Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018
Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Commission File Number 1-34073
Huntington Bancshares Incorporated
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
41 S. High Street, Columbus, Ohio
(Address of principal executive offices)
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (614) 480-2265
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of class
Name of exchange on which registered
5.875% Series C Non-Cumulative, perpetual preferred stock
6.250% Series D Non-Cumulative, perpetual preferred stock
Common Stock—Par Value $0.01 per Share
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Title of class
Depositary Shares (each representing a 1/40th interest in a share of Floating Rate Series B Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock)
Depositary Shares (each representing a 1/100th interest in a share of 5.700% Series E Fixed-to-Floating Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock)
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Exchange Act. x Yes ¨ No
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. ¨ Yes x No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. x Yes ¨ No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). x Yes ¨ No
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. x
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer”, “smaller reporting company”, and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer
Smaller reporting company
Emerging growth company
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act) ¨ Yes x No
The aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2018, determined by using a per share closing price of $14.76, as quoted by NASDAQ on that date, was $16,029,310,082. As of January 31, 2019, there were 1,046,813,306 shares of common stock with a par value of $0.01 outstanding.
Documents Incorporated By Reference
Part III of this Form 10-K incorporates by reference certain information from the registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement for the 2019 Annual Shareholders’ Meeting.
When we refer to “Huntington,” “we,” “our,” “us,” and “the Company” in this report, we mean Huntington Bancshares Incorporated and our consolidated subsidiaries, unless the context indicates that we refer only to the parent company, Huntington Bancshares Incorporated. When we refer to the “Bank” in this report, we mean our only bank subsidiary, The Huntington National Bank, and its subsidiaries.
Item 1: Business
We are a multi-state diversified regional bank holding company organized under Maryland law in 1966 and headquartered in Columbus, Ohio. We have 15,693 average full-time equivalent employees. Through the Bank, we have over 150 years of serving the financial needs of our customers. Through our subsidiaries, we provide full-service commercial, small business, consumer banking services, mortgage banking services, automobile financing, recreational vehicle and marine financing, equipment leasing, investment management, trust services, brokerage services, insurance programs, and other financial products and services. The Bank, organized in 1866, is our only bank subsidiary. At December 31, 2018, the Bank had 10 private client group offices and 944 branches as follows:
• 451 branches in Ohio
• 37 branches in Illinois
• 300 branches in Michigan
• 31 branches in Wisconsin
• 49 branches in Pennsylvania
• 25 branches in West Virginia
• 41 branches in Indiana
• 10 branches in Kentucky
Select financial services and other activities are also conducted in various other states. International banking services are available through the headquarters office in Columbus, Ohio. Our foreign banking activities, in total or with any individual country, are not significant.
Our business segments are based on our internally-aligned segment leadership structure, which is how we monitor results and assess performance. For each of our four business segments, we expect the combination of our business model and exceptional service to provide a competitive advantage that supports revenue and earnings growth. Our business model emphasizes the delivery of a complete set of banking products and services offered by larger banks but distinguished by local delivery and customer service.
A key strategic emphasis has been for our business segments to operate in cooperation to provide products and services to our customers and to build stronger and more profitable relationships using our OCR sales and service process. The objectives of OCR are to:
•Use a consultative sales approach to provide solutions that are specific to each customer.
•Leverage each business segment in terms of its products and expertise to benefit customers.
•Develop prospects who may want to have multiple products and services as part of their relationship with us.
Following is a description of our four business segments and the Treasury / Other function:
Consumer and Business Banking: The Consumer and Business Banking segment provides a wide array of financial products and services to consumer and small business customers including but not limited to checking accounts, savings accounts, money market accounts, certificates of deposit, investments, consumer loans, credit cards, and small business loans. Other financial services available to consumer and small business customers include mortgages, insurance, interest rate risk protection, foreign exchange, and treasury management. Huntington serves customers through our network of branches. In addition to our extensive branch network, customers can access Huntington through online banking, mobile banking, telephone banking, and ATMs.
We have a “Fair Play” banking philosophy; providing differentiated products and services, built on a strong foundation of customer advocacy. Our brand resonates with consumers and businesses; earning us new customers and deeper relationships with current customers.
Business Banking is a dynamic part of our business and we are committed to being the bank of choice for businesses in our markets. Business Banking is defined as serving companies with revenues up to $20 million. Huntington continues to develop products and services that are designed specifically to meet the needs of small business and look for ways to help companies find solutions to their financing needs.
Home Lending, an operating unit of Consumer and Business Banking, originates consumer loans and mortgages for customers who are generally located in our primary banking markets. Consumer and mortgage lending products are primarily distributed through the Consumer and Business Banking and Regional Banking and The Huntington Private
Client Group segments, as well as through commissioned loan originators. Home Lending earns interest on portfolio loans and loans held-for-sale, earns fee income from the origination and servicing of mortgage loans, and recognizes gains or losses from the sale of mortgage loans. Home Lending supports the origination of mortgage loans across all segments.
Commercial Banking: Through a relationship banking model, this segment provides a wide array of products and services to the middle market, corporate, real estate and government public sector customers located primarily within our geographic footprint. The segment is divided into six business units: Middle Market, Specialty Banking, Asset Finance, Capital Markets/Institutional Corporate Banking, Commercial Real Estate, and Treasury Management.
Middle Market primarily focuses on providing banking solutions to companies with annual revenues of $20 million to $500 million. Through a relationship management approach, various products, capabilities, and solutions are seamlessly delivered in a client centric way.
Specialty Banking offers tailored products and services to select industries that have a foothold in the Midwest. Each team is comprised of industry experts with a dynamic understanding of the market and industry. Many of these industries are experiencing tremendous change, which creates opportunities for Huntington to leverage our expertise and help clients navigate, adapt, and succeed.
Asset Finance is a combination of our Huntington Equipment Finance, Huntington Public Capital®, Technology and Healthcare Equipment Leasing, and Lender Finance divisions that focus on providing financing solutions against these respective asset classes.
Capital Markets/Institutional Corporate Banking has three distinct product offerings: 1) corporate risk management services, 2) institutional sales, trading, and underwriting, 3) institutional corporate banking. The Capital Markets Group offers a full suite of risk management tools including commodities, foreign exchange, and interest rate hedging services. The Institutional Sales, Trading, & Underwriting team provides access to capital and investment solutions for both municipal and corporate institutions. Institutional Corporate Banking works with larger, often more complex companies with revenues greater than $500 million. These entities, many of which are publicly traded, require a different and customized approach to their banking needs.
The Commercial Real Estate team serves real estate developers, REITs, and other customers with lending needs that are secured by commercial properties. Most of these customers are located within our footprint. Within Commercial Real Estate, Huntington Community Development focuses on improving the quality of life for our communities and the residents of low-to moderate-income neighborhoods by developing and delivering innovative products and services to support affordable housing and neighborhood stabilization.
Treasury Management teams help businesses manage their working capital programs and reduce expenses. Our liquidity solutions help customers save and invest wisely, while our payables and receivables capabilities help them manage purchases and the receipt of payments for goods and services. All of this is provided while helping customers take a sophisticated approach to managing their overhead, inventory, equipment, and labor.
Vehicle Finance: Our products and services include providing financing to consumers for the purchase of automobiles, light-duty trucks, recreational vehicles, and marine craft at franchised and other select dealerships, and providing financing to franchised dealerships for the acquisition of new and used inventory. Products and services are delivered through highly specialized relationship-focused bankers and product partners. Huntington creates well-defined relationship plans which identify needs where solutions are developed and customer commitments are obtained.
The Vehicle Finance team services automobile dealerships, its owners, and consumers buying automobiles through these franchised dealerships. Huntington has provided new and used automobile financing and dealer services throughout the Midwest since the early 1950s. This consistency in the market and our focus on working with strong dealerships has allowed us to expand into select markets outside of the Midwest and to actively deepen relationships while building a strong reputation. Huntington also provides financing for the purchase by consumers of recreational vehicles and marine craft on an indirect basis through a series of dealerships.
Regional Banking and The Huntington Private Client Group: Regional Banking and The Huntington Private Client Group is closely aligned with our regional banking markets. A fundamental point of differentiation is our commitment to be actively engaged within our local markets - building connections with community and business leaders and offering a uniquely personal experience delivered by colleagues working within those markets.
The core business of The Huntington Private Client Group is The Huntington Private Bank, which consists of Private Banking, Wealth & Investment Management, and Retirement Plan Services. The Huntington Private Bank provides high net-worth customers with deposit, lending (including specialized lending options), and banking services. The Huntington Private Bank also delivers wealth management and legacy planning through investment and portfolio management, fiduciary administration, and trust services. This group also provides retirement plan services to corporate
businesses. The Huntington Private Client Group also provides corporate trust services and institutional and mutual fund custody services.
Treasury/Other: The Treasury / Other function includes technology and operations, other unallocated assets, liabilities, revenue, and expense.
The financial results for each of these business segments are included in Note 23 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and are discussed in the Business Segment Discussion of our MD&A.
We compete with other banks and financial services companies such as savings and loans, credit unions, and finance and trust companies, as well as mortgage banking companies, automobile and equipment financing companies (including captive automobile finance companies), insurance companies, mutual funds, investment advisors, and brokerage firms, both within and outside of our primary market areas. Financial Technology Companies, or FinTechs, are also providing nontraditional, but increasingly strong, competition for our borrowers, depositors, and other customers.
We compete for loans primarily on the basis of a combination of value and service by building customer relationships as a result of addressing our customers’ entire suite of banking needs, demonstrating expertise, and providing convenience to our customers. We also consider the competitive pricing pressures in each of our markets.
We compete for deposits similarly on a basis of a combination of value and service and by providing convenience through a banking network of branches and ATMs within our markets and our website at www.huntington.com. We also employ customer friendly practices, such as our 24-Hour Grace® account feature, which gives customers an additional business day to cover overdrafts to their consumer account without being charged overdraft fees.
The table below shows our competitive ranking and market share based on deposits of FDIC-insured institutions as of June 30, 2018, in the top 10 metropolitan statistical areas (MSA) in which we compete:
Grand Rapids, MI
Source: FDIC.gov, based on June 30, 2018 survey.
Many of our nonfinancial institution competitors have fewer regulatory constraints, broader geographic service areas, greater capital, and, in some cases, lower cost structures. In addition, competition for quality customers has intensified as a result of changes in regulation, advances in technology and product delivery systems, consolidation among financial service providers, and bank failures.
FinTechs continue to emerge in key areas of banking. In response, we are monitoring activity in marketplace lending along with businesses engaged in money transfer, investment advice, and money management tools. Our strategy involves assessing the marketplace and determining our near term plan, while developing a longer term approach to effectively service our existing customers and attract new customers. This includes evaluating which products we develop in-house, as well as evaluating partnership options, where applicable.
The banking industry is highly regulated. We are subject to supervision, regulation, and examination by various federal and state regulators, including the Federal Reserve, OCC, SEC, CFPB, FDIC, FINRA, and various state regulatory agencies. The
statutory and regulatory framework that governs us is generally intended to protect depositors and customers, the DIF, the U.S. banking and financial system, and financial markets as a whole.
Banking statutes, regulations, and policies are continually under review by Congress, state legislatures, and federal and state regulatory agencies. In addition to laws and regulations, state and federal bank regulatory agencies may issue policy statements, interpretive letters, and similar written guidance applicable to Huntington and its subsidiaries. Any change in the statutes, regulations, or regulatory policies applicable to us, including changes in their interpretation or implementation, could have a material effect on our business or organization.
Both the scope of the laws and regulations and the intensity of the supervision to which we are subject increased in response to the financial crisis, as well as other factors, such as technological and market changes. Regulatory enforcement and fines have also increased across the banking and financial services sector. Many of these changes have occurred as a result of the Dodd-Frank Act and its implementing regulations, most of which are now in place. While the regulatory environment has entered a period of rebalancing of the post financial crisis framework, we expect that our business will remain subject to extensive regulation and supervision.
On May 24, 2018, the Economic Growth Act was signed into law. Among other regulatory changes, the Economic Growth Act amends various sections of the Dodd-Frank Act, including section 165 of Dodd-Frank Act, which was revised to raise the asset thresholds for determining the application of enhanced prudential standards for BHCs. Under the Economic Growth Act, BHCs with consolidated assets below $100 billion were immediately exempted from all of the enhanced prudential standards, except risk committee requirements, which will now apply to publicly-traded BHCs with $50 billion or more of consolidated assets. BHCs with consolidated assets between $100 billion and $250 billion, including Huntington, will continue to be subject to the enhanced prudential standards that applied to them before enactment of the Economic Growth Act for 18 months after the date of enactment, unless the Federal Reserve acts earlier to exempt these BHCs from enhanced prudential standards or to continue to subject these BHCs to some form of enhanced prudential standards. Following that 18-month period, BHCs with consolidated assets between $100 billion and $250 billion will be exempt from all enhanced prudential standards that the Federal Reserve has not made applicable to them, with the exception of risk committee requirements. As discussed immediately below, the Federal Reserve has proposed a rule to implement the Economic Growth Act under which Huntington would remain subject to certain enhanced prudential standards.
On October 31, 2018, the Federal Reserve issued the Proposed EPS Tailoring Rule pursuant to the Economic Growth Act to adjust the thresholds at which certain enhanced prudential standards apply to U.S. BHCs with $100 billion or more in total consolidated assets. Also on October 31, 2018, the Federal Reserve, OCC, and FDIC issued the Proposed Capital and Liquidity Tailoring Rule to similarly adjust the thresholds at which certain other capital and liquidity standards apply to U.S. BHCs and banks with $100 billion or more in total consolidated assets. Under the Proposed Tailoring Rules, these BHCs and banks, including Huntington and the Bank, would be placed into one of four risk-based categories based on the banking organization’s size, status as a global systemically important bank (or not), cross-jurisdictional activity, weighted short-term wholesale funding, nonbank assets, and off-balance sheet exposure. The extent to which enhanced prudential standards and certain other capital and liquidity standards would apply to these BHCs and banks would depend on the banking organization’s category. Under the Proposed Tailoring Rules, which remain subject to finalization and may be revised, Huntington and the Bank would each qualify as a Category IV banking organization subject to the least restrictive of the proposed requirements applicable to firms with $100 billion or more in total consolidated assets.
