Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2012

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies [Abstract]

Principles of Consolidation

Principles of Consolidation

ESB Financial Corporation (the Company) is a publicly traded Pennsylvania thrift holding company. The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its direct and indirect wholly owned subsidiaries, ESB Bank (ESB or the Bank), THF, Inc. (THF), AMSCO, Inc. (AMSCO) and ESB Financial Services, Inc. ESB is a Pennsylvania chartered Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insured stock savings bank.

AMSCO is engaged in real estate development and construction of 1-4 family residential units independently or in conjunction with its joint ventures. The Bank has provided all development and construction financing. The joint ventures which are 51% owned or greater by AMSCO have been included in the consolidated financial statements and are reflected within other noninterest income or expense. The Bank’s loans to AMSCO and related interest have been eliminated in consolidation.

In addition to the elimination of the loans and interest to the joint ventures described above, all other significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.

Basis of Presentation

Basis of Presentation

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) requires management to make some estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Certain amounts previously reported have been reclassified to conform to the current year financial statement presentation. The reclassification had no effect on net income.

Operating Segments

Operating Segments

An operating segment is defined as a component of an enterprise that engages in business activities that generate revenue and incur expense, the operating results of which are reviewed by management and for which discrete financial information is available. The Company conducts business through 23 full service banking branches, one loan production office and its various other subsidiaries. Loans and deposits are primarily generated from the areas where banking branches are located. The Company derives its income predominantly from interest on loans and securities and to a lesser extent, noninterest income. The Company’s principal expenses are interest paid on deposits and borrowed funds and normal operating costs. The Company’s operations are principally in the savings and loan industry. Consistent with internal reporting, the Company’s operations are reported in one operating segment, which is community banking.

Cash Equivalents

Cash Equivalents

Cash equivalents include cash on hand and in banks, interest-earning deposits with original maturities of 120 days or less and federal funds sold. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve imposes certain reserve requirements on all depository institutions. These reserves are maintained in the form of vault cash or as a noninterest bearing balance with the Federal Reserve Bank. Required reserves at the Federal Reserve Bank averaged $1.0 million and $824,000 during the year 2012 and 2011, respectively.

Securities Available for Sale and Held for Maturity

Securities Available for Sale and Held for Maturity

Securities include investments primarily in bonds, notes and to a lesser extent equity securities and are classified as either available for sale or held to maturity at the time of purchase based on management’s intent. Such intent includes consideration of the interest rate environment, prepayment risk, credit risk, maturity and repricing characteristics, liquidity considerations, investment and asset/liability management policies and other pertinent factors. Unrealized holding gains and losses, net of applicable income taxes, on available for sale securities are reported as accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI) until realized. Gains and losses on the sale of securities are determined using the specific identification method and are included in operations in the period sold.

Management monitors all of the Company’s securities for other than temporary impairment (OTTI) on a quarterly basis and determines whether any impairment should be recorded. For a security to be considered OTTI, its characteristics would have to consist of an accumulation of these factors:

• Fair value is significantly below cost

• Decline in fair value is attributable to specific adverse conditions affecting a particular investment, specific conditions in an industry or geographic area

• Management does not possess both the intent and ability to hold the investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery in fair value

• The decline in fair value has existed for an extended period of time

• Debt security has been downgraded by a rating agency

• Rating differences

• Financial condition of the issuer has deteriorated and the issuer has reduced or eliminated scheduled dividends or interest payments

• SEC filings – disclosures that would indicate an inability by the issuer to satisfy their obligations

• Audits – the Company will review the issuer’s audits to determine if they have received going concern audit opinions

• Other debt of the issuers – the Company will review the market prices of other debt of the issuer to determine if the market loss of an issue is related to credit or interest rate risk

Management will more closely evaluate the securities that have unrealized losses of 15% or more. If management determines that the declines in value of the security are not temporary, or if management does not have the ability to hold the security until maturity, which is the case with equity securities, then management will record impairment on the security. For equity securities, typically the amount of impairment is the difference between the security’s book value and current fair value determined by independent market pricing. For debt securities evaluated for impairment, management will determine what portion of the unrealized valuation loss is attributed to projected or known loss of principal, and what portion is attributed to market pricing not reflective of the true value of the security, based on current cash flow analysis. Management will generally record impairment equivalent to the projected or known loss of principal, known as the credit loss. The other portion of the fair value loss is attributed to market factors and it is management’s opinion that these fair value losses are temporary and not permanent. All impairment is recorded as a loss on securities and is included in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations.

