Webster Financial 10-K 2013
Documents found in this filing:
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Commission File Number: 001-31486
WEBSTER FINANCIAL CORPORATION
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933. þ Yes ¨ No
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. ¨ Yes þ No
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. þ Yes ¨ No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (Section 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). þ Yes ¨ No
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. þ
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 the 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 Exchange Act Rule 12b-2). ¨ Yes þ No
The aggregate market value of common stock held by non-affiliates of Webster Financial Corporation was approximately $1.8 billion, based on the closing sale price of the common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on June 29, 2012, the last trading day of the registrant's most recently completed second quarter.
The number of shares of common stock, par value $.01 per share, outstanding as of January 31, 2013 was 85,340,995.
Documents Incorporated by Reference
Part III: Portions of the Definitive Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held on April 25, 2013.
ITEM 1. BUSINESS
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. For a discussion of forward-looking statements, see the section captioned “Forward-Looking Statements” in Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”
Webster Financial Corporation (collectively, with its consolidated subsidiaries, “Webster”, the “Company”, our company, we or us), is a bank holding company and financial holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, headquartered in Waterbury, Connecticut and incorporated under the laws of Delaware in 1986. At December 31, 2012 Webster Financial Corporation’s principal asset was all of the outstanding capital stock of Webster Bank, National Association (“Webster Bank”). Webster had assets of $20.1 billion and shareholders' equity of $2.1 billion at December 31, 2012. Webster’s common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “WBS”.
Webster, through Webster Bank and non-banking financial services subsidiaries, delivers financial services to individuals, families and businesses primarily from Westchester County, N.Y. to Boston, MA. Webster provides commercial, small business and consumer banking, mortgage lending, financial planning, trust and investment services through 167 banking offices, 293 owned ATMs, telephone banking, mobile banking and its Internet website (www.websterbank.com). Webster Bank provides health savings account trustee and administrative services on a nationwide basis through its HSA Bank division and its internet website (www.hsabank.com). Webster also offers equipment financing, commercial real estate lending, and asset-based lending.
The core of our company's value proposition is the service quality model that we refer to as the “Type W Personality”, which promises knowledgeable and reliable relationship-based bankers who know their markets and make decisions at the local level. The Company operates with a local market orientation as a community focused, values guided regional bank. Operating objectives include acquiring and developing customer relationships through marketing, onboarding and cross-sale efforts to fuel organic growth and expanding contiguously. The Company is in the process of strategically reconfiguring its approach to retail banking with the goal of focusing primarily on customer preferences rather than product sets. This process is expected to bring together our consumer banking services and products, including deposits, investment services, consumer finance and distribution planning under the umbrella of a Personal Bank.
In 2012, we focused on improving the customer experience by aligning Webster’s delivery channels and capital investment in line with our customers' shifting preference to utilize electronic and mobile channels to transact more of their banking business. This strategic decision to significantly increase investment in electronic infrastructure is in response to meeting customers' high expectations for access to convenience while lowering our service delivery costs. In 2012, the Company completed a year-long investment in technology to upgrade its ATMs by implementing customized settings, touchscreens, and speech capabilities, in order to provide a best-in-class experience for customers. All 293 Webster-owned ATMs across the four state footprint are now personalized, simpler, faster and more convenient. Also, for its 251 deposit-taking ATMs, the Company implemented envelope-free and image capture enhancements.
The Company also upgraded its mobile banking capabilities during 2012 with the introduction of an application for smart phones, which allows WebsterOnline customers to check balances, view transactions, pay bills and transfer money on their mobile devices. In addition, the Company launched "eChecking", a low cost product for both customers and Webster, designed for those who prefer to conduct banking using electronic channels. We believe that the shift to electronic infrastructure provides customers with more convenience, while giving branch personnel greater opportunity to build broader, deeper relationships with customers across all lines of business.
In 2012, the continued move from transaction-based to relationship-based banking was clearly evident as growth was driven by an increased focus on the customer experience, product enhancements, and an expanded sales force. Branch managers completed Webster's Business Banking certification program early in 2012. The success of the continued focus on relationship-based banking is evident in the 2012 Business and Professional Banking results. Business and Professional Banking recorded loan originations of $312.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2012, a 15.8% increase from prior year. Business and Professional Banking loan originations were accompanied by $194.8 million, or 12.4%, net deposit growth from December 31, 2011 to December 31, 2012 with the majority of this increase concentrated in Transaction/Demand Deposit account products. A pilot of Webster's Universal Banker program was launched late in 2012 with a full rollout of this new branch staffing model planned to occur throughout 2013. Under this program, branch bankers are trained to assist customers with a wider variety of banking matters and are more focused on financial advisory activities as transactions continue to migrate to Webster's electronic and mobile delivery
channels. During 2012, Consumer Finance doubled the loan originator sales force, with an emphasis on jumbo mortgages as a key to relationship building. As a result, Consumer Finance loan originations were $1.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2012, an 11.8% increase from prior year. The Company implemented a strategy of selling a higher percentage of conforming fixed-rate loans, which contributed to a $18.1 million increase in mortgage banking activity in 2012 as compared to 2011.
The Commercial Bank also benefited from the investment in relationship-based banking as Middle Market loan originations in 2012 were $1.3 billion, a 60.5% increase from prior year. The Commercial Real Estate portfolio also saw significant growth, generating $680.6 million in loan originations during the year ended December 31, 2012, a 67.1% increase from the prior year. During 2012, the Commercial Bank also formed a new Treasury and Payment Solutions group that brings together all of the Commercial Bank's cash management services and features automated capabilities that will enable the Company to best meet customers' cash management needs.
The Private Banking and HSA business segments also experienced significant growth during 2012. In the Private Bank, the Company added new relationship managers resulting in coverage in six of the Company's seven regional markets. In the first quarter of 2013, the Company opened a full service branch and Private Banking facility in Greenwich, CT. During 2012, the Private Bank had an 88.9% increase in deposits and a 16.1% increase in loans, as compared to prior year. The HSA segment experienced a 21.8% increase in deposit balances from prior year, driven by increased penetration into the midsize and larger group employer segment and differentiating value-added services.
On December 4, 2012, the Company closed the public offering of 5,060,000 depositary shares pursuant to an Underwriting Agreement, dated November 27, 2012, between the Company and Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., as representative for the underwriters listed therein. Each Depositary Share represents a 1/1000th interest in a share of the Company's Series E Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, with a liquidation preference of $25,000 per share (equivalent to $25 per depositary share). Dividends accrue and are payable on the liquidation amount of $25,000 per share of Series E Preferred Stock in arrears at 6.40% per annum only when, as, and if declared by the Board of Directors of Webster and to the extent Webster has legally available funds to pay dividends.
On December 6, 2012, Webster announced that its Board of Directors authorized a $100 million common stock repurchase program under which shares may be repurchased from time to time in open market or privately negotiated transactions, subject to market conditions and other factors.
On December 7, 2012, the Company, Warburg Pincus Private Equity X, L.P. and Warburg Pincus X Partners, L.P. and Barclays Capital Inc. entered into an underwriting agreement pursuant to which the Warburg entities as selling stockholders, agreed to sell 10,000,000 shares of Webster's common stock, $0.01 par value per share, to the underwriter. The transaction closed on December 12, 2012. Webster purchased 2,518,891 shares of its common stock in the offering at a price per share equal to $19.85, the price per share paid by the underwriter to the selling stockholders pursuant to the underwriting agreement.
Webster’s operations are managed along four business segments consisting of Commercial Banking, Retail Banking, Consumer Finance and Other. Other includes the HSA Bank, or HSA, and Private Banking operating segments. These segments reflect how executive management responsibilities are assigned by the Chief Executive Officer for each of the core businesses, the products and services provided, or the type of customer served, and they reflect the way that financial information is currently evaluated by management. A description of each of the Company’s business segments is included in Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”, and financial statement results for each of the Company’s business segments are included in Note 21 - Business Segments in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, which is located elsewhere in this report.
Webster is subject to strong competition from banks and other financial institutions, including savings and loan associations, finance companies, credit unions, consumer finance companies and insurance companies. Certain of these competitors are larger financial institutions with substantially greater resources, lending limits, larger branch systems and a wider array of commercial banking services than Webster. Competition could intensify in the future as a result of industry consolidation, the increasing availability of products and services from non-banks, greater technological developments in the industry, and banking regulatory reform.
Webster faces substantial competition for deposits and loans throughout its market areas. The primary factors in competing for deposits are interest rates, personalized services, the quality and range of financial services, convenience of office locations, automated services and office hours. Competition for deposits comes primarily from other commercial banks, savings institutions, credit unions, mutual funds and other investment alternatives. The primary factors in competing for commercial and business
loans are interest rates, loan origination fees, the quality and range of lending services and personalized service. Competition for origination of mortgage loans comes primarily from savings institutions, mortgage banking firms, mortgage brokers, other commercial banks and insurance companies. Factors which affect competition include the general and local economic conditions, current interest rate levels and volatility in the mortgage markets.
Supervision and Regulation
Webster, Webster Bank and certain of its non-banking subsidiaries are subject to extensive regulation under federal and state laws. The regulatory framework applicable to bank holding companies and their subsidiary banks is intended to protect depositors, federal deposit insurance funds, consumers and the banking system as a whole, and not necessarily investors in bank holding companies such as Webster.
Set forth below is a description of the significant elements of the laws and regulations applicable to Webster and its subsidiaries. The description that follows is qualified in its entirety by reference to the full text of the statutes, regulations and policies that are described. Also, such statutes, regulations and policies are continually under review by Congress and state legislatures and federal and state regulatory agencies. A change in statutes, regulations or regulatory policies applicable to Webster and its subsidiaries could have a material effect on the results of the Company.
Webster is a legal entity separate and distinct from Webster Bank and its other subsidiaries. As a bank holding company and a financial holding company, Webster is regulated under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (“BHC Act”), and is subject to inspection, examination and supervision by the Federal Reserve Board ("FRB"). Webster is also under the jurisdiction of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") and 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, as administered by the SEC. Webster's common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under the trading symbol “WBS” and is subject to the rules of the NYSE for listed companies.