The ultimate benefits or consequences of the Economic Growth Act for Huntington, the Bank, Huntington’s other subsidiaries, and Huntington’s activities will depend on the final form of the Proposed Tailoring Rules and additional rulemakings to implement the Act that are expected to be issued by the U.S. banking agencies, which we cannot predict.
We are also subject to the disclosure and regulatory requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, both as administered by the SEC, as well as the rules of Nasdaq that apply to companies with securities listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market.
The following discussion describes certain elements of the comprehensive regulatory framework applicable to us. This discussion is not intended to describe all laws and regulations applicable to Huntington, the Bank, and Huntington’s other subsidiaries.
Huntington as a Bank Holding Company
Huntington is registered as a BHC with the Federal Reserve under the BHC Act and qualifies for and has elected to become a FHC under the GLBA. As a FHC, Huntington is permitted to engage in, and be affiliated with companies engaging in, a broader range of activities than those permitted for a BHC. BHCs are generally restricted to engaging in the business of banking, managing or controlling banks, and certain other activities determined by the Federal Reserve to be closely related to banking. FHCs may also engage in activities that are considered to be financial in nature, as well as those incidental or complementary to financial activities, including underwriting, dealing and making markets in securities, and making merchant banking investments in non-financial companies. Huntington and the Bank must each remain “well-capitalized” and “well managed” in order for
Huntington to maintain its status as a FHC. In addition, the Bank must receive a CRA rating of at least “Satisfactory” at its most recent examination for Huntington to engage in the full range of activities permissible for FHCs.
Huntington is subject to primary supervision, regulation and examination by the Federal Reserve, which serves as the primary regulator of our consolidated organization. The primary regulators of our non-bank subsidiaries directly regulate the activities of those subsidiaries, with the Federal Reserve exercising a supervisory role. Such non-bank subsidiaries include, for example, broker-dealers registered with the SEC and investment advisers registered with the SEC with respect to their investment advisory activities.
The Bank as a National Bank
The Bank is a national banking association chartered under the laws of the United States. As a national bank, the activities of the Bank are limited to those specifically authorized under the National Bank Act and OCC regulations. The Bank is subject to comprehensive primary supervision, regulation, and examination by the OCC. As a member of the DIF, the Bank is also subject to regulation and examination by the FDIC.
Supervision, Examination and Enforcement
A principal objective of the U.S. bank regulatory regime is to protect depositors and customers, the DIF, the U.S. banking and financial system, and financial markets as a whole by ensuring the financial safety and soundness of BHCs and banks, including Huntington and the Bank. Bank regulators regularly examine the operations of BHCs and banks. In addition, BHCs and banks are subject to periodic reporting and filing requirements.
The Federal Reserve, OCC, and FDIC have broad supervisory and enforcement authority with regard to BHCs and banks, including the power to conduct examinations and investigations, impose nonpublic supervisory agreements, issue cease and desist orders, impose fines and other civil and criminal penalties, terminate deposit insurance, and appoint a conservator or receiver. In addition, Huntington, the Bank and other Huntington subsidiaries are subject to supervision, regulation, and examination by the CFPB, which is the primary administrator of most federal consumer financial statutes and Huntington’s primary consumer financial regulator. Supervision and examinations are confidential, and the outcomes of these actions may not be made public.
Bank regulators have various remedies available if they determine that the financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, earnings prospects, management, liquidity, or other aspects of a banking organization’s operations are unsatisfactory. The regulators may also take action if they determine that the banking organization or its management is violating or has violated any law or regulation. The regulators have the power to, among other things, prohibit unsafe or unsound practices, require affirmative actions to correct any violation or practice, issue administrative orders that can be judicially enforced, direct increases in capital, direct the sale of subsidiaries or other assets, limit dividends and distributions, restrict growth, assess civil monetary penalties, remove officers and directors, and terminate deposit insurance.
Engaging in unsafe or unsound practices or failing to comply with applicable laws, regulations, and supervisory agreements could subject the Company, its subsidiaries, and their respective officers, directors, and institution-affiliated parties to the remedies described above, and other sanctions. In addition, the FDIC may terminate a bank’s deposit insurance upon a finding that the bank’s financial condition is unsafe or unsound or that the bank has engaged in unsafe or unsound practices or has violated an applicable rule, regulation, order, or condition enacted or imposed by the bank’s regulatory agency.
In November 2018, the Federal Reserve adopted a new rating system, the LFI Rating System, to align its supervisory rating system for large financial institutions, including Huntington, with its current supervisory programs for these firms. As compared to the rating system it replaces, which will continue to be used for smaller BHCs, the LFI Rating System places a greater emphasis on capital and liquidity, including related planning and risk management practices. Huntington will receive its first rating under the LFI Rating System in 2020. These ratings will remain confidential.
Bank Acquisitions by Huntington
BHCs, such as Huntington, must obtain prior approval of the Federal Reserve in connection with any acquisition that results in the BHC owning or controlling 5% or more of any class of voting securities of a bank or another BHC.
Acquisitions of Ownership of the Company
Acquisitions of Huntington’s voting stock above certain thresholds are subject to prior regulatory notice or approval under federal banking laws, including the BHC Act and the Change in Bank Control Act of 1978. Under the Change in Bank Control Act, a person or entity generally must provide prior notice to the Federal Reserve before acquiring the power to vote 10% or more of our outstanding common stock. Investors should be aware of these requirements when acquiring shares in our stock.
Under the Riegle-Neal Act, a BHC may acquire banks in states other than its home state, subject to any state requirement that the bank has been organized and operating for a minimum period of time, not to exceed five years, and the requirement that the
BHC not control, prior to or following the proposed acquisition, more than 10% of the total amount of deposits of insured depository institutions nationwide or, unless the acquisition is the BHC’s initial entry into the state, more than 30% of such deposits in the state (or such lesser or greater amount set by the state). The Riegle-Neal Act also authorizes banks to merge across state lines, thereby creating interstate branches. A national bank, such as the Bank, with the approval of the OCC may open a branch in any state if the law of that state would permit a state bank chartered in that state to establish the branch.
Regulatory Capital Requirements
Huntington and the Bank are subject to certain risk-based capital and leverage ratio requirements under the U.S. Basel III capital rules adopted by the Federal Reserve, for Huntington, and by the OCC, for the Bank. These rules implement the Basel III international regulatory capital standards in the United States, as well as certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. These quantitative calculations are minimums, and the Federal Reserve and OCC may determine that a banking organization, based on its size, complexity, or risk profile, must maintain a higher level of capital in order to operate in a safe and sound manner.
Under the U.S. Basel III capital rules, Huntington’s and the Bank’s assets, exposures, and certain off-balance sheet items are subject to risk weights used to determine the institutions’ risk-weighted assets. These risk-weighted assets are used to calculate the following minimum capital ratios for Huntington and the Bank:
CET1 Risk-Based Capital Ratio, equal to the ratio of CET1 capital to risk-weighted assets. CET1 capital primarily includes common shareholders’ equity subject to certain regulatory adjustments and deductions, including with respect to goodwill, intangible assets, certain deferred tax assets, and AOCI. Certain of these adjustments and deductions were subject to phase-in periods that began on January 1, 2015, and was scheduled to end on January 1, 2018. Together with the FDIC, the Federal Reserve and OCC have issued proposed rules that would simplify the capital treatment of certain capital deductions and adjustments, and the final phase-in period for these capital deductions and adjustments has been indefinitely delayed. In addition, in December 2018, the U.S. federal banking agencies finalized rules that would permit BHCs and banks to phase-in, for regulatory capital purposes, the day-one impact of the new current expected credit loss accounting rule on retained earnings over a period of three years. For further discussion of the new current expected credit loss accounting rule, see Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital Ratio, equal to the ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets. Tier 1 capital is primarily comprised of CET1 capital, perpetual preferred stock, and certain qualifying capital instruments.
Total Risk-Based Capital Ratio, equal to the ratio of total capital, including CET1 capital, Tier 1 capital, and Tier 2 capital, to risk-weighted assets. Tier 2 capital primarily includes qualifying subordinated debt and qualifying ALLL. Tier 2 capital also includes, among other things, certain trust preferred securities.
Tier 1 Leverage Ratio, equal to the ratio of Tier 1 capital to quarterly average assets (net of goodwill, certain other intangible assets, and certain other deductions).
The total minimum regulatory capital ratios and well-capitalized minimum ratios are reflected on the following page. The Federal Reserve has not yet revised the well-capitalized standard for BHCs to reflect the higher capital requirements imposed under the U.S. Basel III capital rules. For purposes of the Federal Reserve’s Regulation Y, including determining whether a BHC meets the requirements to be an FHC, BHCs, such as Huntington, must maintain a Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital Ratio of 6.0% or greater and a Total Risk-Based Capital Ratio of 10.0% or greater. If the Federal Reserve were to apply the same or a very similar well-capitalized standard to BHCs as that applicable to the Bank, Huntington’s capital ratios as of December 31, 2018 would exceed such revised well-capitalized standard. The Federal Reserve may require BHCs, including Huntington, to maintain capital ratios substantially in excess of mandated minimum levels, depending upon general economic conditions and a BHC’s particular condition, risk profile, and growth plans.
Failure to be well-capitalized or to meet minimum capital requirements could result in certain mandatory and possible additional discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have an adverse material effect on our operations or financial condition. Failure to be well-capitalized or to meet minimum capital requirements could also result in restrictions on Huntington’s or the Bank’s ability to pay dividends or otherwise distribute capital or to receive regulatory approval of applications.
In addition to meeting the minimum capital requirements, under the U.S. Basel III capital rules, Huntington and the Bank must also maintain the required Capital Conservation Buffer to avoid becoming subject to restrictions on capital distributions and certain discretionary bonus payments to management. The Capital Conservation Buffer is calculated as a ratio of CET1 capital to risk-weighted assets, and it effectively increases the required minimum risk-based capital ratios. The Capital Conservation Buffer requirement was phased in over a three-year period that began on January 1, 2016. The phase-in period ended on January 1, 2019, and the Capital Conservation Buffer is now at its fully phased-in level of 2.5%. Throughout 2018, the required Capital Conservation Buffer was 1.875%. The Tier 1 Leverage Ratio is not impacted by the Capital Conservation Buffer, and a banking institution may be considered well-capitalized while remaining out of compliance with the Capital Conservation Buffer. In April 2018, the Federal Reserve issued a proposal that would, among other things, replace the Capital Conservation Buffer with stress
buffer requirements for certain large BHCs, including Huntington. Please refer to the Proposed Stress Buffer Requirements section below for further details.
The table below summarizes the capital requirements that Huntington and the Bank must satisfy to avoid limitations on capital distributions and certain discretionary bonus payments (i.e., the required minimum capital ratios plus the Capital Conservation Buffer) during the remaining transition period for the Capital Conservation Buffer:
Minimum Basel III Regulatory Capital Ratio
Plus Capital Conservation Buffer
January 1, 2018
January 1, 2019
CET 1 risk-based capital ratio
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio
Total risk-based capital ratio
The following table presents the minimum regulatory capital ratios, minimum ratio plus capital conservation buffer, and well capitalized minimums compared with Huntington’s and the Bank’s regulatory capital ratios as of December 31, 2018, calculated using the regulatory capital methodology applicable during 2018.
Minimum Regulatory Capital Ratio
Minimum Ratio + Capital Conservation Buffer (1)
At December 31, 2018
(dollar amounts in billions)
CET 1 risk-based capital ratio
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio
Total risk-based capital ratio
Tier 1 leverage ratio
Reflects the capital conservation buffer of 1.875% applicable during 2018. Huntington and the Bank already meet the Capital Conservation Buffer at the fully phased-in level of 2.5%.
Reflects the well-capitalized standard applicable to Huntington under Federal Reserve Regulation Y and the well-capitalized standard applicable to the Bank.
Huntington has the ability to provide additional capital to the Bank to maintain the Bank’s risk-based capital ratios at levels which would be considered well-capitalized.
As of December 31, 2018, Huntington’s and the Bank’s regulatory capital ratios were above the well-capitalized standards and met the then-applicable Capital Conservation Buffer and the Capital Conservation Buffer on a fully phased-in basis. Based on current estimates, we believe that Huntington and the Bank will continue to exceed all applicable well-capitalized regulatory capital requirements and the Capital Conservation Buffer, on a fully phased-in basis.
BHCs with total consolidated assets of $250 billion or more are subject to a minimum LCR, and BHCs with at least $100 billion but less than $250 billion in total consolidated assets, including Huntington, are currently subject to a less stringent modified version of the LCR. The LCR requires Huntington to meet certain liquidity measures by holding an adequate amount of unencumbered high-quality liquid assets, such as Treasury securities and other sovereign debt, to cover its projected net cash outflows over a 30 calendar-day stress scenario window. Because the LCR assigns less severe outflow assumptions to certain types of customer deposits, banks’ demand for and the cost of these deposits may increase. Additionally, the LCR has increased the demand for direct U.S. government and U.S. government-guaranteed debt that, while high quality, generally carry lower yields than other securities BHCs hold in their investment portfolios. Under the Proposed Capital and Liquidity Tailoring Rule, Huntington, as a Category IV banking organization, would be exempt from the LCR.
In addition, in May 2016, the federal bank regulatory agencies proposed a Net Stable Funding Ratio rule, which would require large financial firms to meet certain net stable funding measures by funding themselves with adequate amounts of medium- and long-term funding. As initially proposed, Huntington would be subject to a less stringent modified version of the Net Stable Funding Ratio. Under the Proposed Capital and Liquidity Tailoring Rule, however, Huntington, as a Category IV banking organization, would be exempt from the proposed Net Stable Funding Ratio.
We cannot predict whether the final form of the Proposed Capital and Liquidity Tailoring Rule will exempt Huntington from the LCR and the proposed Net Stable Funding Ratio.
Enhanced Prudential Standards
Under the Dodd-Frank Act, as modified by the Economic Growth Act, BHCs with consolidated assets of more than $100 billion, such as Huntington, are currently subject to certain enhanced prudential standards. As a result, Huntington is subject to more stringent standards, including liquidity and capital requirements, leverage limits, stress testing, resolution planning, and risk management standards, than those applicable to smaller institutions. Certain larger banking organizations are subject to additional enhanced prudential standards.