Yields and carrying values for certain mortgage-backed securities are subject to normal interest rate and prepayment risks. Premiums and discounts on securities are recognized in interest income using the interest method over the period to maturity.

Loans Receivable

Loans Receivable

Loans receivable, for which management has the intent and the Company has the ability to hold for the foreseeable future or until maturity or payoff, are reported at their outstanding unpaid principal balances reduced by any charge-offs and net of any deferred fees or costs on loans originated, unamortized premiums or discounts on loans purchased and the allowance for loan losses.

Interest income on loans is accrued and credited to operations as earned. Interest income is not accrued for loans delinquent 90 days or greater. Interest on impaired loans is discontinued when, in management’s opinion, the borrower may be unable to meet contractual payments. When interest accrual is discontinued, all unpaid accrued interest is reversed. Interest receipts on nonaccrual and impaired loans are recognized as interest revenue or applied to principal when management believes the ultimate collectibility of principal is in doubt.

The Company maintains records of the full amount of interest that is owed by the borrowers. A non-accrual loan will generally be placed back on accrual status only when the delinquency is less than 90 days.

Discounts and premiums on purchased loans are recognized in interest income using the interest method over the remaining period to contractual maturity, adjusted for prepayments. Loan origination fees and certain direct origination costs are capitalized and recognized as an adjustment to the yield of the related loan over the loan’s period to maturity. Loans originated and intended for sale are carried at the lower of cost or fair value in the aggregate.

Impaired loans are commercial, multi-family, residential real estate construction and commercial real estate loans for which it is probable the Company will not be able to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. The Company individually evaluates such loans for impairment and does not aggregate loans by major risk classifications. The definition of impaired loans is not the same as the definition of nonaccrual loans, although the two categories overlap. The Company may choose to place a loan on nonaccrual status due to payment delinquency or uncertain collectibility, while not classifying the loan as impaired. Factors considered by management in determining impairment include payment status and collateral value. The amount of impairment for these types of impaired loans is determined by the difference between the present value of the expected cash flows related to the loan, using current interest rates and its recorded value, or, as a practical expedient in the case of collateralized loans, the difference between the fair value of the collateral and the recorded amount of the loans. When the loan balance becomes collateral dependent, impairment is measured based on the fair value of the collateral.

Mortgage loans on one-to four family properties and all consumer loans are large groups of smaller balance homogeneous loans and are measured for impairment collectively. Loans that experience insignificant payment delays, which are defined as less than 90 days, generally are not classified as impaired. Management determines the significance of payment delays on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration all circumstances surrounding the loan and the borrower including the length of the delay, the borrower’s prior payment record and the amount of shortfall in relation to the principal and interest owed.

Allowance for loan losses

Allowance for loan losses

Management establishes the allowance for loan losses based upon its evaluation of the pertinent factors underlying the types and quality of loans in the portfolio. Commercial loans and commercial real estate loans are reviewed on a regular basis with a focus on larger loans along with loans which have experienced past payment or financial deficiencies. Larger commercial loans, multi-family, residential real estate construction and commercial real estate loans which are 60 days or more past due are selected for impairment testing. These loans are analyzed to determine if they are “impaired”, which means that it is probable that all amounts will not be collected according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. All loans that are delinquent 90 days and are placed on nonaccrual status are classified on an individual basis. Residential loans 60 days past due, which are still accruing interest are classified as substandard as per the Company’s asset classification policy. The remaining loans are evaluated and classified as groups of loans with similar risk characteristics. The Company allocates allowances based on the factors described below, which conform to the Company’s asset classification policy. In reviewing risk within the Bank’s loan portfolio, management has determined there to be several different risk categories within the loan portfolio. The allowance for loan losses consists of amounts applicable to: (i) the commercial loan portfolio; (ii) the commercial real estate portfolio; (iii) the consumer loan portfolio; (iv) the residential real estate portfolio. Factors considered in this process included general loan terms, collateral and availability of historical data to support the analysis. Historical loss percentages for each risk category are calculated and used as the basis for calculating allowance allocations. Certain qualitative factors are then added to the historical loss percentages to get the adjusted factor to be applied to non classified loans. The following qualitative factors are analyzed:

• Levels of and trends in delinquencies and nonaccruals

• Trends in volume and terms

• Changes in lending policies and procedures

• Volatility of losses within each risk category

• Loans and Lending staff acquired through acquisition

• Economic trends

• Concentrations of credit

• Experience depth and ability of management

The Company also maintains an unallocated allowance to account for any factors or conditions that may cause a potential loss but are not specifically addressed in the process described above. The Company analyzes its loan portfolio each quarter to determine the appropriateness of its allowance for loan losses.

The allowance for loan losses is maintained at a level believed to be adequate by management to absorb probable losses inherent in the portfolio and is based on the size and current risk characteristics of the loan portfolio, an assessment of individual problem loans and actual loss experience, current economic events in specific industries and other pertinent factors such as regulatory guidance and general economic conditions. Determination of the allowance is inherently subjective as it requires significant estimates, including the amounts and timing of expected future cash flows on impaired loans, estimated losses on pools of homogeneous loans based on historical loss experience and consideration of current economic trends, all of which may be susceptible to significant change. Loan losses are charged off against the allowance, while recoveries of amounts previously charged off are credited to the allowance. A provision for loan losses is charged to operations based on management’s periodic evaluation of the factors previously mentioned, as well as other pertinent factors. Evaluations are conducted quarterly, during which loans may be charged off upon reaching various stages of delinquency and depending upon the loan type.

Loan Charge-off Policies

Loan Charge-off Policies

Consumer loans are generally fully or partially charged down to the fair value of collateral securing the asset when the loan is 180 days past due for open-end loans or 120 days past due for closed-end loans unless the loan is well secured and in the process of collection. All other loans are generally charged down to the fair value when the loan is 90 days past due.

Troubled Debt Restructurings

Troubled Debt Restructurings

In situations where, for economic or legal reasons related to a borrower’s financial difficulties, management may grant a concession for other than an insignificant period of time to the borrower that would not otherwise be considered, the related loan is classified as a TDR. Management strives to identify borrowers in financial difficulty early and work with them to modify to more affordable terms before their loan reaches nonaccrual status. These modified terms may include rate reductions, principal forgiveness, payment forbearance and other actions intended to minimize the economic loss and to avoid foreclosure or repossession of the collateral. In cases where borrowers are granted new terms that provide for a reduction of either interest or principal, management measures any impairment on the restructuring as noted above for impaired loans. In addition to the allowance for the pooled portfolios, management has developed a separate allowance for loans that are identified as impaired through a TDR. These loans are excluded from pooled loss forecasts and a separate reserve is provided under the accounting guidance for loan impairment. Consumer loans whose terms have been modified in a TDR are also individually analyzed for estimated impairment.

Real Estate Acquired Through Foreclosure

Real Estate Acquired Through Foreclosure

Real estate properties acquired through foreclosure are initially recorded at the lower of cost or fair value at the date of foreclosure, establishing a new cost basis. After foreclosure, management periodically performs valuations and the real estate is carried at the lower of cost or fair value less estimated costs to sell. Revenue and expenses from operations of the properties, gains and losses on sales and additions to the valuation allowance are included in operating results.

Federal Home Loan Bank Stock

Federal Home Loan Bank Stock

The Bank is a member of the FHLB of Pittsburgh and as such, is required to maintain a minimum investment in FHLB stock that varies with the level of advances outstanding with the FHLB. The stock is bought from and sold to the FHLB based upon its $100 par value. The stock does not have a readily determinable fair value and as such is classified as restricted stock, carried at cost and evaluated for impairment when necessary. The stock’s value is determined by the ultimate recoverability of the par value rather than by recognizing temporary declines. The determination of whether the par value will ultimately be recovered is influenced by criteria such as the following: (a) the significance of the decline in net assets of the FHLB as compared to the capital stock amount and the length of time this situation has persisted (b) commitments by the FHLB to make payments required by law or regulation and the level of such payments in relation to the operating performance (c) the impact of legislative and regulatory changes on the customer base of the FHLB and (d) the liquidity position of the FHLB. There was no impairment of the FHLB stock at December 31, 2012 or 2011.

