10-K 1 c58631e10vk.htm FORM 10-K e10vk
Table of Contents

 
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
 
Form 10-K
 
 
     
þ
  ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
    For the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010
or
o
  TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
    For the transition period from          to          
 
Commission File Number 0-20006
 
ANCHOR BANCORP WISCONSIN INC.  
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
 
     
Wisconsin
(State or other jurisdiction
of incorporation or organization)
  39-1726871
(IRS Employer
Identification No.)
 
25 West Main Street
Madison, Wisconsin 53703
(Address of principal executive office)
 
 
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (608) 252-8700
 
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12 (b) of the Act:
 
Common stock, par value $.10 per share NASDAQ Global Market
(Title of Class) (Name of each exchange on which registered)
 
 
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12 (g) of the Act:
Not Applicable
 
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.  Yes o     No þ
 
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.  Yes o     No þ
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes þ     No o
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).  Yes þ     No o
 
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 or 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 the 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. (Check one):
 
             
Large accelerated filer o
  Accelerated filer o   Non-accelerated filer þ
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
  Smaller reporting company o
 
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).  Yes o     No þ
 
As of September 30, 2009, the aggregate market value of the 21,589,792 outstanding shares of the Registrant’s common stock deemed to be held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $24.7 million, based upon the closing price of $1.30 per share of common stock as reported by the Nasdaq Global Market on such date. Although directors and executive officers of the Registrant and certain of its employee benefit plans were assumed to be “affiliates” of the Registrant for purposes of this calculation, the classification is not to be interpreted as an admission of such status.
 
As of June 4, 2010, 21,689,604 shares of the Registrant’s common stock were outstanding.
 
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
 
Portions of the definitive Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on August 9, 2010 (Part III, Items 10 to 14).
 


 

 
ANCHOR BANCORP WISCONSIN INC.
 
FISCAL 2010 FORM 10-K ANNUAL REPORT
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
 
 
                 
        Page
 
      BUSINESS     1  
        General     1  
        Market Area     1  
        Competition     2  
        Key Business Strategies     3  
        Recent Developments     5  
        Lending Activities     6  
        Investment Securities     14  
        Sources of Funds     16  
        Subsidiaries     17  
        Regulation and Supervision     20  
        Taxation     30  
      RISK FACTORS     30  
      UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS     44  
      PROPERTIES     44  
      LEGAL PROCEEDINGS     44  
      [RESERVED]     44  
 
PART II
      MARKET FOR THE REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER REPURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES     44  
      SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA     47  
      MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS     48  
      QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK     70  
      FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA     74  
      CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE     127  
      CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES     127  
      OTHER INFORMATION     130  
 
PART III
      DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE     130  
      EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION     130  
      SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS     130  
      CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE     131  
      PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES     131  
 
PART IV
      EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES     131  
        SIGNATURES     131  
 EX-10.35
 EX-10.36
 EX-23.1
 EX-31.1
 EX-31.2
 EX-32.1
 EX-32.2
 EX-99.1
 EX-99.2


(i)


Table of Contents

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
 
In the normal course of business, we, in an effort to help keep our shareholders and the public informed about our operations, may from time to time issue or make certain statements, either in writing or orally, that are or contain forward-looking statements, as that term is defined in the U.S. federal securities laws. Generally, these statements relate to business plans or strategies, projected or anticipated benefits from acquisitions or dispositions made by or to be made by us, projections involving anticipated revenues, earnings, liquidity, profitability or other aspects of operating results or other future developments in our affairs or the industry in which we conduct business. Forward-looking statements may be identified by reference to a future period or periods or by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “project,” “continue,” “ongoing,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “estimate” or similar expressions.
 
Although we believe that the anticipated results or other expectations reflected in our forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, we can give no assurance that those results or expectations will be attained. Forward-looking statements involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions (some of which are beyond our control), and as a result actual results may differ materially from those expressed in forward-looking statements due to several factors more fully described in Item 1A, “Risk Factors,” as well as elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Factors that could cause actual results to differ from forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, the following, as well as those discussed elsewhere herein:
 
  •  general economic or industry conditions could be less favorable than expected, resulting in a deterioration in credit quality, a change in the allowance for loan and lease losses or a reduced demand for credit or fee-based products and services;
 
  •  soundness of other financial institutions with which the Company and the Bank engage in transactions;
 
  •  competitive pressures could intensify and affect our profitability, including as a result of continued industry consolidation, the increased availability of financial services from non-banks, technological developments or bank regulatory reform;
 
  •  changes in technology;
 
  •  deterioration in commercial real estate, land and construction loan portfolios resulting in increased loan losses;
 
  •  uncertainties regarding our ability to continue as a going concern;
 
  •  our ability to address our own liquidity problems;
 
  •  demand for financial services, loss of customer confidence, and customer deposit account withdrawals;
 
  •  our ability to pay dividends;
 
  •  changes in the quality or composition of the Bank’s loan and investment portfolios and allowances for loan loss;
 
  •  unprecedented volatility in the market and fluctuations in the value of our common stock;
 
  •  dilution of existing shareholders as a result of possible future transaction;
 
  •  uncertainties about the Company and the Bank’s Cease and Desist Orders with OTS;
 
  •  uncertainties about our ability to raise sufficient new capital in a timely manner in order to increase the Bank’s regulatory capital ratios;
 
  •  changes in the conditions of the securities markets, which could adversely affect, among other things, the value or credit quality of our assets, the availability and terms of funding necessary to meet our liquidity needs and our ability to originate loans;
 
  •  increases in Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation premiums due to market developments and regulatory changes; changes in accounting principles, policies or guidelines;


(ii)


Table of Contents

 
  •  uncertainties regarding our investment in the common stock of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago;
 
  •  delisting of the Company’s common stock from Nasdaq;
 
  •  significant unforeseen legal expenses;
 
  •  uncertainties about market interest rates;
 
  •  security breaches of our information systems;
 
  •  acts or threats of terrorism and actions taken by the United States or other governments as a result of such acts or threats, severe weather, natural disasters, acts of war;
 
  •  environmental liability for properties to which we take title;
 
  •  expiration of Amendment No. 6 to our Amended and Restated Credit Agreement on May 31, 2011;
 
  •  uncertainties about our ability to obtain regulatory approval and finalize transactions to sell several branch locations;
 
  •  uncertainties relating to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act or 2008, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the implementation by the U.S. Department of the Treasury and federal banking regulators of a number of programs to address capital and liquidity issues in the banking system and additional programs that will apply to us in the future, all of which may have significant effects on us and the financial services industry;
 
  •  changes in the U.S. Treasury’s Capital Purchase Program;
 
  •  changes in the extensive laws, regulations and policies governing financial holding companies and their subsidiaries;
 
  •  monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. Department of the Treasury; and
 
  •  challenges relating to recruiting and retaining key employees.
 
You should not put undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made and we undertake no obligation to update them in light of new information or future events, except to the extent required by federal securities laws.


(iii)


Table of Contents

 
PART I
 
Item 1.   Business
 
General
 
We, Anchor BanCorp Wisconsin Inc. (the “Corporation” or the “Company”) are a registered savings and loan holding company incorporated under the laws of the State of Wisconsin. We are engaged in the savings and loan business through our wholly owned banking subsidiary, AnchorBank, fsb (the “Bank”).
 
The Bank was organized in 1919 as a Wisconsin chartered savings institution and converted to a federally chartered savings institution in July 2000. AnchorBank, fsb is the third largest depository institution headquartered in the state of Wisconsin and its largest thrift in terms of assets. The Bank’s deposits are insured up to the maximum allowable amount by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). The Bank is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) of Chicago, and is regulated by the Office of Thrift Supervision (“OTS”) and the FDIC. The Corporation is regulated by the OTS as a savings and loan holding company and is subject to the periodic reporting requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”). See “Regulation and Supervision.”
 
Primarily through our branch network, we offer checking, savings, money market accounts, mortgages, home equity and other consumer loans, credit cards, annuities, investment products and related consumer financial services. The Bank also provides banking services to businesses, including checking accounts, lines of credit, secured loans and commercial real estate loans. AnchorBank’s branch network serves as the primary vehicle through which we cross sell additional products to existing customers and generate new customer relationships. During the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010, more than 11,000 new customer households were added, with nearly 70 percent coming in via three key product “gateways”: checking accounts (DDAs), Certificates of Deposit and Residential Mortgages.
 
In addition to our branch network, we provide products and services online via our WebBranchtm online banking system and our Speed e-Apptm online mortgage application tool. During the 2010 fiscal year we saw a substantial increase in mortgage applications come in through Speed e-App, with online applications accounting for nearly 50 percent of mortgage applications.
 
The Corporation also has a non-banking subsidiary, Investment Directions, Inc. (“IDI”), a Wisconsin corporation which has historically invested in real estate partnerships. IDI had two subsidiaries, Nevada Investment Directions, Inc. (“NIDI”) and California Investment Directions, Inc. (“CIDI”), both of which invested in real estate held for development and sale. During our fiscal year ended March 31, 2010 IDI’s investment activities were substantially curtailed.
 
The Bank has two wholly-owned subsidiaries: ADPC Corporation (“ADPC”), a Wisconsin corporation, holds and develops certain of the Bank’s foreclosed properties. Anchor Investment Corporation (“AIC”), an operating subsidiary that is located in and formed under the laws of the State of Nevada, manages a portion of the Bank’s investment portfolio (primarily mortgage related securities).
 
The Corporation maintains a web site at www.anchorbank.com. All of the Corporation’s filings under the Exchange Act are available through that web site, free of charge, including copies of Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports, on the date that the Corporation files those materials with, or furnishes them to, the SEC.
 
Market Area
 
The Bank’s primary market area consists of south-central, east-central, southeastern and northwest Wisconsin, as well as contiguous counties in Iowa, Minnesota and Illinois. At March 31, 2010, the Bank conducted business from its headquarters and main office in Madison, Wisconsin, and from 70 other full-service offices and two loan origination offices which services our more than 165,000 households and businesses. During the fiscal year an agreement was reached, to sell 11 of the bank’s branches in the Northwest region of the state and, in May, 2010 to sell, four offices in the Green Bay area. Additionally, in May 2010 the Bank’s lending only office in Hudson, WI was


1


Table of Contents

closed. One lending only office in Lake Geneva, WI remains, all other offices operate as full service branches. Both transactions were anticipated to be closed during fiscal 2010.
 
Following the sale of these branches, AnchorBank’s market area will be concentrated in the greater Madison/Dane County, Suburban Milwaukee and Fox Valley areas. Together these areas account for nearly half of Wisconsin’s population and provide a strong platform for long term growth locally and regionally. Within its market footprint AnchorBank exhibits a strong retail franchise with the second highest market share of both deposits and mortgage origination in the Madison area and with the sixth largest deposit and mortgage origination share in the state overall.
 
Our home market of Madison provides a strong base in a highly attractive market. Madison is home to both state and county governments as well as the University of Wisconsin. Madison has enjoyed rapid population growth of 12.8 percent since 2000, a median household income 15 percent above the national average and relatively low unemployment at 5.7 percent (as of April 2010) versus the national average of 9.9 percent.
 
The Fox Valley, consisting primarily of the cities of Appleton and Oshkosh and their associated satellite communities is one of the state’s fastest growing areas and also benefits from significantly higher than median income levels at approximately $69,700, 27 percent higher than the national average. The bank operates 12 branches in the Fox Valley area.
 
In the Milwaukee area, AnchorBank operates eight branches, all located in suburban areas outside the City of Milwaukee. The largest city in Wisconsin, the Milwaukee Metropolitan area is home to more than 2 million people with a median income of $60,500 and more than 61,000 businesses.
 
Competition
 
The Bank encounters strong competition in attracting both loan and deposit customers. Such competition includes banks, savings institutions, mortgage banking companies, credit unions, finance companies, mutual funds, insurance companies and brokerage and investment banking firms. The Bank’s market area includes branches of several commercial banks that are substantially larger in terms of loans and deposits. Furthermore, tax exempt credit unions operate in most of the Bank’s market area and aggressively price their products and services to a large portion of the market. The Corporation’s profitability depends upon the Bank’s continued ability to successfully maintain market share and mitigate credit losses.
 
Customer demand for real estate loans has decreased and the Bank’s income has been affected because alternative investments, such as securities, typically earn less income than real estate secured loans. Customer demand for loans secured by real estate has been reduced by a weak economy, an increase in unemployment and a decrease in real estate values.
 
The principal factors that are used to attract deposit accounts and that distinguish one financial institution from another include rates of return, quality of service to the depositors, types of accounts, service fees, convenience of office locations and hours, and other services. We offer a full array of deposit, savings and investment products to meet the needs of our consumer and business customers with features, high service levels, convenience and rates/fees structured to provide a competitive value proposition for our customers and prospective customers. In return, our customers have rewarded us with high levels of satisfaction and loyalty.
 
The primary factors in competing for loans are interest rates, loan fee charges, and timeliness and quality of service to the borrower. Similar to the market for deposit and investment products, we focus on offering the best overall value to our loan customers. During the 2010 fiscal year we originated $1.20 billion in single family “conforming” loans. While single family “conforming” loans are subsequently sold to investors, a key competitive difference is that AnchorBank retains servicing on our residential mortgages, thereby ensuring a high level of continuing customer service. AnchorBank currently has a servicing portfolio of approximately $3.60 billion.
 
Overall 97 percent of our customers report they are satisfied with AnchorBank, with 14 percent of them indicating that their satisfaction has increased over the past year according to a survey conducted in the past fiscal year. The average tenure of their patronage to our bank is 12 years.


2


Table of Contents

 
Key Business Strategies
 
To address the challenges of the current business environment in which we operate we have undertaken four key strategic initiatives to strengthen our operations, reduce risk and enhance the value of our franchise. These are:
 
1. Strengthening our management team
 
2. Increasing efficiency and improving core operations
 
3. Realigning our balance sheet
 
4. Enhancing our risk management and lending processes and aggressively addressing our classified loan portfolio
 
Strengthening our management team
 
We began a transformational process within our leadership ranks beginning with the appointment of Dave Omachinski as Lead Director of the Board in February 2009. This process accelerated significantly in June, 2009 when Mr. Omachinski was elected as Chairman of the Board, and with the appointment that same month of Chris Bauer as President and CEO of Anchor BanCorp Wisconsin and CEO of AnchorBank, fsb. Mr. Omachinski had served on the Board since 2002.
 
Previously, Mr.Omachinski served as President/Chief Operating Officer of Oshkosh B’Gosh Company. Following the sale of Oshkosh B’Gosh to Carter’s in 2005, Mr. Omachinski has had an active management consulting practice.
 
Mr. Bauer brings an extensive 33-year background in the banking sector, having previously served as Chairman and CEO of Firstar Bank Milwaukee, and head of commercial banking for Firstar Corporation, a $37-billion financial services company based in Milwaukee, at the time of his retirement in 1999. In 2000, Bauer founded First Business Bank Milwaukee and served as its Chairman of the Board until 2003. Under Mr. Bauer’s leadership, First Business Bank Milwaukee grew to more than $70 million in assets in only three years. Bauer was also recently elected Chairman of the Board of the American Automobile Association.
 
In August, 2009, Martha M. Hayes was added to our executive management team as Chief Credit Risk Officer, a new role at AnchorBank. The Chief Credit Risk Officer function was born out of the Bank’s commitment to reinforce our commercial loan process to provide for stricter controls and monitoring. Previously, Ms. Hayes was with Merrill Lynch Business Financial Services in Chicago, where she served as President and Managing Director. While there, she was recognized for leading the turnaround of a $250 million revenue line of business for the company. Prior to that role, she served in a variety of related capacities for Wachovia Corporation, including Senior Vice President and Director of Commercial Loan Products and Chief Operating Officer for Wachovia’s Risk Management Division, Business Credit Solutions. Ms. Hayes’ significant progress in this area was recognized by the Corporation’s Board with her promotion to Executive Vice President, Chief Risk Officer in June 2010.
 
Further enhancements in the Credit area were made in November, 2009 with the addition of Kurt Reindl as 1st Vice President — Credit Administration and Scott Ciano as 1st Vice President — Special Assets. Together Messrs. Reindl and Ciano bring more than 50 years of financial services, lending and workout experience to AnchorBank. Additionally in November, 2009, Ms. Patricia Carlin was added as 1st Vice President — Bank Operations in order to strengthen and gain efficiencies in our operations areas. Ms. Carlin brings 28 years of bank operations experience to AnchorBank.
 
Increasing efficiency and improving core operations
 
During fiscal 2010 we put substantial effort into improving our efficiency and operations. Historically, until our recent challenges with credit-related expenses, we have demonstrated sound operating efficiency levels. However, the dynamics of the current market mean we must focus on even more aggressive cost management and operational improvement efforts.
 
In March, 2009, Management undertook a comprehensive branch review which ultimately led to the decision to close three branches which had substantial geographic overlap with other branches. Branches closed were one


3


Table of Contents

each in Madison, Neenah and Oshkosh. In May, 2009, we made the strategic decision to exit the indirect auto lending business, which analysis showed was only marginally profitable and deemed non-core to our business strategy.
 
Focusing on developing operating efficiencies and re-engineering business processes has allowed the Corporation to reduce its compensation and benefits expenses from $14 million for the quarter ending September 2009 to $12 million for the quarters ending December 2009 and March 2010. Additional cost savings were generated by an all encompassing strategic business review completed in May, 2010. An approximately 13 percent reduction in core operating expenses is anticipated from this process, which reviewed staffing levels, vendor relationships and business processes. If fully implemented as planned, these efforts will lower core operating expenses (core operating expenses exclude non-recurring expenses and expenses that are temporarily elevated due to current economic conditions).
 
Realigning Our Balance Sheet
 
A core strategy to address our capital needs has been to reduce the size of our balance sheet, reduce our funding costs and shift our loan concentration in favor of a more balanced portfolio. Sales of portions of our loan portfolio, including our indirect auto loan portfolio, substantial portions of our student loan portfolio and sales of certain one-to-four family mortgage loans previously held for investment have generated a $158.2 million reduction in our assets during the fiscal year. Further balance sheet contraction of $291 million is anticipated in early fiscal 2011 as part of planned sales of branches in the Northwest region of the state and the Green Bay area, as discussed above. Overall the size of our loan portfolio has decreased by $952 million from a height of $4.39 billion as of March 31, 2008 to $3.44 billion as of March 31, 2010. At the same time, access to the secondary market for residential mortgage loans has allowed us to remain very active in the residential mortgage and refinancing markets without adding assets to our balance sheet.
 
As of March 31, 2010, commercial real estate loans made up more than 24 percent of the Bank’s total loan portfolio and land and construction loans made up nearly 10 percent. Our target is that by 2013 these two segments of the portfolio will be reduced to 16 percent and 6 percent, respectively. We see opportunities to increase Commercial &Industrial, Consumer and Residential Mortgage lending as portions of the targeted loan mix.
 
On the funding side of the balance sheet, we have worked to both maintain our liquidity through selective deposit promotions as well as to begin the process of shifting our funding mix in favor of lower cost core deposits and away from reliance on time deposits (Certificates of Deposit). This has led to an evolution of our CD pricing strategy to more closely align with the costs of competing sources of funds, such as the Federal Home Loan Bank and Federal Reserve, and to provide the Bank’s best rates only to those customers who provide the Bank with deeper, multi-product relationships, which in turn provide access to lower cost core deposits and the opportunity to generate fee income. New checking products and promotions have been developed to help drive core deposit relationships, and sales training and incentive programs have been shifted to focus on core deposit sales and cross selling.
 
Together with a favorable rate environment, these efforts have helped reduce our cost of funds from 2.94 percent at March 31, 2009, to 2.82 percent at March 31, 2010, a reduction of 12 basis points.
 
Enhancing our risk management and lending processes and aggressively addressing our existing classified loan portfolio
 
Under the leadership of Ms. Hayes, we have made significant progress in enhancing our risk management and lending process, as well as aggressively addressing our classified loan portfolio. These actions are aimed at addressing the need for an Enterprise Risk Management culture. Specific actions taken include the creation of a Special Assets Group to properly address and develop resolution plans with borrowers experiencing deteriorating financial condition. The commercial bank has been realigned to improve the overall risk management and align the resource around the risk in the portfolio. These changes include the establishment of a new independent underwriting group which evaluates the total borrowing relationship using a global cash flow methodology. Credit and collections groups have also been consolidated across lending areas to enhance efficiency, as well as provide a more consistent approach and comprehensive view of the Bank’s collections efforts. New metric and reporting have


4


Table of Contents

been introduced to more effectively manage the portfolio performance. A new loan risk rating system using qualitative metrics to identify loans with potential risk has been implemented along with a new enhanced impairment analysis to evaluate all classified loans.
 
Recent Developments
 
The following provides a summary of significant developments occurring after the end of fiscal year 2010 (March 31, 2010) but prior to the filing of this 10K report in late June 2010.
 
  •  March 31, 2010: Anchor Bancorp Wisconsin Inc. and Badger Anchor Holdings, LLC mutually terminated agreements entered into in December 2009 pursuant to which Badger Holdings would have made up to a $400 million investment in the Corporation, including a term loan in the aggregate principal amount of $110 million. The parties terminated the Agreements because several conditions to closing had not been met.
 
  •  April 2, 2010: the Corporation announced that we engaged Sandler O’Neill & Partners, L.P. as financial advisor to assist the Corporation in evaluating strategic alternatives. Sandler O’Neill is a preeminent investment banking firm serving financial institutions and was engaged as part of our comprehensive effort to raise additional capital, strengthen our balance sheet and improve our financial performance.
 
  •  May 3, 2010: the Corporation entered into Amendment No. 6 to the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of June 9, 2008, among the Corporation, U.S. Bank National Association, and its partner lenders. The Amendment provided, among other provisions, that the maturity date of the loan was extended to May 31, 2011 and that interest accruing is due on the earlier of (i) the date the Loans are paid in full or the maturity date.
 
  •  May 5, 2010: Douglas Timmerman announced his retirement from the Board of Directors of Anchor BanCorp Wisconsin Inc, effective May 5, 2010. Mr. Timmerman’s resignation was not due to any dispute or disagreement with the Corporation and/or its board or management. He had served on the Board of Directors since 1971.
 
  •  May 13, 2010: the Audit Committee Chair, as previously authorized by the Corporation’s board of directors, concluded based upon the recommendation of management and the findings of a recent internal financial review of the accounting for FDIC insurance premiums at its wholly-owned subsidiary, AnchorBank, fsb (the “Bank”), that the Corporation’s previously filed consolidated financial statements as of and for the three quarters ending June 30, 2009, September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2009, as reported in its Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, as well as the Corporation’s previously issued earnings release for each affected quarter, can no longer be relied upon and would be restated based on the adjusted additional accrued FDIC insurance premiums. As a result of the foregoing, the Corporation incurred an additional loss in the range of $1.2 million to $3.2 million for each quarter under restatement for a total loss of $6.6 million. The impact of the restatement had no effect on the Bank’s regulatory capital ratio classification for any affected quarters.
 
  •  May 14, 2010: the bank announced that it has entered into a definitive agreement for the sale of four AnchorBank branches in the Green Bay, Wisconsin, area to Nicolet National Bank (Nicolet) of Green Bay. The transaction is subject to regulatory approval and customary closing conditions and is expected to be completed in July 2010. Under the agreement, Nicolet will assume approximately $117 million in deposits along with loans, real estate, and other assets. The branches involved in the transaction are the Ashwaubenon Office located at 2363 Holmgren Way in Green Bay, the Howard office at 2380 Dousman Street in Green Bay and the De Pere offices at 1610 Lawrence Drive and 2082 Monroe Road.
 
  •  Also On May 14, 2010: Dale Ringgenberg announced his retirement as Chief Financial Officer of Anchor Bancorp Wisconsin Inc., effective August 31, 2010 after 34 years of service with the Corporation. Mr. Ringgenberg’s retirement was not due to any dispute or disagreement with the Corporation and/or its board or management. Management is currently conducting a national search for Mr. Ringgenberg’s replacement.
 
  •  May 26, 2010: Anchor Bancorp Wisconsin Inc. and the Corporation’s wholly-owned subsidiary bank, AnchorBank, fsb and Mark Timmerman agreed to terminate Mr. Timmerman’s employment agreements


5


Table of Contents

  with the Corporation and the Bank, effective May 26, 2010. Mr. Timmerman agreed to release and discharge the Bank and the Corporation from any and all obligations or liabilities under the Employment Agreements. Mr. Timmerman will continue to be employed in his present capacity as Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of the Corporation and as President and Chief Operating Officer of the Bank.
 
  •  During May an all encompassing strategic business review was completed. An approximately 13 percent reduction in core operating expenses is anticipated from this process, which reviewed staffing levels, vendor relationships and business processes. Approximately one-third of the savings resulted from staff reductions. If fully implemented as planned, these efforts will lower core operating expenses.
 
  •  June 1, 2010: Martha M. Hayes was promoted to the position of Executive Vice President — Chief Risk Officer, subject to regulatory approval as part of an ongoing effort to drive operational excellence while ensuring the highest standard of credit quality in every loan it makes, Hayes joined the Corporation in August 2009.
 
  •  June 2, 2010: Dan Nichols, Executive Vice President — Commercial Lending announces he is leaving AnchorBank, effective August 31, 2010 after 25 years of service with the Bank. Mr. Nichols’ resignation was not due to any dispute or disagreement with the Corporation and/or its board or management.
 
  •  June 2, 2010: The Corporation received notice from its regulator, the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) to address several compliance issues. Management expects the Board of Directors to voluntarily adopt the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on or before June 30, 2010.
 
  •  On June 14, 2010: the Bank, announced that it received the necessary regulatory approval for the sale of 11 AnchorBank branches to Royal Credit Union under an agreement previously reached in November, 2009. The sale and conversion was completed on June 25, 2010. The branches included in the sale are located in Amery, Balsam Lake, Centuria, Menomonie, Milltown, New Richmond, Osceola, River Falls, St. Croix Falls, Somerset, and Star Prairie. Under the terms of the agreement, AnchorBank sold approximately $169 million in deposits, real estate loans and other assets.
 
