Edgar Filing: CATHAY GENERAL BANCORP

caty_10k-123112.htm

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-K

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Commission file number 0-18630

Cathay General Bancorp

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware		95-4274680
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

777 North Broadway, Los Angeles, California (Address of principal executive offices)		90012 (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (213) 625-4700

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

Title of each class		Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, $.01 par value		The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes R No ¨

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes R No ¨

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

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

	Large accelerated filer R	Accelerated filer ¨
	Non-accelerated filer ¨	Smaller reporting company¨
	(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

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

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant, computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold as of the last business day of the Registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter (June 30, 2012) was $1,186,791,731. This value is estimated solely for the purposes of this cover page. The market value of shares held by Registrant’s directors, executive officers, and Employee Stock Ownership Plan have been excluded because they may be considered to be affiliates of the Registrant.

As of February 15, 2013, there were 78,785,472 shares of common stock outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

•

Portions of Registrant’s definitive proxy statement relating to Registrant’s 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders which will be filed within 120 days of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, are incorporated by reference into Part III.

CATHAY GENERAL BANCORP

2012 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I		3
Item 1.	Business.	3
Item 1A.	Risk Factors.	21
Item 1B.	Unresolved Staff Comments.	34
Item 2.	Properties.	34
Item 3.	Legal Proceedings.	34
Item 4.	Mine Safety Disclosures.	35
Executive Officers of the Registrant.		35

PART II		35
Item 5.	Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.	35
Item 6.	Selected Financial Data.	37
Item 7.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.	39
Item 7A.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.	78
Item 8.	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.	82
Item 9.	Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.	82
Item 9A.	Controls and Procedures.	82
Item 9B.	Other Information.	85

PART III		85
Item 10.	Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.	85
Item 11.	Executive Compensation.	85
Item 12.	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.	85
Item 13.	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.	86
Item 14.	Principal Accounting Fees and Services.	86

PART IV		86
Item 15.	Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules.	86

SIGNATURES		92

Forward-Looking Statements

In this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the term “Bancorp” refers to Cathay General Bancorp and the term “Bank” refers to Cathay Bank. The terms “Company,” “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to Bancorp and the Bank collectively. The statements in this report include forward-looking statements within the meaning of the applicable provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 regarding management’s beliefs, projections, and assumptions concerning future results and events. We intend such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provision for forward-looking statements in these provisions. All statements other than statements of historical fact are “forward-looking statements” for purposes of federal and state securities laws, including statements about anticipated future operating and financial performance, financial position and liquidity, growth opportunities and growth rates, growth plans, acquisition and divestiture opportunities, business prospects, strategic alternatives, business strategies, financial expectations, regulatory and competitive outlook, investment and expenditure plans, financing needs and availability, and other similar forecasts and statements of expectation and statements of assumptions underlying any of the foregoing. Words such as “aims,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “can,” “could,” “estimates,” “expects,” “hopes,” “intends,” “may,” “plans,” “projects,” “seeks,” “shall,” “should,” “will,” “predicts,” “potential,” “continue,” “possible,” “optimistic,” and variations of these words and similar expressions are intended to identify these forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements by us are based on estimates, beliefs, projections, and assumptions of management and are not guarantees of future performance. These forward-looking statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from our historical experience and our present expectations or projections. Such risks and uncertainties and other factors include, but are not limited to, adverse developments or conditions related to or arising from:

U.S. and international business and economic conditions;

credit risks of lending activities and deterioration in asset or credit quality;

current and potential future supervisory action by bank supervisory authorities;

increased costs of compliance and other risks associated with changes in regulation and the current regulatory environment, including the requirements of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), and the potential for substantial changes in the legal, regulatory, and enforcement framework and oversight applicable to financial institutions in reaction to recent adverse financial market events, including changes pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act;

potential goodwill impairment;

liquidity risk;

fluctuations in interest rates;

inflation and deflation;

risks associated with acquisitions and the expansion of our business into new markets;

real estate market conditions and the value of real estate collateral;

environmental liabilities;

our ability to compete with larger competitors;

the possibility of higher capital requirements, including implementation of the Basel III capital standards of the Basel Committee;

our ability to retain key personnel;

successful management of reputational risk;

natural disasters and geopolitical events;

general economic or business conditions in California, Asia, and other regions where the Bank has operations;

restrictions on compensation paid to our executives as a result of our participation in the TARP Capital Purchase Program;

failures, interruptions, or security breaches of our information systems;

our ability to adapt our systems to technological changes, including successfully implementing our core system conversion;

adverse results in legal proceedings;

changes in accounting standards or tax laws and regulations;

market disruption and volatility;

restrictions on dividends and other distributions by laws and regulations and by our regulators and our capital structure;

successfully raising additional capital, if needed, and the resulting dilution of interests of holders of our common stock; and

the soundness of other financial institutions.

These and other factors are further described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K (at Item 1A in particular), the Company’s other reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and other filings the Company makes with the SEC from time to time. Actual results in any future period may also vary from the past results discussed in this report. Given these risks and uncertainties, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements, which speak to the date of this report. We have no intention and undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement or to publicly announce any revision of any forward-looking statement to reflect future developments or events, except as required by law.

PART I

Item 1. Business.

Business of Bancorp

Overview

Cathay General Bancorp is a corporation that was organized in 1990 under the laws of the State of Delaware. We are the holding company of Cathay Bank, a California state-chartered commercial bank (“Cathay Bank” or the “Bank”), six limited partnerships investing in affordable housing investments in which the Bank is the sole limited partner, and GBC Venture Capital, Inc. We also own 100% of the common stock of five statutory business trusts created for the purpose of issuing capital securities. In the future, we may become an operating company or acquire savings institutions, other banks, or companies engaged in bank-related activities and may engage in or acquire such other businesses, or activities as may be permitted by applicable law. Our principal place of business is currently located at 777 North Broadway, Los Angeles, California 90012, and our telephone number at that location is (213) 625-4700. In addition, certain of our administrative offices are located in El Monte, California, and our address there is 9650 Flair Drive, El Monte, California 91731. Our common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market and our trading symbol is “CATY”.

We are regulated as a bank holding company by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Federal Reserve”). Cathay Bank is regulated as a California commercial bank by the California Department of Financial Institutions (“DFI”) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”).

Subsidiaries of Bancorp

In addition to its wholly-owned bank subsidiary, the Bancorp has the following subsidiaries:

Cathay Capital Trust I, Cathay Statutory Trust I, Cathay Capital Trust II, Cathay Capital Trust III and Cathay Capital Trust IV. The Bancorp established Cathay Capital Trust I in June 2003, Cathay Statutory Trust I in September 2003, Cathay Capital Trust II in December 2003, Cathay Capital Trust III in March 2007, and Cathay Capital Trust IV in May 2007 (collectively, the “Trusts”) as wholly-owned subsidiaries. The Trusts are statutory business trusts. The Trusts issued capital securities representing undivided preferred beneficial interests in the assets of the Trusts. The Trusts exist for the purpose of issuing the capital securities and investing the proceeds thereof, together with proceeds from the purchase of the common securities of the Trusts by the Bancorp, in Junior Subordinated Notes issued by the Bancorp. The Bancorp guarantees, on a limited basis, payments of distributions on the capital securities of the Trusts and payments on redemption of the capital securities of the Trusts. The Bancorp is the owner of all the beneficial interests represented by the common securities of the Trusts. The purpose of issuing the capital securities was to provide the Company with a cost-effective means of obtaining Tier 1 Capital for regulatory purposes. Because the Bancorp is not the primary beneficiary of the Trusts, the financial statements of the Trusts are not included in our Consolidated Financial Statements.

GBC Venture Capital, Inc. The business purpose of GBC Venture Capital, Inc. is to hold equity interests (such as options or warrants) received as part of business relationships and to make equity investments in companies and limited partnerships subject to applicable regulatory restrictions.

Competition

Our primary business is to act as the holding company for the Bank. Accordingly, we face the same competitive pressures as those expected by the Bank. For a discussion of those risks, see “Business of the Bank — Competition” below under this Item 1.

Employees

Due to the limited nature of the Bancorp’s activities as a bank holding company, the Bancorp currently does not employ any persons other than Bancorp’s management, which includes the Chief Executive Officer and President, the Chief Operating Officer, the Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice Presidents, the Secretary, Assistant Secretary, and the General Counsel. See also “Business of the Bank — Employees” below under this Item 1.

Business of the Bank

General

Cathay Bank was incorporated under the laws of the State of California on August 22, 1961, was licensed by the DFI (previously known as the California State Banking Department) and commenced operations as a California state-chartered bank on April 19, 1962. Cathay Bank is an insured bank under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act by the FDIC, but it is not a member of the Federal Reserve.

The Bank’s head office is located in the Chinatown area of Los Angeles, at 777 North Broadway, Los Angeles, California 90012. In addition, as of December 31, 2012, the Bank had branch offices in Southern California (20 branches), Northern California (11 branches), New York (eight branches), Massachusetts (one branch), Texas (two branches), Washington (three branches), Illinois (three branch locations and one drive-through location), New Jersey (one branch), and Hong Kong (one branch) and a representative office in Shanghai and in Taipei. Deposit accounts at the Hong Kong branch are not insured by the FDIC. Each branch has loan approval rights subject to the branch manager’s authorized lending limits. Current activities of the Shanghai and Taipei representative offices are limited to coordinating the transportation of documents to the Bank’s head office and performing liaison services.

Our primary market area is defined by the Community Reinvestment Act delineation, which includes the contiguous areas surrounding each of the Bank’s branch offices. It is the Bank’s policy to reach out and actively offer services to low and moderate income groups in the delineated branch service areas. Many of the Bank’s employees speak both English and one or more Chinese dialects or Vietnamese, and are thus able to serve the Bank’s Chinese, Vietnamese, and English speaking customers.

As a commercial bank, the Bank accepts checking, savings, and time deposits, and makes commercial, real estate, personal, home improvement, automobile, and other installment and term loans. From time to time, the Bank invests available funds in other interest-earning assets, such as U.S. Treasury securities, U.S. government agency securities, state and municipal securities, mortgage-backed securities, asset-backed securities, corporate bonds, and other security investments. The Bank also provides letters of credit, wire transfers, forward currency spot and forward contracts, traveler’s checks, safe deposit, night deposit, Social Security payment deposit, collection, bank-by-mail, drive-up and walk-up windows, automatic teller machines (“ATM”), Internet banking services, and other customary bank services.

The Bank primarily services individuals, professionals, and small to medium-sized businesses in the local markets in which its branches are located and provides commercial mortgage loans, commercial loans, Small Business Administration (“SBA”) loans, residential mortgage loans, real estate construction loans, equity lines of credit, and installment loans to individuals for automobile, household, and other consumer expenditures.

Through Cathay Wealth Management, the Bank provides its customers the ability to trade securities online and to purchase mutual funds, annuities, equities, bonds, and short-term money market instruments. All securities and insurance products provided by Cathay Wealth Management are offered by, and all Financial Consultants are registered with, Cetera Financial Services, a registered securities broker/dealer and licensed insurance agency and member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and Security Investor Protection Corporation. Cetera Financial Services and Cathay Bank are independent entities. These products are not insured by the FDIC.

Securities

The Bank’s securities portfolio is managed in accordance with a written Investment Policy which addresses strategies, types, and levels of allowable investments, and which is reviewed and approved by our Board of Directors on an annual basis.

Our investment portfolio is managed to meet our liquidity needs through proceeds from scheduled maturities and is also utilized for pledging requirements for deposits of state and local subdivisions, securities sold under repurchase agreements, and Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances. The portfolio is comprised of U.S. government agency securities, mortgage-backed securities, collateralized mortgage obligations, obligations of states and political subdivisions, corporate debt instruments, asset-backed securities, mutual funds, and equity securities.

Information concerning the carrying value, maturity distribution, and yield analysis of the Company’s securities portfolio as well as a summary of the amortized cost and estimated fair value of the Bank’s securities by contractual maturity is included in Part II — Item 7 — “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and in Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Loans

The Bank’s Board of Directors and senior management establish, review, and modify the Bank’s lending policies. These policies include (as applicable) an evaluation of a potential borrower’s financial condition, ability to repay the loan, character, existence of secondary repayment source (such as guaranties), quality and availability of collateral, capital, leverage capacity of the borrower, regulatory guidelines, market conditions for the borrower’s business or project, and prevailing economic trends and conditions. Loan originations are obtained through a variety of sources, including existing customers, walk-in customers, referrals from brokers or existing customers, and advertising. While loan applications are accepted at all branches, the Bank’s centralized document department supervises the application process including documentation of loans, review of appraisals, and credit reports.

Commercial Mortgage Loans. Commercial mortgage loans are typically secured by first deeds of trust on commercial properties. Our commercial mortgage portfolio includes primarily commercial retail properties, shopping centers, and owner-occupied industrial facilities, and, secondarily, office buildings, multiple-unit apartments, hotels, and multi-tenanted industrial properties.

The Bank also makes medium-term commercial mortgage loans which are generally secured by commercial or industrial buildings where the borrower uses the property for business purposes or derives income from tenants.

Commercial Loans. The Bank provides financial services to diverse commercial and professional businesses in its market areas. Commercial loans consist primarily of short-term loans (normally with a maturity of up to one year) to support general business purposes, or to provide working capital to businesses in the form of lines of credit to finance trade. The Bank continues to focus primarily on commercial lending to small-to-medium size businesses within the Bank’s geographic market areas. The Bank participates or syndicates loans, typically more than $20 million in principal amount, with other financial institutions to limit its credit exposure. Commercial loan pricing is generally at a rate tied to the prime rate, as quoted in The Wall Street Journal, or the Bank’s reference rate.

SBA Loans. The Bank originates U.S. Small Business Administration (“SBA”) loans under the national “preferred lender” status. Preferred lender status is granted to a lender which has made a certain number of SBA loans and which, in the opinion of the SBA, has staff qualified and experienced in small business loans. As a preferred lender, the Bank’s SBA Lending Group has the authority to issue, on behalf of the SBA, the SBA guaranty on loans under the 7(a) program which may result in shortening the time it takes to process a loan. In addition, under this program, the SBA delegates loan underwriting, closing, and most servicing and liquidation authority and responsibility to selected lenders.

The Bank utilizes both the 504 program, which is focused toward long-term financing of buildings and other long-term fixed assets, and the 7(a) program, which is the SBA’s primary loan program and which can be used for financing of a variety of general business purposes such as acquisition of land and buildings, equipment, inventory and working capital needs of eligible businesses generally over a 5- to 25-year term. The collateral position in the SBA loans is enhanced by the SBA guaranty in the case of 7(a) loans, and by lower loan-to-value ratios under the 504 program. The Bank has sold, and may in the future sell, the guaranteed portion of certain of its SBA 7(a) loans in the secondary market. SBA loan pricing is generally at a rate tied to the prime rate, as quoted in The Wall Street Journal.

Residential Mortgage Loans. The Bank originates single-family-residential mortgage loans. The single-family-residential mortgage loans are comprised of conforming, nonconforming, and jumbo residential mortgage loans, and are secured by first or subordinate liens on single (one-to-four) family residential properties. The Bank’s products include a fixed-rate residential mortgage loan and an adjustable-rate residential mortgage loan. Mortgage loans are underwritten in accordance with the Bank’s and regulatory guidelines, on the basis of the borrower’s financial capabilities, independent appraisal of value of the property, historical loan quality, and other relevant factors. As of December 31, 2012, approximately 63% of the Bank’s residential mortgages were for properties located in California. It is the current practice of the Bank to sell all conforming fixed rate residential first mortgages that meet Government Sponsored Agency guidelines to the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation on a cash basis as they are originated. The Bank retains all other mortgage loans it originates in its portfolio. As such, the Bank doesn’t expect to be impacted by the expected regulations pertaining to risk retention, since the Bank doesn’t securitize any of the loans it sells or retains.

