Document Contents

Former Name, Former Address and Former Fiscal Year, if Changed Since Last Report

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ 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. 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). Yes ☒ No ☐

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.

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 ☐ No ☒

The aggregate market value of voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant at June 30, 2019, based on the closing sale price of the registrant’s common stock on June 30, 2019, was approximately $66,920,814.

The registrant had 5,660,985 shares of common stock, no par value per share, outstanding as of April 14, 2020.

The information required by Part III of this Form 10-K will be included in the registrant’s definitive proxy statement for the 2020 annual meeting of shareholders and incorporated herein by reference or in an amendment to this Form 10-K filed within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K.

Blue Ridge Bankshares, Inc. (the “Company,” “we,” “us,” or “our”) is a bank holding company headquartered in Charlottesville, Virginia. It provides commercial and consumer banking and financial services through its wholly-owned bank subsidiary, Blue Ridge Bank, National Association (the “Bank”), and its non-bank financial services affiliates. The Company was incorporated under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia in July 1988 in connection with the holding company reorganization of the Bank, which was completed in July 1988.

The Bank is a federally chartered national bank headquartered in Martinsville, Virginia that traces its roots to Page Valley Bank of Virginia, which opened for business in 1893. The Bank currently operates fourteen full-service banking offices in central Virginia and north-central North Carolina.

As of December 31, 2019, the Company had total consolidated assets of approximately $960.8 million, total consolidated loans of approximately $702.5 million, total consolidated deposits of approximately $722.0 million and consolidated shareholders’ equity of approximately $92.6 million.

The Bank serves businesses, professionals and consumers with a wide variety of financial services, including retail and commercial banking, investment services, mortgage banking and payroll processing. Products include checking accounts, savings accounts, money market accounts, cash management accounts, certificates of deposit, individual retirement accounts, commercial and industrial loans, residential mortgages, commercial mortgages, home equity loans, consumer installment loans, investment accounts, insurance, credit cards, online banking, telephone banking and mobile banking. Deposits of the Bank are insured by the Deposit Insurance Fund (the “DIF”) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”).

The Bank’s primary source of revenue is interest income from its lending activities. The Bank’s other major sources of revenue are interest and dividend income from investments, interest income from its interest-earning deposit balances in other depository institutions, mortgage banking income, transactions and fee income from its lending and deposit activities, and income associated with payroll processing services. The Bank’s major expenses are interest on deposits and general and administrative expenses such as employee compensation and benefits, federal deposit insurance premiums, data processing expenses and office occupancy expenses.

As a bank holding company incorporated under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Company is subject to regulation by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve”) and the Bureau of Financial Institutions of the Virginia State Corporation Commission (the “Virginia SCC”). The Bank’s primary regulator is the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the “OCC”).

On December 31, 2019, the Company, through its banking subsidiary, acquired LenderSelect Mortgage Group (“LenderSelect”) based in Richmond, Virginia for an aggregate purchase price of $720,489. The purchase price was allocated to an amortizing intangible asset. LenderSelect offers wholesale and third party residential mortgage origination services to other financial institutions and credit unions.

On May 13, 2019, the Company and Virginia Community Bankshares, Inc. (“VCB”), based in Louisa, Virginia, entered into a definitive agreement pursuant to which VCB agreed to merge into the Company, with the Company as the survivor in the merger. The Company completed its acquisition of VCB on December 15, 2019. Also on December 15, 2019, VCB’s Virginia chartered subsidiary bank, Virginia Community Bank, merged with and into the Bank. The Company acquired total assets of approximately $242.5 million and assumed total liabilities of approximately $219.2 million in the acquisition. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, each share of VCB common stock was converted into the right to receive either $58.00 in cash or 3.05 shares of the Company’s common stock at the election of each VCB shareholder. The agreement contained allocation and proration procedures ensuring that 60% of VCB’s outstanding shares were converted into the Company’s common stock and 40% of VCB’s outstanding shares were converted into cash. In the merger, the Company issued 1,312,919 shares of its common stock and made cash payments to VCB shareholders that totaled $16,646,540 in the aggregate.

On February 1, 2019, the Company , through its banking subsidiary, acquired a 35% ownership interest in Hammond Insurance Agency, Incorporated for an aggregate purchase price of $1,018,500. The purchase price was allocated to goodwill in the amount of $612,500 and an amortizing intangible asset of $406,000.

On October 4, 2017, the Company, through its banking subsidiary, acquired an 80% ownership interest in MoneyWise Payroll Solutions (“MoneyWise), a payroll management services company located in Charlottesville, VA, for an aggregate price of $800,000. The purchase price was allocated to an amortizing intangible asset.