Premises and Equipment

Premises and Equipment

Land is carried at cost. Premises, furniture and equipment and leasehold improvements are carried at cost less accumulated depreciation or amortization. Depreciation is calculated on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the related assets, which are twenty-five to fifty years for buildings and three to ten years for furniture and equipment. Amortization of leasehold improvements is computed using the straight-line method over the term of the related lease.

Goodwill and Intangible Assets

Goodwill and Intangible Assets

Goodwill consisted of $41.6 million at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The Company evaluates goodwill for impairment. This impairment assessment is performed at least annually by assessing various qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. The Company performed this assessment as of October 31, 2012 and concluded that the recorded value of goodwill was not impaired. Core deposit intangible was $288,000 and $539,000 at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The core deposit intangible assets are amortized on a sum of the year’s digit basis over the estimated useful life, generally up to ten years. Amortization of finite lived assets is expected to total $170,000, $110,000 and $8,000 for the years 2013, 2014 and 2015, respectively.

Mortgage Servicing Assets

Mortgage Servicing Assets

At December 31, 2012, the remaining balance and fair value of the servicing asset was $14,000, which is recorded in intangible assets. Servicing assets are amortized in proportion to and over the period of, estimated net servicing revenues. Impairment of servicing assets is based on fair value of those assets, estimated using discounted cash flows and prepayment assumptions for the market area of the servicing portfolio. For purposes of measuring impairment, the servicing asset is stratified based on interest rate. The amount of impairment recognized is the amount by which the capitalized servicing asset for a stratum exceeds the fair value of that stratum. During 2012 the Company recovered a portion of the impairment valuation of approximately $9,000. The remaining impairment valuation at December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 was $15,000, $24,000 and $30,000, respectively. The amortization taken on the servicing asset for the year ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 was $10,000, $14,000 and $14,000, respectively. The Company had total loans serviced for others of $5.8 million, $10.2 million and $14.8 million December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

Advertising Costs

Advertising Costs

Advertising costs are expensed as the costs are incurred. Advertising expenses amounted to $613,000, $612,000 and $608,000 for 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.

Income Taxes

Income Taxes

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are reflected at currently enacted income tax rates applicable to the period in which the deferred tax assets or liabilities are expected to be realized or settled. As changes in tax laws or rates are enacted, deferred tax assets and liabilities are adjusted through the provision for income taxes.

Bank-Owned Life Insurance (BOLI)

Bank-Owned Life Insurance (BOLI)

The Company owns insurance on the lives of a certain group of key employees. The policies were purchased to help offset the increases in the costs of various fringe benefit plans including healthcare. The cash surrender value of these policies is included as an asset on the consolidated statements of financial condition and any increases in cash surrender value are recorded as noninterest income on the consolidated statements of operations. In the event of the death of an insured individual under these policies, the Company would receive a death benefit.

Financial Instruments

Financial Instruments

As part of its overall interest rate risk management activities, the Company utilizes derivative instruments to manage its exposure to various types of interest rate risk. Interest rate swaps and interest rate caps are the primary instruments the Company uses for interest rate risk management. Derivative instruments are recorded at fair value as either part of prepaid expenses and other assets or accrued expenses and other liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. The accounting for changes in the fair value of derivatives depends on the intended use of the derivative and the resulting designation. Derivatives used to hedge the exposure to changes in the fair value of an asset, liability, or firm commitment attributable to a particular risk, such as interest rate risk, are considered fair value hedges. Derivatives used to hedge the exposure to variability in expected future cash flows, or other types of forecasted transactions, are considered cash flow hedges.

The Company formally documents the relationship between the hedging instruments and hedged items, as well as the risk management objective and strategy, before undertaking an accounting hedge. To qualify for hedge accounting, the derivatives and related hedged items must be designated as a hedge at inception of the hedge relationship. For accounting hedge relationships, we formally assess, both at the inception of the hedge and on an ongoing basis, if the derivatives are highly effective in offsetting designated changes in the fair value or cash flows of the hedged item. If it is determined that the derivative instrument is not highly effective, hedge accounting is discontinued.