Real Estate Construction Loans. The Bank’s real estate construction loan activity focuses on providing short-term loans to individuals and developers, primarily for the construction of multi-unit projects. Residential real estate construction loans are typically secured by first deeds of trust and guarantees of the borrower. The economic viability of the projects, borrower’s credit worthiness, and borrower’s and contractor’s experience are primary considerations in the loan underwriting decision. The Bank utilizes approved independent licensed appraisers and monitors projects during the construction phase through construction inspections and a disbursement program tied to the percentage of completion of each project. The Bank also occasionally makes unimproved property loans to borrowers who intend to construct a single-family residence on their lots generally within twelve months. In addition, the Bank makes commercial real estate construction loans to high net worth clients with adequate liquidity for construction of office and warehouse properties. Such loans are typically secured by first deeds of trust and are guaranteed by the borrower.

Home Equity Lines of Credit. The Bank offers variable-rate home equity lines of credit that are secured by the borrower’s home. The pricing on the variable-rate home equity line of credit is generally at a rate tied to the prime rate, as quoted in The Wall Street Journal, or the Bank’s reference rate. Borrowers may use this line of credit for home improvement financing, debt consolidation and other personal uses.

Installment Loans. Installment loans tend to be fixed rate and longer-term (one-to-six year maturities). These loans are funded primarily for the purpose of financing the purchase of automobiles and other personal uses of the borrower.

Distribution and Maturity of Loans. Information concerning types, distribution, and maturity of loans is included in Part II — Item 7 — “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and in Note 5 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Asset Quality

The Bank’s lending and credit policies require management to review regularly the Bank’s loan portfolio so that the Bank can monitor the quality of its assets. If during the ordinary course of business, management becomes aware that a borrower may not be able to meet the contractual payment obligations under a loan, then that loan is supervised more closely with consideration given to placing the loan on non-accrual status, the need for an additional allowance for loan losses, and (if appropriate) partial or full charge-off.

Under the Bank’s current policy, a loan will generally be placed on a non-accrual status if interest or principal is past due 90 days or more, or in cases where management deems the full collection of principal and interest unlikely. When a loan is placed on non-accrual status, previously accrued but unpaid interest is reversed and charged against current income, and subsequent payments received are generally first applied towards the outstanding principal balance of the loan. Depending on the circumstances, management may elect to continue the accrual of interest on certain past due loans if partial payment is received or the loan is well-collateralized, and in the process of collection. The loan is generally returned to accrual status when the borrower has brought the past due principal and interest payments current and, in the opinion of management, the borrower has demonstrated the ability to make future payments of principal and interest as scheduled. A non-accrual loan may also be returned to accrual status if all principal and interest contractually due are reasonably assured of repayment within a reasonable period and there has been a sustained period of payment performance, generally six months.

Information concerning non-performing loans, restructured loans, allowance for credit losses, loans charged-off, loan recoveries, and other real estate owned is included in Part II — Item 7 — “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and in Note 5 and Note 6 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Deposits

The Bank offers a variety of deposit products in order to meet its customers’ needs. As of December 31, 2012, the Bank offered passbook accounts, checking accounts, money market deposit accounts, certificates of deposit, individual retirement accounts, college certificates of deposit, and public funds deposits. These products are priced in order to promote growth of deposits.

The Bank’s deposits are generally obtained from residents within its geographic market area. The Bank utilizes traditional marketing methods to attract new customers and deposits, by offering a wide variety of products and services and utilizing various forms of advertising media. From time to time, the Bank may offer special deposit promotions. Information concerning types of deposit accounts, average deposits and rates, and maturity of time deposits of $100,000 or more is included in Part II — Item 7 — “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and in Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Borrowings

Borrowings from time to time include securities sold under agreements to repurchase, the purchase of federal funds, funds obtained as advances from the FHLB, borrowing from other financial institutions, subordinated debt, and Junior Subordinated Notes. Information concerning the types, amounts, and maturity of borrowings is included in Note 10 and Note 11 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Return on Equity and Assets

Information concerning the return on average assets, return on average stockholders’ equity, the average equity to assets ratio and the dividend payout ratio is included in Part II — Item 7 — “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

Interest Rates and Differentials

Information concerning the interest-earning asset mix, average interest-earning assets, average interest-bearing liabilities, and the yields on interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities is included in Part II — Item 7 — “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

Analysis of Changes in Net Interest Income

An analysis of changes in net interest income due to changes in rate and volume is included in Part II — Item 7 — “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

Commitments and Letters of Credit

Information concerning the Bank’s outstanding loan commitments and letters of credit is included in Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Expansion

We have engaged in expansion through acquisitions and may consider acquisitions in the future in order to compete for new deposits and loans, and to be able to serve our customers more effectively

Subsidiaries of Cathay Bank

Cathay Real Estate Investment Trust (“CB REIT”) is a real estate investment trust subsidiary of the Bank that was formed in January 2003 to provide the Bank with flexibility in raising capital. During 2003, the Bank contributed $1.13 billion in loans and securities to CB REIT in exchange for 100% of the common stock of CB REIT. CB REIT sold $4.4 million in 2003 and $4.2 million in 2004 of its 7.0% Series A Non-Cumulative preferred stock to accredited investors. During 2005, CB REIT repurchased $131,000 of its preferred stock. At December 31, 2012, total assets of CB REIT were consolidated with the Company and totaled approximately $1.47 billion.

Cathay Community Development Corporation (“CCDC”) is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Bank and was incorporated in September 2006. The primary mission of CCDC is to help in the development of low-income neighborhoods in the Bank's California and New York service areas by providing or facilitating the availability of capital to businesses and real estate developers working to renovate these neighborhoods. In October 2006, CCDC formed a wholly-owned subsidiary, Cathay New Asia Community Development Corporation (“CNACDC”), for the purpose of assuming New Asia Bank’s pre-existing New Markets Tax Credit activities in the greater Chicago area by providing or facilitating the availability of capital to businesses and real estate developers working to renovate these neighborhoods. CNACDC has been certified as a community development entity and is seeking to participate in the U.S. Treasury Department's New Markets Tax Credit program.

Cathay Holdings LLC (“CHLLC”) was incorporated in December 2007, Cathay Holdings 2 LLC (“CHLLC2”) was incorporated in January 2008, and Cathay Holdings 3 LLC (“CHLLC3”) was incorporated in December 2008. They are wholly-owned subsidiaries of the Bank. The purpose of these subsidiaries is to hold other real estate owned in the state of Texas that was transferred from the Bank. Since February 2011, CHLLC, CHLLC2, and CHLLC3 have not owned any real estate.

Competition

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

To compete with other financial institutions in its primary service areas, the Bank relies principally upon local promotional activities, personal contacts by its officers, directors, employees, and stockholders, extended hours on weekdays, Saturday banking in certain locations, Internet banking, an Internet website (www.cathaybank.com), and certain other specialized services. The content of our website is not incorporated into and is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

If a proposed loan exceeds the Bank’s internal lending limits, the Bank has, in the past, and may in the future, arrange the loan on a participation or syndication basis with correspondent banks. The Bank also assists customers requiring other services not offered by the Bank to obtain these services from its correspondent banks.

In California, one larger Chinese-American bank competes for loans and deposits with the Bank and at least two super-regional banks compete with the Bank for deposits. In addition, there are many other Chinese-American banks in both Southern and Northern California. Banks from the Pacific Rim countries, such as Taiwan, Hong Kong, and China also continue to open branches in the Los Angeles area, thus increasing competition in the Bank’s primary markets. See discussion below in Part I — Item 1A — “Risk Factors.”

Employees

As of December 31, 2012, the Bank and its subsidiaries employed approximately 1,092 persons, including 480 banking officers. None of the employees are represented by a union. We believe that our employer-employee relations are good.

Available Information

We invite you to visit our website at www.cathaygeneralbancorp.com, to access free of charge the Bancorp's Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports, all of which are made available as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with or furnish it to the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). In addition, you can write to us to obtain a free copy of any of those reports at Cathay General Bancorp, 9650 Flair Drive, El Monte, California 91731, Attn: Investor Relations. These reports are also available through the SEC’s Public Reference Room, located at 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 and online at the SEC’s website, located at www.sec.gov. Investors can obtain information about the operation of the SEC’s Public Reference Room by calling 800-SEC-0300.

Regulation and Supervision

General

The Bancorp and the Bank are subject to significant regulation and restrictions by federal and state laws and regulatory agencies. This regulation is intended primarily for the protection of depositors and the deposit insurance fund, and secondarily for the stability of the U.S. banking system. It is not intended for the benefit of stockholders of financial institutions. The following discussion of statutes and regulations is a summary and does not purport to be complete nor does it address all applicable statutes and regulations. This discussion is also qualified in its entirety by reference to the full text and to the implementation and enforcement of the statutes and regulations referred to in this discussion.

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

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act financial reform legislation (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) significantly revised and expanded the rulemaking, supervisory and enforcement authority of the federal bank regulatory agencies. The numerous rules and regulations that have been promulgated and are yet to be promulgated and finalized under the Dodd-Frank Act are likely to significantly impact our operations and compliance costs. The Dodd-Frank Act followed the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (“ARRA”) in response to the economic downturn and financial industry instability.

The Dodd-Frank Act impacts many aspects of the financial industry and, in many cases, will impact larger and smaller financial institutions and community banks differently over time. Many of the following key provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act affecting the financial industry are now either effective or are in the proposed rule or implementation stage:

●

the creation of a Financial Services Oversight Counsel to identify emerging systemic risks and improve interagency cooperation;

●

expanded the authority of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) to conduct the orderly liquidation of certain systemically significant non-bank financial companies in addition to depository institutions;

●

the establishment of strengthened capital and liquidity requirements for banks and bank holding companies, including minimum leverage and risk-based capital requirements no less than the strictest requirements in effect for depository institutions as of the date of enactment;

●

the requirement by statute that bank holding companies serve as a source of financial strength for their depository institution subsidiaries;

●

limitations, or significant burdens and compliance and other costs, on activities traditionally conducted by banking organizations, such as originating and securitizing mortgage loans and other financial assets, arranging and participating in swap and derivative transactions and proprietary trading and investing in private equity and other funds (the “Volcker Rule”);

●

the termination of investments by the U.S. Treasury under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”);

●

the elimination and phase out of trust preferred securities from Tier 1 capital with certain exceptions;

●

a permanent increase of FDIC deposit insurance to $250,000 and an extension of federal deposit coverage through 2012 for the full net amount held by depositors in business checking and othernon-interesting bearing transaction accounts;

●

changes in the calculation of FDIC deposit insurance assessments, such that the assessment base will no longer be the institution’s deposit base, but instead, will be its average consolidated total assets less its average tangible equity;

●

the elimination of remaining barriers to de novo interstate branching by banks;

●

expanded restrictions on transactions with affiliates and insiders under Section 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and lending limits for derivative transactions, repurchase agreements, and securities lending and borrowing transactions;

●

provisions that affect corporate governance and executive compensation at most United States publicly traded companies, including (i) stockholder advisory votes on executive compensation, (ii) executive compensation “clawback” requirements for companies listed on national securities exchanges in the event of materially inaccurate statements of earnings, revenues, gains or other criteria, (iii) enhanced independence requirements for compensation committee members, and (iv) giving the SEC authority to adopt proxy access rules which would permit stockholders of publicly traded companies to nominate candidates for election as director and have those nominees included in a company’s proxy statement; and

●

the establishment of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) with responsibility for promulgating regulations designed to protect consumers’ financial interests and prohibit unfair, deceptive, and abusive acts and practices by financial institutions, and with authority to directly examine those financial institutions with $10 billion or more in assets for compliance with consumer laws and regulations.

In general, more stringent capital, liquidity and leverage requirements are expected to impact our business as the Dodd-Frank Act is fully implemented. The federal agencies have issued proposed rules which will apply directly to larger institutions with more than $10 billion in assets, such as regulations of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve for financial institutions deemed systemically significant, Federal Reserve and FDIC rules requiring stress tests and Federal Reserve rules to implement the Volcker Rule. However, requirements and policies imposed on larger institutions may, in some cases, become “best practice” standards for smaller institutions. Therefore, as a result of the changes required by the Dodd-Frank Act, the profitability of our business activities may be impacted and we may be required to make changes to certain of our business practices. These changes may also require us to devote significant management attention and resources to evaluate and make any changes necessary to comply with new statutory and regulatory requirements.

We participated in TARP, which was designed to bolster eligible healthy institutions by injecting capital into these institutions, so that we could continue to lend and support our current and prospective clients. Under the terms of our participation, we received $258 million in exchange for the issuance of preferred stock (the “Series B Preferred Stock”) and a warrant to purchase common stock and thereby became subject to various requirements, including certain restrictions on paying dividends on our common stock and repurchasing our equity securities, unless the U.S. Treasury has consented.

In order to participate in TARP, financial institutions were required to adopt certain standards for executive compensation and corporate governance. ARRA also included a wide variety of programs intended to stimulate the economy and provide for extensive infrastructure, energy, health, and education needs. ARRA imposes certain stringent executive compensation and corporate expenditure limits on all TARP recipients until the U.S. Treasury is repaid. We have complied with the compensation provisions of TARP and ARRA and have certified as to such compliance in the exhibits attached to this report pursuant to Section 111(b) of EESA. We contemplate that we may be able to partially or fully redeem the Series B Preferred Stock in 2013 depending on our earnings and receipt of approval by our regulators to receive dividends from the Bank that would be used to repurchase our Series B Preferred Stock.

Bank Holding Company and Bank Regulation

The Bancorp is a bank holding company within the meaning of the Bank Holding Company Act and is registered as such with the Federal Reserve. The Bancorp is also a bank holding company within the meaning of Section 3700 of the California Financial Code and is subject to examination by, and may be required to file reports with, the California Department of Financial Institutions (“DFI”). As a California commercial bank the deposits of which are insured by the FDIC, the Bank is subject to regulation, supervision, and regular examination by the DFI and by the FDIC, as the Bank’s primary federal regulator, and must additionally comply with certain applicable regulations of the Federal Reserve.

Bank holding companies and their bank and non-bank subsidiaries are subject to significant regulation and restrictions by federal and state laws and regulatory agencies. These laws, regulations and restrictions, which may affect the cost of doing business, limit permissible activities and expansion or impact the competitive balance between banks and other financial services providers, are intended primarily for the protection of depositors and the FDIC’s Deposit Insurance Fund, and secondarily for the stability of the U.S. banking system. They are not intended for the benefit of stockholders of financial institutions. The following discussion of key statutes and regulations to which the Bancorp and the Bank are subject is a summary and does not purport to be complete nor does it address all applicable statutes and regulations. This discussion is qualified in its entirety by reference to the full statutes and regulations.

The wide range of requirements and restrictions contained in both federal and state banking laws include:

●

Requirements that bank holding companies and banks file periodic reports.

●

Requirements that bank holding companies and banks meet or exceed minimum capital requirements. See Part 1 — Item 1 — “Business — Capital Requirements.”

●

Requirements that bank holding companies serve as a source of financial and managerial strength for their banking subsidiaries. In addition, the regulatory agencies have “prompt corrective action” authority to limit activities and require a limited guaranty of a required bank capital restoration plan by a bank holding company if the capital of a bank subsidiary falls below capital levels required by the regulators.

●

Limitations on dividends payable to stockholders. The Bancorp’s ability to pay dividends on both its common and preferred stock are subject to legal and regulatory restrictions. A substantial portion of the Bancorp’s funds to pay dividends or to pay principal and interest on our debt obligations is derived from dividends paid by the Bank.

●

Limitations on dividends payable by bank subsidiaries. These dividends are subject to various legal and regulatory restrictions. The federal banking agencies have indicated that paying dividends that deplete a depositary institution’s capital base to an inadequate level would be an unsafe and unsound banking practice. Moreover, the federal agencies have issued policy statements that provide that bank holding companies and insured banks should generally only pay dividends out of current operating earnings.

●

Safety and soundness requirements. Banks must be operated in a safe and sound manner and meet standards applicable to internal controls, information systems, internal audit, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, and compensation, as well as other operational and management standards. These safety and soundness requirements give bank regulatory agencies significant latitude in exercising their supervisory authority and their authority to initiate informal or formal enforcement action.

●

Requirements for notice, application and approval, or non-objection of acquisitions and activities conducted directly or in subsidiaries of the Bancorp or the Bank.