  •  On June 18, 2010: the Corporation received a letter from The Nasdaq Stock Market (“Nasdaq”) stating that it no longer complies with Nasdaq Marketplace Rule 5450(a)(1) because the bid price of the Corporation’s common stock closed below the required minimum $1.00 per share for the previous 30 consecutive business days (May 6, 2010 through June 17, 2010). The letter also indicated that, in accordance with Marketplace Rule 5810(c)(3)(A), the Corporation has a period of 180 calendar days, until December 15, 2010, to regain compliance with Rule 5450(a)(1). If at any time before December 15, 2010, the bid price of the Corporation’s common stock closes at $1.00 per share or more for a minimum of 10 consecutive business days, Nasdaq will notify the Corporation that it has regained compliance with Rule 5450(a)(1). In the event the Corporation does not regain compliance with Rule 5450(a)(1) prior to the expiration of the 180-day period, Nasdaq will notify the Corporation that its common stock is subject to delisting. The Corporation may appeal the delisting determination to a Nasdaq hearing panel. At such hearing, the Corporation would present a plan to regain compliance and Nasdaq would then subsequently render a decision. The Corporation is currently evaluating its alternatives to resolve the listing deficiency.
 
Business Overview
 
Lending Activities
 
General. At March 31, 2010, the Bank’s net loans held for investment totaled $3.23 billion, representing approximately 73.1% of its $4.42 billion of total assets at that date. Approximately $2.56 billion, or 74.6%, of the Bank’s total loans receivable at March 31, 2010 were secured by first liens on real estate.
 
The Bank originates single-family residential loans secured by properties located primarily in Wisconsin, with adjustable-rate loans generally being originated for inclusion in the Bank’s loan portfolio and fixed-rate loans generally being originated for sale into the secondary market. At this time, the Bank is not active in the origination of new commercial real estate, multi-family, construction, and commercial business loans. Consumer and education loans are still originated to our core retail banking customers.


6


Table of Contents

Non-real estate loans originated by the Bank consist of a variety of consumer loans and commercial business loans. At March 31, 2010, the Bank’s total loans receivable included $709.3 million, or 20.6%, of consumer loans and $164.3 million, or 4.8%, of commercial business loans.
 
Loan Portfolio Composition.  The following table presents information concerning the composition of the Bank’s consolidated loans held for investment at the dates indicated.
 
                                                 
    March 31,  
    2010     2009     2008  
          Percent
          Percent
          Percent
 
    Amount     of Total     Amount     of Total     Amount     of Total  
    (Dollars in Thousands)  
 
Mortgage loans:
                                               
Single-family residential
  $ 765,312       22.27 %   $ 843,482       20.52 %   $ 893,001       20.35 %
Multi-family residential
    614,930       17.89       662,483       16.12       694,423       15.82  
Commercial real estate
    842,905       24.53       1,020,981       24.84       1,088,004       24.79  
Construction
    108,486       3.16       267,375       6.51       402,395       9.17  
Land
    231,330       6.73       266,756       6.49       306,363       6.98  
                                                 
Total mortgage loans
    2,562,963       74.58       3,061,077       74.48       3,384,186       77.11  
                                                 
Consumer loans:
                                               
Second mortgage and home equity
    352,795       10.27       394,708       9.61       356,009       8.11  
Education
    331,475       9.64       358,784       8.73       275,850       6.29  
Other
    24,990       0.73       56,302       1.37       95,149       2.17  
                                                 
Total consumer loans
    709,260       20.64       809,794       19.71       727,008       16.57  
                                                 
Commercial business loans:
                                               
Loans
    164,329       4.78       238,940       5.81       277,312       6.32  
Lease receivables
          0.00             0.00             0.00  
                                                 
Total commercial business loans
    164,329       4.78       238,940       5.81       277,312       6.32  
                                                 
Total loans receivable
    3,436,552       100.00 %     4,109,811       100.00 %     4,388,506       100.00 %
                                                 
Contras to loans:
                                               
Undisbursed loan proceeds
    (23,334 )             (71,672 )             (141,219 )        
Allowance for loan losses
    (179,644 )             (137,165 )             (38,285 )        
Unearned net loan fees
    (3,898 )             (4,441 )             (6,075 )        
Net (discount) premium on loans purchased
    (8 )             (10 )             (11 )        
Unearned interest
    (88 )             (84 )             (83 )        
                                                 
Total contras to loans
    (206,972 )             (213,372 )             (185,673 )        
                                                 
Loans receivable, net
  $ 3,229,580             $ 3,896,439             $ 4,202,833          
                                                 
 


7


Table of Contents

                                 
    March 31,  
    2007     2006  
          Percent
          Percent
 
    Amount     of Total     Amount     of Total  
          (Dollars in Thousands)        
 
Mortgage loans:
                               
Single-family residential
  $ 843,677       20.76 %   $ 785,444       20.51 %
Multi-family residential
    654,567       16.11       626,029       16.35  
Commercial real estate
    1,020,325       25.10       974,123       25.43  
Construction
    460,746       11.33       457,493       11.94  
Land
    214,703       5.28       159,855       4.17  
                                 
Total mortgage loans
    3,194,018       78.58       3,002,944       78.40  
                                 
Consumer loans:
                               
Second mortgage and home equity
    351,739       8.65       342,829       8.95  
Education
    223,707       5.50       213,628       5.58  
Other
    60,413       1.49       65,858       1.72  
                                 
Total consumer loans
    635,859       15.64       622,315       16.25  
                                 
Commercial business loans:
                               
Loans
    234,791       5.78       205,019       5.35  
Lease receivables
    1       0.00       1       0.00  
                                 
Total commercial business loans
    234,792       5.78       205,020       5.35  
                                 
Gross loans receivable
    4,064,669       100.00 %     3,830,279       100.00 %
                                 
Contras to loans:
                               
Undisbursed loan proceeds
    (163,505 )             (193,755 )        
Allowance for loan losses
    (20,517 )             (15,570 )        
Unearned net loan fees
    (6,541 )             (7,469 )        
Net premium on loans purchased
    (15 )             795          
Unearned interest
    (42 )             (15 )        
                                 
Total contras to loans
    (190,620 )             (216,014 )        
                                 
Loans receivable, net
  $ 3,874,049             $ 3,614,265          
                                 

8


Table of Contents

The following table shows, at March 31, 2010, the scheduled contractual maturities of the Bank’s consolidated gross loans held for investment, as well as the dollar amount of such loans which are scheduled to mature after one year which have fixed or adjustable interest rates.
 
                                         
          Multi-Family
                   
          Residential,
                   
          Commercial
                   
          Real Estate,
                   
    Single-Family
    Construction
          Commercial
       
    Residential
    and Land
    Consumer
    Business
       
    Loans     Loans     Loans     Loans     Total  
    (In thousands)  
 
Amounts due:
                                       
In one year or less
  $ 43,362     $ 855,311     $ 57,491     $ 92,118     $ 1,048,282  
After one year through five years
    47,046       648,478       172,566       54,168       922,258  
After five years
    674,904       293,862       479,203       18,043       1,466,012  
                                         
    $ 765,312     $ 1,797,651     $ 709,260     $ 164,329     $ 3,436,552  
                                         
Interest rate terms on amounts due:
                                       
Fixed
  $ 244,552     $ 1,139,904     $ 424,536     $ 122,398     $ 1,931,390  
                                         
Adjustable
  $ 520,760     $ 657,747     $ 284,724     $ 41,931     $ 1,505,162  
                                         
 
Single-Family Residential Loans.  At March 31, 2010, $765.3 million, or 22.3%, of the Bank’s total loans receivable consisted of single-family residential loans, substantially all of which are conventional loans, which are neither insured nor guaranteed by a federal or state agency. Single-family residential loans have increased as a percentage of the Bank’s total loans receivable from 20.5% at March 31, 2006 to 22.3% at March 31, 2010.
 
The adjustable-rate loans currently emphasized by the Bank have up to 30-year maturities and terms which permit the Bank to annually increase or decrease the rate on the loans, based on a designated index. This is generally subject to a limit of 2% per adjustment and an aggregate 6% adjustment over the life of the loan. The Bank makes a limited number of interest-only loans and does not make payment option loans, pursuant to which a consumer may select a payment option which can result in negative amortization on the loan.
 
Adjustable-rate loans decrease the risks associated with changes in interest rates but involve other risks, primarily because as interest rates rise, the payment by the borrower rises to the extent permitted by the terms of the loan, thereby increasing the potential for default. At the same time, the marketability of the underlying property may be adversely affected by higher interest rates. The Bank believes that these risks, which have not had a material adverse effect on the Bank to date, generally are less than the risks associated with holding fixed-rate loans in an increasing interest rate environment. At March 31, 2010, approximately $520.8 million, or 68.0%, of the Bank’s permanent single-family residential loans receivable consisted of loans with adjustable interest rates. Also, as interest rates decline, borrowers may refinance their mortgages into fixed-rate loans thereby prepaying the balance of the loan prior to maturity.
 
The Bank continues to originate long-term, fixed-rate conventional mortgage loans. The Bank generally sells current production of these loans with terms of 15 years or more to the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“FHLMC”), Federal National Mortgage Association (“FNMA”) and other institutional investors, while keeping some of the 10-year term loans in its portfolio. In order to provide a full range of products to its customers, the Bank also participates in the loan origination programs of Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority (“WHEDA”), and Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs (“WDVA”). The Bank retains the right to service substantially all loans that it sells.
 
At March 31, 2010, approximately $244.6 million, or 32.0%, of the Bank’s permanent single-family residential loans receivable consisted of loans that provide for fixed rates of interest. Although these loans generally provide for repayments of principal over a fixed period of 10 to 30 years, it is the Bank’s experience that, because of prepayments and due-on-sale clauses, such loans generally remain outstanding for a substantially shorter period of time.


9


Table of Contents

Multi-Family Residential and Commercial Real Estate.  The Bank originates multi-family residential and commercial real estate loans that it typically holds in its loan portfolio. Such loans generally have adjustable rates and shorter terms than single-family residential loans, thus increasing the sensitivity of the loan portfolio to changes in interest rates, as well as providing higher fees and rates than single-family residential loans. At March 31, 2010, the Bank had $614.9 million of loans secured by multi-family residential real estate and $842.9 million of loans secured by commercial real estate, which represented 17.9% and 24.5% of the Bank’s total loans receivable, respectively. The Bank generally limits the origination of such loans to its primary market area.
 
The Bank’s multi-family residential loans are primarily secured by apartment buildings and commercial real estate loans are primarily secured by office buildings, industrial buildings, warehouses, small retail shopping centers and various special purpose properties, including hotels, restaurants and nursing homes.
 
Although terms vary, multi-family residential and commercial real estate loans generally have maturities of 15 to 20 years, as well as balloon payments, and terms which provide that the interest rates thereon may be adjusted annually at the Bank’s discretion, based on a designated index, subject to an initial fixed-rate for a one to five year period and an annual limit generally of 1.5% per adjustment, with no limit on the amount of such adjustments over the life of the loan.
 
Construction and Land Loans.  The Bank, in the past years, has been an originator of loans to construct residential and commercial properties (“construction loans”) and loans to acquire and develop real estate for the construction of such properties (“land loans”). At March 31, 2010, construction loans amounted to $108.5 million, or 3.2%, of the Bank’s total loans receivable. Land loans amounted to $231.3 million, or 6.7%, of the Bank’s total loans receivable at March 31, 2010.
 
The Bank’s construction loans generally have terms of six to 12 months, fixed interest rates and fees which are due at the time of origination and at maturity if the Bank does not originate the permanent financing on the constructed property. Loan proceeds are disbursed in increments as construction progresses and as inspections by the Bank’s in-house Construction Administrator and outside construction inspectors warrant. Typically, a component of the loan amount has been a reserve to cover interest payments during the construction phase. Land acquisition and development loans generally have the same terms as construction loans, but may have longer maturities than such loans. At this time, the Bank is not active and has currently suspended activity in this market segment.
 
Consumer Loans.  The Bank offers consumer loans in order to provide a full range of financial services to its customers. At March 31, 2010, $709.3 million, or 20.6%, of the Bank’s consolidated total loans receivable consisted of consumer loans. Consumer loans generally have shorter terms and higher interest rates than mortgage loans but generally involve more risk than mortgage loans because of the type and nature of the collateral and, in certain cases, the absence of collateral.
 
The largest component of the Bank’s consumer loan portfolio is second mortgage and home equity loans, which amounted to $352.8 million, or 10.3%, of total loans receivable at March 31, 2010. The primary home equity loan product has an adjustable interest rate that is linked to the prime interest rate and is secured by a mortgage, either a primary or a junior lien, on the borrower’s residence. Advances do not exceed 85% of assessed or appraised value as of the loan origination date. A fixed-rate home equity product is also offered.
 
Approximately $331.5 million, or 9.6%, of the Bank’s total loans receivable at March 31, 2010 consisted of education loans. These are generally made for a maximum of $3,500 per year for undergraduate studies and $8,500 per year for graduate studies and are placed in repayment on an installment basis within six months of graduation. Education loans generally have interest rates that adjust annually in accordance with a designated index. Both the principal amount of an education loan and interest thereon generally are guaranteed by the Great Lakes Higher Education Corporation, which generally obtains reinsurance of its obligations from the U.S. Department of Education. Education loans may be sold to the U.S. Department of Education or to other investors. The Bank received $84.8 million from the sale of these education loans during fiscal 2010.
 
The remainder of the Bank’s consumer loan portfolio consists of vehicle loans and other secured and unsecured loans that have been made for a variety of consumer purposes. These include credit extended through credit cards issued by the Bank pursuant to an agency arrangement under which the Bank participates in outstanding balances,


10


Table of Contents

currently at 28%, with a third party, ELAN Financial Services. The Bank also shares 33% of annual fees paid to ELAN and 30% of late payment, over limit and cash advance fees paid to ELAN as well as 25% to 30% of interchange income paid to ELAN.
 
At March 31, 2010, the Bank’s approved credit card lines amounted to $46.2 million. The total outstanding amount at March 31, 2010 is $8.8 million.
 
Commercial Business Loans and Leases.  The Bank originates loans for commercial, corporate and business purposes, including issuing letters of credit. At March 31, 2010, commercial business loans amounted to $164.3 million, or 4.8%, of the Bank’s total loans receivable. The Bank’s commercial business loan portfolio is comprised of loans for a variety of purposes and generally is secured by equipment, machinery and other business assets. Commercial business loans generally have terms of five years or less and interest rates that float in accordance with a designated published index. Substantially all of such loans are secured and backed by the personal guarantees of the owners of the business.
 
Net Fee Income From Lending Activities.  Loan origination and commitment fees and certain direct loan origination costs are being deferred and the net amounts are amortized as an adjustment to the related loan’s yield.
 
The Bank also receives other fees and charges relating to existing mortgage loans, which include prepayment penalties, late charges and fees collected in connection with a change in borrower or other loan modifications. Other types of loans also generate fee income for the Bank. These include annual fees assessed on credit card accounts, transactional fees relating to credit card usage and late charges on consumer loans.
 
Origination, Purchase and Sale of Loans.  The Bank’s loan originations come from a number of sources. Residential mortgage loan originations are attributable primarily to depositors, walk-in customers, the Company’s website, referrals from real estate brokers, builders and direct solicitations. Commercial real estate loan originations are obtained by direct solicitations and referrals. Consumer loans are originated from walk-in customers, existing depositors and mortgagors and direct solicitation. Student loans are originated from direct marketing of current customers with college students and college lender lists.
 
Applications for all types of loans are obtained at the Bank’s seven regional lending offices, certain of its branch offices and two loan origination facilities. Loans may be approved by members of the Senior Loan Committee, within designated limits. Depending on the type and amount of the loans, four signatures of the members of the Senior Loan Committee also may be required. For loan requests of $1.5 million or less, loan approval authority is designated to a Concurrence Authority Credit Officer to sign within their authority. Senior Loan Committee members are authorized to approve loan requests between $1.5 million and $4.0 million and approval requires at least three of the members’ signatures. Loan requests in excess of $4.0 million must be approved by the Board of Directors.
 
The Bank’s general policy is to lend up to 80% of the appraised value or purchase price of the property, whichever is less, securing a single-family residential loan (referred to as the loan-to-value ratio). The Bank will lend more than 80% of the appraised value of the property, but will require that the borrower obtain when possible, private mortgage insurance in an amount intended to reduce the Bank’s exposure to 80% or less of the appraised value of the underlying property. At March 31, 2010, the Bank had approximately $2.6 million of loans that had loan-to-value ratios of greater than 80% and did not have private mortgage insurance for the portion of the loans above such amount.
 
Property appraisals on the real estate and improvements securing the Bank’s single-family residential loans are made by the Bank’s staff or independent appraisers approved by the Bank’s Board of Directors during the underwriting process. Appraisals are performed in accordance with federal regulations and policies.
 
The Bank’s underwriting criteria generally require that multi-family residential and commercial real estate loans have loan-to-value ratios which amount to 80% or less and debt coverage ratios of at least 110%. The Bank also generally obtains personal guarantees on its multi-family residential and commercial real estate loans from the principals of the borrowers, as well as appraisals of the collateral from independent appraisal firms.
 
The portfolio of commercial real estate, multi-family residential and commercial business loans is reviewed on a continuing basis to identify any potential risks that exist in regard to the property management, financial criteria of


11


Table of Contents

the loan, operating performance, competitive marketplace and collateral valuation. The credit analysis function of the Bank is responsible for identifying and reporting credit risk quantified through a loan rating system and making recommendations to mitigate credit risk in the portfolio. These and other underwriting standards are documented in written policy statements, which are periodically updated and approved by the Bank’s Board of Directors.
 
The Bank encounters certain environmental risks in its lending activities. Under federal and state environmental laws, lenders may become liable for costs of cleaning up hazardous materials found on secured properties. Certain states may also impose liens with higher priorities than first mortgages on properties to recover funds used in such efforts. Although the foregoing environmental risks are more usually associated with industrial and commercial loans, environmental risks may be substantial for residential lenders, like the Bank, since environmental contamination may render the secured property unsuitable for residential use. In addition, the value of residential properties may become substantially diminished by contamination of nearby properties. In accordance with the guidelines of FNMA and FHLMC, appraisals for single-family homes on which the Bank lends include comments on environmental influences and conditions. The Bank attempts to control its exposure to environmental risks with respect to loans secured by larger properties by monitoring available information on hazardous waste disposal sites and requiring environmental inspections of such properties prior to closing the loan. No assurance can be given, however, that the value of properties securing loans in the Bank’s portfolio will not be adversely affected by the presence of hazardous materials or that future changes in federal or state laws will not increase the Bank’s exposure to liability for environmental cleanup.
 
The Bank has been actively involved in the secondary market since the mid-1980s and generally originates single-family residential loans under terms, conditions and documentation which permit sale to FHLMC, FNMA, and other investors in the secondary market. The Bank sells substantially all of the fixed-rate, single-family residential loans with terms over 15 years it originates in order to decrease the amount of such loans in its loan portfolio. The volume of loans originated and sold is dependent on a number of factors, but is most influenced by general interest rates. In periods of lower interest rates, demand for fixed-rate mortgages increases. In periods of higher interest rates, customer demand for fixed-rate mortgages declines. The Bank’s sales are usually made through forward sales commitments. The Bank attempts to limit any interest rate risk created by forward commitments by limiting the number of days between the commitment and closing, charging fees for commitments, and limiting the amounts of its uncovered commitments at any one time. Forward commitments to cover closed loans and loans with rate locks to customers range from 70% to 100% of committed amounts. The Bank also periodically has used its loans to securitize mortgage-backed securities.
 
The Bank generally services all originated loans that have been sold to other investors. This includes the collection of payments, the inspection of the secured property, and the disbursement of certain insurance and tax advances on behalf of borrowers. The Bank recognizes a servicing fee when the related loan payments are received. At March 31, 2010, the Bank was servicing $3.60 billion of loans for others.
 
The Bank is not an active purchaser of loans because of sufficient loan demand in its market area. Servicing of loans or loan participations purchased by the Bank is performed by the seller, with a portion of the interest being paid by the borrower retained by the seller to cover servicing costs. At March 31, 2010, approximately $14.1 million of mortgage loans were being serviced for the Bank by others.


12


Table of Contents

The following table shows the Bank’s consolidated total loans originated, purchased, sold and repaid during the periods indicated.
 
                         
    Year Ended March 31,  
    2010     2009     2008  
    (In thousands)  
 
Gross loans receivable at beginning of year(1)
  $ 4,271,775     $ 4,398,175     $ 4,069,143  
Loans originated for investment:
                       
Single-family residential(2)
    184,354       126,585       209,924  
Multi-family residential
    44,109       71,881       109,320  
Commercial real estate
    89,869       226,848       244,694  
Construction and land
    81,799       138,260       367,573  
Consumer
    212,460       172,628       156,983  
Commercial business
    18,512       43,775       103,260  
                         
Total originations
    631,103       779,977       1,191,754  
                         
Repayments
    (1,255,484 )     (1,058,672 )     (867,917 )
Transfers of loans to held for sale
    (48,878 )            
                         
Net activity in loans held for investment
    (673,259 )     (278,695 )     323,837  
                         
Loans originated for sale:
                       
Single-family residential
    887,466       1,005,355       530,260  
Multi-family residential
          20,296       23,537  
Commercial
          3,999       107,044  
Transfers of loans from held for investment
    48,878              
Sales of loans
    (1,029,946 )     (877,355 )     (655,646 )
Loans converted into mortgage-backed securities
    (48,878 )            
                         
Net activity in loans held for sale
    (142,480 )     152,295       5,195  
                         
Gross loans receivable at end of period
  $ 3,456,036     $ 4,271,775     $ 4,398,175  
                         
 
 
(1) Includes loans held for sale and loans held for investment.
 
(2) Includes single-family residential loans originated on an agency basis through the Mortgage Partnership Finance 100 Program of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago.
 
Delinquency Procedures.  Delinquent and problem loans are a normal part of any lending business. When a borrower fails to make a required payment by the 15th day after which the payment is due, the loan is considered delinquent and internal collection procedures are instituted. The borrower is contacted to determine the reason for the delinquency and attempts are made to cure the loan. The Bank regularly reviews the loan status, the condition of the property, and circumstances of the borrower. Based upon the results of its review, the Bank may negotiate and accept a repayment program with the borrower, accept a voluntary deed in lieu of foreclosure or initiate foreclosure proceedings.
 
A decision as to whether and when to initiate foreclosure proceedings is based upon such factors as the amount of the outstanding loan in relation to the original indebtedness, the extent of delinquency, the value of the collateral, and the borrower’s financial ability and willingness to cooperate in curing the deficiencies. If foreclosed on, the property is sold at a public sale and the Bank will generally bid an amount reasonably equivalent to the lower of the fair value of the foreclosed property or the amount of judgment due the Bank.
 
Real estate acquired as a result of foreclosure or by deed in lieu of foreclosure is classified as foreclosed property until it is sold. When property is acquired, it is recorded at the estimated fair value less cost to sell at the


13


Table of Contents

date of acquisition, with charge-offs, if any, charged to the allowance for loan losses prior to transfer to foreclosed property. Upon acquisition, all costs incurred in maintaining the property are expensed.
 
For discussion of the Corporation’s asset quality, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Financial Condition — Non-Performing Assets” in Item 7. See also Notes 1 and 5 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8.
 
Investment Securities
 
In addition to lending activities, the Corporation conducts other investment activities on an ongoing basis in order to diversify assets, limit interest rate risk and credit risk and meet regulatory liquidity requirements. The Corporation invests in mortgage-related securities which are insured or guaranteed by FHLMC, FNMA, or the Government National Mortgage Association (“GNMA”) backed by FHLMC, FNMA and GNMA mortgage-backed securities and also invests in non-agency collateralized mortgage obligations (“CMOs”). Investment decisions are made by authorized officers in accordance with policies established by the board of directors.
 
Management determines the appropriate classification of securities at the time of purchase. Debt securities are classified as held-to-maturity when the Corporation has the intent and ability to hold the securities to maturity. Held-to-maturity securities are carried at amortized cost. Securities are classified as trading when the Corporation intends to actively buy and sell securities in order to make a profit. Trading securities are carried at fair value, with unrealized holding gains and losses included in earnings.
 
At March 31, 2010, the amortized cost of the Corporation’s investment securities held to maturity amounted to $39,000, all of which are 30-year securities. There were no five- and seven-year balloon securities. All of the held to maturity investment securities are insured or guaranteed by FNMA and are adjustable-rate securities.
 
Securities not classified as held-to-maturity or trading are classified as available-for-sale. Available-for-sale securities are carried at fair value, with the unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, reported as a separate component of stockholders’ equity. For the years ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, stockholders’ equity increased $938,000 (net of deferred income tax receivable) and decreased $8.2 million (net of deferred income tax receivable), respectively, to reflect net unrealized gains and losses on holding securities classified as available-for-sale. There were no securities designated as trading during the three years ended March 31, 2010.
 
The Corporation’s policy does not permit investment in non-investment grade bonds and permits investment in various types of liquid assets permissible for the Bank under OTS regulations, which include U.S. Government obligations, municipal bonds, securities of various federal agencies, certain certificates of deposit of insured banks and savings institutions, certain bankers’ acceptances, repurchase agreements and federal funds. Although the Corporation does not purchase non-investment grade securities, it does own $28.3 million, or 6.8% of the total investment security portfolio, of non-investment grade securities as a result of ratings downgrades. Subject to limitations on investment grade securities, the Corporation also invests in corporate stock and debt securities from time to time.
 
Agency-backed securities increase the quality of the Corporation’s assets by virtue of the insurance or guarantees of federal agencies that back them, require less capital under risk-based regulatory capital requirements than non-insured or guaranteed mortgage loans, are more liquid than individual mortgage loans and may be used to collateralize borrowings or other obligations of the Corporation. At March 31, 2010, securities with a fair value of $317.7 million held by the Corporation are either AAA rated or are guaranteed by the government. At March 31, 2010, $301.2 million of the Corporation’s securities available-for-sale were pledged to secure various obligations of the Corporation. The Corporation had no securities held-to-maturity that were pledged to secure obligations of the Corporation at March 31, 2010.


14


Table of Contents

The table below sets forth information regarding the amortized cost and fair values of the Corporation’s investment securities at the dates indicated.
 