On March 30, 2016, the Company and River Bancorp, Inc. (“River”), based in Martinsville, Virginia, entered into a definitive agreement pursuant to which River agreed to merge into the Company, with the Company as the survivor in the merger. The Company completed its acquisition of River on October 20, 2016. The Company acquired total assets of approximately $114.0 million and assumed total liabilities of approximately $103.0 million in the acquisition. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, each share of River common stock was converted into the right to receive either $16.57 in cash or 0.8143 shares of the Company’s common stock at the election of each River shareholder. The agreement contained allocation and proration procedures ensuring that 70% of River’s outstanding shares were converted into the Company’s common stock and 30% of River’s outstanding shares were converted into cash. In the merger, the Company issued 423,246 shares of its common stock and made cash payments to River shareholders that totaled $3,692,772 in the aggregate. On December 9, 2016, the Company’s Virginia chartered subsidiary bank merged with and into River’s national bank subsidiary and the surviving bank was renamed Blue Ridge Bank, National Association.

On November 20, 2015, the Company entered into a Subordinated Note Purchase Agreement under which it issued an aggregate of $10.0 million of fixed-to-floating rate subordinated notes (the “Notes”) to certain accredited investors. The Notes have a maturity date of December 1, 2025 and bear interest at the rate of 6.75% per year until December 1, 2020, at which date the rate will reset quarterly, equal to the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) determined on the determination date of the applicable interest period plus 512.8 basis points. Interest on the Notes is payable semi-annually on December 1 and June 1 of each year through December 1, 2020 and quarterly thereafter on March 1, June 1, September 1 and December 1 of each year through the maturity date or early redemption date. The Notes are not convertible into common stock or preferred stock, and are not callable by the holders. The Company has the right to redeem the Notes, in whole or in part, without premium or penalty, at any interest payment date on or after December 1, 2020 and prior to the maturity date, but in all cases in a principal amount with integral multiples of $1,000, plus interest accrued and unpaid through the date of redemption. If an event of default occurs, such as the bankruptcy of the Company, the holder of a Note may declare the principal amount of the Note to be due and immediately payable. The Notes are unsecured, subordinated obligations of the Company and rank junior in right of payment to the Company’s existing and future senior indebtedness. The Notes qualify as Tier 2 capital for regulatory reporting.

In December 2015, with the proceeds from the issuance of the Notes, the Company redeemed all $4.5 million of its outstanding Senior Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A. Such preferred stock was originally issued to the U.S. Department of the Treasury under the Small Business Lending Fund.

The principal executive offices of the Company are located at 1807 Seminole Trail, Charlottesville, Virginia 22835, and its telephone number is (540) 743-6521.

The Company files annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements and other information with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The Company’s SEC filings are filed electronically and are available to the public over the Internet at the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov. The Company’s website can be accessed at https://www.mybrb.com. The Company makes its SEC filings available through this website under “Investor Relations,” “Financial Documents,” “Documents” as soon as practicable after filing or furnishing the material to the SEC. Copies of documents can also be obtained free of charge by writing to the Company’s Corporate Secretary at 17 West Main Street, Luray, Virginia 22835, or by calling (540) 743-6521. Information on the Company’s website does not constitute part of, and is not incorporated into, this report or any other filing the Company makes with the SEC.

The Bank currently has branches in Charlottesville, Culpepper, Drakes Branch, Fredericksburg, Gordonsville, Harrisonburg, Luray, Martinsville, Mineral, Orange, Shenandoah, Stuart, and Zion Crossroads, Virginia and also does business as Carolina State Bank in Greensboro, North Carolina. Interstates 64 and 81, and major Routes 29 and 33, all pass through the Bank’s trade area and provide efficient access to other regions of Virginia, North Carolina and beyond. The Company’s primary market area covers a significant portion of central Virginia and north-central North Carolina. Additionally, the Company has mortgage operations in Virginia, Maryland, North Carolina, and Florida.

Mortgage Loans on Real Estate. The Company’s mortgage loans on real estate comprise the largest segment of its loan portfolio. The majority of the Company’s real estate loans are mortgages on owner-occupied one-to-four family residential properties, including both fixed-rate and adjustable-rate structures. Residential mortgages are underwritten and documented within the guidelines and regulations of the OCC. Home equity lines of credit are also offered. Construction loans with a 12-month term are another component of the Company’s portfolio. Underwritten at 80% loan to value to qualified builders and individuals, these loans are disbursed as construction progresses and verified by Company inspection. The Company also offers commercial loans that are secured by real estate. These loans are also typically written at a maximum of 80% loan to value.

The Company offers secondary market residential loan origination. Through the Bank, customers may apply for home mortgages that are underwritten in accordance with the guidelines of either the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation or the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”). These loans are then sold into the secondary market on a loan-by-loan basis, usually directly to Fannie Mae. The Bank earns origination and servicing fees from this service.

Commercial and Industrial Loans. Commercial lending activities of the Company include small business loans, asset-based loans, and other secured and unsecured loans and lines of credit. Commercial and industrial loans may entail greater risk than residential mortgage loans, and are therefore underwritten with strict risk management standards. Among the criteria for determining the borrower’s ability to repay is a cash flow analysis of the business and business collateral.