●

Compliance with the Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”). The CRA requires that banks help meet the credit needs in their communities, including the availability of credit to low and moderate income individuals. If the Bank fails to adequately serve its communities, penalties may be imposed, including denials of applications for branches, for adding subsidiaries and affiliates, or for the merger with or purchase of other financial institutions. In its last reported examination by the FDIC in March, 2011, the Bank received a CRA rating of “Satisfactory.”

●

Compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act, the USA Patriot Act, and other anti-money laundering laws. These laws and regulations require financial institutions to assist U.S. government agencies in detecting and preventing money laundering and other illegal acts by maintaining policies, procedures and controls designed to detect and report money laundering, terrorist financing, and other suspicious activity.

●

Limitations on the amount of loans to one borrower and its affiliates and to executive officers and directors.

●

Limitations on transactions with affiliates.

●

Restrictions on the nature and amount of any investments in, and ability to underwrite, certain securities.

●

Requirements for opening of intra- and interstate branches.

●

Truth in lending and other consumer protection and disclosure laws to ensure equal access to credit and to protect consumers in credit transactions.

●

Provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (“GLB Act”) and other federal and state laws dealing with privacy for nonpublic personal information of customers.

Additional Restrictions on Bancorp and Bank Activities

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

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

Enforcement Authority

The Bank operates branches and/or loan production offices in California, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, Texas, Washington, and New Jersey. While the DFI remains the Bank’s primary state regulator, the Bank’s operations in these jurisdictions are subject to examination and supervision by local bank regulators, and transactions with customers in those jurisdictions are subject to local laws, including consumer protection laws. The Bank also operates a branch in Hong Kong and a representative office in Taipei and in Shanghai. The operations of these foreign offices and branches (and limits on the scope of their activities) are subject to local law and regulatory authorities in those jurisdictions in addition to regulation and supervision by the DFI and the Federal Reserve.

The federal and California regulatory structure gives the bank regulatory agencies extensive discretion in connection with their supervisory and enforcement activities and examination policies, including policies with respect to the classification of assets and the establishment of adequate loan loss reserves for regulatory purposes. The regulatory agencies have adopted guidelines to assist in identifying and addressing potential safety and soundness concerns before an institution’s capital becomes impaired. The guidelines establish operational and managerial standards generally relating to: (i) internal controls, information systems, and internal audit systems; (ii) loan documentation; (iii) credit underwriting; (iv) interest-rate exposure; (v) asset growth and asset quality; and (vi) compensation, fees, and benefits. Further, the regulatory agencies have adopted safety and soundness guidelines for asset quality and for evaluating and monitoring earnings to ensure that earnings are sufficient for the maintenance of adequate capital and reserves. If, as a result of an examination, the DFI or the FDIC should determine that the financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, earnings prospects, management, liquidity, or other aspects of the Bank’s operations are unsatisfactory or that the Bank or its management is violating or has violated any law or regulation, the DFI and the FDIC, and separately the FDIC as insurer of the Bank’s deposits, have residual authority to:

●

Require affirmative action to correct any conditions resulting from any violation or practice;

●

Direct an increase in capital and the maintenance of higher specific minimum capital ratios, which may preclude the Bank from being deemed well capitalized and restrict its ability to accept certain brokered deposits;

●

Restrict the Bank’s growth geographically, by products and services, or by mergers and acquisitions;

●

Enter into or issue informal or formal enforcement actions, including required Board resolutions, memoranda of understanding, written agreements and consent or cease and desist orders or prompt corrective action orders to take corrective action and cease unsafe and unsound practices;

●

Require prior approval of senior executive officer or director changes; remove officers and directors, and assess civil monetary penalties; and

●

Terminate FDIC insurance, revoke the Bank’s charter, take possession of and close and liquidate the Bank, or appoint the FDIC as receiver.

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

On December 17, 2009, the Bancorp entered into a memorandum of understanding with the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (the “FRB SF”) under which the Bancorp agreed, among other things, to limitations on payment of and receipt of dividends and on senior executive officer and director changes, and to submit a plan to maintain sufficient capital, a plan to improve management of our liquidity position and funds management practices, and a liquidity policy and contingency funding plan for the Bancorp.

Until it was terminated as of November 7, 2012, the Bank was subject to a memorandum of understanding with the DFI and the FDIC that was entered into on March 1, 2010, by which the Bank agreed to undertake certain steps to strengthen its operations. This included, among other things, the submission of satisfactory plans to reduce commercial real estate concentrations, to enhance and to improve the quality of our stress testing of the Bank’s loan portfolio, to address improved profitability and capital ratios and reduce the Bank’s overall risk profile, to improve asset quality, and to reduce dependence on wholesale funding. In addition, we were required to maintain management and a board acceptable to the DFI and FDIC.

Deposit Insurance

The FDIC is an independent federal agency that insures deposits, up to prescribed statutory limits, of federally insured banks and savings institutions and safeguards the safety and soundness of the banking and savings industries. The FDIC insures our customer deposits through the Deposit Insurance Fund (the “DIF”) up to prescribed limits for each depositor. Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the maximum deposit insurance amount was permanently increased to $250,000 and unlimited insurance coverage for non-interest-bearing transaction accounts was provided through December 31, 2012, but the latter coverage was not extended by Congress. The amount of FDIC assessments paid by each DIF member institution is based on its relative risk of default as measured by regulatory capital ratios and other supervisory factors. All FDIC-insured institutions are also required to pay assessments to the FDIC to fund interest payments on bonds issued by the Financing Corporation (“FICO"), an agency of the federal government established to recapitalize the predecessor to the DIF. These assessments will continue until the FICO bonds mature in 2017.

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

Capital Adequacy Requirements

Bank holding companies and banks are subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by state and federal banking agencies. Increased capital requirements have also been proposed as a result of expanded authority set forth in the Dodd-Frank Act. Capital adequacy guidelines and, additionally for banks, prompt corrective action regulations involve quantitative measures of assets, liabilities, and certain off-balance sheet items calculated under regulatory accounting practices. Capital amounts and classifications are also subject to qualitative judgments by regulators about components, risk weighting, and other factors. At December 31, 2012, the Company’s and the Bank’s capital ratios exceeded the minimum capital adequacy guideline percentage requirements of the federal banking agencies for “well capitalized” institutions. See Part II — Item 7 — “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Capital Resources —Capital Adequacy.”

The current risk-based capital guidelines for bank holding companies and banks adopted by the federal banking agencies are expected to provide a measure of capital that reflects the degree of risk associated with a banking organization’s operations for both transactions reported on the balance sheet as assets, such as loans, and those recorded as off-balance sheet items, such as commitments, letters of credit, and recourse arrangements. The risk-based capital ratio is determined by classifying assets and certain off-balance sheet financial instruments into weighted categories, with higher levels of capital being required for those categories perceived as representing greater risks and dividing its qualifying capital by its total risk-adjusted assets and off-balance sheet items. Bank holding companies and banks engaged in significant trading activity may also be subject to the market risk capital guidelines and be required to incorporate additional market and interest rate risk components into their risk-based capital standards.

Qualifying capital is classified depending on the type of capital:

●

“Tier I capital” currently includes common equity and trust preferred securities, subject to certain criteria and quantitative limits. The capital received from the sale of the Series B Preferred Stock also qualifies as Tier I capital. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, depository institution holding companies with more than $15 billion in total consolidated assets as of December 31, 2009, will no longer be able to include trust preferred securities as Tier 1 regulatory capital as of the end of a phase-out period in 2016, and will be obligated to replace any outstanding trust preferred securities issued prior to May 19, 2010, with qualifying Tier 1 regulatory capital during the phase-out period.

●

“Tier II capital” includes hybrid capital instruments, other qualifying debt instruments, a limited amount of the allowance for loan and lease losses, and a limited amount of unrealized holding gains on equity securities. Following the phase-out period under the Dodd-Frank Act, trust preferred securities will be treated as Tier II capital.

●

“Tier III capital” consists of qualifying unsecured debt. The sum of Tier II and Tier III capital may not exceed the amount of Tier I capital.

Under the current capital guidelines, there are three fundamental capital ratios: a total risk-based capital ratio, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio, and a Tier 1 leverage ratio. To be deemed “well capitalized” a bank must have a total risk-based capital ratio of at least 10.00%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of at least at 6.00%, and a Tier 1 leverage ratio of at least 5.00%. There is currently no Tier 1 leverage requirement for a holding company to be deemed well-capitalized. At December 31, 2012, the respective capital ratios of the Bancorp and the Bank exceeded the minimum percentage requirements to be deemed “well-capitalized.” As of December 31, 2012, the Bank’s total risk-based capital ratio was 17.08% and its Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio was 15.33%. As of December 31, 2012, the Bancorp’s total risk-based capital ratio was 19.12% and its Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio was 17.36%.

The Bancorp and the Bank are also required to maintain a leverage capital ratio designed to supplement the risk-based capital guidelines. Banks and bank holding companies that have received the highest rating of the five categories used by regulators to rate banks and that are not anticipating or experiencing any significant growth must maintain a ratio of Tier 1 capital (net of all intangibles) to adjusted total assets of at least 3.00%. All other institutions are required to maintain a leverage ratio of at least 100 to 200 basis points above the 3.00% minimum, for a minimum of 4.00% to 5.00%. As of December 31, 2012, the Bank’s leverage capital ratio was 12.22%, and the Bancorp’s leverage capital ratio was 13.82%, both of which exceeded regulatory minimums.

Pursuant to federal regulations, banks must maintain capital levels commensurate with the level of risk to which they are exposed, including the volume and severity of problem loans. Federal regulators may, however, set higher capital requirements when a bank’s particular circumstances warrant and have required many banks and bank holding companies subject to enforcement actions to maintain capital ratios in excess of the minimum ratios otherwise required to be deemed well capitalized, in which case institutions may no longer be deemed well capitalized and may therefore be subject to restrictions on taking brokered deposits.

The federal regulatory authorities’ risk-based capital guidelines are based upon the 1988 capital accord (“Basel I”) of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the “Basel Committee”). The Basel Committee is a committee of central banks and bank supervisors/regulators from the major industrialized countries that develops broad policy guidelines for use by each country’s supervisors in determining the supervisory policies they apply. In 2004, the Basel Committee published a new capital accord (“Basel II”) to replace Basel I. Basel II provides two approaches for setting capital standards for credit risk – an internal ratings-based approach tailored to individual institutions’ circumstances and a standardized approach that bases risk weightings on external credit assessments to a much greater extent than permitted in existing risk-based capital guidelines. Basel II also sets capital requirements for operational risk and refines the existing capital requirements for market risk exposures.

In December 2010, the Basel Committee released its final framework for strengthening international capital and liquidity regulation, now officially identified as “Basel III.” If and when implemented by the U.S. banking agencies and fully phased-in, it would require bank holding companies and their bank subsidiaries to maintain substantially more capital than currently required, with a greater emphasis on common equity. The Dodd-Frank Act also required the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Controller of the Currency, and the FDIC to adopt regulations imposing a continuing “floor” of the Basel I-based capital requirements in cases where the Basel II-based capital requirements and any changes in capital regulations resulting from Basel III otherwise would permit lower requirements. In December 2010, the federal bank regulatory agencies issued a joint notice of proposed rulemaking not yet finalized that would implement this requirement.

On June 7, 2012, the federal bank regulatory agencies issued a series of proposed rules that would revise their risk-based and leverage capital requirements and their method for calculating risk-weighted assets to make them consistent with the agreements that were reached by the Basel Committee in Basel III and certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. The proposed rules, which would be fully phased in by January 1, 2019, would apply to all depository institutions, top-tier bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of $500 million or more, and top-tier savings and loan holding companies (“banking organizations”). Among other things, the proposed rules establish a new Common Equity Tier 1 minimum capital requirement of 4.5% and a higher minimum Tier 1 capital requirement of 6.0% and assign higher risk weightings (150%) to exposures that are more than 90 days past due or are on nonaccrual status and certain commercial real estate facilities that finance the acquisition, development or construction of real property. Additionally, the U.S. implementation of Basel III contemplates that, for banking organizations with less than $15 billion in assets, the ability to treat trust preferred securities as Tier 1 capital would be phased out over a ten-year period. The proposed rules also require unrealized gains and losses on certain securities holdings to be included for purposes of calculating regulatory capital requirements. The proposed rules limit a banking organization’s capital distributions and certain discretionary bonus payments if the banking organization does not hold a “capital conservation buffer” consisting of 2.5% of a specified amount of common equity Tier 1 capital in addition to the amount necessary to meet its minimum risk-based capital requirements. The proposed rules indicated that the final rule would become effective on January 1, 2013, and the changes set forth in the final rules will be phased in from January 1, 2013, through January 1, 2019. However, the agencies have recently indicated that, due to the volume of public comments received, the final rule would not become effective on January 1, 2013.

While the proposed regulatory capital requirements, when finalized, will likely result in generally higher regulatory capital standards for the Bancorp and the Bank, it is difficult at this time to predict when or how many of the proposed provisions will ultimately be adopted or whether broader exemptions may be provided for community banks. In addition, bank regulators may also continue their past policies of expecting banks to maintain yet additional capital beyond the new minimum requirements. The implementation of more stringent requirements to maintain higher levels of capital or to maintain higher levels of liquid assets could adversely impact the Bancorp’s net income and return on equity, restrict the ability to pay dividends and require the raising of additional capital.

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

Prompt Corrective Action Provisions

The FDI Act provides a framework for regulation of depository institutions and their affiliates, including parent holding companies, by their federal banking regulators. It requires the relevant federal banking regulator to take “prompt corrective action” with respect to a depository institution if that institution does not meet certain capital adequacy standards, including requiring the prompt submission of an acceptable capital restoration plan. Supervisory actions by the appropriate federal banking regulator under the prompt corrective action rules generally depend upon an institution’s classification within five capital categories as defined in the regulations. The relevant capital measures are the capital ratio, the Tier 1 capital ratio, and the leverage ratio. However, the federal banking agencies have also adopted non-capital safety and soundness standards to assist examiners in identifying and addressing potential safety and soundness concerns before capital becomes impaired. These include operational and managerial standards relating to: (i) internal controls, information systems, and internal audit systems, (ii) loan documentation, (iii) credit underwriting, (iv) asset quality and growth, (v) earnings, (vi) risk management, and (vii) compensation and benefits.

A depository institution’s capital tier under the prompt corrective action regulations will depend upon how its capital levels compare with various relevant capital measures and the other factors established by the regulations. A bank will be: (i) “well capitalized” if the institution has a total risk-based capital ratio of 10.00% or greater, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6.00% or greater, and a leverage ratio of 5.00% or greater and is not subject to any order or written directive by any such regulatory authority to meet and maintain a specific capital level for any capital measure; (ii) “adequately capitalized” if the institution has a total risk-based capital ratio of 8.00% or greater, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 4.00% or greater, and a leverage ratio of 4.00% or greater and is not “well capitalized;” (iii) “undercapitalized” if the institution has a total risk-based capital ratio that is less than 8.00%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of less than 4.00%, or a leverage ratio of less than 4.0%; (iv) “significantly undercapitalized” if the institution has a total risk-based capital ratio of less than 6.00%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of less than 3.00%, or a leverage ratio of less than 3.00%; and (v) “critically undercapitalized” if the institution’s tangible equity is equal to or less than 2.00% of average quarterly tangible assets. An institution may be downgraded to, or deemed to be in, a capital category that is lower than indicated by its capital ratios if it is determined to be in an unsafe or unsound condition or if it receives an unsatisfactory examination rating with respect to certain matters.

The FDI Act generally prohibits a depository institution from making any capital distributions (including payment of a dividend) or paying any management fee to its parent holding company if the depository institution would thereafter be “undercapitalized.” “Undercapitalized” institutions are subject to growth limitations and are required to submit a capital restoration plan. The regulatory agencies may not accept such a plan without determining that the plan is based on realistic assumptions and is likely to succeed in restoring the depository institution’s capital. In addition, for a capital restoration plan to be acceptable, the depository institution’s parent holding company must guarantee that the institution will comply with the plan. The bank holding company must also provide appropriate assurances of performance with potential liability of up to 5% of the depository institution’s total assets at the time it became undercapitalized.