                                 
    March 31,  
    2010     2009  
    Amortized
          Amortized
       
    Cost     Fair Value     Cost     Fair Value  
          (In thousands)        
 
Available-for-sale:
                               
U.S. government and federal agency obligations
  $ 51,029     $ 51,031     $ 48,471     $ 48,919  
Municipal bonds
                21,768       22,233  
Mutual fund
                1,797       1,797  
Corporate stock and other
    1,176       1,198       4,806       4,735  
Agency CMOs and REMICs
    1,393       1,413       142,692       143,995  
Non-agency CMOs
    91,140       85,367       119,473       107,527  
Residential mortgage-backed securities
    14,907       15,440       97,562       100,754  
GNMA securities
    261,957       261,754       54,753       55,025  
                                 
      421,602       416,203       491,322       484,985  
Held-to-maturity:
                               
Residential mortgage-backed securities
    39       40       50       50  
                                 
      39       40       50       50  
                                 
Total investment securities
  $ 421,641     $ 416,243     $ 491,372     $ 485,035  
                                 
 
The Corporation’s mortgage-derivative securities are made up of CMOs, including CMOs which qualify as Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduits (“REMICs”) under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (“Code”). At March 31, 2010, the Corporation had no mortgage-derivative securities held to maturity. The fair value of the mortgage-derivative securities available for sale held by the Corporation amounted to $327.3 million at the same date.
 
The following table sets forth the maturity and weighted average yield characteristics of the Corporation’s mortgage-related securities at March 31, 2010, classified by term to maturity. The balance is at amortized cost for held-to-maturity securities and at fair value for available-for-sale securities.
 
                                                         
    Less than Five Years     Five to Ten Years     Over Ten Years        
          Weighted
          Weighted
          Weighted
       
          Average
          Average
          Average
       
    Balance     Yield     Balance     Yield     Balance     Yield     Total  
    (Dollars in thousands)  
 
Available-for-sale:
                                                       
U.S. Government and federal agency obligations
  $ 46,000       0.23 %               $ 5,031       5.53 %   $ 51,031  
Corporate stock and other
    25       7.20                   1,173       8.66       1,198  
Agency CMOs and REMICs
                796       4.46       617       4.08       1,413  
Non-agency CMOs
    2,045       4.76       20,936       5.52       62,386       7.16       85,367  
Residential mortgage-backed Securities
    1,587       4.24       7,423       5.28       6,430       3.80       15,440  
GNMA Securities
                794       4.88       260,960       2.89       261,754  
                                                         
      49,657       0.34       29,949       5.42       336,597       7.46       416,203  
                                                         
Held-to-maturity:
                                                       
Residential mortgage-backed Securities
                39       3.90                   39  
                                                         
                  39       3.90                   39  
                                                         
Total investment securities
  $ 46,657       0.34 %   $ 29,988       5.42 %   $ 336,597       7.46 %   $ 416,242  
                                                         


15


Table of Contents

Due to repayments of the underlying loans, the actual maturities of mortgage-related securities are expected to be substantially sooner than the scheduled maturities.
 
For additional information regarding the Corporation’s investment securities, see the Corporation’s Consolidated Financial Statements, including Note 4 thereto included in Item 8.
 
Sources of Funds
 
General.  Deposits are a major source of the Bank’s funds for lending and other investment activities. In addition to deposits, the Bank derives funds from principal repayments and prepayments on loan and mortgage-related securities, maturities of investment securities, sales of loans and securities, interest payments on loans and securities, advances from the FHLB and, from time to time, repurchase agreements and other borrowings. Loan repayments and interest payments are a relatively stable source of funds, while deposit inflows and outflows and loan prepayments are significantly influenced by general interest rates, economic conditions and competition. Borrowings may be used on a short-term basis to compensate for reductions in the availability of funds from other sources. They also may be used on a longer term basis for general business purposes, including providing financing for lending and other investment activities and asset/liability management strategies.
 
Deposits.  The Bank’s deposit products include passbook savings accounts, demand accounts, interest bearing checking accounts, money market deposit accounts and certificates of deposit ranging in terms of 42 days to seven years. Included among these deposit products are Individual Retirement Account certificates and Keogh retirement certificates, as well as negotiable-rate certificates of deposit with balances of $100,000 or more (“jumbo certificates”).
 
The Bank’s deposits are obtained primarily from residents of Wisconsin. The Bank has entered into agreements with certain brokers that provide funds for a specified fee. While brokered deposits are a good source of funds, they are interest rate driven and thus inherently have more liquidity and interest rate risk. To mitigate this risk, the Bank’s liquidity policy limits the amount of brokered deposits to 10% of assets and to the total amount of borrowings. At March 31, 2010, the Bank had $173.5 million in brokered deposits, which accounted for 4.9% of its $3.55 billion of total deposits and accrued interest. At March 31, 2010, the Bank is precluded from obtaining new or renewing existing brokered deposits because the Bank is undercapitalized.
 
The Bank attracts deposits through a network of convenient office locations by utilizing a detailed customer sales and service plan and by offering a wide variety of accounts and services, competitive interest rates and convenient customer hours. Deposit terms offered by the Bank vary according to the minimum balance required, the time period the funds must remain on deposit and the interest rate, among other factors. In determining the characteristics of its deposit accounts, consideration is given to the profitability of the Bank, matching terms of the deposits with loan products, the attractiveness to customers and the rates offered by the Bank’s competitors.
 
The following table sets forth the amount and maturities of the Bank’s certificates of deposit at March 31, 2010.
 
                                                 
          Over Six
    Over
    Over Two
             
          Months
    One Year
    Years
    Over
       
    Six Months
    Through
    Through
    Through
    Three
       
Interest Rate
  and Less     One Year     Two Years     Three Years     Years     Total  
    (In thousands)  
 
0.00% to 2.99%
  $ 856,967     $ 409,865     $ 187,899     $ 6,621     $ 6,954     $ 1,468,306  
3.00% to 4.99%
    178,413       475,260       154,529       36,685       31,792       876,679  
5.00% to 6.99%
    819       276       2,911       571       2       4,579  
S&C PVA(1)
    8       6       5       1             20  
                                                 
    $ 1,036,207     $ 885,407     $ 345,344     $ 43,878     $ 38,748     $ 2,349,584  
                                                 
          
                                               
 
 
(1) Stemming from the Bank’s acquisition of S&C Bank on January 2, 2008, a purchase value adjustment was made to the market values of certificates of deposit and core deposit accounts. The market value of certificate of deposit accounts was determined by discounting cash flows using current deposit rates for the remaining


16


Table of Contents

contractual maturity. The market value of the core deposit intangible in the amount of $5.5 million (checking, money market and passbook accounts) was determined using discounted cash flows with estimated decay rates and is not included in the above table.
 
At March 31, 2010, the Bank had $483.8 million of certificates greater than or equal to $100,000, of which $157.6 million are scheduled to mature in seven through twelve months and $63.7 million in over twelve months.
 
Borrowings.  From time to time the Bank obtains advances from the FHLB, which generally are secured by capital stock of the FHLB that certain of the Bank’s mortgage loans and investment securities. See “Regulation.” Such advances are made pursuant to several different credit programs, each of which has its own interest rate and range of maturities. The FHLB may prescribe the acceptable uses for these advances, as well as limitations on the size of the advances and repayment provisions.
 
From time to time the Bank enters into repurchase agreements with nationally recognized primary securities dealers. Repurchase agreements are accounted for as borrowings by the Bank and are secured by mortgage-backed securities. The Bank did not utilize this source of funds during the year ended March 31, 2010, but may do so in the future.
 
The Corporation used a short-term line of credit used in part to fund IDI’s partnership interests and investments in real estate held for development and sale. This line of credit also funded other Corporation needs. The final maturity of the line of credit was extended to May 2011. At March 31, 2010 and 2009, the Corporation had drawn $116.3 million under this line of credit, respectively. The Corporation does not have credit remaining on this line of credit. See Note 11 to the Corporation’s Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 for more information on borrowings.
 
The following table sets forth the outstanding balances and weighted average interest rates for the Corporation’s borrowings at the dates indicated.
 
                                                 
    March 31,
    2010   2009   2008
        Weighted
      Weighted
      Weighted
        Average
      Average
      Average
    Balance   Rate   Balance   Rate   Balance   Rate
    (Dollars in thousands)
 
FHLB advances
  $ 613,429       3.08 %   $ 887,329       3.41 %   $ 1,059,850       3.63 %
Other borrowed funds
    182,724       8.71       191,063       8.00       146,887       4.37  
 
The following table sets forth information relating to the Corporation’s short-term (original maturities of one year or less) borrowings at the dates and for the periods indicated.
 
                         
    March 31,
    2010   2009   2008
    (In thousands)
 
Maximum month-end balance:
                       
FHLB advances
  $     $ 210,500     $ 665,300  
Other borrowed funds
    116,300       118,465       118,465  
Average balance:
                       
FHLB advances
          100,217       434,446  
Other borrowed funds
    116,300       116,678       72,853  
 
Subsidiaries
 
Investment Directions, Inc.  IDI is a wholly-owned non-banking subsidiary of the Corporation that has invested in various limited partnerships (see Davsha and Oakmont partnerships below) and subsidiaries funded by borrowings from the Corporation. Because the Corporation has made substantially all of the initial capital investment in these partnerships and as a result bears substantially all the risks of ownership of these partnerships, such partnerships have been deemed variable interest entities (“VIE’s”) subject to the consolidation requirements of ASC 810-10-15. The application of ASC-810-10-15 results in the consolidation of assets, liabilities, income and expense of the partnerships into the Corporation’s financial statements. The portion of ownership and income that


17


Table of Contents

belongs to the other partner is reflected as noncontrolling interest so there is no effect on net income or shareholders’ equity. See Note 1 — Variable Interest Entities to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 for a detailed discussion of the financial statement effects of ASC-810-10-15. During the year ended March 31, 2010, IDI sold for $11.5 million its interest in Davsha, LLC and its related interest in the limited partnerships as well as the golf course and resort at Indian Palms, which included some developed lots.
 
The following table sets forth certain selected parent-only financial data of IDI at and for the years ended March 31, 2010 and 2009.
 
                 
    At or for the Year Ended March 31
    2010   2009
    (In thousands)
 
Cash and other assets
  $ 1,394     $ 3,248  
Loans receivable, net
    1,554       2,132  
Investments in consolidated partnerships and corporations:
               
California Investment Directions
          (640 )
Nevada Investment Directions
          (619 )
Indian Palms
          5,739  
Davsha
          (3,776 )
Other assets
    2,997       2,547  
Total assets
    5,945       8,631  
Borrowings from the Corporation
    4,600       20,442  
Other liabilities
    24        
Shareholder’s equity
    1,321       (11,811 )
Net interest income (expense)
    59       (177 )
Investment income (loss):
               
California Investment Directions
    765       (1,756 )
Nevada Investment Directions
          875  
Indian Palms
    10,449       (6,143 )
Davsha
    2,059       (6,983 )
Oakmont
          74  
Impairment on investments
    (1,000 )     (5,500 )
Other income (loss)
    (706 )     457  
Operating expenses
    (14,958 )     (772 )
Income tax benefit
    488       1,488  
Net loss
    (2,844 )     (18,437 )
 
California Investment Directions, Inc.  CIDI was a wholly owned non-banking subsidiary of IDI formed in April 2000 to purchase and hold the general partnership interest in S&D Indian Palms, Ltd. and a minority interest in Davsha, LLC. CIDI was organized in the state of California. Davsha and its subsidiaries invested in VIE’s which were subject to consolidation pursuant to ASC 810-10-15. CIDI was dissolved during the year ended March 31, 2010 because its entire interest in the limited partnerships was eliminated.
 
Nevada Investment Directions, Inc.  NIDI was a wholly owned non-banking subsidiary of IDI formed in March 1997 that had invested in a limited partnership, Oakmont, as a 94.12% owner (IDI being the other 5.88% owner). NIDI was organized in the state of Nevada. Oakmont invested in a VIE, Chandler Creek Business Park of Round Rock, Texas. This interest was eliminated in March 2009.
 
S&D Indian Palms, Ltd.  Indian Palms was a wholly owned non-banking subsidiary of IDI organized in the state of California which owned a golf resort and land for residential lot development in California. Indian Palms sold land to Davsha, LLC, which in turn sold land to its subsidiaries and subsequently to its real estate partnerships for lot development.


18


Table of Contents

Davsha, LLC.  Davsha was a wholly owned non-banking subsidiary of IDI (80% owned) and CIDI (20% owned). Davsha was organized in the state of California, where it purchased land from Indian Palms and developed residential housing for sale. Davsha had three wholly owned non-banking subsidiaries, Davsha III, Davsha V and Davsha VII. Each of these subsidiaries formed partnerships with developers and purchased lots from Davsha.
 
Oakmont.  Oakmont became a wholly owned non-banking subsidiary of NIDI and IDI in January 2000 with NIDI having a 94.12% partnership interest and IDI having a 5.88% partnership interest. Oakmont was organized in the state of Texas. Oakmont was a limited partner in Chandler Creek Business Park of Round Rock, Texas, a joint venture partnership formed to develop an industrial park located in Round Rock, Texas. The original project consisted of four office warehouse buildings totaling 163,000 square feet and vacant land of approximately 135 acres. Oakmont sold its interest in Chandler Creek in March 2009 to one of the other partners in the partnership. As a result of the sale, Oakmont recognized a gain on sale of $1.4 million.
 
The assets that remain at IDI include an equity interest in one commercial real estate property and one real estate development along with various notes receivable.
 
At March 31, 2010, the Corporation had extended $4.6 million to IDI to fund various partnership and subsidiary investments. This represents a decrease of $15.8 million from borrowings of $20.4 million at March 31, 2009. These amounts are eliminated in consolidation.
 
ADPC Corporation.  ADPC is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bank that holds and develops certain of the Bank’s foreclosed properties. The Bank’s investment in ADPC at March 31, 2010 amounted to $2.7 million as compared to $3.7 million at March 31, 2009. ADPC had a net loss of $998,000 for the year ended March 31, 2010 as compared to $747,000 for the year ended March 31, 2009.
 
Anchor Investment Corporation.  AIC is an operating subsidiary of the Bank that was incorporated in March 1993. Located in the state of Nevada, AIC was formed for the purpose of managing a portion of the Bank’s investment portfolio (primarily mortgage-backed securities). As an operating subsidiary, AIC’s results of operations are combined with the Bank’s for financial and regulatory purposes. The Bank’s investment in AIC amounted to $223.6 million at March 31, 2010 as compared to $212.6 million at March 31, 2009. AIC had net income of $7.8 million for the year ended March 31, 2010 as compared to $5.3 million for the year ended March 31, 2009.
 
Employees
 
The Corporation had 932 full-time employees and 131 part-time employees at March 31, 2010. The Corporation promotes equal employment opportunity and considers its relationship with its employees to be good. The employees are not represented by a collective bargaining unit.
 
Branch Sale Agreements
 
On November 13, 2009, the Bank entered into a Branch Sale Agreement for the sale of eleven branches in Northwestern Wisconsin to Royal Credit Union (RCU) of Eau Claire, Wisconsin, whereby RCU assumed approximately $169 million in deposits and received a corresponding amount in loans, real estate and other assets. The transaction received regulatory approval and closed on June 25, 2010.
 
The Company and RCU made customary representations, warranties, covenants and agreements in the Branch Sale Agreement. The parties have also agreed to indemnify each other (subject to customary limitations) with respect to breaches of representations and warranties, breaches of covenants and agreements, assets not retained or purchased, liabilities not retained or assumed, and ownership or operation of the branches, assets or liabilities during certain time periods.
 
On May 4, 2010, the Bank entered into a Branch Sale Agreement for the sale of four branches in the Green Bay, Wisconsin area to Nicolet National Bank (Nicolet) of Green Bay, Wisconsin, whereby Nicolet assumed approximately $117 million in deposits and receive a corresponding amount in loans, real estate and other assets. The transaction is subject to regulatory approval and customary closing conditions. The transaction is expected to be completed in the second fiscal quarter.


19


Table of Contents

The Bank and Nicolet made customary representations, warranties, covenants and agreements in the Branch Sale Agreement. The parties have also agreed to indemnify each other (subject to customary limitations) with respect to breaches of representations and warranties, breaches of covenants and agreements, assets not retained or purchased, liabilities not retained or assumed, and ownership or operation of the branches, assets or liabilities during certain time periods.
 
Regulation and Supervision
 
The business of the Corporation and the Bank is subject to extensive regulation and supervision under federal banking laws and other federal and state laws and regulations. In general, these laws and regulations are intended for the protection of depositors, the deposit insurance funds administered by the FDIC and the banking system as a whole, and not for the protection of stockholders or creditors of insured institutions.
 
Set forth below are brief descriptions of selected laws and regulations applicable to the Corporation and the Bank. These descriptions are not intended to be a comprehensive description of all laws and regulations to which the Corporation and the Bank are subject or to be complete descriptions of the laws and regulations discussed. The descriptions of statutory and regulatory provisions are qualified in their entirety by reference to the particular statutes and regulations. Changes in applicable statutes, regulations or regulatory policy may have a material effect on us and our businesses.
 
The Corporation
 
General.  The Corporation is registered as a savings and loan holding company under Section 10 of the Home Owners’ Loan Act (“HOLA”). As a result, the Corporation is subject to the regulation, examination, supervision and reporting requirements of the OTS. The Corporation must file quarterly and annual reports with the OTS that describes its financial condition.
 
Activities Restrictions.  There are generally no restrictions on the activities of a savings and loan holding company, such as the Corporation, which controlled only one subsidiary savings association on or before May 4, 1999 (a “grandfathered holding company”). However, if the Director of the OTS determines that there is reasonable cause to believe that the continuation by a savings and loan holding company of an activity constitutes a serious risk to the financial safety, soundness or stability of its subsidiary savings association, the Director may impose such restrictions as it deems necessary to address such risk, including limiting (i) payment of dividends by the savings association; (ii) transactions between the savings association and its affiliates; and (iii) any activities of the savings association that might create a serious risk that the liabilities of the holding company and its affiliates may be imposed on the savings association. Notwithstanding the above rules as to permissible business activities of unitary savings and loan holding companies, if the savings association subsidiary of such a holding company fails to meet the qualified thrift lender (“QTL”) test, then such unitary holding company also shall become subject to the activities restrictions applicable to multiple savings and loan holding companies and, unless the savings association requalifies as a QTL within one year thereafter, shall register as, and become subject to the restrictions applicable to, a bank holding company. Regulation as a bank holding company could be adverse to the Corporation’s operations and impose additional and possibly more burdensome regulatory requirements on the Corporation. See “— The Bank — Qualified Thrift Lender Test” below.
 
If a savings and loan holding company acquires control of a second savings association and holds it as a separate institution, the holding company becomes a multiple savings and loan holding company. As a general rule, multiple savings and loan holding companies are subject to restrictions on their activities that are not imposed on a grandfathered holding company. They could not commence or continue any business activity other than: (i) those permitted for a bank holding company under section 4(c) of the Bank Holding Company Act (unless the Director of the OTS by regulation prohibits or limits such 4(c) activities); (ii) furnishing or performing management services for a subsidiary savings association; (iii) conducting an insurance agency or escrow business; (iv) holding, managing, or liquidating assets owned by or acquired from a subsidiary savings association; (v) holding or managing properties used or occupied by a subsidiary savings association; (vi) acting as trustee under deeds of trust; or (vii) those activities authorized by regulation as of March 5, 1987, to be engaged in by multiple savings and loan holding companies.


20


Table of Contents

Restrictions on Acquisitions.  Except under limited circumstances, savings and loan holding companies are prohibited from acquiring, without prior approval of the OTS:
 
  •  control of any other savings institution or savings and loan holding company or all or substantially all the assets thereof; or
 
  •  more than 5% of the voting shares of a savings institution or holding company of a savings institution which is not a subsidiary.
 
In evaluating an application by a holding company to acquire a savings association, the OTS must consider the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the holding company and savings association involved, the risk of the acquisition to the insurance funds, the convenience and needs of the community and the effect of the acquisition on competition. Acquisitions which result in a savings and loan holding company controlling savings associations in more than one state are generally prohibited, except in supervisory transactions involving failing savings associations or based on specific state authorization of such acquisitions. Except with the prior approval of the OTS, no director or officer of a savings and loan holding company or person owning or controlling by proxy or otherwise more than 25% of such Corporation’s voting stock, may acquire control of any savings institution, other than a subsidiary savings institution, or of any other savings and loan holding company.
 
Change of Control.  Federal law requires, with few exceptions, OTS approval (or, in some cases, notice and effective clearance) prior to any acquisition of control of the Corporation. Among other criteria, under OTS regulations, “control” is conclusively presumed to exist if a person or Corporation acquires, directly or indirectly, more than 25% of any class of voting stock of the savings association or holding company. Control is also presumed to exist, subject to rebuttal, if an acquiror acquires more than 10% of any class of voting stock (or more than 25% of any class of stock) and is subject to any of several “control factors,” including, among other matters, the relative ownership position of a person, the existence of control agreements and board composition.
 
Change in Management.  If a savings and loan holding company is in a “troubled condition,” as defined in the OTS regulations, it is required to give 30 days’ prior written notice to the OTS before adding or replacing a director, employing any person as a senior executive officer or changing the responsibility of any senior executive officer so that such person would assume a different senior executive position. The OTS then has the opportunity to disapprove any such appointment.
 
Limitations on Dividends.  The Corporation is a legal entity separate and distinct from the Bank and its other subsidiaries. The Corporation’s principal source of revenue consists of dividends from the Bank. The payment of dividends by the Bank is subject to various regulatory requirements, including a minimum of 30 days’ advance notice to the OTS of any proposed dividend to the Corporation.
 
Other limitations may apply depending on the size of the proposed dividend and the condition of the Bank. See “— The Bank — Restrictions on Capital Distributions” below.
 
The Bank
 
General.  The Bank is a federal savings bank organized under the laws of the United States and subject to regulation and examination by the OTS. The OTS regulates all areas of the Bank’s banking operations, including investments, reserves, lending, mergers, payment of dividends, interest rates, transactions with affiliates (including the Corporation), establishment of branches and other aspects of the Bank’s operations. The Bank is subject to regular examinations by the OTS and is assessed amounts to cover the costs of such examinations.
 
Because the Bank’s deposits are insured by the FDIC to the maximum extent permitted by law, the Bank is also regulated by the FDIC. The major functions of the FDIC with respect to insured institutions include making assessments, if required, against insured institutions to fund the appropriate deposit insurance fund and preventing the continuance or development of unsound and unsafe banking practices.
 
Capital Requirements.  OTS regulations require that federal savings banks maintain: (i) “tangible capital” in an amount of not less than 1.5% of adjusted total assets, (ii) “core (Tier 1) capital” in an amount not less than 3.0% of adjusted total assets and (iii) a level of risk-based capital equal to 8.0% of total risk-weighted assets. Most banks are required to maintain a “minimum leverage” ratio of core (Tier 1) capital of at least 4.0% to 5.0% of adjusted total assets.


21


Table of Contents

“Core capital” includes common stockholders’ equity (including common stock, additional paid in capital and retained earnings, but excluding any net unrealized gains or losses, net of related taxes, on certain securities available for sale), noncumulative perpetual preferred stock and any related surplus and noncontrolling interests in the equity accounts of full consolidated subsidiaries. Intangible assets generally must be deducted from core capital, other than certain servicing assets and purchased credit card relationships, subject to limitations. “Tangible capital” means core capital less any intangible assets (except for mortgage servicing assets includable in core capital) and investments in subsidiaries engaged in activities not permissible for a national bank. “Total capital,” for purposes of the risk-based capital requirement, equals the sum of core capital plus supplementary (Tier 2) capital (which, as defined, includes the sum of, among other items, perpetual preferred stock not counted as core capital, limited life preferred stock, subordinated debt and general loan and lease loss allowances up to 1.25% of risk-weighted assets) less certain deductions. The amount of supplementary (Tier 2) capital that may be counted towards satisfaction of the total capital requirement may not exceed 100% of core capital, and OTS regulations require the maintenance of a minimum ratio of core capital to total risk-weighted assets of 4.0%. Risk-weighted assets are determined by multiplying certain categories of a savings association’s assets, including off-balance sheet equivalents, by an assigned risk weight of 0% to 100% based on the credit risk associated with those assets as specified in OTS regulations.
 
As of March 31, 2010, the Bank was not in compliance with all minimum regulatory capital requirements, with tangible, core and risk-based capital ratios of 3.73%, 3.73% and 7.32%, respectively. Capital requirements higher than the generally applicable minimum requirement may be established for a particular savings association if the OTS determines that the institution’s capital was or may become inadequate in view of its particular circumstances. In June, 2009, the Bank consented to the issuance of a Cease and Desist Agreement with the OTS which requires, among other things, capital requirements in excess of the generally applicable minimum requirements. See Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8.
 
Prompt Corrective Action.  Under Section 38 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“FDIA”), each federal banking agency is required to take prompt corrective action to deal with depository institutions subject to their jurisdiction that fail to meet their minimum capital requirements or are otherwise in a troubled condition. The prompt corrective action provisions require undercapitalized institutions to become subject to an increasingly stringent array of restrictions, requirements and prohibitions as their capital levels deteriorate and supervisory problems mount. Should these corrective measures prove unsuccessful in recapitalizing the institution and correcting its problems, the FDIA mandates that the institution be placed in receivership.
 
Pursuant to regulations promulgated under Section 38 of the FDIA, the corrective actions that the banking agencies either must or may take are tied primarily to an institution’s capital levels. In accordance with the framework set forth in the FDIA, the federal banking agencies have developed a classification system, pursuant to which all banks and savings associations are placed into one of five categories: well capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized. The capital thresholds established for each of the categories are as follows:
 
             
        Tier 1
  Total
    Tier 1
  Risk-Based
  Risk-Based
Capital Category
  Leverage Ratio   Capital Ratio   Capital Ratio
 
Well Capitalized
  5% or above   6% or above   10% or above
Adequately Capitalized
  4% or above(1)   4% or above   8% or above
Undercapitalized
  Less than 4%   Less than 4%   Less than 8%
Significantly Undercapitalized
  Less than 3%   Less than 3%   Less than 6%
Critically Undercapitalized
  Less than 2%    
 
 
(1) 3% for banks with the highest supervisory rating.
 
The applicable federal banking agency also has authority, after providing an opportunity for a hearing, to downgrade an institution from “well capitalized” to “adequately capitalized” or to subject an “adequately capitalized” or “undercapitalized” institution to the supervisory actions applicable to the next lower category, for supervisory concerns.