Webster Bank is organized as a national banking association under the National Bank Act. It is subject to broad regulation and examination by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) as its primary supervisory agency, as well as by the Federal Reserve, and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). As noted below, on July 21, 2011 supervision of Webster's and Webster Bank's compliance with federal consumer financial protection laws was transferred to the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, or CFPB. The Company may also be subject to increased scrutiny and enforcement efforts by state attorneys general in regard to consumer protection laws. Webster Bank's deposits are insured by the FDIC.
Many of the Company's non-bank subsidiaries also are subject to regulation by the FRB and other federal and state agencies. Other non-bank subsidiaries are subject to both federal and state laws and regulations.
Bank Holding Company Regulation
In general, the BHC Act limits the business of bank holding companies to banking, managing or controlling banks and other activities that the Federal Reserve Board has determined to be so closely related to banking as to be a proper incident thereto. Bank holding companies that are financial holding companies may engage in any activity, or acquire and retain the shares of a company engaged in any activity that is either (i) financial in nature or incidental to such financial activity (as determined by the FRB in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury) or (ii) complementary to a financial activity, and that does not pose a substantial risk to the safety and soundness of depository institutions or the financial system generally (as solely determined by the Federal Reserve Board). Activities that are financial in nature include securities underwriting and dealing, insurance underwriting and making merchant banking investments.
If a bank holding company seeks to engage in the broader range of activities that are permitted under the BHC Act for financial holding companies, (i) all of its depository institution subsidiaries, and the holding company must be “well capitalized” and “well managed,” as defined in the FRB's Regulation Y, and (ii) it must file a declaration with the Federal Reserve Board that it elects to be a “financial holding company”.
In order for a financial holding company to commence any activity that is financial in nature, incidental thereto, or complementary to a financial activity, or to acquire a company engaged in any such activity permitted by the BHC Act, each insured depository institution subsidiary of the financial holding company must have received a rating of at least “satisfactory” in its most recent examination under the Community Reinvestment Act. See the section captioned “Community Reinvestment Act and Fair Lending Laws” included elsewhere in this item.
The BHC Act generally limits acquisitions by bank holding companies that are not qualified as financial holding companies to commercial banks and companies engaged in activities that the FRB has determined to be so closely related to banking as to be
a proper incident thereto. Financial holding companies like Webster are also permitted to acquire control of non-depository institution companies engaged in activities that are financial in nature and in activities that are incidental and complementary to financial activities without prior FRB approval. However, the BHC Act, as amended by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), requires prior written approval from the Federal Reserve or prior written notice to the Federal Reserve before a financial holding company may acquire control of a company with consolidated assets of $10 billion or more.
The BHC Act, the Federal Bank Merger Act and other federal and state statutes regulate acquisitions of commercial banks. The BHC Act requires the prior approval of the FRB for the direct or indirect acquisition of 5.0% or more of the voting shares of a commercial bank or its parent holding company. Under the Bank Merger Act, the prior approval of the OCC is required for a national bank to merge with another bank or purchase the assets or assume the deposits of another bank. In reviewing applications seeking approval of merger and acquisition transactions, the bank regulatory authorities will consider, among other things, the competitive effect and public benefits of the transactions, the capital position of the combined organization, the applicant's performance record under the Community Reinvestment Act (see the section captioned “Community Reinvestment Act and Fair Lending Laws” included elsewhere in this item) and the effectiveness of the subject organizations in combating money laundering activities.
The Dodd-Frank Act, enacted on July 21, 2010, significantly changed the bank regulatory landscape and has impacted and will continue to impact the lending, deposit, investment, trading and operating activities of financial institutions and their holding companies. The Dodd-Frank Act requires various federal agencies to adopt a broad range of new rules and regulations and to prepare various studies and reports for Congress. Certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act applicable to Webster are discussed herein.
International reforms, such as the Basel III capital requirements, have also been proposed to be implemented in the United States. In June 2012, the FRB, the OCC and the FDIC issued three proposals that would amend the existing capital adequacy requirements of banks and bank holding companies. The three proposals, discussed in more detail below, would, among other things, implement the Basel III capital standards, as well as the Basel II standardized approach for almost all banking organizations in the United States. The Basel III proposal would increase the minimum levels of required capital, narrow the definition of capital, and place greater emphasis on common equity. The Basel II standardized proposal would modify the risk weights for various asset classes for purposes of calculating capital ratios. The U.S. rules are still pending with regulators, and the Company is still in the process of assessing the impacts of these complex proposals. We believe, however, that we will continue to exceed all expected well capitalized regulatory requirements over the course of the proposed phase-in period, and on a fully phased-in basis.
On December 20, 2011, the FRB issued a notice of proposed rulemaking on enhanced prudential requirements required by the Dodd-Frank Act. Although most of the enhanced prudential requirements only apply to bank holding companies with more than $50 billion in assets, the proposed rule, as directed by the Dodd-Frank Act, contains certain requirements that apply to bank holding companies with more than $10 billion in assets, including an annual company-run stress test requirement and a requirement to use a risk committee of the Company's board of directors for enterprise-wide risk management practices. Webster meets these requirements.
On October 9, 2012, the FDIC, the OCC, and the Federal Reserve issued separate but similar Dodd-Frank Act-mandated final rules requiring covered banks and bank holding companies with more than $10 billion in total consolidated assets to conduct annual company-run stress tests. The final rules required banks with more than $50 billion in assets to begin conducting annual stress tests in 2012 and requires banks with between $10 billion and $50 billion in assets to begin conducting annual stress tests in October 2013.
In June 2011, the Federal Reserve approved a final debit card interchange rule pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act that would cap an issuer's base fee at 21 cents per transaction and allow an additional amount equal to 5 basis-points of the transaction's value. The FRB separately issued an interim final rule that also allows a fraud-prevention adjustment of 1 cent per transaction conditioned upon an issuer developing, implementing and updating reasonably designed fraud prevention policies and procedures. The FRB also adopted requirements in the final rule that issuers include two unaffiliated networks for routing debit transactions.
The requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act and other regulatory reforms continue to be implemented. It is difficult to predict at this time what specific impact certain provisions and yet to be finalized implementing rules and regulations will have on the Company, including any regulations promulgated by the CFPB. Financial reform legislation and rules could have adverse implications on the financial industry, the competitive environment, and our ability to conduct business. Management will have to apply resources to ensure compliance with all applicable provisions of the regulatory reform, including the Dodd-Frank Act and any implementing rules, which may increase our costs of operations and adversely impact our earnings.
The principal source of Webster's liquidity is dividends from Webster Bank. The prior approval of the OCC is required if the total of all dividends declared by a national bank in any calendar year would exceed the sum of the bank's net profits for that year and its net retained profits for the preceding two calendar years, less any required transfers to surplus. Federal law also prohibits national banks from paying dividends that would be greater than the bank's undivided profits after deducting statutory bad debt in excess of the bank's allowance for loan and lease losses. At December 31, 2012, there were $128.4 million of retained earnings available for the payment of dividends by Webster Bank to the Company. Webster Bank paid the Company $140.0 million in dividends during the year ended December 31, 2012.
In addition, Webster and Webster Bank are subject to other regulatory policies and requirements relating to the payment of dividends, including requirements to maintain adequate capital above regulatory minimums. The appropriate federal regulatory authority is authorized to determine, under certain circumstances relating to the financial condition of a bank holding company or a bank, that the payment of dividends would be an unsafe or unsound practice and to prohibit payment thereof. The appropriate federal regulatory authorities have indicated that paying dividends that deplete a bank's capital base to an inadequate level would be an unsafe and unsound banking practice and that banking organizations should generally pay dividends only out of current operating earnings.
Federal Reserve System
FRB regulations require depository institutions to maintain non-interest-earning reserves against their transaction accounts (primarily interest-bearing and regular checking accounts). Webster Bank's required reserves can be in the form of vault cash and, if vault cash does not fully satisfy the required reserves, in the form of a balance maintained with the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. The FRB regulations currently require that reserves be maintained against aggregate transaction accounts except for transaction accounts up to $12.4 million, which are exempt. Transaction accounts greater than $12.4 million up to $79.5 million have a reserve requirement of 3%, and those greater than $79.5 million have a reserve requirement of $2.013 million plus 10% of the amount over $79.5 million. The FRB generally makes annual adjustments to the tiered reserves. Webster Bank is in compliance with these requirements.
As a member of the Federal Reserve System, the Bank is required to hold capital stock of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. The shares may be adjusted up or down based on changes to Webster Bank's common stock and paid-in surplus. Webster Bank is in compliance with the FRB's capital stock requirement.
Federal Home Loan Bank System
The Federal Home Loan Bank System consists of 12 regional Federal Home Loan Banks. The Federal Home Loan Bank System provides a central credit facility for member institutions. The Bank is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston (“FHLB”). Webster Bank is required to purchase and hold shares of capital stock in the FHLB in an amount equal to 0.35% of the aggregate principal amount of its unpaid residential mortgage loans and similar obligations at the beginning of each year up to a maximum of $25.0 million. Webster Bank is also required to hold shares of capital stock in the FHLB in amounts that vary from 3.0% to 4.5% of its advances (borrowings), depending on the maturities of the advances. Webster Bank was in compliance with this requirement with a total investment in FHLB stock of $104.9 million at December 31, 2012. At December 31, 2012, Webster Bank had approximately $1.8 billion in FHLB advances.
The FHLB restored its quarterly dividend in March 2011, and Webster Bank received $0.5 million and $0.3 million in 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Source of Strength Doctrine
FRB policy, now codified under the Dodd-Frank Act, requires bank holding companies to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to their subsidiary banks. As a result, Webster is expected to commit resources to support Webster Bank, including at times when Webster may not be in a financial position to provide such resources. Any capital loans by a bank holding company to any of its subsidiary banks are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and to certain other indebtedness of such subsidiary banks. The Federal bankruptcy code provides that, in the event of a bank holding company's bankruptcy, any commitment by the bank holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a subsidiary bank will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to priority of payment.