Dividends

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

Our capital management and dividend policy as part of our Three-Year Capital and Strategic Plan includes a policy to refrain from paying dividends in excess of $.01 per share per quarter, except when covered by operating earnings. The amount of future dividends will depend on our earnings, financial condition, capital requirements and other factors, and will be determined by our board of directors in accordance with the capital management and dividend policy.

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

Further, it is the Federal Reserve's policy that bank holding companies participating in the TARP and other government capital programs must comply on an ongoing basis with the pertinent capital and other requirements established by the U.S. Treasury (including those explicitly set forth in EESA) and related Federal Reserve supervisory policy. Moreover, a recipient of taxpayer funds through such capital programs should consider and communicate reasonably in advance to Federal Reserve supervisory staff how the bank holding company's proposed dividends, capital redemptions, and capital repurchases are consistent with the requirements applicable to its receipt of capital under the program and related Federal Reserve supervisory policy, as well as its ability to redeem securities issued to the government prior to any contractual increase in the dividend rate without affecting safety and soundness.

The terms of our Series B Preferred Stock and Junior Subordinated Notes also limit our ability to pay dividends on our common stock. If we are not current in our payment of dividends on our Series B Preferred Stock or in our payment of interest on our Junior Subordinated Notes, we may not pay dividends on our common stock.

We have agreed under the memorandum of understanding with the FRB SF that Bancorp will not, without the FRB SF’s prior written approval, declare or pay any dividends, make any payments on trust preferred securities, or make any other capital distributions. In February, 2013, Bancorp received Federal Reserve approval to make payments on our Series B Preferred Stock and Junior Subordinated Notes. There can be no assurance that our regulators will approve such payments or dividends in the future.

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

Under the memorandum of understanding entered into with the FRB SF, the Bancorp also agreed that it would not, without the FRB SF’s prior written approval, receive any dividends or any other form of payment or distribution representing a reduction of capital from the Bank. The Bank did not pay a dividend to the Bancorp in 2010 or 2011, but paid dividends of $154.7 million to Bancorp following regulatory approval in 2012, and will pay additional dividends with regulatory approval in 2013 to maintain Bancorp’s cash balance equal to at least two years of Bancorp’s operating expenses and to be in a position, subject to regulatory approval, to repurchase in installments during 2013 the Series B Preferred Stock issued to the U.S. Treasury under the TARP Capital Purchase Program.

Operations and Consumer Compliance Laws

The Bank must comply with numerous federal anti-money laundering and consumer protection statutes and implementing regulations, including the USA Patriot Act, the Bank Secrecy Act, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (effective 2013), the CRA, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as amended by the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the National Flood Insurance Act, and various federal and state privacy protection laws. The Bank and the Company are also subject to federal and state laws prohibiting unfair or fraudulent business practices, untrue or misleading advertising and unfair competition.

These laws and regulations also mandate certain disclosure and reporting requirements and regulate the manner in which financial institutions must deal with customers when taking deposits, making loans, collecting loans, and providing other services. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations can subject the Bank to lawsuits and penalties, including but not limited to enforcement actions, injunctions, fines or criminal penalties, punitive damages to consumers, and the loss of certain contractual rights.

The Dodd-Frank Act provided for the creation of the CFPB as an independent entity within the Federal Reserve and as a new regulatory agency for United States banks. The CFPB has broad rulemaking, supervisory, and enforcement authority over consumer financial products and services, including deposit products, residential mortgages, home-equity loans and credit cards. The CFPB’s functions include investigating consumer complaints, conducting market research, rulemaking, supervising and examining bank consumer transactions, and enforcing rules related to consumer financial products and services. The CFPB examines banks (such as the Bank) with over $10 billion in assets. Banks with less than $10 billion in assets are examined for compliance with the consumer laws and regulations by their primary federal banking agency.

Under the Dodd-Frank Act, regulators were required to mandate specific underwriting criteria to support a reasonable, good faith determination by lenders of a consumer's ability to repay a mortgage. The CFPB by amendment to Regulation Z, which implements the Truth in Lending Act and takes effect January 10, 2014, has defined what would be considered a “qualified mortgage.” Another Dodd-Frank provision requires banks and other mortgage lenders to retain a minimum 5% economic interest in mortgage loans sold through securitizations unless the loans meet a definition of a “qualified residential mortgage” yet to be promulgated. Banks will have to reevaluate their underwriting standards and the extent and type of their mortgage lending as a result of these regulations implementing the Dodd-Frank Act.

Federal Home Loan Bank System

The Bank is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) of San Francisco. Among other benefits, each FHLB serves as a reserve or central bank for its members within its assigned region. Each FHLB is financed primarily from the sale of consolidated obligations of the FHLB system. Each FHLB makes available loans or advances to its members in compliance with the policies and procedures established by the board of directors of the individual FHLB. Each member of the FHLB of San Francisco is required to own stock in an amount equal to the greater of (i) a membership stock requirement with an initial cap of $25 million (100% of “membership asset value” as defined), or (ii) an activity based stock requirement (based on a percentage of outstanding advances). There can be no assurance that the FHLB will pay dividends at the same rate it has paid in the past, or that it will pay any dividends in the future.

Impact of Monetary Policies

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

Securities and Corporate Governance

The Bancorp is subject to the disclosure and regulatory requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, both as administered by the SEC. As a company listed on the NASDAQ Capital Market, the Company is subject to NASDAQ listing standards for listed companies. The Bancorp is also subject to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, and other federal and state laws and regulations which address, among other issues, required executive certification of financial presentations, corporate governance requirements for board audit committees and their members, and disclosure of controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting, auditing and accounting, executive compensation, and enhanced and timely disclosure of corporate information. NASDAQ has also adopted corporate governance rules, which are intended to allow stockholders and investors to more easily and efficiently monitor the performance of companies and their directors.

Audit Requirements

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

Under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, management and the Bancorp’s independent registered public accounting firm are required to assess the effectiveness of the Bancorp’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012. These assessments are included in Part II — Item 9A — “Controls and Procedures.”

Regulation of Non-Bank Subsidiaries

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

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Difficult business and economic conditions can adversely affect our industry and business.

Our financial performance generally, and the ability of borrowers to pay interest on and repay the principal of outstanding loans and the value of the collateral securing those loans, is highly dependent upon the business and economic conditions in the markets in which we operate and in the United States as a whole. Although the U.S. economy has recently showed signs of improvement, certain sectors, such as real estate, remain soft, and unemployment remains high in general and in the markets in which we operate. Local governments and many businesses are still experiencing serious difficulties due to the lack of consumer spending and liquidity in the credit markets. There is also uncertainty over the federal budget and taxation. In addition, concerns about the performance of international economies, including the potential impact of the European debt crises and economic conditions in Asia, particularly the economies of China and Taiwan, can impact the economy here in the United States. Concerns about the economy have also resulted in decreased lending by financial institutions to their customers and to each other. These economic pressures on consumers and businesses may continue to adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and stock price. In particular, we may face the following risks in connection with these events:

We face increased regulation of our industry, including changes by Congress or federal regulatory agencies to the banking and financial institutions regulatory regime and heightened legal standards and regulatory requirements that may be adopted in the future. Compliance with such regulation may increase our costs and limit our ability to pursue business opportunities.

The process we use to estimate losses inherent in our credit exposure requires difficult, subjective, and complex judgments, including forecasts of economic conditions and how these economic conditions might impair the ability of our borrowers to repay their loans. The level of uncertainty concerning economic conditions may adversely affect the accuracy of our estimates which may, in turn, impact the reliability of the process.

Our banking operations are concentrated primarily in California, and secondarily in New York, Texas, Massachusetts, Washington, Illinois, New Jersey, and Hong Kong. Adverse economic conditions in these regions in particular could impair borrowers’ ability to service their loans, decrease the level and duration of deposits by customers, and erode the value of loan collateral. These conditions include the effects of the general decline in real estate sales and prices in many markets across the United States from their recent highs, the economic recession of recent years, and higher rates of unemployment. These conditions could increase the amount of our non-performing assets and have an adverse effect on our efforts to collect our non-performing loans or otherwise liquidate our non-performing assets (including other real estate owned) on terms favorable to us, if at all, and could also cause a decline in demand for our products and services, or a lack of growth or a decrease in deposits, any of which may cause us to incur losses, adversely affect our capital, and hurt our business.

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

At December 31, 2012, our allowance for loan losses totaled $183.3 million and we had total charge-offs of $32.8 million for 2012. Although economic conditions in the real estate market in portions of Los Angeles, San Diego, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties and the Central Valley of California where many of our commercial real estate and construction loan customers are based, have improved, the economic recovery in these areas of California is still slow. This slow recovery has resulted in weak pricing and relatively elevated inventories of homes to be sold, which could contribute to financial strain on home builders and suppliers. As of December 31, 2012, we had approximately $4.0 billion in commercial real estate and construction loans. Any deterioration in the real estate market generally and in the commercial real estate and residential building segments in particular could result in additional loan charge offs and provisions for loan losses in the future, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, net income, and capital.

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

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

We are currently subject to a memorandum of understanding with the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, and the Bank was previously subject to a memorandum of understanding with the California Department of Financial Institutions and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and we may be subject to further supervisory action by bank supervisory authorities that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and the value of our common stock.

Under federal and state laws and regulations pertaining to the safety and soundness of financial institutions, the FRB SF has authority over Bancorp and separately the DFI and FDIC have authority over the Bank to compel or restrict certain actions if the Bancorp's or the Bank’s capital should fall below adequate capital standards as a result of operating losses, or if these regulators otherwise determine that the Bancorp or the Bank have insufficient capital or has engaged in unsafe or unsound practices. These regulators, as well as the CFPB, also have authority over the Bancorp and the Bank over compliance with various statutes and consumer protection and other regulations. Among other matters, the corrective actions may include, but are not limited to, requiring the Bancorp and/or the Bank to enter into informal or formal enforcement orders, including board resolutions, memoranda of understanding, written agreements, supervisory letters, commitment letters, and consent or cease and desist orders to take corrective action and refrain from unsafe and unsound practices; removing officers and directors; assessing civil monetary penalties; and taking possession of and closing and liquidating the Bank. On December 17, 2009, the Bancorp entered into a memorandum of understanding with the FRB SF (the “MOU”) under which the Bancorp agreed, among other things, to limitations on payment of and receipt of dividends and senior executive officer and director changes, and to submit a plan to maintain sufficient capital, a plan to improve management of our liquidity position and funds management practices, and a liquidity policy and contingency funding plan for the Bancorp.

If we are unable to meet the requirements of, any such memoranda or other corrective actions, we could become subject to additional supervisory action, including a cease and desist order. If our banking supervisors were to take such additional supervisory action, we could, among other things, become subject to significant restrictions on our ability to develop any new business, as well as restrictions on our existing business, and we could be required to raise additional capital, dispose of certain assets and liabilities within a prescribed period of time, or both. The terms of any such supervisory action could have a material negative effect on our business, our financial condition, and the value of our common stock. Additionally, there can be no assurance that we will not be subject to further supervisory action or regulatory proceedings that could have a material negative impact on our business.

Additional requirements imposed by the Dodd-Frank Act could adversely affect us.

Recent government efforts to strengthen the U.S. financial system have resulted in the imposition of additional regulatory requirements, including expansive financial services regulatory reform legislation. The Dodd-Frank Act provided for sweeping regulatory changes including the establishment of strengthened capital and liquidity requirements for banks and bank holding companies, including minimum leverage and risk-based capital requirements no less than the strictest requirements in effect for depository institutions as of the date of enactment; the requirement by statute that bank holding companies serve as a source of financial strength for their depository institution subsidiaries; enhanced regulation of financial markets, including the derivative and securitization markets, and the elimination of certain proprietary trading activities by banks; additional corporate governance and executive compensation requirements; enhanced financial institution safety and soundness regulations, revisions in FDIC insurance assessment fees and a permanent increase in FDIC deposit insurance coverage to $250,000; authorization for financial institutions to pay interest on business checking accounts through 2012; and the establishment of new regulatory bodies, such as the CFPB and the Financial Services Oversight Counsel, to identify emerging systemic risks and improve interagency cooperation. Many of the provisions remain subject to final rulemaking and/or study. Accordingly, we cannot fully assess its impact on our operations and costs until final regulations are adopted and implemented.

Current and future legal and regulatory requirements, restrictions, and regulations, including those imposed under the Dodd-Frank Act, may adversely impact our profitability and may have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations, may require us to invest significant management attention and resources to evaluate and make any changes required by the legislation and related regulations and may make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified executive officers and employees.

We may become subject to more stringent capital requirements.

The U.S. federal bank regulators have jointly proposed new capital requirements on banks and bank holding companies as required by the Dodd-Frank Act that incorporate the elements of Basel Committee’s Basel III accords and which, may have the effect of raising our capital requirements and imposing new capital requirements beyond those required by current law. Increased regulatory capital requirements (and the associated compliance costs) whether due to the adoption of new laws and regulations, changes in existing laws and regulations, or more expansive or aggressive interpretations of existing laws and regulations, may impact our ability to pay dividends and may have a material adverse effect on our business, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to extensive laws and regulations and supervision, and may become subject to future laws and regulations and supervision, if any, that may be enacted, that could limit or restrict our activities, may hamper our ability to increase our assets and earnings, and could adversely affect our profitability.

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

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

We may experience goodwill impairment.

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

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

Liquidity is essential to our business. An inability to raise funds through deposits, borrowings, the sale of loans, and other sources could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity. Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance our activities could be impaired by factors that affect us specifically or the financial services industry in general. Factors that could detrimentally impact our access to liquidity sources include a decrease in the level of our business activity due to a market downturn or adverse regulatory action against us. Our ability to acquire deposits or borrow could also be impaired by factors that are not specific to us, such as a severe disruption of the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the financial services industry as a whole.

Our business is subject to interest rate risk and fluctuations in interest rates could reduce our net interest income and adversely affect our business.

A substantial portion of our income is derived from the differential, or “spread,” between the interest earned on loans, investment securities and other interest-earning assets, and the interest paid on deposits, borrowings and other interest-bearing liabilities. The interest rate risk inherent in our lending, investing, and deposit taking activities is a significant market risk to us and our business. Income associated with interest earning assets and costs associated with interest-bearing liabilities may not be affected uniformly by fluctuations in interest rates. The magnitude and duration of changes in interest rates, events over which we have no control, may have an adverse effect on net interest income. Prepayment and early withdrawal levels, which are also impacted by changes in interest rates, can significantly affect our assets and liabilities. Increases in interest rates may adversely affect the ability of our floating rate borrowers to meet their higher payment obligations, which could in turn lead to an increase in non-performing assets and net charge-offs.

Generally, the interest rates on our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities do not change at the same rate, to the same extent, or on the same basis. Even assets and liabilities with similar maturities or periods of re-pricing may react in different degrees to changes in market interest rates. Interest rates on certain types of assets and liabilities may fluctuate in advance of changes in general market interest rates, while interest rates on other types of assets and liabilities may lag behind changes in general market rates. Certain assets, such as fixed and adjustable rate mortgage loans, have features that limit changes in interest rates on a short-term basis and over the life of the asset.

We seek to minimize the adverse effects of changes in interest rates by structuring our asset-liability composition to obtain the maximum spread. We use interest rate sensitivity analysis and a simulation model to assist us in estimating the optimal asset-liability composition. However, such management tools have inherent limitations that impair their effectiveness. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in minimizing the adverse effects of changes in interest rates.

We have engaged in expansion through acquisitions and may consider additional acquisitions in the future, which could negatively affect our business and earnings.

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

Our earnings, financial condition, and prospects after a merger or acquisition depend in part on our ability to successfully integrate the operations of the acquired company. We may be unable to integrate operations successfully or to achieve expected cost savings. Any cost savings which are realized may be offset by losses in revenues or other charges to earnings.

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

We may in the future engage in FDIC-assisted transactions, which could present additional risks to our business.

