UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

x      Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the Fiscal year ended December 31, 2014

or

o         Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Commission file number: 001-31567

Central Pacific Financial Corp.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code:

(808) 544-0500

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

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 o No x

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

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 x No o

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 x No o

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. o

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.

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

As of June 30, 2014, the aggregate market value of the common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $374,448,000. As of February 13, 2015, the number of shares of common stock of the registrant outstanding was 34,759,845 shares.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s proxy statement for the 2015 annual meeting of shareholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this annual report on Form 10-K to the extent stated herein. The proxy statement will be filed within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this annual report on Form 10-K.

PART 1

Forward-Looking Statements and Factors that Could Affect Future Results

Certain statements contained in this annual report on Form 10-K that are not statements of historical fact constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “Act”), notwithstanding that such statements are not specifically identified. In addition, certain statements may be contained in our future filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), in press releases and in oral and written statements made by us or with our approval that are not statements of historical fact and constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Act. Examples of forward-looking statements include but are not limited to: (i) projections of revenues, expenses, income or loss, earnings or loss per share, the payment or nonpayment of dividends, capital position and other financial items; (ii) statements of plans, objectives and expectations of Central Pacific Financial Corp. or its management or Board of Directors, including those relating to business plans, use of capital resources, products or services and regulatory developments and regulatory actions; (iii) statements of future economic performance; and (iv) statements of assumptions underlying such statements. Words such as “believes,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “expects,” “intends,” “forecasts,” “hopes,” “targeted,” “continue,” “remain,” “will,” “should,” “may” and other similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements but are not the exclusive means of identifying such statements.

Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from those in such statements. Factors that could cause actual results to differ from those discussed in the forward-looking statements include but are not limited to:

·                  increase in inventory or adverse conditions in the real estate market and deterioration in the construction industry;

·                  adverse changes in the financial performance and/or condition of our borrowers and, as a result, increased loan delinquency rates, deterioration in asset quality and losses in our loan portfolio;

·                  the impact of local, national, and international economies and events (including natural disasters such as wildfires, tsunamis, storms and earthquakes) on the Company’s business and operations and on tourism, the military and other major industries operating within the Hawaii market and any other markets in which the Company does business;

·                  deterioration or malaise in domestic economic conditions, including any further destabilization in the financial industry and deterioration of the real estate market, as well as the impact of declining levels of consumer and business confidence in the state of the economy in general and in financial institutions in particular;

·                  changes in estimates of future reserve requirements based upon the periodic review thereof under relevant regulatory and accounting requirements;

·                  the impact of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), changes in capital standards, other regulatory reform, including but not limited to regulations promulgated by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”), government-sponsored enterprise reform, and any related rules and regulations which affect our business operations and competitiveness;

·                  the costs and effects of legal and regulatory developments, including legal proceedings or regulatory or other governmental inquiries and proceedings and the resolution thereof, and the results of regulatory examinations or reviews;

2

·                  the effects of and changes in trade, monetary and fiscal policies and laws, including the interest rate policies of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “FRB” of the “Federal Reserve”);

·                  inflation, interest rate, securities market and monetary fluctuations;

·                  negative trends in our market capitalization and adverse changes in the price of the Company’s common shares;

·                  political instability;

·                  acts of war or terrorism;

·                  changes in consumer spending, borrowings and savings habits;

·                  failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting or disclosure controls and procedures;

·                  technological changes and developments;

·                  changes in the competitive environment among financial holding companies and other financial service providers;

·                  the effect of changes in accounting policies and practices, as may be adopted by the regulatory agencies, as well as the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) and other accounting standard setters;

·                  our ability to attract and retain skilled employees;

·                  changes in our organization, compensation and benefit plans; and

·                  our success at managing any of the risks involved in the foregoing items.

For information with respect to factors that could cause actual results to differ from the expectations stated in the forward-looking statements, see also “Risk Factors” under Part I, Item 1A of this report. We urge investors to consider all of these factors carefully in evaluating the forward-looking statements contained in this Form 10-K. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which such statements are made. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date on which such statement is made, or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events except as required by law.

ITEM 1.                                                BUSINESS

General

Central Pacific Financial Corp., a Hawaii corporation and bank holding company registered under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “BHC Act”), was organized on February 1, 1982. Our principal business is to serve as a holding company for our bank subsidiary, Central Pacific Bank, which was incorporated in its present form in the state of Hawaii on March 16, 1982 in connection with the holding company reorganization. Its predecessor entity was incorporated in the state of Hawaii on January 15, 1954.

When we refer to “the Company,” “we,” “us” or “our,” we mean Central Pacific Financial Corp. and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. When we refer to “Central Pacific Financial Corp.,” “CPF” or to the holding company, we are referring to the parent company on a standalone basis. We refer to Central Pacific Bank herein as “our bank” or “the bank.”

3

Through our bank and its subsidiaries, we offer full-service commercial banking with 36 bank branches and 110 ATMs located throughout the state of Hawaii. Our administrative and main offices are located in Honolulu and we have 28 branches on the island of Oahu. We operate four branches on the island of Maui, two branches on the island of Hawaii and two branches on the island of Kauai. Our bank’s deposits are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) up to applicable limits. The bank is not a member of the Federal Reserve System.

Central Pacific Bank is a full-service commercial bank offering a broad range of banking products and services, including accepting time and demand deposits and originating loans. Our loans include commercial loans, construction loans, commercial and residential mortgage loans and consumer loans.

We derive our income primarily from interest and fees on loans, interest on investment securities and fees received in connection with deposit and other services. Our major operating expenses are the interest paid by our bank on deposits and borrowings, salaries and employee benefits and general operating expenses. Our bank relies substantially on a foundation of locally generated deposits. For financial reporting purposes, we have the following three reportable segments: (1) Banking Operations, (2) Treasury and (3) All Others. For further information about our reporting segments, including information about the assets and operating results of each, see “Note 25 — Segment Information” in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

Our operations, like those of other financial institutions that operate in our market, are significantly influenced by economic conditions in Hawaii, including the strength of the real estate market, as well as the fiscal and regulatory policies of the federal and state government and the regulatory authorities that govern financial institutions. See “—Supervision and Regulation” below for other information about the regulation of our holding company and bank.

Following our successful capital raises in 2011, we have accomplished a number of key performance objectives through December 31, 2014:

·                  In 2013, our Board of Directors and management, in consultation with our regulators, reinstated and declared quarterly cash dividends on the Company’s outstanding common stock totaling $0.16 per share of common stock in 2013 ($0.08 per share in the 3rd and 4th quarters of 2013) and $0.36 per share of common stock in 2014 ($0.08 per share in the 1st and 2nd quarters of 2014 and $0.10 per share in the 3rd and 4th quarters of 2014).

·                  On March 28, 2014, we completed a tender offer to purchase 3,405,888 shares of common stock at a purchase price of $20.20 per share for a total cost of $68.8 million, excluding fees and expenses. On April 7, 2014, we also completed repurchase agreements with each of our two largest shareholders to privately purchase 1,391,089 shares of common stock at a purchase price of $20.20 per share from each shareholder for a total cost of $56.2 million, excluding fees and expenses.

·                  On May 20, 2014, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase and retirement of up to $30.0 million of the Company’s outstanding common stock. In 2014, 857,554 shares of common stock, at a cost of $16.5 million, were repurchased under this program.

·                  We have continued to maintain a strong capital position with tier 1 risk-based capital, total risk-based capital and leverage capital ratios as of December 31, 2014 of 16.97%, 18.24%, and 12.03%, respectively, compared to 20.27%, 21.54%, and 13.68%, respectively, as of December 31, 2013, and 22.54%, 23.83%, and 14.32%, respectively, as of December 31, 2012. Our capital ratios continue to exceed the levels required for a “well-capitalized” regulatory designation.

4

·                  We reported four consecutive profitable years with net income totaling $40.5 million, $172.1 million, $47.4 million, and $36.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

·                  We have continued to grow our loan and lease portfolio. Loans and leases, net of deferred income/costs, totaled $2.9 billion at December 31, 2014, and increased by $301.6 million, or 11.5%, from December 31, 2013.

·                  We reduced our nonperforming assets by $4.8 million to $42.0 million at December 31, 2014 from $46.8 million at December 31, 2013. Our nonperforming assets at December 31, 2013 were reduced by $43.2 million from $90.0 million at December 31, 2012.

·                  We maintained an allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total loans and leases of 2.53% at December 31, 2014, compared to 3.19% and 4.37% at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. In addition, we maintained an allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of nonperforming assets of 176.14% at December 31, 2014, compared to 179.29% and 107.10% at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

On February 12, 2013, the Written Agreement that we entered into with the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (“FRBSF”) and the Hawaii Division of Financial Institutions (“DFI”) in July 2010 was terminated.

In addition, the bank was notified by the FDIC on November 14, 2014 that the Compliance MOU that the bank entered into with the FDIC in October 2012 had been terminated.

We also remain focused on lowering our efficiency ratio and growing market share within our core Hawaii market. In connection with improving our efficiency ratio, we have completed several initiatives, including (i) outsourcing the data center and hardware for our core information technology system as well as our items processing function to Fiserv, which is our existing core software application provider; and (ii) implementing a staff right-sizing plan. Additionally, we have begun designing, developing, and implementing our data warehouse and customer relationship management programs.

Our Services

We offer a full range of banking services and products to businesses, professionals and individuals. We provide our customers with an array of loan products, including residential mortgage loans, commercial and consumer loans and lines of credit, commercial real estate loans and construction loans.

Through our bank, we concentrate our lending activities in five principal areas:

(1)       Residential Mortgage Lending.  Residential mortgage loans include fixed- and adjustable-rate loans primarily secured by single-family, owner-occupied residences in Hawaii and home equity lines of credit and loans. We typically require loan-to-value ratios of not more than 80%, although higher levels are permitted with accompanying mortgage insurance. First mortgage loans secured by residential properties generally carry a moderate level of credit risk, with an average loan size of approximately $0.4 million and marketable collateral. Changes in interest rates, the economic recession and other market factors have impacted, and future changes will likely continue to impact, the marketability and value of collateral and the financial condition of our borrowers and thus the level of credit risk inherent in the portfolio. The majority of our residential mortgage loan originations are sold in the secondary market.

(2)       Commercial Lending and Leasing.  Loans in this category consist primarily of term loans, lines of credit and equipment leases to small and middle-market businesses and professionals in the state of Hawaii. The borrower’s business is typically regarded as the principal source of repayment, although our underwriting policies and practices generally require additional sources of collateral, including real estate and other business assets, as well as personal guarantees where possible to mitigate risk and help to reduce credit losses.

5

(3)       Commercial Real Estate Lending.  Loans in this category consist of loans secured by commercial real estate, including but not limited to, structures and facilities to support activities designated as multi-family residential properties, industrial, warehouse, general office, retail, health care and religious dwellings. Our underwriting policy generally requires net cash flow from the property to cover the debt service while maintaining an appropriate amount of reserve and permits consideration of liquidation of the collateral as a secondary source of repayment. Financing of commercial real estate projects is subject to a high degree of credit risk. The limited supply of land at a given commercially attractive location, the long economic life of the assets, the long delivery time frames required for the development and construction of major projects and high interest rate sensitivity have given commercial real estate markets a long history of significant cyclical fluctuations and volatility.

(4)       Construction Lending.  Construction lending encompasses the financing of residential and commercial construction projects. Similar to commercial real estate lending, construction projects are subject to a high degree of credit risk given the long delivery time frames for projects.

(5)       Consumer Lending.  Loans in this category are generally either unsecured or secured by personal assets such as automobiles. The average loan size is generally small and risk is diversified amount many borrowers.

Beyond the lending function described above, we also offer a full range of deposit products and services including checking, savings and time deposits, cash management and electronic banking services, trust services and retail brokerage services.

Our Market Area and Competition

Based on deposit market share among FDIC-insured financial institutions in Hawaii, Central Pacific Bank was the fourth-largest depository institution in the state at December 31, 2014.

The banking and financial services industry in the state of Hawaii generally, and particularly in our target market areas, is highly competitive. We compete for loans, deposits and customers with other commercial banks, savings banks, securities and brokerage companies, mortgage companies, insurance companies, finance companies, credit unions and other nonbank financial service providers. Some of these competitors are much larger by total assets and capitalization, have greater access to capital markets and have achieved better results than we have during the recent economic downturn.

In order to compete with the other financial services providers in the state of Hawaii, we principally rely upon local promotional activities, personal relationships between customers and our officers, directors and employees, and specialized services tailored to meet the needs of our customers and the communities we serve. We remain competitive by offering flexibility and superior service levels, coupled with competitive interest rates and pricing.

For further discussion of factors affecting our operations see, “Part II, Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

Business Concentrations

No individual or single group of related accounts is considered material in relation to the assets or deposits of our bank, or in relation to the overall business of the Company. However, approximately 72% of our loan portfolio held for investment at December 31, 2014 consisted of real estate-related loans, including construction loans, residential mortgage loans and commercial mortgage loans. See “Part II, Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Financial Condition—Loan Portfolio.”

6

Our business activities are focused primarily in Hawaii. Consequently, our results of operations and financial condition are impacted by the general economic trends in Hawaii, particularly in the commercial and residential real estate markets. During periods of economic strength, the real estate market and the real estate industry typically perform well; during periods of economic weakness, they typically are adversely affected.

Our Subsidiaries

Central Pacific Bank is the wholly-owned principal subsidiary of Central Pacific Financial Corp. Other wholly-owned subsidiaries include: CPB Capital Trust II; CPB Statutory Trust III; CPB Capital Trust IV; and CPB Statutory Trust V. CPB Capital Trust I was dissolved in 2014.

Central Pacific Bank had two wholly-owned subsidiaries as of December 31, 2013: CPB Real Estate, Inc. and Citibank Properties, Inc. Both were real estate investment trusts that were dissolved in 2014. Central Pacific Bank had two other wholly-owned subsidiaries, CB Technology, Inc. and Central Pacific HomeLoans, Inc., that were dissolved in February 2013 and February 2012, respectively. As of December 31, 2014, Central Pacific Bank does not have any wholly-owned subsidiaries but does own 50% of Pacific Access Mortgage, LLC, Gentry HomeLoans, LLC, Haseko HomeLoans, LLC, and Island Pacific HomeLoans, LLC.