In addition, under the National Bank Act, if the capital stock of Webster Bank is impaired by losses or otherwise, the OCC is authorized to require payment of the deficiency by assessment upon Webster. If the assessment is not paid within three months, the OCC could order a sale of the Webster Bank stock held by Webster to make good the deficiency.
Capital Adequacy and Prompt Corrective Action
Federal law requires, among other things, that federal bank regulatory authorities take “prompt corrective action” with respect
to banks that do not meet minimum capital requirements. For these purposes, the law establishes five capital categories:
As of December 31, 2012, Webster and Webster Bank exceeded the regulatory requirements for the classification as “well capitalized”. On May 8, 2012, Webster Bank was notified by the OCC that the previously disclosed individual minimum capital ratios applicable to the Bank were terminated effective May 3, 2012. Webster Bank's Tier 1 leverage, total risk-based, and Tier 1 capital ratios were 8.1%, 12.9%, and 11.6% respectively, at December 31, 2012. See Note 14 - Regulatory Matters in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding Webster and Webster Bank's regulatory capital levels.
At December 31, 2012, $75.0 million in trust preferred securities have been included in the Tier 1 capital of Webster Financial Corporation for regulatory reporting purposes pursuant to the Federal Reserve's capital adequacy guidelines. Certain provisions of the Basel III proposal will require the Company to exclude all trust preferred securities from the Company's Tier 1 capital. Excluding trust preferred securities from the Tier 1 capital at December 31, 2012 would not affect the Company's ability to meet all capital adequacy requirements to which it is subject. Trust preferred securities will continue to be entitled to be treated as Tier 2 capital after they are phased out of Tier 1 capital.
On August 5, 2011, Standard & Poor's rating agency lowered the long-term rating of the U.S. government and federal agencies from AAA to AA+. In response, the federal banking agencies have indicated that for risk-based capital purposes, the risk weights for Treasury securities and other securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government, government agencies, and government sponsored entities are not affected.
Basel III Proposed Amendments to Capital Adequacy Requirements
The current U.S. federal bank regulatory agencies' risk-based capital guidelines are based upon the 1988 capital accord (“Basel I”) of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (“Basel Committee”). The Basel Committee is a committee of central banks and bank supervisors/regulators from the major industrialized countries that meet under the auspices of the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland to develop broad policy guidelines for use by each country's supervisors in determining the supervisory policies they apply.
In 2010, the Basel Committee released its final framework for strengthening international capital and liquidity regulation, now officially identified by the Basel Committee as “Basel III.” Basel III, when implemented by the U.S. bank regulatory agencies and fully phased-in, will require bank holding companies and their bank subsidiaries to maintain substantially more capital, with a greater emphasis on common equity.
While the Basel Committee initially called for the implementation of the Basel III final framework to commence January 1, 2013, final rules have not yet been implemented in the United States.
“CET1” or “Common Equity Tier 1” is a new capital measure introduced by the Basel III capital framework. In June 2012, the Federal Banking Agencies issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (“NPR”) to implement Basel III in the United States. The Basel III NPR closely followed the Basel Committee's Basel III proposal in most respects. Although the NPR calls for
implementation to begin in 2013, the Federal Banking Agencies have not yet finalized the proposal. The NPR would initially require banks and bank holding companies to meet the following minimum requirements:
•3.5% CET1 to risk-weighted assets;
•4.5% Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets; and
•8.0% Total capital to risk-weighted assets.
Under the Basel III NPR, the minimum capital requirements would increase in 2019 to the following:
•4.5% CET1 to risk-weighted assets;
•6.0% Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets; and
•8.0% Total capital to risk-weighted assets.
The Basel III final framework and the NPR provide for a number of new deductions from and adjustments to CET1. These include, for example, the requirement that mortgage servicing rights, deferred tax assets and significant investments in non-consolidated financial entities be deducted from CET1 to the extent that any one such category exceeds 10% of CET1 or all such categories in the aggregate exceed 15% of CET1.
In addition to the Basel III NPR, the federal banking regulators also released an NPR to implement the Basel II Standardized Approach in the United States and make it applicable to almost all banking organizations in the United States. It incorporates aspects of the Basel Committee's Basel II standardized framework and provides alternatives to credit ratings for the treatment of certain exposures, consistent with the Dodd-Frank Act. The Standardized Approach NPR would increase the risk sensitivity of the Federal Banking Agencies' general risk-based capital requirements for determining risk-weighted assets (i.e., the denominator of a banking organization's risk-based capital ratios) by proposing revised methodologies for determining risk-weighted assets for:
The Standardized Approach NPR would also generally replace the use of credit ratings for securitization exposures with a formula-based approach under the existing gross up approach, or a new simplified supervisory formula approach ("SSFA"). The Standardized Approach NPR notes that the SSFA would generally result in relatively higher capital requirements for the more risky junior tranches of securitizations and relatively lower capital requirements for the most senior tranches. The Standardized Approach NPR would also provide greater recognition of credit risk mitigants, such as collateral and guarantees. For assets with newly eligible guarantees and eligible collateral, this will result in lower capital requirements. The changes in the Standardized Approach NPR are proposed to take effect January 1, 2015; however, banking organizations may choose to comply with the proposed requirements prior to that date.
The Dodd-Frank Act requires the Federal Reserve to adopt regulations imposing a continuing “floor” of the Basel I-based capital requirements in cases where the Basel II-based capital requirements and any changes in capital regulations resulting from Basel III otherwise would permit lower requirements. In June 2011, the Federal Reserve finalized regulations implementing this requirement.
Given that the Basel III rules remain subject to implementation and change, and the scope and content of capital regulations that U.S. federal banking agencies may adopt under the Dodd-Frank Act is uncertain, we cannot be certain of the impact new capital regulations will have on our capital ratios; however, Webster believes it is already fully compliant with Basel III, including the conservation buffers.
Transactions with Affiliates & Insiders
Under federal law, transactions between depository institutions and their affiliates are governed by Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act (“FRA”). In a holding company context, at a minimum, the parent holding company of a bank, and any
companies which are controlled by such parent holding company, are affiliates of the bank. Generally, sections 23A and 23B are intended to protect insured depository institutions from losses arising from transactions with non-insured affiliates, by limiting the extent to which a bank or its subsidiaries may engage in covered transactions with any one affiliate and with all affiliates of the bank in the aggregate, and by requiring that such transactions be on terms that are consistent with safe and sound banking practices.
Further, Section 22(h) of the FRA restricts loans to directors, executive officers, and principal stockholders (“insiders”). Under Section 22(h), loans to insiders and their related interests may not exceed, together with all other outstanding loans to such persons and affiliated entities, the institution's total capital and surplus. Loans to insiders above specified amounts must receive the prior approval of the board of directors. Further, under Section 22(h), loans to directors, executive officers and principal stockholders must be made on terms substantially the same as offered in comparable transactions to other persons, except that such insiders may receive preferential loans made under a benefit or compensation program that is widely available to the bank's employees and does not give preference to the insider over the employees. Section 22(g) of the FRA places additional limitations on loans to executive officers.
Consumer Protection and Financial Privacy Laws
The Company is subject to a number of federal and state laws designed to protect borrowers and promote lending to various sectors of the economy and population. These laws include the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, various state law counterparts, and the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, which constitutes part of the Dodd-Frank Act and establishes the CFPB, as described above.
On January 10, 2013, the CFPB issued a final rule implementing the ability-to-repay and qualified mortgage (QM) provisions of the Truth in Lending Act, as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act (the “QM Rule”). The ability-to-repay provision requires creditors to make reasonable, good faith determinations that borrowers are able to repay their mortgages before extending the credit based on a number of factors and consideration of financial information about the borrower from reasonably reliable third-party documents. Under the Dodd-Frank Act and the QM Rule, loans meeting the definition of “qualified mortgage” are entitled to a presumption that the lender satisfied the ability-to-repay requirements. The presumption is a conclusive presumption/safe harbor for prime loans meeting the QM requirements, and a rebuttable presumption for higher-priced/subprime loans meeting the QM requirements. The definition of a “qualified mortgage” incorporates the statutory requirements, such as not allowing negative amortization or terms longer than 30 years. The QM Rule also adds an explicit maximum 43% debt-to-income ratio for borrowers if the loan is to meet the QM definition, though some mortgages that meet GSE, FHA and VA underwriting guidelines may, for a period not to exceed seven years, meet the QM definition without being subject to the 43% debt-to-income limits. The QM Rule will become effective January 10, 2014.
In addition, federal law and certain state laws currently contain client privacy protection provisions. These provisions limit the ability of banks and other financial institutions to disclose non-public information about consumers to affiliated companies and non-affiliated third parties. These rules require disclosure of privacy policies to clients and, in some circumstance, allow consumers to prevent disclosure of certain personal information to affiliates or non-affiliated third parties by means of "opt out" or "opt in" authorizations. Pursuant to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ("GLBA") and certain state laws, companies are required to notify clients of security breaches resulting in unauthorized access to their personal information.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDIA) provides that, in the event of the “liquidation or other resolution” of an insured depository institution, the claims of depositors of the institution, including the claims of the FDIC as subrogee of insured depositors, and certain claims for administrative expenses of the FDIC as a receiver, will have priority over other general unsecured claims against the institution. If an insured depository institution fails, insured and uninsured depositors, along with the FDIC, will have priority in payment ahead of unsecured, non-deposit creditors, including the parent bank holding company, with respect to any extensions of credit they have made to such insured depository institution.
Substantially all of the deposits of Webster Bank are insured up to applicable limits by the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) of the FDIC and are subject to deposit insurance assessments to maintain the DIF. The FDIC utilizes a risk-based assessment system that imposes insurance premiums based upon a risk matrix that takes into account a bank's capital level and supervisory rating (“CAMELS rating”). The risk matrix utilizes four risk categories which are distinguished by capital levels and supervisory ratings.