A rule to implement one other enhanced prudential standard—early remediation requirements—is still under consideration by the Federal Reserve. In June 2018, the Federal Reserve adopted a final rule that established single counterparty credit limits. The new single counterparty credit limits do not apply to BHCs like Huntington that do not have at least $250 billion of total consolidated assets.
As discussed in the Regulatory Environment section above, following the 18-month period after the enactment of the Economic Growth Act, BHCs with consolidated assets between $100 billion and $250 billion, such as Huntington, will be exempt from all enhanced prudential standards that the Federal Reserve has not made applicable to them, with the exception of risk committee requirements. Under the Proposed EPS Tailoring Rule, Huntington, as a Category IV banking organization, would be subject to the least restrictive enhanced prudential standards applicable to firms with $100 billion or more in total consolidated assets. As compared to enhanced prudential standards currently applicable to Huntington, under the Proposed EPS Tailoring Rule, Huntington would no longer be subject to company-run stress testing requirements and would be subject to less frequent supervisory stress tests, less frequent internal liquidity stress tests, and reduced liquidity risk management requirements. We cannot predict whether the Proposed EPS Tailoring Rule will be adopted as proposed or whether any changes will be made to it that would affect the enhanced prudential standards applicable to Huntington. In addition, future rulemakings to implement the Economic Growth Act may further change the enhanced prudential standards applicable to Huntington.
Huntington is required to submit a capital plan annually to the Federal Reserve for supervisory review in connection with its annual CCAR process. Huntington is required to include within its capital plan an assessment of the expected uses and sources of capital and a description of all planned capital actions over the nine-quarter planning horizon, a detailed description of the process for assessing capital adequacy, its capital policy, and a discussion of any expected changes to its business plan that are likely to have a material impact on its capital adequacy.
The Federal Reserve expects BHCs subject to CCAR, such as Huntington, to have sufficient capital to withstand a highly adverse operating environment and to be able to continue operations, maintain ready access to funding, meet obligations to creditors and counterparties, and serve as credit intermediaries. In addition, the Federal Reserve evaluates the planned capital actions of these BHCs, including planned capital distributions such as dividend payments or stock repurchases. This involves a quantitative assessment of capital based on supervisory-run stress tests that assess the ability to maintain capital levels above certain minimum ratios, after taking all capital actions included in a BHC’s capital plan, under baseline and stressful conditions throughout the nine-quarter planning horizon. As part of CCAR, the Federal Reserve evaluates whether BHCs have sufficient capital to continue operations throughout times of economic and financial market stress and whether they have robust, forward-looking capital planning processes that account for their unique risks. We generally may pay dividends and repurchase stock only in accordance with a capital plan that has been reviewed by the Federal Reserve and as to which the Federal Reserve has not objected. In addition, we are generally prohibited from making a capital distribution unless, after giving effect to the distribution, we will meet all minimum regulatory capital ratios.
Under revised CCAR rules that became effective on March 6, 2017, the Federal Reserve is no longer allowed to object to the capital plan of a large and non-complex BHC, such as Huntington, on a qualitative, as opposed to quantitative, basis. Instead, the Federal Reserve may evaluate the strength of Huntington’s qualitative capital planning process through the regular supervisory process and targeted horizontal reviews of particular aspects of capital planning. In April 2018, the Federal Reserve issued a proposal to integrate its annual capital planning and stress testing requirements with certain ongoing regulatory capital requirements, which would make changes to capital planning and stress testing processes for BHCs subject to the proposed rule, including Huntington. Please refer to the Proposed Stress Buffer Requirements section below for further details. In addition, the Federal Reserve has stated that, as part of a future rulemaking to implement the Economic Growth Act, it may further streamline the CCAR rules and other capital planning requirements applicable to certain BHCs with consolidated assets between $100 billion and $250 billion, including Huntington.
Huntington submitted its 2018 capital plan to the Federal Reserve in April 2018. The Federal Reserve did not object to Huntington’s 2018 capital plan. On February 5, 2019, the Federal Reserve announced that certain less-complex U.S. BHCs with less than $250 billion in total consolidated assets, including Huntington, would not be subject to supervisory stress testing,
company-run stress testing, or the CCAR process for the 2019 capital plan and stress test cycle. Those BHCs, including Huntington, remain subject to the requirement to develop and maintain a capital plan, and the board of directors (or designated subcommittee thereof) at those BHCs remain subject to the requirement to review and approve the BHC’s capital plan. If Huntington chooses to submit a capital plan to the FRB in the 2019 capital plan cycle, it will be subject to a supervisory stress test by the FRB. There can be no assurance that the Federal Reserve will respond favorably to Huntington’s future capital plans, capital actions, or stress test results.
Huntington is subject to annual supervisory stress tests. These supervisory stress tests are forward-looking quantitative evaluations of the impact of stressful economic and financial market conditions on Huntington’s capital. Huntington also must conduct semi-annual company-run stress tests, the results of which are filed with the Federal Reserve and publicly disclosed. The objective of the annual company-run stress test is to ensure that covered institutions have robust, forward-looking capital planning processes that account for their unique risks and to help ensure that covered institutions have sufficient capital to continue operations throughout times of economic and financial stress. The results of these annual stress tests must be publicly disclosed.
As noted above, Huntington is not subject to supervisory stress testing or company-run stress testing for the 2019 stress test cycle.
Under the Proposed EPS Tailoring Rule, Huntington, as a Category IV banking organization, would no longer be subject to company-run stress testing requirements and would be subject to supervisory stress tests every two years, instead of annually. In addition, on December 18, 2018, the OCC proposed a rule to implement the Economic Growth Act that would change the minimum threshold at which company-run stress test requirements apply for national banks to $250 billion in total consolidated assets. Under this proposed rule, the Bank would no longer be subject to company-run stress testing requirements. We cannot predict whether the Proposed EPS Tailoring Rule or the OCC’s proposed rule will be adopted as proposed or whether any changes will be made to either rule that would affect the stress testing requirements applicable to Huntington or the Bank.
Proposed Stress Buffer Requirements
On April 10, 2018, the Federal Reserve issued a proposal to integrate its annual capital planning and stress testing requirements with certain ongoing regulatory capital requirements. The proposal, which would apply to certain BHCs, including Huntington, would introduce a stress capital buffer and a stress leverage buffer, or stress buffer requirements, and related changes to the capital planning and stress testing processes.
For risk-based capital requirements, the stress capital buffer would replace the existing Capital Conservation Buffer, which is 2.5% as of January 1, 2019. The stress capital buffer would equal the greater of (i) the maximum decline in our CET1 Risk-Based Capital Ratio under the severely adverse scenario over the supervisory stress test measurement period, plus the sum of the ratios of the dollar amount of our planned common stock dividends to our projected risk-weighted assets for each of the fourth through seventh quarters of the supervisory stress test projection period, and (ii) 2.5%.
Like the stress capital buffer, the stress leverage buffer would be calculated based on the results of our most recent supervisory stress tests. The stress leverage buffer would equal the maximum decline in our Tier 1 Leverage Ratio under the severely adverse scenario, plus the sum of the ratios of the dollar amount of our planned common stock dividends to our projected leverage ratio denominator for each of the fourth through seventh quarters of the supervisory stress test projection period. No floor would be established for the stress leverage buffer, which would apply in addition to the current minimum Tier 1 Leverage Ratio of 4%.
The proposal would make related changes to capital planning and stress testing processes for BHCs subject to the stress buffer requirements. In particular, the proposal would limit projected capital actions to planned common stock dividends in the fourth through seventh quarters of the supervisory stress test projection period and would assume that BHCs maintain a constant level of assets and risk-weighted assets throughout the supervisory stress test projection period.
In November 2018, the Federal Reserve’s Vice Chairman for Supervision stated that the Federal Reserve does not expect that the proposed stress buffer requirements will go into effect before 2020, and that, while the Federal Reserve expects to finalize certain elements of those requirements as proposed, other elements of the proposal will be re-proposed and again subject to public comment.
Restrictions on Dividends
Huntington is a legal entity separate and distinct from its banking and non-banking subsidiaries. Since our consolidated net income consists largely of net income of Huntington’s subsidiaries, our ability to pay dividends and repurchase shares depends upon our receipt of dividends from these subsidiaries. Under federal law, there are various limitations on the extent to which the Bank can declare and pay dividends to Huntington, including those related to regulatory capital requirements, general regulatory oversight to prevent unsafe or unsound practices, and federal banking law requirements concerning the payment of dividends out
of net profits, surplus, and available earnings. Certain contractual restrictions also may limit the ability of the Bank to pay dividends to Huntington. No assurances can be given that the Bank will, in any circumstances, pay dividends to Huntington.
Huntington’s ability to declare and pay dividends to our shareholders is similarly limited by federal banking law and Federal Reserve regulations and policy. As discussed in the Capital Planning section above, a BHC may pay dividends and repurchase stock only in accordance with a capital plan that has been reviewed by the Federal Reserve and as to which the Federal Reserve has not objected.
Huntington and the Bank must maintain the applicable CET1 Capital Conservation Buffer to avoid becoming subject to restrictions on capital distributions, including dividends. As of January 1, 2019, the fully phased in Capital Conservation Buffer is 2.5%. For more information on the Capital Conservation Buffer and the stress buffer requirements that the Federal Reserve has proposed that would replace the Capital Conservation Buffer for BHCs, see the Regulatory Capital Requirements section and Proposed Stress Buffer Requirements sections above, respectively.
Federal Reserve policy provides that a BHC should not pay dividends unless (1) the BHC’s net income over the last four quarters (net of dividends paid) is sufficient to fully fund the dividends, (2) the prospective rate of earnings retention appears consistent with the capital needs, asset quality, and overall financial condition of the BHC and its subsidiaries, and (3) the BHC will continue to meet minimum required capital adequacy ratios. Accordingly, a BHC should not pay cash dividends that can only be funded in ways that weaken the BHC’s financial health, such as by borrowing. The policy also provides that a BHC should inform the Federal Reserve reasonably in advance of declaring or paying a dividend that exceeds earnings for the period for which the dividend is being paid or that could result in a material adverse change to the BHC’s capital structure. BHCs also are required to consult with the Federal Reserve before increasing dividends or redeeming or repurchasing capital instruments. Additionally, the Federal Reserve could prohibit or limit the payment of dividends by a BHC if it determines that payment of the dividend would constitute an unsafe or unsound practice.
Under the Volcker Rule, we are prohibited from (1) engaging in short-term proprietary trading for our own account and (2) having certain ownership interests in and relationships with hedge funds or private equity funds (covered funds). The Volcker Rule regulations contain exemptions for market-making, hedging, underwriting, trading in U.S. government and agency obligations, and also permit certain ownership interests in certain types of covered funds to be retained. They also permit the offering and sponsoring of covered funds under certain conditions. The Volcker Rule regulations impose significant compliance and reporting obligations on banking entities, such as us. We have put in place the compliance programs required by the Volcker Rule and have either divested or received extensions for any holdings in illiquid covered funds.
The five federal agencies implementing the Volcker Rule regulations have approved an interim final rule to permit banking entities to retain interests in certain collateralized debt obligations backed primarily by trust preferred securities if certain qualifications are met. In addition, the agencies released a non-exclusive list of issuers that meet the requirements of the interim final rule. As of December 31, 2018, we had no investments in trust preferred securities.
In May 2018, the five federal agencies with rulemaking authority with respect to the Volcker Rule released a proposal to revise the Volcker Rule. The proposal would tailor the Volcker Rule’s compliance requirements to the amount of a firm’s trading activity, revise the definition of trading account, clarify certain key provisions in the Volcker Rule, and modify the information companies are required to provide the federal agencies. If adopted, the proposed changes to the definition of trading account would likely expand the scope of investing and trading activities subject to the Volcker Rule’s restrictions. We are currently evaluating the potential impact that this proposed rule would have on our investing and trading activities.
Recovery and Resolution Planning
As a BHC with assets of $50 billion or more, Huntington is currently required to submit annually to the Federal Reserve and the FDIC a resolution plan for the orderly resolution of Huntington and its significant legal entities under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code or other applicable insolvency laws in a rapid and orderly fashion in the event of future material financial distress or failure. If the Federal Reserve and the FDIC jointly determine that the resolution plan is not credible and the deficiencies are not cured in a timely manner, they may jointly impose on us more stringent capital, leverage, or liquidity requirements, or restrictions on our growth, activities, or operations. If we were to fail to address the deficiencies in our resolution plan when required, we could eventually be required to divest certain assets or operations. Huntington submitted its resolution plan to the Federal Reserve and the FDIC on December 21, 2017. The Federal Reserve and FDIC have extended the filing deadline for certain BHCs, including Huntington, and as a result Huntington’s next resolution plan is not due to the Federal Reserve and FDIC until December 31, 2019. In addition, the Bank is required to periodically file a separate resolution plan with the FDIC. The public versions of the resolution plans previously submitted by Huntington and the Bank are available on the FDIC’s website and, in the case of Huntington’s resolution plans, also on the Federal Reserve’s website.
The Economic Growth Act raised the threshold for BHC resolution plans to $250 billion in consolidated assets, but BHCs with consolidated assets between $100 billion and $250 billion, including Huntington, continue to be subject to this requirement
for 18 months after the Economic Growth Act’s date of enactment, and the Federal Reserve and FDIC may require such BHCs to remain subject to these requirements. The Federal Reserve and the FDIC have stated that they will propose a rule to amend the applicability of resolution planning requirements for BHCs with between $100 billion and $250 billion in consolidated assets. We cannot predict whether and to what extent Huntington will continue to be subject to the resolution plan requirements as a result of any final rule resulting from this proposal.
The Economic Growth Act did not change the FDIC’s rules that require the Bank to periodically file a separate resolution plan. The FDIC’s Chairman, however, has indicated that the FDIC intends to release an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking with respect to the FDIC’s bank resolution plan requirements meant to better tailor bank resolution plans to a firm’s size, complexity, and risk profile. Until the FDIC’s revisions to its bank resolution plan requirement are finalized, no bank resolution plans will be required to be filed.