Supervision and Regulation

General

The Company and the bank are subject to significant regulation and restrictions by federal and state laws and regulatory agencies for the protection of depositors and the FDIC deposit insurance fund, borrowers, and the stability of the U.S. banking system. 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 qualified in its entirety by reference to the statutes and regulations referred to in this discussion. We cannot predict whether or when new legislative initiatives may be proposed or enacted or new regulations or guidance may be promulgated nor the effect new laws, regulations and supervisory policies may have on community banks generally or on our financial condition and results of operations. Such developments could increase or decrease the cost of doing business, limit or expand permissible activities or affect the competitive balance among banks, savings associations, credit unions and other financial institutions.

Regulatory Agencies

Central Pacific Financial Corp. is a legal entity separate and distinct from its subsidiaries. As a bank holding company, Central Pacific Financial Corp. is regulated under the BHC Act and is subject to inspection, examination and supervision by the FRB. It is also subject to Hawaii’s Code of Financial Institutions and is subject to inspection, examination and supervision by the DFI.

The Company 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 (the “Exchange Act”), as administered by the SEC. Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under the trading symbol “CPF,” and we are subject to the rules of the NYSE for companies listed there. In addition to the powers of the bank regulatory agencies we are subject to, the SEC and the NYSE have the ability to take enforcement actions against us.

The Company is also subject to the accounting oversight and corporate governance requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, including, among other things, required executive certification of financial presentations, requirements for board audit committees and their members, and disclosure of controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting.

7

Central Pacific Bank, as a Hawaii-chartered bank, is subject to primary supervision, periodic examination and regulation by the DFI and FDIC and is also subject to certain regulations promulgated by the FRB. In periodic examinations, each of these regulatory bodies assesses our financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, earnings prospects, management, liquidity and other aspects of our operations. These bodies also determine whether our management is effectively managing the bank and the holding company and whether they are in compliance with all applicable laws or regulations.

Legislative and Regulatory Developments

The implementation and impact of legislation and regulations enacted since 2008 in response to the U.S. economic downturn and financial industry instability continued in 2014, even as continued modest recovery was experienced by many institutions in the banking sector. Many institutions, including CPF, have exited Treasury investments under the Troubled Assets Relief Program (“TARP”) and certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act are effective and have been fully implemented, including the revisions in the deposit insurance assessment base for FDIC insurance and the permanent increase in coverage to $250,000; the permissibility of paying interest on business checking accounts; the removal of barriers to interstate branching and required disclosure and shareholder advisory votes on executive compensation. Implementation in 2014 of additional Dodd-Frank regulatory provisions included aspects of (i) the final new capital rules and (ii) the so called Volcker Rule restrictions on certain proprietary trading and investment activities.

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

Capital Adequacy Requirements

Bank holding companies and banks are subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by state and federal banking agencies. New capital rules described below were effective on January 1, 2014, and are being phased in over various periods (the “New Capital Rules”). The basic capital rule changes were fully effective on January 1, 2015, but many elements are being phased in over multiple future years. Capital adequacy guidelines and, additionally for banks, prompt corrective action regulations (see “Prompt Corrective Action Provisions” below), 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. The risk-based capital guidelines for bank holding companies and banks require capital ratios that vary based on the perceived 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. To the extent that the new rules are not fully phased in, the prior capital rules continue to apply.

Under the risk-based capital guidelines in place prior to the effectiveness of the New Capital Rules, there were 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, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio and a Tier 1 leverage ratio of at least ten percent, six percent and five percent, respectively. Under the capital rules that applied in 2014, there was no Tier 1 leverage requirement for a holding company to be deemed well-capitalized. At December 31, 2014, the respective capital ratios of the Company and the bank exceeded the minimum percentage requirements to be deemed “well-capitalized” for regulatory purposes. — See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Capital Resources.” The federal banking agencies may require banks and bank holding companies subject to enforcement actions to maintain capital ratios in excess of the minimum ratios otherwise required to be deemed well capitalized, in which case institutions may no longer be deemed to be well capitalized and may therefore be subject to certain restrictions such as taking brokered deposits.

8

The New Capital Rules and Minimum Capital Ratios

In July 2013, the federal bank regulatory agencies adopted final regulations which revised their risk-based and leverage capital requirements for banking organizations to meet requirements of the Dodd—Frank Act and to implement the Basel III international agreements reached by the Basel Committee. Although many of the rules contained in these final regulations are applicable only to large, internationally active banks, some of them will apply on a phased-in basis to all banking organizations, including the Company and the bank.

The following are among the new requirements that are phased-in beginning January 1, 2015 under the New Capital Rules:

·                  an increase in the minimum Tier 1 capital ratio from 4.00% to 6.00% of risk-weighted assets;

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

·                  a minimum non-risk-based leverage ratio is set at 4.00% with no 3.00% exception for higher rated banks;

·                  changes in the permitted composition of Tier 1 capital to exclude trust preferred securities subject to certain grandfathering exceptions for organizations like the Company which were under $15 billion in assets as of December 31, 2009, mortgage servicing rights and certain deferred tax assets and include unrealized gains and losses on available for sale debt and equity securities unless the organization opts out of including such unrealized gains and losses, which the Company intends to do;

·                  the risk-weights of certain assets for purposes of calculating the risk-based capital ratios are changed for high volatility commercial real estate acquisition, development and construction loans, certain past due non-residential mortgage loans and certain mortgage-backed and other securities exposures; and

·                  an additional “countercyclical capital buffer” is required for larger and more complex institutions.

The prompt corrective action standards are changed as the new capital rule ratios become effective. Under the new standards, in order to be considered well-capitalized, the bank will be required to meet the new common equity Tier 1 ratio of 6.5%, an increased Tier 1 ratio of 8% (increased from 6%), a total capital ratio of 10% (unchanged) and a leverage ratio of 5% (unchanged).

An additional capital conservation buffer of 2.5% of risk weighted assets above the regulatory minimum capital ratios established under the new final capital rule will be phased in from 2016 to 2019 and must be met to avoid limitations on the ability of the bank to pay dividends, repurchase shares or pay discretionary bonuses. Including the capital conservation buffer of 2.5%, the new final capital rule would result in the following minimum ratios to be considered well capitalized: (i) a Tier 1 capital ratio of 8.5%, (ii) a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 7.0%, and (iii) a total capital ratio of 10.5%. The new capital conservation buffer requirement will be phased in beginning in January 2016 at 0.625% of risk-weighted assets and would increase each year until fully implemented in January 2019. While the new final capital rule sets higher regulatory capital standards for the Company and the bank, bank regulators may also continue their past policies of expecting banks to maintain additional capital beyond the new minimum requirements. The implementation of the new capital rules or more stringent requirements to maintain higher levels of capital or to maintain higher levels of liquid assets could adversely impact the Company’s net income and return on equity, restrict the ability to pay dividends or executive bonuses and require the raising of additional capital.

9

Management believes that, as of December 31, 2014, the Company and the bank would meet all applicable capital requirements under the New Capital Rules on a fully phased-in basis if such requirements were currently in effect (see “Legislative and Regulatory Developments”).

Prompt Corrective Action Provisions

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

Final Volcker Rule

In December 2013, the federal bank regulatory agencies adopted final rules that implement a part of the Dodd-Frank Act commonly referred to as the “Volcker Rule.” Under these rules and subject to certain exceptions, banking entities are restricted from engaging in activities that are considered proprietary trading and from sponsoring or investing in certain entities, including hedge or private equity funds that are considered “covered funds.” These rules became effective on April 1, 2014, although certain provisions are subject to delayed effectiveness under rules promulgated by the FRB. The Company and the bank held no investment positions at December 31, 2014 which were subject to the final rule. Therefore, while these new rules may require us to conduct certain internal analysis and reporting, they did not require any material changes in our operations or business.

Bank Holding Company Regulation

As contained in both federal and state banking laws and regulations, a wide range of requirements and restrictions apply to bank holding companies and their subsidiaries which:

·                  require regular periodic reports and such additional reports of information as the Federal Reserve may require;

·                  require bank holding companies to meet or exceed minimum capital requirements (see “Legislative and Regulatory Developments” and “Current Capital Adequacy Requirements”);

·                  require that bank holding companies serve as a source of financial and managerial strength to subsidiary banks and commit resources as necessary to support each subsidiary bank. The source-of-strength doctrine most directly affects bank holding companies where a bank holding company’s subsidiary bank fails to maintain adequate capital levels. In such a situation, the subsidiary bank will be required by the bank’s federal regulator to take “prompt corrective action” (see “Prompt Corrective Action Provisions”);

10

·                  limit dividends payable to shareholders and restrict the ability of bank holding companies to obtain dividends or other distributions from their subsidiary banks;

·                  require a bank holding company to terminate an activity or terminate control of or liquidate or divest certain subsidiaries, affiliates or investments if the Federal Reserve believes the activity or the control of the subsidiary or affiliate constitutes a significant risk to the financial safety, soundness or stability of any bank subsidiary;

·                  require the prior approval for changes in senior executive officer or directors and prohibit golden parachute payments, including change in control agreements, or new employment agreements with such payment terms, which are contingent upon termination when a bank holding company is deemed to be in troubled condition;

·                  regulate provisions of certain bank holding company debt, including the authority to impose interest ceilings and reserve requirements on such debt and require prior approval to purchase or redeem securities in certain situations; and

·                  require prior approval of acquisitions and mergers with other banks or bank holding companies and consider certain competitive, management, financial, and anti-money laundering compliance impact on the U.S.

Other Restrictions on the Company’s 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 that elect and retain “financial holding company” status pursuant to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (“GLBA”) 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 GLBA 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 that bank holding company must be well capitalized and well managed, and, except in limited circumstances, depository subsidiaries must be in satisfactory compliance with the Community Reinvestment Act (“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 the required divestiture of subsidiary banks or the termination of all activities that do not conform to those permissible for a bank holding company. The Company has not elected financial holding company status and neither Company nor the bank has engaged in any activities determined by the Federal Reserve to be financial in nature or incidental or complementary to activities that are financial in nature.

Dividends

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. The Federal Reserve has also discouraged payment ratios that are at maximum allowable levels unless both asset quality and capital are very strong.

The bank is a legal entity that is separate and distinct from its holding company. CPF is dependent on the performance of the bank for funds which may be received as dividends from the bank for use in the operation of CPF and the ability of CPF to pay dividends to shareholders. Subject to the regulatory restrictions which currently further restrict the ability of the bank to declare and pay dividends under applicable Hawaii law, future cash dividends by the bank will depend upon management’s assessment of future capital requirements, contractual restrictions and other factors. When effective, the new minimum capital rule may restrict dividends by the bank if the additional capital conservation buffer is not achieved.

11

Regulation of the Bank

As a Hawaii-chartered commercial bank whose deposits are insured by the FDIC, the bank is subject to regulation, supervision, and regular examination by the DFI and by the FDIC as a nonmember state bank, as the bank’s primary Federal regulator. Specific federal and state laws and regulations which are applicable to banks regulate, among other things, the scope of their business, their investments, their reserves against deposits, the timing of the availability of deposited funds, their activities relating to dividends, investments, loans, the nature and amount of and collateral for certain loans, servicing and foreclosing on loans, transactions with affiliates, borrowings, capital requirements, certain check-clearing activities, branching, and mergers and acquisitions.

FDIC and DFI Enforcement Authority

The federal and Hawaii 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: (1) internal controls, information systems, and internal audit systems; (2) loan documentation; (3) credit underwriting; (4) interest-rate exposure; (5) asset growth and asset quality; and (6) 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, including bidding in FDIC receiverships for failed banks;

·                  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 charter and/or take possession of and close and liquidate the bank or appoint the FDIC as receiver, which for a Hawaii-chartered bank would result in a revocation of its charter.

12

The bank received a letter from the FDIC dated November 14, 2014 advising that the Memorandum of Understanding (the “Compliance MOU”) previously entered into with the FDIC on October 9, 2012, relating to improvement of the bank’s compliance management system (“CMS”) was terminated. As further described in Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements under “Part II, Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” the bank and CPF were previously subject to regulatory orders with the FDIC and the FRB which were terminated on October 26, 2012 and February 12, 2013, respectively. Although we are no longer subject to any regulatory agreements with our regulators, we may in the future become subject to other agreements with our regulators which restrict our activities or may also impose increased capital ratios or other requirements on our business.

Deposit Insurance

The FDIC is an independent federal agency that insures deposits through the Deposit Insurance Fund (the “DIF”) 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 amount of FDIC assessments paid by each DIF member institution is based on its asset size and its relative risk of default as measured by regulatory capital ratios and other supervisory factors. The bank’s FDIC insurance expense totaled $2.8 million for 2014. We are generally unable to control the amount of premiums 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 premiums. Any future increases in FDIC insurance premiums may have a material and adverse effect on our earnings and could have a material adverse effect on the value of, or market for, our common stock.

Operations and Consumer Compliance Laws

The bank must comply with numerous federal and state anti-money laundering and consumer protection and privacy statutes and implementing regulations, including the USA Patriot Act of 2001, GLBA, 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, the California Homeowner Bill of Rights and various federal and state privacy protection laws. Noncompliance with these laws could subject the bank to lawsuits and could also result in administrative penalties, including, fines and reimbursements. The bank and CPF 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 mandate certain disclosure and reporting requirements and regulate the manner in which financial institutions must deal with customers when taking deposits, making loans, servicing, collecting, and foreclosure of loans, and providing other services. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations can subject the bank to various 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 bank received an “Outstanding” rating in the FDIC’s 2012 Community Reinvestment performance evaluation that measures how financial institutions support their communities in the areas of lending, investment and service.