In February 2011, the FDIC issued rules to implement changes to the deposit insurance assessment base, and risk-based assessments mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act. The base for insurance assessments changed from domestic deposits to consolidated assets less tangible equity. Assessment rates are calculated using formulas that take into account the risk of the
institution being assessed. The rule was effective April 1, 2011. On September 28, 2011, the FDIC issued notification to insured depository institutions that the transition guidance for reporting certain leveraged and subprime loans on the Call Report had been extended from October 1, 2011 to April 1, 2012. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC may review the definitions of subprime and leveraged loans. On October 9, 2012, the FDIC finalized the definitions of "higher-risk" consumer and C&I loans and securities used under Large Bank Pricing ("LBP") of deposit insurance assessments adopted February 25, 2011 for banks with $10 billion or more of assets. The final rule, among other things, renames leveraged loans “higher-risk C&I loans and securities”; renames subprime consumer loans “higher-risk consumer loans”; clarifies when an asset must be identified as higher risk; and clarifies the way securitizations are identified as higher risk. The Company is still in the process of assessing the impact of the final rule on the overall FDIC assessment rate. The new definitions will be incorporated in the LBP assessment effective April 1, 2013.
The Bank's FDIC deposit insurance assessment expenses totaled $22.7 million, $20.9 million and $24.5 million, for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. FDIC insurance expense includes deposit insurance assessments and Financing Corporation (“FICO”) assessments related to outstanding FICO bonds. The FICO is a mixed-ownership government corporation established by the Competitive Equality Banking Act of 1987 whose sole purpose was to function as a financing vehicle for the now defunct Federal Savings & Loan Insurance Corporation.
Under the FDIA, the FDIC may terminate deposit insurance upon a finding that the institution has engaged in unsafe and unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations, or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, order or condition imposed by the FDIC. Webster's management is not aware of any practice, condition or violation that might lead to the termination of deposit insurance.
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Sarbanes-Oxley) implemented a broad range of corporate governance and accounting measures to increase corporate responsibility, to provide for enhanced penalties for accounting and auditing improprieties at publicly traded companies, and to protect investors by improving the accuracy and reliability of disclosures under federal securities laws. We are subject to Sarbanes-Oxley because we are required to file periodic reports with the SEC under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Among other things, Sarbanes-Oxley and/or its implementing regulations have established new membership requirements and additional responsibilities for our audit committee, imposed restrictions on the relationship between us and our outside auditors (including restrictions on the types of non-audit services our auditors may provide to us), imposed additional responsibilities for our external financial statements on our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, expanded the disclosure requirements for our corporate insiders, required our management to evaluate our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting, and required our auditors to issue a report on our internal control over financial reporting. The NYSE has imposed a number of additional corporate governance requirements as well.
The Dodd-Frank Act requires publicly traded companies to give stockholders a non-binding vote on executive compensation at their first annual meeting taking place six months after the date of enactment and at least every three years thereafter and on so-called “golden parachute” payments in connection with approvals of mergers and acquisitions. The legislation also authorizes the SEC to promulgate rules that would allow stockholders to nominate their own candidates using a company's proxy materials. Additionally, the Dodd-Frank Act directs the federal banking regulators to promulgate rules requiring the reporting of incentive-based compensation and prohibiting excessive incentive-based compensation paid to executives of depository institutions and their holding companies with assets in excess of $1.0 billion, regardless of whether the company is publicly traded or not. In April 2011, the FRB, along with other federal banking supervisors, issued a joint notice of proposed rulemaking implementing those requirements. The Dodd-Frank Act gives the SEC authority to prohibit broker discretionary voting on elections of directors, executive compensation matters and any other significant matter. At the 2011 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, Webster's shareholders voted on a non-binding, advisory basis to hold a non-binding, advisory vote on the compensation of named executive officers of Webster annually. In light of the results, the Board of Directors determined to hold the vote annually.
Community Reinvestment Act and Fair Lending Laws
Webster Bank has a responsibility under the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (“CRA”) to help meet the credit needs of its communities, including low and moderate-income neighborhoods. The CRA does not establish specific lending requirements or programs for financial institutions nor does it limit an institution's discretion to develop the types of products and services that it believes are best suited to its particular community, consistent with the CRA. In connection with its examination, the OCC assesses Webster Bank's record of compliance with the CRA. In addition, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Housing Act prohibit discrimination in lending practices on the basis of characteristics specified in those statutes. Webster Bank's failure to comply with the provisions of the CRA could, at a minimum, result in regulatory restrictions on its activities and the activities of Webster. Webster Bank's failure to comply with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Housing Act could result in enforcement actions against it by the OCC, as well as other federal regulatory agencies, including the CFPB and the
Department of Justice. The Bank's latest OCC CRA rating was “satisfactory.”
USA PATRIOT Act
Under Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act, all financial institutions are required to take certain measures to identify their customers, prevent money laundering, monitor customer transactions and report suspicious activity to U.S. law enforcement agencies. Financial institutions also are required to respond to requests for information from federal banking regulatory authorities and law enforcement agencies. Information sharing among financial institutions for the above purposes is encouraged by an exemption granted to complying financial institutions from the privacy provisions of GLBA and other privacy laws. Financial institutions that hold correspondent accounts for foreign banks or provide private banking services to foreign individuals are required to take measures to avoid dealing with certain foreign individuals or entities, including foreign banks with profiles that raise money laundering concerns, and are prohibited from dealing with foreign “shell banks” and persons from jurisdictions of particular concern. The primary federal banking regulators and the Secretary of the Treasury have adopted regulations to implement several of these provisions. All financial institutions also are required to establish internal anti-money laundering programs. The effectiveness of a financial institution in combating money laundering activities is a factor to be considered in any application submitted by the financial institution under the Bank Merger Act. Webster has in place a Bank Secrecy Act and USA PATRIOT Act compliance program and engages in very few transactions of any kind with foreign financial institutions or foreign persons.
Office of Foreign Assets Control Regulation
The United States has imposed economic sanctions that affect transactions with designated foreign countries, nationals and others. These are typically known as the “OFAC” rules based on their administration by the U.S. Treasury Department Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”). The OFAC-administered sanctions targeting countries take many different forms. Generally, they contain one or more of the following elements: i) restrictions on trade with or investment in a sanctioned country, including prohibitions against direct or indirect imports from and exports to a sanctioned country and prohibitions on “U.S. persons” engaging in financial transactions relating to making investments in, or providing investment-related advice or assistance to, a sanctioned country; and ii) a blocking of assets in which the government or specially designated nationals of the sanctioned country have an interest, by prohibiting transfers of property subject to U.S. jurisdiction (including property in the possession or control of U.S. persons). Blocked assets (e.g., property and bank deposits) cannot be paid out, withdrawn, set off or transferred in any manner without a license from OFAC. Failure to comply with these sanctions could have serious legal and reputational consequences.
Other Legislative Initiatives
From time to time, various legislative and regulatory initiatives are introduced in Congress and state legislatures, as well as by regulatory agencies. Such initiatives may include proposals to expand or contract the powers of bank holding companies and/or depository institutions or proposals to substantially change the financial institution regulatory system. Such legislation could change banking statutes and the operating environment of the Company in substantial and unpredictable ways. If enacted, such legislation 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. The Company cannot predict whether any such legislation will be enacted, and, if enacted, the effect that it or any implementing regulations would have on the financial condition or results of operations of the Company. A change in statutes, regulations or regulatory policies applicable to Webster or any of its subsidiaries could have a material effect on the business of the Company.
Risk Management Framework
Webster utilizes an enterprise-wide approach to identifying, assessing, monitoring and managing risk within the Board-approved risk appetite framework. The Audit and Risk Committees of the Board of Directors, comprised of independent directors, oversee all Webster's risk-related matters and provide input and guidance as appropriate. Webster's Enterprise Risk Management Committee (“ERMC”), which reports directly to the Risk Committee of the Board, is chaired by Webster's President and is comprised of members of Webster's Executive Management Committee and Senior Risk Officers who oversee risk management activities.
The Chief Risk Officer is responsible for oversight of the bank's credit risk, operational risk management, compliance programs, and loan workout and recovery activities. The Corporate Treasurer, who reports to the Chief Financial Officer, is responsible for overseeing market, liquidity and capital risk management activities.
Webster's risk appetite framework includes a risk appetite statement and supporting policy, along with board-level scorecards for monitoring Webster's risk positions relative to its established risk appetite.
Webster Bank manages and controls risk in its loan and investment portfolios through established underwriting practices, adherence to consistent standards and utilization of various portfolio and transaction monitoring activities. Written credit policies are in place that include underwriting standards and guidelines, provide limits on exposure and establish various other standards as deemed necessary and prudent. Additional approval requirements and reporting are implemented to ensure proper identification, rationale and disclosure of policy exceptions.
Credit Risk Management policies and transaction approvals are managed under the supervision of the Chief Credit Officer and are independent of the loan production and Treasury areas. The independent credit risk function oversees the underwriting, approval and portfolio management process, establishes and ensures adherence to credit policies and manages the collections and problem asset resolution activities in order to control and reduce classified and non-performing assets.
As part of the Credit Risk Management process, there is a Credit Risk Management Committee ("CRMC") that meets regularly to report and discuss key credit risk topics, issues and policy recommendations affecting Webster Bank. Included in the CRMC process is the periodic review of Webster's credit risk scorecard, which covers key risk indicators and limits established as part of the Company's risk appetite framework. The CRMC consists of a group of senior managers responsible for lending as well as senior managers from the Credit Risk Management function and is chaired by Webster's Chief Credit Officer. Important findings regarding credit quality and trends within the loan and investment portfolios are regularly reported by the Chief Credit Officer to the ERMC and the Risk Committee of the Board of Directors.
In addition to the Credit Risk Management team, there is an independent Credit Risk Review function that assesses risk ratings and credit underwriting process for all areas of the organization that incur credit risk. Credit Risk Review findings are reported to the CRMC, ERMC and the Risk Committee of the Board. Corrective measures are monitored and tested to ensure risk issues are mitigated or resolved. The head of Credit Risk Review reports directly to the Risk Committee of the Board and administratively to the Chief Risk Officer.