22


Table of Contents

Applicable laws and regulations also generally provide that no insured institution may make a capital distribution if it would cause the institution to become “undercapitalized.” Capital distributions include cash (but not stock) dividends, stock purchases, redemptions and other distributions of capital to the owners of an institution. Moreover, only a “well capitalized” depository institution may accept brokered deposits without prior regulatory approval.
 
“Undercapitalized” depository institutions are subject to growth limitations and other restrictions and are required to submit a capital restoration plan. The federal banking agencies may not accept a capital plan without determining, among other things, that the plan is based on realistic assumptions and is likely to succeed in restoring the depository institution’s capital. In addition, for a capital restoration plan to be acceptable, the depository institution’s parent holding company must guarantee that the institution will comply with such capital restoration plan. The aggregate liability of the parent holding company is limited to the lesser of (i) an amount equal to 5% of the depository institution’s total assets at the time it became “undercapitalized,” and (ii) the amount which is necessary (or would have been necessary) to bring the institution into compliance with all capital standards applicable with respect to such institution as of the time it fails to comply with the plan. If a depository institution fails to submit an acceptable plan, it is treated as if it is “significantly undercapitalized.”
 
“Significantly undercapitalized” depository institutions may be subject to a number of requirements and restrictions, including orders to sell sufficient voting stock to become “adequately capitalized,” requirements to reduce total assets and cessation of receipt of deposits from correspondent banks.
 
“Critically undercapitalized” institutions are subject to the appointment of a receiver or conservator.
 
As of March 31, 2010, the Bank was “undercapitalized.” See Note 12 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8.
 
Restrictions on Capital Distributions.  OTS regulations govern capital distributions by savings institutions, which include cash dividends, stock repurchases and other transactions charged to the capital account of a savings institution to make capital distributions. Under applicable regulations, a savings institution must file an application for OTS approval of the capital distribution if:
 
  •  the total capital distributions for the applicable calendar year exceed the sum of the institution’s net income for that year to date plus the institution’s retained net income for the preceding two years;
 
  •  the institution would not be at least adequately capitalized following the distribution;
 
  •  the distribution would violate any applicable statute, regulation, agreement or OTS-imposed condition; or
 
  •  the institution is not eligible for expedited treatment of its filings with the OTS.
 
If an application is not required to be filed, savings institutions such as the Bank which are a subsidiary of a holding company (as well as certain other institutions) must still file a notice with the OTS at least 30 days before the board of directors declares a dividend or approves a capital distribution.
 
An institution that either before or after a proposed capital distribution fails to meet its then applicable minimum capital requirement or that has been notified that it needs more than normal supervision may not make any capital distributions without the prior written approval of the OTS. In addition, the OTS may prohibit a proposed capital distribution, which would otherwise be permitted by OTS regulations, if the OTS determines that such distribution would constitute an unsafe or unsound practice.
 
The FDIC prohibits an insured depository institution from paying dividends on its capital stock or interest on its capital notes or debentures (if such interest is required to be paid only out of net profits) or distributing any of its capital assets while it remains in default in the payment of any assessment due the FDIC. The Bank is currently not in default in any assessment payment to the FDIC.
 
Qualified Thrift Lender Test.  A savings association can comply with the qualified thrift lender, or QTL, test set forth in the HOLA and implementing regulations of the OTS by either meeting the QTL test set forth therein or qualifying as a domestic building and loan association as defined in Section 7701(a)(19) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The QTL test set forth in the HOLA requires a savings association to maintain 65% of portfolio assets


23


Table of Contents

in qualified thrift investments, or QTLs. Portfolio assets are defined as total assets less intangibles, property used by a savings association in its business and liquidity investments in an amount not exceeding 20% of assets. Generally, QTLs are residential housing related assets. At March 31, 2010, the amount of the Bank’s assets which were invested in QTLs exceeded the percentage required to qualify the Bank under the QTL test.
 
Applicable laws and regulations provide that any savings association that fails to meet the definition of a QTL must either convert to a national bank charter or limit its future investments and activities (including branching and payments of dividends) to those permitted for both savings associations and national banks. Further, within one year of the loss of QTL status, a holding company of a savings association that does not convert to a bank charter must register as a bank holding company and be subject to all statutes applicable to bank holding companies. In order to exercise the powers granted to federally-chartered savings associations and maintain full access to FHLB advances, the Bank must continue to meet the definition of a QTL.
 
Safety and Soundness Standards.  The OTS and the other federal bank regulatory agencies have established guidelines for safety and soundness, addressing operational and managerial standards, as well as compensation matters for insured financial institutions. Institutions failing to meet these standards are required to submit compliance plans to their appropriate federal regulators. The OTS and the other agencies have also established guidelines regarding asset quality and earnings standards for insured institutions. The Bank believes that it is in compliance with these guidelines and standards.
 
Community Investment and Consumer Protection Laws.  In connection with the Bank’s lending activities, the Bank is subject to a variety of federal laws designed to protect borrowers and promote lending to various sectors of the economy and population. Included among these are the federal Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, Truth-in-Lending Act, Truth-in-Savings Act, Fair Housing Act, Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Fair Credit Reporting Act, Bank Secrecy Act, Money Laundering Prosecution Improvements Act and Community Reinvestment Act.
 
The Community Reinvestment Act requires insured institutions to define the communities that they serve, identify the credit needs of those communities and adopt and implement a “Community Reinvestment Act Statement” pursuant to which they offer credit products and take other actions that respond to the credit needs of the community. The responsible federal banking regulator (the OTS in the case of the Bank) must conduct regular Community Reinvestment Act examinations of insured financial institutions and assign to them a Community Reinvestment Act rating of “outstanding,” “satisfactory,” “needs improvement” or “unsatisfactory.” The record of a depository institution under the Community Reinvestment Act will be taken into account when applying for the establishment of new branches or mergers with other institutions. The Bank’s current Community Reinvestment Act rating is “satisfactory.”
 
The Bank attempts in good faith to ensure compliance with the requirements of the consumer protection statutes to which it is subject, as well as the regulations that implement the statutory provisions. The requirements are complex, however, and even inadvertent non-compliance could result in civil and, in some cases, criminal liability.
 
Federal Deposit Insurance.  The FDIC insures the deposits, up to prescribed statutory limits, of federally insured banks and savings institutions. Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Act of 2005 (the “Reform Act”), which was signed into law on February 15, 2006: (i) the Bank Insurance Fund and the Savings Association Insurance Fund administered by the FDIC were merged into a new combined fund, called the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”), effective March 31, 2006, (ii) the current $100,000 deposit insurance coverage will be indexed for inflation (with adjustments every five years, commencing January 1, 2011); and (iii) deposit insurance coverage for retirement accounts was increased to $250,000 per participant subject to adjustment for inflation. The FDIC also has been given greater latitude in setting the assessment rates for insured depository institutions which could be used to impose minimum assessments. On October 3, 2008, as part of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, the level of basic FDIC insurance of accounts was temporarily increased to $250,000. The basic level is scheduled to return to $100,000 on December 31, 2013.
 
In addition, on November 21, 2008, the Board of Directors of the FDIC adopted a final rule relating to its Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (“TLGP”). The TLGP was first announced by the FDIC on October 14,


24


Table of Contents

2008, preceded by the determination of systemic risk by the Secretary of the Treasury (after consultation with the President), as an initiative to counter the system-wide crisis in the nation’s financial sector. Under the TLGP, the FDIC will (i) guarantee, through the earlier of maturity or June 30, 2012, certain newly issued senior unsecured debt issued by participating institutions on or after October 14, 2008 and before June 30, 2009 and (ii) provide full FDIC deposit insurance coverage through December 31, 2009 for non-interest bearing transaction deposit accounts paying less than 0.5% interest per annum and held at participating FDIC-insured institutions. Coverage under the TLGP was available for the first 30 days without charge. The Company and the Bank elected to continue to participate in the TLGP account insurance program, through payment of a fee assessment of 10 basis points per quarter on amounts in excess of $250,000 in covered accounts. At March 31, 2010, neither the Company nor the Bank had issued any senior unsecured debt under the TLGP.
 
The FDIC is authorized to set the reserve ratio for the DIF annually at between 1.15% and 1.5% of estimated insured deposits. If the DIF’s reserves exceed the designated reserve ratio, the FDIC is required to pay out all or, if the reserve ratio is less than 1.5%, a portion of the excess as a dividend to insured depository institutions based on the percentage of insured deposits held on December 31, 1996 adjusted for subsequently paid premiums. Insured depository institutions that were in existence on December 31, 1996 and paid assessments prior to that date (or their successors) are entitled to a one-time credit against future assessments based on their past contributions to the FDIC’s insurance funds.
 
Pursuant to the Reform Act, the FDIC has determined to maintain the designated reserve ratio at its current 1.25%. The FDIC also has adopted a new risk-based premium system that provides for quarterly assessments based on an insured institution’s ranking in one of four risk categories based on their examination ratings and capital ratios. Well-capitalized institutions with the CAMELS ratings of 1 or 2 are grouped in Risk Category I and are assessed for deposit insurance at an annual rate of between 12 and 16 basis points, with the assessment rate for an individual institution to be determined according to a formula based on a weighted average of the institution’s individual CAMELS component ratings plus either five financial ratios or, in the case of an institution with assets of $10 billion or more, the average ratings of its long-term debt. Institutions in Risk Categories II, III and IV are assessed at annual rates of 22, 32 and 45 basis points, respectively.
 
In addition, all institutions with deposits insured by the FDIC are required to pay assessments to fund interest payments on bonds issued by the Financing Corporation, an agency of the Federal government established to recapitalize the predecessor to the Savings Association Insurance Fund. The assessment rate for the first quarter of 2010 was .0104% of insured deposits and it is adjusted quarterly. These assessments will continue until the Financing Corporation bonds mature in 2017.
 
Insurance of deposits may be terminated by the FDIC, after notice and hearing, upon a finding by the FDIC that the savings association has engaged in unsafe or unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations, or has violated any applicable law, rule, regulation, order or condition imposed by, or written agreement with, the FDIC. Additionally, if insurance termination proceedings are initiated against a savings association, the FDIC may temporarily suspend insurance on new deposits received by an institution under certain circumstances.
 
Due to losses incurred by the Deposit Insurance Fund from failed institutions in 2008 and anticipated future losses, the FDIC adopted, pursuant to a Restoration Plan to replenish the fund, an across the board 7.0 basis point increase in the assessment range for the first quarter of 2009. The FDIC subsequently adopted further refinements to its risk-based assessment system, effective April 1, 2009, that effectively make the range 7.0 to 77.5 basis points. In May 2009, the FDIC adopted a final rule imposing a special assessment on all insured institutions due to recent bank and savings association failures. The emergency assessment amounts to 5 basis points of total assets minus Tier 1 Capital as of June 30, 2009. The assessment was collected on September 30, 2009 and recorded against earnings for the quarter ended June 30, 2009.
 
In November 2009, the FDIC issued a rule that required all insured depository institutions, with limited exceptions, to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012. The FDIC also adopted a uniform three-basis point increase in assessment rates effective on January 1, 2011.


25


Table of Contents

Brokered Deposits.  The FDIA restricts the use of brokered deposits by certain depository institutions. Under the FDIA and applicable regulations, (i) a “well capitalized insured depository institution” may solicit and accept, renew or roll over any brokered deposit without restriction, (ii) an “adequately capitalized insured depository institution” may not accept, renew or roll over any brokered deposit unless it has applied for and been granted a waiver of this prohibition by the OTS and (iii) an “undercapitalized insured depository institution” may not (x) accept, renew or roll over any brokered deposit or (y) solicit deposits by offering an effective yield that exceeds by more than 75 basis points the prevailing effective yields on insured deposits of comparable maturity in such institution’s normal market area or in the market area in which such deposits are being solicited. The term “undercapitalized insured depository institution” is defined to mean any insured depository institution that fails to meet the minimum regulatory capital requirement prescribed by its appropriate federal banking agency. The OTS may, on a case-by-case basis and upon application by an adequately capitalized insured depository institution, waive the restriction on brokered deposits upon a finding that the acceptance of brokered deposits does not constitute an unsafe or unsound practice with respect to such institution. The Corporation had $173.5 million of outstanding brokered deposits at March 31, 2010. At March 31, 2010, the Bank is undercapitalized and as a result, precluded from accepting, renewing or rolling over brokered deposits without prior approval of the OTS. See Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8.
 
Federal Home Loan Bank System.  The FHLB System consists of 12 regional FHLBs, each subject to supervision and regulation by the Federal Housing Finance Board, or FHFB. The FHLBs provide a central credit facility for member savings associations. Collateral is required. The Bank is a member of the FHLB of Chicago. The maximum amount that the FHLB of Chicago will advance fluctuates from time to time in accordance with changes in policies of the FHFB and the FHLB of Chicago, and the maximum amount generally is reduced by borrowings from any other source. In addition, the amount of FHLB advances that a savings association may obtain is restricted in the event the institution fails to maintain its status as a QTL.
 
Federal Reserve System.  The Federal Reserve Board has adopted regulations that require savings associations to maintain non-earning reserves against their transaction accounts (primarily NOW and regular checking accounts). These reserves may be used to satisfy liquidity requirements imposed by the OTS. Because required reserves must be maintained in the form of cash or a non-interest-bearing account at a Federal Reserve Bank, the effect of this reserve requirement is to reduce the amount of the Bank’s interest-earning assets.
 
Transactions With Affiliates Restrictions.  Transactions between savings associations and any affiliate are governed by Section 11 of the HOLA and Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and regulations thereunder. An affiliate of a savings association generally is any company or entity which controls, is controlled by or is under common control with the savings association. In a holding company context, the parent holding company of a savings association (such as the Corporation) and any companies which are controlled by such parent holding company are affiliates of the savings association. Generally, Section 23A limits the extent to which the savings association or its subsidiaries may engage in “covered transactions” with any one affiliate to an amount equal to 10% of such association’s capital stock and surplus, and contains an aggregate limit on all such transactions with all affiliates to an amount equal to 20% of such capital stock and surplus. Section 23B applies to “covered transactions” as well as certain other transactions and requires that all transactions be on terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable, to the savings association as those provided to a non-affiliate. The term “covered transaction” includes the making of loans to, purchase of assets from and issuance of a guarantee to an affiliate and similar transactions. Section 23B transactions also apply to the provision of services and the sale of assets by a savings association to an affiliate. In addition to the restrictions imposed by Sections 23A and 23B, Section 11 of the HOLA prohibits a savings association from (i) making a loan or other extension of credit to an affiliate, except for any affiliate which engages only in certain activities which are permissible for bank holding companies, or (ii) purchasing or investing in any stocks, bonds, debentures, notes or similar obligations of any affiliate, except for affiliates which are subsidiaries of the savings association.
 
In addition, Sections 22(g) and (h) of the Federal Reserve Act place restrictions on extensions of credit to executive officers, directors and principal stockholders. Under Section 22(h), loans to a director, an executive officer and to a greater than 10% stockholder of a savings association (“a principal stockholder”), and certain affiliated interests of either, may not exceed, together with all other outstanding loans to such person and affiliated interests, the savings association’s loans to one borrower limit (generally equal to 15% of the institution’s


26


Table of Contents

unimpaired capital and surplus). Section 22(h) also requires that loans to directors, executive officers and principal stockholders be made on terms substantially the same as offered in comparable transactions to other persons unless the loans are made pursuant to a benefit or compensation program that (i) is widely available to employees of the institution and (ii) does not give preference to any director, executive officer or principal stockholder, or certain affiliated interests of either, over other employees of the savings institution. Section 22(h) also requires prior board approval for certain loans. In addition, the aggregate amount of extensions of credit by a savings institution to all insiders cannot exceed the institution’s unimpaired capital and surplus. Furthermore, Section 22(g) places additional restrictions on loans to executive officers. At March 31, 2010, the Bank was in compliance with the above restrictions.
 
The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001.  The USA PATRIOT Act requires financial institutions such as the Bank to prohibit correspondent accounts with foreign shell banks, establish an anti-money laundering program that includes employee training and an independent audit, follow minimum standards for identifying customers and maintaining records of the identification information and make regular comparisons of customers against agency lists of suspected terrorists, their organizations and money launderers.
 
Privacy Regulation.  The Corporation and the Bank are subject to numerous privacy-related laws and their implementing regulations, including but not limited to Title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, the Right to Financial Privacy Act, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act and other federal and state privacy and consumer protection laws. Those laws and the regulations promulgated under their authority can limit, under certain circumstances, the extent to which financial institutions may disclose nonpublic personal information that is specific to a particular individual to affiliated companies and nonaffiliated third parties. Moreover, the Bank is required to establish and maintain a comprehensive Information Security Program in accordance with the Interagency Guidelines Establishing Standards for Safeguarding Customer Information. The program must be designed to:
 
  •  ensure the security and confidentiality of customer information;
 
  •  protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such information; and
 
  •  protect against unauthorized access to or use of such information that could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer.
 
In addition, the Federal Trade Commission has implemented a nationwide “do not call” registry that allows consumers to prevent unsolicited telemarketing calls. Millions of households already have placed their telephone numbers on this registry.
 
Regulatory Enforcement Authority.  The enforcement powers available to federal banking agencies are substantial and include, among other things, the ability to assess civil money penalties, to issue cease-and-desist or removal orders and to initiate injunctive actions against insured institutions and institution-affiliated parties. In general, these enforcement actions may be initiated for violations of laws and regulations and unsafe or unsound practices. Other actions or inactions may provide the basis for enforcement action, including misleading or untimely reports filed with regulatory authorities.
 
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.  On July 30, 2002, President George W. Bush signed into law the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which generally establishes a comprehensive framework to modernize and reform the oversight of public company auditing, improve the quality and transparency of financial reporting by those companies and strengthen the independence of auditors. Among other things, the new legislation (i) created a public company accounting oversight board which is empowered to set auditing, quality control and ethics standards, to inspect registered public accounting firms, to conduct investigations and to take disciplinary actions, subject to SEC oversight and review; (ii) strengthened auditor independence from corporate management by, among other things, limiting the scope of consulting services that auditors can offer their public company audit clients; (iii) heightened the responsibility of public company directors and senior managers for the quality of the financial reporting and disclosure made by their companies; (iv) adopted a number of provisions to deter wrongdoing by corporate management; (v) imposed a number of new corporate disclosure requirements; (vi) adopted provisions which generally seek to limit and expose to public view possible conflicts of interest affecting securities analysts; and


27


Table of Contents

(vii) imposed a range of new criminal penalties for fraud and other wrongful acts, as well as extended the period during which certain types of lawsuits can be brought against a company or its insiders.
 
Overdraft Regulation.  The Federal Reserve has amended Regulation E (Electronic Fund Transfers) effective July 1, 2010 to require consumers to opt in, or affirmatively consent, to the institution’s overdraft service for ATM and one-time debit card transactions, before overdraft fees may be assessed on the account. Consumers will also be provided a clear disclosure of the fees and terms associated with the institution’s overdraft service.
 
Source of Strength Doctrine.  Federal Reserve policy requires bank holding companies to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to their subsidiary banks. Under this policy, the holding company is expected to commit resources to support its bank subsidiary, including at times when the holding company may not be in a financial position to provide it. Any capital loans by a bank holding company to its subsidiary bank are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and to certain other indebtedness of such subsidiary bank. 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 bank subsidiary will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to priority of payment.
 
Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008
 
On October 3, 2008, President Bush signed into law the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”), giving the United States Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) authority to take certain actions to restore liquidity and stability to the U.S. banking markets. Based upon its authority in the EESA, a number of programs to implement EESA have been announced. Those programs include the following:
 
  •  Capital Purchase Program (“CPP”). Pursuant to this program, Treasury, on behalf of the US government, will purchase preferred stock, along with warrants to purchase common stock, from certain financial institutions, including bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies and banks or savings associations not controlled by a holding company. The investment will have a dividend rate of 5% per year, until the fifth anniversary of Treasury’s investment and a dividend of 9% thereafter. During the time Treasury holds securities issued pursuant to this program, participating financial institutions will be required to comply with certain provisions regarding executive compensation and corporate governance. Participation in this program also imposes certain restrictions upon an institution’s dividends to common shareholders and stock repurchase activities. As described further herein, we elected to participate in the CPP and received $110 million pursuant to the program.
 
  •  Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program. This program contained both (i) a debt guarantee component, whereby the FDIC will guarantee until June 30, 2012, the senior unsecured debt issued by eligible financial institutions between October 14, 2008 and June 30, 2009; and (ii) an account transaction guarantee component, whereby the FDIC will insure 100% of non-interest bearing deposit transaction accounts held at eligible financial institutions, such as payment processing accounts, payroll accounts and working capital accounts through December 31, 2009. The deadline for participation or opting out of this program was December 5, 2008. We elected not to opt out of the program.
 
  •  Temporary increase in deposit insurance coverage. Pursuant to the EESA, the FDIC temporarily raised the basic limit on federal deposit insurance coverage from $100,000 to $250,000 per depositor. The EESA provides that the basic deposit insurance limit will return to $100,000 after December 31, 2013.
 
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
 
On February 17, 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (“ARRA”) was signed into law. Included among the many provisions in ARRA are restrictions affecting financial institutions who are participants in TARP, which are set forth in the form of amendments to EESA. These amendments provide that during the period in which any obligation under TARP remains outstanding (other than obligations relating to outstanding warrants), TARP recipients are subject to appropriate standards for executive compensation and corporate governance which were set forth in an interim final rule regarding TARP standards for Compensation and Corporate Governance,


28


Table of Contents

issued by Treasury and effective on June 15, 2009 (the “Interim Final Rule”). Among the executive compensation and corporate governance provisions included in ARRA and the Interim Final Rule are the following:
 
  •  an incentive compensation “clawback” provision to cover “senior executive officers” (defined in this instance and below to mean the “named executive officers” for whom compensation disclosure is provided in the company’s proxy statement) and the next 20 most highly compensated employees;
 
  •  a prohibition on certain golden parachute payments to cover any payment related to a departure for any reason (with limited exceptions) made to any senior executive officer (as defined above) and the next five most highly compensated employees;
 
  •  a limitation on incentive compensation paid or accrued to the five most highly compensated employees of the financial institution, subject to limited exceptions for pre-existing arrangements set forth in written employment contracts executed on or prior to February 11, 2009, and certain awards of restricted stock which may not exceed 1/3 of annual compensation, are subject to a two year holding period and cannot be transferred until Treasury’s preferred stock is redeemed in full;
 
  •  a requirement that the Company’s chief executive officer and chief financial officer provide in annual securities filings, a written certification of compliance with the executive compensation and corporate governance provisions of the Interim Final Rule;
 
  •  an obligation for the compensation committee of the board of directors to evaluate with the company’s chief risk officer certain compensation plans to ensure that such plans do not encourage unnecessary or excessive risks or the manipulation of reported earnings;
 
  •  a requirement that companies adopt a company-wide policy regarding excessive or luxury expenditures; and
 
  •  a requirement that companies permit a separate, non-binding shareholder vote to approve the compensation of executives.
 
ARRA also empowers the Treasury with the authority to review bonus, retention, and other compensation paid to senior executive officers that have received TARP assistance to determine if the compensation was inconsistent with the purposes of ARRA or TARP, or otherwise contrary to the public interest and, if so, seek to negotiate reimbursements. The provision of ARRA will apply to the Company until it has redeemed the securities sold to the Treasury under the CPP.
 
In addition, companies who have issued preferred stock to Treasury under TARP are now permitted to redeem such investments at any time, subject to consultation with banking regulators. Upon such redemption, the warrants may be immediately liquidated by Treasury.
 
Homeowners Affordability and Stability Plan
 
In February 2009, the Administration also announced its Financial Stability Plan and Homeowners Affordability and Stability Plan (“HASP”). The Financial Stability Plan is the second phase of TARP, to be administrated by the Treasury. Its four key elements include:
 
  •  the development of a public/private investment fund essentially structured as a government sponsored enterprise with the mission to purchase troubled assets from banks with an initial capitalization from government funds;
 
  •  the Capital Assistance Program under which the Treasury will purchase additional preferred stock available only for banks that have undergone a new stress test given by their regulator;
 
  •  an expansion of the Federal Reserve’s term asset-backed liquidity facility to support the purchase of up to $1 trillion in AAA-rated asset backed securities backed by consumer, student, and small business loans, and possible other types of loans; and
 
  •  the establishment of a mortgage loan modification program with $50 billion in federal funds further detailed in the HASP.


29


Table of Contents

 
The HASP is a program aimed to help seven to nine million families restructure their mortgages to avoid foreclosure. The plan also develops guidance for loan modifications nationwide. HASP provides programs and funding for eligible refinancing of loans owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, along with incentives to lenders, mortgage servicers, and borrowers to modify mortgages of “responsible” homeowners who are at risk of defaulting on their mortgage. The goals of HASP are to assist in the prevention of home foreclosures and to help stabilize falling home prices.
 
Beyond the Company’s participation in certain programs, such as TARP, the Company will benefit from these programs if they help stabilize the national banking system and aid in the recovery of the housing market.
 
Legislative and Regulatory Proposals
 
Proposals to change the laws and regulations governing the operations and taxation of, and federal insurance premiums paid by, savings banks and other financial institutions and companies that control such institutions are frequently raised in the U.S. Congress, state legislatures and before the FDIC, the OTS and other bank regulatory authorities. The likelihood of any major changes in the future and the impact such changes might have on us or our subsidiaries are impossible to determine. Similarly, proposals to change the accounting treatment applicable to savings banks and other depository institutions are frequently raised by the SEC, the federal banking agencies, the IRS and other appropriate authorities, including, among others, proposals relating to fair market value accounting for certain classes of assets and liabilities. The likelihood and impact of any additional future accounting rule changes and the impact such changes might have on us or our subsidiaries are impossible to determine at this time.
 
Taxation
 
Federal
 
The Corporation files a consolidated federal income tax return on behalf of itself, the Bank and its subsidiaries on a fiscal tax year basis.
 
The Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 (the “Job Protection Act”) repealed the “reserve method” of accounting for bad debts by most thrift institutions effective for the taxable years beginning after 1995. Larger thrift institutions such as the Bank are now required to use the “specific charge-off method.” The Job Protection Act also granted partial relief from reserve recapture provisions, which are triggered by the change in method. This legislation did not have a material impact on the Bank’s financial condition or results of operations.
 
