table indicates the amounts representing the fair value of derivative assets and derivative liabilities at the dates presented:

NOTE 7 – DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND HEDGING ACTIVITIES – (continued)

The following table indicates the income (loss) recognized on derivatives for the periods presented:

Presenting offsetting derivatives that are subject to legally enforceable netting arrangements with the same party is permitted. For example, we may have a derivative asset and a derivative liability with the same counterparty to a swap transaction and are permitted to offset the asset position and the liability position resulting in a net presentation.

The following table indicates the gross amounts of commercial loan swap derivative assets and derivative liabilities, the amounts offset and the carrying values in the Consolidated Balance Sheets at the dates presented:

NOTE 8 –DEPOSITS

The following table presents the composition of deposits at the dates presented:

All deposit accounts are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) up to the maximum amount allowed by law. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, signed into law on July 21, 2010, makes permanent the $250,000 limit for federal deposit insurance and the coverage limit applies per depositor, per insured depository institution for each account ownership. Certificates of deposits that exceed the FDIC Insurance limit of $250,000 at June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023 were $273.1 million and $235.0 million, respectively.

At June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, total brokered deposits were $115.6 million and $70.0 million, respectively.

Certificates of Deposit maturing as of the date presented:

Overdrafts reclassified to loans were $0.3 million at both June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023.

NOTE 9 –FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK BORROWINGS AND FEDERAL FUNDS PURCHASED

Borrowings serve as an additional source of liquidity for the Company. The Company had $238.0 million Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) borrowings at June 30, 2024 and $393.4 million at December 31, 2023. FHLB borrowings are fixed and variable rate advances for various terms and are secured by a blanket lien on select residential mortgages, select multifamily loans, and select commercial real estate loans. Variable rate FHLB borrowings were 7.6% and 5.6% of total borrowings at June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively. Total loans pledged as collateral were $1.6 billion at June 30, 2024 and $1.5 billion at December 31, 2023. There wereno securities available-for-sale pledged as collateral at both June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023.

At June 30, 2024, funding sources accessible to the Company include borrowing availability at the FHLB, equal to 25.0% of the Company’s assets or approximately $1.1 billion, subject to the amount of eligible collateral pledged, of which the Company is eligible to borrow up to an additional $669.5 million. The Company has unsecured facilities with three other correspondent financial institutions totaling $50.0 million at both June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively, a fully secured facility withone other correspondent financial institution totaling $45.0 million, and access to the institutional certificate of deposit (“CD”) and brokered deposit markets. The Company did not have outstanding borrowings on these fed funds lines as of June 30, 2024 or December 31, 2023. The Company had the capacity to borrow up to an additional $480.3 million from the FHLB at December 31, 2023.

The following table represents the balance of FHLB borrowings and the weighted average interest rate as of the periods presented:

The following table represents the balance of federal funds purchased and the weighted average interest rate as of the periods presented:

Scheduled annual maturities and weighted average interest rates for FHLB borrowings for each of the five years subsequent to June 30, 2024 and thereafter are as follows:

NOTE 10 –COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Commitments to extend credit, which amounted to $698.0 million at June 30, 2024 and $702.3 million at December 31, 2023, represent agreements to lend to customers with fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses. The Company provides lines of credit to our clients to finance the completion of construction projects and revolving lines of credit to operating companies to finance their working capital needs. Lines of credit for construction projects represented $409.7 million, or 58.7% and $452.2 million, or 64.4%, of the commitments to extend credit at June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively. Standby letters of credit are conditional commitments issued by the Company guaranteeing the performance of a customer to a third-party.

Those guarantees are primarily issued to support public and private borrowing arrangements. The Company had outstanding letters of credit totaling $17.9 million at June 30, 2024 and $19.6 million at December 31, 2023.

The following table sets forth our commitments and letters of credit as of the dates presented:

Our exposure to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by the other party to the financial instrument for commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit is represented by the contractual amount of those instruments. The Company uses the same credit policies in making commitments and unconditional obligations as it does for on-balance sheet instruments. Unless noted otherwise, collateral or other security is required to support financial instruments with credit risk.

Life-of-Loss Reserve on Unfunded Loan Commitments

We maintain a life-of-loss reserve on unfunded commercial lending commitments and letters of credit to provide for the risk of loss inherent in these arrangements. The life-of-loss reserve is computed using a methodology similar to that used to determine the ACL for loans, modified to take into account the probability of a draw-down on the commitment. The life-of-loan reserve for unfunded commitments is included on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The following table presents activity in the life-of-loss reserve on unfunded loan commitments as of and for the dates presented:

Amounts are added or subtracted to the provision for unfunded commitments through a charge or credit to current earnings in the (recovery) provision for unfunded commitments. A recovery of $0.2 million was recorded for the three months ended June 30, 2024, which resulted in a decrease of $0.6 million compared to the provision of $0.4 million for the three months ended June 30, 2023. The decrease in the (recovery) provision for unfunded commitments was primarily due to a decline in construction commitments.