In the current economic environment, and subject to any requisite regulatory consent, we may potentially be presented with opportunities to acquire the assets and liabilities of failed banks in FDIC-assisted transactions. These acquisitions involve risks similar to acquiring existing banks even though the FDIC might provide assistance to mitigate certain risks such as sharing in exposure to loan losses and providing indemnification against certain liabilities of the failed institution. However, because these acquisitions are structured in a manner that would not allow us the time normally associated with preparing for and evaluating an acquisition, including preparing for integration of an acquired institution, we may face additional risks if we engage in FDIC-assisted transactions. These risks include the loss of customers, strain on management resources related to collection and management of problem loans and problems related to integration of personnel and operating systems. If we engage in FDIC-assisted transactions, we may not be successful in overcoming these risks or any other problems encountered in connection with these transactions. Our inability to overcome these risks could have an adverse effect on our ability to achieve our business strategy and maintain our market value and profitability.

Moreover, even if we were inclined to participate in an FDIC-assisted transaction, there are no assurances that the FDIC would allow us to participate or what the terms of such a transaction might be or whether we would be successful in acquiring the bank or assets that we are seeking. We may be required to raise additional capital as a condition to, or as a result of, participation in an FDIC-assisted transaction. Any such transactions and related issuances of stock may have a dilutive effect on earnings per share and share ownership.

Furthermore, to the extent we are allowed to, and choose to, participate in FDIC-assisted transactions, we may face competition from other financial institutions with respect to the proposed FDIC-assisted transactions. To the extent that our competitors are selected to participate in FDIC-assisted transactions, our ability to identify and attract acquisition candidates and/or make acquisitions on favorable terms may be adversely affected.

Inflation and deflation may adversely affect our financial performance.

The Consolidated Financial Statements and related financial data presented in this report have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. These principles require the measurement of financial position and operating results in terms of historical dollars, without considering changes in the relative purchasing power of money over time due to inflation or deflation. The primary impact of inflation on our operations is reflected in increased operating costs. Conversely, deflation will tend to erode collateral values and diminish loan quality. Virtually all of our assets and liabilities are monetary in nature. As a result, interest rates have a more significant impact on our performance than the general levels of inflation or deflation. Interest rates do not necessarily move in the same direction or in the same magnitude as the price of goods and services.

As we expand our business outside of California markets, we will encounter risks that could adversely affect us.

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

To the extent that we expand through acquisitions, such acquisitions may also adversely harm our business if we fail to adequately address the financial and operational risks associated with such acquisitions. For example, risks can include difficulties in assimilating the operations, technology, and personnel of the acquired company; diversion of management’s attention from other business concerns; inability to maintain uniform standards, controls, procedures, and policies; potentially dilutive issuances of equity securities; the incurring of additional debt and contingent liabilities; use of cash resources; large write-offs; and amortization expenses related to other intangible assets with finite lives.

Our loan portfolio is largely secured by real estate, which has adversely affected and may continue to adversely affect our results of operations.

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

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

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

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

Liabilities from environmental regulations could materially and adversely affect our business and financial condition.

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

We face substantial competition from our competitors.

We face substantial competition for deposits, loans, and for other banking services, as well as acquisitions, throughout our market area from the major banks and financial institutions that dominate the commercial banking industry. This may cause our cost of funds to exceed that of our competitors. These banks and financial institutions have greater resources than we do, including the ability to finance advertising campaigns and allocate their investment assets to regions of higher yield and demand and make acquisitions. By virtue of their larger capital bases, they have substantially greater lending limits than we do and perform certain functions, including trust services, which are not presently offered by us. We also compete for loans and deposits, as well as other banking services, with savings and loan associations, brokerage houses, insurance companies, mortgage companies, credit unions, credit card companies and other financial and non-financial institutions and entities. The recent consolidation of certain competing financial institutions and the conversion of certain investment banks to bank holding companies has increased the level of competition among financial services companies and may adversely affect our ability to market our products and services.

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

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

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

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

Natural disasters and geopolitical events beyond our control could adversely affect us.

Natural disasters such as earthquakes, wildfires, extreme weather conditions, hurricanes, floods, and other acts of nature and geopolitical events involving civil unrest, changes in government regimes, terrorism, or military conflict could adversely affect our business operations and those of our customers and cause substantial damage and loss to real and personal property. These natural disasters and geopolitical events could impair our borrowers’ ability to service their loans, decrease the level and duration of deposits by customers, erode the value of loan collateral, and result in an increase in the amount of our non-performing loans and a higher level of non-performing assets (including real estate owned), net charge-offs, and provision for loan losses, which could adversely affect our earnings.

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

A substantial number of our customers have economic and cultural ties to Asia and, as a result, we are likely to feel the effects of adverse economic and political conditions in Asia, including the effects of rising inflation or slowing growth in China and other regions. Additionally, we maintain a branch in Hong Kong. U.S. and global economic policies, military tensions, and unfavorable global economic conditions may adversely impact the Asian economies. This could include an actual or perceived default of certain European Union (“EU”) member states on their debt obligations, the continued uncertainty of the EU’s financial support programs, the possibility that other EU member states may experience similar financial troubles, and any resulting slowdown in the economies of the EU member states. In addition, pandemics and other public health crises or concerns over the possibility of such crises could create economic and financial disruptions in the region. A significant deterioration of economic conditions in Asia could expose us to, among other things, economic and transfer risk, and we could experience an outflow of deposits by those of our customers with connections to Asia. Transfer risk may result when an entity is unable to obtain the foreign exchange needed to meet its obligations or to provide liquidity. This may adversely impact the recoverability of investments with or loans made to such entities. Adverse economic conditions in Asia, and in China or Taiwan in particular, may also negatively impact asset values and the profitability and liquidity of our customers who operate in this region.

Because of our participation in the TARP Capital Purchase Program, we are subject to several restrictions including restrictions on compensation paid to our executives.

Pursuant to the terms of the Purchase Agreement between us and the U.S. Treasury (the “Purchase Agreement”), under which we sold $258 million of our Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series B, with a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share (“Series B Preferred Stock”), we adopted certain standards for executive compensation and corporate governance. These standards generally apply to our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and the three next most highly compensated executive officers. The standards include (i) ensuring that incentive compensation for senior executive officers does not encourage unnecessary and excessive risks that threaten the value of the financial institution; (ii) requiring clawback of any bonus or incentive compensation paid to a senior executive officer based on statements of earnings, gains, or other criteria that are later proven to be materially inaccurate; (iii) a prohibition on making golden parachute payments to senior executives; and (iv) agreement not to deduct for tax purposes executive compensation in excess of $500,000 for each senior executive. In particular, the change to the deductibility limit on executive compensation will likely increase the overall cost of our compensation programs in future periods.

The adoption of the ARRA on February 17, 2009, and interim final regulations thereunder effective June 15, 2009, have imposed certain executive compensation and corporate expenditure limits on all current and future TARP recipients, including the Company, until the institution has repaid the U.S. Treasury or, in certain instances, until the U.S. Treasury no longer holds our securities, which is now permitted under the ARRA without penalty and without the need to raise new capital, subject to the U.S. Treasury’s consultation with the recipient’s appropriate regulatory agency. The ARRA executive compensation standards are in many respects more stringent than those that continue in effect under TARP and those previously proposed by the U.S. Treasury. The standards include (but are not limited to) (i) prohibitions on bonuses, retention awards and other incentive compensation, other than restricted stock or restricted stock unit grants for up to one-third of an employee’s total annual compensation, which grants cannot vest for a period of at least two years and can be liquidated during the TARP period only in proportion to the repayment of the TARP investment at 25% increments, (ii) prohibitions on golden parachute payments for departure from a company or change in control of the company, (iii) an expanded clawback of bonuses, retention awards, and incentive compensation if payment is based on materially inaccurate statements of earnings, revenues, gains or other criteria, (iv) prohibitions on compensation plans that encourage manipulation of reported earnings, (v) retroactive review of bonuses, retention awards, and other compensation previously provided by TARP recipients if found by the U.S. Treasury to be inconsistent with the purposes of TARP or otherwise contrary to the public interest, (vi) required establishment of a company-wide policy regarding “excessive or luxury expenditures,” and (vii) inclusion in a participant’s proxy statements for annual shareholder meetings of a nonbinding “Say on Pay” shareholder vote on the compensation of executives.

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

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

In recent periods, there has been a rise in electronic fraudulent activity, security breaches, and cyber attacks within the financial services industry, especially in the commercial banking sector. Some financial institutions have reported breaches of their security of their websites and systems, some of which have involved sophisticated and targeted attacks intended to obtain unauthorized access to confidential information, destroy data, disable or degrade service, or sabotage systems. The secure maintenance and transmission of confidential information, as well as execution of transactions over our systems, are essential to protect us and our customers against fraud and security breaches and to maintain our customers’ confidence. Increases in criminal activity levels and sophistication, advances in computer capabilities, or other developments could result in a compromise or breach of the technology, processes, and controls that we use to prevent fraudulent transactions or to protect data about us, our customers, and underlying transactions, as well as the technology used by our customers to access our systems. These risks may increase in the future as we continue to increase our offerings of mobile services and other Internet or web-based products.

The occurrence of any failures, interruptions, or security breaches could damage our reputation, result in a loss of customers, cause us to incur additional expenses, disrupt our business, affect our ability to grow our online and mobile banking services, subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny, or expose us to civil litigation and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Our need to continue to adapt our information technology systems to allow us to provide new and expanded service and to successfully implement the core system conversion we are currently undergoing, could present operational issues, require significant capital spending, and disrupt our business.

As we continue to offer Internet banking and other on-line and mobile services to our customers, and continue to expand our existing conventional banking services, we will need to adapt our information technology systems to handle these changes in a way that meets constantly changing industry and regulatory standards. This can be very expensive and may require significant capital expenditures. In addition, our success will depend on, among other things, our ability to provide secure and reliable services, anticipate changes in technology, and efficiently develop and introduce services that are accepted by our customers and cost effective for us to provide. We are also in the process of undergoing a core system conversion to a new third party provider. If we are not able to successfully implement the core system conversion in the time frame we currently anticipate and with minimal interruption to our systems and customers, our business could be harmed.

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

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

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

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

Our financial results could be adversely affected by changes in accounting standards or tax laws and regulations.

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

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

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

actual or anticipated quarterly fluctuations in our operating results and financial condition;

changes in revenue or earnings estimates or publication of research reports and recommendations by financial analysts;

failure to meet analysts’ revenue or earnings estimates;

speculation in the press or investment community;

strategic actions by us or our competitors, such as acquisitions or restructurings;

acquisitions of other banks or financial institutions, through FDIC-assisted transactions or otherwise;

actions by institutional stockholders;

fluctuations in the stock price and operating results of our competitors;

general market conditions and, in particular, developments related to market conditions for the financial services industry;

proposed or adopted regulatory changes or developments;

anticipated or pending investigations, proceedings, or litigation that involve or affect us;

successful management of reputational risk; and

domestic and international economic factors unrelated to our performance.

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

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

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

A substantial portion of Bancorp’s cash flow has in earlier years come from dividends that the Bank pays to us. Various statutory provisions restrict the amount of dividends that the Bank can pay to us without regulatory approval.

The Federal Reserve Board has previously issued Federal Reserve Supervision and Regulation Letter SR-09-4 that states that bank holding companies are expected to inform and consult with the Federal Reserve supervisory staff prior to taking any actions that could result in a diminished capital base, including any payment or increase in the rate of dividends. In addition, we have agreed under the memorandum of understanding with the FRB SF that we will not, without the FRB SF’s prior written approval, (i) receive any dividends or any other form of payment or distribution representing a reduction of capital from the Bank, or (ii) declare or pay any dividends, make any payments on trust preferred securities, or make any other capital distributions. There can be no assurance that our regulators will approve the payment of such dividends. Further, if we are not current in our payment of dividends on our Series B Preferred Stock or interest on our Junior Subordinated Notes, we may not pay dividends on our common stock.

If the Bank were to liquidate, the Bank’s creditors would be entitled to receive distributions from the assets of the Bank to satisfy their claims against the Bank before Bancorp, as a holder of the equity interest in the Bank, would be entitled to receive any of the assets of the Bank as a distribution or dividend.

The restrictions described above, together with the potentially dilutive impact of the Warrant, described below, could have a negative effect on the value of our common stock. Moreover, holders of our common stock are entitled to receive dividends only when, as and if declared by our Board of Directors. Although we have historically paid cash dividends on our common stock, we are not required to do so and our Board of Directors could reduce or eliminate our common stock dividend in the future.

Our outstanding preferred stock impacts net income available to our common stockholders and earnings per common share, and the Warrant as well as other potential issuances of equity securities may be dilutive to holders of our common stock.

The dividends declared and the accretion on discount on our outstanding preferred stock will reduce the net income available to common stockholders and our earnings per common share. Our outstanding preferred stock is perpetual and currently bears a dividend rate of 5% per annum. If we do not redeem or otherwise retire our preferred stock, this dividend rate increases to 9% per annum commencing in December 2013. Our outstanding preferred stock will also receive preferential treatment in the event of our liquidation, dissolution, or winding up. Additionally, the ownership interest of the existing holders of our common stock will be diluted to the extent the Warrant is exercised. The 1,846,374 shares of common stock underlying the Warrant represent approximately 2.3% of the shares of our common stock outstanding as of December 31, 2012 (including the shares issuable upon exercise of the Warrant in total shares outstanding). Although the U.S. Treasury has agreed not to vote any of the shares of common stock it receives upon exercise of the Warrant, a transferee of any portion of the Warrant or of any shares of common stock acquired upon exercise of the Warrant is not bound by this restriction. In addition, to the extent options to purchase common stock under our stock option plans are exercised, holders of our common stock will incur additional dilution.

We are not restricted from issuing additional common stock or preferred stock, including any securities that are convertible into or exchangeable for, or that represent the right to receive, common stock or preferred stock or any substantially similar securities. If we sell additional equity or convertible debt securities, these sales could result in increased dilution to our stockholders. See “We may need to raise additional capital which may dilute the interests of holders of our common stock or otherwise have an adverse effect on their investment” below.

The issuance of additional shares of preferred stock could adversely affect holders of common stock, which may negatively impact their investment.

Our Board of Directors is authorized to issue additional classes or series of preferred stock without any action on the part of the stockholders. The board of directors also has the power, without stockholder approval, to set the terms of any such classes or series of preferred stock that may be issued, including voting rights, dividend rights and preferences over the common stock with respect to dividends or upon the liquidation, dissolution, or winding up of our business and other terms. If we issue preferred stock in the future that has a preference over the common stock with respect to the payment of dividends or upon liquidation, dissolution or winding up, or if we issue preferred stock with voting rights that dilute the voting power of the common stock, the rights of holders of the common stock or the market price of the common stock could be adversely affected.

Our outstanding debt securities restrict our ability to pay dividends on our capital stock.

We have issued an aggregate of $121.1 million in trust preferred securities (collectively, the “Trust Preferred Securities).” Payments to investors in respect of the Trust Preferred Securities are funded by distributions on certain series of securities issued by us, with similar terms to the relevant series of Trust Preferred Securities, which we refer to as the “Junior Subordinated Notes.” In addition, in September 2006, the Bank issued $50.0 million in subordinated debt in a private placement (the “Bank Subordinated Debt”). If we are unable to pay interest in respect of the Junior Subordinated Notes (which will be used to make distributions on the Trust Preferred Securities), or if any other event of default occurs, then we will generally be prohibited from declaring or paying any dividends or other distributions, or redeeming, purchasing or acquiring, any of our capital securities, including the common stock, during the next succeeding interest payment period applicable to any of the Junior Subordinated Notes.

If the Bank is unable to pay interest in respect of the Bank Subordinated Debt, or if any other event of default has occurred and is continuing on the Bank Subordinated Debt, then the Bank will be prohibited from declaring or paying dividends or other distributions, or redeeming, purchasing or acquiring, any of its capital stock, during the next succeeding interest payment applicable to the Bank Subordinated Debt. As a result, the Bank will be prohibited from making dividend payments to us, which, in turn could affect our ability to pay dividends on our capital securities, including the common stock.

Moreover, any other financing agreements that we enter into in the future may limit our ability to pay cash dividends on our capital stock, including the common stock. In the event that any other financing agreements in the future restrict our ability to pay such dividends, we may be unable to pay dividends in cash on the common stock unless we can refinance amounts outstanding under those agreements.