Market risk refers to the risk of loss arising from adverse changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, commodity prices and other relevant market rates and prices, such as equity prices. The risk of loss can be assessed from the perspective of adverse changes in fair values, cash flows and future earnings. Due to the nature of its operations, Webster is primarily exposed to interest rate risk. Accordingly, Webster's interest rate sensitivity is monitored on an ongoing basis by its Asset and Liability Committee (“ALCO”). ALCO's primary goals are to manage interest rate risk to maximize earnings and net economic value in changing interest rate and business environments within Board of Director approved risk appetite limits. ALCO is chaired by Webster's Corporate Treasurer who, as a Senior Risk Officer, regularly reports ALCO findings to the ERMC, the Risk Committee of the Board and the Board of Directors.
Liquidity risk refers to the ability of Webster Bank to meet a demand for funds by converting assets into cash or cash equivalents and by increasing liabilities at acceptable costs. Liquidity management involves maintaining the ability to meet day-to-day and longer-term cash flow requirements of customers, whether they are depositors wishing to withdraw funds or borrowers requiring funds to meet their credit needs. Liquidity sources include the amount of unencumbered or “free” investment portfolio securities the Company owns.
The Company requires funds for dividends to shareholders, payment of debt obligations, repurchase of shares, potential acquisitions, and for general corporate purposes. Its sources of funds include dividends from Webster Bank, income from investment securities, the issuance of equity and debt from capital markets.
Both Webster Bank and the Company will maintain a level of liquidity necessary to achieve their business objectives under both normal and stressed conditions. Liquidity risk is monitored and managed by ALCO and reviewed regularly with ERMC, the Risk Committee of the Board and the Board of Directors.
Webster needs to maintain adequate capital in both normal and stressed environments to support its business objectives and risk appetite. ALCO monitors regulatory and tangible capital levels according to regulatory requirements and management targets and recommends capital conservation, generation and/or deployment strategies to the Risk Committee of the Board and the Board of Directors. ALCO also has responsibility for the annual capital plan, contingency planning and quarterly stress testing, which are all reviewed and approved by the Risk Committee of the Board and the Board of Directors at least annually.
As defined by the Basel Committee, operational risk is “the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems or from external events”. The definition includes the risks stemming from failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations, reputational damage due to lapse in compliance with industry ethical standards and governance norms, and the lack of required risk identification or mitigation pertaining to business processes and utilized systems of operation.
The Operational Risk function is responsible for establishing processes and tools to identify, manage and aggregate operational risk across the organization; providing guidance and advice on operational risk matters; and educating the organization on operational risks. Specific programs and functions have been established to manage the risks associated with numerous legal and regulatory requirements, suppliers and other third-parties, information security, business disruption, fraud, models, and new products and services.
Webster has established an Operational Risk Management Committee (ORMC), which consists of Senior Risk Officers and senior managers responsible for human resources, legal, information security and operations to periodically review the aforementioned programs, key operational risk trends, concerns and mitigation best practices. The ORMC is chaired by the Director of Operating Risk Management, who is responsible for overseeing Webster's enterprise risk management program and operational risk management framework.
Internal Audit provides an independent assessment of the quality of internal controls for all major business units and operations throughout Webster. Results of Internal Audit reviews are reported to management and the Audit Committee of the Board. Corrective measures are monitored to ensure risk issues are mitigated or resolved. The General Auditor reports directly to the Audit Committee and administratively to the Chief Risk Officer.
Additional information on risks and uncertainties and additional factors that could affect the results anticipated in these forward-looking statements or from historical performance can be found in Item 1A and elsewhere within this Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012 and in other reports filed by Webster with the SEC.
Regional Expansion and Related Activities
Webster Bank operates seven regional offices located in Boston, Providence, White Plains, Stamford, Waterbury, New Haven and Hartford.
The Company’s growth and increased market share have been achieved through internal growth and also, in prior periods, through acquisitions. Acquisitions typically involve the payment of a premium over book and market values and commonly result in one-time charges against earnings for integration and similar costs. Cost-savings, especially incident to in-market acquisitions, are achieved and revenue growth opportunities may be enhanced through acquisitions. No acquisitions were undertaken during 2012 or 2011.
Subsidiaries of Webster Financial Corporation
Webster’s direct subsidiaries as of December 31, 2012 included Webster Bank, Fleming, Perry & Cox, Inc., and Webster Licensing, LLC. Webster also owns all of the outstanding common stock of Webster Statutory Trust, an unconsolidated financial vehicle that has issued or may in the future issue trust preferred securities. The Company completed the redemption at par of all the outstanding principal amount of Webster Capital Trust IV fixed to floating-rate trust preferred securities on July 18, 2012 using cash on hand.
Webster Bank's direct subsidiaries include Webster Mortgage Investment Corporation, Webster Business Credit Corporation (“WBCC”) and Webster Capital Finance, Inc. (“WCF”). Webster Bank is the primary source of retail activity within the consolidated group. Webster Bank provides banking services through 167 banking offices, 293 owned ATMs, telephone banking, mobile banking and its Internet websites. Residential mortgage origination activity is conducted through Webster Bank. Webster Mortgage Investment Corporation is a passive investment subsidiary whose primary function is to provide servicing on passive investments, such as residential real estate and commercial mortgage real estate loans transferred from Webster Bank. Various commercial lending products are provided through Webster Bank and its subsidiaries to clients within the region from Westchester County, NY to Boston, MA. WBCC provides asset-based lending services. WCF provides equipment financing for end users of equipment. Additionally, Webster Bank has various other subsidiaries that are not significant to the consolidated group.
At December 31, 2012, Webster had 2,826 employees, including 2,730 full-time and 96 part-time and other employees. None of the employees were represented by a collective bargaining group. Webster maintains a comprehensive employee benefit program providing, among other benefits, group medical and dental insurance, life insurance, disability insurance, and an employee 401(k) investment plan. Management considers relations with its employees to be good. See Note 19 - Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements contained elsewhere within this report for additional information on certain benefit programs.
Webster makes available free of charge on its websites (www.websterbank.com or www.wbst.com) its Annual Report on Form 10-K, its quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as soon as practicable after it electronically files such material with, or furnishes it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission. Information on Webster’s website is not incorporated by reference into this report.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
Our financial condition and results of operations are subject to various risks inherent in our business. The material risks and uncertainties that management believes affect us are described below. If any of the events or circumstances described in the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition or results of operations could suffer. You should consider all of the following risks together with all of the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Changes in interest rates and spreads could have an impact on earnings and results of operations which could have a negative impact on the value of our stock.
Our consolidated earnings and financial condition are dependent to a large degree upon net interest income, which is the difference between interest earned from loans and investments and interest paid on deposits and borrowings. The narrowing of interest rate spreads could adversely affect our earnings and financial condition. We cannot predict with certainty or control changes in interest rates. Regional and local economic conditions and the policies of regulatory authorities, including monetary policies of the Federal Reserve Board, affect interest income and interest expense. While we have ongoing policies and procedures designed to manage the risks associated with changes in market interest rates, changes in interest rates still may have an adverse effect on our profitability. For example, high interest rates could affect the amount of loans that we can originate because higher rates could cause customers to apply for fewer mortgages, or cause depositors to shift funds from accounts that have a comparatively lower cost to accounts with a higher cost, or experience customer attrition due to competitor pricing. If the cost of interest-bearing deposits increases at a rate greater than the yields on interest-earning assets increase, net interest income will be negatively affected. Changes in the asset and liability mix may also affect net interest income. Similarly, lower interest rates cause higher yielding assets to prepay and floating or adjustable rate assets to reset to lower rates. If we are not able to reduce our funding costs sufficiently, due to either competitive factors or the maturity schedule of existing liabilities, then our net interest margin will decline.
The possibility of the economy’s return to recessionary conditions and the possibility of further turmoil or volatility in the financial markets would likely have an adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operations.
The economy in the United States and globally began to recover from severe recessionary conditions in mid-2009 and is currently in the midst of a moderate economic recovery. The sustainability of the moderate recovery is dependent on a number of factors that are not within our control, such as a return to private sector job growth and investment, strengthening of housing sales and construction, continuation of the economic recovery globally, and the timing and impact of changing governmental policies. We continue to face risks resulting from the aftermath of the severe recession generally and the moderate pace of the current recovery. A slowing or failure of the economic recovery would likely aggravate the adverse effects of these difficult economic and market conditions on us and on others in the financial services industry.
In particular, we may face the following risks in connection with the current economic and market environment:
Compliance with the Dodd-Frank Act and other regulatory reforms may increase our costs of operations and adversely impact our earnings and capital ratios.
On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) into law. The Dodd-Frank Act represents a significant overhaul of many aspects of the regulation of the financial services industry. Among other things, the Dodd-Frank Act creates a new federal financial consumer protection agency, increases capital standards, imposes clearing and margining requirements on many derivatives activities, and generally increases oversight and regulation of financial institutions and financial activities. It requires bank holding companies with assets greater than $500 million to be subject to minimum leverage and risk-based capital requirements and phases out the ability of such bank holding companies to count certain securities, such as trust preferred securities, as Tier 1 capital. Other regulatory proposals, if adopted, would increase
minimum levels of required capital, narrow the definition of capital, place greater emphasis on common equity, and modify risk weights for various asset classes for purposes of calculating capital ratios.
In addition to the self-implementing provisions of the statute, the Dodd-Frank Act calls for many administrative rulemakings by various federal agencies to implement various parts of the legislation. We cannot be certain when final rules affecting us will be issued through such rulemakings and what the specific content of such rules will be. The financial reform legislation and any implementing rules that are ultimately issued could have adverse implications on the financial industry, the competitive environment, and our ability to conduct business. We will have to apply resources to ensure that we are in compliance with all applicable provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and any implementing rules, which may increase our costs of operations and adversely impact our earnings.
We are subject to extensive government regulation and supervision, which may interfere with our ability to conduct our business and may negatively impact our financial results.
We, primarily through Webster Bank and certain non-bank subsidiaries, are subject to extensive federal and state regulation and supervision. Banking regulations are primarily intended to protect depositors’ funds, federal deposit insurance funds and the banking system as a whole, not shareholders. 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. Changes to statutes, regulations or regulatory policies, including changes in interpretation or implementation of statutes, regulations or policies, could affect us in substantial and unpredictable ways. Such changes could subject us to additional costs, limit the types of financial services and products, and/or limit pricing able to be charged on certain banking services, among other things. Failure to comply with laws, regulations or policies could result in sanctions by regulatory agencies, civil money penalties and/or reputation damage, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. While we have policies and procedures designed to prevent any such violations, there can be no assurance that such violations will not occur. See the section captioned “Supervision and Regulation” in Item 1 of this report for further information.