The Bank had previously been required to develop and maintain a recovery plan that is appropriate for its individual size, risk profile, activities, and complexity, including the complexity of its organizational and legal entity structure under OCC guidelines that establish enforceable standards for recovery planning for insured national banks. On December 27, 2018, the OCC finalized an amendment to its guidelines that, among other things, raised the threshold at which banks become subject to the OCC’s recovery planning guidelines to $250 billion in total consolidated assets. This increased threshold became effective on January 28, 2019, and as a result, the Bank is no longer subject to the OCC’s recovery planning guidelines.
Source of Strength
Huntington is required to serve as a source of financial and managerial strength to the Bank and, under appropriate conditions, to commit resources to support the Bank. This support may be required by the Federal Reserve at times when we might otherwise determine not to provide it or when doing so is not otherwise in the interests of Huntington or our shareholders or creditors. The Federal Reserve may require a BHC to make capital injections into a troubled subsidiary bank and may charge the BHC with engaging in unsafe and unsound practices if the BHC fails to commit resources to such a subsidiary bank or if it undertakes actions that the Federal Reserve believes might jeopardize the BHC’s ability to commit resources to such subsidiary bank.
Under these requirements, Huntington may in the future be required to provide financial assistance to the Bank should it experience financial distress. Capital loans by Huntington to the Bank would be subordinate in right of payment to deposits and certain other debts of the Bank. In the event of Huntington’s bankruptcy, any commitment by Huntington to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of the Bank would be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to a priority of payment.
FDIC as Receiver or Conservator of Huntington
Upon the insolvency of an insured depository institution, such as the Bank, the FDIC may be appointed as the conservator or receiver of the institution. Under the Orderly Liquidation Authority, upon the insolvency of a BHC, such as Huntington, the FDIC may be appointed as conservator or receiver of the BHC, if certain findings are made by the FDIC, the Federal Reserve, and the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the President. Acting as a conservator or receiver, the FDIC would have broad powers to transfer any assets or liabilities of the institution without the approval of the institution’s creditors.
The FDIA provides that, in the event of the liquidation or other resolution of an insured depository institution, including the Bank, the claims of depositors of the institution (including the claims of the FDIC as subrogee of insured depositors) and certain claims for administrative expenses of the FDIC as a receiver would have priority over other general unsecured claims against the institution. If the Bank were to fail, insured and uninsured depositors, along with the FDIC, would have priority in payment ahead of unsecured, non-deposit creditors, including Huntington, with respect to any extensions of credit they have made to such insured depository institution.
Transactions between a Bank and its Affiliates
Federal banking laws and regulations impose qualitative standards and quantitative limitations upon certain transactions between a bank and its affiliates, including between a bank and its holding company and companies that the BHC may be deemed to control for these purposes. Transactions covered by these provisions must be on arm’s-length terms and cannot exceed certain amounts which are determined with reference to the bank’s regulatory capital. Moreover, if the transaction is a loan or other extension of credit, it must be secured by collateral in an amount and quality expressly prescribed by statute, and if the affiliate is unable to pledge sufficient collateral, the BHC may be required to provide it. The Dodd-Frank Act expanded the coverage and scope of these regulations, including by applying them to the credit exposure arising under derivative transactions, repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements, and securities borrowing and lending transactions. Federal banking laws also place similar restrictions on loans and other extensions of credit by FDIC-insured banks, such as the Bank, and their subsidiaries to their directors, executive officers, and principal shareholders.
The federal bank regulatory agencies have adopted uniform regulations prescribing standards for extensions of credit that are secured by liens or interests in real estate or made for the purpose of financing permanent improvements to real estate. Under these regulations, all insured depository institutions, such as the Bank, must adopt and maintain written policies establishing appropriate limits and standards for extensions of credit that are secured by liens or interests in real estate or are made for the purpose of financing permanent improvements to real estate. These policies must establish loan portfolio diversification standards, prudent underwriting standards (including loan-to-value limits) that are clear and measurable, loan administration procedures, and documentation, approval and reporting requirements. The real estate lending policies must reflect consideration of the federal bank regulatory agencies’ Interagency Guidelines for Real Estate Lending Policies.
Heightened Governance and Risk Management Standards
The OCC has published guidelines to update expectations for the governance and risk management practices of certain large financial institutions, including the Bank. The guidelines require covered institutions to establish and adhere to a written governance framework in order to manage and control their risk-taking activities. In addition, the guidelines provide standards for the institutions’ boards of directors to oversee the risk governance framework. As discussed in the Risk Management and Capital section of the MDA, the Bank currently has a written governance framework and associated controls.
The Bank Secrecy Act and the Patriot Act contain anti-money laundering and financial transparency provisions intended to detect and prevent the use of the U.S. financial system for money laundering and terrorist financing activities. The Bank Secrecy Act, as amended by the Patriot Act, requires depository institutions and their holding companies to undertake activities including maintaining an AML program, verifying the identity of clients, monitoring for and reporting suspicious transactions, reporting on cash transactions exceeding specified thresholds, and responding to requests for information by regulatory authorities and law enforcement agencies. The Bank is subject to the Bank Secrecy Act and, therefore, is required to provide its employees with AML training, designate an AML compliance officer, and undergo an annual, independent audit to assess the effectiveness of its AML program. The Bank has implemented policies, procedures, and internal controls that are designed to comply with these AML requirements. In May 2016, FinCEN, which is a unit of the Treasury Department that drafts regulations implementing the Patriot Act and other AML legislation, issued final rules governing enhanced customer due diligence. The rules impose several new obligations on covered financial institutions with respect to their “legal entity customers,” including corporations, limited liability companies, and other similar entities. For each such customer that opens an account (including an existing customer opening a new account), the covered financial institution must identify and verify the customer’s “beneficial owners,” who are specifically defined in the rules. The rules contain an exemption for insurance premium financing transactions, but cash refunds issued in connection with such transactions are not exempt, thus requiring verification of beneficial ownership before cash refunds may be issued to borrowers. Bank regulators are focusing their examinations on AML compliance, and we will continue to monitor and augment, where necessary, our AML compliance programs. The federal banking agencies are required, when reviewing bank and BHC acquisition or merger applications, to take into account the effectiveness of the AML activities of the applicant.
OFAC is responsible for administering economic sanctions that affect transactions with designated foreign countries, nationals, and others, as defined by various Executive Orders and in various legislation. OFAC-administered sanctions take many different forms. For example, sanctions may include: (1) restrictions on trade with or investment in a sanctioned country, including prohibitions against direct or indirect imports from and exports to a sanctioned country and prohibitions on U.S. persons engaging in financial transactions relating to, making investments in, or providing investment-related advice or assistance to, a sanctioned country; and (2) a blocking of assets in which the government or “specially designated nationals” of the sanctioned country have an interest, by prohibiting transfers of property subject to U.S. jurisdiction, including property in the possession or control of U.S. persons. OFAC also publishes lists of persons, organizations, and countries suspected of aiding, harboring, or engaging in terrorist acts, known as Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons. Blocked assets, for example property and bank deposits, cannot be paid out, withdrawn, set off, or transferred in any manner without a license from OFAC. Failure to comply with these sanctions could have serious legal and reputational consequences.
Federal and state law contains extensive consumer privacy protection provisions. The GLBA requires financial institutions to periodically disclose their privacy policies and practices relating to sharing such information and enables retail customers to opt out of our ability to share information with unaffiliated third parties under certain circumstances. Other federal and state laws and regulations impact our ability to share certain information with affiliates and non-affiliates for marketing and/or non-marketing purposes, or to contact customers with marketing offers. The GLBA also requires financial institutions to implement a comprehensive information security program that includes administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to ensure the security and confidentiality of customer records and information. These security and privacy policies and procedures for the protection of
personal and confidential information are in effect across all businesses and geographic locations as applicable. Federal law also makes it a criminal offense, except in limited circumstances, to obtain or attempt to obtain customer information of a financial nature by fraudulent or deceptive means.
Data privacy and data protection are areas of increasing state legislative focus. For example, in June of 2018, the Governor of California signed into law the CCPA. The CCPA, which becomes effective on January 1, 2020, applies to for-profit businesses that conduct business in California and meet certain revenue or data collection thresholds. The CCPA will give consumers the right to request disclosure of information collected about them, and whether that information has been sold or shared with others, the right to request deletion of personal information (subject to certain exceptions), the right to opt out of the sale of the consumer’s personal information, and the right not to be discriminated against for exercising these rights. The CCPA contains several exemptions, including an exemption applicable to information that is collected, processed, sold, or disclosed pursuant to the GLBA. The California Attorney General has not yet proposed or adopted regulations implementing the CCPA, and the California State Legislature has amended the Act since its passage. In California the CCPA may be interpreted or applied in a manner inconsistent with our understanding or similar laws may be adopted by other states where we operate. We are continuing to assess the impact of the CCPA on our business. The federal government may also pass data privacy or data protection legislation.
Like other lenders, the Bank and other of our subsidiaries use credit bureau data in their underwriting activities. Use of such data is regulated under the FCRA, and the FCRA also regulates reporting information to credit bureaus, prescreening individuals for credit offers, sharing of information between affiliates, and using affiliate data for marketing purposes. Similar state laws may impose additional requirements on us and our subsidiaries.
The DIF provides insurance coverage for certain deposits, up to a standard maximum deposit insurance amount of $250,000 per depositor and is funded through assessments on insured depository institutions, based on the risk each institution poses to the DIF. The Bank accepts customer deposits that are insured by the DIF and, therefore, must pay insurance premiums. The FDIC may increase the Bank’s insurance premiums based on various factors, including the FDIC’s assessment of its risk profile. Until September 30, 2018, banks with $10 billion or more in total assets, such as the Bank, were required to pay an assessment surcharge. This requirement ended effective September 30, 2018, as a result of the FDIC’s reserve ratio exceeding 1.35%.
The FDIC issued a rule that requires large insured depository institutions, including the Bank, to enhance their deposit account recordkeeping and related information technology system capabilities to facilitate prompt payment of insured deposits if such an institution were to fail. We must comply with these new requirements by April 1, 2020.
Our compensation practices are subject to oversight by the Federal Reserve and, with respect to some of our subsidiaries and employees, by other financial regulatory bodies. The scope and content of compensation regulation in the financial industry are continuing to develop, and we expect that these regulations and resulting market practices will continue to evolve over a number of years.
The federal bank regulatory agencies have issued joint guidance on executive compensation designed to ensure that the incentive compensation policies of banking organizations, such as Huntington and the Bank, do not encourage imprudent risk taking and are consistent with the safety and soundness of the organization. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act requires the federal bank regulatory agencies and the SEC to issue regulations or guidelines requiring covered financial institutions, including Huntington and the Bank, to prohibit incentive-based payment arrangements that encourage inappropriate risks by providing compensation that is excessive or that could lead to material financial loss to the institution. A proposed rule was issued in 2016. Also pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, in 2015, the SEC proposed rules that would direct stock exchanges to require listed companies to implement clawback policies to recover incentive-based compensation from current or former executive officers in the event of certain financial restatements and would also require companies to disclose their clawback policies and their actions under those policies. Huntington continues to evaluate the proposed rules, both of which are subject to further rulemaking procedures.
The CISA is intended to improve cybersecurity in the United States by enhanced sharing of information about security threats among the U.S. government and private sector entities, including financial institutions. The CISA also authorizes companies to monitor their own systems notwithstanding any other provision of law and allows companies to carry out defensive measures on their own systems from cyber-attacks. The law includes liability protections for companies that share cyber threat information with third parties so long as such sharing activity is conducted in accordance with CISA.
In October 2016, the federal bank regulatory agencies issued an ANPR regarding enhanced cyber risk management standards which would apply to a wide range of large financial institutions and their third-party service providers, including us and the Bank.
The proposed standards would expand existing cybersecurity regulations and guidance to focus on cyber risk governance and management, management of internal and external dependencies, and incident response, cyber resilience, and situational awareness. In addition, the proposal contemplates more stringent standards for institutions with systems that are critical to the financial sector.
Community Reinvestment Act
The CRA is intended to encourage banks to help meet the credit needs of their service areas, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, consistent with safe and soundness practices. The relevant federal bank regulatory agency, the OCC in the Bank’s case, examines each bank and assigns it a public CRA rating. A bank’s record of fair lending compliance is part of the resulting CRA examination report.
The CRA requires the relevant federal bank regulatory agency to consider a bank’s CRA assessment when considering the bank’s application to conduct certain mergers or acquisitions or to open or relocate a branch office. The Federal Reserve also must consider the CRA record of each subsidiary bank of a BHC in connection with any acquisition or merger application filed by the BHC. An unsatisfactory CRA record could substantially delay or result in the denial of an approval or application by Huntington or the Bank. The Bank received a CRA rating of “Outstanding” in its most recent examination.
Leaders of the federal banking agencies recently have indicated their support for revising the CRA regulatory framework, and on August 28, 2018, the OCC issued an ANPR to solicit ideas for building a new CRA framework. It is too early to tell whether any changes will be made to applicable CRA requirements.
Transaction Account Reserves
Federal Reserve rules require depository institutions to maintain reserves against their transaction accounts, primarily negotiable order of withdrawal (NOW) and regular checking accounts. For 2019, the first $16.3 million of covered balances are exempt from the reserve requirement, aggregate balances between $16.3 million and $124.2 million are subject to a 3% reserve requirement, and aggregate balances above $124.2 million are subject to a 10% reserve requirement. These reserve requirements are subject to annual adjustment by the Federal Reserve. The Bank is in compliance with these requirements.
Debit Interchange Fees
We are subject to a statutory requirement that interchange fees for electronic debit transactions that are paid to or charged by payment card issuers, including the Bank, be reasonable and proportional to the cost incurred by the issuer. Interchange fees for electronic debit transactions are limited to 21 cents plus 0.05% of the transaction, plus an additional one cent per transaction fraud adjustment. These fees impose requirements regarding routing and exclusivity of electronic debit transactions, and generally require that debit cards be usable in at least two unaffiliated networks.
Consumer Protection Regulation and Supervision
We are subject to supervision and regulation by the CFPB with respect to federal consumer protection laws. We are also subject to certain state consumer protection laws, and under the Dodd-Frank Act, state attorneys general and other state officials are empowered to enforce certain federal consumer protection laws and regulations. State authorities have increased their focus on and enforcement of consumer protection rules. These federal and state consumer protection laws apply to a broad range of our activities and to various aspects of our business and include laws relating to interest rates, fair lending, disclosures of credit terms and estimated transaction costs to consumer borrowers, debt collection practices, the use of and the provision of information to consumer reporting agencies, and the prohibition of unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices in connection with the offer, sale, or provision of consumer financial products and services.