Legal Proceedings

In the normal course of business, the Company is subject to various legal and administrative proceedings and claims. Legal and administrative proceedings are subject to inherent uncertainties and unfavorable rulings could occur, and the timing and outcome of any legal or administrative proceeding cannot be predicted with certainty. Further, estimating an amount or range of possible losses that may result from legal or administrative proceedings and claims is inherently difficult and requires an extensive degree of judgment, particularly where the matters involve indeterminate claims for monetary damages, may involve awards that are discretionary in amount, present novel legal theories or policies, are in the early stages of the proceedings, or are subject to appeal. In addition, because legal proceedings may be resolved over an extended period of time, potential losses are subject to change due to the outcome of intermediate procedural and substantive rulings, actions by other parties which may be influenced by their settlement posture or their evaluation of the strength or weakness of their case, and other factors.

For these reasons, the Company cannot reasonably estimate the ultimate outcome or timing of, or possible losses resulting from, the matters described below, and cannot conclude if the outcome of any of these matters would have a material impact to the Company.

Other than as set forth below, as of June 30, 2024, the Company is not involved in any other material pending legal proceedings other than proceedings occurring in the ordinary course of business.

Settlement of Certain Justice Disputes

On June 26, 2024, the Bank announced that it had agreed to a pathway of curtailment and payoff of loans outstanding to the Bank owed or guaranteed by James C. Justice, II, Cathy L. Justice and James C. Justice, III, and various entities that are owned or controlled by them (such entities, the “Justice Entities” and collectively, the “Justice Obligors”). In connection with this agreement, several legal proceedings involving the Bank and the Justice Obligors were dismissed, as described below, and the Justice Obligors executed a release that waives all causes of action of any kind that they might claim to have against the Company or the Bank.

Justice Collection Actions

The Bank has been engaged in a variety of collection proceedings (the “Collection Actions”) against James C. Justice, II, Cathy L. Justice, James C. Justice, III and various Justice Entities (collectively, the “Collection Defendants”). On April 20, 2023 and May 15, 2023, the Bank filed in the Circuit Court of the City of Martinsville, Virginia (the “Martinsville Circuit Court”) confessions of judgment against the Collection Defendants with respect to amounts owed on matured promissory notes made or guaranteed by the Collection Defendants with an aggregate principal balance of approximately $301.9 million. On May 12, 2023 and June 7, 2023, the Collection Defendants filed motions to set aside the confessions of judgment that the Bank had filed. On February 21, 2024, the Martinsville Circuit Court issued final orders denying such motions. On February 26, 2024, the Collection Defendants filed a notice of appeal regarding the Martinsville Circuit Court’s order denying such motions.

In connection with the settlement described above, on July 3, 2024, the Collection Defendants withdrew their notices of appeal, and the Collection Defendants have agreed not to challenge further the confessions of judgment or the final orders related thereto issued by the Martinsville Circuit Court.

Justice Federal Court Litigation

On November 10, 2023, the Company, the Bank, and the individual directors of the Company and the Bank were named as defendants in a lawsuit (the “Justice Federal Court Litigation”) filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia by the Collection Defendants. The allegations contained in the Justice Federal Court Litigation related to the matured promissory notes made or guaranteed by the Collection Defendants that have been reduced to judgment in the Martinsville Circuit Court. In the Justice Federal Court Litigation, as plaintiffs the Collection Defendants alleged that the Company, the Bank and to a vicarious and limited extent, the individual directors (i) breached an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, (ii) breached fiduciary duties, (iii) tortiously interfered with business relations and (iv) violated anti-tying restrictions of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, and alleged that the individual directors aided and abetted the same. As plaintiffs in the Justice Federal Court Litigation, the Collection Defendants sought monetary damages of not less than $1.0 billion, additional punitive damages and interest on damages as allowed by law, payment of costs, expenses and attorneys’ fees, and a declaratory judgment from the court that certain confessions of judgment, and certain guarantees, be declared void and unenforceable. On December 6, 2023, the Company and the Bank filed a motion to transfer venue of the Justice Federal Court Litigation to the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia. That motion was granted on April 24, 2024.

In connection with the settlement described above, on June 26, 2024 the Justice Federal Court Litigation was dismissed with prejudice.

Justice Foreclosure Litigation

On February 7, 2024, the Bank was named as a defendant in a lawsuit (the “Justice Foreclosure Litigation”) filed in the Circuit Court of Greenbrier County, West Virginia (the “Greenbrier Circuit Court”) by The Greenbrier Sporting Club Development Company, Inc. and The Greenbrier Sporting Club, Inc. (collectively, “Sporting Club”). The Justice Foreclosure Litigation related to a deed of trust (the “Trust Deed”) granted by Sporting Club in favor of the Bank. The trustee under this deed of trust was also named as a defendant. In the Justice Foreclosure Litigation, Sporting Club requested that the Greenbrier Circuit Court issue declaratory judgments that the Trust Deed was invalid and unenforceable, that the Notice of Sale (defined below) was invalid and of no effect, and that the trustee and the Bank could not sell the property described in the Notice of Sale. Sporting Club also requested that the Greenbrier Circuit Court issue a declaratory judgment that the debts secured by the Trust Deed were not payable and therefore no trustee sale was permitted, or alternatively that Sporting Club was entitled to final adjudication of the Justice Federal Court Litigation before any sale of property by the trustee under the Trust Deed might proceed.