State
 
Under current law, the state of Wisconsin imposes a corporate franchise tax of 7.9% on the separate taxable incomes of the members of the Corporation’s consolidated income tax group, including, pursuant to an agreement between the Corporation and the Wisconsin Department of Revenue, AIC commencing in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2004.
 
Item 1A.   Risk Factors
 
In analyzing whether to make or to continue an investment in our securities, investors should consider, among other factors, the following risk factors.
 
Risks Related to Our Industry
 
Our business may be adversely affected by current conditions in the financial markets, the real estate market and economic conditions generally.
 
Beginning in the latter half of 2007 and continuing into 2010, negative developments in the capital markets resulted in uncertainty and instability in the financial markets, and an economic downturn. The housing market declined, resulting in decreasing home prices and increasing delinquencies and foreclosures. The credit performance of residential and commercial real estate, construction and land loans resulted in significant write-downs of


30


Table of Contents

asset values by financial institutions, including government-sponsored entities and major commercial and investment banks. The declines in the performance and value of mortgage assets encompassed all mortgage and real estate asset types, leveraged bank loans and nearly all other asset classes, including equity securities. These write-downs have caused many financial institutions to seek additional capital or to merge with larger and stronger institutions. Some financial institutions have failed. Continued, and potentially increased, volatility, instability and weakness could affect our ability to sell investment securities and other financial assets, which in turn could adversely affect our liquidity and financial position. This instability also could affect the prices at which we could make any such sales, which could adversely affect our earnings and financial condition.
 
Concerns over the stability of the financial markets and the economy have resulted in decreased lending by some financial institutions to their customers and to each other. This tightening of credit has led to increased loan delinquencies, lack of customer confidence, increased market volatility and a widespread reduction in general business activity. Competition among depository institutions for deposits has increased significantly, and access to deposits or borrowed funds has decreased for many institutions. It has also become more difficult to assess the creditworthiness of customers and to estimate the losses inherent in our loan portfolio.
 
Current conditions, including high unemployment, weak corporate performance, soft real estate markets, and the decline of home sales and property values, could negatively affect the volume of loan originations and prepayments, the value of the real estate securing our mortgage loans, and borrowers’ ability to repay loan obligations, all of which could adversely impact our earnings and financial condition. Business activity across a wide range of industries and regions is greatly reduced, and local governments and many companies are in serious difficulty due to the lack of consumer spending and the lack of liquidity in the credit markets. A worsening of current conditions would likely adversely affect our business and results of operations, as well as those of our customers. As a result, we may experience increased foreclosures, delinquencies and customer bankruptcies, as well as more restricted access to funds.
 
The soundness of other financial institutions could negatively 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 institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty, or other relationships. As a result, defaults by, or even rumors or questions about, one or more financial services institutions, or the financial services industry generally, have led to market-wide liquidity problems and could lead to losses or defaults by us or by other institutions. 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 when the collateral held by us cannot be realized upon or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the financial instrument exposure due us. There is no assurance that any such losses would not materially and adversely affect our results of operations.
 
Regulation by federal and state agencies could adversely affect our business, revenue, and profit margins.
 
We are heavily regulated by federal and state agencies. This regulation is to protect depositors, the federal deposit insurance fund and the banking system as a whole. Congress and state legislatures and federal and state regulatory agencies continually review banking laws, regulations, and policies for possible changes. Changes to statutes, regulations, or regulatory policies, including interpretation or implementation of statutes, regulations, or policies, could affect us adversely, including limiting the types of financial services and products we may offer and/or increasing the ability of non-banks to offer competing financial services and products. Also, if we do not comply with laws, regulations, or policies, we could receive regulatory sanctions and damage to our reputation.
 
Competition in the financial services industry is intense and could result in losing business or reducing margins.
 
We operate in a highly competitive industry that could become even more competitive as a result of legislative, regulatory and technological changes, and continued consolidation. We face aggressive competition from other domestic and foreign lending institutions and from numerous other providers of financial services. The ability of non-banking financial institutions to provide services previously limited to commercial banks has intensified


31


Table of Contents

competition. Because non-banking financial institutions are not subject to the same regulatory restrictions as banks and bank holding companies, they can often operate with greater flexibility and lower cost structures. Securities firms and insurance companies that elect to become financial holding companies may acquire banks and other financial institutions. This may significantly change the competitive environment in which we conduct business. Some of our competitors have greater financial resources and/or face fewer regulatory constraints. As a result of these various sources of competition, we could lose business to competitors or be forced to price products and services on less advantageous terms to retain or attract clients, either of which would adversely affect our profitability.
 
We continually encounter technological change.
 
The financial services industry is continually undergoing rapid technological change with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. The effective use of technology increases efficiency and enables financial institutions to better serve customers and to reduce costs. Our future success depends, in part, upon our ability to address the needs of our customers by using technology to provide products and services that will satisfy customer demands, as well as to create additional efficiencies in our operations. Many competitors have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements. We may not be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services or be successful in marketing these products and services to its 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, results of operations and cash flows.
 
Risks Related to Our Business
 
We experienced a net loss in fiscal 2010 directly attributable to a substantial deterioration in our commercial real estate, land and construction loan portfolio and the resulting increase in our provision for loan losses.
 
We realized a net loss of $177.1 million in fiscal 2010. The net loss is primarily the result of a $161.9 million provision to our loan loss reserve. The loan loss reserve is the amount required to maintain the allowance for loan losses at an adequate level to absorb probable loan losses. The provision for loan losses is primarily attributable to our residential construction and residential land loan portfolios, which continue to experience deterioration in estimated collateral values and repayment abilities of some of our customers. Other reasons for the level of the provision for loan losses are attributable to the continuing general weakening economic conditions and decline in real estate values in the markets served by the Corporation.
 
At March 31, 2010, our non-performing loans (consisting of loans past due more than 90 days, loans less than 90 days delinquent but placed on non-accrual status due to anticipated probable loss and non-accrual troubled debt restructurings) were $369.1 million compared to $227.8 million at March 31, 2009. For the year ended March 31, 2010, annualized net charge-offs as a percentage of average loans were 3.30% compared to 2.60% for the corresponding period in 2009. These increases are primarily due to our construction and land portfolio.
 
At March 31, approximately 75% of total gross loans were classified as first mortgage loans, with approximately 3% of loans being classified as construction loans and approximately 7% being classified as land loans.
 
The deterioration in our commercial real estate, construction and land loan portfolios has been caused primarily by the weakening economy and the slowdown in sales of the housing market. The unemployment rate for the state of Wisconsin was 9.8% as of March 31, 2010 compared to 9.4% at March 31, 2009. With many real estate projects requiring an extended time to market, some of our borrowers have exhausted their liquidity which may require us to place their loans into non-accrual status.
 
Our independent registered public accounting firm has expressed substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.
 
Our independent registered public accounting firm in its audit report for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2010 has expressed substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Continued operations depend on


32


Table of Contents

our ability to meet our existing debt obligations and the financing or other capital required to do so may not be available or may not be available on reasonable terms. The Bank has low levels of capital, significant operating losses and significant deterioration in the quality of its assets. Further, we have become subject to enhanced regulatory scrutiny. The potential lack of sources of liquidity raises substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern for the foreseeable future. Our Consolidated Financial Statements were prepared under the assumption that we will continue our operations on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and the discharge of liabilities in the normal course of business. Our Consolidated Financial Statements do not include any adjustments that might be necessary if we are unable to continue as a going concern. If we cannot continue as a going concern, our shareholders will lose some or all of their investment.
 
We are actively pursuing a broad range of strategic alternatives in order to address any doubt related to the Corporation’s ability to continue as a going concern. There can be no assurance that the pursuit of strategic alternatives will result in any transaction, or that any such transaction, if consummated, will allow the Corporation’s shareholders to avoid a loss of all or substantially all of their investment in the Corporation. In addition, a transaction, which would likely involve equity financing, would result in substantial dilution to our current shareholders and could adversely affect the price of our common stock. The pursuit of strategic alternatives may also involve significant expenses and management time and attention.
 
The Bank may be subject to a federal conservatorship or receivership if it cannot comply with the Cease and Desist Order, the Capital Restoration Plan, the Memorandum of Understanding, or if its condition continues to deteriorate.
 
In June 2009, the Bank voluntarily entered into a Cease and Desist Order with the OTS which required, among other things, capital requirements in excess of the generally applicable minimum requirements. The Bank is also required to create and implement a Capital Restoration Plan. In December 2009, the Bank submitted its Capital Restoration Plan which was rejected by the OTS. The Bank was given until May, 2010 to submit another Capital Restoration Plan and there is no assurance it will be able to submit an acceptable plan or, if a plan is accepted, implement the plan. Moreover, the condition of the Bank’s loan portfolio may continue to deteriorate in the current economic environment and thus continue to deplete the Bank’s capital and other financial resources. Therefore, should the Bank fail to comply with the Cease and Desist Order or the Memorandum of Understanding, fail to implement an acceptable Capital Restoration Plan and comply with its terms, fail to comply with capital and liquidity funding requirements, or suffer a continued deterioration in its financial condition, the Bank may be subject to being placed into a federal conservatorship or receivership by the OTS, with the FDIC appointed as conservator or receiver. If these events occur, the Corporation probably would suffer a complete loss of the value of its ownership interest in the Bank, and the Corporation subsequently may be exposed to significant claims by the FDIC and the OTS.
 
Our business is subject to liquidity risk, and changes in our source of funds may adversely affect our performance and financial condition by increasing our cost of funds.
 
Our ability to make loans is directly related to our ability to secure funding. Retail deposits and core deposits are our primary source of liquidity. We also rely on advances from the FHLB of Chicago as a funding source. We have also been granted access to Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago’s discount window, but as of March 31, 2010 we had no borrowings outstanding from this source. In addition, as of March 31, 2010, the Corporation had outstanding borrowings from the FHLB of $613.4 million, out of our maximum borrowing capacity from the FHLB at this time of $729.7 million.
 
Primary uses of funds include withdrawal of and interest payments on deposits, originations of loans and payment of operating expenses. Core deposits represent a significant source of low-cost funds. Alternative funding sources such as large balance time deposits or borrowings are a comparatively higher-cost source of funds. Liquidity risk arises from the inability to meet obligations when they come due or to manage unplanned decreases or changes in funding sources. Although we believe we can continue to pursue our core deposit funding strategy successfully, significant fluctuations in core deposit balances may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.


33


Table of Contents

Concern of our customers over deposit insurance may cause a decrease in deposits.
 
With recent increased concerns about bank failures, customers increasingly are concerned about the extent to which their deposits are insured by the FDIC. Customers may withdraw deposits in an effort to ensure that the amount they have on deposit with their bank is fully insured. On October 14, 2008, the FDIC announced a new program, the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (the “TLGP”) where all noninterest-bearing transaction deposit accounts, including all personal and business checking deposit accounts, and NOW accounts, which are capped at a rate no higher than 0.50%, are fully guaranteed, through December 31, 2010, regardless of dollar amount. We have elected to participate in the program. If this program is not extended beyond December 31, 2010, we may experience a decrease in deposits. Decreases in deposits may adversely affect our funding costs, net income, and liquidity.
 
Our liquidity is largely dependent upon our ability to receive dividends from our subsidiary bank, which accounts for most of our revenue and could affect our ability to pay dividends, and we may be unable to enhance liquidity from other sources.
 
We are a separate and distinct legal entity from our subsidiaries, including the Bank. We receive substantially all of our revenue from dividends from the Bank. These dividends are the principal source of funds to pay dividends on our common stock and interest and principal on our debt. Various federal and/or state laws and regulations limit the amount of dividends that the Bank and certain of our non-bank subsidiaries may pay us. Additionally, if our subsidiaries’ earnings are not sufficient to make dividend payments to us while maintaining adequate capital levels, our ability to make dividend payments to our preferred and common shareholders will be negatively impacted. The Bank is currently precluded from paying dividends to us.
 
Additional increases in our level of non-performing assets would have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
 
Weakening conditions in the real estate sector have adversely affected, and may continue to adversely affect, our loan portfolio. Non-performing assets increased by $144.1 million to $424.5 million, or 9.6% of total assets, at March 31, 2010 from $280.4 million, or 5.3% of total assets, at March 31, 2009. If loans that are currently non-performing further deteriorate, we may need to increase our allowance to cover additional charge-offs. If loans that are currently performing become non-performing, we may need to continue to increase our allowance for loan losses if additional losses are anticipated which would have an adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations. The increased time and expense associated with the work out of non-performing assets and potential non-performing assets also could adversely affect our operations.
 
Future sales or other dilution of the Corporation’s equity may adversely affect the market price of the Corporation’s common stock.
 
In connection with our participation in TARP CPP the Corporation has, or under other circumstances may, issue additional common stock or preferred securities, including securities convertible or exchangeable for, or that represent the right to receive, common stock. Further, pursuant to the Cease and Desist order with the OTS, the Bank must meet certain capital ratios which may require the issuance of additional equity capital, which would significantly dilute the current shareholders. The market price of the Corporation’s common stock could decline as a result of sales of a large number of shares of common stock, preferred stock or similar securities in the market. The issuance of additional capital stock would dilute the ownership interest of the Corporation’s existing shareholders.
 
Holders of our common stock have no preemptive rights and are subject to potential dilution.
 
Our articles of incorporation do not provide any shareholder with a preemptive right to subscribe for additional shares of common stock upon any increase thereof. Thus, upon the issuance of any additional shares of common stock or other voting securities of the Company or securities convertible into common stock or other voting securities, shareholders may be unable to maintain their pro rata voting or ownership interest in us.


34


Table of Contents

On June 26, 2009, the Corporation and the Bank each consented to the issuance of an Order to Cease and Desist by the Office of Thrift Supervision. If we do not raise additional capital, we may not be in compliance with the capital requirements of the Bank’s Cease and Desist Order, which could have a material adverse effect upon us.
 
The Cease and Desist Orders required that, no later than September 30, 2009, the Bank meet and maintain both a core capital ratio equal to or greater than 7 percent and a total risk-based capital ratio equal to or greater than 11 percent. Further, no later than December 31, 2009, the Bank had to meet and maintain both a core capital ratio equal to or greater than 8 percent and a total risk-based capital ratio equal to or greater than 12 percent. At March 31, 2010, the Bank and Corporation had complied with all aspects of the Cease and Desist Orders, except that the Bank, based upon presently available unaudited financial information, had core capital and total risk-based capital ratios of 3.73 percent and 7.32 percent, respectively, each below the required capital ratios set forth above. On May 21, 2010, the Bank submitted a revised Capital Restoration Plan to the OTS and continues to comply with all other requests from the OTS with the exception of achieving the capital ratios set forth above. Without a waiver by the OTS, amendment or modification of the Orders, or acceptance of the Bank’s Capital Restoration Plan, the Bank could be subject to further regulatory action.
 
All customer deposits remain fully insured to the highest limits set by the FDIC.
 
If the Bank is placed in conservatorship or receivership, it is highly likely that such action would lead to a complete loss of all value of the Company’s ownership interest in the Bank. In addition, further restrictions could be placed on the Bank if it were determined that the Bank was significantly undercapitalized, or critically undercapitalized, with increasingly greater restrictions being imposed as any level of undercapitalization increased.
 
Anchor Bancorp and the Bank are no longer considered “adequately capitalized” for regulatory purposes, which causes us to incur increased premiums for deposit insurance, limits the Bank’s ability to gather brokered deposits, and will trigger acceleration of certain of our brokered deposits.
 
As of March 31, 2010, AnchorBank is not considered “adequately capitalized” for regulatory capital purposes. As a result, the FDIC will assess higher deposit insurance premiums on the Bank, which will impact our earnings. Because the Bank is not considered “adequately capitalized”, the Bank is not able to accept new brokered deposits at this time or to renew maturing brokered deposits without FDIC approval. The Bank is also precluded from offering certificates of deposit at rates which exceed the national average from comparable certificates of deposit plus 75 basis points.
 
Our allowance for losses on loans and leases may not be adequate to cover probable losses.
 
Our level of non-performing loans increased significantly in the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010, relative to comparable periods for the preceding year. Our provision for loan losses decreased by $43.8 million to $161.9 million for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010 from $205.7 million for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009. Our allowance for loan losses increased by $42.4 million to $179.6 million, or 5.2% of total loans, at March 31, 2010 from $137.2 million, or 3.3% of total loans at March 31, 2009. Our allowance for loan losses also increased by $98.9 million to $137.2 million, or 3.3% of total loans, at March 31, 2009, from $38.3 million, or 0.9% of total loans, at March 31, 2008. Our allowance for loan and foreclosure losses was 46.2% at March 31, 2010, 52.1% at March 31, 2009 and 35.0% at March 31, 2008, respectively, of non-performing assets. There can be no assurance that any future declines in real estate market conditions and values, general economic conditions or changes in regulatory policies will not require us to increase our allowance for loan and lease losses, which would adversely affect our results of operations.
 
Future Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation assessments will hurt our earnings.
 
In May 2009, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation adopted a final rule imposing a special assessment on all insured institutions due to recent bank and savings association failures. The emergency assessment amounts to 5 basis points of total assets minus Tier 1 Capital as of June 30, 2009. We recorded an expense of $2.5 million during the quarter ended June 30, 2009, to reflect the special assessment. The assessment was collected on September 30, 2009 and was recorded against earnings for the quarter ended June 30, 2009. The special assessment negatively


35


Table of Contents

impacted the Company’s earnings for the year ended March 31, 2010, as compared to the year ended March 31, 2009, as a result of this special assessment. In November 2009, the FDIC issued a rule that required all insured depository institutions, with limited exceptions, to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012. The FDIC also adopted a uniform three-basis point increase in assessment rates effective on January 1, 2011. Any additional emergency special assessment imposed by the FDIC will likely negatively impact the Company’s earnings.
 
If our investment in the common stock of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago is other than temporarily impaired, our financial condition and results of operations could be materially impaired.
 
The Bank owns common stock of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago (“FHLBC”). The common stock is held to qualify for membership in the Federal Home Loan Bank System and to be eligible to borrow funds under the FHLBC’s advance program. The aggregate cost and fair value of our FHLBC common stock as of March 31, 2010 was $54.8 million, based on its par value. There is no market for the FHLBC common stock.
 
On October 10, 2007, the FHLBC entered into a consensual cease and desist order with the Federal Housing Finance Board, now known as the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”). Under the terms of the order, capital stock repurchases and redemptions, including redemptions upon membership withdrawal or other termination, are prohibited unless the FHLBC receives the prior approval of the Director of the Office of Supervision of the FHFA (the “Director”). The order also provides that dividend declarations are subject to the prior written approval of the Director and required the FHLBC to submit a capital structure plan to the FHFA. The FHLBC has not declared any dividends since the order was issued and it has not received approval of a capital structure plan. In July of 2008, the FHFA amended the order to permit the FHLBC to repurchase or redeem newly-issued capital stock to support new advances, subject to certain conditions set forth in the order. Our FHLBC common stock is not newly-issued and is not affected by this amendment.
 
Recent published reports indicate that certain member banks of the Federal Home Loan Bank System could have materially lower regulatory capital levels due to the application of certain accounting rules and asset quality issues. In an extreme situation, it is possible that the capitalization of a Federal Home Loan Bank, including the FHLBC, could be substantially diminished or reduced to zero. Our FHLBC common stock is accounted for in accordance with the authoritative guidance for financial services — depository and lending (ASC 942-325-35). This guidance provides that, for impairment testing purposes, the value of long term investments such as FHLBC common stock is based on the “ultimate recoverability” of the par value of the security without regard to temporary declines in value. Consequently, if events occur that give rise to substantial doubt about the ultimate recoverability of the par value of our FHLBC common stock, this investment could be deemed to be other-than-temporarily impaired, and the impairment loss that would be required to be recorded would cause our earnings to decrease by the after-tax amount of the impairment loss.
 
We are not paying dividends on our common stock and are deferring distributions on our preferred stock, and are otherwise restricted from paying cash dividends on our common stock. The failure to resume paying dividends may adversely affect us.
 
We historically paid cash dividends before suspending dividend payments on our common stock. The Federal Reserve, as a matter of policy, has indicated that bank holding companies should not pay dividends using funds from TARP CPP. There is no assurance that we will resume paying cash dividends. Even if we resume paying dividends, future payment of cash dividends on our common stock, if any, will be subject to the prior payment of all unpaid dividends and deferred distributions on our Series B Preferred Stock held by the U.S. Treasury. Further, we need prior Treasury approval to increase our quarterly cash dividends prior to January 30, 2012, or until the date we redeem all shares of Series B Preferred Stock or the Treasury has transferred all shares of Series B Preferred Stock to third parties. All dividends are declared and paid at the discretion of our board of directors and are dependent upon our liquidity, financial condition, results of operations, capital requirements and such other factors as our board of directors may deem relevant.
 
Further, dividend payments on our Series B Preferred Stock are cumulative and therefore unpaid dividends and distributions will accrue and compound on each subsequent dividend payment date. In the event of any liquidation,


36


Table of Contents

dissolution or winding up of the affairs of our company, holders of the Series B Preferred Stock shall be entitled to receive for each share of Series B Preferred Stock the liquidation amount plus the amount of any accrued and unpaid dividends. If we defer six quarterly dividend payments, whether or not consecutive, the Treasury will have the right to appoint two directors to our board of directors until all accrued but unpaid dividends have been paid. We have deferred five dividend payments on the Series B Preferred Stock held by the Treasury.
 
Maintaining or increasing market share depends on market acceptance and regulatory approval of new products and services.
 
Our success depends, in part, on the ability to adapt products and services to evolving industry standards. There is increasing pressure to provide products and services at lower prices. This can reduce net interest income and noninterest income from fee-based products and services. In addition, the widespread adoption of new technologies could require us to make substantial capital expenditures to modify or adapt existing products and services or develop new products and services. We may not be successful in introducing new products and services in response to industry trends or development in technology or those new products may not achieve market acceptance. As a result, we could lose business, be forced to price products and services on less advantageous terms to retain or attract clients, or be subject to cost increases.
 
We may fail to meet continued listing requirements with NASDAQ.
 
Our common stock is listed on the NASDAQ Global Market. As a NASDAQ listed company, we are required to comply with the continued listing requirements of the NASDAQ Market Place Rules to maintain our listing status which includes maintaining a minimum closing bid price of at least $1.00 per share for our common stock. We were notified by NASDAQ on June 24, 2010 of our non-compliance with listing standards because the bid price of our common stock closed below the required minimum $1.00 per share for the previous 30 consecutive business days. We regained compliance with the NASDAQ listing requirements but there is no guarantee we will remain compliant. If we are unable to remain compliant, our common stock could be delisted by NASDAQ. Delisting could reduce the ability of investors to purchase or sell our common stock as quickly and as inexpensively as they have done historically.
 
Continued deterioration in the real estate markets or other segments of our loan portfolio could lead to additional losses, which could have a material negative effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
 
The commercial real estate market continues to experience a variety of difficulties. As a result of increased levels of commercial and consumer delinquencies and declining real estate values, which reduce the customer’s borrowing power and the value of the collateral securing the loan, we have experienced increasing levels of charge-offs and provisions for loan losses. Continued increases in delinquency levels or continued declines in real estate values, which cause our borrowers’ loan-to-value ratios to increase, could result in additional charge-offs and provisions for loan losses. This could have a material negative effect on our business and results of operations.
 
Significant legal actions could subject us to substantial uninsured liabilities.
 
We are from time to time subject to claims related to our operations. These claims and legal actions, including supervisory actions by our regulators, could involve large monetary claims and significant defense costs. Substantial legal liability or significant regulatory action against us could have material adverse financial effects or cause significant reputational harm to us, which in turn could seriously harm our business prospects. We may be exposed to substantial uninsured liabilities, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
 
While we attempt to manage the risk from changes in market interest rates, interest rate risk management techniques are not exact. In addition, we may not be able to economically hedge our interest rate risk. A rapid or substantial increase or decrease in interest rates could adversely affect our net interest income and results of operations.
 
Our net income depends primarily upon our net interest income. Net interest income is income that remains after deducting, from total income generated by earning assets, the interest expense attributable to the acquisition of


37


Table of Contents

the funds required to support earning assets. Income from earning assets includes income from loans, investment securities and short-term investments. The amount of interest income is dependent on many factors, including the volume of earning assets, the general level of interest rates, the dynamics of changes in interest rates and the level of nonperforming loans. The cost of funds varies with the amount of funds required to support earning assets, the rates paid to attract and hold deposits, rates paid on borrowed funds and the levels of non-interest-bearing demand deposits and equity capital.
 
Different types of assets and liabilities may react differently, and at different times, to changes in market interest rates. We expect that we will periodically experience “gaps” in the interest rate sensitivities of our assets and liabilities. That means either our interest-bearing liabilities will be more sensitive to changes in market interest rates than our interest earning assets, or vice versa. When interest-bearing liabilities mature or reprice more quickly than interest earning assets, an increase in market rates of interest could reduce our net interest income. Likewise, when interest-earning assets mature or reprice more quickly than interest-bearing liabilities, falling interest rates could reduce net interest income. We are unable to predict changes in market interest rates which are affected by many factors beyond our control including inflation, recession, unemployment, money supply, domestic and international events and changes in the United States and other financial markets. Based on our net interest income simulation model, if market interest rates were to increase immediately by 100 or 200 basis points (a parallel and immediate shift of the yield curve) net interest income would be expected to increase by 7.07% and 13.49%, respectively, from what it would be if rates were to remain at March 31, 2010 levels. The actual amount of any increase or decrease may be higher or lower than that predicted by our simulation model. The output from our simulation model has not been validated or back tested against actual movements in market interest rates. We are unable to say with any degree of certainty that the modeled simulation of our net interest income would be a fair approximation of the actual change in net interest income given if one or more of the market scenarios we examine had actually occurred. Net interest income is not only affected by the level and direction of interest rates, but also by the shape of the yield curve, credit spreads, relationships between interest sensitive instruments and key driver rates, balance sheet growth, client loan and deposit preferences and the timing of changes in these variables.
 
An interruption in or breach in security of our information systems may result in a loss of customer business.
 