The CFPB has promulgated many mortgage-related final rules since it was established under the Dodd-Frank Act, including rules related to the ability to repay and qualified mortgage standards, mortgage servicing standards, loan originator compensation standards, high-cost mortgage requirements, HMDA requirements, and appraisal and escrow standards for higher priced mortgages. The mortgage-related final rules issued by the CFPB have materially restructured the origination, servicing, and securitization of residential mortgages in the United States. These rules have impacted, and will continue to impact, the business practices of mortgage lenders, including the Company.
We are subject to the informational requirements of the Exchange Act and, in accordance with the Exchange Act, we file annual, quarterly, and current reports, proxy statements, and other information with the SEC. The SEC maintains an Internet web site that contains reports, proxy statements, and other information about issuers, like us, who file electronically with the SEC. The address of the site is http://www.sec.gov. The reports and other information, including any related amendments, filed by us with, or furnished by us to, the SEC are also available free of charge at our Internet web site as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. The address of the site is http://www.huntington.com. Except as specifically incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K, information on those web sites is not part of this
We, like other financial companies, are subject to a number of risks that may adversely affect our financial condition or results of operations, many of which are outside of our direct control. Among these risks are:
Credit risk, which is the risk of loss due to loan and lease customers or other counterparties not being able to meet their financial obligations under agreed upon terms;
Market risk, which occurs when fluctuations in interest rates impact earnings and capital. Financial impacts are realized through changes in the interest rates of balance sheet assets and liabilities (net interest margin) or directly through valuation changes of capitalized MSR and/or trading assets (noninterest income);
Liquidity risk, which is the risk to current or anticipated earnings or capital arising from an inability to meet obligations when they come due. Liquidity risk includes the inability to access funding sources or manage fluctuations in funding levels. Liquidity risk also results from the failure to recognize or address changes in market conditions that affect our ability to liquidate assets quickly and with minimal loss in value;
Operational and Legal risk, which is the risk of loss arising from inadequate or failed internal processes or systems, human errors or misconduct, or adverse external events. Operational losses result from internal fraud, external fraud, inadequate or inappropriate employment practices and workplace safety, failure to meet professional obligations involving customers, products, and business practices, damage to physical assets, business disruption and systems failures, and failures in execution, delivery, and process management. Legal risk includes, but is not limited to, exposure to orders, fines, penalties, or punitive damages resulting from litigation, as well as regulatory actions;
Compliance risk, which exposes us to money penalties, enforcement actions, or other sanctions as a result of non-conformance with laws, rules, and regulations that apply to the financial services industry;
Strategic risk, which is defined as risk to current or anticipated earnings, capital, or enterprise value arising from adverse business decisions, improper implementation of business decisions or lack of responsiveness to industry / market changes; and
Reputation risk, which is the risk that negative publicity regarding an institution’s business practices, whether true or not, will cause a decline in the customer base, costly litigation, or revenue reductions.
In addition to the other information included or incorporated by reference into this report, readers should carefully consider that the following important factors, among others, could negatively impact our business, future results of operations, and future cash flows materially.
Our ACL level may prove to not be adequate or be negatively affected by credit risk exposures which could adversely affect our net income and capital.
Our business depends on the creditworthiness of our customers. Our ACL of $868 million at December 31, 2018, represented Management’s estimate of probable losses inherent in our loan and lease portfolio (ALLL) as well as our unfunded loan commitments and letters of credit (AULC). We regularly review our ACL for appropriateness. In doing so, we consider economic conditions and trends, collateral values, and credit quality indicators, such as past charge-off experience, levels of past due loans, and NPAs. There is no certainty that our ACL will be appropriate over time to cover losses in the portfolio because of unanticipated adverse changes in the economy, market conditions, or events adversely affecting specific customers, industries, or markets. If the credit quality of our customer base materially decreases, if the risk profile of a market, industry, or group of customers changes materially, or if the ACL is not appropriate, our net income and capital could be materially adversely affected, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
In addition, regulatory review of risk ratings and loan and lease losses may impact the level of the ACL and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Furthermore, in June 2016, the FASB issued a new current expected credit loss rule, which will require banks to record, at the time of origination, credit losses expected throughout the life of the asset portfolio on loans and held-to-maturity securities, as opposed to the current practice of recording losses when it is probable that a loss event has occurred. We are required to adopt the current expected credit loss rule in 2020 and expect to recognize a one-time cumulative effect adjustment to our ACL and retained earnings as of January 1, 2020. The current expected credit loss model could materially affect how we determine our ACL and report our financial condition and results of operations. For further discussion, see Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Weakness in economic conditions could adversely affect our business.
Our performance could be negatively affected to the extent there is deterioration in business and economic conditions which have direct or indirect material adverse impacts on us, our customers, and our counterparties. These conditions could result in one or more of the following:
A decrease in the demand for loans and other products and services offered by us;
A decrease in customer savings generally and in the demand for savings and investment products offered by us; and
An increase in the number of customers and counterparties who become delinquent, file for protection under bankruptcy laws, or default on their loans or other obligations to us.
An increase in the number of delinquencies, bankruptcies, or defaults could result in a higher level of NPAs, NCOs, provision for credit losses, and valuation adjustments on loans held for sale. The markets we serve are dependent on industrial and manufacturing businesses and, thus, are particularly vulnerable to adverse changes in economic conditions affecting these sectors.
Changes in interest rates could reduce our net interest income, reduce transactional income, and negatively impact the value of our loans, securities, and other assets. This could have an adverse impact on our cash flows, financial condition, results of operations, and capital.
Our results of operations depend substantially on net interest income, which is the difference between interest earned on interest earning assets (such as investments and loans) and interest paid on interest bearing liabilities (such as deposits and borrowings). Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors, including governmental monetary policies and domestic and international economic and political conditions. Conditions such as inflation, deflation, recession, unemployment, money supply, and other factors beyond our control may also affect interest rates. In addition, after an extended period during which the Federal Reserve increased the size of its balance sheet substantially above historical levels through the purchase of debt securities, the Federal Reserve has begun to reduce the size of its balance sheet from these elevated levels, which might also affect interest rates. If our interest earning assets mature or reprice faster than interest bearing liabilities in a declining interest rate environment, net interest income could be materially adversely impacted. Likewise, if interest bearing liabilities mature or reprice more quickly than interest earning assets in a rising interest rate environment, net interest income could be adversely impacted.
After a prolonged period of low and relatively stable interest rates, interest rates rose over the course of 2017 and 2018, although interest rates continue to remain low by historical standards.
Changes in interest rates can affect the value of loans, securities, assets under management, and other assets, including mortgage and nonmortgage servicing rights. An increase in interest rates that adversely affects the ability of borrowers to pay the principal or interest on loans and leases may lead to an increase in NPAs and a reduction of income recognized, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows. When we place a loan on nonaccrual status, we reverse any accrued but unpaid interest receivable, which decreases interest income. However, we continue to incur interest expense as a cost of funding NALs without any corresponding interest income. In addition, transactional income, including trust income, brokerage income, and gain on sales of loans can vary significantly from period-to-period based on a number of factors, including the interest rate environment. A decline in interest rates along with a flattening yield curve limits our ability to reprice deposits given the current historically low level of interest rates and could result in declining net interest margins if longer duration assets reprice faster than deposits.
Rising interest rates reduce the value of our fixed-rate securities. Any unrealized loss from these portfolios impacts OCI, shareholders’ equity, and the Tangible Common Equity ratio. Any realized loss from these portfolios impacts regulatory capital ratios. In a rising interest rate environment, pension and other post-retirement obligations somewhat mitigate negative OCI impacts from securities and financial instruments. For more information, refer to “Market Risk” of the MD&A.
Certain investment securities, notably mortgage-backed securities, are very sensitive to rising and falling rates. Generally, when rates rise, prepayments of principal and interest will decrease and the duration of mortgage-backed securities will increase. Conversely, when rates fall, prepayments of principal and interest will increase and the duration of mortgage-backed securities will decrease. In either case, interest rates have a significant impact on the value of mortgage-backed securities.
MSR fair values are sensitive to movements in interest rates, as expected future net servicing income depends on the projected outstanding principal balances of the underlying loans, which can be reduced by prepayments. Prepayments usually increase when mortgage interest rates decline and decrease when mortgage interest rates rise.
In addition to volatility associated with interest rates, the Company also has exposure to equity markets related to the investments within the benefit plans and other income from client based transactions.
Industry competition may have an adverse effect on our success.
Our profitability depends on our ability to compete successfully. We operate in a highly competitive environment, and we expect competition to intensify. Certain of our competitors are larger and have more resources than we do, enabling them to be more aggressive than us in competing for loans and deposits. In our market areas, we face competition from other banks and financial service companies that offer similar services. Some of our non-bank competitors are not subject to the same extensive regulations we are and, therefore, may have greater flexibility in competing for business. Technological advances have made it possible for our non-bank competitors to offer products and services that traditionally were banking products and for financial institutions and other
companies to provide electronic and internet-based financial solutions, including mobile payments, online deposit accounts, electronic payment processing, and marketplace lending, without having a physical presence where their customers are located. Legislative or regulatory changes also could lead to increased competition in the financial services sector. For example, the Economic Growth Act and, if adopted, the Proposed Tailoring Rules reduce the regulatory burden of certain large BHCs and raise the asset thresholds at which more onerous requirements apply, which could cause certain large BHCs to become more competitive or to more aggressively pursue expansion. Our ability to compete successfully depends on a number of factors, including customer convenience, quality of service by investing in new products and services, electronic platforms, personal contacts, pricing, and range of products. If we are unable to successfully compete for new customers and retain our current customers, our business, financial condition, or results of operations may be adversely affected. In particular, if we experience an outflow of deposits as a result of our customers seeking investments with higher yields or greater financial stability, or a desire to do business with our competitors, we may be forced to rely more heavily on borrowings and other sources of funding to operate our business and meet withdrawal demands, thereby adversely affecting our net interest margin. For more information, refer to “Competition” section of Item 1. Business.
Uncertainty about the future of LIBOR may adversely affect our business.
LIBOR and certain other interest rate “benchmarks” are the subject of recent national, international, and other regulatory guidance and proposals for reform. These reforms may cause such benchmarks to perform differently than in the past or have other consequences which cannot be predicted. On July 27, 2017, the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority, which regulates LIBOR, publicly announced that it intends to stop persuading or compelling banks to submit information to the administrator of LIBOR after 2021. The announcement indicates that the continuation of LIBOR on the current basis cannot be guaranteed after 2021. While there is no consensus on what rate or rates may become accepted alternatives to LIBOR, a group of market participants convened by the Federal Reserve, the Alternative Reference Rate Committee, has selected the Secured Overnight Finance Rate as its recommended alternative to LIBOR. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York started to publish the Secured Overnight Financing Rate in April 2018. The Secured Overnight Financing Rate is a broad measure of the cost of overnight borrowings collateralized by Treasury securities that was selected by the Alternative Reference Rate Committee due to the depth and robustness of the U.S. Treasury repurchase market. At this time, it is impossible to predict whether the Secured Overnight Financing Rate will become an accepted alternative to LIBOR.
The market transition away from LIBOR to an alternative reference rate, such as the Secured Overnight Financing Rate, is complex and could have a range of adverse effects on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In particular, any such transition could:
adversely affect the interest rates paid or received on, the revenue and expenses associated with or the value of Huntington’s LIBOR-based assets and liabilities, which include certain variable rate loans, Huntington’s Series B preferred stock, certain of Huntington’s junior subordinated debentures, certain of the Bank’s senior notes and certain other securities or financial arrangements;
adversely affect the interest rates paid or received on, the revenue and expenses associated with or the value of other securities or financial arrangements, given LIBOR’s role in determining market interest rates globally;
prompt inquiries or other actions from regulators in respect of Huntington’s preparation and readiness for the replacement of LIBOR with an alternative reference rate; and
result in disputes, litigation or other actions with counterparties regarding the interpretation and enforceability of certain fallback language in LIBOR-based contracts and securities.
The transition away from LIBOR to an alternative reference rate will require the transition to or development of appropriate systems and analytics to effectively transition Huntington’s risk management and other processes from LIBOR-based products to those based on the applicable alternative reference rate, such as the Secured Overnight Financing Rate. Huntington has developed a LIBOR transition team and project plan that outlines timelines and priorities to prepare its processes, systems and people to support this transition. Timelines and priorities include assessing the impact on our customers, as well as assessing system requirements for operational processes. There can be no guarantee that these efforts will successfully mitigate the operational risks associated with the transition away from LIBOR to an alternative reference rate.
The manner and impact of the transition from LIBOR to an alternative reference rate, as well as the effect of these developments on our funding costs, loan and investment and trading securities portfolios, asset-liability management, and business, is uncertain.
Changes in either Huntington’s financial condition or in the general banking industry could result in a loss of depositor confidence.
Liquidity is the ability to meet cash flow needs on a timely basis at a reasonable cost. The Bank uses its liquidity to extend credit and to repay liabilities as they become due or as demanded by customers. The board of directors establishes liquidity policies, including contingency funding plans, and limits, and management establishes operating guidelines for liquidity.
Our primary source of liquidity is our large supply of deposits from consumer and commercial customers. The continued availability of this supply depends on customer willingness to maintain deposit balances with banks in general and us in particular. The availability of deposits can also be impacted by regulatory changes (e.g., changes in FDIC insurance, the LCR, etc.), changes in the financial condition of Huntington, other banks, or the banking industry in general, changes in the interest rates our competitors pay on their deposits, and other events which can impact the perceived safety or economic benefits of bank deposits. Recently, competition for deposits has increased and interest rates paid on deposits have generally risen. While we make significant efforts to consider and plan for hypothetical disruptions in our deposit funding, market related, geopolitical, or other events could impact the liquidity derived from deposits.
We are a holding company and depend on dividends by our subsidiaries for most of our funds.
