Basis of Accounting. The unaudited interim consolidated condensed financial statements of First Horizon National Corporation (“FHN”), including its subsidiaries, have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and follow general practices within the industries in which it operates. This preparation requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. These estimates and assumptions are based on information available as of the date of the financial statements and could differ from actual results. In the opinion of management, all necessary adjustments have been made for a fair presentation of financial position and results of operations for the periods presented. These adjustments are of a normal recurring nature unless otherwise disclosed in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. The operating results for the interim 2019 period are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected going forward. For further information, refer to the audited consolidated financial statements in Exhibit 13 to FHN’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018.

Revenues. Revenue is recognized when the performance obligations under the terms of a contract with a customer are satisfied in an amount that reflects the consideration FHN expects to be entitled. FHN derives a significant portion of its revenues from fee-based services. Noninterest income from transaction-based fees is generally recognized immediately upon completion of the transaction. Noninterest income from service-based fees is generally recognized over the period in which FHN provides the service. Any services performed over time generally require that FHN render services each period and therefore FHN measures progress in completing these services based upon the passage of time and recognizes revenue as invoiced.

Contract Balances. As of September 30, 2019, accounts receivable related to products and services on non-interest income were $8.6 million. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019, FHN had no material impairment losses on non-interest accounts receivable and there were no material contract assets, contract liabilities or deferred contract costs recorded on the Consolidated Condensed Statements of Condition as of September 30, 2019.

Leases. At inception, all arrangements are evaluated to determine if they contain a lease, which is defined as a contract, or part of a contract, that conveys the right to control the use of identified property, plant, or equipment for a period of time in exchange for consideration. Control is deemed to exist when a lessor has granted and a lessee has received both the right to obtain substantially all of the economic benefits from use of the identified asset and the right to direct the use of the identified asset throughout the period of use.

Lessee. As a lessee, FHN recognizes lease (right-of-use) assets and lease liabilities for all leasing arrangements with lease terms that are greater than one year. The lease asset and lease liability are recognized at the present value of estimated future lease payments, including estimated renewal periods, with the discount rate reflecting a fully-collateralized rate matching the estimated lease term. Renewal options are included in the estimated lease term if they are considered reasonably certain of exercise. Periods covered by termination options are included in the lease term if it is reasonably certain they will not be exercised. Additionally, prepaid or accrued lease payments, lease incentives and initial direct costs related to lease arrangements are recognized within the right-of-use asset. Each lease is classified as a financing or operating lease which depends on the relationship of the lessee’s rights to the economic value of the leased asset. For finance leases, interest on the lease liability is recognized separately from amortization of the right-of-use asset in earnings, resulting in higher expense in the earlier portion of the lease term. For operating leases, a single lease cost is calculated so that the cost of the lease is allocated over the lease term on a generally straight-line basis. Substantially all of FHN’s lessee arrangements are classified as operating leases. For leases with a term of 12 months or less, FHN does not to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities and expense is generally recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term.

Lease assumptions and classification are reassessed upon the occurrence of events that result in changes to the estimated lease term or consideration. Modifications to lease contracts are evaluated to determine 1) if a right to use an additional asset has been obtained, 2) if only the lease term and/or consideration have been revised or 3) if a full or partial termination has occurred. If an additional right-of use-asset has been obtained, the modification is treated as a separate contract and its classification is evaluated as a new lease arrangement. If only the lease term or consideration are changed, the lease liability is revalued with an offset to the lease asset and the lease classification is re-assessed. If a modification results in a full or partial termination of the lease, the lease liability is revalued through earnings along with a proportionate reduction in the value of the related lease asset and subsequent expense recognition is similar to a new lease arrangement.

Lease assets are evaluated for impairment when triggering events occur, such as a change in management intent regarding the continued occupation of the leased space. If a lease asset is impaired, it is written down to the present value of estimated future cash flows and the prospective expense recognition for that lease follows the accelerated expense recognition methodology applicable to finance leases, even if it remains classified as an operating lease.

Lessor. As a lessor, FHN also evaluates its lease arrangements to determine whether a finance lease or an operating lease exists and utilizes the rate implicit in the lease arrangement as the discount rate to calculate the present value of future cash flows. Depending upon the terms of the individual agreements, finance leases represent either sales-type or direct financing leases, both of which require de-recognition of the asset being leased with offsetting recognition of a lease receivable that is evaluated for impairment similar to loans. Currently, all of FHN’s lessor arrangements are considered operating leases.