CFPB

The Dodd-Frank Act provided for the creation of the CFPB as an independent entity within the Federal Reserve with broad rulemaking, supervisory and enforcement authority over consumer financial products and services, including deposit products, residential mortgages, home-equity loans, credit cards, and other consumer loans. The CFPB’s functions include investigating consumer complaints, conducting market research, rulemaking, supervising and examining bank consumer transactions, and enforcing rules related to consumer financial products and services. CFPB regulations and guidance apply to all financial institutions and banks with $10 billion or more in assets and are subject to examination by the CFPB. Banks with less than $10 billion in assets, including the bank, will continue to be examined for compliance by their primary federal banking agency. If we were able to grow beyond $10 billion in assets, we would be subject to enhanced CFPB examination as well as be required to perform more comprehensive stress-testing on our business and operations.

13

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

Employees

At December 31, 2014, we employed 841 persons, 754 on a full-time basis and 87 on a part-time basis. We are not a party to any collective bargaining agreement.

Protection of Net Operating Losses

We have generated considerable tax benefits, including net operating loss carry-forwards and federal and state tax credits. Our use of the tax benefits in the future would be significantly limited if we experience an “ownership change” for U.S. federal income tax purposes. In general, an “ownership change” will occur if there is a cumulative increase in the Company’s ownership by “5-percent shareholders” (as defined under U.S. income tax laws) that exceeds 50 percentage points over a rolling three-year period.

On November 23, 2010, our board declared a dividend of preferred share purchase rights (“Rights”) in respect of our common stock which were issued pursuant to a Tax Benefits Preservation Plan, dated as of November 23, 2010 (the “Tax Benefits Preservation Plan”), between the Company and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as rights agent. Each Right represents the right to purchase, upon the terms and subject to the conditions in the Tax Benefits Preservation Plan, 1/10,000th of a share of our Junior Participating Preferred Stock, Series C, no par value, for $6.00, subject to adjustment. The Tax Benefits Preservation Plan is designed to reduce the likelihood that the Company will experience an ownership change by discouraging any person from becoming a beneficial owner of 4.99% or more of our common stock (a “Threshold Holder”). Adoption of the Tax Benefits Preservation Plan was required by our agreements with The Carlyle Group (“Carlyle”) and Anchorage Capital Group, L.L.C. (“Anchorage”). On January 29, 2014, our Board of Directors approved an amendment to the Tax Benefits Preservation Plan to extend it for up to an additional two years (until February 18, 2016).

To further protect our tax benefits, on January 26, 2011, our board approved a proposed amendment to our restated articles of incorporation to restrict transfers of our stock if the effect of an attempted transfer would cause the transferee to become a Threshold Holder or to cause the beneficial ownership of a Threshold Holder to increase (the “Protective Charter Amendment”). At our annual meeting of shareholders on April 27, 2011, our shareholders approved the Protective Charter Amendment. On January 29, 2014, our Board of Directors approved an amendment to the Protective Charter Amendment to extend it for up to an additional two years (until May 2, 2016). Our shareholders approved the extension of the Protective Charter Amendment on April 25, 2014. There is no guarantee, however, that the Tax Benefits Preservation Plan or the Protective Charter Amendment will prevent the Company from experiencing an ownership change.

14

Available Information

Our internet website can be found at www.centralpacificbank.com. Our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and all amendments to those reports can be found on our internet website as soon as reasonably practicable after such materials are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. Copies of the Company’s filings with the SEC may also be obtained directly from the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. These documents may also be obtained in print upon request by our shareholders to our Investor Relations Department.

Also posted on our website and available in print upon request of any shareholder to our Investor Relations Department, are the charters for our Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Corporate Governance Committee, as well as our Corporate Governance Guidelines and Code of Business Conduct and Ethics. Within the time period required by the SEC and NYSE, we will post on our website any amendment to the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and any waiver applicable to our senior financial officers, as defined by the SEC, and our executive officers or directors. In addition, our website includes information concerning purchases and sales of our equity securities by our executive officers and directors, as well as disclosure relating to certain non-GAAP financial measures (as defined in the SEC’s Regulation G) that we may make public orally, telephonically, by webcast, by broadcast or by similar means from time to time.

ITEM 1A.                                       RISK FACTORS

Our business faces significant risks, including credit, market/liquidity, operational, legal/regulatory and strategic/reputation risks. The factors described below may not be the only risks we face and are not intended to serve as a comprehensive listing or be applicable only to the category of risk under which they are disclosed. The risks described below are generally applicable to more than one of the following categories of risks. Additional risks that we do not yet know of or that we currently think are immaterial may also impair our business operations. If any of the events or circumstances described in the following factors actually occurs, our business, financial condition and/or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Risk Factors Related to our Business

Negative developments in the global and U.S. economies could have an adverse effect on us.

Although general economic trends and market conditions have stabilized, concerns about the ability to maintain a sustained economic recovery still remain, including lingering concerns over unemployment levels, growing U.S. government and foreign indebtedness, a large budget deficit, and the federal debt ceiling. Downgrades in U.S. and foreign debt instruments could raise borrowing costs and adversely impact the mortgage and housing markets. In general, adverse economic conditions could have one or more of the following negative impacts on us, any one of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations: (i) loan delinquencies may increase; (ii) problem assets and foreclosures may increase leading to higher loan charge-offs; (iii) demand for our products and services may decline; (iv) low cost or non-interest bearing deposits may decrease; and (v) collateral for loans made by us, especially involving real estate, may decline in value, in turn reducing customers’ borrowing power and reducing the value of assets and collateral associated with our existing loans.

Difficult economic and market conditions have adversely affected our industry and renewed economic slowdown in Hawaii would result in additional adverse effects on us.

Unlike larger national or other regional banks that are more geographically diversified, our business and operations are closely tied to the Hawaii market. The Hawaii economy relies on tourism, real estate, government and other service-based industries. Declines in tourism, increases in energy costs, the availability of affordable air transportation, adverse weather and natural disasters, and local budget issues impact consumer and corporate spending. As a result, such events may contribute to the deterioration in Hawaii’s general economic condition, which could adversely impact us and our borrowers.

15

The high concentration of real estate loans in our portfolio, combined with the deterioration in these sectors caused by the economic downturn, had and may continue to have a significantly more adverse impact on our operating results than many other banks across the nation. If our borrowers continue to experience financial difficulty, or if property values securing our real estate loans decline, we will incur elevated credit costs due to the composition of our loan portfolio even if market conditions improve.

Our real estate loan operations have a considerable effect on our results of operations.

The performance of our real estate loans depends on a number of factors, including the continued stabilization and eventual improvement of the real estate markets in which we operate. As we have seen in the Hawaii and California construction and real estate markets since the latter part of 2007, the strength of the real estate market and the results of our operations could be negatively affected by an economic downturn.

In addition, declines in the market for commercial property could cause some of our borrowers to suffer losses on their project, which would negatively affect our financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Declines in housing prices and the supply of existing houses for sale could cause residential developers who are our borrowers to suffer losses on their projects and encounter difficulty in repaying their loans. We cannot assure you that we will have an adequate allowance for loan and lease losses to cover future losses. If we suffer greater losses than we are projecting, our financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected.

Our allowance for loan and lease loss methodology has resulted in credits to our provision for loan and lease losses but the credit provisions may not continue.

For four consecutive years from 2011 through 2014, we recorded a credit to the provision for loan and lease losses. Although other factors of our overall risk profile have improved in recent years and general economic trends and market conditions have stabilized, concerns over the global and U.S. economies still remain. Accordingly, it is possible that the real estate markets we participate in could deteriorate as it did from the latter part of 2007 through 2010. If this occurs, it may result in an increase in loan delinquencies, loan charge-offs, and our allowance for loan and lease losses. Even if economic conditions improve or stay the same, it is possible that we may experience material credit losses and in turn, increases to our allowance for loan and lease losses, due to any number of factors, including but not limited to, the elevated risk still inherent in our existing loan portfolio resulting from our high concentration of commercial real estate loans. If that were to occur, or if we continue to have strong growth in our loan portfolio, we may have to record a provision for loan and lease losses which would have an adverse impact on our net income.

A large percentage of our loans are collateralized by real estate and continued deterioration in the real estate market may result in additional losses and adversely affect our financial results.

Our results of operations have been, and in future periods, will continue to be significantly impacted by the economy in Hawaii, and to a lesser extent, other markets we are exposed to including California. Approximately 72% of our loan portfolio as of December 31, 2014 was comprised of loans primarily collateralized by real estate, with the significant majority of these loans concentrated in Hawaii.

Deterioration of the economic environment in Hawaii, California or other markets we are exposed to, including a decline in the real estate market and single-family home resales or a material external shock, may significantly impair the value of our collateral and our ability to sell the collateral upon foreclosure. In the event of a default with respect to any of these loans, amounts received upon sale of the collateral may be insufficient to recover outstanding principal and interest on the loan. As we have seen in the past, material declines in the value of the real estate assets securing many of our commercial real estate loans may lead to significant credit losses in this portfolio. As a result of our particularly high concentration of real estate loans, our portfolio had been and remains particularly susceptible to significant credit losses during economic downturns and adverse changes in the real estate market.

16

Our allowance for loan and lease losses may not be sufficient to cover actual loan losses, which could adversely affect our results of operations. Additional loan losses may occur in the future and may occur at a rate greater than we have experienced to date.

As a lender, we are exposed to the risk that our loan customers may not repay their loans according to their terms and that the collateral or guarantees securing these loans may be insufficient to assure repayment. Our current allowance for loan and lease losses may not be sufficient to cover future loan losses. We may experience significant loan losses that could have a material adverse effect on our operating results. Management makes various assumptions and judgments about the collectibility of our loan portfolio, which are regularly reevaluated and are based in part on:

·                  current economic conditions and their estimated effects on specific borrowers;

·                  an evaluation of the existing relationships among loans, potential loan losses and the present level of the allowance for loan and lease losses;

·                  results of examinations of our loan portfolios by regulatory agencies; and

·                  management’s internal review of the loan portfolio.

In determining the size of the allowance for loan and lease losses, we rely on an analysis of our loan portfolio, our experience and our evaluation of general economic conditions, as well as the requirements of any supervisory action taken by the bank’s regulators and other regulatory input. If our assumptions prove to be incorrect, our current allowance for loan and lease losses may not be sufficient to cover the losses. Because of the uncertainty in the economy, volatility in the credit and real estate markets, including specifically, the deterioration in the Hawaii and California real estate markets and our high concentration of commercial real estate loans, we made significant enhancements to our allowance for loan and lease losses over the past several years and may need to make additional enhancements in the future. In addition, third parties, including our federal and state regulators, periodically evaluate the adequacy of our allowance for loan and lease losses and may communicate with us concerning the methodology or judgments that we have raised in determining the allowance for loan and lease losses. As a result of this input, we may be required to assign different grades to specific credits, increase our provision for loan and lease losses, and/or recognize further loan charge offs.

Our ability to use net operating loss carry forwards to reduce future tax payments may be limited or restricted.

We have generated significant net operating losses (“NOLs”) as a result of our prior losses. We generally are able to carry NOLs forward to reduce taxable income in future years. However, our ability to utilize the NOLs is subject to the rules of Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code. Section 382 generally restricts the use of NOLs after an “ownership change.” An ownership change occurs if, among other things, the shareholders (or specified groups of shareholders) who own or have owned, directly or indirectly, 5% or more of a corporation’s common stock or are otherwise treated as 5% shareholders under Section 382 and Treasury regulations promulgated thereunder increase their aggregate percentage ownership of that corporation’s stock by more than 50 percentage points over the lowest percentage of the stock owned by these shareholders over a three-year rolling period. In the event of an ownership change, Section 382 imposes an annual limitation on the amount of taxable income a corporation may offset with NOL carry forwards. This annual limitation is generally equal to the product of the value of the corporation’s stock on the date of the ownership change, multiplied by the long-term tax-exempt rate published monthly by the Internal Revenue Service. Any unused annual limitation may be carried over to later years until the applicable expiration date for the respective NOL carryforwards.

17

In order to reduce the likelihood that transactions in our common stock will result in an ownership change, on November 23, 2010, we adopted a Tax Benefits Preservation Plan, which provides an economic disincentive for any person or group to become an owner, for relevant tax purposes, of 4.99% or more of our common stock. On January 29, 2014, our Board of Directors approved an amendment to the Tax Benefits Preservation Plan to extend it for up to an additional two years (until February 18, 2016). To further protect our NOL carryforwards, on May 2, 2011, we filed the Protective Charter Amendment to restrict transfers of our common stock if the effect of the transfer would be to cause the transferee to become an owner, for relevant tax purposes, of 4.99% or more of our common stock (a “Threshold Holder”) or cause the beneficial ownership of our common stock by any Threshold Holder to increase. On January 29, 2014, our Board of Directors approved an amendment to the Protective Charter Amendment to extend it for up to an additional two years (to May 2, 2016). Our shareholders approved the extension of the Protective Charter Amendment on April 25, 2014. However, we cannot ensure that our ability to use our NOLs to offset income will not become limited in the future. As a result, we could pay taxes earlier and in larger amounts than would be the case if our NOLs were available to reduce our federal income taxes without restriction.

Our ability to maintain adequate sources of funding and liquidity and required capital levels may be negatively impacted by uncertainty in the economic environment which may, among other things, impact our ability to satisfy our obligations.

Liquidity is essential to our business. An inability to raise funds through deposits, borrowings, the sale of investments or loans, and other sources would have a substantial negative effect on our liquidity. Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance our activities on terms which are acceptable to us could be impaired by factors that affect us specifically or the financial services industry or economy in general. Factors that could detrimentally impact our access to liquidity sources include concerns regarding deterioration in our financial condition, increased regulatory actions against us and a decrease in the level of our business activity as a result of a downturn in the markets in which our loans or deposits are concentrated. Our ability to borrow could also be impaired by factors that are not specific to us, such as a disruption in the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the financial industry in light of the past turmoil faced by banking organizations and the credit markets.

The management of liquidity risk is critical to the management of our business and our ability to service our customer base. In managing our balance sheet, our primary source of funding is customer deposits. Our ability to continue to attract these deposits and other funding sources is subject to variability based upon a number of factors including volume and volatility in the securities’ markets, our financial condition, our credit rating and the relative interest rates that we are prepared to pay for these liabilities. The availability and level of deposits and other funding sources is highly dependent upon the perception of the liquidity and creditworthiness of the financial institution, which perception can change quickly in response to market conditions or circumstances unique to a particular company. Concerns about our past and future financial condition or concerns about our credit exposure to other persons could adversely impact our sources of liquidity, financial position, including regulatory capital ratios, results of operations and our business prospects.