Consumer Loans. As part of its full range of services, the Company’s consumer lending services include automobile lending, home improvement loans, credit cards and unsecured personal loans. These consumer loans historically entail greater risk than loans secured by real estate, but also generate a higher return.

Consumer Deposit Services. Consumer deposit products offered by the Company include checking accounts, savings accounts, money market accounts, certificates of deposit, online banking, mobile banking and electronic statements.

Commercial Banking Services. The Company offers a variety of services to commercial customers. These services include analysis checking, cash management deposit accounts, wire services, direct deposit payroll service, online banking, telephone banking, remote deposit and a full line of commercial lending options. The bank also offers Small Business Administration (“SBA”) loan products under the 504 Program and the Paycheck Protection Program. The 505 Program provides long-term funding for commercial real estate and long-lived equipment. This allows commercial customers to obtain favorable rate loans for the development of business opportunities, while providing the Bank with a partial guarantee of the outstanding loan balance. The Paycheck Protection Program, which was authorized under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the “CARES Act”), provides small business loans to pay payroll and group health costs, salaries and commissions, mortgage and rent payments, utilities, and interest on other debt.

The financial services industry is highly competitive. The Company competes for loans, deposits and financial services directly with other bank and nonbank institutions located within its markets, internet-based banks, out-of-market banks and bank holding companies that advertise or otherwise serve its markets, along with money market and mutual funds, brokerage houses, mortgage companies, and insurance companies or other commercial entities that offer financial services products. Competition involves efforts to retain current customers and to obtain new loans and deposits, and differentiators include the scope and type of services offered, interest rates paid on deposits and charged on loans, and the customer service experience. Many of the Company’s competitors enjoy competitive advantages, including greater financial resources, a wider geographic presence, more accessible branch office locations, the ability to offer additional services, more favorable pricing alternatives and lower origination and operating costs. The Company believes that its competitive pricing, personalized service and community involvement enable it to effectively compete in the communities in which it operates.

The Company had 244 full-time and 27 part-time employees as of December 31, 2019. None of its employees are represented by any collective bargaining unit and the Company believes that relations with its employees are good.

The Company and the Bank are extensively regulated under federal and state law. The following information describes certain aspects of that regulation applicable to the Company and the Bank and does not purport to be complete. Proposals to change the laws, regulations, and policies governing the banking industry are frequently raised in U.S. Congress, in state legislatures, and before the various bank regulatory agencies. The likelihood and timing of any changes and the impact such changes might have on the Company and the Bank are impossible to determine with any certainty. A change in applicable laws, regulations or policies, or a change in the way such laws, regulations or policies are interpreted by regulatory agencies or courts, may have a material impact on the business, operations, and earnings of the Company and the Bank.

The Company is qualified as a bank holding company within the meaning of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “BHC Act”), and is registered as such with the Federal Reserve. As a bank holding company, the Company is subject to supervision, regulation and examination by the Federal Reserve and is required to file various reports and additional information with the Federal Reserve. The Company is also registered under the bank holding company laws of Virginia and is subject to supervision, regulation and examination by the Virginia SCC.

Under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (the “GLB Act”), a bank holding company may elect to become a financial holding company and thereby engage in a broader range of financial and other activities than are permissible for traditional bank holding companies. In order to qualify for the election, all of the depository institution subsidiaries of the bank holding company must be well capitalized, well managed, and have achieved a rating of “satisfactory” or better under the Community Reinvestment Act (the “CRA”). Financial holding companies are permitted to engage in activities that are “financial in nature” or incidental or complementary thereto as determined by the Federal Reserve. The GLB Act identifies several activities as “financial in nature,” including insurance underwriting and sales, investment advisory services, merchant banking and underwriting, and dealing or making a market in securities. The Company has not elected to become a financial holding company and has no immediate plans to become a financial holding company.

The Bank is a federally chartered national bank. As a national bank, the Bank is subject to supervision, regulation and examination by the OCC and is required to file various reports and additional information with the OCC. The OCC has primary supervisory and regulatory authority over the operations of the Bank. Because the Bank accepts insured deposits from the public, it is also subject to examination by the FDIC.

Depository institutions, including the Bank, are subject to extensive federal and state regulations that significantly affect their businesses and activities. Regulatory bodies have broad authority to implement standards and initiate proceedings designed to prohibit depository institutions from engaging in unsafe and unsound banking practices. The standards relate generally to operations and management, asset quality, interest rate exposure, and capital. The bank regulatory agencies are authorized to take action against institutions that fail to meet such standards.

As with other financial institutions, the earnings of the Bank are affected by general economic conditions and by the monetary policies of the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve exerts a substantial influence on interest rates and credit conditions, primarily through open market operations in U.S. Government securities, setting the reserve requirements of member banks, and establishing the discount rate on member bank borrowings. The policies of the Federal Reserve have a direct impact on loan and deposit growth and the interest rates charged and paid thereon. They also impact the source, cost of funds, and the rates of return on investments. Changes in the Federal Reserve’s monetary policies have had a significant impact on the operating results of the Bank and other financial institutions and are expected to continue to do so in the future.

