NOTE 5 – LOANS

The following table details the Company’s loans at September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018:

The credit quality of the loan portfolio is summarized no less frequently than quarterly using categories similar to the standard asset classification system used by the federal banking agencies. The following table presents credit quality indicators for the loan loss portfolio segments and classes. These categories are utilized to develop the associated allowance for loan losses using historical losses adjusted for current economic conditions defined as follows:

Loans by credit quality indicator as of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018 were as follows:

Loans by performance status as of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018 were as follows:

Loans by past due status as of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018 were as follows:

The allowance for loan losses is maintained at a level which, in management’s judgment, is adequate to absorb credit losses inherent in the loan portfolio. The amount of the allowance is based on management’s evaluation of the collectability of the loan portfolio, including the nature of the portfolio, credit concentrations, trends in historical loss experience, specific impaired loans, economic conditions and other risks inherent in the portfolio. Allowances for impaired loans are generally determined based on collateral values or the present value of the estimated cash flows. The allowance is increased by a provision for loan losses, which is charged to expense, and reduced by charge-offs, net of recoveries. In addition, various regulatory agencies, as an integral part of their examination process, periodically review the allowance for losses on loans. Such agencies may require the Company to recognize adjustments to the allowance based on their judgments about information available to them at the time of their examination.

The methodology utilized for the calculation of the allowance for loan losses is divided into four distinct categories. Those categories include allowances for non-impaired loans (ASC 450), impaired loans (ASC 310), external qualitative factors, and internal qualitative factors. A description of each category of the allowance for loan loss methodology is listed below.

Non-Impaired Loans. Non-impaired loans are grouped into homogeneous loan pools by loan type: commercial and industrial, construction and development, commercial real estate, second lien home equity lines of credit, and all other loans. Each loan pool is stratified by internal risk rating and multiplied by a loss allocation percentage derived from the loan pool historical loss rate. The historical loss rate is based on an age weighted 5 year history of net charge-offs experienced by pool, with the most recent net charge-off experience given a greater weighting. This results in the expected loss rate per year, adjusted by a qualitative adjustment factor and a years-to-impairment factor, for each pool of loans to derive the total amount of allowance for non-impaired loans.

Impaired Loans. Loans are considered impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that the Bank will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the original terms of the loan agreement. The collection of all amounts due according to contractual terms means that both the contractual interest and principal payments of a loan will be collected as scheduled in the loan agreement. Impaired loans are measured based on the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the rate implicit in the original loan agreement, at the loan’s observable market price or the fair value of the underlying collateral. The fair value of collateral, reduced by costs to sell on a discounted basis, is used if a loan is collateral-dependent. Fair value estimates for specifically impaired collateral-dependent loans are derived from appraised values based on the current market value or “as is” value of the property, normally from recently received and reviewed appraisals. Appraisals are obtained from certified and licensed appraisers and are based on certain assumptions, which may include construction or development status and the highest and best use of the property. These appraisals are reviewed by our credit administration department, and values are adjusted downward to reflect anticipated disposition costs. Once this estimated net realizable value has been determined, the value used in the impairment assessment is updated for each impaired loan. As subsequent events dictate and estimated net realizable values decline, required reserves may be established or further adjustments recorded.

External Qualitative Factors. The determination of the portion of the allowance for loan losses relating to external qualitative factors is based on consideration of the following factors: gross domestic product growth rate, changes in prime rate, delinquency trends, peer delinquency trends, year over year loan growth and state unemployment rate trends. Data for the three most recent periods is utilized in the calculation for each external qualitative component. The factors have a consistent weighted methodology to calculate the amount of allowance due to external qualitative factors.

Internal Qualitative Factors. The determination of the portion of the allowance for loan losses relating to internal qualitative factors is based on the consideration of criteria which includes the following: number of extensions and deferrals, single pay and interest only loans, current financial information, credit concentrations and risk grade accuracy. A self-assessment for each of the criteria is made with a consistent weighted methodology used to calculate the amount of allowance required for internal qualitative factors.

During the third quarter of 2019, the Company recorded a $7.4 million payment resulting from the termination of a Loan Guarantee Program (“LGP”) operated by the State of Alabama. The payment was recorded as an increase to the allowance for loan losses specifically related to loans formerly enrolled in this program, in accordance with the Company’s established ALLL review and evaluation criteria. In general, loans enrolled in the program had a collateral shortfall or other enhanced credit risk. In return for the Company’s acceptance of these higher risk loans, the Company received a guarantee of up to 50% of losses in the event of a borrower’s default.  These were loans that would have otherwise not met the Company’s loan underwriting criteria.  The program required a 1% fee on the commitment balance at origination.  As of September 30, 2019, the Company had 72 loans outstanding totaling $44.3 million that were formerly enrolled in the loan guarantee program. Of this total, $37.8 million were categorized as pass within the Company's credit quality asset classification, $5.2 million were categorized as Special Mention and $1.3 million were categorized as Substandard.

The following table presents an analysis of the allowance for loan losses by portfolio segment and changes in the allowance for loan losses for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019 and September 30, 2018. The total allowance for loan losses is disaggregated into those amounts associated with loans individually evaluated and those associated with loans collectively evaluated.

The following table presents details of the Company’s impaired loans as of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively. Loans which have been fully charged off do not appear in the tables.

Troubled Debt Restructurings (“TDR”) at September 30, 2019, December 31, 2018 and September 30, 2018 totaled $11.2 million, $14.6 million and $16.6 million, respectively. TDRs that were in accrual status totaled $3.5 million, $3.1 million and $15.5 million for the same comparative periods. At September 30, 2019, the Company had a related allowance for loan losses of $1.8 million allocated to these TDRs, compared to $4.3 million at December 31, 2018 and $3.7 million at September 30, 2018. TDR activity by portfolio segment for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018 is presented in the table below.

The following table presents TDRs by portfolio segment which defaulted during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018, and which were modified in the previous twelve months (i.e., twelve months prior to default). For purposes of this disclosure, default is defined as 90 days past due and still accruing or placement on nonaccrual status. As of September 30, 2019, the Company’s TDRs have all resulted from term extensions, rather than from interest rate reductions or debt forgiveness.