If the level of deposits were to materially decrease, we would need to raise additional funds by increasing the interest that we pay on certificates of deposits or other depository accounts, seek other debt or equity financing or draw upon our available lines of credit. We rely on commercial and retail deposits, and to a lesser extent, advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Seattle (“FHLB”) and the Federal Reserve discount window, to fund our operations. Although we have historically been able to replace maturing deposits and advances as necessary, we might not be able to replace such funds in the future if, among other things, our results of operations or financial condition or the results of operations or financial condition of the FHLB or market conditions were to change.

Our line of credit with the FHLB serves as our primary outside source of liquidity. The Federal Reserve discount window also serves as an additional outside source of liquidity. Borrowings under this arrangement are through the Federal Reserve’s primary facility under the borrower-in-custody program. The duration of borrowings from the Federal Reserve discount window are generally for a very short period, usually overnight. In the event that these outside sources of liquidity become unavailable to us, we will need to seek additional sources of liquidity, including selling assets. We cannot assure you that we will be able to sell assets at a level to allow us to repay borrowings or meet our liquidity needs.

18

We constantly monitor our activities with respect to liquidity and evaluate closely our utilization of our cash assets; however, there can be no assurance that our liquidity or the cost of funds to us may not be materially and adversely impacted as a result of economic, market, or operational considerations that we may not be able to control.

Our business is subject to interest rate risk and fluctuations in interest rates may adversely affect our earnings.

The majority of our assets and liabilities are monetary in nature and subject to risk from changes in interest rates. Like most financial institutions, our earnings and profitability depend significantly on our net interest income, which is the difference between interest income on interest-earning assets, such as loans and investment securities, and interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities, such as deposits and borrowings. We expect that we will periodically experience “gaps” in the interest rate sensitivities of our assets and liabilities, meaning that either our interest-bearing liabilities will be more sensitive to changes in market interest rates than our interest-earning assets, or vice versa. If market interest rates should move contrary to our position, this “gap” will work against us and our earnings may be negatively affected. In light of our current volume and mix of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, our net interest margin could be expected to remain relatively constant during periods of rising interest rates, and to decline slightly during periods of falling interest rates. We are unable to predict or control fluctuations of market interest rates, which are affected by many factors, including the following:

·                  inflation;

·                  recession;

·                  changes in unemployment;

·                  the money supply;

·                  international disorder and instability in domestic and foreign financial markets; and

·                  governmental actions.

Our asset/liability management strategy may not be able to control our risk from changes in market interest rates and it may not be able to prevent changes in interest rates from having a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. From time to time, we may reposition our assets and liabilities to reduce our net interest income volatility. Failure to perform in any of these areas could significantly weaken our competitive position, which could adversely affect our growth and profitability, which, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Governmental regulation and regulatory actions against us may further impair our operations or restrict our growth.

We are subject to significant governmental supervision and regulation. These regulations are intended primarily for the protection of depositors’ funds, federal deposit insurance funds and the banking system as a whole, not security holders. These regulations affect our lending practices, capital structure, investment practices, dividend policy and growth, among other things. Congress and federal regulatory agencies continually review banking laws, regulations and policies for possible changes. Statutes and regulations affecting our business may be changed at any time and the interpretation of these statutes and regulations by examining authorities may also change. In addition, regulations may be adopted which increase our deposit insurance premiums and enact special assessments which could increase expenses associated with running our business and adversely affect our earnings.

19

There can be no assurance that such statutes and regulations, any changes thereto or to their interpretation will not adversely affect our business. In particular, these statutes and regulations, and any changes thereto, could subject us to additional costs (including legal and compliance 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. In addition to governmental supervision and regulation, we are subject to changes in other federal and state laws, including changes in tax laws, which could materially affect us and the banking industry generally. We are subject to the rules and regulations of the FRBSF, the FDIC and the DFI, and may be subject to the rules and regulations promulgated by the CFPB. In addition, we are subject to the rules and regulation of the NYSE and the SEC. If we fail to comply with federal and state regulations, the regulators may limit our activities or growth, impose fines on us or in the case of our bank regulators, ultimately require our bank to cease its operations. Bank regulations can hinder our ability to compete with financial services companies that are not regulated in the same manner or are less regulated. Federal and state bank regulatory agencies regulate many aspects of our operations. These areas include:

·                  the capital that must be maintained;

·                  the kinds of activities that can be engaged in;

·                  the kinds and amounts of investments that can be made;

·                  the locations of offices;

·                  insurance of deposits and the premiums that we must pay for this insurance;

·                  procedures and policies we must adopt; and

·                  how much cash we must set aside as reserves for deposits.

In addition, bank regulatory authorities have the authority to bring enforcement actions against banks and bank holding companies, including the bank and CPF, for unsafe or unsound practices in the conduct of their businesses or for violations of any law, rule or regulation, any condition imposed in writing by the appropriate bank regulatory agency or any written agreement with the authority. Enforcement actions against us could include a federal conservatorship or receivership for the bank, the issuance of additional orders that could be judicially enforced, the imposition of civil monetary penalties, the issuance of directives to enter into a strategic transaction, whether by merger or otherwise, with a third party, the termination of insurance of deposits, the issuance of removal and prohibition orders against institution-affiliated parties, and the enforcement of such actions through injunctions or restraining orders.

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

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

20

New regulatory capital standards impose enhanced capital adequacy requirements on us.

Increased regulatory capital requirements (and the associated compliance costs) which have been adopted by federal banking regulators impose additional capital requirements on our business. The administration of existing capital adequacy laws as well as adoption of new laws and regulations relating to capital adequacy, or more expansive or aggressive interpretations of existing laws and regulations, could have a material adverse effect on our business, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations and could substantially restrict our ability to pay dividends, repurchase any of our capital stock, or pay executive bonuses. In addition, increased regulatory capital requirements could require us to raise additional capital which would dilute our existing shareholders at the time of such capital issuance.

If we are unable to effectively manage the composition of our investment securities portfolio, which we expect will continue to comprise a significant portion of our earning assets, our net interest income and net interest margin could be adversely affected.

Our primary sources of interest income include interest on loans and leases, as well as interest earned on investment securities. Interest earned on investment securities represented 25.1% of our interest income in the year ended December 31, 2014, as compared to 25.4% of our interest income in the year ended December 31, 2013. Accordingly, effectively managing our investment securities portfolio to generate interest income while managing the composition and risks associated with that portfolio, including the mix of government agency and non-agency securities, has become increasingly important. If we are unable to effectively manage our investment securities portfolio or if the interest income generated by our investment securities portfolio declines, our net interest income and net interest margin could be adversely affected.

The soundness of other financial institutions could adversely affect us.

Our ability to engage in routine funding transactions could be adversely affected by the actions and commercial soundness of other financial institutions. Defaults by, or even rumors or questions about, one or more financial services institutions, or the financial services industry generally, have led to market-wide liquidity problems and could lead to losses or defaults by us or by other institutions. There is no assurance that any such losses would not materially and adversely affect our results of operations.

Our deposit customers may pursue alternatives to deposits at our bank or seek higher yielding deposits causing us to incur increased funding costs.

Checking and savings account balances and other forms of deposits can decrease when our deposit customers perceive alternative investments, such as the stock market or other non-depository investments as providing superior expected returns or seek to spread their deposits over several banks to maximize FDIC insurance coverage. Furthermore, technology and other changes have made it more convenient for the bank’s customers to transfer funds into alternative investments including products offered by other financial institutions or non-bank service providers. Additional increases in short-term interest rates could increase transfers of deposits to higher yielding deposits. Efforts and initiatives we undertake to retain and increase deposits, including deposit pricing, can increase our costs. When the bank’s customers move money out of bank deposits in favor of alternative investments or into higher yielding deposits, or spread their accounts over several banks, we can lose a relatively inexpensive source of funds, thus increasing our funding costs.

21

The fiscal, monetary and regulatory policies of the federal government and its agencies could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

The FRB regulates the supply of money and credit in the U.S. Its policies determine in large part the cost of funds for lending and investing and the return earned on those loans and investments, both of which affect the net interest margin. It also can materially decrease the value of financial assets we hold, such as debt securities.

In an effort to stimulate the economy, the federal government and its agencies have taken various steps to keep interest rates at extremely low levels. Our net interest income and net interest margin may be negatively impacted by a prolonged low interest rate environment like we are currently experiencing as it may result in us holding lower yielding loans and securities on our balance sheet, particularly if we are unable to replace the maturing higher yielding assets with similar higher yielding assets. Changes in the slope of the yield curve, which represents the spread between short-term and long-term interest rates, could also reduce our net interest income and net interest margin. Historically, the yield curve is upward sloping, meaning short-term rates are lower than long-term rates. When the yield curve flattens, as is the case in the current interest rate environment, our net interest income and net interest margin could decrease as our cost of funds increases relative to the yield we can earn on our assets.

If we continue to see an improvement in national economic conditions or other changes occur, there is a potential that the FRB will increase interest rates. Should the FRB raise interest rates significantly and rapidly, there is potential for decreased demand for our loan products, an increase in our cost of funds, and curtailment of the current economic recovery.

Changes in FRB policies and our regulatory environment generally are beyond our control, and we are unable to predict what changes may occur or the manner in which any future changes may affect our business, financial condition and results of operation.

We rely on dividends from our subsidiaries for most of our revenue.

Because we are a holding company with no significant operations other than our bank, we depend upon dividends from our bank for a substantial portion of our revenues.

Hawaii law only permits the bank to pay dividends out of retained earnings as defined under Hawaii banking law (“Statutory Retained Earnings”), which differs from GAAP retained earnings. At December 31, 2014, the bank had Statutory Retained Earnings of $123.8 million.

Our ability to pay cash dividends to our shareholders is subject to restrictions under federal and Hawaii law, including restrictions imposed by the FRB and covenants set forth in various agreements we are a party to, including covenants set forth in our subordinated debentures.

The occurrence of fraudulent activity, breaches or failures of our information security controls or cybersecurity-related incidents could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

As a financial institution, we are susceptible to fraudulent activity, information security breaches and cybersecurity-related incidents that may be committed against us or our clients, which may result in financial losses or increased costs to us or our clients, disclosure or misuse of our information or our client information, misappropriation of assets, privacy breaches against our clients, litigation, or damage to our reputation. Such fraudulent activity may take many forms, including check fraud, electronic fraud, wire fraud, phishing, social engineering and other dishonest acts. Information security breaches and cybersecurity-related incidents may include fraudulent or unauthorized access to systems used by us or our clients, denial or degradation of service attacks, and malware or other cyber-attacks. In recent periods, there continues to be a rise in electronic fraudulent activity, security breaches and cyber-attacks within the financial services industry, especially in the commercial banking sector due to cyber criminals targeting commercial bank accounts. Consistent with industry trends, we have also experienced an increase in attempted electronic fraudulent activity, security breaches and cybersecurity-related incidents in recent periods. Moreover, in recent periods, several large corporations, including financial institutions and retail companies, have suffered major data breaches, in some cases exposing not only confidential and proprietary corporate information, but also sensitive financial and other personal information of their customers and employees and subjecting them to potential fraudulent activity. Some of our clients may have been affected by these breaches, which increase their risks of identity theft, credit card fraud and other fraudulent activity that could involve their accounts with us.

22

Information pertaining to us and our clients is maintained, and transactions are executed, on the networks and systems of us, our clients and certain of our third party partners, such as our online banking or reporting systems. The secure maintenance and transmission of confidential information, as well as execution of transactions over these systems, are essential to protect us and our clients against fraud and security breaches and to maintain our clients’ confidence. Breaches of information security also may occur, and in infrequent cases have occurred, through intentional or unintentional acts by those having access to our systems or our clients’ or counterparties’ confidential information, including employees. In addition, increases in criminal activity levels and sophistication, advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries, vulnerabilities in thirdparty technologies (including browsers and operating systems) or other developments could result in a compromise or breach of the technology, processes and controls that we use to prevent fraudulent transactions and to protect data about us, our clients and underlying transactions, as well as the technology used by our clients to access our systems. Although we have developed, and continue to invest in, systems and processes that are designed to detect and prevent security breaches and cyber-attacks and periodically test our security, our inability to anticipate, or failure to adequately mitigate, breaches of security could result in: losses to us or our clients; our loss of business and/or clients; damage to our reputation; the incurrence of additional expenses; disruption to our business; our inability to grow our online services or other businesses; additional regulatory scrutiny or penalties; or our exposure 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.

More generally, publicized information concerning security and cyber-related problems could inhibit the use or growth of electronic or web-based applications or solutions as a means of conducting commercial transactions. Such publicity may also cause damage to our reputation as a financial institution. As a result, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

We continually encounter technological change.

The financial services industry is continually undergoing rapid technological change with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. The effective use of technology increases efficiency and enables financial institutions to better serve customers and to reduce costs. Our future success depends, in part, upon our ability to address the needs of our customers by using technology to provide products and services that will satisfy customer demands, as well as to create additional efficiencies in our operations. Many of our competitors have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements. We may not be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services or be successful in marketing these products and services to our customers. In addition, there are a limited number of qualified persons in our local marketplace with the knowledge and experience required to effectively maintain our information technology systems and implement our technology initiatives. Failure to successfully attract and retain qualified personnel, or keep pace with technological change affecting the financial services industry could have a material adverse impact on our business and, in turn, our financial condition and results of operations.

We are implementing changes to our operations to improve our efficiency ratio that may adversely impact our results of operations.