Huntington is an entity separate and distinct from the Bank. The Bank conducts most of our operations, and Huntington depends upon dividends from the Bank to service Huntington’s debt and to pay dividends to Huntington’s shareholders. The availability of dividends from the Bank is limited by various statutes and regulations. It is possible, depending upon the financial condition including liquidity and capital adequacy of the Bank and other factors, that the OCC could limit the payment of dividends or other payments to Huntington by the Bank. In addition, the payment of dividends by our other subsidiaries is also subject to the laws of the subsidiary’s state of incorporation, and regulatory capital and liquidity requirements applicable to such subsidiaries. In the event that the Bank was unable to pay dividends to us, we in turn would likely have to reduce or stop paying dividends on our Preferred and Common Stock. Our failure to pay dividends on our Preferred and Common Stock could have a material adverse effect on the market price of our Preferred and Common Stock. Additional information regarding dividend restrictions is provided in Item 1. Regulatory Matters.
If we lose access to capital markets, we may not be able to meet the cash flow requirements of our depositors, creditors, and borrowers, or have the operating cash needed to fund corporate expansion and other corporate activities.
Wholesale funding sources include securitization, federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase agreements, non-core deposits, and long-term debt. The Bank is also a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Cincinnati, which provides members access to funding through advances collateralized with mortgage-related assets. We maintain a portfolio of highly-rated, marketable securities that is available as a source of liquidity.
Capital markets disruptions can directly impact the liquidity of Huntington and the Bank. The inability to access capital markets funding sources as needed could adversely impact our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and level of regulatory-qualifying capital. We may, from time-to-time, consider using our existing liquidity position to opportunistically retire outstanding securities in privately negotiated or open market transactions.
A reduction in our credit rating could adversely affect our access to capital and could increase our cost of funds.
The credit rating agencies regularly evaluate Huntington and the Bank, and credit ratings are based on a number of factors, including our financial strength and ability to generate earnings, as well as factors not entirely within our control, including conditions affecting the financial services industry, the economy, and changes in rating methodologies. There can be no assurance that we will maintain our current credit ratings. A downgrade of the credit ratings of Huntington or the Bank could adversely affect our access to liquidity and capital, and could significantly increase our cost of funds, trigger additional collateral or funding requirements, and decrease the number of investors and counterparties willing to lend to us or purchase our securities. This could affect our growth, profitability, and financial condition, including liquidity.
Operational and Legal Risks:
Our operational or security systems or infrastructure, or those of third parties, could fail or be breached, which could disrupt our business and adversely impact our results of operations, liquidity, and financial condition, as well as cause legal or reputational harm.
The potential for operational risk exposure exists throughout our business and, as a result of our interactions with, and reliance on, third parties, is not limited to our own internal operational functions. Our operational and security systems and infrastructure, including our computer systems, data management, and internal processes, as well as those of third parties, are integral to our performance. We rely on our employees and third parties in our day-to-day and ongoing operations, who may, as a result of human
error, misconduct, malfeasance, or failure, or breach of our or of third-party systems or infrastructure, expose us to risk. For example, our ability to conduct business may be adversely affected by any significant disruptions to us or to third parties with whom we interact or upon whom we rely. In addition, our ability to implement backup systems and other safeguards with respect to third-party systems is more limited than with respect to our own systems. Our financial, accounting, data processing, backup, or other operating or security systems and infrastructure may fail to operate properly or become disabled or damaged as a result of a number of factors, including events that are wholly or partially beyond our control, which could adversely affect our ability to process transactions or provide services. Such events may include sudden increases in customer transaction volume; electrical, telecommunications, or other major physical infrastructure outages; natural disasters such as earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, and floods; disease pandemics; cyber-attacks; and events arising from local or larger scale political or social matters, including wars and terrorist acts. In addition, we may need to take our systems offline if they become infected with malware or a computer virus or as a result of another form of cyber-attack. In the event that backup systems are utilized, they may not process data as quickly as our primary systems and some data might not have been saved to backup systems, potentially resulting in a temporary or permanent loss of such data. We frequently update our systems to support our operations and growth and to remain compliant with applicable laws, rules, and regulations. This updating entails significant costs and creates risks associated with implementing new systems and integrating them with existing ones, including business interruptions. Implementation and testing of controls related to our computer systems, security monitoring, and retaining and training personnel required to operate our systems also entail significant costs. Operational risk exposures could adversely impact our operations, liquidity, and financial condition, as well as cause reputational harm. In addition, we may not have adequate insurance coverage to compensate for losses from a major interruption.
We face security risks, including denial of service attacks, hacking, social engineering attacks targeting our colleagues and customers, malware intrusion or data corruption attempts, and identity theft that could result in the disclosure of confidential information, adversely affect our business or reputation, and create significant legal and financial exposure.
Our computer systems and network infrastructure and those of third parties, on which we are highly dependent, are subject to security risks and could be susceptible to cyber-attacks, such as denial of service attacks, hacking, terrorist activities, or identity theft. Our business relies on the secure processing, transmission, storage, and retrieval of confidential, proprietary, and other information in our computer and data management systems and networks, and in the computer and data management systems and networks of third parties. In addition, to access our network, products, and services, our customers and other third parties may use personal mobile devices or computing devices that are outside of our network environment and are subject to their own cybersecurity risks.
We, our customers, regulators, and other third parties, including other financial services institutions and companies engaged in data processing, have been subject to, and are likely to continue to be the target of, cyber-attacks. These cyber-attacks include computer viruses, malicious or destructive code, phishing attacks, denial of service or information, ransomware, improper access by employees or vendors, attacks on personal email of employees, ransom demands to not expose security vulnerabilities in our systems or the systems of third parties or other security breaches that could result in the unauthorized release, gathering, monitoring, misuse, loss, or destruction of confidential, proprietary, and other information of ours, our employees, our customers, or of third parties, damage our systems or otherwise materially disrupt our or our customers’ or other third parties’ network access or business operations. As cyber threats continue to evolve, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to continue to modify or enhance our protective measures or to investigate and remediate any information security vulnerabilities or incidents. Despite efforts to ensure the integrity of our systems and implement controls, processes, policies, and other protective measures, we may not be able to anticipate all security breaches, nor may we be able to implement guaranteed preventive measures against such security breaches. Cyber threats are rapidly evolving, and we may not be able to anticipate or prevent all such attacks and could be held liable for any security breach or loss.
Cybersecurity risks for banking organizations have significantly increased in recent years in part because of the proliferation of new technologies, and the use of the internet and telecommunications technologies to conduct financial transactions. For example, cybersecurity risks may increase in the future as we continue to increase our mobile-payment and other internet-based product offerings and expand our internal usage of web-based products and applications. In addition, cybersecurity risks have significantly increased in recent years in part due to the increased sophistication and activities of organized crime affiliates, terrorist organizations, hostile foreign governments, disgruntled employees or vendors, activists, and other external parties, including those involved in corporate espionage. Even the most advanced internal control environment may be vulnerable to compromise. Targeted social engineering attacks and “spear phishing” attacks are becoming more sophisticated and are extremely difficult to prevent. In such an attack, an attacker will attempt to fraudulently induce colleagues, customers, or other users of our systems to disclose sensitive information in order to gain access to its data or that of its clients. Persistent attackers may succeed in penetrating defenses given enough resources, time, and motive. The techniques used by cyber criminals change frequently, may not be recognized until launched, and may not be recognized until well after a breach has occurred. The risk of a security breach caused by a cyber-attack at a vendor or by unauthorized vendor access has also increased in recent years. Additionally, the existence of cyber-attacks or security breaches at third-party vendors with access to our data may not be disclosed to us in a timely manner.
We also face indirect technology, cybersecurity, and operational risks relating to the customers, clients, and other third parties with whom we do business or upon whom we rely to facilitate or enable our business activities, including, for example, financial counterparties, regulators, and providers of critical infrastructure such as internet access and electrical power. As a result of increasing
consolidation, interdependence, and complexity of financial entities and technology systems, a technology failure, cyber-attack, or other information or security breach that significantly degrades, deletes, or compromises the systems or data of one or more financial entities could have a material impact on counterparties or other market participants, including us. This consolidation, interconnectivity, and complexity increases the risk of operational failure, on both individual and industry-wide bases, as disparate systems need to be integrated, often on an accelerated basis. Any third-party technology failure, cyber-attack, or other information or security breach, termination, or constraint could, among other things, adversely affect our ability to effect transactions, service our clients, manage our exposure to risk, or expand our business.
Cyber-attacks or other information or security breaches, whether directed at us or third parties, may result in a material loss or have material consequences. Furthermore, the public perception that a cyber-attack on our systems has been successful, whether or not this perception is correct, may damage our reputation with customers and third parties with whom we do business. Hacking of personal information and identity theft risks, in particular, could cause serious reputational harm. A successful penetration or circumvention of system security could cause us serious negative consequences, including our loss of customers and business opportunities, costs associated with maintaining business relationships after an attack or breach; significant business disruption to our operations and business, misappropriation, exposure, or destruction of our confidential information, intellectual property, funds, and/or those of our customers; or damage to our or our customers’ and/or third parties’ computers or systems, and could result in a violation of applicable privacy laws and other laws, litigation exposure, regulatory fines, penalties or intervention, loss of confidence in our security measures, reputational damage, reimbursement or other compensatory costs, additional compliance costs, and could adversely impact our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition. In addition, we may not have adequate insurance coverage to compensate for losses from a cybersecurity event.
The resolution of significant pending litigation, if unfavorable, could have an adverse effect on our results of operations for a particular period.
We face legal risks in our businesses, and the volume of claims and amount of damages and penalties claimed in litigation and regulatory proceedings against financial institutions remain high. Substantial legal liability against us could have material adverse financial effects or cause significant reputational harm to us, which in turn could seriously harm our business prospects. It is possible that the ultimate resolution of these matters, if unfavorable, may be material to the results of operations for a particular reporting period.
For more information on litigation risks, see Note 20 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
We face significant operational risks which could lead to financial loss, expensive litigation, and loss of confidence by our customers, regulators, and capital markets.
We are exposed to many types of operational risks, including the risk of fraud or theft by colleagues or outsiders, unauthorized transactions by colleagues or outsiders, operational errors by colleagues, business disruption, and system failures. Huntington executes against a significant number of controls, a large percent of which are manual and dependent on adequate execution by colleagues and third-party service providers. There is inherent risk that unknown single points of failure through the execution chain could give rise to material loss through inadvertent errors or malicious attack. These operational risks could lead to financial loss, expensive litigation, and loss of confidence by our customers, regulators, and the capital markets.
Moreover, negative public opinion can result from our actual or alleged conduct in any number of activities, including clients, products, and business practices; corporate governance; acquisitions; and from actions taken by government regulators and community organizations in response to those activities. Negative public opinion can adversely affect our ability to attract and retain customers and can also expose us to litigation and regulatory action.
Relative to acquisitions, we incur risks and challenges associated with the integration of employees, accounting systems, and technology platforms from acquired businesses and institutions in a timely and efficient manner, and we cannot guarantee that we will be successful in retaining existing customer relationships or achieving anticipated operating efficiencies expected from such acquisitions. Acquisitions may be subject to the receipt of approvals from certain governmental authorities, including the Federal Reserve, the OCC, and the United States Department of Justice, as well as the approval of our shareholders and the shareholders of companies that we seek to acquire. These approvals for acquisitions may not be received, may take longer than expected, or may impose conditions that are not presently anticipated or that could have an adverse effect on the combined company following the acquisitions. Subject to requisite regulatory approvals, future business acquisitions may result in the issuance and payment of additional shares of stock, which would dilute current shareholders’ ownership interests. Additionally, acquisitions may involve the payment of a premium over book and market values. Therefore, dilution of our tangible book value and net income per common share could occur in connection with any future transaction.
Failure to maintain effective internal controls over financial reporting could impair our ability to accurately and timely report our financial results or prevent fraud, resulting in loss of investor confidence and adversely affecting our business and our stock price.
Effective internal controls over financial reporting are necessary to provide reliable financial reports and prevent fraud. We are subject to regulation that focuses on effective internal controls and procedures. Such controls and procedures are modified,
supplemented, and changed from time-to-time as necessitated by our growth and in reaction to external events and developments. Any failure to maintain an effective internal control environment could impact our ability to report our financial results on an accurate and timely basis, which could result in regulatory actions, loss of investor confidence, and an adverse impact on our business and our stock price.
We rely on quantitative models to measure risks and to estimate certain financial values.
Quantitative models may be used to help manage certain aspects of our business and to assist with certain business decisions, including estimating probable loan losses, measuring the fair value of financial instruments when reliable market prices are unavailable, estimating the effects of changing interest rates and other market measures on our financial condition and results of operations, managing risk, and for capital planning purposes (including during the CCAR capital planning and capital adequacy process). Our measurement methodologies rely on many assumptions, historical analyses, and correlations. These assumptions may not capture or fully incorporate conditions leading to losses, particularly in times of market distress, and the historical correlations on which we rely may no longer be relevant. Additionally, as businesses and markets evolve, our measurements may not accurately reflect this evolution. Even if the underlying assumptions and historical correlations used in our models are adequate, our models may be deficient due to errors in computer code, inaccurate data, misuse of data, or the use of a model for a purpose outside the scope of the model’s design.
All models have certain limitations. Reliance on models presents the risk that our business decisions based on information incorporated from models will be adversely affected due to incorrect, missing, or misleading information. In addition, our models may not capture or fully express the risks we face, may suggest that we have sufficient capitalization when we do not, or may lead us to misjudge the business and economic environment in which we will operate. If our models fail to produce reliable results on an ongoing basis, we may not make appropriate risk management, capital planning, or other business or financial decisions. Strategies that we employ to manage and govern the risks associated with our use of models may not be effective or fully reliable. Also, information that we provide to the public or regulators based on poorly designed models could be inaccurate or misleading.
Banking regulators continue to focus on the models used by banks and bank holding companies in their businesses. Some of our decisions that the regulators evaluate, including distributions to our shareholders, could be affected adversely due to their perception that the quality of the models used to generate the relevant information is insufficient.
We rely on third parties to provide key components of our business infrastructure.
We rely on third-party service providers to leverage subject matter expertise and industry best practice, provide enhanced products and services, and reduce costs. Although there are benefits in entering into third-party relationships with vendors and others, there are risks associated with such activities. When entering a third-party relationship, the risks associated with that activity are not passed to the third-party but remain our responsibility. The Technology Committee of the board of directors provides oversight related to the overall risk management process associated with third-party relationships. Management is accountable for the review and evaluation of all new and existing third-party relationships. Management is responsible for ensuring that adequate controls are in place to protect us and our customers from the risks associated with vendor relationships.