On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Dodd-Frank Act”). The Dodd-Frank Act significantly restructured the financial regulatory regime in the United States and has had a broad impact on the financial services industry as a result of the significant regulatory and compliance changes required under the act. A summary of certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act is set forth below:

Increased Capital Standards. The federal banking agencies are required to establish minimum leverage and risk-based capital requirements for banks and bank holding companies. Among other things, the Dodd-Frank Act increased such requirements. See “Capital Requirements” below.

Deposit Insurance. The Dodd-Frank Act made permanent the $250,000 deposit insurance limit for insured deposits. Amendments to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act of 1950 (the “FDI Act”) also revised the assessment base against which an insured depository institution’s deposit insurance premiums paid to the DIF are calculated. Under the amendments, the assessment base is no longer the institution’s deposit base, but rather its average consolidated total assets less its average tangible equity during the assessment period. Additionally, the Dodd-Frank Act made changes to the minimum designated reserve ratio of the DIF, increasing the minimum from 1.15% to 1.35% of the estimated amount of total insured deposits and eliminating the requirement that the FDIC pay dividends to depository institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds certain thresholds. The Dodd-Frank Act also provides that depository institutions may pay interest on demand deposits.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The Dodd-Frank Act created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”). The CFPB is charged with establishing rules and regulations under certain federal consumer protection laws with respect to the conduct of providers of certain consumer financial products and services. See “Consumer Financial Protection” below.

Compensation Practices. The Dodd-Frank Act provides that the appropriate federal regulators must establish standards prohibiting as an unsafe and unsound practice any compensation plan of a bank holding company or bank that provides an insider or other employee with “excessive compensation” or that could lead to a material financial loss to such firm. In June 2010, prior to the Dodd-Frank Act, the federal bank regulatory agencies promulgated the Interagency Guidance on Sound Incentive Compensation Policies, which requires that financial institutions establish metrics for measuring the impact of activities to achieve incentive compensation with the related risk to the financial institution of such behavior.

Recent Amendments to the Dodd-Frank Act. The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act of 2018 (the “EGRRCPA”), which became effective May 24, 2018, amended the Dodd-Frank Act to provide regulatory relief for certain smaller and regional financial institutions, such as the Company and the Bank. The EGRRCPA, among other things, provides financial institutions with less than $10 billion in total consolidated assets with relief from certain capital requirements and exempts banks with less than $250 billion in total consolidated assets from the enhanced prudential standards and the company-run and supervisory stress tests required under the Dodd-Frank Act. The Dodd-Frank Act has had, and may in the future have, a material impact on the Company’s operations, particularly through increased compliance costs resulting from new and possible future consumer and fair lending regulations. The future changes resulting from the Dodd-Frank Act may affect the profitability of business activities, require changes to certain business practices, impose more stringent regulatory requirements or otherwise adversely affect the business and financial condition of the Company and the Bank. These changes may also require the Company to invest significant management attention and resources to evaluate and make necessary changes to comply with new statutory and regulatory requirements.

The deposits of the Bank are insured up to applicable limits by the DIF and are subject to deposit insurance assessments to maintain the DIF. On April 1, 2011, the deposit insurance assessment base changed from total deposits to average total assets minus average tangible equity, pursuant to a rule issued by the FDIC as required by the Dodd-Frank Act. Effective July 1, 2016, the FDIC changed its deposit insurance pricing to a “financial ratios method” based on “CAMELS” composite ratings to determine assessment rates for small established institutions with less than $10 billion in assets. The CAMELS rating system is a supervisory rating system designed to take into account and reflect all financial and operational risks that a bank may face, including capital adequacy, asset quality, management capability, earnings, liquidity and sensitivity to market risk (“CAMELS”). CAMELS composite ratings set a maximum assessment for CAMELS 1 and 2 rated banks, and set minimum assessments for lower rated institutions.

The FDIC’s “reserve ratio” of the DIF to total industry deposits reached its 1.15% target effective June 30, 2016. On March 15, 2016, the FDIC implemented by final rule certain Dodd-Frank Act provisions by raising the DIF’s minimum reserve ratio from 1.15% to 1.35%. The FDIC imposed a 4.5 basis point annual surcharge on insured depository institutions with total consolidated assets of $10 billion or more. The new rule granted credits to smaller banks for the portion of their regular assessments that contributed to increasing the reserve ratio from 1.15% to 1.35%. The 1.35% target was achieved in the third quarter of 2018. In 2019 and 2018, the Company recorded expense of $420,733 and $250,319, respectively, for FDIC insurance premiums.