We may need to raise additional capital which may dilute the interests of holders of our common stock or otherwise have an adverse effect on their investment.

Should economic conditions deteriorate, particularly in the California commercial real estate and residential real estate markets where our business is concentrated, we may need to raise more capital to support any additional provisions for loan losses and loan charge-offs. In addition, we may need to raise more capital to meet other regulatory requirements, including new required capital standards, if our losses are higher than expected, if we are unable to meet our capital requirements or if additional capital is required for our growth. There can be no assurances that we would succeed in raising any such additional capital, and any capital we obtain may dilute the interests of holders of our common stock, or otherwise have an adverse effect on their investment.

The soundness of other financial institutions could adversely affect us.

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

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

The Company has not received written comments regarding its periodic or current reports from the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission that were issued not less than 180 days before the end of its 2012 fiscal year and that remain unresolved.

Item 2. Properties.

Cathay General Bancorp

The Bancorp currently neither owns nor leases any real or personal property. The Bancorp uses the premises, equipment, and furniture of the Bank at 777 North Broadway, Los Angeles, California 90012 and at 9650 Flair Drive, El Monte, California 91731 in exchange for payment of a management fee to the Bank.

Cathay Bank

The Bank’s head office is located in a 36,727 square foot building in the Chinatown area of Los Angeles. The Bank owns both the building and the land upon which the building is situated. The Bank maintains certain of its administrative offices at a seven-story 102,548 square foot office building located at 9650 Flair Drive, El Monte, California 91731. The Bank also owns this building and land in El Monte.

The Bank owns its branch offices in Monterey Park, Alhambra, Westminster, San Gabriel, City of Industry, Cupertino, Artesia, New York City, Flushing (2 locations), and Chicago. In addition, the Bank has certain operating and administrative departments located at 4128 Temple City Boulevard, Rosemead, California, where it owns the building and land with approximately 27,600 square feet of space.

The other branch and representative offices and other properties are leased by the Bank under leases with expiration dates ranging from June 2013 to March 2023, exclusive of renewal options. As of December 31, 2012, the Bank’s investment in premises and equipment totaled $102.6 million, net of accumulated depreciation. See Note 8 and Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

The Company and its subsidiaries and their property are not currently a party or subject to any material pending legal proceeding.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not Applicable.

Executive Officers of the Registrant.

The table below sets forth the names, ages, and positions at the Bancorp and the Bank of all executive officers of the Company as of February 15, 2013.

Name	Age	Present Position and Principal Occupation During the Past Five Years

Dunson K. Cheng	68	Chairman of the Board of Directors of Bancorp and the Bank since 1994; Director, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Bancorp since 1990; President of the Bank since 1985; Director of the Bank since 1982.

Peter Wu	64	Director, Executive Vice Chairman, and Chief Operating Officer of Bancorp and the Bank since October 20, 2003.

Anthony M. Tang	59	Director of Bancorp since 1990; Executive Vice President of Bancorp since 1994; Chief Lending Officer of the Bank since 1985; Director of the Bank since 1986; Senior Executive Vice President of the Bank since December 1998.

Heng W. Chen	60	Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer of Bancorp since June 2003; Executive Vice President of the Bank since June 2003; Chief Financial Officer of the Bank since January 2004.

Irwin Wong	64	Executive Vice President-Branch Administration of the Bank from 1999 to February 2011; Executive Vice President and Chief Risk Officer of the Bank since February 2011.

Kim R. Bingham	56	Executive Vice President and Chief Credit Officer of the Bank since August 2004.

Perry P. Oei	50	Senior Vice President of Bancorp and the Bank since January 2004; General Counsel of Bancorp and the Bank since July 2001; Secretary of Bancorp and the Bank since August 2010.

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

Market Information

Our common stock is listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “CATY.” The closing price of our common stock on February 15, 2013, was $20.14 per share, as reported by the NASDAQ Global Select Market.

The following table sets forth the high and low closing prices as reported on the NASDAQ Global Select Market for the periods presented:

	Year Ended December 31,
	2012				2011
	High		Low		High		Low
First quarter	$	18.19	$	14.93	$	18.87	$	15.63
Second quarter		18.16		15.18		17.90		14.81
Third quarter		18.14		15.71		17.06		10.21
Fourth quarter		19.82		16.61		15.19		10.69

Holders

As of February 15, 2013, there were approximately 1,639 holders of record of our common stock.

Dividends

The cash dividends per share declared by quarter were as follows:

	Year Ended December 31,
	2012		2011
First quarter	$	0.01	$	0.01
Second quarter		0.01		0.01
Third quarter		0.01		0.01
Fourth quarter		0.01		0.01
Total	$	0.04	$	0.04

For information concerning restrictions on the payment of dividends, see Part II — Item 7 — “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Capital Resources — Dividend Policy,” and Note 13 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Performance Graph

The graph and accompanying information furnished below shows the cumulative total stockholder return over the past five years assuming the investment of $100 on December 31, 2007 (and the reinvestment of dividends thereafter) in each of our common stock, the S&P 500 Index and the SNL Western Bank Index. The SNL Western Bank Index is a market-weighted index comprised of publicly traded banks and bank holding companies (including the Company) most of which are based in California and the remainder of which are based in eight other western states, including Oregon, Washington, and Nevada. We will furnish, without charge, on the written request of any person who is a stockholder of record as of the record date for the 2013 annual meeting of stockholders, a list of the companies included in the SNL Western Bank Index. Requests for this information should be addressed to Perry Oei, Secretary, Cathay General Bancorp, 777 North Broadway, Los Angeles, California 90012.

NOTE: The comparisons in the graph below are based upon historical data and are not indicative of, nor intended to forecast, the future performance of, or returns on, our common stock. Such information furnished herewith shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any of our filings under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” under the Securities Act or the Securities Exchange Act with the Securities and Exchange Commission except to the extent that the Company specifically requests that such information be treated as soliciting material or specifically incorporates it by reference into a filing under the Securities Act or the Securities Exchange Act.

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities

There were no sales of any equity securities by the Company during the period covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K that were not registered under the Securities Act.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

As of December 31, 2012, Bancorp may repurchase up to 622,500 shares of common stock under the November 2007 stock repurchase program, subject to regulatory limitations. No shares were repurchased from 2008 through 2012.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data.

The following table presents our selected historical consolidated financial data, and is derived in part from our audited Consolidated Financial Statements. The selected historical consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and the Notes thereto included elsewhere herein and with Part II — Item 7— “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

Selected Consolidated Financial Data

	Year Ended December 31,
	2012			2011			2010			2009			2008
	(Dollars in thousands, except share and per share data)
Income Statement
Interest income	$	429,744		$	453,571		$	489,594		$	528,731		$	589,951
Interest expense		108,491			139,881			191,688			246,039			294,804
Net interest income before provision for credit losses		321,253			313,690			297,906			282,692			295,147
(Reversal)/Provision for credit losses		(9,000	)		27,000			156,900			307,000			106,700
Net interest income/(loss) after provision for credit losses		330,253			286,690			141,006			(24,308	)		188,447

Securities gains/(losses)		18,026			21,131			18,695			55,644			(5,971	)
Other non-interest income		28,481			29,761			13,556			23,010			24,878
Non-interest expense		192,589			185,566			175,711			183,037			136,676

(Loss)/income before income tax expense		184,171			152,016			(2,454	)		(128,691	)		70,678
Income tax (benefit)/expense		66,128			51,261			(14,629	)		(61,912	)		19,554
Net income/(loss)		118,043			100,755			12,175			(66,779	)		51,124
Less: net income attributable to noncontrolling interest		605			605			610			611			603
Net income/(loss) attributable to Cathay General Bancorp		117,438			100,150			11,565			(67,390	)		50,521
Dividends on preferred stock		(16,488	)		(16,437	)		(16,388	)		(16,338	)		(1,140	)
Net income/(loss) attributable to common stockholders	$	100,950		$	83,713		$	(4,823	)	$	(83,728	)	$	49,381
Net income/(loss) attributable to common stockholders per common share
Basic	$	1.28		$	1.06		$	(0.06	)	$	(1.59	)	$	1.00
Diluted	$	1.28		$	1.06		$	(0.06	)	$	(1.59	)	$	1.00
Cash dividends paid per common share	$	0.040		$	0.040		$	0.040		$	0.205		$	0.420
Weighted-average common shares
Basic		78,719,133			78,633,317			77,073,954			52,629,159			49,414,824
Diluted		78,723,297			78,640,652			77,073,954			52,629,159			49,529,793

Statement of Condition
Investment securities	$	2,065,248		$	2,447,982		$	2,843,669		$	3,550,114		$	3,083,817
Net loans (1)		7,235,587			6,844,483			6,615,769			6,678,914			7,340,181
Loans held for sale		-			760			2,873			54,826			-
Total assets		10,694,089			10,644,864			10,801,986			11,588,232			11,582,639
Deposits		7,383,225			7,229,131			6,991,846			7,505,040			6,836,736
Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase		1,250,000			1,400,000			1,561,000			1,557,000			1,662,000
Advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank		146,200			225,000			550,000			929,362			1,449,362
Borrowings from other financial institutions		18,713			19,800			27,576			26,532			19,500
Long-term debt		171,136			171,136			171,136			171,136			171,136
Total equity		1,629,504			1,515,633			1,436,105			1,312,744			1,301,387

Common Stock Data
Shares of common stock outstanding		78,778,288			78,652,557			78,531,783			63,459,590			49,508,250
Book value per common share	$	17.12		$	15.75		$	14.80		$	16.49		$	20.90

Profitability Ratios
Return on average assets		1.11	%		0.94	%		0.10	%		(0.58	%)		0.47	%
Return on average stockholders' equity		7.48			6.78			0.81			(5.20	)		4.91
Dividend payout ratio		2.68			3.14			27.16			n/m			42.02
Average equity to average assets ratio		14.87			13.98			12.45			11.29			9.58
Efficiency ratio		52.37			50.90			53.22			50.65			43.52

* n/m, not meaningful

(1)	Net loans represent gross loans net of loan participations sold, allowance for loan losses, and unamortized deferred loan fees.

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

General

The following discussion is intended to provide information to facilitate the understanding and assessment of the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Bancorp and its subsidiaries. It should be read in conjunction with the audited Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The Bank offers a wide range of financial services. It currently operates 20 branches in Southern California, 11 branches in Northern California, eight branches in New York State, one branch in Massachusetts, two branches in Texas, three branches in Washington State, three branches in Illinois, one branch in New Jersey, one branch in Hong Kong and two representative offices (one in Shanghai, China, and one in Taipei, Taiwan). The Bank is a commercial bank, servicing primarily individuals, professionals, and small to medium-sized businesses in the local markets in which its branches are located.

The financial information presented herein includes the accounts of the Bancorp, its subsidiaries, including the Bank, and the Bank’s consolidated subsidiaries. All material transactions between these entities are eliminated.

Critical Accounting Policies

The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our Consolidated Financial Statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of these Consolidated Financial Statements requires management to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of our Consolidated Financial Statements. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.

Certain accounting policies involve significant judgments and assumptions by management which have a material impact on the carrying value of certain assets and liabilities; management considers such accounting policies to be critical accounting policies. The judgments and assumptions used by management are based on historical experience and other factors, which are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances.

Management believes the following are critical accounting policies that require the most significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of the Consolidated Financial Statements:

Allowance for Credit Losses

The determination of the amount of the provision for credit losses charged to operations reflects management’s current judgment about the credit quality of the loan portfolio and takes into consideration changes in lending policies and procedures, changes in economic and business conditions, changes in the nature and volume of the portfolio and in the terms of loans, changes in the experience, ability, and depth of lending management, changes in the volume and severity of past due, non-accrual, and adversely classified or graded loans, changes in the quality of the loan review system, changes in the value of underlying collateral for collateral-dependent loans, the existence and effect of any concentrations of credit and the effect of competition, legal and regulatory requirements, and other external factors. The nature of the process by which we determine the appropriate allowance for loan losses requires the exercise of considerable judgment. The allowance is increased by the provision for loan losses and decreased by charge-offs when management believes the uncollectibility of a loan is confirmed. Subsequent recoveries, if any, are credited to the allowance. A weakening of the economy or other factors that adversely affect asset quality could result in an increase in the number of delinquencies, bankruptcies, or defaults, and a higher level of non-performing assets, net charge-offs, and provision for loan losses in future periods.

The total allowance for credit losses consists of two components: specific allowances and general allowances. To determine the adequacy of the allowance in each of these two components, we employ two primary methodologies, the individual loan review analysis methodology and the classification migration methodology. These methodologies support the basis for determining allocations between the various loan categories and the overall adequacy of our allowance to provide for probable losses inherent in the loan portfolio. These methodologies are further supported by additional analysis of relevant factors such as the historical losses in the portfolio, and environmental factors which include trends in delinquency and non-accrual, and other significant factors, such as the national and local economy, the volume and composition of the portfolio, strength of management and loan staff, underwriting standards, and the concentration of credit.

The Bank’s management allocates a specific allowance for “Impaired Credits,” in accordance with Accounting Standard Codification (“ASC”) Section 310-10-35. For non-Impaired Credits, a general allowance is established for those loans internally classified and risk graded Pass, Minimally Acceptable, Special Mention, or Substandard based on historical losses in the specific loan portfolio and a reserve based on environmental factors determined for that loan group. The level of the general allowance is established to provide coverage for management’s estimate of the credit risk in the loan portfolio by various loan segments not covered by the specific allowance. The allowance for credit losses is discussed in more detail in “Risk Elements of the Loan Portfolio– Allowance for Credit Losses” below.

Investment Securities

The classification and accounting for investment securities are discussed in detail in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Under ASC Topic 320, formerly SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, investment securities must be classified as held-to-maturity, available-for-sale, or trading. The appropriate classification is based partially on our ability to hold the securities to maturity and largely on management's intentions with respect to either holding or selling the securities. The classification of investment securities is significant since it directly impacts the accounting for unrealized gains and losses on securities. Unrealized gains and losses on trading securities flow directly through earnings during the periods in which they arise, whereas available-for-sale securities are recorded as a separate component of stockholders' equity (accumulated other comprehensive income or loss) and do not affect earnings until realized. The fair values of our investment securities are generally determined by reference to quoted market prices and reliable independent sources. We are obligated to assess, at each reporting date, whether there is an "other-than-temporary" impairment to our investment securities. ASC Topic 320 requires us to assess whether we have the intent to sell the debt security or more likely than not will be required to sell the debt security before its anticipated recovery. Other-than-temporary impairment related to credit losses will be recognized in earnings. Other-than-temporary impairment related to all other factors will be recognized in other comprehensive income.

Income Taxes

The provision for income taxes is based on income reported for financial statement purposes, and differs from the amount of taxes currently payable, since certain income and expense items are reported for financial statement purposes in different periods than those for tax reporting purposes. Taxes are discussed in more detail in Note 12 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Accrued taxes represent the net estimated amount due or to be received from taxing authorities. In estimating accrued taxes, we assess the relative merits and risks of the appropriate tax treatment of transactions taking into account statutory, judicial, and regulatory guidance in the context of our tax position.

We account for income taxes using the asset and liability approach, the objective of which is to establish deferred tax assets and liabilities for the temporary differences between the financial reporting basis and the tax basis of our assets and liabilities at enacted tax rates expected to be in effect when such amounts are realized or settled. A valuation allowance is established for deferred tax assets if, based on the weight of available evidence, it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.

Goodwill and Goodwill Impairment

Goodwill represents the excess of costs over fair value of assets of businesses acquired. ASC Topic 805, formerly SFAS No. 141, Business Combinations (Revised 2007), requires an entity to recognize the assets, liabilities and any non-controlling interest at fair value as of the acquisition date. Contingent consideration is required to be recognized and measured at fair value on the date of acquisition rather than at a later date when the amount of that consideration may be determinable beyond a reasonable doubt. ASC Topic 805 also requires an entity to expense acquisition-related costs as incurred rather than allocating such costs to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed. Contingent considerations are to be recognized at fair value on the acquisition date in a business combination and would be subject to the probable and estimable recognition criteria of ASC Topic 450, “Accounting for Contingencies.” Goodwill and intangible assets acquired in a purchase business combination and determined to have an indefinite useful life are not amortized, but instead are tested for impairment at least annually in accordance with the provisions of ASC Topic 350, formerly SFAS No. 142. SFAS No. 142 also requires that intangible assets with estimable useful lives be amortized over their respective estimated useful lives to their estimated residual values, and reviewed for impairment in accordance with ASC Topic 360, formerly SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets.”