Increased risk could occur based on poor planning, oversight, control, and inferior performance or service on the part of the third-party, and may result in legal costs or loss of business. While we have implemented a vendor management program to actively manage the risks associated with the use of third-party service providers, any problems caused by third-party service providers could adversely affect our ability to deliver products and services to our customers and to conduct our business. Replacing a third-party service provider could also take a long period of time and result in increased expenses.
Changes in accounting policies, standards, and interpretations could affect how we report our financial condition and results of operations.
The FASB, regulatory agencies, and other bodies that establish accounting standards periodically change the financial accounting and reporting standards governing the preparation of our financial statements. Additionally, those bodies that establish and interpret the accounting standards (such as the FASB, SEC, and banking regulators) may change prior interpretations or positions on how these standards should be applied.
For further discussion, see Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Impairment of goodwill could require charges to earnings, which could result in a negative impact on our results of operations.
Our goodwill could become impaired in the future. If goodwill were to become impaired, it could limit the ability of the Bank to pay dividends to Huntington, adversely impacting Huntington liquidity and ability to pay dividends or repay debt. The most significant assumptions affecting our goodwill impairment evaluation are variables including the market price of our Common Stock, projections of earnings, the discount rates used in the income approach to fair value, and the control premium above our current stock price that an acquirer would pay to obtain control of us. We are required to test goodwill for impairment at least annually or when impairment indicators are present. If an impairment determination is made in a future reporting period, our earnings and book value of goodwill will be reduced by the amount of the impairment. If an impairment loss is recorded, it will have little or no impact on the
tangible book value of our Common Stock, or our regulatory capital levels, but such an impairment loss could significantly reduce the Bank’s earnings and thereby restrict the Bank’s ability to make dividend payments to us without prior regulatory approval, because Federal Reserve policy states the bank holding company dividends should be paid from current earnings. At December 31, 2018, the book value of our goodwill was $2.0 billion, substantially all of which was recorded at the Bank. Any such write down of goodwill or other acquisition related intangibles will reduce Huntington’s earnings, as well.
Negative publicity could damage our reputation and could significantly harm our business.
Our ability to attract and retain customers, clients, investors, and highly-skilled management and employees is affected by our reputation. Public perception of the financial services industry in general was damaged as a result of the financial crisis that started in 2008. We face increased public and regulatory scrutiny resulting from the financial crisis and economic downturn. Significant harm to our reputation can also arise from other sources, including employee misconduct, actual or perceived unethical behavior, conflicts of interest, litigation, GSE or regulatory actions, failing to deliver minimum or required standards of service and quality, failing to address customer and agency complaints, compliance failures, unauthorized release of confidential information due to cyber-attacks or otherwise, and the activities of our clients, customers, and counterparties, including vendors. Actions by the financial service industry generally or by institutions or individuals in the industry can adversely affect our reputation, indirectly by association. All of these could adversely affect our growth, results of operation, and financial condition.
We depend on our executive officers and key personnel to continue the implementation of our long-term business strategy and could be harmed by the loss of their services.
We believe that our continued growth and future success will depend in large part on the skills of our management team and our ability to motivate and retain these individuals and other key personnel. The loss of service of one or more of our executive officers or key personnel could reduce our ability to successfully implement our long-term business strategy, our business could suffer, and the value of our stock could be materially adversely affected. Leadership changes will occur from time to time, and we cannot predict whether significant resignations will occur or whether we will be able to recruit additional qualified personnel. We believe our management team possesses valuable knowledge about the banking industry and that their knowledge and relationships would be very difficult to replicate. Our success also depends on the experience of our branch managers and lending officers and on their relationships with the customers and communities they serve. The loss of these key personnel could negatively impact our banking operations. The loss of key personnel, or the inability to recruit and retain qualified personnel in the future, could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or operating results.
We operate in a highly regulated industry, and the laws and regulations that govern our operations, corporate governance, executive compensation and financial accounting, or reporting, including changes in them, or our failure to comply with them, may adversely affect us.
The banking industry is highly regulated. We are subject to supervision, regulation, and examination by various federal and state regulators, including the Federal Reserve, OCC, SEC, CFPB, FDIC, FINRA, and various state regulatory agencies. The statutory and regulatory framework that governs us is generally intended to protect depositors and customers, the DIF, the U.S. banking and financial system, and financial markets as a whole-not to protect shareholders. These laws and regulations, among other matters, prescribe minimum capital requirements, impose limitations on our business activities (including foreclosure and collection practices), limit the dividend or distributions that we can pay, restrict the ability of institutions to guarantee our debt, and impose certain specific accounting requirements that may be more restrictive and may result in greater or earlier charges to earnings or reductions in our capital than accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Compliance with laws and regulations can be difficult and costly, and changes to laws and regulations often impose additional compliance costs. Both the scope of the laws and regulations and the intensity of the supervision to which we are subject have increased in recent years in response to the financial crisis, as well as other factors such as technological and market changes. Such regulation and supervision may increase our costs and limit our ability to pursue business opportunities. Further, our failure to comply with these laws and regulations, even if the failure was inadvertent or reflects a difference in interpretation, could subject us to restrictions on our business activities, fines, and other penalties, any of which could adversely affect our results of operations, capital base, and the price of our securities. Further, any new laws, rules, and regulations could make compliance more difficult or expensive or otherwise adversely affect our business and financial condition.
Bank regulations regarding capital and liquidity, including the annual CCAR assessment process and the U.S. Basel III capital and liquidity standards, could require higher levels of capital and liquidity. Among other things, these regulations could impact our ability to pay common stock dividends, repurchase common stock, attract cost-effective sources of deposits, or require the retention of higher amounts of low yielding securities.
The Federal Reserve administers CCAR, an annual forward-looking quantitative assessment of Huntington’s capital adequacy and planned capital distributions and a review of the strength of Huntington’s practices to assess capital needs. We generally may pay dividends and repurchase stock only in accordance with a capital plan that has been reviewed by the Federal Reserve and as to which the Federal Reserve has not objected. The Federal Reserve also makes a quantitative assessment of capital based on supervisory-run stress tests that assess the ability to maintain capital levels above each minimum regulatory capital ratio after making all capital actions included in Huntington’s capital plan, under baseline and stressful conditions throughout a nine-quarter planning horizon. There can be no assurance that the Federal Reserve or OCC will respond favorably to our capital plans, planned capital actions or stress test results, and the Federal Reserve, OCC, or other regulatory capital requirements may limit or otherwise restrict how we utilize our capital, including common stock dividends and stock repurchases.
We are also required to maintain minimum capital ratios and the Federal Reserve and OCC may determine that Huntington and/or the Bank, based on size, complexity, or risk profile, must maintain capital ratios above these minimums in order to operate in a safe and sound manner. In the event we are required to raise capital to maintain required minimum capital and leverage ratios or ratios above the required applicable minimums, we may be forced to do so when market conditions are undesirable or on terms that are less favorable to us than we would otherwise require. Furthermore, in order to prevent becoming subject to restrictions on our ability to distribute capital or make certain discretionary bonus payments to management, we must maintain a Capital Conservation Buffer (of 1.875% in 2018 and 2.5% as of January 1, 2019), which is in addition to our required minimum capital ratios.
We are also currently subject to a modified LCR requirement that requires Huntington to maintain an adequate amount of unencumbered high-quality liquid assets, such as Treasury securities and other sovereign debt, to cover projected net cash outflows over a 30 calendar-day stress scenario window. Because the LCR assigns less severe outflow assumptions to certain types of customer deposits, banks’ demand for and the cost of these deposits may increase. Additionally, the LCR has increased the demand for direct U.S. government and U.S. government-guaranteed debt that, while high quality, generally carry lower yields than other securities BHCs hold in their investment portfolios.
For more information regarding CCAR, stress testing, and capital and liquidity requirements, including several proposed rules that would alter, reduce, or eliminate certain of these requirements as they apply to Huntington, refer to Item 1: Business - Regulatory Matters.
If our regulators deem it appropriate, they can take regulatory actions that could result in a material adverse impact on our financial results, ability to compete for new business, or preclude mergers or acquisitions. In addition, regulatory actions could constrain our ability to fund our liquidity needs or pay dividends. Any of these actions could increase the cost of our services.
We are subject to the supervision and regulation of various state and federal regulators, including the OCC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, SEC, CFPB, FINRA, and various state regulatory agencies. As such, we are subject to a wide variety of laws and regulations, many of which are discussed in Item 1. Regulatory Matters. As part of their supervisory process, which includes periodic examinations and continuous monitoring, the regulators have the authority to impose restrictions or conditions on our activities and the manner in which we manage the organization. Such actions could negatively impact us in a variety of ways, including charging monetary fines, impacting our ability to pay dividends, precluding mergers or acquisitions, limiting our ability to offer certain products or services, or imposing additional capital requirements.
Under the supervision of the CFPB, our Consumer and Business Banking products and services are subject to heightened regulatory oversight and scrutiny with respect to compliance under consumer laws and regulations. We may face a greater number or wider scope of investigations, enforcement actions, and litigation in the future related to consumer practices, thereby increasing costs associated with responding to or defending such actions. Also, federal and state regulators have been increasingly focused on sales practices of branch personnel, including taking regulatory action against other financial institutions. In addition, increased regulatory inquiries and investigations, as well as any additional legislative or regulatory developments affecting our consumer businesses, and any required changes to our business operations resulting from these developments, could result in significant loss of revenue, require remuneration to our customers, trigger fines or penalties, limit the products or services we offer, require us to increase our prices and, therefore, reduce demand for our products, impose additional compliance costs on us, increase the cost of collection, cause harm to our reputation, or otherwise adversely affect our consumer businesses.
In addition, we are allowed to conduct certain activities that are financial in nature by virtue of Huntington’s status as an FHC, as discussed in more detail in Item 1. Regulatory Matters. If Huntington or the Bank cease to meet the requirements necessary for Huntington to continue to qualify as an FHC, the Federal Reserve may impose upon us corrective capital and managerial requirements, and may place limitations on our ability to conduct all of the business activities that we conduct as a FHC. If the failure to meet these standards persists, we could be required to divest our Bank, or cease all activities other than those activities that may be conducted by a BHC but not an FHC.
Legislative and regulatory actions taken now or in the future that impact the financial industry may materially adversely affect us by increasing our costs, adding complexity in doing business, impeding the efficiency of our internal business processes, negatively impacting the recoverability of certain of our recorded assets, requiring us to increase our regulatory capital, limiting our ability to pursue business opportunities, and otherwise resulting in a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operation, liquidity, or stock price.
Both the scope of the laws and regulations and the intensity of the supervision to which we are subject increased in response to the financial crisis as well as other factors such as technological and market changes. Regulatory enforcement and fines have also increased across the banking and financial services sector. Compliance with these laws and regulations have resulted in and will continue to result in additional costs, which could be significant, and may have a material and adverse effect on our results of operations. In addition, if we do not appropriately comply with current or future legislation and regulations, especially those that apply to our consumer operations, which has been an area of heightened focus, we may be subject to fines, penalties or judgments, or material regulatory restrictions on our businesses, which could adversely affect operations and, in turn, financial results.
We may become subject to more stringent regulatory requirements and activity restrictions if the Federal Reserve and FDIC determine that our resolution plan is not credible.
Huntington is required to submit annually to the Federal Reserve and the FDIC a resolution plan for its orderly resolution under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. If the Federal Reserve and the FDIC jointly determine that our resolution plan is not credible, we could become subjected to more stringent capital, leverage or liquidity requirements or restrictions, or restrictions on our growth, activities, or operations. If we were to fail to address deficiencies in our resolution plan when required, we could eventually be required to divest certain assets or operations in ways that could negatively impact our operations and strategy.
For more information regarding resolution planning requirements, refer to Item 1: Business - Regulatory Matters.
Noncompliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and other anti-money laundering statutes and regulations could cause us material financial loss.
The Bank Secrecy Act and the Patriot Act contain anti-money laundering and financial transparency provisions intended to detect and prevent the use of the U.S. financial system for money laundering and terrorist financing activities. The Bank Secrecy Act, as amended by the Patriot Act, requires depository institutions and their holding companies to undertake activities including maintaining an anti-money laundering program, verifying the identity of clients, monitoring for and reporting suspicious transactions, reporting on cash transactions exceeding specified thresholds, and responding to requests for information by regulatory authorities and law enforcement agencies. FinCEN, a unit of the Treasury Department that administers the Bank Secrecy Act, is authorized to impose significant civil money penalties for violations of those requirements and has recently engaged in coordinated enforcement efforts with the federal bank regulatory agencies, as well as the United States Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, and IRS.
There is also increased scrutiny of compliance with the rules enforced by the OFAC. If our policies, procedures, and systems are deemed deficient or the policies, procedures, and systems of the financial institutions that we have already acquired or may acquire in the future are deficient, we would be subject to liability, including fines and regulatory actions such as restrictions on our ability to pay dividends and the necessity to obtain regulatory approvals to proceed with certain planned business activities, including acquisition plans, which would negatively impact our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Failure to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing could also have serious reputational consequences for us.
For more information regarding the Bank Secrecy Act, Patriot Act, anti-money laundering requirements and OFAC-administered sanctions, refer to Item 1: Business - Regulatory Matters.
Cybersecurity and data privacy are areas of heightened legislative and regulatory focus.
As cybersecurity and data privacy risks for banking organizations and the broader financial system have significantly increased in recent years, cybersecurity and data privacy issues have become the subject of increasing legislative and regulatory focus. The federal bank regulatory agencies have proposed enhanced cyber risk management standards, which would apply to a wide range of large financial institutions and their third-party service providers, including us and the Bank, and would focus on cyber risk governance and management, management of internal and external dependencies, and incident response, cyber resilience, and situational awareness. Several states have also proposed or adopted cybersecurity legislation and regulations, which require, among other things, notification to affected individuals when there has been a security breach of their personal data. For more information regarding cybersecurity, refer to Item 1: Business - Regulatory Matters.