Summary of Accounting Changes. In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases,” which requires a lessee to recognize in its statement of condition a liability to make lease payments (the lease liability) and a right-of-use asset representing its right to use the underlying asset for the lease term. ASU 2016-02 leaves lessor accounting largely unchanged from prior standards. For leases with a term of 12 months or less, a lessee is permitted to make an accounting policy election by class of underlying asset not to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities. If a lessee makes this election, it should recognize lease expense for such leases generally on a straight-line basis over the lease term. All other leases must be classified as financing or operating leases which depends on the relationship of the lessee’s rights to the economic value of the leased asset. For finance leases, interest on the lease liability is recognized separately from amortization of the right-of-use asset in earnings, resulting in higher expense in the earlier portion of the lease term. For operating leases, a single lease cost is calculated so that the cost of the lease is allocated over the lease term on a generally straight-line basis.

In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-11, “Leases - Targeted Improvements,” which provides an election for a cumulative effect adjustment to retained earnings upon initial adoption of ASU 2016-02. Alternatively, under the initial guidance of ASU 2016-02, lessees and lessors are required to recognize and measure leases at the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented using a modified retrospective approach. Both adoption alternatives include a number of optional practical expedients that entities may elect to apply, which would result in continuing to account for leases that commence before the effective date in accordance with previous requirements (unless the lease is modified) except that lessees are required to recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for all operating leases at each reporting date based on the present value of the remaining minimum rental payments that were tracked and disclosed under previous requirements. ASU 2016-02 also requires expanded qualitative and quantitative disclosures to assess the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from lease arrangements. ASU 2016-02 and ASU 2018-11 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Upon adoption, FHN utilized the cumulative effect transition alternative provided by ASU 2018-11. FHN utilized the lease classification practical expedients and the short-term lease exemption upon adoption. FHN also has elected to determine the discount rate on leases as of the effective date and elected to use hindsight in determining lease terms as well as impairments of lease assets resulting from lease abandonments upon adoption. The table below summarizes the impact of adopting ASU 2016-02 as of January 1, 2019, for line items in the Consolidated Condensed Statements of Condition. Lease assets of approximately $185 million are included in Other Assets. Lease liabilities of

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-15, “Customer’s Accounting for Implementation Costs Incurred in a Cloud Computing Arrangement That Is a Service Contract,” which aligns the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract with the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred to develop or obtain internal-use software (and hosting arrangements that include an internal use software license). Capitalized implemented costs are required to be expensed over the term of the hosting arrangement which includes the non-cancellable period of the arrangement plus periods covered by (1) an option to extend the arrangement if the customer is reasonably certain to exercise that option, (2) an option to terminate the arrangement if the customer is reasonably certain not to exercise the termination option, and (3) an option to extend (or not to terminate) the arrangement in which exercise of the option is in the control of the vendor. ASU 2018-15 also requires application of the impairment guidance applicable to long-lived assets to the capitalized implementation costs. Amortization expense related to capitalized implementation costs must be presented in the same line item in the statement of income as the fees associated with the hosting element (service) of the arrangement and payments for capitalized implementation costs will be classified in the statement of cash flows in the same manner as payments made for fees associated with the hosting element. Capitalized implementation costs will be presented in the statement of financial position in the same line item that a prepayment for the fees of the associated hosting arrangement would be presented. ASU 2018-15 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019 with early adoption permitted. Adoption may be either fully retrospective or prospective only. FHN elected early adoption of ASU 2018-15 effective January 1, 2019 using the prospective transition method and the effects of adoption were not significant.