On or about February 6, 2024, a notice of sale (the “Notice of Sale”) was published in multiple newspapers regarding the proposed sale by the Trustee of certain real estate encumbered by the Trust Deed. On February 16, 2024, the Bank voluntarily cancelled the proposed sale by the Trustee of the real estate encumbered by the Trust Deed.

In connection with the settlement described above, on June 28, 2024 the Justice Foreclosure Litigation was dismissed with prejudice.

GLAS Federal Court Litigation

On February 12, 2024, the Bank was named as a defendant in a lawsuit (the “GLAS Federal Court Litigation”) filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia by GLAS Trust Company LLC (“GLAS”). The allegations contained in the GLAS Federal Court Litigation relate to a series of financing transactions that occurred in 2018 between Bluestone Resources, Inc. (“Bluestone Resources”), its subsidiary Bluestone Coal Sales Corporation (“Bluestone Sales”, and together with Bluestone Resources and their respective affiliates, the “Bluestone Entities”), and Greensill (UK) Limited, Ltd. (“Greensill”). The Bluestone Entities are owned and controlled by James C. Justice, II and James C. Justice, III. In the GLAS Federal Court Litigation, GLAS alleges that it serves as trustee for investors that acquired notes via a series of securities transactions that repackaged the Bluestone Entities’ obligations to repay Greensill and sold them to those investors. In the GLAS Federal Court Litigation, GLAS alleges that certain transfers to the Bank executed during 2018 by the Bluestone Entities or Greensill, which in the aggregate total approximately $226 million, each constitute either a fraudulent conveyance, or a voluntary conveyance, under Virginia law. In the GLAS Federal Court Litigation, GLAS seeks an award equal to the full amount of such fraudulent conveyances and/or voluntary conveyances plus interest and payment of attorneys’ fees and costs. On March 29, 2024, the Bank filed a motion to dismiss the original complaint filed by GLAS due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to assert facts sufficient to support the claims alleged by GLAS. Subsequently, GLAS filed an amended complaint on April 19, 2024, which contains substantively similar allegations regarding fraudulent and/or voluntary conveyances, and seeks the same relief, in each case as the original complaint. On May 13, 2024, the Bank filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint filed by GLAS on similar grounds.

The Company and the Bank deny the allegations contained in the GLAS Federal Court Litigation and intend to defend vigorously all claims asserted in the GLAS Federal Court Litigation. Based on information presently available to the Company and the Bank and based on consultation with legal counsel, the Company believes that the Bank has meritorious defenses to all allegations contained in the GLAS Federal Court Litigation.

During the course of the Bank’s lending transactions with James C. Justice, II, Cathy L. Justice and James C. Justice, III, and various Justice Entities, each of James C. Justice, II, Cathy L. Justice and James C. Justice, III and all Collection Defendants agreed (the “Justice Indemnity Agreement”) to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Bank from damages, claims, liabilities, losses, and expenses incurred in connection with certain claims that may be asserted against the Bank, including the claims that are asserted in the GLAS Federal Court Litigation. These indemnity obligations are supported by substantial pledged collateral. The Company and the Bank intend to pursue vigorously all remedies available to the Bank under the Justice Indemnity Agreement.

The Company cannot reasonably estimate the ultimate outcome or timing of, or possible losses resulting from, the GLAS Federal Court Litigation or any related legal proceedings that may commence, and cannot conclude if the outcome of any of these matters would have a material impact to the Company.

NOTE 11 –TAX EFFECTS ON OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)

The following table presents the change in components of other comprehensive income (loss) for the periods presented, net of tax effects:

NOTE 12 –STOCK REPURCHASE PLAN

The Company was active in share repurchase activity and repurchased 1,000,000 shares of its common stockat a total cost of $14.2 million, or an average price of $14.16 per share during the year ended December 31, 2023. On March 29, 2023, the Company's Board of Directors authorized a new share repurchase program (the “2023 Program”) which took effect starting May 1, 2023, after the expiration of the previous repurchase program (the “2022 Program”), which was originally authorized through August 1, 2023, but was fully exhausted as of March 10, 2023. The Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of 1,000,000 shares of common stock under the 2023 Program and on August 31, 2023 reached the maximum number of shares that could be purchased under the 2023 Program. The Company’s Board of Directors has not authorized a new repurchase program as of June 30, 2024.