We have completed or are in progress with several initiatives to improve our efficiency ratio. Several key initiatives involve changes to our technology and information systems including outsourcing the data centers and hardware for our core information technology system and items processing function to Fiserv, Inc., which is our existing core software application provider, and designing, developing, and implementing our data warehouse and customer relationship management programs. Additionally, during the third quarter of 2013, we began to implement a staff right-sizing plan which was completed in 2014. With the assistance of third-party consultants, we have completed comprehensive assessments and plans and are effectively managing and monitoring the execution of these initiatives. However, as a result of the significance of the changes, we could experience adverse effects on our operations. These adverse effects may include system transactional or reporting errors and delays, short-term reduced productivity, undesired personnel turnover, and loss of key customer relationships. If any of these effects were to occur, it could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations. Additionally, these changes could require us to change our internal and management control environment.

23

Financial services companies depend on the accuracy and completeness of information about customers and counterparties.

In deciding whether to extend credit or enter into other transactions, we may rely on information furnished by or on behalf of customers and counterparties, including financial statements, credit reports and other financial information. We may also rely on representations of those customers, counterparties or other third parties, such as independent auditors, as to the accuracy and completeness of that information. Reliance on inaccurate or misleading financial statements, credit reports or other financial information could have a material adverse impact on our business and, in turn, our financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to various legal claims and litigation.

From time to time, customers, employees and others that we do business with, or are regulated by, as well as our shareholders, can make claims and take legal action against us. Regardless of whether these claims and legal actions are founded or unfounded, if such claims and legal actions are not resolved in a manner favorable to us, they may result in significant financial liability and/or adversely affect the market perception of us and our products and services, as well as impact customer demand for our products and services. Any financial liability or reputational damage could have a material adverse effect on our business, which, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Even if these claims and legal actions do not result in a financial liability or reputational damage, defending these claims and actions have resulted in, and will continue to result in, increased legal and professional services costs, which adds to our noninterest expense and negatively impacts our operating results.

We operate in a highly competitive industry and market area.

We face substantial competition in all areas of our operations from a variety of different competitors, many of which are larger and may have more financial resources. Such competitors primarily include national, regional and community banks within the various markets we operate. Additionally, various out of state banks conduct significant business in the market areas in which we currently operate. We also face competition from many other types of financial institutions, including, without limitation, savings banks, credit unions, finance companies, brokerage firms, insurance companies, factoring companies and other financial intermediaries.

The financial services industry could become even more competitive as a result of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and continued consolidation. Banks, securities firms and insurance companies can merge under the umbrella of a financial holding company, which can offer virtually any type of financial service, including banking, securities underwriting, insurance (both agency and underwriting) and merchant banking. Also, technology has lowered barriers to entry and made it possible for non-banks to offer products and services traditionally provided by banks, such as automatic transfer and automatic payment systems. Many of our competitors have fewer regulatory constraints and may have lower cost structures. Additionally, due to their size, many competitors may be able to achieve economies of scale and, as a result, may offer a broader range of products and services as well as better pricing for those products and services than we can.

24

Our ability to compete successfully depends on a number of factors, including, among other things:

·                  the ability to develop, maintain and build upon long-term customer relationships based on top quality service, high ethical standards and safe, sound assets;

·                  the ability to expand our market position;

·                  the scope, relevance and pricing of products and services offered to meet customer needs and demands;

·                  the rate at which we introduce new products and services relative to our competitors;

·                  customer satisfaction with our level of service; and

·                  industry and general economic trends.

Failure to perform in any of these areas could significantly weaken our competitive position, which could adversely affect our growth and profitability, which, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

The soundness of our financial condition may also affect our competitiveness. Customers may decide not to do business with the bank due to its financial condition.

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 is a limited number of qualified persons with knowledge of, and experience in, the regional banking industry, especially in the Hawaii market. 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, including our Chief Executive Officer, our Presidents who are our Chief Banking Officer and our Chief Operating Officer, our Chief Financial Officer, our Chief Risk Officer and certain other employees.

Our business could be adversely affected by unfavorable actions from rating agencies.

Ratings assigned by ratings agencies to us, our affiliates or our securities may impact the decision of certain customers, in particular, institutions, to do business with us. A rating downgrade or a negative rating could adversely affect our deposits and our business relationships.

We may suffer substantial losses due to our agreements to indemnify investors who invested in our Company in 2011 against a broad range of potential claims.

In our agreements with certain investors who provided us with capital in 2011 (the “Private Placement”), we agreed to indemnify the investors for a broad range of claims, including losses resulting from the inaccuracy or breach of representations or warranties made by us in such agreements and the breach by us to perform our covenants contained in such agreements. While these indemnities are subject to various limitations, if claims were successfully brought against us, it could potentially result in significant losses for the Company.

25

As a result of the recapitalization, Carlyle and Anchorage are substantial holders of our common stock.

Following the closing of our recapitalization in 2011, the two lead investors in the recapitalization, Carlyle Financial Services Harbor, L.P. (“Carlyle”) and ACMO CPF, L.L.C. (“Anchorage”) each became beneficial owners of our outstanding common stock. As of December 31, 2014, each of Carlyle and Anchorage owns approximately 23% of our common stock and each has the ability to designate a representative on our Board of Directors so long as each owns 10% or more of our outstanding common stock. Accordingly, Anchorage and Carlyle have influence over the election of directors to our board and over corporate policy, including decisions to enter into mergers or other extraordinary transactions. In addition, Carlyle and Anchorage each have certain preemptive rights to maintain their respective fully diluted percentage ownership of our common stock in the event of certain issuances of securities by us so long as each owns 10% or more of our outstanding common stock. In pursuing their economic interests, Anchorage and Carlyle may make decisions with respect to fundamental corporate transactions that may not be aligned with the interests of other shareholders.

Failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting or disclosure controls and procedures could adversely affect our ability to report our financial condition and results of operations accurately and on a timely basis.

A failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting or disclosure controls and procedures could adversely affect our ability to report our financial results accurately and on a timely basis, which could result in a loss of investor confidence in our financial reporting or adversely affect our access to sources of liquidity. Furthermore, because of the inherent limitations of any system of internal control over financial reporting, including the possibility of human error, the circumvention or overriding of controls and fraud, even effective internal controls may not prevent or detect all misstatements.

Risk Factors Related to Our Securities

The market price of our common stock could decline.

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:

·                  failure to comply with all of the requirements of any governmental orders or agreements we may become subject to and the possibility of resulting action by the regulators;

·                  deterioration of asset quality;

·                  the incurrence of losses;

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

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

·                  failure to meet analysts’ revenue or earnings/losses estimates;

·                  speculation in the press or investment community;

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

·                  additions or departures of key personnel;

26

·                  actions by institutional shareholders;

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

·                  future sales of our common stock, including sales of our common stock in short sale transactions;

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

·                  proposed or adopted regulatory changes or developments;

·                  breaches in our security systems and loss of customer data;

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

·                  domestic and international economic factors unrelated to our performance.

The stock market and, in particular, the market for financial institution stocks, have experienced significant volatility over the past few years. In addition, the trading volume in our common stock may fluctuate more than usual and cause significant price variations to occur. In addition, sales of shares by investors in the Private Placement may cause our share price to decrease. Accordingly, the common stock that you purchase may trade at a price lower than that at which they were purchased. Volatility in the market price of our common stock may prevent individual shareholders from being able to sell their shares when they want or at prices they find attractive.

A significant decline in our stock price could result in substantial losses for shareholders and could lead to costly and disruptive securities litigation.

The transferability of our common stock is limited as a result of the Tax Benefits Preservation Plan and the Protective Charter Amendment.

As described under “—Risk Factors Related to our Business—Our ability to use net operating loss carryforwards to reduce future tax payments may be limited or restricted,” we have generated significant NOLs as a result of our prior losses. In order to reduce the likelihood that transactions in our common stock would result in an ownership change, on November 23, 2010, we adopted a Tax Benefits Preservation Plan, which provides an economic disincentive for any person or group to become an owner, for relevant tax purposes, of 4.99% or more of our common stock. On January 29, 2014, our Board of Directors approved an extension of the Tax Benefits Preservation Plan by up to an additional two years (until February 18, 2016). To further protect our NOLs, we filed the Protective Charter Amendment on May 2, 2011 to restrict transfers of our stock if the effect of an attempted transfer would cause the transferee to become a Threshold Holder or cause the beneficial ownership of a Threshold Holder to increase. On January 29, 2014 our Board of Directors approved an amendment to the Protective Charter Amendment to extend it for up to an additional two years (until May 2, 2016). Our shareholders approved the extension of the Protective Charter Amendment on April 25, 2014.

The Tax Benefits Preservation Plan and the Protective Charter Amendment have the effect of limiting transferability of our common stock because they may make it more difficult and more expensive to acquire our common stock under the circumstances described above and, in the case of the Protective Charter Amendment, prohibit certain acquisitions of our common stock as described above. These transfer restrictions may discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of the Company and make it more difficult for a potential acquirer to consummate an acquisition of the Company. In addition, these provisions could limit the price that investors would be willing to pay in the future for our common shares and may limit a shareholder’s ability to dispose of our common shares by reducing the class of potential acquirers for our common shares.

27

Anti-takeover provisions in our restated articles of incorporation and bylaws and applicable federal and state law may limit the ability of another party to acquire us, which could cause our stock price to decline.

Various provisions of our restated articles of incorporation and bylaws and certain other actions we have taken could delay or prevent a third-party from acquiring us, even if doing so might be beneficial to our shareholders. These include, among other things, the Tax Benefits Preservation Plan, the Protective Charter Amendment and the authorization to issue “blank check” preferred stock by action of the Board of Directors acting alone, thus without obtaining shareholder approval. In addition, applicable provisions of federal and state law require regulatory approval in connection with certain acquisitions of our common stock and supermajority voting provisions in connection with certain transactions. These provisions of our restated articles of incorporation and bylaws and federal and state law may prevent a merger or acquisition that would be attractive to shareholders and could limit the price investors would be willing to pay in the future for our common stock.

Resales of our common stock in the public market may cause the market price of our common stock to fall.

We issued a large number of common stock to the investors in the Private Placement. Carlyle and Anchorage (the “Lead Investors”) have certain registration rights with respect to the common stock held by them. The registration rights for the Lead Investors will allow them to sell their common stock without compliance with the volume and manner of sale limitations under Rule 144 promulgated under the Securities Act. The market value of our common stock could decline as a result of sales by the Lead Investors from time to time of a substantial amount of the common stock held by them.

Our common stock is equity and therefore is subordinate to our subsidiaries’ indebtedness and preferred stock.

Our common stock constitutes equity interests and does not constitute indebtedness. As such, common stock will rank junior to all current and future indebtedness and other non-equity claims on us with respect to assets available to satisfy claims against us, including in the event of our liquidation. We may, and the bank and our other subsidiaries may also, incur additional indebtedness from time to time and may increase our aggregate level of outstanding indebtedness. As of December 31, 2014, we had $90.0 million in face amount of trust preferred securities outstanding and accrued and unpaid dividends thereon of $0.2 million. We also had short-term borrowings of $38.0 million as of December 31, 2014. Additionally, holders of common stock are subject to the prior dividend and liquidation rights of any holders of our preferred stock that may be outstanding from time to time. The Board of Directors is authorized to cause us to issue additional classes or series of preferred stock without any action on the part of our stockholders. If we issue preferred shares in the future that have a preference over our common stock with respect to the payment of dividends or upon liquidation, or if we issue preferred shares with voting rights that dilute the voting power of the common stock, then the rights of holders of our common stock or the market price of our common stock could be adversely affected.

There is a limited trading market for our common stock and as a result, you may not be able to resell your shares at or above the price you pay for them.

Although our common stock is listed for trading on the NYSE, the volume of trading in our common shares is lower than many other companies listed on the NYSE. A public trading market with depth, liquidity and orderliness depends on the presence in the market of willing buyers and sellers of our common shares at any given time. This presence depends on the individual decisions of investors and general economic and market conditions over which we have no control.

Our common stock is not insured and you could lose the value of your entire investment.

An investment in our common stock is not a deposit and is not insured against loss by the government.

28

ITEM 1B.                                       UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

Certifications

We have filed the required certifications under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 as Exhibits 31.1 and 31.2 to this annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014. Last year, we submitted to the NYSE on April 25, 2014 our annual CEO certification regarding the Company’s compliance with the NYSE’s corporate governance listing standards. This year, we intend to submit to the NYSE our annual CEO certification within 30 days of the Company’s annual meeting of shareholders, which is scheduled for April 24, 2015.

ITEM 2.                                                PROPERTIES

We hold title to the land and building in which our Main branch office and headquarters, Hilo branch office, Kailua-Kona branch office, Pearl City branch office and certain operations offices are located. We also hold title to portions of the land our University branch office and operations center are located. The remaining lands on which the University branch office and operations center are located are leased, as are all remaining branch and support office facilities. We also own four floors of a commercial office condominium in downtown Honolulu where certain administrative and support operations are located.

We occupy or hold leases for approximately 40 other properties including office space for our remaining branches. These leases expire on various dates through 2038 and generally contain renewal options for periods ranging from five to 15 years. For additional information relating to lease rental expense and commitments as of December 31, 2014, see Note 18 to the Consolidated Financial Statements under “Part II, Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

ITEM 3.                                                LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Certain claims and lawsuits have been filed or are pending against us arising in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, all such matters are of a nature that, if disposed of unfavorably, would not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations or financial position.

ITEM 4.                                                MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Not applicable

29

PART II

ITEM 5.                                                MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

Our common stock is traded on the NYSE under the ticker symbol “CPF.” Set forth below is a line graph comparing the cumulative total stockholder return on the Company’s common stock, based on the market price of the common stock and assuming reinvestment of dividends, with the Russell 2000 Index and the S&P SmallCap 600 Commercial Bank Index for the five year period commencing December 31, 2009 and ending December 31, 2014. The graph assumes the investment of $100 on December 31, 2009.

Indexed Total Annual Return

(as of December 31, 2014)

30

The following table sets forth information on the range of high and low sales prices of our common stock as reported by the NYSE, for each full quarterly period within 2014 and 2013:

As of February 13, 2015, there were 2,649 shareholders of record, excluding individuals and institutions for which shares were held in the names of nominees and brokerage firms.

Dividends

The following table sets forth information on dividends declared per share of common stock for each quarterly period within 2014 and 2013:

The holders of our common stock share proportionately, on a per share basis, in all dividends and other distributions declared by our Board of Directors.