We may be subject to more stringent capital requirements.
Webster and Webster Bank are each subject to capital adequacy guidelines and other regulatory requirements specifying minimum amounts and types of capital which each of Webster and Webster Bank must maintain. From time to time, the regulators implement changes to these regulatory capital adequacy guidelines. If we fail to meet these minimum capital guidelines and other regulatory requirements, our financial condition would be materially and adversely affected. In light of proposed changes to regulatory capital requirements contained in the Dodd-Frank Act and the regulatory accords on international banking institutions formulated by the Basel Committee and implemented by the Federal Reserve and OCC, we likely will be required to satisfy additional, more stringent, capital adequacy standards. The ultimate impact of the new capital and liquidity standards on us cannot be determined at this time and will depend on a number of factors, including the treatment and final implementation by the U.S. banking regulators. These requirements, however, and any other new regulations, could adversely affect our ability to pay dividends, or could require us to reduce business levels or to raise capital, including in ways that may adversely affect our financial condition or results of operations. For more information concerning our compliance with capital requirements, see the “Liquidity” section of Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
If all or a significant portion of the unrealized losses in our portfolio of investment securities were determined to be other-than-temporarily impaired, we would recognize a material charge to our earnings and our capital ratios would be adversely impacted.
Market values for certain securities in our portfolio declined moderately during 2011 and 2012 as liquidity and pricing continue to be disrupted for certain securities. When the fair value of a security declines, management must assess whether that decline is other-than-temporary. When management reviews whether a decline in fair value is other-than-temporary, it considers numerous factors, many of which involve significant judgment. Generally, market conditions remain strained for certain classes of securities. Accordingly, no assurance can be provided that the amount of the unrealized losses will not increase.
To the extent that any portion of the unrealized losses in our portfolio of investment securities is determined to be other-than-temporarily impaired, we will recognize a charge to our earnings in the quarter during which such determination is made and our capital ratios will be adversely impacted. If any such charge is deemed significant, a rating agency might downgrade our credit rating or put us on a credit watch. A downgrade or a significant reduction in our capital ratios might adversely impact our ability to access the capital markets or might increase our cost of capital. Even if we do not determine that the unrealized losses associated with the investment portfolio require an impairment charge, increases in such unrealized losses adversely impact the tangible common equity ratio, which may adversely impact credit rating agency and investor sentiment. Such negative perception also may adversely impact our ability to access the capital markets or might increase our cost of capital. See Note 3 – Investment Securities in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
Our allowance for loan and lease losses may be insufficient.
Our business is subject to periodic fluctuations based on national and local economic conditions. These fluctuations are not predictable, cannot be controlled and may have a material adverse impact on our operations and financial condition. For example, declines in housing activity including declines in building permits, housing starts and home prices may make it more difficult for our borrowers to sell their homes or refinance their debt. Sales may also slow, which could strain the resources of real estate developers and builders. The current economic uncertainty is affecting employment levels and impacting the ability of our borrowers to service their debt. Bank regulatory agencies also periodically review our allowance for loan and lease losses and may require an increase in the provision for loan and lease losses or the recognition of further loan charge-offs, based on judgments different than those of management. In addition, if charge-offs in future periods exceed the allowance for loan and lease losses, we may need, depending on an analysis of the adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses, additional provisions to increase the allowance for loan losses. Any increases in the allowance for loan and lease losses will result in a decrease in net income and, possibly, capital, and may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. We may suffer higher loan and lease losses as a result of these factors and the resulting impact on our borrowers.
Changes in local economic conditions could adversely affect our business.
A majority of our mortgage loans are secured by real estate in the State of Connecticut. Our success depends in part upon economic conditions in this and our other geographic markets. Adverse changes in such local markets could reduce our growth in loans and deposits, impair our ability to collect our loans, increase problem loans and charges-offs, and otherwise negatively affect our performance and financial condition.
Our stock price can be volatile.
Stock price volatility may negatively impact the price at which our common stock may be sold, and may also negatively impact the timing of any sale. Our stock price can fluctuate widely in response to a variety of factors including, among other things:
General market fluctuations, industry factors and general economic and political conditions and events, such as economic slowdowns or recessions, interest rate changes, credit loss trends or currency fluctuations, could also cause our stock price to decrease regardless of our operating results.
We operate in a highly competitive industry and market area. If we fail to compete effectively, our financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.
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 in which we operate. We also face competition from many other types of financial institutions, including, without limitation, savings and loans, 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. Recent regulatory proposals also impose restrictions on the basis of asset size providing a potential advantage to smaller banking entities. 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. 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 than we, as well as better pricing for those products and services.
Our ability to compete successfully depends on a number of factors, including, among other things:
Failure to perform in any of these areas could significantly weaken our competitive position, which could adversely affect the growth and profitability, which, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
The unsoundness 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. Financial services companies are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty or other relationships. We have exposure to many different industries and counterparties, and we routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including brokers and dealers, commercial banks, investment banks, mutual and hedge funds, and other institutional clients. As a result, defaults by, or even rumors or questions about, one or more financial services companies, 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. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of default of our counterparty or client. In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated if the collateral held by us cannot be realized or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the loan or derivative exposure due us. There is no assurance that any such losses would not materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.
We may not be able to attract and retain skilled people.
Our success depends, in large part, on our ability to attract and retain key people. Competition for the best people in most activities in which we engage can be intense and we may not be able to hire people or to retain them. Currently, we do not have employment agreements with any of our executive officers. The unexpected loss of services of one or more of our key personnel could have a material adverse impact on the business because we would lose the employees’ skills, knowledge of the market, and years of industry experience and may have difficulty promptly finding qualified replacement personnel.
If the goodwill that we have recorded in connection with our acquisitions becomes impaired, it could have a negative impact on our profitability.
Applicable accounting standards require that the purchase method of accounting be used for all business combinations. Under purchase accounting, if the purchase price of an acquired company exceeds the fair value of the acquired company’s net assets, the excess is carried on the acquirer’s balance sheet as goodwill. A continuing period of market disruption, or further market capitalization to book value deterioration, may result in the requirement to perform testing for impairment between annual assessments. Management will continue to monitor the relationship of the Company’s market capitalization to its book value, which management attributes primarily to financial services industry-wide factors and to evaluate the carrying value of goodwill. To the extent that testing results in the identification of impairment, the Company may be required to record charges for the impairment of goodwill. Write-downs of the amount of any impairment, if necessary, are to be charged to the results of operations in the period in which the impairment occurs. There can be no assurance that future evaluations of goodwill will not result in findings of impairment and related write-downs, which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. See Note 7 – Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.
We continually encounter technological change. The failure to understand and adapt to these changes could negatively impact our business.
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 can increase efficiency and enable financial institutions to better serve customers and to reduce costs. However, some new technologies needed to compete effectively result in incremental operating 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 operations. Many of our competitors, because of their larger size and available capital, 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. Failure to successfully 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.
Our controls and procedures may fail or be circumvented, which may result in a material adverse effect on our business.
Management regularly reviews and updates our internal controls, disclosure controls and procedures, and corporate governance policies and procedures. Any system of controls, however well designed and operated, is based in part on certain assumptions and can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurances that the objectives of the system are met. Any failure or circumvention of the controls and procedures or failure to comply with regulations related to controls and procedures could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
New lines of business or new products and services may subject us to additional risks. A failure to successfully manage these risks may have a material adverse effect on our business.
From time to time, we may implement new lines of business, offer new products and services within existing lines of business or shift focus on our asset mix. There are substantial risks and uncertainties associated with these efforts, particularly in instances where the markets are not fully developed. In developing and marketing new lines of business and/or new products and services and/or shifting focus of asset mix, we may invest significant time and resources. Initial timetables for the introduction and development of new lines of business and/or new products or services may not be achieved and price and profitability targets may not prove feasible. External factors, such as compliance with regulations, competitive alternatives, and shifting market preferences, may also impact the successful implementation of a new line of business or a new product or service. Furthermore, any new line of business and/or new product or service could have a significant impact on the effectiveness of our system of internal controls. Failure to successfully manage these risks in the development and implementation of new lines of business or new products or services could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
A failure or breach of our systems, or those of our third party vendors and other service providers, including as a result of cyber attacks, could disrupt our businesses, result in the misuse of confidential or proprietary information, damage our reputation, increase our costs and cause losses.
As a large financial institution, we depend on our ability to process, record, and monitor a large number of customer transactions, and customer, public and regulatory expectations regarding operational and information security have increased over time. Accordingly, our operational systems and infrastructure must continue to be safeguarded and monitored for potential failures, disruptions and breakdowns. Our business, financial, accounting, data processing systems or other operating systems and facilities may stop operating properly or become disabled as a result of a number of factors that may be wholly or partially beyond our control. For example, there could be sudden increases in customer transaction volume; electrical or telecommunications outages; natural disasters; pandemics; events arising from political or social matters, including terrorist acts; and cyber attacks. Although we have business continuity plans and believe we have robust information security procedures and controls in place, disruptions or failures in the physical infrastructure or operating systems that support our businesses and customers, or cyber attacks or security breaches of the networks, systems or devices on which customers’ personal information is stored and that our customers use to access our products and services could result in customer attrition, regulatory fines, penalties or intervention, reputational damage, reimbursement or other compensation costs, and/or additional compliance costs, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations or financial condition.
Third parties with whom we do business or that facilitate our business activities, including exchanges, clearing houses, financial intermediaries or vendors that provide services or security solutions for our operations, could also be sources of operational and information security risk to us, including from breakdowns or failures of their own systems or capacity constraints.