For derivatives designated as fair value hedges, changes in the fair value of the derivative and the hedged item related to the hedged risk are recognized in earnings. To the extent the change in fair value of the derivative does not offset the change in fair value of the hedged item, the difference or ineffectiveness is reflected in earnings in the same financial statement category as the hedged item.

For derivatives designated as cash flow hedges, the effective portion of changes in the fair value of the derivative is initially reported in AOCI and subsequently reclassified to earnings when the hedged transaction affects earnings and the ineffective portion of changes in the fair value of the derivative is recognized directly in earnings. The Company assesses the effectiveness of each hedging relationship by comparing the changes in fair value or cash flows of the derivative hedging instrument with the changes in fair value or cash flows of the designated hedged item or transaction. For derivatives not designated as hedges, changes in fair value are recognized in earnings.

At December 31, 2012, there were sixteen interest rate cap contracts outstanding with notional amounts totaling $170.0 million. These derivative instruments are not hedged and therefore adjustments to fair value are recorded in current earnings.

During 2009, the Company entered into two interest rate swap contracts to manage its exposure to interest rate risk. These interest rate swap transactions involved the exchange of the Company’s interest payment on $35.0 million in junior subordinated notes which became floating rate notes in 2011 for a fixed rate interest payment without the exchange of the underlying principal amount. Entering into interest rate derivatives potentially exposes the Company to the risk of counterparties’ failure to fulfill their legal obligations including, but not limited to, potential amounts due or payable under each derivative contract. Notional principal amounts are often used to express the volume of these transactions, but the amounts potentially subject to credit risk are much smaller. Management utilizes the change in variable cash flows method to measure hedge ineffectiveness. To the extent that the cumulative change in anticipated cash flows from the hedging derivative offsets from 80% to 125% of the cumulative change in anticipated cash flows from the hedged exposure, the hedged is deemed effective. As of December 31, 2012 the interest rate swaps were deemed to be effective, therefore no amounts were charged to current earnings. The Company also does not expect to reclassify any hedge related amounts from AOCI to earnings over the next twelve months.

The pay fixed interest rate swap contracts outstanding at December 31, 2012 are being utilized to hedge $35.0 million in floating rate junior subordinated notes. The interest rate swaps are carried at fair value. Below is a summary of the interest rate swap contracts and the terms at December 31, 2012:

(Dollars in thousands)	Notional Amount		Effective Date		Pay Rate			Receive Rate (*)			Maturity Date		Unrealized Loss
Cash Flow Hedge	$	20,000		2/10/2011		4.18	%		0.31	%		2/10/2018	$	3,400
Cash Flow Hedge		15,000		2/10/2011		3.91	%		0.31	%		2/10/2018		2,343
	$	35,000											$	5,743

* Variable receive rate based upon contract rates in effect at December 31, 2012

Transfers of Financial Assets

Transfers of Financial Assets

Transfers of financial assets are accounted for as sales when control over the assets has been surrendered. Control over transferred assets is deemed to be surrendered when (1) the assets have been isolated from the Company, (2) the transferee obtains the right (free of conditions that constrain it from taking advantage of the right) to pledge or exchange the transferred assets, and (3) the Company does not maintain effective control over the transferred assets through an agreement to repurchase them before their maturity.

Stock-Based Compensation

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company accounts for stock compensation based on the grant-date fair value of all share-based payment awards that are expected to vest, including employee share options to be recognized as employee compensation expense over the requisite service period.

During the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, the Company recorded $575,000, $377,000, and $355,000, respectively, in compensation expense and tax benefits of $73,000, $1,000 and $20,000, respectively, related to our share-based compensation awards. As of December 31, 2012, there was approximately $53,000 of unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested share-based compensation awards granted in 2009. That cost is expected to be recognized over the next year. There was approximately $209,000 of unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested share-based compensation awards granted in 2010. That cost is expected to be recognized over the next two years. There was approximately $254,000 of unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested share-based compensation awards granted in 2011. That cost is expected to be recognized over the next three years. Finally, there was approximately $233,000 of unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested share-based compensation awards granted in 2012, that is expected to be recognized over the next two years and $332,000 of unrecognized compensation related to unvested share- based compensation awards granted in 2012 that is expected to be recognized over the next four years.