Under the terms of our trust preferred securities, our ability to pay dividends with respect to common stock was restricted until our obligations under our trust preferred securities were brought current. Our obligations on our outstanding trust preferred securities were brought current in the first quarter of 2013.

Additionally, our ability to pay dividends depends on our ability to obtain dividends from our bank. As a Hawaii state-chartered bank, the bank may only pay dividends to the extent it has retained earnings as defined under Hawaii banking law (“Statutory Retained Earnings”), which differs from GAAP retained earnings. As of December 31, 2014, the bank had Statutory Retained Earnings of $123.8 million. In 2013, in light of the Company’s improved capital position and financial condition, our Board of Directors in consultation with our regulators, reinstated and declared quarterly cash dividends on the Company’s outstanding common shares.

Dividends are payable at the discretion of the Board of Directors and there can be no assurance that the Board of Directors will continue to pay dividends at the same rate, or at all, in the future. Our ability to pay cash dividends to our shareholders is subject to restrictions under federal and Hawaii law, including restrictions imposed by the FRB and covenants set forth in various agreements we are a party to, including covenants set forth in our subordinated debentures.

See “Part I, Item 1. Business — Supervision and Regulation — Regulatory Actions” for a discussion on regulatory restrictions. For additional information regarding our previous election to defer payments on our trust preferred securities, see Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements under “Part II, Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

31

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

During the second quarter of 2014, we discovered that common stock that was not registered with the SEC was sold to certain participants, through their investment in our unitized common stock fund, in the Central Pacific Bank 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan (the “Plan”). Under terms of the Plan, participants may invest Plan contributions for an interest in the common stock fund which is primarily comprised of shares of our common stock, and to a lesser extent, cash. The unregistered shares of our common stock held in the common stock fund are purchased by our Plan trustee from the open market; hence, these purchases do not represent any additional equity dilution of our outstanding shares. We do not receive any proceeds from these transactions.

Under applicable federal securities laws, certain participants may have a right to rescind, and to require us to repurchase, their purchases of our common stock (through their investment in the common stock fund) for an amount equal to the price paid for the securities, plus interest. Generally, the federal statute of limitations applicable to such rescission rights is one year. Additionally, we may be subject to potential civil and other penalties by regulatory authorities as a result of this registration issue.

Based on our estimates, we do not believe the amount of potential liability associated with the securities subject to rescission rights is material to our financial condition or results of operations. As of December 31, 2014, we estimate that there were 2,383 shares of our common stock in the Plan that were purchased within a one-year period would potentially be subject to rescission rights. These securities continue to be reflected in stockholders’ equity in our balance sheet.

On June 18, 2014, we filed a new registration statement on Form S-8 to register 250,000 shares for future sales of our common stock through our common stock fund under the Plan.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

In January 2008, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase and retirement of up to 60,000 shares of the Company’s common stock (the “2008 Repurchase Plan”). Repurchases under the 2008 Repurchase Plan may be made from time to time on the open market or in privately negotiated transactions. A total of 55,000 shares remained available for repurchase under the 2008 Repurchase Plan at December 31, 2013. In January 2014, the 2008 Repurchase Plan and the remaining 55,000 shares were superseded by the Tender Offer and Repurchase Agreements with our Lead Investors.

On May 20, 2014, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase and retirement of up to $30.0 million of the Company’s outstanding common stock (the “2014 Repurchase Plan”). Repurchases under the 2014 Repurchase Plan may be made from time to time on the open market or in privately negotiated transactions.

In 2014, 857,554 shares of common stock, at a cost of $16.5 million, were repurchased. A total of $13.5 million remained available for repurchased under the 2014 Repurchase Plan at December 31, 2014. The table below sets forth certain information concerning repurchases of our securities during the fourth quarter of 2014.

32

In January 2015, our Board of Directors increased the authorization under the share repurchase program by an additional $25.0 million.

Information relating to compensation plans under which equity securities of the Registrant are authorized for issuance is set forth under “Part III, Item 12—Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.”

ITEM 6.                SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

The following table sets forth selected financial information for each of the years in the five-year period ended December 31, 2014. This information is not necessarily indicative of results of future operations and should be read in conjunction with “Part II, Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the Consolidated Financial Statements and related Notes contained in “Part II, Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

33

(1)  Held-to-maturity securities at amortized cost, available-for-sale securities at fair value.

(2)  Noninterest-bearing demand, interest-bearing demand and savings deposits, and time deposits under $100,000.

(3)  On February 2, 2011, we effected a 1 for 20 reverse stock split on our outstanding common stock.

(4)  The efficiency ratio is a non-GAAP financial measure which should be read and used in conjunction with the Company’s GAAP financial information. Comparison of our efficiency ratio with those of other companies may not be possible because other companies may calculate the efficiency ratio differently.  Our efficiency ratio is derived by dividing other operating expense by net operating revenue (net interest income plus other operating income). See Item 7 — Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations —Table 7. Reconciliation to Efficiency Ratio.

(5)  Computed on a taxable equivalent basis using an assumed income tax rate of 35%.

(6)  Nonaccrual loans include nonaccrual loans held for sale.

34

Five Year Performance Comparison

The significant items affecting the comparability of the five years’ performance include:

Provision for loan and lease losses

·                  Credit to the provision for loan and lease losses of $6.4 million, $11.3 million, $18.9 million and $40.7 million in 2014, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively, compared to a charge of $159.5 million in 2010.

Other operating income

·                  Net gains on sales of residential mortgage loans of $5.5 million, $10.0 million, $17.1 million, $8.1 million and $8.5 million in 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively;

·                  Net gains on sales of foreclosed assets of $1.0 million, $8.6 million, $5.0 million, $6.8 million and $0.7 million in 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively;

·                  Gain on early extinguishment of debt of $1.0 million in 2013, compared to a loss on early extinguishment of debt of $6.2 million and $5.7 million in 2011 and 2010, respectively; and

·                  Gain on ineffective portion of derivative of $0.1 million and $1.0 million in 2013 and 2011, respectively, compared to a loss on ineffective portion of derivative of $0.1 million in 2012.

Other operating expense

·                  Share-based compensation expense of $6.1 million, $6.4 million, $4.6 million, $2.6 million and $0.4 million recognized in 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively;

·                  FDIC insurance premiums of $2.8 million, $2.7 million, $4.9 million, $6.8 million and $12.6 million in 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively;

·                  Foreclosed asset expense of $1.7 million, $1.0 million, $6.9 million, $11.4 million and $9.6 million in 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively;

·                  Severance, early retirement, and retention benefits of $0.9 million and $3.0 million in 2014 and 2013, respectively;

·                  Branch consolidation and relocation costs of $1.3 million in 2014;

·                  Charge for the provision for repurchased residential mortgage loans of $0.5 million, $5.0 million and $6.1 million in 2014, 2011 and 2010, respectively, compared to a credit to the provision for repurchased residential mortgage loans of $0.1 million and $2.0 million in 2013 and 2012, respectively;

·                  Credit to the reserve for unfunded loan commitments of $0.4 million, $3.5 million, $1.7 million, and $1.1 million in 2014, 2013, 2012 and 2010, respectively, compared to a charge of $1.6 million in 2011;

·                  Contributions to the Central Pacific Bank Foundation of $0.7 million, $0.8 million and $8.5 million in 2013, 2012, and 2011, respectively;

·                  Write down of assets of $2.6 million, $4.6 million and $1.5 million in 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively;

·                  Goodwill impairment charge of $102.7 million in 2010; and

·                  Gain on sale of property of $7.7 million in 2010.

Income tax expense (benefit)

·                  Income tax expense of $20.4 million in 2014, compared to income tax benefit of $112.2 million in 2013. We did not record income tax expense in 2012, 2011 and 2010.

35

ITEM 7.                                                MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Introduction

We are a bank holding company that, through our banking subsidiary, Central Pacific Bank, offers full service commercial banking in the state of Hawaii.

Our products and services consist primarily of the following:

·                  Loans: Our loans consist of commercial, commercial mortgage, construction loans, and leases to small and medium-sized companies, business professionals, and real estate developers, as well and residential mortgage and consumer loans to local homebuyers and individuals. Our lending activities contribute to a key component of our revenues—interest income.

·                  Deposits: We strive to provide exceptional customer service and products that meet our customers’ needs, like our Value Plus Checking, as well as our Exceptional Checking & Savings and Super Savings accounts. We also maintain a broad branch and ATM network in the state of Hawaii. The interest paid on such deposits has a significant impact on our interest expense, an important factor in determining our earnings. In addition, fees and service charges on deposit accounts contribute to our revenues.

Additionally, we offer wealth management products and services, such as non-deposit investment products, annuities, insurance, investment management, asset custody and general consultation and planning services.

In this discussion, we have included statements that may constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are not historical facts but instead represent only our beliefs regarding future events, many of which, by their nature, are inherently uncertain and beyond our control. These statements relate to our future plans and objectives, among other things. By identifying these statements for you in this manner, we are alerting you to the possibility that our actual results may differ, possibly materially, from the results indicated in the forward-looking statements. Important factors that could, among others, cause our results to differ, possibly materially, from those indicated in the forward-looking statements are discussed above under “Part 1. Forward-Looking Statements and Factors that Could Affect Future Results” and “Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors—Factors that May Affect our Business.”

Executive Overview

We continued to make significant progress toward a full recovery of our Company in 2014. After three years of net losses in 2008 to 2010, we recorded our fourth consecutive profitable year in 2014. During fiscal 2014, we reported net income of $40.5 million, compared to net income of $172.1 million and $47.4 million in fiscal 2013 and 2012, respectively. Net income in 2013 included a non-cash income tax benefit of $119.8 million recorded in the first quarter of 2013 related to the reversal of a significant portion of a valuation allowance that was established against the Company’s net DTA during the third quarter of 2009. We also saw continued improvement in our asset quality as we reduced our nonperforming assets by $4.8 million to $42.0 million at December 31, 2014 from $46.8 million at December 31, 2013.

As a result of the continued improvement in our credit risk profile, we were able to reduce our allowance for loan and lease losses (the “Allowance”), which resulted in a positive impact to earnings. Our total credit costs during fiscal 2014, which include the provision for loan and lease losses (the “Provision”), write-downs of loans classified as held for sale, foreclosed asset expense, gains on sales of foreclosed assets, and the change in the reserve for unfunded loan commitments, totaled a credit of $6.0 million, compared to a credit of $22.4 million in 2013.

36

With the improving market conditions in Hawaii, together with our efforts to increase market share, we realized strong loan growth of $301.6 million, or 11.5%, as well as an increase of $212.9 million, or 6.9% in our core deposit base in 2014. Our capital position remained strong, supported by four years of profitability and the improvements in our asset quality. As a result of our stable financial performance, all three of the regulatory enforcement actions the bank and CPF were previously subject to have been terminated.

Basis of Presentation

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with the accompanying consolidated financial statements under “Part II, Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

Business Environment

While there remains continued uncertainty in the global macroeconomic environment, the U.S. economy has continued to stabilize following the economic downturn caused by disruptions in the financial system beginning in 2007.

Despite this stabilization, underutilization of labor forces, a slow recovery in the housing sector, low level of inflation as a result of declining commodity prices and weak global trade have added to the uncertainty surrounding a sustained economic recovery. In addition, downgrades of ratings of foreign debt instruments could raise borrowing costs and adversely impact the mortgage and housing markets.

The majority of our operations are concentrated in the state of Hawaii. As a result, our performance is significantly influenced by conditions in the banking industry, macroeconomic conditions and the real estate markets in Hawaii. A favorable business environment is generally characterized by expanding gross state product, low unemployment and rising personal income; while an unfavorable business environment is characterized by the reverse.

Hawaii’s general economic conditions continued to improve in 2014. Tourism continues to be Hawaii’s center of strength and its most significant economic driver. Hawaii’s strong visitor industry broke records for arrivals and visitor spending for the third consecutive year in 2014. According to the Hawaii Tourism Authority (“HTA”), 8.3 million total visitors arrived in the state in 2014. This was an increase of 1.3% from the previous high of 8.2 million visitor arrivals in 2013. The HTA also reported that total spending by visitors increased to $14.7 billion in 2014, an increase of $334.5 million, or 2.3%, from the previous high of $14.4 billion in 2013. According to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development & Tourism (“DBEDT”), total visitor arrivals and visitor spending are expected to gain 1.9% and 3.6% in 2015, respectively.

Hawaii’s labor market conditions continued to improve in 2014. The Department of Labor and Industrial Relations reported that Hawaii’s seasonally adjusted annual unemployment rate improved to 4.0% in December 2014, compared to 4.7% in December 2013. In addition, Hawaii’s unemployment rate in December 2014 of 4.0%, which is among the lowest in the nation, remained below the national seasonally adjusted unemployment rate of 5.6%. DBEDT projects Hawaii’s seasonally adjusted annual unemployment rate to remain stable at 4.1% in 2015.

Both real personal income and real gross state product grew by approximately 2.6% in 2014. DBEDT projects real personal income and real gross state product to grow by 2.5% and 2.8%, respectively, in 2015. Based on the recent developments in the national and global economy, the performance of Hawaii’s tourism industry, the labor market conditions in the state, and growth of personal income and tax revenues, DBEDT expects Hawaii’s economy will continue positive growth in 2015.

37

Historically, real estate lending has been a primary focus for us, including residential mortgage, commercial mortgage and construction loans. As a result, we are dependent on the strength of Hawaii’s real estate market. Home sales in Hawaii and all around the country slowed in 2014. According to the Honolulu Board of Realtors, Oahu unit sales volume decreased by 0.8% for single-family homes and decreased 1.3% for condominiums in 2014 from 2013, due primarily to low inventory of properties on the market. Real estate prices on Oahu, however, continued its moderate appreciation and set new records in 2014. The median resale price in 2014 for single-family homes on Oahu was $675,000, representing an increase of 3.8% from the median resale price of $650,000 in 2013. The median resale price for condominiums on Oahu was $350,000, representing an increase of 5.4% from the median resale price of $332,000 in 2013. We believe the Hawaii real estate market will show improvements in 2015, however, there can be no assurance that this will occur.