In addition, all FDIC insured institutions were required to pay assessments to the FDIC at an annual rate of approximately one basis point of insured deposits to fund interest payments on bonds issued by the Financing Corporation, an agency of the federal government established to recapitalize the predecessor to the Savings Association Insurance Fund, until the bonds matured during 2019.

The Federal Reserve, the OCC and the FDIC have issued substantially similar capital requirements applicable to all banks and bank holding companies. In addition, those regulatory agencies may from time to time require that a banking organization maintain capital above the minimum levels because of its financial condition or actual or anticipated growth.

Effective January 1, 2015, the Company and the Bank became subject to the rules implementing the Basel III capital framework and certain related provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act (the “Basel III Capital Rules”). The Basel III Capital Rules require the Company and the Bank to comply with the following minimum capital ratios: (i) a ratio of common equity Tier 1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 4.5%, plus a 2.5% “capital conservation buffer” (effectively resulting in a minimum ratio of common equity Tier 1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 7%), (ii) a ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 6.0%, plus the 2.5% capital conservation buffer (effectively resulting in a minimum Tier 1 capital ratio of 8.5%), (iii) a ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 8.0%, plus the 2.5% capital conservation buffer (effectively resulting in a minimum total capital ratio of 10.5%), and (iv) a leverage ratio of 4%, calculated as the ratio of Tier 1 capital to average assets. The phase-in of the capital conservation buffer requirement began on January 1, 2016, at 0.625% of risk-weighted assets, increasing by the same amount each year until it was fully implemented at 2.5% on January 1, 2019. The capital conservation buffer is designed to absorb losses during periods of economic stress. Banking institutions with a ratio of common equity Tier 1 to risk-weighted assets above the minimum but below the conservation buffer face constraints on dividends, equity repurchases, and compensation based on the amount of the shortfall. The Tier 1 and total capital to risk-weighted asset ratios of the Company were 12.13% and 14.26%, respectively, as of December 31, 2019, thus exceeding the minimum requirements. The common equity Tier 1 capital ratio was 12.13% for the Company and 11.14% for the Bank as of December 31, 2019. The Tier 1 and total capital to risk-weighted asset ratios of the Bank were 11.14% and 11.82%, respectively, as of December 31, 2019, also exceeding the minimum requirements.

With respect to the Bank, the “prompt corrective action” regulations pursuant to Section 38 of the FDI Act were also revised, effective as of January 1, 2015, to incorporate a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio and to increase certain other capital ratios. To be well capitalized under the revised regulations, a bank must have the following minimum capital ratios: (i) a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of at least 6.5%; (ii) a Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 8.0%; (iii) a total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 10.0%; and (iv) a leverage ratio of at least 5.0%. The Bank exceeded the thresholds to be considered well capitalized as of December 31, 2019.

The Basel III Capital Rules also changed the risk weights of assets to better reflect credit risk and other risk exposures. These include a 150% risk weight for certain high volatility commercial real estate acquisition, development and construction loans and nonresidential mortgage loans that are 90 days past due or otherwise on non-accrual status, a 20% credit conversion factor for the unused portion of a commitment with an original maturity of one year or less that is not unconditionally cancelable, a 250% risk weight for mortgage servicing rights and deferred tax assets that are not deducted from capital, and increased risk-weights for equity exposures.

In December 2017, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision published standards that it described as the finalization of the Basel III post-crisis regulatory reforms (the standards are commonly referred to as “Basel IV”). Among other things, these standards revise the standardized approach for credit risk (including by recalibrating risk weights and introducing new capital requirements for certain “unconditionally cancellable commitments,” such as unused credit card lines of credit) and provide a new standardized approach for operational risk capital. Under the proposed framework, these standards will generally be effective on January 1, 2022, with an aggregate output floor phasing-in through January 1, 2027. Under the current capital rules, operational risk capital requirements and a capital floor apply only to advanced approaches institutions, and not to the Company. The impact of Basel IV on the Company and the Bank will depend on the manner in which it is implemented by the federal bank regulatory agencies.

On August 28, 2018, the Federal Reserve issued an interim final rule required by the EGRRCPA that expands the applicability of the Federal Reserve’s Small Bank Holding Company Policy Statement (the “SBHC Policy Statement”) to bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of less than $3 billion (up from the prior $1 billion threshold). Under the SBHC Policy Statement, qualifying bank holding companies have additional flexibility in the amount of debt they can issue and are also exempt from the Basel III Capital Rules (subsidiary depository institutions of qualifying bank holding companies are still subject to capital requirements). The Company currently has less than $3 billion in total consolidated assets and would likely qualify under the revised SBHC Policy Statement. However, the Company does not currently intend to issue a material amount of debt or take any other action that would cause its capital ratios to fall below the minimum ratios required by the Basel III Capital Rules.