We receive, maintain, and store non-public personal information of our customers and counterparties, including, but not limited to, personally identifiable information and personal financial information. The sharing, use, disclosure, and protection of this information are governed by federal and state law. Both personally identifiable information and personal financial information is increasingly subject to legislation and regulation, the intent of which is to protect the privacy of personal information that is collected and handled. For example, in June of 2018, the Governor of California signed into law the CCPA. The CCPA, which becomes effective on January 1, 2020, applies to for-profit businesses that conduct business in California and meet certain revenue or data
collection thresholds. For more information regarding data privacy laws and regulations, refer to Item 1: Business - Regulatory Matters.
We may become subject to new legislation or regulation concerning cybersecurity or the privacy of personally identifiable information and personal financial information or of any other information we may store or maintain. We could be adversely affected if new legislation or regulations are adopted or if existing legislation or regulations are modified such that we are required to alter our systems or require changes to our business practices or privacy policies. If cybersecurity, data privacy, data protection, data transfer, or data retention laws are implemented, interpreted, or applied in a manner inconsistent with our current practices, we may be subject to fines, litigation, or regulatory enforcement actions or ordered to change our business practices, policies, or systems in a manner that adversely impacts our operating results.
Item 1B: Unresolved Staff Comments
Item 2: Properties
Our headquarters, as well as the Bank’s, is located in the Huntington Center, a thirty seven story office building located in Columbus, Ohio. Of the building’s total office space available, we lease approximately 22%. The lease term expires in 2030, with six five-year renewal options for up to 30 years but with no purchase option. The Bank has an indirect minority equity interest of 18.4% in the building.
Our other major properties consist of the following:
Flint South (own building, lease portion of land, own portion of land)
Flint West (own building, lease land)
Holland Operations Center
Tower Building - Office
Cascade III (own building, lease land)
Cleveland - Public Square (lease a portion of building)
Easton - HNB Business Service Center
Huntington Center (lease a portion of building)
Crosswoods - Mortgage Group
Toledo Corporate Building
Mahoning Federal Plaza Building
New Castle Building
New Castle, PA
Pittsburgh Main (lease a portion of building)
The major properties occupied by the Company are used across all of the business segments and for corporate purposes.
Item 3: Legal Proceedings
Information required by this item is set forth in Note 20 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements under the caption “Litigation and Regulatory Matters” and is incorporated into this Item by reference.
Item 5: Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Shareholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
The common stock of Huntington Bancshares Incorporated is traded on the NASDAQ Stock Market under the symbol “HBAN”. As of January 31, 2019, we had 28,724 shareholders of record.
Information regarding restrictions on dividends, as required by this Item, is set forth in Item 1: Business - Regulatory Matters and in Note 21 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and incorporated into this Item by reference.
The following graph shows the changes, over the five-year period, in the value of $100 invested in (i) shares of Huntington’s Common Stock; (ii) the Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index (the S&P 500 Index) and (iii) Keefe, Bruyette & Woods Bank Index, for the period December 31, 2013, through December 31, 2018. The KBW Bank Index is a market capitalization-weighted bank stock index published by Keefe, Bruyette & Woods. The index is composed of the largest banking companies and includes all money center banks and regional banks, including Huntington. An investment of $100 on December 31, 2013, and the reinvestment of all dividends, are assumed. The plotted points represent the cumulative total return on the last trading day of the fiscal year indicated.
KBW Bank Index
For information regarding securities authorized for issuance under Huntington’s equity compensation plans, see Part III, Item 12.
The following table provides information regarding Huntington’s purchases of its Common Stock during the three-month period ended December 31, 2018.
Maximum Number of Shares (or
Approximate Dollar Value) that
May Yet Be Purchased Under
the Plans or Programs (2)
October 1, 2018 to October 31, 2018
November 1, 2018 to November 30, 2018
December 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018
The reported shares were repurchased pursuant to Huntington’s publicly-announced share repurchase authorization.
The number shown represents, as of the end of each period, the approximate dollar value of Common Stock that may yet be purchased under publicly-announced share repurchase authorizations. The shares may be purchased, from time-to-time, depending on market conditions.
On June 28, 2018, Huntington was notified by the Federal Reserve that it had no objection to Huntington’s proposed capital actions included in Huntington’s capital plan submitted in the 2018 CCAR. These actions included a 27% increase in quarterly dividend per common share to $0.14, starting in the third quarter of 2018, the repurchase of up to $1.068 billion of common stock over the next four quarters (July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019), and maintaining dividends on the outstanding classes of preferred stock and trust preferred securities. Any capital actions, including those contemplated in the above announced actions, are subject to consideration and evaluation by Huntington’s Board of Directors.
On July 17, 2018, the Board authorized the repurchase of up to $1.068 billion of common shares over the four quarters through the 2019 second quarter. During the 2018 fourth quarter, Huntington repurchased a total of 15 million shares at a weighted average share price of $13.36.
Comparisons for presented periods are impacted by a number of factors. Refer to the “Significant Items” in the Discussion of Results of Operations for additional discussion regarding these key factors.
On an FTE basis assuming a 21% tax rate and a 35% tax rate for periods prior to January 1, 2018.
Net income applicable to common shares excluding expense for amortization of intangibles for the period divided by average tangible shareholders’ equity. Average tangible shareholders’ equity equals average total shareholders’ equity less average intangible assets and goodwill. Expense for amortization of intangibles and average intangible assets are net of deferred tax.
Noninterest expense less amortization of intangibles divided by the sum of FTE net interest income and noninterest income excluding securities gains. (Non-GAAP)
Tangible common equity (total common equity less goodwill and other intangible assets) divided by tangible assets (total assets less goodwill and other intangible assets). Other intangible assets are net of deferred tax.
Tangible equity (total equity less goodwill and other intangible assets) divided by tangible assets (total assets less goodwill and other intangible assets). Other intangible assets are net of deferred tax.
Tier 1 common equity, tangible equity, tangible common equity, and tangible assets are non-GAAP financial measures. Additionally, any ratios utilizing these financial measures are also non-GAAP. These financial measures have been included as they are considered to be critical metrics with which to analyze and evaluate financial condition and capital strength. Other companies may calculate these financial measures differently.
In accordance with applicable regulatory reporting guidance, we are not required to retrospectively update historical filings for newly adopted accounting principles. On January 1, 2015, we became subject to the Basel III capital requirements and the standardized approach for calculating risk-weighted assets in accordance with subpart D of the final capital rule.
Item 7: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
This MD&A provides information we believe necessary for understanding our financial condition, changes in financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. The MD&A should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements, Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, and other information contained in this report. The forward-looking statements in this section and other parts of this report involve assumptions, risks, uncertainties, and other factors, including statements regarding our plans, objectives, goals, strategies, and financial performance. Our actual results could differ materially from the results anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of factors set forth under the caption “Forward-Looking Statements” and those set forth in Item 1A.
2018 Financial Performance Review
In 2018, we reported net income of $1.4 billion, a 17% increase from the prior year. Earnings per common share on a diluted basis for the year was $1.20, up 20% from the prior year.
Fully-taxable equivalent net interest income for 2018 increased $167 million, or 5%, from 2017. This reflected the impact of 4% average earning asset growth, a three basis point increase in the NIM to 3.33%, partially offset by 7% average interest-bearing liability growth. Average earning asset growth included a $4.4 billion, or 6%, increase in average loans and leases, partially offset by a $0.4 billion, or 2%, decrease in average securities. The NIM expansion reflected a 35 basis point positive impact from the mix and yield on earning assets and a 10 basis point increase in the benefit from noninterest-bearing funding, partially offset by a 42 basis point increase in funding costs.
The provision for credit losses was $235 million, up $34 million, or 17%. The increase in provision expense over the prior year are primarily attributed to loan balance growth across the portfolio.
Noninterest income was $1.3 billion, up $14 million, or 1%, from the prior year. Card and payment processing income increased $18 million, or 9%, due to higher check card interchange income and underlying customer growth. Trust and investment management services increased $15 million, or 10%, primarily reflecting increased sales production and year over year market growth. Capital markets fees increased $15 million, or 20%, reflecting increased sales of interest rate, foreign exchange and commodity derivatives as well as fees as a result of the acquisition of Hutchinson, Shockey, Erley & Co. (HSE). Service charges on deposit accounts increased $11 million, or 3%, due to an increase in both personal and corporate service charges. These increases were partially offset by a $23 million, or 18% decrease in mortgage banking income, due to lower margin on loans sold, $17 million, or 425%, increase in securities losses reflecting portfolio repositioning completed in the 2018 fourth quarter and a $5 million, or 3%, decrease in other income primarily reflecting an unfavorable Visa Class B derivative fair value adjustment.
Noninterest expense was $2.6 billion, down $67 million, or 2%, from the prior year. Reported noninterest expense was impacted by FirstMerit acquisition-related expenses totaling $154 million, offset by branch and facility consolidation-related expenses and personnel costs. Net occupancy expense decreased $28 million, or 13%, primarily reflecting $52 million of prior year acquisition-related expense, lower occupancy related expenses and reserves, partially offset by $28 million of branch and facility consolidation-related expense. Outside data processing and other services decreased $19 million, or 6%, primarily reflecting $24 million of acquisition-related expense in the year-ago period, partially offset by higher technology investment costs. Deposit and other insurance expense decreased $15 million, or 19%, primarily due to the discontinuation of the FDIC surcharge in the 2018 fourth quarter. Other noninterest expense decreased $14 million, or 6%, reflecting $9 million of acquisition-related expense in the year-ago period, as well as declines in franchise and other taxes. Professional services decreased $9 million, or 13%, primarily reflecting $10 million of acquisition-related expense in the year-ago period. Equipment decreased $7 million, or 4%, primarily due to $16 million in acquisition-related costs in the year-ago period, partially offset by $7 million of branch and facility consolidation-related expense in the 2018 fourth quarter. Marketing decreased $7 million, or 12%, driven by a decrease in promotional expense, partially offset by an increase in advertising. Partially offsetting these decreases, personnel costs increased $35 million, or 2%, primarily reflecting higher benefit costs and merit increases.
The tangible common equity to tangible assets ratio was 7.21%, down 13 basis points. The regulatory Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) risk-based capital ratio was 9.65%, down 36 basis points. The regulatory Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio was 11.06%, down 28 basis points.
Consistent with the 2018 CCAR capital plan, the Company repurchased $939 million of common stock during 2018 at an average cost of $15.23 per share. Included in the share repurchase activity, the Company completed a $400 million ASR which effectively offset the impact of the $363 million Series A preferred equity conversion in the 2018 first quarter.
Our view of 2019 from a balance sheet growth perspective remains unchanged, generally consistent with our view of overall economic activity. The underlying fundamentals of our local economies are positive, and businesses are generally performing well and we are optimistic about 2019. Our loan pipelines remain steady, and credit metrics remain strong. We are executing on our new strategic plan and continue to invest to drive organic growth. The plan entails low execution risk and builds on the success of the past two strategic plans. At the same time, given recent market volatility, we are reverting to our historic practice of assuming no interest rate hikes in our revenue expectation and are adjusting our expense expectation as a result. We are focused on what we can control to drive long-term performance.
Legislative and Regulatory
A comprehensive discussion of legislative and regulatory matters affecting us can be found in the Regulatory Matters section included in Item 1 of this Form 10-K.
This section provides a review of financial performance from a consolidated perspective. It also includes a “Significant Items” section that summarizes key issues important for a complete understanding of performance trends. Key consolidated balance sheet and income statement trends are discussed. All earnings per share data are reported on a diluted basis. For additional insight on financial performance, please read this section in conjunction with the “Business Segment Discussion.”
Earnings comparisons among the three years ended December 31, 2018, 2017, and 2016 were impacted by a number of Significant Items summarized below.
There were no Significant Items in 2018.
Significant Items included in 2017 and 2016 were:
Mergers and Acquisitions. Significant events relating to mergers and acquisitions, and the impacts of those events on our reported results, were as follows:
During 2017, $154 million of noninterest expense and $2 million of noninterest income was recorded related to the acquisition of FirstMerit. This resulted in a negative impact of $0.09 per common share in 2017.
During 2016, $282 million of noninterest expense and $1 million of noninterest income was recorded related to the acquisition of FirstMerit. This resulted in a negative impact of $0.20 per common share in 2016.
Federal tax reform-related tax benefit. Significant events relating to federal tax reform-related tax benefits, and the impacts of those events on our reported results, were as follows:
During 2017, $123 million of federal tax reform-related tax benefit was recorded as provision for income taxes. This resulted in a positive impact of $0.11 per common share in 2017.
Litigation Reserve. Significant events relating to our litigation reserve, and the impacts of those events on our reported results, were as follows:
During 2016, a $42 million reduction to litigation reserves was recorded as other noninterest expense. This resulted in a positive impact of $0.03 per common share in 2016.
The following table reflects the earnings impact of the above-mentioned Significant Items for periods affected by this Results of Operations discussion:
Our primary source of revenue is net interest income, which is the difference between interest income from earning assets (primarily loans, securities, and direct financing leases), and interest expense of funding sources (primarily interest-bearing deposits and borrowings). Earning asset balances and related funding sources, as well as changes in the levels of interest rates, impact net interest income. The difference between the average yield on earning assets and the average rate paid for interest-bearing liabilities is the net interest spread. Noninterest-bearing sources of funds, such as demand deposits and shareholders’ equity, also support earning assets. The impact of the noninterest-bearing sources of funds, often referred to as “free” funds, is captured in the net interest margin, which is calculated as net interest income divided by average earning assets. Both the net interest margin and net interest spread are presented on a fully-taxable equivalent basis, which means that tax-free interest income has been adjusted to a pretax equivalent income, assuming a 21% tax rate and a 35% tax rate for periods prior to January 1, 2018.
The following table shows changes in fully-taxable equivalent interest income, interest expense, and net interest income due to volume and rate variances for major categories of earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities:
Table 4 - Change in Net Interest Income Due to Changes in Average Volume and Interest Rates (1)
(dollar amounts in millions)
Increase (Decrease) From
Previous Year Due To
Increase (Decrease) From
Previous Year Due To
Fully-taxable equivalent basis (2)
Loans and leases
Other earning assets
Total interest income from earning assets
Total interest expense of interest-bearing liabilities
Net interest income
The change in interest rates due to both rate and volume has been allocated between the factors in proportion to the relationship of the absolute dollar amounts of the change in each.
Calculated assuming a 21% tax rate and a 35% tax rate for periods prior to January 1, 2018.