We rely heavily on communications and information systems to conduct our business. Any failure or interruptions or breach in security of these systems could result in failures or disruptions in our customer relationship management, general ledger, deposits, servicing, or loan origination systems. The occurrence of any failures, interruptions or security breaches of information systems used to process customer transactions could damage our reputation, result in a loss of customer business, subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny, or expose us to civil litigation and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
 
Additionally, we outsource a portion of our data processing to a third party. If our third party provider encounters difficulties or if we have difficulty in communicating with such third party, it will significantly affect our ability to adequately process and account for customer transactions, which would significantly affect our business operations. Furthermore, breaches of such third party’s technology may also cause reimbursable loss to our consumer and business customers, through no fault of our own.
 
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 our 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, cash flows and financial condition.


38


Table of Contents

Severe weather, natural disasters, acts of war or terrorism and other external events could significantly impact our business.
 
Severe weather, natural disasters, acts of war or terrorism and other adverse external events could have a significant impact on our ability to conduct business. Such events could affect the stability of our deposit base; impair the ability of borrowers to repay outstanding loans, impair the value of collateral securing loans, cause significant property damage, result in loss of revenue and/or cause us to incur additional expenses. Although management has established disaster recovery policies and procedures and is insured for these situations, the occurrence of any such event could have a material adverse effect on our business, which, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
 
We are exposed to risk of environmental liabilities with respect to properties to which it takes title.
 
In the course of our business, we may own or 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 governmental entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation and clean-up costs incurred by these parties in connection with environmental contamination, or may be required to investigate or clean up hazardous or toxic substances, or chemical releases at a property. The costs associated with investigation or remediation activities could be substantial. In addition, as the owner or former owner of 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. If we ever become subject to significant environmental liabilities, our business, financial condition, cash flows, liquidity and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.
 
Risks Related to Our Credit Agreement
 
We are party to a credit agreement that requires us to observe certain covenants that limit our flexibility in operating our business.
 
We are party to a credit agreement, dated as of June 9, 2008, by and among the Corporation, the financial institutions from time to time party to the agreement and U.S. Bank National Association, as administrative agent for the lenders, as amended (the “Credit Agreement”). The most recent amendment, Amendment No. 6 to Amended and Restated Credit Agreement was dated April 29, 2010. The Credit Agreement requires us to comply with affirmative and negative covenants customary for restricted indebtedness. These covenants limit our ability to, among other things:
 
  •  incur additional indebtedness or issue certain preferred shares;
 
  •  pay dividends on, repurchase or make distributions in respect of our capital stock or make other restricted payments;
 
  •  make certain investments;
 
  •  sell certain assets; and
 
  •  consolidate, merge, sell or otherwise dispose of all or substantially all of the Corporation’s assets.
 
The Credit Agreement provides that the Bank must attain and maintain certain capital ratios and requires us to retain a financial consult, as well as other customary representations, warranties, conditions and events of default for agreements of such type. The Agent and the lenders have certain rights, including the right to accelerate the maturity of the borrowings if all covenants are not complied with. Further, the Agent or the lenders have agreed to forbear from exercising their rights and remedies until the earlier of (i) the occurrence of an event of default, as that term is defined in the Amendment, other than failure to make principal payments, or (ii) May 31, 2011.
 
If the lenders under the secured credit facilities accelerate the repayment of borrowings, we may not have sufficient assets to make the payments when due.
 
Accordingly, this creates significant uncertainty related to the Corporation’s operations.


39


Table of Contents

We must pay in full the outstanding balance under the Credit Agreement by the earlier of May 31, 2011 or the receipt of net proceeds of a financing transaction from the sale of equity securities.
 
As of March 31, 2010, the total revolving loan commitment under the Credit Agreement was $116.3 million and aggregate borrowings under the Credit Agreement were $116.3 million. We must pay in full the outstanding balance under the Credit Agreement by the earlier of May 31, 2011 or the receipt of net proceeds of a financing transaction from the sale of equity securities of not less than $116.3 million. If the net proceeds are received from the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the terms of such investment prohibit the use of the investment proceeds to repay senior debt, then no payment is required from the Treasury investment. As of the date of this filing, we do not have sufficient cash on hand to reduce our outstanding borrowings to zero. There can be no assurance that we will be able to raise sufficient capital or have sufficient cash on hand to reduce our outstanding borrowings to zero by May 31, 2011, which may limit our ability to fund ongoing operations.
 
Unless the maturity date is extended, our outstanding borrowings under our Credit Agreement are due on May 31, 2011. The Credit Agreement does not include a commitment to refinance the remaining outstanding balance of the loans when they mature and there is no guarantee that our lenders will renew their loans at that time. Refusal to provide us with renewals or refinancing opportunities would cause our indebtedness to become immediately due and payable upon the contractual maturity of such indebtedness, which could result in our insolvency if we are unable to repay the debt.
 
If the Agent or the lenders decided not to refinance the remaining outstanding balance of the loans then at the earlier of (i) the occurrence of an event of default under the Amendment (other than a failure to make principal payments), or (ii) May 31, 2011, the agent, on behalf of the lenders may, among other remedies, seize the outstanding shares of the Bank’s capital stock held by the Corporation or other securities or assets of the Corporation’s subsidiaries which have been pledged as collateral for borrowings under the Credit Agreement. If the Agent were to take one or more of these actions, it could have a material adverse affect on our reputation, operations and ability to continue as a going concern, and you could lose your investment in the securities.
 
If we are unable to renew, replace or expand our sources of financing on acceptable terms, it may have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations and our ability to make distributions to shareholders. Upon liquidation, holders of our debt securities and lenders with respect to other borrowings will receive, and any holders of preferred stock that is currently outstanding and that we may issue in the future may receive, a distribution of our available assets prior to holders of our common stock. The decisions by investors and lenders to enter into equity and financing transactions with us will depend upon a number of factors, including our historical and projected financial performance, compliance with the terms of our current credit arrangements, industry and market trends, the availability of capital and our investors’ and lenders’ policies and rates applicable thereto, and the relative attractiveness of alternative investment or lending opportunities.
 
Risks Related to Recent Branch Sales
 
We may fail to complete the proposed sale of four branches to Nicolet National Bank of Green Bay or realize the anticipated benefits of the disposition.
 
The proposed sale of four branches to Nicolet National Bank of Green Bay are subject to a variety of conditions, including regulatory approvals for both the Bank and buyers. All regulatory applications have been filed with the appropriate regulators. The regulators may not grant these approvals as we anticipate, or the approvals may require material changes to the terms of the sale or otherwise contain material adverse conditions that would preclude closing the sale. Further, the parties may be unable to satisfy all the closing conditions. Even if we sell the braches as we expect, we may not realize the anticipated benefits to our capital and earnings.


40


Table of Contents

Risks Related to Recent Market, Legislative and Regulatory Events
 
The TARP CPP and the ARRA impose certain executive compensation and corporate governance requirements that may adversely affect us and our business, including our ability to recruit and retain qualified employees.
 
The purchase agreement we entered into in connection with our participation in the TARP CPP required us to adopt the Treasury’s standards for executive compensation and corporate governance while the Treasury holds the equity issued pursuant to the TARP CPP, including the common stock which may be issued pursuant to the warrant to purchase 7,399,103 shares of common stock. These standards generally apply to our chief executive officer, chief financial officer and the three next most highly compensated senior executive officers. The standards include:
 
  •  ensuring that incentive compensation for senior executives does not encourage unnecessary and excessive risks that threaten the value of the financial institution;
 
  •  requiring clawbacks of any bonus or incentive compensation paid to a senior executive based on statements of earnings, gains or other criteria that are later proven to be materially inaccurate;
 
  •  prohibiting golden parachute payments to senior executives; and
 
  •  agreeing not to deduct for tax purposes executive compensation in excess of $500,000 for each senior executive.
 
In particular, the change to the deductibility limit on executive compensation may increase the overall cost of our compensation programs in future periods.
 
ARRA imposed further limitations on compensation during the TARP Assistance Period including
 
  •  a prohibition on making any golden parachute payment to a senior executive officer or any of our next five most highly compensated employees;
 
  •  a prohibition on any compensation plan that would encourage manipulation of the reported earnings to enhance the compensation of any of its employees; and
 
  •  a prohibition of the five highest paid executives from receiving or accruing any bonus, retention award, or incentive compensation, or bonus except for long-term restricted stock with a value not greater than one-third of the total amount of annual compensation of the employee receiving the stock.
 
The prohibition may expand to other employees based on increases in the aggregate value of financial assistance that we receive in the future.
 
The Treasury released an interim final rule on TARP standards for compensation and corporate governance on June 10, 2009, which implemented and further expanded the limitations and restrictions imposed on executive compensation and corporate governance by the TARP CPP and ARRA. The new Treasury interim final rules, which became effective on June 15, 2009, also prohibit any tax gross-up payments to senior executive officers and the next 20 highest paid executives. The rule further authorizes the Treasury to establish the Office of the Special Master for TARP Executive Compensation with broad powers to review compensation plans and corporate governance matters of TARP CPP recipients.
 
These provisions and any future rules issued by the Treasury could adversely affect our ability to attract and retain management capable and motivated sufficiently to manage and operate our business through difficult economic and market conditions. If we are unable to attract and retain qualified employees to manage and operate our business, we may not be able to successfully execute our business strategy.
 
TARP lending goals may not be attainable.
 
Congress and the bank regulators have encouraged recipients of TARP CPP capital to use such capital to make loans and it may not be possible to safely, soundly and profitably make sufficient loans to creditworthy persons in the current economy to satisfy such goals. Congressional demands for additional lending by TARP CPP recipients, and regulatory demands for demonstrating and reporting such lending are increasing. On November 12, 2008, the


41


Table of Contents

bank regulatory agencies issued a statement encouraging banks to, among other things, “lend prudently and responsibly to creditworthy borrowers” and to “work with borrowers to preserve homeownership and avoid preventable foreclosures.” We continue to lend and have expanded our mortgage loan originations, and to report our lending to the Treasury. The future demands for additional lending are unclear and uncertain, and we could be forced to make loans that involve risks or terms that we would not otherwise find acceptable or in our shareholders’ best interest. Such loans could adversely affect our results of operation and financial condition, and may be in conflict with bank regulations and requirements as to liquidity and capital. The profitability of funding such loans using deposits may be adversely affected by increased FDIC insurance premiums.
 
The Company and the Bank are subject to extensive regulation, supervision and examination by federal banking authorities.
 
Changes in applicable regulations or legislation could have a substantial impact on our operations. Additional legislation and regulations that could significantly affect our powers, authority and operations may be enacted or adopted in the future, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. In that regard, proposals for legislation restructuring the regulation of the financial services industry are currently under consideration. Adoption of such proposals could, among other things, increase the overall costs of regulatory compliance. Further, regulators have significant discretion and authority to prevent or remedy unsafe or unsound practices or violations of laws or regulations by financial institutions and holding companies in the performance of their supervisory and enforcement duties. These powers recently have been utilized more frequently due to the serious national, regional and local economic conditions that we and other financial institutions are facing. The exercise of regulatory authority may have a negative impact on our financial condition and results of operations. We cannot predict the actual effects of various governmental, regulatory, monetary and fiscal initiatives, which have been and may be enacted on the financial markets. The terms and costs of these activities, or the failure of these actions to help stabilize the financial markets, asset prices, market liquidity, and a continuation or worsening of current financial market and economic conditions could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and the trading price of our common stock. In addition, failure or the inability to comply with these various requirements can lead to diminished reputation and investor confidence, reduced franchise value, loss of business, curtailment of expansion opportunities, fines and penalties, intervention or sanctions by regulators and costly litigation or expensive additional controls and systems.
 
There can be no assurance that enacted legislation or any proposed federal programs will stabilize the U.S. financial system and such legislation and programs may adversely affect us.
 
There has been much legislative and regulatory action in response to the financial crises affecting the banking system and financial markets and threats to investment banks and other financial institutions. There can be no assurance, however, as to the actual impact that the legislation and its implementing regulations or any other governmental program will have on the financial markets. The failure of the actions by the legislators, the regulatory bodies or the U.S. government to stabilize the financial markets and a continuation or worsening of current financial market conditions could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and access to credit or the trading price of our common shares.
 
Contemplated and proposed legislation, state and federal programs, and increased government control or influence may adversely affect us by increasing the uncertainty in our lending operations and expose us to increased losses, including legislation that would allow bankruptcy courts to permit modifications to mortgage loans on a debtor’s primary residence, moratoriums on a mortgagor’s right to foreclose on property, and requirements that fees be paid to register other real estate owned property. Statutes and regulations may be altered that may potentially increase our costs to service and underwrite mortgage loans. Additionally, federal intervention and operation of formerly private institutions may adversely affect our rights under contracts with such institutions and the way in which we conduct business in certain markets.


42


Table of Contents

The fiscal and monetary policies of the federal government and its agencies could have a material adverse effect on our earnings.
 
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System regulates the supply of money and credit in the United States. Its policies determine in large part the cost of funds for lending and investing and the return earned on those loans and investments, both of which affect the net interest margin. The resultant changes in interest rates can also materially decrease the value of certain financial assets we hold, such as debt securities. Its policies can also adversely affect borrowers, potentially increasing the risk that they may fail to repay their loans. Changes in Federal Reserve Board policies are beyond our control and difficult to predict; consequently, the impact of these changes on our activities and results of operations is difficult to predict.
 
Management’s ability to retain key officers and employees may change.
 
Our future operating results depend substantially upon the continued service of its executive officers and key personnel. Our future operating results also depend in significant part upon its ability to attract and retain qualified management, financial, technical, marketing, sales and support personnel. Competition for qualified personnel is intense, and we cannot ensure success in attracting or retaining qualified personnel. There may be only a limited number of persons with the requisite skills to serve in these positions, and it may be increasingly difficult for us to hire personnel over time.
 
Our ability to retain key officers and employees may be further impacted by legislation and regulation affecting the financial services industry. For example, Section 7001 of the ARRA which amended Section 111 of the EESA in its entirety, as well as the final interim regulations issued by the U.S. Treasury, significantly expanded the executive compensation restrictions. Such restrictions applied to us as a participant in the TARP CPP and generally continued to apply for as long as any Treasury owned shares were outstanding. These ARRA restrictions shall not apply to us during such time when the federal government only holds warrants to purchase common shares. Such restrictions and standards may further impact management’s ability to compete with financial institutions that are not subject to the ARRA limitations on executive compensation.
 
Our business, financial condition, or results of operations could be materially adversely affected by the loss of any of its key employees, or our inability to attract and retain skilled employees.
 
We are subject to various reporting requirements that increase compliance costs, and failure to comply timely could adversely affect our reputation and the value of our common stock.
 
We are required to comply with various corporate governance and financial reporting requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as well as rules and regulations adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public Corporation Accounting Oversight Board and Nasdaq. In particular, we are required to include management and independent auditor reports on internal controls as part of our Annual Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. We expect to continue to spend significant amounts of time and money on compliance with these rules. In addition, pursuant to our Cease and Desist Order with OTS, we must prepare and submit various reports and may face further reporting obligations in the future depending upon our financial condition. Compliance with various regulatory reporting requires significant commitments of time from management and our directors, which reduces the time available for the performance of their other responsibilities. Our failure to track and comply with the various rules may materially adversely affect our reputation, ability to obtain the necessary certifications to financial statements, lead to additional regulatory enforcement actions, and could adversely affect the value of our common stock.
 
Non-compliance with USA PATRIOT Act, Bank Secrecy Act, or other laws and regulations could result in fines or sanctions, and curtail expansion opportunities
 
Financial institutions are required under the USA PATRIOT and Bank Secrecy Acts to develop programs to prevent financial institutions from being used for money laundering and terrorist activities. Financial institutions are also obligated to file suspicious activity reports with the U.S. Treasury’s office of Financial Crimes Enforcement Network if such activities are detected. These rules also require financial institutions to establish procedures for identifying and verifying the identity of customers seeking to open new financial accounts. Failure or the inability to


43


Table of Contents

comply with these regulations could result in fines or penalties, curtailment of expansion opportunities, intervention or sanctions by regulators and costly litigation or expensive additional controls and systems. During the last few years, several banking institutions have received large fines for non-compliance with these laws and regulations. We have developed policies and continues to augment procedures and systems designed to assist in compliance with these laws and regulations.
 
Item 1B.   Unresolved Staff Comments.
 
None
 
Item 2.   Properties
 
At March 31, 2010, the Bank conducted its business from its headquarters and main office at 25 West Main Street, Madison, Wisconsin and 70 other full-service offices and two loan origination offices. The Bank owns 44 of its full-service offices, leases the land on which four such offices are located, and leases the remaining 23 full-service offices. The Bank also owns a building at its headquarters which hosts its support center, one vacant lot for sale as well as three land sites for future development. In addition, the Bank leases its two loan-origination facilities. The leases expire between 2010 and 2030. The aggregate net book value at March 31, 2010 of the properties owned or leased, including headquarters, properties and leasehold improvements, was $32.3 million. See Note 9 to the Corporation’s Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8, for information regarding premises and equipment.
 
Item 3.   Legal Proceedings
 
The Corporation is involved in routine legal proceedings occurring in the ordinary course of business which, in the aggregate, are believed by management of the Corporation to be immaterial to the financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation.
 
Item 4.   Reserved
 
This item is not in use.
 
PART II
 
Item 5.   Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Repurchases of Equity Securities
 
Common Stock
 
The Corporation’s Common Stock is traded on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “ABCW”. At June 4, 2010, there were approximately 2,500 stockholders of record. That number does not include stockholders holding their stock in street name or nominee’s name.


44


Table of Contents

Quarterly Stock Price and Dividend Information
 
The table below shows the reported high and low sale prices of Common Stock and cash dividends paid per share of Common Stock during the periods indicated in fiscal 2010 and 2009.
 
                         
            Cash
Quarter Ended
  High   Low   Dividend
 
March 31, 2010
  $ 1.400     $ 0.640     $  
December 31, 2009
    1.350       0.370        
September 30, 2009
    1.650       1.020        
June 30, 2009
    2.420       0.850        
                         
March 31, 2009
  $ 2.770     $ 0.380     $  
December 31, 2008
    7.730       1.810       0.010  
September 30, 2008
    9.450       5.860       0.100  
June 30, 2008
    19.920       7.010       0.180  
 
For information regarding restrictions on the payments of dividends by the Bank to the Corporation, see “Item 1. Business — Regulation and Supervision — The Bank — Restrictions on Capital Distributions,” “Item 1A. Risk Factors — Risks Related to Our Business” and “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources” of this Form 10-K.
 
Repurchases of Common Stock
 
As of March 31, 2010, the Corporation does not have a stock repurchase plan in place.


45


Table of Contents

Performance Graph
 
The following graph compares the yearly cumulative total return on the Common Stock over a five-year measurement period since March 31, 2005 with (i) the yearly cumulative total return on the stocks included in the Nasdaq Stock Market Index (for United States companies) and (ii) the yearly cumulative total return on the stocks included in the Morningstar, Inc. index (formally known as the Hemscott Group) Index. All of these cumulative returns are computed assuming the reinvestment of dividends at the frequency with which dividends were paid during the applicable years.
 
(PERFORMANCE GRAPH)


46


Table of Contents

Item 6.   Selected Financial Data
 
The following information at and for the years ended March 31, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007 and 2006 has been derived from the Corporation’s historical audited consolidated financial statements for those years.
 
                                         
    At or For Year Ended March 31,
    2010   2009   2008(4)   2007   2006
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
 
Operations Data:
                                       
Interest income
  $ 217,082     $ 260,262     $ 296,675     $ 280,692     $ 238,550  
Interest expense
    132,271       135,472       167,670       152,646       105,846  
Net interest income
    84,811       124,790       129,005       128,046       132,704  
Provision for loan losses
    161,926       205,719       22,551       11,255       3,900  
Real estate investment partnership revenue
          2,130       8,399       18,977       33,974  
Other non-interest income
    56,753       43,817       42,747       35,538       33,037  
Real estate investment partnership cost of sales
          1,736       8,489       17,607       28,509  
Other non-interest expense
    158,200       224,195       98,731       90,382       89,973  
Income (loss) before income tax expense (benefit)
    (178,562 )     (260,913 )     50,380       63,317       77,333  
Income tax expense (benefit)
    (1,500 )     (30,098 )     19,650       24,586       30,927  
Net income (loss)
    (177,062 )     (230,815 )     30,730       38,731       46,406  
Loss (income) attributable to non-controlling interest in real estate partnerships
          (148 )     (402 )     (241 )     1,723  
Preferred stock dividends and discount accretion
    (12,911 )     (2,172 )                  
Net income (loss) available to common equity of Anchor BanCorp
    (189,973 )     (232,839 )     31,132       38,972       44,683  
Earnings (loss) per common share:
                                       
Basic
    (8.97 )     (11.05 )     1.48       1.82       2.07  
Diluted
    (8.97 )     (11.05 )     1.48       1.80       2.03  
Balance Sheet Data:
                                       
Total assets
  $ 4,416,265     $ 5,272,110     $ 5,149,557     $ 4,539,685     $ 4,275,140  
Investment securities available for sale
    416,203       484,985       356,406       321,516       296,959  
Investment securities held to maturity
    39       50       59       68       77  
Loans receivable held for investment, net
    3,229,580       3,896,439       4,202,833       3,874,049       3,614,265  
Deposits and accrued interest
    3,552,762       3,923,827       3,539,994       3,248,246       3,040,217  
Other borrowed funds
    796,153       1,078,392       1,206,761       900,477       861,861  
Stockholders’ equity
    30,113       211,365       345,116       336,866       321,025  
Common shares outstanding
    21,685,925       21,569,785       21,348,170       21,669,094       21,854,303  
Other Financial Data:
                                       
Book value per common share at end of period
  $ (3.68 )   $ 4.70     $ 16.17     $ 15.55     $ 14.69  
Dividends paid per share
    0.00       0.29       0.71       0.67       0.62  
Dividend payout ratio
    0.00 %     (2.62 )%     47.97 %     36.81 %     29.95 %
Yield on earning assets
    4.74       5.63       6.25       6.71       6.05  
Cost of funds
    2.82       2.94       3.65       3.80       2.80  
Interest rate spread
    1.92       2.69       2.60       2.91       3.25  
Net interest margin(1)
    1.85       2.70       2.72       3.06       3.36  
Return on average assets(2)
    (3.67 )     (4.65 )     0.63       0.89       1.08  
Return on average equity(3)
    (158.84 )     (77.05 )     9.17       11.75       14.16  
Average equity to average assets
    2.31       6.03       6.82       7.55       7.62  
 
 
(1) Net interest margin represents net interest income as a percentage of average interest-earning assets.
 
(2) Return on average assets represents net income as a percentage of average total assets.
 
(3) Return on average equity represents net income as a percentage of average total stockholders’ equity.
 
(4) During the fourth quarter of the year ended March 31, 2008, the Corporation acquired S&C Bank, which consisted of total assets of $381.1 million, total deposits of $305.5 million and total loans of $280.8 million.


47


Table of Contents

 
Item 7.   Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
 
Set forth below is a discussion and analysis of the Corporation’s financial condition and results of operations, including information on the Corporation’s asset/liability management strategies, sources of liquidity and capital resources and significant accounting policies. Management is required to make estimates, assumptions, and judgments that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. These estimates, assumptions, and judgments are based on information available as of the date of the financial statements; accordingly, as this information changes, actual results could differ from the estimates, assumptions, and judgments reflected in the financial statements. Certain policies inherently have a greater reliance on the use of estimates, assumptions, and judgments and, as such, have a greater possibility of producing results that could be materially different than originally reported. Management believes the following policies are both important to the portrayal of our financial condition and results of operations and require subjective or complex judgments; therefore, management considers the following to be critical accounting policies. Management has reviewed the application of these polices with the Audit Committee of our board of directors. Management’s discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and supplemental data contained elsewhere in this report.
 
Critical Accounting Policies
 
There are a number of accounting policies that require the use of judgment. Some of the more significant policies are as follows:
 
  •  Declines in the fair value of held-to-maturity and available-for-sale securities below their amortized cost that are deemed to be other than temporary due to credit loss are reflected in earnings as realized losses. In estimating other-than-temporary impairment losses on debt securities, management considers many factors which include: (1) the length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than cost, (2) the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer, and (3) the intent and ability of the Corporation to retain its investment in the issuer for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery in fair value. To determine if an other-than-temporary impairment exists on a debt security, the Corporation first determines if (a) it intends to sell the security or (b) it is more likely than not that it will be required to sell the security before its anticipated recovery. If either of the conditions is met, the Corporation will recognize an other-than-temporary impairment in earnings equal to the difference between the fair value of the security and its adjusted cost. If neither of the conditions is met, the Corporation determines (a) the amount of the impairment related to credit loss and (b) the amount of the impairment due to all other factors. The difference between the present values of the cash flows expected to be collected and the amortized cost basis is the credit loss. The credit loss is the amount of the other-than-temporary impairment that is recognized in earnings and is a reduction to the cost basis of the security. The amount of total impairment related to all other factors is included in other comprehensive income (loss).
 
  •  The allowance for loan losses is a valuation allowance for probable and inherent losses incurred in the loan portfolio. The allowance is comprised of both a specific and general component. Specific allowances are provided on impaired loans pursuant to accounting standards. The general allowance is based on historical loss experience, adjusted for qualitative and environmental factors pursuant to ASC 450-2 “Loss Contingencies” and other related regulatory guidance. At least quarterly, we review the assumptions and methodology related to the general allowance in an effort to update and refine the estimate.
 
In determining the general allowance we have segregated the loan portfolio by collateral type. By doing so we are better able to identify trends in borrower behavior and loss severity. For each collateral type, we compute a historical loss factor. In determining the appropriate period of activity to use in computing the historical loss factor we look at trends in quarterly net charge-off ratios. It is our intention to utilize a period of activity that we believe to be most reflective of current experience. Changes in the historical period are made when there is a distinct change in the trend of net charge-off experience. Given the changes in the credit market that have occurred in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, management reviewed each strata’s historical losses by quarter for any trends that would indicate a shorter look back period would be more representative. Based on this review, it was determined that increases in charge-offs in the more recent


48


Table of Contents

quarters were being diluted by minimal charge-offs in the earlier quarters for each strata except acquisitions and development. As a result, a twelve quarter historical loss period was used for these stratas, versus a 20 quarter historical loss period, as it was determined to be more representative of the current credit market.
 