Although to date we have not experienced any material losses relating to cyber attacks or other information security breaches, there can be no assurance that we will not suffer such losses in the future. Our risk and exposure to these matters remains heightened and as a result the continued development and enhancement of our controls, processes and practices designed to protect our systems, computers, software, data and networks from attack, damage or unauthorized access remain a priority for us. As an additional layer of protection, we have purchased network and privacy liability risk insurance coverage which includes digital asset loss, business interruption loss, network security liability, privacy liability, network extortion and data breach coverage. As cyber threats continue to evolve, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to modify our protective measures or to investigate and remediate any information security vulnerabilities.
We may not pay dividends if we are not able to receive dividends from our subsidiary, Webster Bank.
We are a separate and distinct legal entity from our banking and non-banking subsidiaries and depend on the payment of cash dividends from Webster Bank and our existing liquid assets as the principal sources of funds for paying cash dividends on our common stock. Unless we receive dividends from Webster Bank or choose to use our liquid assets, we may not be able to pay
dividends. Webster Bank’s ability to pay dividends is subject to its ability to earn net income and to meet certain regulatory requirements. See “Supervision and Regulation—Dividends” for a discussion of regulatory and other restrictions on dividend declarations.
We are exposed to risk of environmental liabilities with respect to properties to which we obtain title.
A large portion of our loan portfolio is secured by real estate. In the course of our business, we may foreclose and take title to real estate and could be subject to environmental liabilities with respect to these properties. We may be held liable to a government entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation and clean-up costs incurred by these parties in connection with environmental contamination, or may be required to clean up hazardous or toxic substances, or chemical releases at a property. The costs associated with investigation and remediation activities could be substantial. In addition, if we are the owner or former owner of a contaminated site, we may be subject to common law claims by third parties based on damages and costs resulting from environmental contamination emanating from the property. These costs and claims could adversely affect our business, results of operations and prospects.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
Webster has no unresolved comments from the SEC staff.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
The Company's headquarters is located in Waterbury, Connecticut. This facility, which is owned by the Company, houses the Company's executive and primary administrative offices, as well as the principal banking headquarters of Webster Bank.
At December 31, 2012, Webster Bank had 167 banking offices, as follows:
Lease expiration dates range from 1 to 75 years with renewal options of 2 to 35 years. For additional information regarding leases and rental payments, see Note 22 - Commitments and Contingencies in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
The following subsidiaries and divisions maintain the following offices: Webster Private Banking, is headquartered in Hartford, Connecticut with offices in Stamford, New Haven, Waterbury and Providence, Rhode Island. Webster Capital Finance is headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. Webster Business Credit Corporation (WBCC) is headquartered in New York, New York with offices in South Easton, Massachusetts; Radnor, Pennsylvania; and New Milford, Connecticut. HSA Bank is headquartered in Sheboygan, Wisconsin with an office in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
From time to time, Webster and its subsidiaries are subject to certain legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of business. Management presently believes that the ultimate outcome of these proceedings, individually and in the aggregate, will not be material to Webster or its consolidated financial position. Webster establishes reserves for specific legal matters when it determines that the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome is probable and the loss is reasonably estimable. Legal proceedings are subject to inherent uncertainties, and unfavorable rulings could occur that could cause Webster to adjust its litigation reserves or could have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, or operating results.
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
The common shares of Webster trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “WBS”.
On January 31, 2013, the closing market price of Webster common stock was $22.25. On January 30, 2013, Webster’s Board of Directors declared a quarterly dividend of $.10 per share.
The following table sets forth for each quarter of 2012 and 2011 the intra-day high and low sales prices per share of Webster's common stock as reported by the NYSE and the cash dividends declared per share:
Webster had 7,840 holders of record of common stock and 85,340,995 shares outstanding on January 31, 2013. The number of shareholders of record was determined by Computershare, the Company’s transfer agent and registrar.
A primary source of liquidity for Webster Financial Corporation is dividend payments from Webster Bank. The Bank’s ability to make dividend payments to Webster is governed by OCC regulations. Without specific OCC approval, and subject to the Bank meeting applicable regulatory capital requirements before and after payment of dividends, the total of all dividends declared by the Bank is limited to net profits for the current year to date as of the declaration date plus net retained profits from the preceding two years. In addition, the OCC has the discretion to prohibit any otherwise permitted capital distribution on general safety and soundness grounds.
The payment of dividends is subject to various additional restrictions, none of which is expected to limit any dividend policy that the Board of Directors may in the future decide to adopt. Payment of dividends to Webster from Webster Bank is subject to certain regulatory and other restrictions. Under OCC regulations, Webster Bank may pay dividends to Webster without prior regulatory approval so long as it meets its applicable regulatory capital requirements before and after payment of such dividends and its total dividends declared do not exceed its net profits for the current year to the date of declaration plus net retained profits from the preceding two years less dividends declared in such years. At December 31, 2012, there were $128.4 million of retained earnings available for the payment of dividends by the Bank to the Company. At December 31, 2012, Webster Bank was in compliance with all applicable minimum capital requirements. The Bank paid the Company $140.0 million in dividends during the year ended December 31, 2012.
If the capital of Webster is diminished by depreciation in the value of its property or by losses, or otherwise, to an amount less than the aggregate amount of the capital represented by the issued and outstanding stock of all classes having a preference upon the distribution of assets, no dividends may be paid out of net profits until the deficiency in the amount of capital represented by the issued and outstanding stock of all classes having a preference upon the distribution of assets has been repaired. See the “Supervision and Regulation” section contained elsewhere within this report for additional information on dividends.
Exchanges of Registered Securities
Registered securities were exchanged as part of employee and director stock compensation plans.
Recent Sale of Unregistered Securities
No unregistered securities were sold by Webster during the year ended December 31, 2012, except as described below.
Webster sponsors the Webster Bank Retirement Savings Plan (the “401(k) Plan”), which is available to all eligible employees of Webster Bank. The 401(k) Plan contains a fund consisting primarily of Webster common stock (the “Webster Stock Fund”) and allows participants to allocate a portion of their account balance to interests in the Webster Stock Fund. Webster recently determined that it had inadvertently failed to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) a registration statement on Form S-8 relating to securities offered under the 401(k) Plan.
Webster previously filed registration statements on Form S-8 with the SEC registering the sale of Webster common stock under the 401(k) Plan, but the number of shares registered was not sufficient to cover the number of shares purchased in the 401(k) Plan. Between October 1, 2011 and September 12, 2012, a total of approximately 263,909 shares of Webster common stock were purchased by the 401(k) Plan in open market transactions. Even though all of such common stock purchased in the Webster Stock Fund was purchased in the open market, because Webster sponsors the 401(k) Plan, it is required to register certain transactions in the 401(k) Plan involving Webster common stock. On September 13, 2012, Webster filed a Registration Statement on Form S-8 registering the sale of 650,000 shares, in the aggregate, under the 401(k) Plan.
Webster believes that it has provided the participants in the 401(k) Plan with the same information they would have received had the registration statement been timely filed. Webster is implementing monitoring and reporting procedures to ensure that, in the future, Webster's registration statements have a sufficient number of shares to cover the shares of Webster common stock purchased by the 401(k) Plan.
Webster has consistently treated the shares purchased by the 401(k) Plan and held in the Webster Stock Fund as outstanding for financial reporting purposes. The unregistered transactions described above do not represent any additional dilution to stockholders.
Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers
On December 6, 2012, Webster announced that its Board of Directors has authorized a $100 million common stock repurchase program under which shares may be repurchased from time to time in open market or privately negotiated transactions, subject to market conditions and other factors. On December 7, 2012, the Company, Warburg Pincus Private Equity X, L.P. and Warburg Pincus X Partners, L.P., as selling stockholders, and Barclays Capital Inc. entered into an underwriting agreement pursuant to which the selling stockholders agreed to sell 10,000,000 shares of Webster's common stock, $0.01 par value per share, to the underwriter. The transaction closed on December 12, 2012. In connection with the common stock repurchase program, Webster purchased 2,518,891 shares of its common stock in the offering at a price per share equal to $19.85, the price per share paid by the underwriter to the selling stockholders pursuant to the underwriting agreement
The following table provides information with respect to any purchase of shares of Webster common stock made by or on behalf of Webster or any “affiliated purchaser” for the quarter ended December 31, 2012:
The performance graph compares Webster’s cumulative shareholder return on its common stock over the last five fiscal years to the cumulative total return of the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (“S&P 500 Index”), and the Keefe, Bruyette & Woods Regional Banking Index (“KRX”). KRX was chosen as the industry index because Webster believes it provides a better comparison and more appropriate benchmark against which to measure stock performance.
Total shareholder return is measured by dividing total dividends (assuming dividend reinvestment) for the measurement period plus share price change for a period by the share price at the beginning of the measurement period. Webster’s cumulative shareholder return over a five-year period is based on an initial investment of $100 on December 31, 2007.
Comparison of Five Year Cumulative Total Return Among
Webster, S&P 500 Index, KRX
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
(a) Calculated based on net income before preferred dividends.
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements of Webster Financial Corporation and the Notes thereto included elsewhere in this report (collectively, the “Consolidated Financial Statements”).