As we have seen in the past, our operating results are significantly impacted by: (i) the economy in Hawaii, and to a significantly lesser extent, California, and (ii) the composition of our loan portfolio. Loan demand, deposit growth, Provision, asset quality, noninterest income and noninterest expense are all affected by changes in economic conditions. If the residential and commercial real estate markets we have exposure to deteriorate as they did in 2008 through 2010, our results of operations would be negatively impacted. See “—Overview of Results of Operations—Concentrations of Credit Risk” for a further discussion on how a deteriorating real estate market, combined with the elevated concentration risk within our portfolio, could have a significant negative impact on our asset quality and credit losses.

Critical Accounting Policies and Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) requires that management make certain judgments and use certain estimates and assumptions that affect amounts reported and disclosures made. Accounting estimates are deemed critical when a different estimate could have reasonably been used or where changes in the estimate are reasonably likely to occur from period to period and would materially impact our consolidated financial statements as of or for the periods presented. Management has discussed the development and selection of the critical accounting estimates noted below with the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors, and the Audit Committee has reviewed the accompanying disclosures.

Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses

The Allowance is management’s estimate of credit losses inherent in our loan and lease portfolio at the balance sheet date. We maintain our Allowance at an amount we expect to be sufficient to absorb probable losses inherent in our loan and lease portfolio. At December 31, 2014, we had an Allowance of $74.0 million, compared to $83.8 million at December 31, 2013.

The Company’s approach to developing the Allowance has three basic elements. These elements include specific reserves for individually impaired loans, a general allowance for loans other than those analyzed as individually impaired, and an unallocated reserve. These three methods are explained below.

Specific Reserve

Individually impaired loans in all loan categories are evaluated using one of three valuation methods as prescribed under Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 310-10, Fair Value of Collateral, Observable Market Price, or Cash Flow. A loan is generally evaluated for impairment on an individual basis if it meets one or more of the following characteristics: risk-rated as substandard, doubtful or loss, loans on nonaccrual status, troubled debt restructures, or any loan deemed prudent by management to so analyze. If the valuation of the impaired loan is less than the recorded investment in the loan, the deficiency will be charged off against the Allowance or, alternatively, a specific reserve will be established and included in the overall Allowance balance. As of December 31, 2014, this specific reserve represented $1.5 million of the total Allowance, compared to $0.3 million at December 31, 2013.

38

General Allowance

In determining the general allowance component of the Allowance, the Company utilizes a comprehensive approach to segment the loan portfolio into homogenous groups. Six criteria divide the Company’s loan portfolio into 128 homogenous subsectors. First, loans are divided by general geographic region (U.S. Mainland and Hawaii). Second, loans are subdivided according to FDIC classification (Construction, Commercial Mortgage, Commercial, Financial and Agricultural, Leases, Residential Mortgage, Consumer). Third, loans within the Construction category are further subdivided by collateral type (Commercial and Residential). Fourth, loans within the Residential Mortgage category are further subdivided by ownership type (Investor-owned and Owner-occupied). Fifth, loans are subdivided by state or for some, by county (All Hawaii, Hawaii Island, Kauai, Maui, Oahu, Other Hawaii, All U.S. Mainland, Los Angeles/Orange County CA, Riverside/San Bernardino CA, Sacramento/Placer/El Dorado/Yolo CA, San Diego CA, Washington/Oregon, Other U.S. Mainland). Finally, loans are further subdivided by risk rating (Pass, Special Mention, Substandard, and Doubtful).

For the purpose of determining general allowance loss factors, loss experience is derived from charge-offs and recoveries.  A charge-off occurs when the Company makes the determination that an amount of debt is deemed to be uncollectible. Loans are also charged off when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and it is possible to make a reasonable estimate of the loss. Charge-offs are classified into subsectors according to the underlying loan’s primary geography, loan category, collateral type (if applicable), investment type (if applicable), state/county, and the risk rating of the loan one year prior to the charge-off. A recovery occurs when a loan that is classified as a bad debt was either partially or fully charged off and has been subsequently recovered. Recoveries are classified according to the subsector of the earliest associated charge-off of the loan within a selected look-back period. The cumulative charge-offs are determined by summing all subsector-specific charge-offs that occurred within the selected look-back period and the cumulative recoveries are determined by summing the subsector-specific recoveries for each subsector.  Subsector losses are measured by subtracting each subsector’s cumulative recoveries from their respective cumulative charge-offs. Subsector losses are then divided by the subsector loan balance averaged over the look-back period to determine each subsector’s historical loss rate.

From 2010 through 2013, the calculation of subsector loss factors involved a look-back period of eight quarters (for loans secured by real estate by FDIC classifications) or four quarters (for all other loans). The Company’s then rapidly evolving loss experience necessitated the use of shorter loss analysis periods in order to ensure that loss rates would be adequately responsive to changes in loss experience. During that period, the Company considered recent loss data to be more relevant to the current period under analysis. The look-back period was also consistent with commentary provided by our primary banking regulator following our 2010 Safety and Soundness Examination.

As economic conditions continued to improve and stabilize through 2014, the Company experienced improving credit quality trends that contributed to consistent reductions to the Allowance. Given the diminishing loss rates, in the first quarter of 2014 the look-back period for loans secured by real estate was extended from 8 quarters to 17 quarters, with the intention of extending the look-back period each quarter thereafter to a total of 24 quarters or six years to incorporate broader loss experience through a more complete economic cycle. This would also reduce the Company’s reliance on proxy loss rates by capturing more of the Company’s own historical loss experience in the extended look-back period. The longer look-back period is appropriate in light of the Company’s limited loss experience throughout the recent economic recovery and stabilization. Additionally, as economic conditions have stabilized through 2014, lower loss rate volatility has diminished the need for shorter loss analysis periods that are more responsive to shifts in loss experience. The enhanced methodology does not incorporate data before 2010 due to the anomalous loss activity during that time period that may cause pre-2010 internal loss data to be an inappropriate representation of the current inherent risk in the Company’s loan portfolio. In our revised approach, the losses during the six year look-back period will be weighted to place more emphasis on recent loss experience. Also in late 2013, the Company received guidance from its primary banking regulator supporting the use of extended loss analysis periods. The Supervisory Examiner recommended a periodic reassessment of the look-back period and suggested that a look-back period beyond eight quarters may be more reasonable given the then current economic conditions and portfolio performance.

39

Application of Proxies

The Company applies external proxies for minimum loss rates in those loan categories with no associated loss experience during the prescribed look-back period, including criticized credits. The Company believes the use of external proxies is a prudent approach versus using a zero loss factor for those loan categories that do not have loss experience in the look-back period.  The external proxies used are based on four select credit loss rates tracked by Moody’s Investor Service.

The following table describes the Moody’s loss rate that is applied as a proxy to each loan category when no associated loss experience is registered in a subsector of the loan category over the relevant look-back period.

In those loan categories described in the table above, specific loss rate proxies are applied based on the equivalence of respective risk ratings between the proxy rate and the loan subsector. Based on the conformity of risk characterizations, B-rated proxy rates are matched to substandard loan segments (risk rating 6), Ba-rated proxy rates are matched to special mention loan segments (risk rating 5), and Aaa, Aa, A and Baa-rated proxy rates are matched to risk ratings strong quality, above average quality, average quality, and acceptable quality, respectively (risk ratings 1, 2, 3 and 4).

For pass rated loan segments with no associated loss experience during the respective prescribed look-back periods, the proxy loss rate is determined by weighting each proxy loss rate (ratings Aaa, Aa, A and Baa) by the loan balance in each equivalent risk rating (strong, above average, average and acceptable quality, respectively).

In assessing the appropriateness of Moody’s proxy rates, the Company conducted a comprehensive review of other potential sources of proxy loss data, evaluated the qualitative and quantitative factors influencing the relevance and reliability of proxy data, and performed a correlation analysis to determine the co-dependency of historical loss ratios with Moody’s loss rates. The analysis compared historical loss ratios in each loan category to the associated Moody’s loss rates over ten years.

An analysis of the correlation between historical loss ratios and Moody’s loss rates revealed that the two metrics demonstrated a directionally consistent loss relationship in nearly every rating group and exhibited average to strong correlation across all rating groups in almost every segment. Given the results of the correlation analysis, the Company deemed application of these proxy loss rates to be reasonable and supportable.

Qualitative Adjustments

Our Allowance methodology uses qualitative adjustments for economic/market conditions and Company-specific conditions. The Company-specific condition factor is applied on a category basis and the economic/market conditions factor is applied on a regional/geographic basis. Two key indicators, personal income and unemployment, comprise the economic/market adjustment factor.

40

Personal income is analyzed by comparing average quarter-to-quarter percentage change trends reported by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. Specifically, the rolling four quarter average percentage change in personal income is calculated and compared to a baseline historical factor, calculated as the average quarter-to-quarter percentage change over the prior ten years. The difference between the current average change and the historical average change is utilized as the personal income component of the economic/market adjustment factor.

The second component of the economic/market factor, unemployment, is derived by comparing the current quarter unemployment rate, reported by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, to its ten year historical average. A constant scaling factor is applied to the difference between the current rate and the historical average in order to smooth significant period-to-period fluctuations. The result is utilized as the unemployment component of the economic factor. The personal income factor and unemployment factor are added together to determine each region’s total economic/market adjustment factor.

The general allowance also incorporates qualitative adjustment factors that capture company-specific conditions for which national/regional statistics are not available, or for which significant localized market specific events have not yet been captured within regional statistics or the Company’s historical loss experience. Since we cannot predict with certainty the amount of loan and lease charge-offs that will be incurred and because the eventual level of loan and lease charge-offs are impacted by numerous conditions beyond our control, we use our historical loss experience adjusted for current conditions to determine both our Allowance and Provision. In addition, various regulatory agencies, as an integral part of their examination processes, periodically review our Allowance. The determination of the Allowance requires us to make estimates of losses that are highly uncertain and involves a high degree of judgment. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates. Changes in the estimate of the Allowance and related Provision could materially affect our operating results.

The sum of each subsector’s historical loss rate plus a region-specific economic/market qualitative adjustment and category-specific other qualitative adjustment, as discussed in the above “Application of Proxies” section, is then multiplied by the subsector’s period-ending loan balance to determine each subsector’s general allowance provision. The sum of the 128 subsector general allowance provisions represents the general allowance provision of the entire portfolio. As of December 31, 2014, this general allowance represented $68.5 million of the total Allowance, compared to $77.5 million at December 31, 2013.

Unallocated Reserve

The Company maintains an unallocated Allowance amount to provide for other credit losses inherent in our loan and lease portfolio that may not have been contemplated in the credit loss factors. The unallocated reserve is a measure to address judgmental estimates that are inevitably imprecise and it reflects an adjustment to the Allowance that is not attributable to specific categories of the loan portfolio. The unallocated reserve is distinct from and not captured in the Company’s qualitative adjustments in the general component of the Allowance. These qualitative adjustments only capture direct and specific risks to our portfolio, whereas the unallocated reserve is intended to capture broader national and global economic risks that could potentially have a ripple effect on our loan portfolio.

As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, an unallocated estimate of $4.0 million and $6.0 million, respectively, was based on the Company’s recognition of domestic (U.S. mainland) and international events that pose heightened volatility in the isolated Hawaiian market. Examples of such stressors are acts of terrorism, pandemic events, energy price volatility and Federal budget changes. Any of these in isolation or combination could have significant effects on the two key drivers of the Hawaiian economy: tourism and Federal spending.

Although the Company does not have direct exposure to the economic and political crises occurring internationally, the ripple effect of continuous uncertainty surrounding ultimate resolution, along with quantifiable measures once achieved, may result in increased risk to the Company from the standpoint of consequences to its customer base and impacts on the Hawaii tourism market.

41

In the second quarter of 2014, the Company adopted an enhancement which limits the unallocated component of the Allowance as a percentage of the then current general component of the Allowance, rounded upward to the nearest $500,000. This is derived by taking the historical average of the percentage of the unallocated component to the general component over the maximum look-back period prescribed in our methodology. The unallocated amount may be maintained at higher levels during times of economic stress conditions on a local or global basis.

Reserve for Unfunded Loan Commitments

Our process for determining the reserve for unfunded loan commitments is consistent with our process for determining the Allowance and is adjusted for estimated loan funding probabilities. The reserve for unfunded loan commitments is recorded separately through a valuation allowance included in other liabilities. Credit losses for off-balance sheet credit exposures are deducted from the allowance for credit losses on off-balance sheet credit exposures in the period in which the liability is settled. The allowance for credit losses on off-balance sheet credit losses is established by a charge to other operating expense. As of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, our reserve for unfunded loan commitments totaled $1.7 million and $2.1 million, respectively.

Loans Held for Sale

Loans held for sale consists of the following two types: (1) Hawaii residential mortgage loans that are originated with the intent to sell them in the secondary market and (2) non-residential mortgage loans in both Hawaii and the U.S. Mainland that were originated with the intent to be held in our portfolio but were subsequently transferred to the held for sale category. Hawaii residential mortgage loans classified as held for sale are carried at the lower of cost or fair value on an aggregate basis while the non-residential Hawaii and U.S. Mainland loans are recorded at the lower of cost or fair value on an individual basis.

When a non-residential mortgage loan is transferred to the held for sale category, the loan is recorded at the lower of cost or fair value. Any reduction in the loan’s value is reflected as a write-down of the recorded investment resulting in a new cost basis, with a corresponding reduction in the Allowance. In subsequent periods, if the fair value of a loan classified as held for sale is less than its cost basis, a valuation adjustment is recognized in our consolidated statement of income in other operating expense and the carrying value of the loan is adjusted accordingly. The valuation adjustment may be recovered in the event that the fair value increases, which is also recognized in our consolidated statement of income in other operating expense.

The fair value of loans classified as held for sale are generally based upon quoted prices for similar assets in active markets, acceptance of firm offer letters with agreed upon purchase prices, discounted cash flow models that take into account market observable assumptions, or independent appraisals of the underlying collateral securing the loans. We report the fair values of the non-residential mortgage loans classified as held for sale net of applicable selling costs on our consolidated balance sheets. At December 31, 2014 and 2013, all of our loans held for sale were Hawaii residential mortgage loans.