On September 17, 2019, the federal banking agencies jointly issued a final rule required by the EGRRCPA that permits qualifying banks and bank holding companies that have less than $10 billion in consolidated assets to elect to be subject to a 9% leverage ratio that would be applied using less complex leverage calculations (commonly referred to as the community bank leverage ratio or “CBLR”). Under the rule, which became effective on January 1, 2020, banks and bank holding companies that opt into the CBLR framework and maintain a CBLR of greater than 9% are not subject to other risk-based and leverage capital requirements under the Basel III Capital Rules and would be deemed to have met the well capitalized ratio requirements under the “prompt corrective action” framework. These CBLR rules were modified in response to the novel coronavirus (“COVID-19”) pandemic. See “— Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act” below. The Company is evaluating whether to opt in to the CBLR framework.

The Company’s principal source of cash flow, including cash flow to pay dividends to its shareholders, is dividends it receives from the Bank. Statutory and regulatory limitations apply to the Bank’s payment of dividends to the Company. As a general rule, the amount of a dividend may not exceed, without prior regulatory approval, the sum of net income in the calendar year to date and the retained net earnings of the immediately preceding two calendar years. A depository institution may not pay any dividend if payment would cause the institution to become “undercapitalized” or if it already is “undercapitalized.” The OCC may prevent the payment of a dividend if it determines that the payment would be an unsafe and unsound banking practice. The OCC also has advised that a national bank should generally pay dividends only out of current operating earnings. In addition, under the current supervisory practices of the Federal Reserve, the Company should inform and consult with the Federal Reserve reasonably in advance of declaring or paying a dividend that exceeds earnings for the period (e.g., quarter) for which the dividend is being paid or that could result in a material adverse change to the Company’s capital structure.

As a bank holding company, the Company is limited to managing or controlling banks, furnishing services to or performing services for its subsidiaries, and engaging in other activities that the Federal Reserve determines by regulation or order to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. In determining whether a particular activity is permissible, the Federal Reserve must consider whether the performance of such an activity reasonably can be expected to produce benefits to the public that outweigh possible adverse effects. Possible benefits include greater convenience, increased competition, and gains in efficiency. Possible adverse effects include undue concentration of resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interest, and unsound banking practices. Despite prior approval, the Federal Reserve may order a bank holding company or its subsidiaries to terminate any activity or to terminate ownership or control of any subsidiary when the Federal Reserve has reasonable cause to believe that a serious risk to the financial safety, soundness or stability of any bank subsidiary of that bank holding company may result from such an activity.

The BHC Act requires, among other things, the prior approval of the Federal Reserve in any case where a bank holding company proposes to (i) acquire direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of the outstanding voting stock of any bank or bank holding company (unless it already owns a majority of such voting shares), (ii) acquire all or substantially all of the assets of another bank or bank holding company, or (iii) merge or consolidate with any other bank holding company. In determining whether to approve a proposed bank acquisition, the Federal Reserve will consider, among other factors, the effect of the acquisition on competition, the public benefits expected to be received from the acquisition, the projected capital ratios and levels on a post-acquisition basis, and the acquiring institution’s performance under the CRA and its compliance with fair housing and other consumer protection laws.

Subject to certain exceptions, the BHC Act and the Change in Bank Control Act, together with the applicable regulations, require Federal Reserve approval (or, depending on the circumstances, no notice of disapproval) prior to any person or company acquiring “control” of a bank or bank holding company. A conclusive presumption of control exists if an individual or company acquires the power, directly or indirectly, to direct the management or policies of an insured depository institution or to vote 25% or more of any class of voting securities of any insured depository institution. A rebuttable presumption of control exists if a person or company acquires 10% or more but less than 25% of any class of voting securities of an insured depository institution and either the institution has registered its securities with the SEC under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), or no other person will own a greater percentage of that class of voting securities immediately after the acquisition.

In addition, Virginia law requires the prior approval of the Virginia SCC for (i) the acquisition of more than 5% of the voting shares of a Virginia bank or any holding company that controls a Virginia bank, or (ii) the acquisition by a Virginia bank holding company of a bank or its holding company domiciled outside Virginia.

Federal Reserve policy has historically required bank holding companies to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to their subsidiary banks. The Dodd-Frank Act codified this policy as a statutory requirement. Under this requirement, the Company is expected to commit resources to support the Bank, including at times when the Company may not be in a financial position to provide such resources. Any capital loans by a bank holding company to any of its subsidiary banks are subordinate in right of payment to depositors and to certain other indebtedness of such subsidiary banks. In the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy, any commitment by the bank holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a subsidiary bank will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to priority of payment.

Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”), the federal bank regulatory agencies possess broad powers to take prompt corrective action to resolve problems of insured depository institutions. The extent of these powers depends upon whether the institution is “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized,” or “critically undercapitalized,” as defined by the law.