In April 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-04, “Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses, Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, and Topic 825, Financial Instruments,” which makes several revisions and clarifications to the accounting for these items. The revisions related to ASU 2016-03 (Topic 326) are discussed below. ASU 2019-04 clarifies several aspects of fair hedge accounting, including the application to partial term fair value hedges. ASU 2019-04 provides an election regarding the timing for amortization of basis adjustments to hedged items in fair value hedges, indicating that amortization may, but is not required to, commence prior to the end of the hedge relationship. ASU 2019-04 also provides additional guidance related to the application of the hypothetical derivative method and first-payments-received method in cash flow hedges. Further, ASU 2019-04 indicates that remeasurement of an equity security without a readily determinable fair value when an orderly transaction is identified for an identical or similar investment of the same issuer represents a non-recurring fair value measurement and the related disclosure requirements apply to the remeasurement event. The hedging updates are effective at the beginning of the first annual reporting period after issuance with early adoption permitted. The financial instruments measurement and disclosure changes are effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2019 with early adoption permitted. FHN early adopted these portions of ASU 2019-04 in second quarter 2019 and the effects were not significant based on its existing accounting practices.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, “Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments,” which revises the measurement and recognition of credit losses for assets measured at amortized cost (e.g., held-to-maturity (“HTM”) loans and debt securities) and available-for-sale (“AFS”) debt securities. Under ASU 2016-13, for assets measured at amortized cost, the current expected credit loss (“CECL”) is measured as the difference between amortized cost and the net amount expected to be collected. This represents a departure from existing GAAP as the “incurred loss” methodology for recognizing credit losses delays recognition until it is probable a loss has been incurred. Under CECL the full amount of expected credit losses will be recognized at the time of loan origination. The measurement of current expected credit losses is based on relevant information about past events, including historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts that affect the

collectability of the reported amount. Additionally, current disclosures of credit quality indicators in relation to the amortized cost of financing receivables will be further disaggregated by year of origination. ASU 2016-13 leaves the methodology for measuring credit losses on AFS debt securities largely unchanged, with the maximum credit loss representing the difference between amortized cost and fair value. However, such credit losses will be recognized through an allowance for credit losses, which permits recovery of previously recognized credit losses if circumstances change.

ASU 2016-13 also revises the recognition of credit losses for purchased financial assets with a more-than insignificant amount of credit deterioration since origination (“PCD assets”). For PCD assets, the initial allowance for credit losses is added to the purchase price. Only subsequent changes in the allowance for credit losses are recorded as a credit loss expense for PCD assets. Interest income for PCD assets will be recognized based on the effective interest rate, excluding the discount embedded in the purchase price that is attributable to the acquirer’s assessment of credit losses at acquisition. Currently, credit losses for purchased credit-impaired assets are included in the initial basis of the assets with subsequent declines in credit resulting in expense while subsequent improvements in credit are reflected as an increase in the future yield from the assets. For non-PCD assets, expected credit losses will be recognized through earnings upon acquisition and the entire premium or discount will be accreted to interest income over the remaining life of the loan.

The provisions of ASU 2016-13 will be generally adopted through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in the year of adoption. Prospective implementation is required for debt securities for which an other-than-temporary-impairment (“OTTI”) had been previously recognized. Amounts previously recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) as of the date of adoption that relate to improvements in cash flows expected to be collected will continue to be accreted into income over the remaining life of the asset. Recoveries of amounts previously written off relating to improvements in cash flows after the date of adoption will be recorded in earnings when received. A prospective transition approach will be used for existing PCD assets where, upon adoption, the amortized cost basis will be adjusted to reflect the addition of the allowance for credit losses. Thus, an entity will not be required to reassess its purchased financial assets that exist as of the date of adoption to determine whether they would have met at acquisition the new criteria of more-than-insignificant credit deterioration since origination. An entity will accrete the remaining noncredit discount (based on the revised amortized cost basis) into interest income at the effective interest rate at the adoption date.

ASU 2016-13 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. FHN continues to evaluate the impact of ASU 2016-13, and is not currently able to reasonably estimate the impact the adoption will have on its consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. Adoption of ASU 2016-13 is likely to lead to significant changes in accounting policies and procedures related to FHN’s ALLL, and it is possible that the impact of the adoption could be material to FHN’s consolidated financial position and results of operations. To date, the Company has, completed model development activities, is finalizing model and accounting policy documentation including portfolio segmentation and measurement methodologies, is finalizing the implementation of the model platform, and assessing impacts to operational processes and internal controls. FHN intends to perform parallel calculations and analysis in fourth quarter 2019. At this time, FHN has performed estimations of the day 1 impact for internal use only as we continue to finalize all aspects of the CECL implementation.

FHN has assessed several asset classes that are within the scope of CECL and determined that the adoption effects for the change in measurement of credit risk will be minimal for these classes. This includes Fed funds sold which have no history of credit losses due to their short (typically overnight) duration and counterparty risk assessment processes. This also includes securities borrowed and securities purchased under agreements to resell which have collateral maintenance agreements that incorporate master netting provisions resulting in minimal uncollateralized positions as of any date as evidenced by the disclosures provided in Note 16 - Master Netting and Similar Agreements-Repurchase, Reverse Repurchase, and Securities Borrowing Transactions. Additionally, FHN has also evaluated the composition of its AFS securities and determined that the changes in ASU 2016-13 will not have a significant effect on the current portfolio.