The Company has recorded $48,000, $55,000 and $74,000 in excess tax benefits which have been classified as financing cash inflows for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively, in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

For purposes of computing results, the Company estimated the fair values of stock options using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The model requires the use of subjective assumptions that can materially affect fair value estimates. The fair value of each option is amortized into compensation expense on a straight line basis between the grant date for the option and each vesting date. The fair value of each stock option granted was estimated using the following weighted-average assumptions:

	2012		2011		2010
Assumptions
Volatility		39.70%		39.52%		38.98%
Interest Rates		1.24%		1.58%		2.16%
Dividend Yields		3.17%		3.03%		2.68%
Weighted Average Life ( in years)		7.0		7.0		7.2

The weighted average fair value of each stock option granted for 2012, 2011 and 2010 was $3.65, $3.94 and $4.76, respectively. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, was $229,000, $287,000 and $192,000, respectively. The total intrinsic value of in-the-money stock options was $3.1 million, $2.5 million and $2.7 million at the year ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 respectively. The total intrinsic value of the exercisable stock options was $2.0 million, $1.6 million and $1.8 million at the year ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

Net Income Per Share

Net Income Per Share

The following table summarizes the Company’s net income per share for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010:

(Amounts in thousands, except per share data)
	2012		2011		2010
Net income	$	14,903	$	14,910	$	14,231
Weighted-average common shares outstanding		14,346		14,438		14,386
Basic earnings per share	$	1.04	$	1.03	$	0.99
Weighted-average common shares outstanding		14,346		14,439		14,385
Common stock equivalents due to effect of stock options		123		116		99
Total weighted-average common shares and equivalents		14,469		14,555		14,484
Diluted earnings per share	$	1.03	$	1.02	$	0.98

The unallocated shares controlled by the ESOP of 246,746, 329,656 and 0 at December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively, are not considered in the weighted average shares outstanding until the shares are committed for allocation to an employee’s individual account. All of the outstanding options were included in the computation of diluted earnings per share for 2012, 2011 and 2010 because the options’ exercise price was less than the average market price of the common shares.

Reclassifications

Reclassifications

Certain amounts in the 2011 financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the 2012 presentation format. These reclassifications had no effect on stockholders’ equity or net income.

Effect of Recent Accounting and Regulatory Pronouncements

Effect of Recent Accounting and Regulatory Pronouncements

In January 2013, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2013-01, Balance Sheet (Topic 210): Clarifying the Scope of Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities. The amendments clarify that the scope of Update 2011-11 applies to derivatives accounted for in accordance with Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, including bifurcated embedded derivatives, repurchase agreements and reverse repurchase agreements, and securities borrowing and securities lending transactions that are either offset in accordance with Section 210-20-45 or Section 815-10-45 or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. An entity is required to apply the amendments for fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 2013, and interim periods within those annual periods. An entity should provide the required disclosures retrospectively for all comparative periods presented. The effective date is the same as the effective date of Update 2011-11. This ASU is not expected to have a significant impact on the Company’s financial statements.

In October, 2012, the FASB issued ASU 2012-06, Business Combinations (Topic 805)—Subsequent Accounting for an Indemnification Asset Recognized at the Acquisition Date as a Result of a Government-Assisted Acquisition of a Financial Institution. ASU 2012-06 requires that when a reporting entity recognizes an indemnification asset (in accordance with Subtopic 805-20) as a result of a government assisted acquisition of a financial institution and subsequently a change in the cash flows expected to be collected on the indemnification asset occurs (as a result of a change in cash flows expected to be collected on the assets subject to indemnification), the reporting entity should subsequently account for the change in the measurement of the indemnification asset on the same basis as the change in the assets subject to indemnification. Any amortization of changes in value should be limited to the contractual term of the indemnification agreement (that is, the lesser of the term of the indemnification agreement and the remaining life of the indemnified assets). ASU 2012-06 is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning on or after December 15, 2012. Early adoption is permitted. The amendments should be applied prospectively to any new indemnification assets acquired after the date of adoption and to indemnification assets existing as of the date of adoption arising from a government-assisted acquisition of a financial institution. This ASU is not expected to have a significant impact on the Company’s financial statements.