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “Act”). Forward-looking statements can be identified by words such as “believes”, “anticipates”, “expects”, “intends”, “targeted”, “continue”, “remain”, “will”, “should”, “may”, “plans”, “estimates” and similar references to future periods, however such words are not the exclusive means of identifying such statements. Examples of forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: (i) projections of revenues, expenses, income or loss, earnings or loss per share, and other financial items; (ii) statements of plans, objectives and expectations of Webster or its management or Board of Directors; (iii) statements of future economic performance; and (iv) statements of assumptions underlying such statements. Forward-looking statements are based on Webster’s current expectations and assumptions regarding its business, the economy and other future conditions. Because forward-looking statements relate to the future, they are subject to inherent uncertainties, risks and changes in circumstances that are difficult to predict. Webster’s actual results may differ materially from those contemplated by the forward-looking statements, which are neither statements of historical fact nor guarantees or assurances of future performance. Factors that could cause actual results to differ from those discussed in the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: (1) local, regional, national and international economic conditions and the impact they may have on us and our customers and our assessment of that impact; (2) volatility and disruption in national and international financial markets; (3) government intervention in the U.S. financial system; (4) changes in the level of non-performing assets and charge-offs; (5) changes in estimates of future reserve requirements based upon the periodic review thereof under relevant regulatory and accounting requirements; (6) adverse conditions in the securities markets that lead to impairment in the value of securities in our investment portfolio; (7) inflation, interest rate, securities market and monetary fluctuations; (8) the timely development and acceptance of new products and services and perceived overall value of these products and services by customers; (9) changes in consumer spending, borrowings and savings habits; (10) technological changes and cyber-security matters; (11) the ability to increase market share and control expenses; (12) changes in the competitive environment among banks, financial holding companies and other financial service providers; (13) the effect of changes in laws and regulations (including laws and regulations concerning taxes, banking, securities and insurance) with which we and our subsidiaries must comply, including those under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and the Basel III update to the Basel Accords; (14) 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 and other accounting standard setters; (15) the costs and effects of legal and regulatory developments including the resolution of legal proceedings or regulatory or other governmental inquiries and the results of regulatory examinations or reviews; and (16) our success at managing the risks involved in the foregoing items. Any forward-looking statement made by the Company in this Annual Report on Form 10-K speaks only as of the date on which it is made. Factors or events that could cause the Company’s actual results to differ may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for the Company to predict all of them. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise, except as may be required by law.
In 2012 the Company achieved several goals which were part of its overall strategy to operate more efficiently and effectively in a changing regulatory environment. During 2012 net income per common share increased, credit quality steadily improved, capital ratios remained strong, low cost deposits were at record highs, total loans grew, and return on average assets and average shareholders' equity showed continued improvement. In addition, the Company launched an all-encompassing review of operating expenses with a goal to operate at a 60% efficiency ratio, which was achieved during the fourth quarter of 2012. These efforts, coupled with our focus on meeting the changing preferences of our customers, resulted in a significant improvement in earnings during 2012.
Webster’s net income available to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2012 was $171.2 million compared to $148.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2011. Net income available to common shareholders per diluted share was $1.86 for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $1.61 for the year ended December 31, 2011. The primary factors which led to the increase in net income available to common shareholders in 2012 as compared to 2011 are outlined below.
The factors positively impacting net income available to common shareholders include:
The factors negatively impacting net income available to common shareholders include:
The impact of the items outlined above, after the effect from income taxes, resulted in income from continuing operations of $173.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 as compared to $149.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2011.
Credit quality improved as evidenced by improvement in asset quality ratios. Net charge offs to average loans and leases decreased from 1.00% at December 31, 2011 to 0.68% at December 31, 2012 and non-performing loans to total loans, leases and Other Real Estate Owned ("OREO") decreased from 1.72% at December 31, 2011 to 1.65% at December 31, 2012. The continued improvement in credit quality in 2012 resulted in a $1.0 million and $92.5 million decrease in the provision for loan and lease losses compared to 2011 and 2010, respectively.
The Company's capital remained strong at December 31, 2012 and well above the requirements to be considered "well capitalized" according to current and proposed regulatory standards. Due to the impact of loan growth on total risk weighted assets, the Tier 1 common equity to risk weighted assets ratio declined to 10.78% at December 31, 2012 from 11.12% at December 31, 2011. The tangible common equity ratio increased to 7.17% at December 31, 2012 from 7.03% at December 31, 2011.
On December 4, 2012, the Company closed the public offering of 5,060,000 depositary shares pursuant to an Underwriting Agreement, dated November 27, 2012, between the Company and Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., as representative for the underwriters listed therein. Each depositary share represents a 1/1000th interest in a share of its Series E Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, with a liquidation preference of $25,000 per share (equivalent to $25 per depositary share). Dividends accrue and are payable on the liquidation amount of $25,000 per share of Series E Preferred Stock in arrears at 6.40% per annum only when, as, and if declared by the Board of Directors of Webster and to the extent Webster has legally available funds to pay dividends.
During 2012, the Company completed several initiatives to improve shareholder return. On January 23, 2012, Webster's Board of Directors declared a quarterly dividend of $0.05 per share and on April 23, 2012, the Company increased its quarterly cash dividend to common shareholders to $0.10 per common share from $0.05 per common share.
In addition, on December 6, 2012, Webster announced that its Board of Directors has authorized a $100 million common stock repurchase program under which shares may be repurchased from time to time in open market or privately negotiated transactions, subject to market conditions and other factors. On December 7, 2012, the Company, Warburg Pincus Private Equity X, L.P. and Warburg Pincus X Partners, L.P., collectively the selling stockholders, and Barclays Capital Inc. entered into an underwriting agreement pursuant to which the Warburg enitities agreed to sell 10,000,000 shares of Webster's common stock, $0.01 par value per share, to the underwriter. The transaction closed on December 12, 2012. In connection with the common stock repurchase program, Webster purchased 2,518,891 shares of its common stock in the offering at a price per share equal to $19.85, the price per share paid by the underwriter to the selling stockholders pursuant to the underwriting agreement
Selected financial highlights are presented in the following table:
The Company evaluates its business based on certain ratios that utilize tangible equity, a non-GAAP financial measure.
The efficiency ratio, which measures the costs expended to generate a dollar of revenue, is calculated excluding foreclosed property expense, amortization of intangibles, gain or loss on securities and other non-recurring items. Accordingly, this is also a non-GAAP financial measure. The Company believes the use of these non-GAAP financial measures provides additional clarity in assessing the results of the Company. Other companies may define or calculate supplemental financial data differently.
See the following tables for reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures with financial measures defined by GAAP at or for the year ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010.
The following table summarize the Company's average balances (average balances are daily averages), interest and yields on major categories of Webster's interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities on a fully tax equivalent basis.
Table 1: Three-year average balance sheet and net interest margin.
Net Interest Income
Net interest income is the difference between interest income on earning assets, such as loans and securities, and interest expense on liabilities, such as deposits and borrowings, which are used to fund those assets. Net interest income is the Company's largest source of revenue, representing 75.0% of total revenue for the year ended December 31, 2012. Net interest margin is the ratio of taxable-equivalent net interest income to average earning assets for the period. The level of interest rates and the volume and mix of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities impact net interest income and net interest margin.
Since net interest income is affected by changes in interest rates, loan and deposit pricing strategies, competitive conditions, the volume and mix of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities as well as the level of non-performing assets, Webster manages the risk of changes in interest rates on its net interest income through an Asset/Liability Management Committee ("ALCO")and through related interest rate risk monitoring and management policies. Four main tools are used for managing interest rate risk: (1) the size and duration of the investment portfolio, (2) the size, duration and credit risk of the wholesale funding portfolio, (3) off-balance sheet interest rate contracts and (4) the pricing and structure of loans and deposits. ALCO meets at least monthly to make decisions on the investment and funding portfolios based on the economic outlook, the Committee’s interest rate expectations, the risk position and other factors. See the “Asset/Liability Management and Market Risk” section for further discussion of Webster’s interest rate risk position.
The following table describes the extent to which changes in interest rates and changes in the volume of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities have impacted interest income and interest expense during the periods indicated. Information is provided in each category with respect to the impact attributable to changes in volume (change in volume multiplied by prior rate), changes attributable to rates (change in rates multiplied by prior volume) and the total net change. The change attributable to the combined impact of volume and rate has been allocated proportionately to the change due to volume and the change due to rate. The table below is based upon reported net interest income.
Table 2: Net interest income - rate/volume analysis (not presented on a tax-equivalent basis).
Net interest income totaled $578.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $563.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, an increase of $15.1 million. The increase in net interest income during the year ended December 31, 2012 was primarily related to an increase in average interest earning assets, partially offset by a decrease in the net interest margin. Average interest-earning assets for the year ended December 31, 2012 increased $1.2 billion from the year ended December 31, 2011. The net interest margin decreased 15 basis points from 3.47% during the year ended December 31, 2011 to 3.32% during the year ended December 31, 2012. The decrease in net interest margin is due to a greater decline in the yield of interest-earning assets than the decline in cost on interest-bearing liabilities, primarily due to growth in the average investment portfolio at lower yields and lower yields in the loan portfolio, partially offset by a decline in the cost of deposits and borrowings. The average yield on interest-earning assets decreased 32 basis points from 4.28% during the year ended December 31, 2011 to 3.96% during the year ended December 31, 2012. The average yield on interest-earning assets is primarily impacted by changes in market interest rates as well as changes in the volume and relative mix of interest-earning assets. Market interest rates have remained at historically low levels during the reported periods.
Average loans increased $471.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2011. The loan portfolio yield decreased 19 basis points to 4.21% for the year ended December 31, 2012 and comprised 64.3% of the average interest-earning assets at December 31, 2012, compared to the loan portfolio yield of 4.40% for the year ended December 31, 2011 which comprised 66.0% of the average interest-earning assets at December 31, 2011. The decrease in the yield on the average loan portfolio is due to the repayment of higher yielding loans and the origination of lower yielding loans in a low interest rate environment.
The average securities portfolio increased $692.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2011. The yield on investment securities decreased 58 basis points to 3.58% for the year ended December 31, 2012 and comprised 34.0% of average interest-earning assets at December 31, 2012, compared to the yield on investment securities of 4.16% for the year ended December 31, 2011, which comprised 32.3% of the average interest-earning assets at December 31, 2011. The decrease in the yield on securities is due to principal repayments and lower reinvestment rates. The growth in the securities portfolio is part of the Company's strategy to protect earnings in anticipation of declines in long-term interest rates and a protracted low rate environment.
Average deposits increased $321.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2011. The increase is due to a $359.6 million increase in non-interest bearing deposits, partially offset by a $38.2 million decrease in interest-bearing deposits. The average cost of deposits decreased 16 basis points to 0.42% for the year ended December 31, 2012 from 0.58% for the year ended December 31, 2011. The decrease in the average cost of deposits is the result of decreased pricing offered on certain deposit products and product mix as the proportion of higher costing certificates of deposits to total interest-bearing deposits decreased from 26.2% for the year ended December 31, 2011 to 23.5% for the year ended December 31, 2012.
Average total borrowings increased $827.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2012