In addition to the historical loss factor, we consider the impact of the following qualitative factors: changes in lending policies, procedures and practices, economic and industry trends and conditions, experience, ability and depth of lending management, level of and trends in past dues and delinquent loans, changes in the quality of the loan review system, changes in the value of the underlying collateral for collateral dependent loans, changes in credit concentrations, portfolio size and other external factors such as legal and regulatory. In determining the impact, if any, of an individual qualitative factor, we compare the current underlying facts and circumstances surrounding a particular factor with those in the historical periods, adjusting the historical loss factor in a directionally consistent manner with changes in the qualitative factor. We will continue to analyze the qualitative factors on a quarterly basis, adjusting the historical loss factor both up and down, to a factor we believe is appropriate for the probable and inherent risk of loss in our portfolio.
 
Specific allowances are determined as a result of our loan review process. When a loan is identified as impaired it is evaluated for loss using either the fair value of collateral less selling costs or a discounted cash flow analysis as a determinant of fair value. If fair value exceeds the Bank’s carrying value of the loan no loss is anticipated and no specific reserve is established. However, if the Bank’s carrying value of the loan is greater than fair value a specific reserve is established. In either situation, loans identified as impaired are excluded from the calculation of the general reserve.
 
We regularly obtain updated appraisals for real estate collateral dependent loans for which we deem it appropriate to assess whether or not a specific asset is impaired. Loans having unpaid principal balance of $500,000 or less and considered to be include in a homogenous pool of assets do not require an impairment analysis therefore updated appraisals are not obtained until the foreclosure or sheriff sale occurs. Due to certain limitations, including, but not limited to, the availability of qualified appraisers, the time necessary to complete acceptable appraisals, the availability of comparable market data and information, and other considerations, in certain instances current appraisals are not readily available. The fair value of such loans for which current and acceptable appraisals are not available is approximately $51 million based on the Corporation’s best estimate of fair value, discounted at various rates depending on the collateral type.
 
Collateral dependent loans are considered to be non-performing at such time that they become ninety days past due or a probable loss is expected. At the time a loan is determined to be non-performing it is downgraded per the Corporation’s loan rating system, it is placed on non-accrual, and an allowance consistent with the Corporation’s historical experience for similar “substandard” loans is established. Within ninety days of this determination a comprehensive analysis of the loans is completed, including ordering new appraisals, where necessary, and an adjustment to the estimated allowance is recognized to reflect the fair value of the loan based on the underlying collateral or the discounted cash flows. Until such date at which an updated appraisal is obtained, when deemed necessary, the Corporation applies discounts to the existing appraisals in estimating the fair value of collateral. These discounts are 25 percent on commercial real estate and 35 percent on unimproved land. These discount percentages are based on actual experience over the past nine month period. If the appraisal is within one year, the Corporation applies a discount of 15 percent. The Corporation believes these discounts reflect market factors, the locations in which the collateral is located and the estimated cost to dispose.
 
We consider the allowance for loan losses at March 31, 2010 to be at an acceptable level. Although we believe that we have established and maintained the allowance for loan losses at an adequate level, changes may be necessary if future economic and other conditions differ substantially from the current environment. Although we use the best information available, the level of the allowance for loan losses remains an estimate that is subject to significant judgment and short-term change.
 
  •  Real estate acquired by foreclosure or by deed in lieu of foreclosure and other repossessed assets, upon initial recognition, is carried at the lower of cost or fair value, less estimated selling expenses. Each parcel of real estate owned is appraised within six months of the time of acquisition of such property and periodically


49


Table of Contents

  thereafter. At the date of foreclosure any write down to fair value less estimated selling costs is charged to the allowance for loan losses. Costs relating to the development and improvement of the property are capitalized; holding period costs and subsequent changes to the valuation allowance are charged to expense. Foreclosed properties and repossessed assets are re-measured at fair value after initial recognition through the use of a valuation allowance on foreclosed assets. The value may be adjusted based on a new appraisal or as a result of an adjustment to the sale price of the property.
 
  •  Mortgage servicing rights are established on loans that are originated and subsequently sold with servicing retained. A portion of the loan’s book basis is allocated to mortgage servicing rights at the time of sale. The fair value of mortgage servicing rights is the present value of estimated future net cash flows from the servicing relationship using current market participant assumptions for prepayments or defaults, servicing costs and other factors. As the loans are repaid and net servicing revenue is earned, mortgage servicing rights are amortized into expense. Net servicing revenues are expected to exceed this amortization expense. However, if actual prepayment experience or defaults exceed what was originally anticipated, net servicing revenues may be less than expected and mortgage servicing rights may be impaired. Mortgage servicing rights are carried at the lower of amortized cost or fair value.
 
  •  The Corporation provides for federal income taxes with a deferred tax liability or deferred tax asset computed by applying the current statutory tax rates to net taxable or deductible differences between the tax basis of an asset or liability and its reported amount in the consolidated financial statements that will result in taxable or deductible amounts in future periods. The Corporation regularly reviews the carrying amount of its deferred tax assets to determine if the establishment of a valuation allowance is necessary. If based on the available evidence, it is more likely than not that all or a portion of the Corporation’s deferred tax assets will not be realized in future periods, a deferred tax valuation allowance would be established. Consideration is given to various positive and negative factors that could affect the realization of the deferred tax assets.
 
In evaluating this available evidence, management considers, among other things, historical financial performance, expectation of future earnings, the ability to carry back losses to recoup taxes previously paid, length of statutory carry forward periods, experience with operating loss and tax credit carry forwards not expiring unused, tax planning strategies and timing of reversals of temporary differences. Significant judgment is required in assessing future earning trends and the timing of reversals of temporary differences. The Corporation’s evaluation is based on current tax laws as well as management’s expectations of future performance.
 
As a result of its evaluation, the Corporation has recorded a full valuation allowance on its net deferred tax asset.
 
Recent Accounting Pronouncements.  Refer to Note 1 of our consolidated financial statements for a description of recent accounting pronouncements including the respective dates of adoption and effects on results of operations and financial condition.
 
Segment Review
 
The Corporation’s primary reportable segment is community banking. Community banking consists of lending and deposit gathering (as well as other banking-related products and services) to businesses, governments and consumers and the support to deliver, fund and manage such banking services. The Corporation’s real estate segment invested in real estate developments. During the quarter ended September 30, 2009, IDI sold its interest in several limited partnerships as well as substantially all of its remaining assets. The assets that remain at IDI include an equity interest in one commercial real estate property and one real estate development along with various notes receivable.


50


Table of Contents

The Corporation’s profitability is predominantly dependent on net interest income, non-interest income, the level of the provision for loan losses, non-interest expense and taxes of its community banking segment. The following table sets forth the results of operations of the Corporation’s segments for the periods indicated.
 
                                 
    Year Ended March 31, 2010  
                      Consolidated
 
    Real Estate
    Community
    Intersegment
    Financial
 
    Investments     Banking     Eliminations     Statements  
    (In thousands)  
 
Interest income
  $ 95     $ 217,144     $ (157 )   $ 217,082  
Interest expense
    128       132,300       (157 )     132,271  
                                 
Net interest income (loss)
    (33 )     84,844             84,811  
Provision for loan losses
          161,926             161,926  
                                 
Net interest loss after provision for loan losses
    (33 )     (77,082 )           (77,115 )
Other revenue from real estate operations
    1,684                   1,684  
Other income
          55,093       (24 )     55,069  
Other expense from real estate partnership operations
    (4,983 )           24       (4,959 )
Other expense
          (153,241 )           (153,241 )
                                 
Income (loss) before income taxes
    (3,332 )     (175,230 )           (178,562 )
Income tax expense (benefit)
    (488 )     (1,012 )           (1,500 )
                                 
Net income (loss)
  $ (2,844 )   $ (174,218 )   $     $ (177,062 )
                                 
Total assets at end of period
  $ 5,945     $ 4,410,320     $     $ 4,416,265  
                                 
 


51


Table of Contents

                                 
    Year Ended March 31, 2009  
                      Consolidated
 
    Real Estate
    Community
    Intersegment
    Financial
 
    Investments     Banking     Eliminations     Statements  
    (In thousands)  
 
Interest income
  $ 102     $ 261,373     $ (1,213 )   $ 260,262  
Interest expense
    1,116       135,569       (1,213 )     135,472  
                                 
Net interest income (loss)
    (1,014 )     125,804             124,790  
Provision for loan losses
          205,719             205,719  
                                 
Net interest loss after provision for loan losses
    (1,014 )     (79,915 )           (80,929 )
Real estate investment partnership revenue
    2,130                   2,130  
Other revenue from real estate operations
    8,194                   8,194  
Other income
          35,297       (90 )     35,207  
Real estate investment partnership cost of sales
    (1,736 )                 (1,736 )
Other expense from real estate partnership operations
    (9,596 )           90       (9,506 )
Real estate partnership impairment
    (17,631 )                 (17,631 )
Non-controlling interest in income of real estate partnerships
    148                   148  
Other expense
          (196,642 )           (196,642 )
                                 
Loss before income taxes
    (19,505 )     (241,260 )           (260,765 )
Income tax benefit
    (1,068 )     (29,030 )           (30,098 )
                                 
Net loss
  $ (18,437 )   $ (212,230 )   $     $ (230,667 )
                                 
Total assets at end of period
  $ 25,070     $ 5,247,040     $     $ 5,272,110  
                                 
 

52


Table of Contents

                                 
    Year Ended March 31, 2008  
                      Consolidated
 
    Real Estate
    Community
    Intersegment
    Financial
 
    Investments     Banking     Eliminations     Statements  
    (In thousands)  
 
Interest income
  $ 141     $ 298,515     $ (1,981 )   $ 296,675  
Interest expense
    1,828       167,823       (1,981 )     167,670  
                                 
Net interest income (loss)
    (1,687 )     130,692             129,005  
Provision for loan losses
          22,551             22,551  
                                 
Net interest income (loss) after provision for loan losses
    (1,687 )     108,141             106,454  
Real estate investment partnership revenue
    8,399                   8,399  
Other revenue from real estate operations
    7,664                   7,664  
Other income
          35,643       (119 )     35,524  
Real estate investment partnership cost of sales
    (8,489 )                 (8,489 )
Other expense from real estate partnership operations
    (10,291 )           119       (10,172 )
Non-controlling interest in income of real estate partnerships
    402                   402  
Other expense
          (89,000 )           (89,000 )
                                 
Income (loss) before income taxes
    (4,002 )     54,784             50,782  
Income tax expense (benefit)
    (1,682 )     21,332             19,650  
                                 
Net income (loss)
  $ (2,320 )   $ 33,452     $     $ 31,132  
                                 
Total assets at end of period
  $ 72,028     $ 5,077,529     $     $ 5,149,557  
                                 
Goodwill
  $     $ 72,375     $     $ 72,375  
                                 
 
Results of Operations
 
Comparison of Years Ended March 31, 2010 and 2009
 
General.  Net income increased $53.7 million to a net loss of $177.1 million in fiscal 2010 from net loss of $230.8 million in fiscal 2009. The primary component of this increase in earnings for fiscal 2010, as compared to fiscal 2009, was a decrease in non-interest expense of $67.7 million, due to a $72.2 million impairment of goodwill in the prior year. The increase in net income was also attributable to a $43.8 million decrease in the provision for loan losses. In addition, non-interest income increased $10.8 million. These increases were partially offset by a decrease in net interest income of $40.0 million and a decrease in income tax benefit of $28.6 million. An allowance of $71.3 million was placed on the deferred tax asset during the year ended March 31, 2010. A full valuation allowance has been recorded on the net deferred tax asset due to the uncertainty of the Corporation to create sufficient taxable income in the near future to fully utilize it. The returns on average assets and average stockholders’ equity for fiscal 2010 were (3.67)% and (158.84)%, respectively, as compared to (4.65)% and (77.05)%, respectively, for fiscal 2009.
 
Net Interest Income.  Net interest income decreased by $40.0 million during fiscal 2010 due to the decline in yield on interest earning assets which was offset by the decreased cost of interest bearing liabilities. The primary factor that contributed to the decline in net interest income was the fact that approximately $12.7 million of interest income on nonaccrual loans was reversed when the loans were placed on nonaccrual status. The average balances of interest-earning assets decreased to $4.58 billion and the average balance of interest-bearing liabilities increased to $4.69 billion in fiscal 2010, from $4.62 billion and $4.61 billion, respectively, in fiscal 2009. The ratio of average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities decreased to 0.98 in fiscal 2010 from 1.00 in fiscal

53


Table of Contents

2009. The average yield on interest-earning assets (4.74% in fiscal 2010 versus 5.63% in fiscal 2009) decreased, as did the average cost on interest-bearing liabilities (2.82% in fiscal 2010 versus 2.94% in fiscal 2009). The net interest margin decreased to 1.85% in fiscal 2010 from 2.70% in fiscal 2009 and the interest rate spread decreased to 1.92% from 2.69% in fiscal 2010 and 2009, respectively. The decrease in interest rate spread was reflective of a decrease in the yields on loans as interest rates decreased, which was slightly offset by a smaller decrease in the cost of funds. These factors are reflected in the analysis of changes in net interest income arising from changes in the volume of interest-earning assets, interest-bearing liabilities and the rates earned and paid on such assets and liabilities as set forth under “Rate/Volume Analysis” below. The analysis indicates that the decrease of $40.0 million in net interest income stemmed from net rate/volume decreases in interest-earning assets of $43.2 million offset by the net rate/volume decreases of interest- bearing liabilities of $3.2 million.
 
Provision for Loan Losses.  The provision for loan losses decreased $43.8 million from $205.7 million in fiscal 2009 to $161.9 million in fiscal 2010 based on management’s ongoing evaluation of asset quality. This charge reflected a decrease in provision to $161.9 million during the year allocated between specific reserves on impaired credits and an increase to the general reserve. The decrease in provision and specific and general reserves was in response to the following trends identified in the portfolio: (i) a proactive method of identification of criticized assets and (ii) continued analysis of the commercial real estate, construction and land portfolios. These increases resulted in the Corporation’s allowance for loan losses increasing $42.4 million from $137.2 million at March 31, 2009 to $179.6 million at March 31, 2010. The allowance for loan losses represented 5.23% of total loans at March 31, 2010, as compared to 3.34% of total loans at March 31, 2009. For further discussion of the allowance for loan losses, see “Financial Condition — Allowance for Loan and Foreclosure Losses.”
 
Future provisions for loan losses will continue to be based upon management’s assessment of the overall loan portfolio and the underlying collateral, trends in non-performing loans, current economic conditions and other relevant factors in order to maintain the allowance for loan losses at adequate levels to provide for probable and estimable future losses. The establishment of the amount of the loan loss allowance inherently involves judgments by management as to the adequacy of the allowance, which ultimately may or may not be correct. Higher rates of loan defaults than anticipated would likely result in a need to increase provisions in future years. Also, as multi-family and commercial loan portfolios increase, additional provisions would likely be added to the loan loss allowance as they carry a higher risk of loss.
 
Non-interest Income.  Non-interest income increased $10.9 million to $56.8 million for fiscal 2010 compared to $45.9 million for fiscal 2009 primarily due to the increase of net gain on sale of investment securities of $14.4 million for fiscal 2010. In addition, net gain on sale of loans increased $7.9 million due to an increase in refinancing activity. Partially offsetting these increases were decreases in other categories. Income from the Corporation’s real estate segment decreased $8.6 million and other non-interest income decreased $1.1 million primarily due to decreased fee income.
 
Non-interest Expense.  Non-interest expense decreased $67.7 million to $158.2 million for fiscal 2010 compared to $225.9 million for fiscal 2009 primarily due to a $72.2 million impairment of goodwill and a $17.6 million impairment of real estate in the prior year. In addition, expenses of the real estate segment decreased $6.3 million, mortgage servicing rights impairment expense decreased $4.3 million and compensation expense decreased $3.4 million. These decreases were offset by an increase in federal deposit insurance premiums of $14.7 million, an increase in other non-interest expense of $9.4 million due to increased legal and consulting fees, an increase in net expense of REO operations of $8.8 million and an increase in the impairment of foreclosure cost advances of $4.7 million due to the fact that previously capitalized foreclosure cost advances were deemed unrecoverable.
 
Real Estate Segment.  Net income generated by the real estate segment increased $15.6 million for fiscal 2010 to a net loss of $2.8 million from a net loss of $18.4 million in fiscal 2009. During the quarter ended September 30, 2009, IDI sold its interest in several limited partnerships as well as substantially all of its remaining assets, which included some developed lots. The assets that remain at IDI include an equity interest in one commercial real estate property and one real estate development along with various notes receivable.


54


Table of Contents

Non-Controlling Interests.  Non-controlling interest in income (loss) of real estate partnership operations represents the share of income of development partners in the Corporation’s real estate investment partnerships. Such non-controlling interest increased $148,000 from a loss of $148,000 in fiscal 2009 to zero in fiscal 2010.
 
For more information on the effects to the consolidated operations of the Corporation, see “Real Estate Held for Development and Sale and Variable Interest Entities,” in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8.
 
Income Taxes.  Income tax benefit decreased $28.6 million for fiscal 2010 as compared to fiscal 2009. The effective tax rate for fiscal 2010 was (0.84)% as compared to (11.65)% for fiscal 2009. The decline in the effective tax rate was primarily due to the valuation allowance of $71.3 million placed on the deferred tax asset during the year ended March 31, 2010. A full valuation allowance has been recorded on the net deferred tax asset due to the uncertainty of the Corporation to create sufficient taxable income in the near future to fully utilize it. See Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8.
 
Comparison of Years Ended March 31, 2009 and 2008
 
General.  Net income decreased $261.5 million to a loss of $230.8 million in fiscal 2009 from net income of $30.7 million in fiscal 2008. The primary component of this decrease in earnings for fiscal 2009, as compared to fiscal 2008, was a $183.2 million increase in the provision for loan losses. The decrease in net income was also attributable to an increase in non-interest expense of $118.7 million, primarily due to a $72.2 million write down of goodwill due to impairment. In addition, non-interest income decreased $5.2 million and net interest income decreased $4.2 million. These decreases were partially offset by a decrease in income tax expense of $49.7 million. An allowance of $46.3 million was placed on the deferred tax asset during the year ended March 31, 2009. A valuation allowance was recognized because it is more-likely-than-not that a portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. The remaining deferred tax asset is realizable due to the ability to carry back losses to prior years, future reversals of existing temporary differences, and the expectation of future taxable income. The returns on average assets and average stockholders’ equity for fiscal 2009 were (4.65)% and (77.05)%, respectively, as compared to 0.63% and 9.17%, respectively, for fiscal 2008.
 
Net Interest Income.  Net interest income decreased by $4.2 million during fiscal 2009 due to the decreased cost of interest bearing liabilities which was offset by the decline in yield on interest earning assets. Factors that contributed to the decline in net interest income were the fact that approximately $5.6 million of interest income on nonaccrual loans was reversed when the loans were placed on nonaccrual status. The average balances of interest-earning assets decreased to $4.62 billion and the average balance of interest-bearing liabilities increased to $4.61 billion in fiscal 2009, from $4.75 billion and $4.60 billion, respectively, in fiscal 2008. The ratio of average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities decreased to 1.00 in fiscal 2009 from 1.03 in fiscal 2008. The average yield on interest-earning assets (5.63% in fiscal 2009 versus 6.25% in fiscal 2008) decreased, as did the average cost on interest-bearing liabilities (2.94% in fiscal 2009 versus 3.65% in fiscal 2008). The net interest margin decreased to 2.70% in fiscal 2009 from 2.72% in fiscal 2008 and the interest rate spread increased to 2.69% from 2.60% in fiscal 2009 and 2008, respectively. The increase in interest rate spread was reflective of a decrease in the cost of funds, which was slightly offset by a smaller decrease in the yields on loans as interest rates decreased. These factors are reflected in the analysis of changes in net interest income arising from changes in the volume of interest-earning assets, interest-bearing liabilities and the rates earned and paid on such assets and liabilities as set forth under “Rate/Volume Analysis” below. The analysis indicates that the decrease of $4.2 million in net interest income stemmed from net rate/volume decreases in interest- earning assets of $36.4 million offset by the net rate/volume decreases of interest- bearing liabilities of $32.2 million.
 
Provision for Loan Losses.  The provision for loan losses increased $183.2 million from $22.6 million in fiscal 2008 to $205.7 million in fiscal 2009 based on management’s ongoing evaluation of asset quality. This charge reflected an increase in provision to $205.7 million during the year allocated between specific reserves on impaired credits and an increase to the general reserve. The increase in provision and specific and general reserves was in response to the following trends identified in the portfolio: (i) an increase in net charge-offs of $99.3 million in fiscal 2009, primarily due to increased mortgage loan charge-offs. and (ii) increases in non-performing loans, in commercial real estate, construction and land and consumer loans, from $101.2 million at March 31, 2008 to


55


Table of Contents

$227.8 million at March 31, 2009. These increases resulted in the Corporation’s allowance for loan losses increasing $98.9 million from $38.3 million at March 31, 2008 to $137.2 million at March 31, 2009. The allowance for loan losses represented 3.34% of total loans at March 31, 2009, as compared to 0.87% of total loans at March 31, 2008. For further discussion of the allowance for loan losses, see “Financial Condition — Allowance for Loan and Foreclosure Losses.”
 
Non-interest Income.  Non-interest income decreased $5.2 million to $45.9 million for fiscal 2009 compared to $51.1 million for fiscal 2008 primarily due to the decrease of income from the Corporation’s real estate segment of $5.7 million for fiscal 2009. In addition, gain (loss) on investments and mortgage-related securities decreased $3.8 million, loan servicing income decreased $2.1 million and other than temporary impairment on securities of $805,000 was recorded. Partially offsetting these decreases were increases in other categories. Net gain on sale of loans increased $4.5 million and service charges on deposits increased $2.4 million.
 
Non-interest Expense.  Non-interest expense increased $118.7 million to $225.9 million for fiscal 2009 compared to $107.2 million for fiscal 2008 primarily due to goodwill impairment of $72.2 million and a $17.6 million impairment of real estate. In addition, net expense of REO operations increased $11.9 million, compensation expense increased $9.4 million, other non-interest expense increased $4.9 million due to increased legal fees and loan fees, mortgage servicing rights impairment expense increased $3.1 million, furniture and equipment expense increased $1.8 million due to the fact that the current year includes a full year of operations at branches acquired in the prior year, occupancy expense increased $1.6 million due to a full year of operations in the current year of branches acquired in the prior year and data processing expense increased $1.1 million. These increases were offset by a decrease in real estate investment partnership cost of sales of $6.8 million and marketing expense decreased $1.0 million.
 
Real Estate Segment.  Net income generated by the real estate segment decreased $16.1 million for fiscal 2009 to a net loss of $18.4 million from a net loss of $2.3 million in fiscal 2008. The primary reason for the decrease for fiscal 2009 was a $17.6 million impairment of real estate. In addition, partnership sales decreased $6.5 million, income tax expense increased $614,000 and minority interest in income of real estate partnerships increased $254,000. These decreases in net income were offset in part by a $6.8 million decrease in real estate investment cost of sales and a $754,000 increase in other revenue from real estate operations. Future sales revenues are based on several factors, including the interest rate environment. Therefore, management cannot predict future activity.
 
Non-Controlling Interests.  Non-controlling interest in income (loss) of real estate partnership operations represents the share of income of development partners in the Corporation’s real estate investment partnerships. Such non-controlling interest increased $254,000 from a loss of $402,000 in fiscal 2008 to a loss of $148,000 in fiscal 2009.
 
For more information on the effects to the consolidated operations of the Corporation, see “Real Estate Held for Development and Sale and Variable Interest Entities,” in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8.
 
Income Taxes.  Income tax expense decreased $49.7 million for fiscal 2009 as compared to fiscal 2008. The effective tax rate for fiscal 2009 was (11.65)% as compared to 38.69% for fiscal 2008. The decline in the effective tax rate was primarily due to the valuation allowance of $46.3 million placed on the deferred tax asset during the year ended March 31, 2009. To the extent available, sources of taxable income, including those available from prior years’ under tax regulations, are deemed per GAAP to be insufficient to absorb tax losses, and a valuation allowance is therefore necessary. See Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8.
 
Fourth Quarter Results
 
Net loss for the quarter ending March 31, 2010 was $26.6 million, compared to net loss of $45.9 million for the quarter ending March 31, 2009. The results for the quarter ending March 31, 2010 generated an annualized return on average assets of (2.40)% and an annualized return on average equity of (232.27)%, compared to (3.62)% and (84.21)%, respectively, for the same period in 2009.


56


Table of Contents

Net interest income was $18.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010, a decrease of $10.1 million from $28.7 million for the comparable period in 2009. The net interest margin was 1.77% for the quarter ending March 31, 2010 and 2.45% for the quarter ending March 31, 2009.
 
Provision for loan losses was $20.2 million in the quarter ending March 31, 2010 compared to $56.4 million in the quarter ending March 31, 2009. Net charge-offs were $5.0 million in the quarter ended March 31, 2010 compared to $41.8 million in the quarter ended March 31, 2009. See “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Asset Quality” below for further analysis of the allowance for loan losses.
 
Non-interest income was $10.5 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, a decrease of $5.5 million compared to $16.0 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2009. The majority of the decrease was attributable to a $5.0 million decrease in revenue from the real estate segment. In addition, income from net gain on sale of loans decreased $4.5 million. Partially offsetting these decreases was an increase in loan servicing income of $1.9 million.
 
Non-interest expense decreased $13.2 million to $37.1 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 from $50.3 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 primarily due to a $15.5 million decrease in expenses from the Corporation’s real estate segment, which included $13.0 million of impairment of real estate in the prior year. Partially offsetting these decreases was an increase in federal deposit insurance premiums of $1.1 million.
 
The Corporation had an income tax benefit of $1.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2010 compared to income tax benefit of $16.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2009. The effective tax rate (benefit) was (5.34)% and (27.2)% for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The change in the effective tax rate was mainly due to the fact that a full valuation allowance has been recorded on the net deferred tax asset due to the uncertainty of the Corporation to create sufficient taxable income in the near future to fully utilize it.
 
Net Interest Income Information
 
Average Interest-Earning Assets, Average Interest-Bearing Liabilities and Interest Rate Spread and Margin.  The following table shows the Corporation’s average balances, interest, average rates, the spread between the combined average rates earned on interest-earning assets and average cost of interest-bearing liabilities, net interest margin, which represents net interest income as a percentage of average interest-earning assets, and the ratio of average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities for the years indicated. The average balances are derived from average daily balances.