ASU 2019-04 provides an election to either not measure or measure separately an allowance for credit losses for accrued interest receivable (“AIR"). Entities electing to not measure an allowance for AIR must write off uncollectible interest in a timely manner. Additionally, an election is provided for the write off of uncollectible interest to be recorded either as a reversal of interest income or a charge against the allowance for credit losses or a combination of both. Disclosures are required depending upon which elections are made.

ASU 2019-04 also clarifies that when loans and securities are transferred between balance sheet categories (e.g., loans from held-for-investment to held-for-sale or securities from held-to-maturity to available-for-sale) the associated allowance for credit losses should be reversed to income and prospective accounting follows the requirements for the new classification. Further, ASU 2019-04 clarifies that recoveries should be incorporated within the estimation of the allowance for credit losses. Expected

recoveries should not exceed the aggregate amount of prior write offs and expected future write offs. The inclusion of expected recoveries in the measurement of expected credit losses may result in a negative credit allowance in certain circumstances. Additionally, for collateral dependent financial assets, the allowance for credit losses that is added to the amortized cost basis should not exceed amounts previously written off.

ASU 2019-04 also makes several changes when a discounted cash flow approach is used to measure expected credit losses. ASU 2019-04 removes ASU 2016-03’s prohibition of using projections of future interest rate environments when using a discounted cash flow method to measure expected credit losses on variable-rate financial instruments. If an entity uses projections or expectations of future interest rate environments in estimating expected cash flows, the same assumptions should be used in determining the effective interest rate used to discount those expected cash flows. The effective interest rate should also be adjusted to consider the effects of expected prepayments on the timing of expected future cash flows. ASU 2019-04 provides an election to adjust the effective interest rate used in discounting expected cash flows to isolate credit risk in measuring the allowance for credit losses. Further, the discount rate should not be adjusted for subsequent changes in expected prepayments if a financial asset is restructured in a troubled debt restructuring.

The effective date and transition requirements for these components of ASU 2019-04 are consistent with the requirements for ASU 2016-13 and FHN is incorporating these changes and revisions within its implementation efforts. Based on its current practices for the timely write off uncollectible AIR, FHN intends to not measure an allowance for credit losses for AIR and to continue recognition of related write offs as a reversal of interest income.

In May 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-05, “Financial Instruments - Credit Losses, Targeted Transition Relief,” which provides an option to irrevocably elect the fair value option for certain financial assets previously measured at amortized cost basis that are in the scope of ASU 2016-13, applied on an instrument-by-instrument basis. The fair value option election does not apply to held-to-maturity debt securities. The effective date and transition requirements for ASU 2019-05 are consistent with the requirements for ASU 2016-13. FHN is evaluating the accounting and disclosure requirements for applying the fair value option in comparison to the requirements for applying CECL for certain in-scope asset classes other than loans.

In September 2019, the FASB approved an ASU for issuance (the “Proposed ASU”), “Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses” which clarifies that expected recoveries should be included in the amortized cost basis previously written off or expected to be written off in the valuation allowance for PCD assets. The Proposed ASU also clarifies that recoveries or expected recoveries of the unamortized noncredit discount or premium should not be included in the allowance for credit losses. The Proposed ASU provides specific transition relief for exiting troubled debt restructurings and extends the disclosure relief of ASU 2019-04 for accrued interest receivable balances to additional relevant disclosures involving amortized cost basis. Related to the assessment of credit risk for collateralized assets, the Proposed ASU indicates that an entity should assess whether it reasonably expects the borrower will be able to continually replenish collateral securing the financial asset to apply the practical expedient of ASU 2016-13 while also requiring an estimation of expected credit losses for any difference between the amount of the amortized cost basis that is greater than the fair value of the collateral securing the financial asset.

The effective date and transition requirements for The Proposed ASU will be consistent with the requirements for ASU 2016-13 and FHN is incorporating these changes and revisions within its implementation efforts and the effects will be embedded within the adoption effects of ASU 2016-13. Consistent with non-PCD assets, the effect of including recoveries and expected recoveries within the measurement of expected credit losses for PCD assets may result in a negative credit allowance in certain circumstances.