Reflecting changes under the new Basel III capital requirements, the relevant capital measures that became effective on January 1, 2015 for prompt corrective action are the total capital ratio, the common equity Tier 1 capital ratio, the Tier 1 capital ratio and the leverage ratio. A bank will be (i) “well capitalized” if the institution has a total risk-based capital ratio of 10.0% or greater, a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 6.5% or greater, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 8.0% or greater, and a leverage ratio of 5.0% or greater, and is not subject to any capital directive order; (ii) “adequately capitalized” if the institution has a total risk-based capital ratio of 8.0% or greater, a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 4.5% or greater, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6.0% or greater, and a leverage ratio of 4.0% or greater and is not “well capitalized”; (iii) “undercapitalized” if the institution has a total risk-based capital ratio that is less than 8.0%, a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio less than 4.5%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of less than 6.0% or a leverage ratio of less than 4.0%; (iv) “significantly undercapitalized” if the institution has a total risk-based capital ratio of less than 6.0%, a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio less than 3.0%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of less than 4.0% or a leverage ratio of less than 3.0%; and (v) “critically undercapitalized” if the institution’s tangible equity is equal to or less than 2.0% of average quarterly tangible assets. An institution may be downgraded to, or deemed to be in, a capital category that is lower than indicated by its capital ratios if it is determined to be in an unsafe or unsound condition or if it receives an unsatisfactory examination rating with respect to certain matters. A bank’s capital category is determined solely for the purpose of applying prompt corrective action regulations, and the capital category may not constitute an accurate representation of the bank’s overall financial condition or prospects for other purposes. Management believes, as of December 31, 2019, the Company met the requirements for being classified as “well capitalized.”

As described above, on September 17, 2019, the federal banking agencies jointly issued a final rule required by the EGRRCPA that permits qualifying banks and bank holding companies that have less than $10 billion in consolidated assets to elect to opt into the CBLR framework. Under the rule, which became effective on January 1, 2020, banks and bank holding companies that opt into the CBLR framework and maintain a CBLR of greater than 9% would be deemed to have met the well capitalized ratio requirements under the “prompt corrective action” framework. These CBLR rules were modified in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. See “— Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act” below. The Company is evaluating whether to opt in to the CBLR framework.

As required by FDICIA, the federal bank regulatory agencies also have adopted guidelines prescribing safety and soundness standards relating to, among other things, internal controls and information systems, internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, and interest rate exposure. In general, the guidelines require appropriate systems and practices to identify and manage the risks and exposures specified in the guidelines. In addition, the agencies adopted regulations that authorize, but do not require, an institution that has been notified that it is not in compliance with safety and soundness standard to submit a compliance plan. If, after being so notified, an institution fails to submit an acceptable compliance plan, the agency must issue an order directing action to correct the deficiency and may issue an order directing other actions of the types to which an undercapitalized institution is subject under the prompt corrective action provisions described above.

Pursuant to Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and Regulation W, the authority of the Bank to engage in transactions with related parties or “affiliates” or to make loans to insiders is limited. Loan transactions with an affiliate generally must be collateralized and certain transactions between the Bank and its affiliates, including the sale of assets, the payment of money or the provision of services, must be on terms and conditions that are substantially the same, or at least as favorable to the Bank, as those prevailing for comparable nonaffiliated transactions. In addition, the Bank generally may not purchase securities issued or underwritten by affiliates.

Loans to executive officers, directors or to any person who directly or indirectly, or acting through or in concert with one or more persons, owns, controls or has the power to vote more than 10% of any class of voting securities of a bank, are subject to Sections 22(g) and 22(h) of the Federal Reserve Act and their corresponding regulations (Regulation O) and Section 13(k) of the Exchange Act relating to the prohibition on personal loans to executives (which exempts financial institutions in compliance with the insider lending restrictions of Section 22(h) of the Federal Reserve Act). Among other things, these loans must be made on terms substantially the same as those prevailing on transactions made to unaffiliated individuals and certain extensions of credit to those persons must first be approved in advance by a disinterested majority of the entire board of directors. Section 22(h) of the Federal Reserve Act prohibits loans to any of those individuals where the aggregate amount exceeds an amount equal to 15% of an institution’s unimpaired capital and surplus plus an additional 10% of unimpaired capital and surplus in the case of loans that are fully secured by readily marketable collateral, or when the aggregate amount on all of the extensions of credit outstanding to all of these persons would exceed the Bank’s unimpaired capital and unimpaired surplus. Section 22(g) of the Federal Reserve Act identifies limited circumstances in which the Bank is permitted to extend credit to executive officers.

The Company is subject to a number of federal and state consumer protection laws that extensively govern its relationship with its customers. These laws include the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Truth in Savings Act, the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, the Expedited Funds Availability Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Service Members Civil Relief Act, laws governing flood insurance, federal and state laws prohibiting unfair and deceptive business practices, foreclosure laws, and various regulations that implement some or all of the foregoing. These laws and regulations mandate certain disclosure requirements and regulate the manner in which financial institutions must deal with customers when taking deposits, making loans, collecting loans and providing other services. If the Company fails to comply with these laws and regulations, it may be subject to various penalties. Failure to comply with consumer protection requirements may also result in failure to obtain any required bank regulatory approval for merger or acquisition transactions the Company may wish to pursue or being prohibited from engaging in such transactions even if approval is not required.