57


Table of Contents

Average Balance Sheets
 
                                                                         
    Year Ended March 31,  
    2010     2009     2008  
                Average
                Average
                Average
 
    Average
          Yield/
    Average
          Yield/
    Average
          Yield/
 
    Balance     Interest     Cost     Balance     Interest     Cost     Balance     Interest     Cost  
    (Dollars in thousands)  
 
Interest-earning Assets
                                                                       
Mortgage loans
  $ 2,685,764     $ 146,190       5.44 %   $ 3,092,823     $ 181,249       5.86 %   $ 3,276,629     $ 209,065       6.38 %
Consumer loans
    764,352       38,611       5.05       766,902       45,566       5.94       721,860       48,627       6.74  
Commercial business loans
    173,151       10,793       6.23       249,502       14,298       5.73       253,794       19,014       7.49  
                                                                         
Total loans receivable(1)(2)
    3,623,267       195,594       5.40       4,109,227       241,113       5.87       4,252,283       276,706       6.51  
Investment securities(3)
    474,808       20,443       4.31       382,068       18,615       4.87       402,787       16,695       4.14  
Interest-bearing deposits
    426,377       1,045       0.25       76,787       534       0.70       43,405       2,702       6.23  
Federal Home Loan Bank stock
    54,829             0.00       54,829             0.00       48,689       572       1.17  
                                                                         
Total interest-earning assets
    4,579,281       217,082       4.74       4,622,911       260,262       5.63       4,747,164       296,675       6.25  
Non-interest-earning assets
    248,171                       337,798                       228,314                  
                                                                         
Total assets
  $ 4,827,452                     $ 4,960,709                     $ 4,975,478                  
                                                                         
Interest-bearing Liabilities
                                                                       
Demand deposits
  $ 939,315       5,179       0.55     $ 1,023,961       9,377       0.92     $ 1,113,836       21,135       1.90  
Regular passbook savings
    244,558       694       0.28       228,978       883       0.39       221,219       916       0.41  
Certificates of deposit
    2,601,292       81,467       3.13       2,217,594       84,597       3.81       2,233,818       101,218       4.53  
                                                                         
Total deposits
    3,785,165       87,340       2.31       3,470,533       94,857       2.73       3,568,873       123,269       3.45  
Other borrowed funds
    901,985       44,931       4.98       1,142,871       40,615       3.55       1,029,810       44,401       4.31  
                                                                         
Total interest-bearing liabilities
    4,687,150       132,271       2.82       4,613,404       135,472       2.94       4,598,683       167,670       3.65  
                                                                         
Non-interest-bearing liabilities
    28,829                       47,950                       37,391                  
                                                                         
Total liabilities
    4,715,979                       4,661,354                       4,636,074                  
Stockholders’ equity
    111,473                       299,355                       339,404                  
                                                                         
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
  $ 4,827,452                     $ 4,960,709                     $ 4,975,478                  
                                                                         
Net interest income/
                                                                       
interest rate spread(4)
          $ 84,811       1.92 %           $ 124,790       2.69 %           $ 129,005       2.60 %
                                                                         
Net interest-earning assets
  $ (107,869 )                   $ 9,507                     $ 148,481                  
                                                                         
Net interest margin(5)
                    1.85 %                     2.70 %                     2.72 %
                                                                         
Ratio of average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities
    0.98                       1.00                       1.03                  
                                                                         
 
 
(1) For the purpose of these computations, non-accrual loans are included in the daily average loan amounts outstanding.
 
(2) Interest earned on loans includes loan fees (which are not material in amount) and interest income which has been received from borrowers whose loans were removed from non-accrual status during the period indicated.
 
(3) Average balances of securities available-for-sale are based on amortized cost.
 
(4) Interest rate spread represents the difference between the weighted-average yield on interest-earning assets and the weighted-average cost of interest-bearing liabilities and is represented on a fully tax equivalent basis.
 
(5) Net interest margin represents net interest income as a percentage of average interest-earning assets.


58


Table of Contents

 
Rate/Volume Analysis
 
The most significant impact on the Corporation’s net interest income between periods is derived from the interaction of changes in the volume of and rates earned or paid on interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. The volume of earning dollars in loans and investments, compared to the volume of interest-bearing liabilities represented by deposits and borrowings, combined with the spread, produces the changes in net interest income between periods. The following table shows the relative contribution of the changes in average volume and average interest rates on changes in net interest income for the periods indicated. Information is provided with respect to the effects on net interest income attributable to (i) changes in rate (changes in rate multiplied by prior volume), (ii) changes in volume (changes in volume multiplied by prior rate) and (iii) changes in rate/volume (changes in rate multiplied by changes in volume).
 
                                                                 
    Increase (Decrease) for the Year Ended March 31,  
    2010 Compared To 2009     2009 Compared To 2008  
                Rate/
                      Rate/
       
    Rate     Volume     Volume     Net     Rate     Volume     Volume     Net  
                      (In thousands)                    
 
Interest-earning Assets
                                                               
Mortgage loans
  $ (12,902 )   $ (23,855 )   $ 1,698     $ (35,059 )   $ (17,044 )   $ (11,728 )   $ 956     $ (27,816 )
Consumer loans
    (6,826 )     (152 )     23       (6,955 )     (5,737 )     3,034       (358 )     (3,061 )
Commercial business loans
    1,254       (4,375 )     (384 )     (3,505 )     (4,470 )     (322 )     76       (4,716 )
                                                                 
Total loans receivable(1)(2)
    (18,474 )     (28,382 )     1,337       (45,519 )     (27,251 )     (9,016 )     674       (35,593 )
Investment securities(3)
    (2,165 )     4,519       (526 )     1,828       2,929       (858 )     (151 )     1,920  
Interest-bearing deposits
    (346 )     2,431       (1,574 )     511       (2,400 )     2,078       (1,846 )     (2,168 )
Federal Home Loan Bank stock
                            (572 )     72       (72 )     (572 )
                                                                 
Total net change in income on interest-earning assets
    (20,985 )     (21,432 )     (763 )     (43,180 )     (27,294 )     (7,724 )     (1,395 )     (36,413 )
Interest-bearing Liabilities
                                                               
Demand deposits
    (3,731 )     (775 )     308       (4,198 )     (10,935 )     (1,705 )     882       (11,758 )
Regular passbook savings
    (233 )     60       (16 )     (189 )     (63 )     32       (2 )     (33 )
Certificates of deposit
    (15,147 )     14,638       (2,621 )     (3,130 )     (16,002 )     (735 )     116       (16,621 )
                                                                 
Total deposits
    (19,111 )     13,923       (2,329 )     (7,517 )     (27,000 )     (2,408 )     996       (28,412 )
Other borrowed funds
    16,315       (8,561 )     (3,439 )     4,315       (7,804 )     4,875       (857 )     (3,786 )
                                                                 
Total net change in expense on interest-bearing liabilities
    (2,796 )     5,362       (5,768 )     (3,202 )     (34,804 )     2,467       139       (32,198 )
                                                                 
Net change in net interest income
  $ (18,189 )   $ (26,794 )   $ 5,005     $ (39,978 )   $ 7,510     $ (10,191 )   $ (1,534 )   $ (4,215 )
                                                                 
 
 
(1) For the purpose of these computations, non-accrual loans are included in the daily average loan amounts outstanding.
 
(2) Interest earned on loans includes loan fees (which are not material in amount) and interest income which has been received from borrowers whose loans were removed from non-accrual status during the period indicated.
 
(3) Average balances of securities available-for-sale are based on amortized cost.


59


Table of Contents

 
Financial Condition
 
General.  Total assets of the Corporation decreased $855.8 million, or 16.2%, from $5.27 billion at March 31, 2009 to $4.42 billion at March 31, 2010. This decrease was primarily attributable to a decrease in loans receivable as well as a decrease in investment securities.
 
Investment Securities.  Investment securities (both available-for-sale and held-to-maturity) decreased $68.8 million during the year due to principal repayments, sales and fair value adjustments of $614.3 million and other-than-temporary impairments of $1.1 million due to credit losses that are recognized in earnings partially offset by purchases of $497.7 million and the securitization of mortgage loans to agency mortgage-backed securities of $48.9 million. See Notes 1 and 5 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8.
 
Investment securities are subject to inherent risks based upon the future performance of the underlying collateral (i.e., mortgage loans) for these securities. Among these risks are prepayment risk, interest rate risk and credit risk. Should general interest rate levels decline, the mortgage-related securities portfolio would be subject to (i) prepayments as borrowers typically would seek to obtain financing at lower rates, (ii) a decline in interest income received on adjustable-rate mortgage-related securities, and (iii) an increase in fair value of fixed-rate mortgage-related securities. Conversely, should general interest rate levels increase, the mortgage-related securities portfolio would be subject to (i) a longer term to maturity as borrowers would be less likely to prepay their loans, (ii) an increase in interest income received on adjustable-rate mortgage-related securities, (iii) a decline in fair value of fixed-rate mortgage-related securities, (iv) a decline in fair value of adjustable-rate mortgage-related securities to an extent dependent upon the level of interest rate increases, the time period to the next interest rate repricing date for the individual security and the applicable periodic (annual and/or lifetime) cap which could limit the degree to which the individual security could reprice within a given time period, and (v) should default rates and loss severities increase on the underlying collateral of mortgage-related securities, the Corporation may experience credit losses that need to be recognized in earnings as an other-than-temporary impairment.
 
Loans Receivable.  Total net loans decreased $809.3 million during fiscal 2010 from $4.06 billion at March 31, 2009 to $3.25 billion at March 31, 2010. The activity included (i) originations of $1.52 billion, (ii) sales of $1.13 billion and (iii) principal repayments and other reductions of $1.20 billion.
 
During 2010, the Corporation originated $631.1 million of loans for investment, as compared to $780.0 million and $1.19 billion during fiscal 2009 and 2008, respectively. Of the $631.1 million of loans originated for investment in fiscal 2010, $184.4 million or 29.2% was comprised of single-family residential loans, $134.0 million or 21.2% was comprised of multi-family residential and commercial real estate loans, $81.8 million or 13.0% was comprised of construction and land loans, $212.5 million or 33.7% was comprised of consumer loans and $18.5 million or 2.9% was comprised of commercial business loans. During the year ended March 31, 2010, the Corporation securitized $48.9 million of mortgage loans to agency mortgage-backed securities which were sold at a gain of $1.8 million. Single-family residential loans held by the Corporation for investment amounted to $765.3 million and $843.5 million at March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, which represented approximately 22.3% and 20.5% of gross loans held for investment in 2010 and 2009, respectively. In the aggregate, gross multi-family residential and commercial real estate loans, construction and land loans, consumer loans and commercial business loans, each of which involves more risk than single-family residential loans because of the nature of, or in certain cases the absence of, loan collateral, decreased $595.1 million or 18.2% from March 31, 2009 to March 31, 2010 and represented approximately 77.7% and 79.5% of gross loans held for investment at March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
 
Single-family residential loans originated for sale amounted to $1.16 billion in fiscal 2010, as compared to $1.01 billion and $530.3 million in fiscal 2009 and fiscal 2008, respectively. This increase was primarily attributable to the decreasing interest rate environment in fiscal 2010. At March 31, 2010, loans held for sale, which consisted of single-family residential loans, multi-family residential loans and commercial real estate loans, amounted to $19.5 million, as compared to $162.0 million at March 31, 2009. Loans held for sale are recorded at the lower of cost or market.


60


Table of Contents

Non-Performing Assets.  The composition of non-performing loans is summarized as follows for the dates indicated:
 
                                                 
    March 31, 2010     March 31, 2009  
                Percent of Total
                Percent of Total
 
    Non-Performing     %     Loans     Non-Performing     %     Loans  
                (Dollars in thousands)              
 
Single-family residential
  $ 52,765       14.3 %     1.54 %   $ 31,868       14.0 %     0.78 %
Multi-family residential
    60,485       16.4 %     1.76 %     50,090       22.0 %     1.22 %
Commercial real estate
    131,730       35.7 %     3.83 %     56,972       25.0 %     1.39 %
Construction and land
    97,240       26.3 %     2.83 %     70,536       31.0 %     1.72 %
Consumer
    5,154       1.4 %     0.15 %     3,525       1.5 %     0.09 %
Commercial business
    21,698       5.9 %     0.63 %     14,823       6.5 %     0.36 %
                                                 
Total Non-Performing Loans
  $ 369,072       100.0 %     10.74 %   $ 227,814       100.0 %     5.54 %
                                                 
 
The following is a summary of non-performing loan activity for the year ended March 31, 2010 (in thousands):
 
                                                                         
    Non-Performing
                                  Non-Performing
    Remaining
       
    Loan Balance
          Moved to
    Moved to
                Loan Balance
    Balance of
    ALLL
 
Loan Category
  April 1, 2009     Additions     Accrual     OREO     Pay Down     Charge Off     March 31, 2010     Loans     Allocated  
 
Single-family residential
  $ 31,868     $ 66,359     $ (26,435 )   $ (6,529 )   $ (9,568 )   $ (2,930 )   $ 52,765     $ 712,547     $ 20,960  
Multi-family residential
    50,090       79,486       (42,897 )     (4,036 )     (14,525 )     (7,633 )     60,485       554,445       26,471  
Commercial real estate
    56,972       212,019       (88,803 )     (11,556 )     (20,479 )     (16,423 )     131,730       711,175       75,379  
Construction and land
    70,536       152,402       (75,119 )     (13,767 )     (17,085 )     (19,727 )     97,240       242,576       23,908  
Consumer
    3,525       1,629                               5,154       704,106       2,650  
Commercial business
    14,823       41,501       (20,721 )     (660 )     (6,185 )     (7,060 )     21,698       142,631       30,276  
                                                                         
Total
  $ 227,814     $ 553,396     $ (253,975 )   $ (36,548 )   $ (67,842 )   $ (53,773 )   $ 369,072     $ 3,067,480     $ 179,644  
                                                                         
 
Non-performing loans (consisting of loans past due more than 90 days, loans less than 90 days delinquent but placed on non-accrual status due to anticipated probable loss and non-accrual troubled debt restructurings) increased $141.3 million during the year ended March 31, 2010. Non-performing assets increased $144.1 million to $424.5 million at March 31, 2010 from $280.4 million at March 31, 2009 and increased as a percentage of total assets to 9.61% from 5.32% at such dates, respectively. The increase in non-performing loans at March 31, 2010 was the result of an increase of $74.8 million in non-performing commercial real estate loans, $26.7 million in non-performing construction and land loans, $20.9 million in non-performing single-family residential loans, $10.4 million in non-performing multi-family loans, $6.9 million in non-performing commercial business loans and $1.6 million in non-performing consumer loans.
 
The composition of non-performing assets is summarized as follows for the dates indicated:
 
                 
    At March 31,
    At March 31,
 
    2010     2009  
    (Dollars in thousands)  
 
Total non-accrual loans
  $ 324,494     $ 166,354  
Troubled debt restructurings — non-accrual(2)
    44,578       61,460  
Other real estate owned (OREO)
    55,436       52,563  
                 
Total non-performing assets
  $ 424,508     $ 280,377  
                 
Total non-performing loans to total loans(1)
    10.74 %     5.54 %
Total non-performing assets to total assets
    9.61       5.32  
Allowance for loan losses to total loans(1)
    5.23       3.34  
Allowance for loan losses to total non-performing loans
    48.67       60.21  
Allowance for loan and foreclosure losses to total non-performing assets
    46.16       52.08  
 
 
(1) Total loans are gross loans receivable before the reduction for loans in process, unearned interest and loan fees and the allowance from loans losses.
 
(2) Troubled debt restructurings — non-accrual represent non-accrual loans that were modified in a troubled debt restructuring less than six months prior to the period end date.


61


Table of Contents

 
The following is a summary of non-performing asset activity for the year ended March 31, 2010 (in thousands):
 
                                         
          Past Due
                   
          90 Days
                   
          and Still
    Total Non-
    Other Real
    Total Non-
 
          Accruing
    Performing
    Estate Owned
    Performing
 
    Non-Accrual     Interest     Loans     (OREO)     Assets  
 
Balance at April 1, 2009
  $ 227,814     $     $ 227,814     $ 52,563     $ 280,377  
Increase in fair market value
                             
Additions
    553,396             553,396       61,090       614,486  
Transfers:
                                     
Past due to nonaccrual
                             
Nonaccrual to OREO
    (36,548 )           (36,548 )           (36,548 )
Returned to accrual status
    (253,975 )           (253,975 )           (253,975 )
Sales
                      (38,441 )     (38,441 )
Charge-offs/Loss
    (53,773 )           (53,773 )     (19,776 )     (73,549 )
Payments
    (67,842 )           (67,842 )           (67,842 )
                                         
Balance at March 31, 2010
  $ 369,072     $     $ 369,072     $ 55,436     $ 424,508  
                                         
 
Loans modified in a troubled debt restructuring due to rate or term concessions that are currently on non-accrual status will remain on non-accrual status for a period of at least six months. If after six months, or a period sufficient enough to demonstrate the willingness and ability of the borrower to perform under the modified terms, the borrower has made payments in accordance with the modified terms, the loan is returned to accrual status but retains its status as a troubled debt restructuring. The designation as a troubled debt restructuring is removed in years after the restructuring if both of the following conditions exist: (a) the restructuring agreement specifies an interest rate equal to or greater than the rate that the creditor was willing to accept at the time of restructuring for a new loan with comparable risk and (b) the loan is not impaired based on the terms specified by the restructuring agreement.
 
The decrease in loans considered troubled debt restructurings of $16.9 million to $44.6 million at March 31, 2010 from $61.5 million at March 31, 2009 is a result of continued efforts by the Corporation to work with their borrowers experiencing financial difficulties. As time passes and borrowers continue to perform in accordance with the restructured loan terms, we expect a portion of this balance to be returned to accrual status.
 
Beginning late in the first quarter of fiscal 2010, management began significant efforts in the credit risk area to obtain a thorough understanding of the risk within the loan portfolio and to take action to eliminate or limit any further material adverse consequences. These efforts include the following:
 
1. Realigning the corporate structure to ensure that risk is adequately and appropriately identified, mitigated and where possible, eliminated:
 
  •  Appointment of a Chief Credit Risk Officer responsible for overseeing all aspects of corporate risk.
 
  •  Creation of a Special Assets Group to properly assess potential collateral shortfall exposure and to develop workout plans.
 
  •  Development of a risk management framework.
 
2. Creation and implementation of a new loan risk rating system using qualitative metrics to identify loans with potential risk so they could be properly classified and monitored.
 
3. Implementation of a new enhanced impairment analysis to evaluate all classified loans.
 
4. Introduction of a new Allowance for Loan and Lease Policy that improves the timeliness of specific reserves taken for the allowance for loan and lease calculation.
 
5. Analysis of the population of recent appraisals received and developed a specific reserve amount to capture the probable deterioration in value.


62


Table of Contents

6. Establishment of an independent underwriting group that evaluates the total borrowing relationship using a global cash flow methodology.
 
7. Beginning of proactive monitoring of matured and delinquent loans.
 
8. Proactive review of the performing (non-impaired) portfolio for performance issues.
 
9. Development of resolution plan on all classified assets.
 
10. Introduction of a portfolio management team.
 
As a result of these continued efforts, management has a clearer understanding of the non-performing loans and related probable and inherent losses within the loan portfolio. While no assurances can be given as to whether significant increases in the level of non-performing loans and the ALLL through additional provisions for loan losses will be required in the future, we believe the magnitude of the initial increase in non-performing loans and in the level of non-performing loans and the provisions that were taken in fiscal 2010 and 2009 are a result of our efforts described above and are not indicative of a trend for the future.
 
Loan Delinquencies.  The following table sets forth information relating to delinquent loans of the Bank and their relation to the Bank’s total loans held for investment at the dates indicated (in thousands).
 
                                                 
    March 31,  
    2010     2009     2008  
          % of
          % of
          % of
 
          Total
          Total
          Total
 
Days Past Due
  Balance     Loans     Balance     Loans     Balance     Loans  
 
30 to 59 days
  $ 53,105       1.54 %   $ 64,862       1.58 %   $ 66,617       1.52 %
60 to 89 days
    53,864       1.56       29,858       0.73       12,928       0.29  
90 days and over
    217,393       6.31       146,151       3.56       101,241       2.31  
                                                 
Total
  $ 324,362       9.42 %   $ 240,871       5.86 %   $ 180,786       4.12 %
                                                 
 
The interest income that would have been recorded during fiscal 2010 if the Bank’s non-performing loans at the end of the period had been current in accordance with their terms during the period was $13.0 million. The amount of interest income attributable to these loans and included in interest income during fiscal 2010 was $5.9 million.
 
Allowances for Loan and Lease Losses.  Like all financial institutions, we must maintain an adequate allowance for loan losses. The allowance for loan losses is established through a provision for loan losses charged to expense. Loans are charged against the allowance for loan losses when we believe that repayment of the principal is unlikely. Subsequent recoveries, if any, are credited to the allowance. The allowance is an amount that we believe will be adequate to absorb probable losses on existing loans that may become uncollectible, based on evaluation of the collectability of loans and prior credit loss experience, together with the other factors noted earlier.
 
Our allowance for loan loss methodology incorporates several quantitative and qualitative risk factors used to establish the appropriate allowance for loan loss at each reporting date. Quantitative factors include our historical loss experience, peer group experience, delinquency and charge-off trends, collateral values, changes in non-performing loans, other factors, and information about individual loans including the borrower’s sensitivity to interest rate movements. Qualitative factors include the economic condition of our operating markets and the state of certain industries. Specific changes in the risk factors are based on perceived risk of similar groups of loans classified by collateral type, purpose and terms. Statistics on local trends, peers, and an internal three-year loss history are also incorporated into the allowance. Due to the credit concentration of our loan portfolio in real estate secured loans, the value of collateral is heavily dependent on real estate values in Wisconsin and surrounding states. While management uses the best information available to make its evaluation, future adjustments to the allowance may be necessary if there are significant changes in economic or other conditions. In addition, the OTS, as an integral part of their examination processes, periodically review the Banks’ allowance for loan losses, and may require us to make additions to the allowance based on their judgment about information available to them at the time of their examinations. Management periodically reviews the assumptions and formulae used in determining the allowance and makes adjustments if required to reflect the current risk profile of the portfolio.


63


Table of Contents

The allowance consists of specific and general components. The specific allowance relates to impaired loans. For such loans, an allowance is established when the discounted cash flows (or collateral value or observable market price) of the impaired loan are lower than the carrying value of that loan, pursuant to ASC 450-20 “Loss Contingencies.” The general allowance covers non-impaired loans and is based on historical loss experience adjusted for the various qualitative and quantitative factors listed above, pursuant to ASC 450-20 and other related regulatory guidance. Loans graded substandard and below are individually examined closely to determine the appropriate loan loss reserve.
 
The following table summarizes the activity in our allowance for loan losses for the period indicated.
 
                                         
    Year Ended March 31,  
    2010     2009     2008     2007     2006  
    (Dollars in thousands)  
 
Allowance at beginning of year
  $ 137,165     $ 38,285     $ 20,517     $ 15,570     $ 26,444  
Purchase of S&C Bank
                2,795              
Charge-offs:
                                       
Single-family residential
    (5,505 )     (11,226 )     (670 )     (192 )     (23 )
Multi-family residential
    (12,729 )     (10,093 )     (700 )     (256 )      
Commercial real estate
    (32,580 )     (33,315 )     (3,551 )     (704 )     (1,193 )
Construction and land
    (44,107 )     (24,978 )           (78 )      
Consumer
    (4,322 )     (2,310 )     (862 )     (416 )     (584 )
Commercial business
    (23,040 )     (27,002 )     (2,130 )     (5,571 )     (13,275 )
                                         
Total charge-offs
    (122,283 )     (108,924 )     (7,913 )     (7,217 )     (15,075 )
                                         
Recoveries:
                                       
Single-family residential
    580       118             3        
Multi-family residential
          6       65       5        
Commercial real estate
    632       941       28       35       155  
Construction and land
    119       141                    
Consumer
    46       73       48       62       81  
Commercial business
    1,459       806       194       804       65  
                                         
Total recoveries
    2,836       2,085       335       909       301  
                                         
Net charge-offs
    (119,447 )     (106,839 )     (7,578 )     (6,308 )     (14,774 )
                                         
Provision
    161,926       205,719       22,551       11,255       3,900  
                                         
Allowance at end of year
  $ 179,644     $ 137,165     $ 38,285     $ 20,517     $ 15,570  
                                         
Net charge-offs to average loans held for sale and for investment
    (3.30 )%     (2.60 )%     (0.18 )%     (0.17 )%     (0.42 )%
                                         
 
Total loan charge-offs were $122.3 million and $108.9 million for the fiscal years ending March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Total loan charge-offs for the years ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 increased $13.4 million and $101.0 million respectively, from the prior fiscal years. The increase in charge-offs for fiscal 2010 was largely due to an increase of $19.1 million in construction and land loan charge-offs, a $2.6 million increase in multi-family residential loan charge-offs and a $2.0 million increase in consumer loan charge-offs, which was offset in part by a $5.7 million decrease in single-family residential loan charge-offs, a $4.0 million decrease in commercial business charge-offs and a $735,000 decrease in commercial real estate charge-offs. The increase in charge-offs for fiscal 2009 was largely due to an increase of $29.8 million in commercial real estate loan charge-offs, a $25.0 million increase in construction and land loan charge-offs, a $24.9 million increase in commercial business loan charge-offs, an $10.6 million increase in single-family residential loan charge-offs, a $9.4 million increase in multi-family residential loan charge-offs and a $1.4 million increase in consumer loan charge-offs. Recoveries increased


64


Table of Contents

$751,000 during the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010. Recoveries increased $1.8 million from $335,000 in fiscal 2008 to $2.1 million in fiscal 2009.
 
The provision for loan losses decreased $43.8 million to $161.9 million for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2010 compared to $205.7 million for the year ended March 31, 2009. The decrease in the provision for loan losses is the result of management’s ongoing evaluation of the loan portfolio. Management considered the increase in non-accrual loans to total loans to 10.83% at March 31, 2010 from 5.54% at March 31, 2009 as well as an increase in total non-performing assets to 9.69% at March 31, 2010 from 5.32% at March 31, 2009 to be factors that warranted the provision for loan losses.
 
The table below shows the Corporation’s allocation of the allowance for loan losses by loan loss reserve category at the dates indicated.