In July, 2012, the FASB issued ASU 2012-02, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350) – Testing Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets for Impairment. ASU 2012-02 give entities the option to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether the existence of events or circumstances leads to a determination that it is more likely than not that an indefinite-lived intangible asset is impaired. If, after assessing the totality of events or circumstances, an entity determines it is more likely than not that an indefinite-lived intangible asset is impaired, then the entity must perform the quantitative impairment test. If, under the quantitative impairment test, the carrying amount of the intangible asset exceeds its fair value, an entity should recognize an impairment loss in the amount of that excess. Permitting an entity to assess qualitative factors when testing indefinite-lived intangible assets for impairment results in guidance that is similar to the goodwill impairment testing guidance in ASU 2011-08. ASU 2012-02 is effective for annual and interim impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after September 15, 2012 (early adoption permitted). This ASU is not expected to have a significant impact on the Company’s financial statements.

In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-10, Property, Plant, and Equipment (Topic 360): Derecognition of in Substance Real Estate-a Scope Clarification. The amendments in this Update affect entities that cease to have a controlling financial interest in a subsidiary that is in substance real estate as a result of default on the subsidiary’s nonrecourse debt. Under the amendments in this Update, when a parent (reporting entity) ceases to have a controlling financial interest in a subsidiary that is in substance real estate as a result of default on the subsidiary’s nonrecourse debt, the reporting entity should apply the guidance in Subtopic 360-20 to determine whether it should derecognize the in substance real estate. Generally, a reporting entity would not satisfy the requirements to derecognize the in substance real estate before the legal transfer of the real estate to the lender and the extinguishment of the related nonrecourse indebtedness. That is, even if the reporting entity ceases to have a controlling financial interest under Subtopic 810-10, the reporting entity would continue to include the real estate, debt, and the results of the subsidiary’s operations in its consolidated financial statements until legal title to the real estate is transferred to legally satisfy the debt. The amendments in this Update should be applied on a prospective basis to deconsolidation events occurring after the effective date. Prior periods should not be adjusted even if the reporting entity has continuing involvement with previously derecognized in substance real estate entities. For public entities, the amendments in this Update are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning on or after June 15, 2012. For nonpublic entities, the amendments are effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2013, and interim and annual periods thereafter. Early adoption is permitted. This ASU did not have a significant impact on the Company’s financial statements.

In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-11, Balance Sheet (Topic 210): Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities. The amendments in this Update affect all entities that have financial instruments and derivative instruments that are either (1) offset in accordance with either Section 210-20-45 or Section 815-10-45 or (2) subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The requirements amend the disclosure requirements on offsetting in Section 210-20-50. This information will enable users of an entity’s financial statements to evaluate the effect or potential effect of netting arrangements on an entity’s financial position, including the effect or potential effect of rights of setoff associated with certain financial instruments and derivative instruments in the scope of this Update. An entity is required to apply the amendments for annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013, and interim periods within those annual periods. An entity should provide the disclosures required by those amendments retrospectively for all comparative periods presented. This ASU is not expected to have a significant impact on the Company’s financial statements.

In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income. The amendments in this Update improve the comparability, clarity, consistency, and transparency of financial reporting and increase the prominence of items reported in other comprehensive income. To increase the prominence of items reported in other comprehensive income and to facilitate convergence of U.S. GAAP and IFRS, the option to present components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity was eliminated. The amendments require that all non-owner changes in stockholders’ equity be presented either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. In the two-statement approach, the first statement should present total net income and its components followed consecutively by a second statement that should present total other comprehensive income, the components of other comprehensive income, and the total of comprehensive income. All entities that report items of comprehensive income, in any period presented, will be affected by the changes in this Update. For public entities, the amendments are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011. For nonpublic entities, the amendments are effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2012, and interim and annual periods thereafter. The amendments in this Update should be applied retrospectively, and early adoption is permitted. The Company has provided the necessary disclosure in the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income.

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs. The amendments in this Update result in common fair value measurement and disclosure requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs. Consequently, the amendments change the wording used to describe many of the requirements in U.S. GAAP for measuring fair value and for disclosing information about fair value measurements. The amendments in this Update are to be applied prospectively. For public entities, the amendments are effective during interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. For nonpublic entities, the amendments are effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. Early application by public entities is not permitted. The Company has included the disclosure requirements in footnote twelve.