Reserve for Residential Mortgage Loan Repurchase Losses

We sell residential mortgage loans on a “whole-loan” basis to government-sponsored entities (“GSEs” or “Agencies”) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and also to non-agency investors. These loan sales occur under industry standard contractual provisions that include various representations and warranties, which typically cover ownership of the loan, compliance with loan criteria set forth in the applicable agreement, validity of the lien securing the loan and other similar matters. We may be required to repurchase certain loans sold with identified defects, indemnify the investor, or reimburse the investor for any credit losses incurred. We establish mortgage repurchase reserves related to various representations and warranties that reflect management’s estimate for which we have a repurchase obligation. The reserves are established by a charge to other operating expense in our consolidated statements of income. At December 31, 2014 and 2013, this reserve totaled $2.7 million and $2.9 million, respectively, and is included in other liabilities on our consolidated balance sheets.

42

The repurchase reserve is applicable to loans we originated and sold with representations and warranties, which is representative of the entire sold portfolio. Originations for agency and non-agency investors for vintages 2005 through 2014 were approximately $4.6 billion and $4.2 billion, respectively. Representations and warranties relating to borrower fraud generally are enforceable for the life of the loan, whereas early payment default clauses generally expire after 90 days, depending on the sales contract. We estimate that outstanding loans sold that have early payment default clauses as of December 31, 2014 total approximately $65.3 million.

The repurchase loss liability is estimated by origination year to capture certain characteristics of each vintage. To the extent that repurchase demands are made by investors, we may be able to successfully appeal such repurchase demands. However, our appeals success may be affected by the reasons for repurchase demands, the quality of the demands, and our appeals strategies. Repurchase and loss estimates are stratified by vintage, based on actual experience and certain assumptions relative to potential investor demand volume, appeals success rates, and losses recognized on successful repurchase demands.

Loans repurchased during the year ended December 31, 2014 totaled approximately $1.2 million. In 2012, additional reserves were established as an unallocated component in recognition of the emergence of make-whole demands. The establishment of an unallocated component considers anticipated future losses and our lack of historical experience with the make-whole demands. Repurchase activity by vintage and investor type are depicted in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Repurchase Demands, Appeals, Repurchased and Pending Resolution

[1] Based on repurchase requests received between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2014.

[2] Based on repurchase requests received between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2013.

43

The reserve for residential mortgage loan repurchase losses of $2.7 million at December 31, 2014 represents our best estimate of the probable loss that we may incur due to the representations and warranties in our loan sales contracts with investors. This represents a decrease of $0.3 million from December 31, 2013. The table below shows changes in the repurchase losses liability.

Table 2. Changes in the Reserve for Residential Mortgage Loan Repurchase Losses

Our capacity to estimate repurchase losses is improving as we record additional experience. Repurchase losses depend upon economic factors and other external conditions that may change over the life of the underlying loans. Additionally, lack of access to the servicing records of loans sold on a service released basis adds difficulty to the estimation process, thus requiring considerable management judgment. To the extent that future investor repurchase demand and appeals success differ from past experience, we could have increased demands and increased loss severities on repurchases, causing future additions to the repurchase reserve.

Other Intangible Assets

Other intangible assets include a core deposit premium and mortgage servicing rights.

Our core deposit premium is being amortized over 14 years which approximates the estimated life of the purchased deposits. The carrying value of our core deposit premium is periodically evaluated to estimate the remaining periods of benefit. If these periods of benefit are determined to be less than the remaining amortizable life, an adjustment to reflect such shorter life will be made.

We utilize the amortization method to measure our mortgage servicing rights. Under the amortization method, we amortize our mortgage servicing rights in proportion to and over the period of net servicing income. Income generated as the result of new mortgage servicing rights is reported as gains on sales of loans. Amortization of the servicing rights is reported as amortization of other intangible assets in our consolidated statements of income. Ancillary income is recorded in other income. Mortgage servicing rights are recorded when loans are sold to third-parties with servicing of those loans retained and we classify our entire mortgage servicing rights into one class.

Initial fair value of the servicing right is calculated by a discounted cash flow model prepared by a third party service provider based on market value assumptions at the time of origination and we assess the servicing right for impairment using current market value assumptions at each reporting period. Critical assumptions used in the discounted cash flow model include mortgage prepayment speeds, discount rates, costs to service and ancillary income. Variations in our assumptions could materially affect the estimated fair values. Changes to our assumptions are made when current trends and market data indicate that new trends have developed. Current market value assumptions based on loan product types (fixed rate, adjustable rate and balloon loans) include average discount rates and national prepayment speeds. Many of these assumptions are subjective and require a high level of management judgment. Our mortgage servicing rights portfolio and valuation assumptions are periodically reviewed by management.

The fair value of our mortgage servicing rights is validated by first ensuring the completeness and accuracy of the loan data used in the valuation analysis. Reconciliation is performed by comparing the loan data from our loan system to a valuation report prepared by a third party. Additionally, the critical assumptions which come from the third party are reviewed by management. This review may include comparing actual assumptions to forecast or evaluating the reasonableness of market assumptions by reviewing them in relation to the values and trends of assumptions used by peer banks. The validation process also includes reviewing key metrics such as the fair value as a percentage of the total unpaid principal balance of the mortgages serviced, and the resulting percentage as a multiple of the net servicing fee. These key metrics are tracked to ensure the trends are reasonable, and are periodically compared to peer banks.

44

Prepayment speeds may be affected by economic factors such as home price appreciation, market interest rates, the availability of other credit products to our borrowers and customer payment patterns. Prepayment speeds include the impact of all borrower prepayments, including full payoffs, additional principal payments and the impact of loans paid off due to foreclosure liquidations. As market interest rates decline, prepayment speeds will generally increase as customers refinance existing mortgages under more favorable interest rate terms. As prepayment speeds increase, anticipated cash flows will generally decline resulting in a potential reduction, or impairment, to the fair value of the capitalized mortgage servicing rights. Alternatively, an increase in market interest rates may cause a decrease in prepayment speeds and therefore an increase in fair value of mortgage servicing rights.

We perform an impairment assessment of our other intangible assets whenever events or changes in circumstance indicate that the carrying value of those assets may not be recoverable. Our impairment assessments involve, among other valuation methods, the estimation of future cash flows and other methods of determining fair value. Estimating future cash flows and determining fair values is subject to judgments and often involves the use of significant estimates and assumptions. The variability of the factors we use to perform our impairment tests depend on a number of conditions, including uncertainty about future events and cash flows. All such factors were interdependent and, therefore, do not change in isolation. Accordingly, our accounting estimates may materially change from period to period due to changing market factors.

During the second quarter of 2012, we evaluated the recoverability of the intangible assets on our customer relationships and non-compete agreements related to the acquisition of Pacific Islands Financial Management. Upon completion of this review, we determined that the intangible assets related to our customer relationships and non-compete agreements were both fully impaired, and thus, we recorded impairment charges to other operating expense totaling $0.9 million during the second quarter of 2012.

Deferred Tax Assets and Tax Contingencies

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the estimated future tax effects attributable to temporary differences and carryforwards. A valuation allowance may be required if, based on the weight of available evidence, it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the DTAs will not be realized. In determining whether a valuation allowance is necessary, we consider the level of taxable income in prior years, to the extent that carrybacks are permitted under current tax laws, as well as estimates of future taxable income and tax planning strategies that could be implemented to accelerate taxable income, if necessary. If our estimates of future taxable income were materially overstated or if our assumptions regarding the tax consequences of tax planning strategies were inaccurate, some or all of our DTAs may not be realized, which would result in a charge to earnings. In 2009, we established a full valuation allowance against our net DTAs. See “— Overview of Results of Operations — Income Taxes” below. The quarter ended March 31, 2013 marked our ninth consecutive quarter of profitability. Based on this earnings performance trend, improvements in our financial condition, asset quality and capital ratios and the expectation of continued profitability, the Company determined that it was more likely than not that our net DTA would be realized. As a result, in the first quarter of 2013, the Company reversed a significant portion of the valuation allowance.

We have established income tax contingency reserves for potential tax liabilities related to uncertain tax positions. Tax benefits are recognized when we determine that it is more likely than not that such benefits will be realized. Where uncertainty exists due to the complexity of income tax statutes and where the potential tax amounts are significant, we generally seek independent tax opinions to support our positions. If our evaluation of the likelihood of the realization of benefits is inaccurate, we could incur additional income tax and interest expense that would adversely impact earnings, or we could receive tax benefits greater than anticipated which would positively impact earnings.

45

Defined Benefit Retirement Plan

Defined benefit plan obligations and related assets of our defined benefit retirement plan are presented in Note 16 to the Consolidated Financial Statements under “Part II, Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.” In 2002, the defined benefit retirement plan was curtailed and all plan benefits were fixed as of that date. Plan assets, which consist primarily of marketable equity and debt securities, are typically valued using market quotations. Plan obligations and the annual pension expense are determined by independent actuaries through the use of a number of assumptions. Key assumptions in measuring the plan obligations include the discount rate and the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets. In determining the discount rate, we utilize a yield that reflects the top 50% of the universe of bonds, ranked in the order of the highest yield. Asset returns are based upon the anticipated average rate of earnings expected on the invested funds of the plans.

At December 31, 2014, we used a weighted-average discount rate of 4.0% and an expected long-term rate of return on plan assets of 7.0%, which affected the amount of pension liability recorded as of year-end 2014 and the amount of pension expense to be recorded in 2015. At December 31, 2013, we used a weighted-average discount rate of 4.7% and an expected long-term rate of return on plan assets of 7.5% in determining the pension liability recorded as of year-end 2013 and the amount of pension expense recorded in 2014. For both the discount rate and the asset return rate, a range of estimates could reasonably have been used which would affect the amount of pension expense and pension liability recorded.

An increase in the discount rate or asset return rate would reduce pension expense in 2014, while a decrease in the discount rate or asset return rate would have had the opposite effect. A 0.25% change in the discount rate assumption would impact 2015 pension expense by less than $0.1 million and year-end 2014 pension liability by $1.0 million, while a 0.25% change in the asset return rate would impact 2015 pension expense by less than $0.1 million.

Overview of Results of Operations

2014 vs. 2013 Comparison

In 2014, we recognized net income of $40.5 million, or $1.07 per diluted common share, compared to net income of $172.1 million, or $4.07 per diluted common share, in 2013. Net income in 2013 included a non-cash income tax benefit of $119.8 million recorded in the first quarter of 2013 related to the reversal of a significant portion of a valuation allowance that was established against the Company’s net DTA during the third quarter of 2009. Excluding this income tax benefit, net income for 2013 was $52.3 million, or $1.24 per diluted common share.

Total credit costs, which include the Provision, write-downs of loans classified as held for sale, foreclosed asset expense, gains on sales of foreclosed assets, and the change in the reserve for unfunded loan commitments, amounted to a credit of $6.0 million in 2014, compared to a credit of $22.4 million in 2013.

The decrease in net income from 2013 to 2014 was due primarily to an income tax benefit of $112.2 million recorded in 2013, which included the aforementioned reversal of a significant portion of a valuation allowance on our net DTA, compared to income tax expense of $20.4 million recorded in 2014. In addition, we recorded a credit to the Provision of $11.3 million in 2013, compared to a credit to the Provision of $6.4 million in 2014, and we also experienced a decrease in other operating income of $11.1 million from 2013 to 2014. The decrease in other operating income was due primarily to lower net gains on sales of foreclosed assets of $7.6 million and lower net gains on sales of residential mortgage loans of $4.4 million.

46

Offsetting these decreases was an increase in net interest income of $10.3 million and a decrease in other operating expense of $6.7 million. The increase in net interest income was due primarily to an increase in interest-earnings assets from 2013 to 2014, combined with an increase in yields earned on the assets. The decrease in other operating expense was due primarily to lower salaries and employee benefits of $8.4 million and lower amortization of intangible assets of $2.1 million, partially offset by higher computer software expense of $1.7 million.

Our net income on average assets and average shareholders’ equity for 2014 was 0.85% and 6.80%, respectively, compared to 3.73% and 27.70%, respectively, in 2013.

2013 vs. 2012 Comparison

In 2013, we recognized net income of $172.1 million, or $4.07 per diluted common share, compared to net income of $47.4 million, or $1.13 per diluted common share, in 2012. Net income in 2013 included a non-cash income tax benefit of $119.8 million recorded in the first quarter of 2013 related to the reversal of a significant portion of a valuation allowance that was established against the Company’s net DTA during the third quarter of 2009. Excluding this income tax benefit, net income for 2013 was $52.3 million, or $1.24 per diluted common share.

Total credit costs, which include the Provision, write-downs of loans classified as held for sale, foreclosed asset expense, gains on sales of foreclosed assets, and the change in the reserve for unfunded loan commitments, amounted to a credit of $22.4 million in 2013, compared to a credit of $16.1 million in 2012. Our operating results in 2013 were positively impacted by an income tax benefit for 2013 of $112.2 million, an increase in net interest income of $13.4 million, and a decrease in other operating expense of $12.4 million, offset by a lower credit to the provision for loan and lease losses of $7.6 million and lower other operating income of $5.8 million. Our net income on average assets and average shareholders’ equity for 2013 was 3.73% and 27.70%, respectively, compared to 1.13% and 9.81%, respectively, in 2012.

Net Interest Income

The following table sets forth information concerning average interest earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities and the yields and rates thereon. Net interest income, when expressed as a percentage of average interest earning assets, is referred to as “net interest margin.” Interest income, which includes loan fees and resultant yield information, is expressed on a taxable equivalent basis using an assumed income tax rate of 35%. Table 4 presents an analysis of changes in components of net interest income between years. For each category of interest earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, information is provided on changes attributable to: (i) changes in volume (change in volume of the asset multiplied by the prior year’s rate) and (ii) changes in rates (change in rate multiplied by the current year’s volume).

47

Table 3. Average Balances, Interest Income and Expense, Yields and Rates (Taxable Equivalent)