Our policy is to assess goodwill for impairment at the reporting unit level on an annual basis or between annual assessments if a triggering event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying amount. Impairment is the condition that exists when the carrying amount of goodwill exceeds its implied fair value. Accounting standards require management to estimate the fair value of each reporting unit in making the assessment of impairment at least annually.

The Company first assesses qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test described in ASC Topic 350. The two-step impairment testing process conducted by us, if needed, begins by assigning net assets and goodwill to our three reporting units- Commercial Lending, Retail Banking, and East Coast Operations. We then complete “step one” of the impairment test by comparing the fair value of each reporting unit (as determined in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements below) with the recorded book value (or “carrying amount”) of its net assets, with goodwill included in the computation of the carrying amount. If the fair value of a reporting unit exceeds its carrying amount, goodwill of that reporting unit is not considered impaired, and “step two” of the impairment test is not necessary. If the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, step two of the impairment test is performed to determine the amount of impairment. Step two of the impairment test compares the carrying amount of the reporting unit’s goodwill to the “implied fair value” of that goodwill. The implied fair value of goodwill is computed by assuming all assets and liabilities of the reporting unit would be adjusted to the current fair value, with the offset as an adjustment to goodwill. This adjusted goodwill balance is the implied fair value used in step two. An impairment charge is recognized for the amount by which the carrying amount of goodwill exceeds its implied fair value.

Valuation of Other Real Estate Owned (OREO)

Real estate acquired in the settlement of loans is initially recorded at fair value, less estimated costs to sell. Specific valuation allowances on other real estate owned are recorded through charges to operations to recognize declines in fair value subsequent to foreclosure. Gains on sales are recognized when certain criteria relating to the buyer’s initial and continuing investment in the property are met.

Results of Operations

Overview

For the year ended December 31, 2012, we reported net income attributable to common stockholders of $101.0 million, or $1.28 per diluted share, compared to net income attributable to common stockholders of $83.7 million, or $1.06 per share, in 2011, and net loss attributable to common stockholders of $4.8 million, or $0.06 per share, in 2010. The $17.3 million increase in net income from 2011 to 2012 was primarily the results of a decrease of $36.0 million in the provision for credit losses, a decrease of $8.1 million in costs associated with debt redemptions, a $7.6 million increase in net interest income, a decrease of $4.2 million in FDIC assessments, and a decrease of $1.8 million in operation expenses of affordable housing investment offset by an increase of $14.9 million in income tax expense, an increase of $6.5 million in salaries and incentive compensation, an increase of $5.6 million in litigation accrual expense, an increase of $4.5 million in other real estate owned (“OREO”) expenses, and a decrease of $3.1 million in gains on sale of securities. The return on average assets in 2012 was 1.11%, improving from 0.94% in 2011, and from 0.10% in 2010. The return on average stockholders’ equity was 7.48% in 2012, improving from 6.78% in 2011, and from 0.81% in 2010.

Highlights

Net income increased $17.2 million, or 17.3%, to $117.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2012, compared to net income of $100.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2011.

Memorandum of Understanding of Cathay Bank lifted by the CDFI and FDIC as of November 7, 2012.

Commercial loans increased $258.8 million, or 13.9%, during 2012, to $2.1 billion at December 31, 2012, compared to $1.9 billion at December 31, 2011. Residential mortgage loans increased $174.0 million, or 17.9%, to $1.1 billion at December 31, 2012, from $972.3 million at December 31, 2011.

Non-performing assets decreased $149.7 million, or 49.8%, to $150.9 million at December 31, 2012, from $300.6 million at December 31, 2011.

Net charge-offs decreased $51.5 million, or 77.9%, to $14.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2012, from $66.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2011.

Net income/(loss) available to common stockholders and key financial performance ratios are presented below for the three years indicated:

	2012			2011			2010
	(Dollars in thousands, except share and per share data)
Net income	$	117,438		$	100,150		$	11,565
Dividends on preferred stock		(16,488	)		(16,437	)		(16,388	)
Net income/(loss) available to common stockholders	$	100,950		$	83,713		$	(4,823	)
Basic earnings/(loss) per common share	$	1.28		$	1.06		$	(0.06	)
Diluted earnings/(loss) per common share	$	1.28		$	1.06		$	(0.06	)
Return on average assets		1.11	%		0.94	%		0.10	%
Return on average stockholders' equity		7.48	%		6.78	%		0.81	%
Total average assets	$	10,617,004		$	10,629,217		$	11,489,165
Total average equity	$	1,579,195		$	1,485,545		$	1,430,433
Efficiency ratio		52.37	%		50.90	%		53.22	%
Effective income tax rate		36.02	%		33.86	%		477.45	%

Net Interest Income

Net interest income increased $7.6 million, or 2.4%, from $313.7 million in 2011 to $321.3 million in 2012. Taxable-equivalent net interest income, using a statutory Federal income tax rate of 35%, totaled $323.5 million in 2012, compared with $316.0 million in 2011, an increase of $7.5 million, or 2.4%. Interest income on tax-exempt securities was $4.2 million, or $6.4 million on a tax-equivalent basis, in 2012 compared to $4.2 million, or $6.5 million on a tax-equivalent basis, in 2011. The increase in net interest income was due primarily to the decreases in interest expense paid for time deposits and the prepayment of Federal Home Loan Bank advances and securities sold under agreements to repurchase.

Average loans for 2012 were $7.10 billion, a $134.5 million, or a 1.9%, increase from $6.96 billion in 2011. Compared with 2011, average commercial loans increased $284.0 million, or 17.1%, and average residential mortgage loans increased $91.6 million, or 8.0%. Offsetting the above increases was a decrease of $121.1 million, or 3.2%, in average commercial mortgage loans and a decrease of $118.0 million, or 37.3%, in average real estate construction loans. Average investment securities were $2.35 billion in 2012, a decrease of $270.5 million, or 10.3%, from 2011, due primarily to decreases of U.S. agency securities of $325.7 million.

Average interest bearing deposits were $6.23 billion in 2012, an increase of $83.7 million, or 1.4%, from $6.14 billion in 2011 primarily due to increases of $238.9 million in all deposit types, offset primarily by decreases of $155.2 million in brokered time deposits. Average FHLB advances and other borrowings decreased $280.9 million, or 88.2%, to $37.7 million in 2012 from $318.6 million in 2011 primarily due to prepayments of FHLB advances in 2012. Average securities sold under agreements to repurchase decreased $86.9 million, or 6.0%, to $1.36 billion in 2012 from $1.45 billion in 2011 primarily due to prepayments of securities sold under agreements to repurchase in 2012.

Taxable-equivalent interest income decreased $23.9 million, or 5.2%, to $432.0 million in 2012 primarily due to decline in volume on investment securities and decreases in loan yields and by a change in the mix of interest-earning assets as discussed below:

Increase in volume: Average interest-earning assets increased $37.1 million, or 0.4%, to $9.87 billion in 2012, compared with the average interest-earning assets of $9.84 billion in 2011. The increase in average loans balance of $134.5 million in 2012 and increase in average interest bearing deposits of $253.6 million, offset by decreases in average investment securities of $270.4 million and decreases in average Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell of $69.5 million, contributed to the slight increase in interest income.

Decrease in rate: The average yield of interest bearing assets decreased 25 basis points to 4.38% in 2012 from 4.63% in 2011. Rate on taxable investment securities decreased 53 basis points from 3.34% in 2011 to 2.81% in 2012. The decrease in taxable investment securities yields caused a $12.3 million decline in interest income. Rate on loans decreased 16 basis points from 5.24% in 2011 to 5.08% in 2012. The decrease in loan yield caused a $10.9 million decline in interest income.

Change in the mix of interest-earnings assets: Average gross loans, which generally have a higher yield than other types of investments, comprised 71.9% of total average interest-earning assets in 2012, an increase from 70.8% in 2011. Average securities comprised 23.8% of total average interest-bearing assets in 2012, a decrease from 26.6% in 2011.

Interest expense decreased by $31.4 million to $108.5 million in 2012 compared with $139.9 million in 2011 primarily due to decreased cost from time deposits, FHLB advances and securities sold under agreements to repurchase. The overall decrease in interest expense was primarily due to a net decrease in rate and a net decrease in volume as discussed below:

Decrease in volume: Average interest-bearing liabilities decreased $284.1 million in 2012, due primarily to the decrease in brokered time deposits, the decrease in FHLB advances, and the decrease in securities sold under agreements to repurchase. The decrease in volume caused interest expense to decline by $10.5 million.

Decline in rate: The average cost of interest bearing liabilities decreased 34 basis points to 1.39% in 2012 from 1.73% in 2011 due primarily to a decrease of 25 basis points in the average cost of interest bearing deposits to 0.76% in 2012 from 1.01% in 2011 and a decrease of 306 basis points in average cost of FHLB advances and other borrowings to 0.72% in 2012 from 3.78% in 2011. The decline in rate caused interest expense to decline by $20.9 million.

Change in the mix of interest-bearing liabilities: Average interest bearing deposits of $6.23 billion increased to 79.9% of total interest-bearing liabilities in 2012 compared to 76.0% in 2011. Offsetting the increases, average FHLB advances and other borrowing decreased to 0.5% of total interest-bearing liabilities in 2012 compared to 3.9% in 2011.

Our taxable-equivalent net interest margin, defined as taxable-equivalent net interest income to average interest-earning assets, increased 7 basis points to 3.28% in 2012 from 3.21% in 2011. The increase in net interest margin from the prior year primarily resulted from increases in loans, decreases in the rate on interest bearing deposits, and the prepayment of FHLB advances and securities sold under agreements to repurchase contributed to the increase in the net interest margin.

Net interest income increased $15.8 million, or 5.3%, from $297.9 million in 2010 to $313.7 million in 2011. Taxable-equivalent net interest income, using a statutory Federal income tax rate of 35%, totaled $316.0 million in 2011, compared with $298.4 million in 2010, an increase of $17.6 million, or 5.9%. Interest income on tax-exempt securities was $4.2 million, or $6.5 million on a tax-equivalent basis, in 2011 compared to $854,000, or $1.3 million on a tax-equivalent basis, in 2010. The increase in net interest income was due primarily to the decreases in interest expense paid for time deposits and the prepayment of Federal Home Loan Bank advances and securities sold under agreements to repurchase.

Average loans for 2011 were $6.96 billion, a $61.7 million, or 0.9%, increase from $6.90 billion in 2010. Compared with 2010, average commercial loans increased $306.6 million, or 22.6%, and average residential mortgage loans increased $181.8 million, or 19.0%. Offsetting the above increases was a decrease of $202.1 million, or 5.0%, in average commercial mortgage loans and a decreased of $223.8 million, or 41.4%, in average real estate construction loans. Average investment securities were $2.62 billion in 2011, a decrease of $884.6 million, or 25.3%, from 2010, due primarily to decreases of U.S. agency securities of $812.6 million.

Average interest bearing deposits were $6.14 billion in 2011, a decrease of $357.9 million, or 5.5%, from $6.50 billion in 2010 primarily due to decreases of $442.9 million in brokered time deposits offset primarily by increases of $42.8 million in saving deposits. Average FHLB advances and other borrowings decreased $524.7 million, or 62.2%, to $318.6 million in 2011 from $843.3 million in 2010 primarily due to prepayments of FHLB advances in 2011. Average securities sold under agreements to repurchase decreased $111.9 million, or 7.2%, to $1.45 billion in 2011 from $1.56 billion in 2010 primarily due to prepayments of securities sold under agreements to repurchase in 2011.

Taxable-equivalent interest income decreased $34.2 million, or 7.0%, to $455.8 million in 2011 primarily due to decline in volume on investment securities and decreases in loan yields and by a change in the mix of interest-earning assets as discussed below:

Decrease in volume: Average interest-earning assets decreased $942.1 million, or 8.7%, to $9.84 billion in 2011, compared with the average interest-earning assets of $10.78 billion in 2010. The decrease in average investment securities balance of $884.6 million in 2011 caused primarily the $26.3 million decline in interest income.

Decrease in yield on loans: Yield on loans decreased 28 basis points from 5.52% in 2010 to 5.24% in 2011. The decrease in loan yield caused a $19.5 million decline in interest income.

Change in the mix of interest-earnings assets: Average gross loans, which generally have a higher yield than other types of investments, comprised 70.8% of total average interest-earning assets in 2011, an increase from 64.0% in 2010. Average securities comprised 26.6% of total average interest-bearing assets in 2011, a decrease from 32.5% in 2010.

Interest expense decreased by $51.8 million to $139.9 million in 2011 compared with $191.7 million in 2010 primarily due to decreased cost from time deposits and FHLB advances. The overall decrease in interest expense was primarily due to a net decrease in rate and a net decrease in volume as discussed below:

Decrease in volume: Average interest-bearing liabilities decreased $994.4 million in 2011, due primarily to the decrease in brokered time deposits, the decrease in FHLB advances, and the decrease in securities sold under agreements to repurchase. The decrease in volume caused interest expense to decline by $31.4 million.

Decline in rate: The average cost of interest bearing liabilities decreased 38 basis points to 1.73% in 2011 from 2.11% in 2010 due primarily to a decrease of 28 basis points in the average cost of interest bearing deposits to 1.01% in 2011 from 1.29% in 2010 and a decrease of 67 basis points in average cost of FHLB advances and other borrowings to 3.78% in 2011 from 4.45%. The decline in rate caused interest expense to decline by $20.4 million.

Change in the mix of interest-bearing liabilities: Average interest bearing deposits of $6.14 billion increased to 76.0% of total interest-bearing liabilities in 2011 compared to 71.6% in 2010. Offsetting the increases, average FHLB advances and other borrowing decreased to 3.9% of total interest-bearing liabilities in 2011 compared to 9.3% in 2010.

Our taxable-equivalent net interest margin, defined as taxable-equivalent net interest income to average interest-earning assets, increased 44 basis points to 3.21% in 2011 from 2.77% in 2010. The increase in net interest margin from the prior year primarily resulted from decreases in the rate on interest bearing deposits, and the prepayment of FHLB advances and securities sold under agreement to repurchase contributed to the increase in the net interest margin.

The following table sets forth information concerning average interest-earning assets, average interest-bearing liabilities, and the yields and rates paid on those assets and liabilities. Average outstanding amounts included in the table are daily averages.

Interest-Earning Assets and Interest-Bearing Liabilities
						Average								Average								Average
	2012			Interest		Yield/			2011			Interest		Yield/			2010			Interest		Yield/
	Average			Income/		Rate			Average			Income/		Rate			Average			Income/		Rate
	Balance			Expense (4)		(1)(2)			Balance			Expense (4)		(1)(2)			Balance			Expense (4)		(1)(2)
	(Dollars in thousands)
Interest-Earning Assets:
Commercial loans	$	1,946,986		$	81,684		4.20	%	$	1,662,937		$	72,188		4.34	%	$	1,356,368		$	63,124		4.65	%
Residential mortgages		1,232,573			60,644		4.92			1,140,936			57,541		5.04			959,112			49,823		5.19
Commercial mortgages		3,701,613			207,541		5.61			3,822,757			220,070		5.76			4,024,863			240,747		5.98
Real estate construction loans		198,363			10,440		5.26			316,323			14,352		4.54			540,151			26,334		4.88
Other loans		15,541			334		2.15			17,583			429		2.44			18,382			634		3.45
Loans (1)		7,095,076			360,643		5.08			6,960,536			364,580		5.24			6,898,876			380,662		5.52
Taxable securities		2,216,857			62,395		2.81			2,484,629			83,083		3.34			3,476,259			106,568		3.07
Tax-exempt securities (3)		131,530			6,401		4.87			134,245			6,489		4.83			27,258			1,314		4.82
FHLB stock		47,938			485		1.01			58,999			177		0.30			68,780			237		0.34
Federal funds sold & securities purchased under agreements to resell		14,986			18		0.12			84,493			83		0.10			6,932			14		0.20
Interest-bearing deposits		367,138			2,042		0.56			113,566			1,430		1.26			300,471			1,259		0.42
Total interest-earning assets	$	9,873,525		$	431,984		4.38		$	9,836,468		$	455,842		4.63		$	10,778,576		$	490,054		4.55
Non-interest Earning Assets:
Cash and due from banks		126,476								161,711								95,996
Other non-earning assets		819,986								872,638								876,771
Total non-interest earning assets		946,462								1,034,349								972,767
Less: Allowance for loan losses		(194,385	)							(233,744	)							(254,420	)
Deferred loan fees		(8,598	)							(7,856	)							(7,758	)
Total Assets	$	10,617,004							$	10,629,217							$	11,489,165

Interest-Bearing Liabilities:
Interest-bearing demand deposits	$	516,246		$	792		0.15			426,252			756		0.18			397,434			927		0.23
Money market deposits		1,059,841			5,938		0.56			979,253			7,351		0.75			966,888			8,733		0.90
Savings deposits		451,022			365		0.08			411,953			482		0.12			369,190			694		0.19
Time deposits		4,197,906			40,278		0.96			4,323,833			53,625		1.24			4,765,632			73,808		1.55
Total interest-bearing deposits		6,225,015			47,373		0.76			6,141,291			62,214		1.01			6,499,144			84,162		1.29
Federal funds purchased		-			-		-			27			0		1.29			-			-		-
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase		1,361,475			55,699		4.09			1,448,363			60,733		4.19			1,560,215			66,141		4.24
FHLB advances and other borrowings		37,717			270		0.72			318,606			12,044		3.78			843,321			37,533		4.45
Long-term debt		171,136			5,149		3.01			171,136			4,890		2.86			171,136			3,852		2.25
Total interest-bearing liabilities		7,795,343			108,491		1.39			8,079,423			139,881		1.73			9,073,816			191,688		2.11
Non-interest Bearing Liabilities:
Demand deposits		1,157,343								996,215								911,351
Other liabilities		85,123								68,034								73,565
Stockholders' equity		1,579,195								1,485,545								1,430,433
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity	$	10,617,004							$	10,629,217							$	11,489,165

Net interest spread (4)							2.99	%							2.90	%							2.44	%
Net interest income (4)				$	323,493							$	315,961							$	298,366
Net interest margin (4)							3.28	%							3.21	%							2.77	%

(1)	Yields and amounts of interest earned include loan fees. Non-accrual loans are included in the average balance.

(2)	Calculated by dividing net interest income by average outstanding interest-earning assets.

(3)	The average yield has been adjusted to a fully taxable-equivalent basis for certain securities of states and political subdivisions and other securities held using a statutory Federal income tax rate of 35%.

(4)	Net interest income, net interest spread, and net interest margin on interest-earning assets have been adjusted to a fully taxable-equivalent basis using a statutory Federal income tax rate of 35%.

Taxable-Equivalent Net Interest Income — Changes Due to Rate and Volume(1)

	2012 - 2011 Increase/(Decrease) in Net Interest Income Due to:									2011 - 2010 Increase/(Decrease) in Net Interest Income Due to:
	Change in Volume			Change in Rate			Total Change			Change in Volume			Change in Rate			Total Change
	(In thousands)
Interest-Earning Assets
Deposits with other banks	$	1,767		$	(1,155	)	$	612		$	(1,155	)	$	1,326		$	171
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell		(80	)		15			(65	)		(1,179	)		1,248			69
Taxable securities		(8,380	)		(12,308	)		(20,688	)		(32,493	)		9,008			(23,485	)
Tax-exempt securities (2)		(132	)		44			(88	)		5,171			4			5,175
FHLB Stock		(39	)		347			308			(31	)		(29	)		(60	)
Loans		6,965			(10,902	)		(3,937	)		3,376			(19,458	)		(16,082	)
Total increase (decrease) in interest income		101			(23,959	)		(23,858	)		(26,311	)		(7,901	)		(34,212	)

Interest-Bearing Liabilities
Interest-bearing demand deposits		146			(110	)		36			63			(234	)		(171	)
Money market deposits		567			(1,980	)		(1,413	)		110			(1,492	)		(1,382	)
Savings deposits		42			(159	)		(117	)		73			(285	)		(212	)
Time deposits		(1,521	)		(11,826	)		(13,347	)		(6,410	)		(13,773	)		(20,183	)
Securities sold under agreemensts to repurchase		(3,580	)		(1,454	)		(5,034	)		(4,697	)		(711	)		(5,408	)
FHLB advances and other borrowings		(6,134	)		(5,640	)		(11,774	)		(20,521	)		(4,968	)		(25,489	)
Long-term debt		-			259			259			-			1,038			1,038
Total decrease in interest expense		(10,480	)		(20,910	)		(31,390	)		(31,382	)		(20,425	)		(51,807	)

Change in net interest income	$	10,581		$	(3,049	)	$	7,532		$	5,071		$	12,524		$	17,595

(1)	Changes in interest income and interest expense attributable to changes in both volume and rate have been allocated proportionately to changes due to volume and changes due to rate.

(2)	The amount of interest earned has been adjusted to a fully tax-equivalent basis for certain securities of states and political subdivisions and other securities held using a statutory Federal income tax rate of 35%.

Provision for Credit Losses

The provision for credit losses represents the charge against current earnings that is determined by management, through a credit review process, as the amount needed to maintain an allowance for loan losses and an allowance for off-balance sheet unfunded credit commitments that management believes to be sufficient to absorb credit losses inherent in the Bank’s loan portfolio and credit commitments. The Bank recorded a negative $9.0 million provision for credit losses in 2012 compared with $27.0 million in 2011, and $156.9 million in 2010. Net charge-offs for 2012 were $14.7 million, or 0.2% of average loans, compared to net charge-offs for 2011 of $66.2 million, or 1.0% of average loans, and compared to net charge-offs for 2010 of $126.4 million, or 1.8% of average loans. The decreases in provision for credit losses and net charge-offs in 2012 were primarily due to decreases in non-performing loans.

Non-interest Income

Non-interest income decreased $4.4 million, or 8.6%, to $46.5 million for 2012, from $50.9 million for 2011, and compared to $32.3 million for 2010. Non-interest income includes depository service fees, letters of credit commissions, securities gains (losses), gains (losses) from loan sales, gains from sale of premises and equipment, and other sources of fee income. These other fee-based services include wire transfer fees, safe deposit fees, fees on loan-related activities, fee income from our Wealth Management division, and foreign exchange fees.

The decrease in non-interest income of $4.4 million, or 8.6%, from 2011 to 2012 was primarily due to a combination of the following:

A $3.1 million decrease in securities gains. We sold securities of $544.2 million and recorded net gains on sale of securities of $18.0 million in 2012 compared to security sales of $1.3 billion with $21.1 million net gains on sale of securities in 2011.

A $2.6 million decrease in gains on sale of loans.

A $1.2 million decrease in foreign exchange income.

The increase in non-interest income of $18.6 million, or 57.8%, from 2010 to 2011 was primarily due to a combination of the following:

A $9.6 million decrease in loss on the value of interest rate swap agreements due to higher unrealized losses recognized during 2010.

A $2.4 million increase in securities gains. We sold securities of $1.3 billion and recorded net gains on sale of securities of $21.1 million in 2011 compared to security sales of $1.1 billion with $19.3 million net gains on sale of securities in 2010.

A $2.3 million increase in gains on sale of loans.

A $1.2 million increase in wealth management commissions.

A $1.2 million increase in letters of credit commissions.

A $1.1 million increase in venture capital income mainly due to venture capital investment distributions.

A $1.1 million increase in commissions from foreign currency and exchange transactions.

Non-interest Expense

Non-interest expense includes expenses related to salaries and benefits of employees, occupancy expenses, marketing expenses, computer and equipment expenses, amortization of core deposit intangibles, and other operating expenses. Non-interest expense totaled $192.6 million in 2012 compared with $185.6 million in 2011. The increase of $7.0 million, or 3.8%, in non-interest expense in 2012 compared to 2011 was primarily due to a combination of the following:

Salaries and employee benefits increased $6.5 million, or 9.1%, primarily due to the hiring of new employees as well as the addition of temporary employees related to the upcoming core system conversion in July 2013.

An accrual of $5.8 million related to a jury verdict in a lender liability case on a construction loan where Cathay Bank owns a 50% interest.

OREO expenses increased $4.5 million, or 43%, primarily due to decreases of $4.9 million in gains on OREO transactions.

Professional service expense increased $1.6 million, or 7.7%, and computer and equipment expenses increased $1.1 million, or 12.7%, due primarily to the upcoming core system conversion.

Marketing expenses increased $1.4 million primarily due to special events celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Bank.

Offsetting the above increases were a $8.1 million decrease in costs associated with debt redemptions due to prepayment penalties on prepayment of FHLB advances and securities sold under agreements to repurchase, a $4.2 million decrease in FDIC and state assessments, and a $1.8 million decrease in operating expenses of affordable housing investments.

The efficiency ratio, defined as non-interest expense divided by the sum of net interest income before provision for loan losses plus non-interest income, increased to 52.37% in 2012 compared to 50.90% in 2011 due primarily to higher non-interest expenses as explained above.

Non-interest expense totaled $185.6 million in 2011 compared with $175.7 million in 2010. The increase of $9.9 million, or 5.6%, in non-interest expense in 2011 compared to 2010 was primarily due to a combination of the following:

Salaries and employee benefits increased $13.0 million, or 22.1%, primarily due to increases in incentive compensation and the hiring of new employees.

Costs associated with debt redemption increased $6.0 million, 41.9%, primarily due to prepayment penalties on prepaying FHLB advances.

Professional service expense increased $2.6 million, or 14.6%, due primarily to increases in legal expenses, collection expenses, and consulting expenses.

Occupancy expense increased $2.0 million, or 16.7%, primarily due to a correction in the depreciation life for certain components of our administrative office building made in 2010.

Offsetting the above increases were a $7.1 million decrease in FDIC and state assessments, a $5.4 million decrease in OREO expenses, and a $3.2 million decrease in write-down on loans held for sale.

The efficiency ratio, defined as non-interest expense divided by the sum of net interest income before provision for loan losses plus non-interest income, decreased to 50.90% in 2011 compared to 53.22% in 2010.

Income Tax Expense

Income tax expense was $66.1 million in 2012, compared to an income tax expense of $51.3 million in 2011, and income tax benefit of $14.6 million in 2010. The effective tax rate was 36.0% for 2012, 33.9% for 2011, and 477% for 2010. The effective tax rate differed from the composite statutory composite rate of 42% primarily as a result of low income housing and other tax credits totaling $9.4 million recognized in 2012, $10.1 million recognized in 2011, and $11.2 million recognized in 2010. The income tax benefit in 2010 was primarily due to the net loss.

Our tax returns are open for audits by the Internal Revenue Service back to 2010 and by the California Franchise Tax Board (“FTB”) of the State of California back to 2003. We are currently under audit by the FTB for the years 2003 to 2007. From time to time, there may be differences in opinion with respect to the tax treatment accorded transactions. When, and if, such differences occur and the related tax effects become probable and estimable, such amounts will be recognized.

Financial Condition

Total assets were $10.7 billion at December 31, 2012, an increase of $49.2 million, or 0.5%, from $10.6 billion at December 31, 2011, primarily due to increases of $369.9 million in gross loans, increases of $117.0 million in short-term investments, and increases of $27.0 million in cash and due from banks, offset by decreases of $382.7 million in investment securities, decreases of $46.3 million in OREO, and decreases of $37.5 million from income tax receivable and deferred tax assets

Investment Securities

Investment securities were $2.1 billion and represented 19.3% of total assets at December 31, 2012, compared with $2.4 billion, or 23.0%, of total assets at December 31, 2011. The following table summarizes the carrying value of our portfolio of securities for each of the past two years:

	As of December 31,
	2012		2011
	(In thousands)
Securities Held-to-Maturity:
U.S. government sponsored entities	$	-	$	99,966
State and municipal securities		129,037		129,577
Mortgage-backed securities		634,757		913,990
Corporate debt securities		9,974		9,971
Total securities held-to-maturity	$	773,768	$	1,153,504

Securities Available-for-Sale:
U.S. treasury securities	$	509,971	$	-
U.S. government sponsored entities		-		501,226
State and municipal securities		-		1,928
Mortgage-backed securities		416,694		337,631
Collateralized mortgage obligations		10,168		16,486
Asset-backed securities		141		166
Corporate debt securities		335,977		380,429
Mutual funds		6,079		6,035
Preferred stock of government sponsored entities		2,335		1,654
Trust preferred securities		10,115		45,963
Other equity securities		-		2,960
Total securities available-for-sale	$	1,291,480	$	1,294,478
Total investment securities	$	2,065,248	$	2,447,982

ASC Topic 320 requires an entity to assess whether it has the intent to sell the debt security or more likely than not will be required to sell the debt security before its anticipated recovery. If either of these conditions is met, an entity must recognize an other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) to its investment securities. If an entity does not intend to sell the debt security and will not be required to sell the debt security, the entity must consider whether it will recover the amortized cost basis of the security. If the present value of expected cash flows is less than the amortized cost basis of the security, OTTI shall be considered to have occurred. OTTI is then separated into the amount of the total impairment related to credit losses and the amount of the total impairment related to all other factors. An entity determines the impairment related to credit losses by comparing the present value of cash flows expected to be collected from the security with the amortized cost basis of the security. OTTI related to the credit loss is thereafter recognized in earnings. OTTI related to all other factors is recognized in other comprehensive income. OTTI not related to the credit loss for a held-to-maturity security should be recognized separately in a new category of other comprehensive income and amortized over the remaining life of the debt security as an increase in the carrying value of the security only when the entity does not intend to sell the security and it is not more likely than not that the entity will be required to sell the security before recovery of its remaining amortized cost basis. The Company has both the ability and the intent to hold and it is not more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell those securities with unrealized losses before recovery of their amortized cost basis.

The Company's unrealized loss on investments in corporate bonds relates to a number of investments in bonds of financial institutions, all of which were investment grade at the date of acquisition and as of December 31, 2012. The unrealized losses were primarily caused by the widening of credit and liquidity spreads since the dates of acquisition. The contractual terms of those investments do not permit the issuers to settle the security at a price less than the amortized cost of the investment. The Company currently does not believe it is probable that it will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the investments. Therefore, it is expected that these bonds would not be settled at a price less than the amortized cost of the investment. Because the Company does not intend to sell and would not be required to sell these investments until a recovery of fair value, which may be maturity, it does not consider its investments in these corporate bonds to be other-than-temporarily impaired at December 31, 2012.

The temporarily impaired securities represent 16.9% of the fair value of investment securities as of December 31, 2012. Unrealized losses for securities with unrealized losses for less than twelve months represent 2.4%, and securities with unrealized losses for twelve months or more represent 4.4%, of the historical cost of these securities. Unrealized losses on these securities generally resulted from increases in interest rate spreads subsequent to the date that these securities were purchased. At December 31, 2012, 34 issues of securities had unrealized losses for 12 months or longer and seven issues of securities had unrealized losses of less than 12 months.

At December 31, 2012, management believed the impairment was temporary and, accordingly, no impairment loss has been recognized in our consolidated statements of operations. We expect to recover the amortized cost basis of our debt securities, and have no intent to sell and will not be required to sell available-for-sale debt securities that have declined below their cost before their anticipated recovery. The table below shows the fair value, unrealized losses, and number of issuances of the temporarily impaired securities in our investment securities portfolio as of December 31, 2012, and December 31, 2011:

As of December 31, 2012

Temporarily Impaired Securities

Less than 12 months

12 months or longer

Total

Fair

Unrealized

No. of

Fair

Unrealized

No. of

Fair

Unrealized

No. of

Value

Losses

Issuances

Value

Losses

Issuances

Value

Losses