The Dodd-Frank Act centralized responsibility for consumer financial protection by creating a new agency, the CFPB, and giving it responsibility for implementing, examining, and enforcing compliance with federal consumer protection laws. The CFPB focuses on (i) risks to consumers and compliance with the federal consumer financial laws, (ii) the markets in which firms operate and risks to consumers posed by activities in those markets, (iii) depository institutions that offer a wide variety of consumer financial products and services, and (iv) non-depository companies that offer one or more consumer financial products or services. The CFPB has broad rule making authority for a wide range of consumer financial laws that apply to all banks, including, among other things, the authority to prohibit “unfair, deceptive or abusive” acts and practices. Abusive acts or practices are defined as those that materially interfere with a consumer’s ability to understand a term or condition of a consumer financial product or service or take unreasonable advantage of a consumer’s (i) lack of financial savvy, (ii) inability to protect himself in the selection or use of consumer financial products or services, or (iii) reasonable reliance on a covered entity to act in the consumer’s interests. The CFPB can issue cease-and-desist orders against banks and other entities that violate consumer financial laws. The CFPB may also institute a civil action against an entity in violation of federal consumer financial law in order to impose a civil penalty or injunction.

The CRA requires the appropriate federal banking agency, in connection with its examination of a bank, to assess the bank’s record in meeting the credit needs of the communities served by the bank, including low and moderate income neighborhoods. Furthermore, such assessment is also required of banks that have applied, among other things, to merge or consolidate with or acquire the assets or assume the liabilities of an insured depository institution, or to open or relocate a branch. In the case of a bank holding company applying for approval to acquire a bank or bank holding company, the record of each subsidiary bank of the applicant bank holding company is subject to assessment in considering the application. Under

the CRA, institutions are assigned a rating of “outstanding,” “satisfactory,” “needs to improve,” or “substantial non-compliance.” The Bank was rated “satisfactory” in its most recent CRA evaluation.

The Company is subject to the Bank Secrecy Act and other anti-money laundering laws and regulations, including the USA Patriot Act of 2001. Among other things, these laws and regulations require the Company to take steps to prevent the use of the Company for facilitating the flow of illegal or illicit money, to report large currency transactions, and to file suspicious activity reports. The Company is also required to carry out a comprehensive anti-money laundering compliance program. Violations can result in substantial civil and criminal sanctions. In addition, provisions of the USA Patriot Act require the federal bank regulatory agencies to consider the effectiveness of a financial institution’s anti-money laundering activities when reviewing bank mergers and bank holding company acquisitions.

The U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) is responsible for administering and enforcing economic and trade sanctions against specified foreign parties, including countries and regimes, foreign individuals and other foreign organizations and entities. OFAC publishes lists of prohibited parties that are regularly consulted by the Company in the conduct of its business in order to assure compliance. The Company is responsible for, among other things, blocking accounts of, and transactions with, prohibited parties identified by OFAC, avoiding unlicensed trade and financial transactions with such parties and reporting blocked transactions after their occurrence. Failure to comply with OFAC requirements could have serious legal, financial and reputational consequences for the Company.

Several recent laws, including the Right to Financial Privacy Act, and related regulations issued by the federal bank regulatory agencies, also provide new protections against the transfer and use of customer information by financial institutions. A financial institution must provide to its customers information regarding its policies and procedures with respect to the handling of customers’ personal information. Each institution must conduct an internal risk assessment of its ability to protect customer information. These privacy provisions generally prohibit a financial institution from providing a customer’s personal financial information to unaffiliated parties without prior notice and approval from the customer.

In June 2010, the federal bank regulatory agencies issued comprehensive final guidance on incentive compensation policies intended to ensure that the incentive compensation policies of financial institutions do not undermine the safety and soundness of such institutions by encouraging excessive risk-taking. The Interagency Guidance on Sound Incentive Compensation Policies, which covers all employees that have the ability to materially affect the risk profile of a financial institutions, either individually or as part of a group, is based upon the key principles that a financial institution’s incentive compensation arrangements should (i) provide incentives that do not encourage risk-taking beyond the institution’s ability to effectively identify and manage risks, (ii) be compatible with effective internal controls and risk management, and (iii) be supported by strong corporate governance, including active and effective oversight by the financial institution’s board of directors.

Section 956 of the Dodd-Frank Act requires the federal banking agencies and the SEC to establish joint regulations or guidelines prohibiting incentive-based payment arrangements at specified regulated entities that encourage inappropriate risk-taking by providing an executive officer, employee, director or principal shareholder with excessive compensation, fees, or benefits or that could lead to material financial loss to the entity. The federal banking agencies issued such proposed rules in March 2011 and issued a revised proposed rule in June 2016 implementing the requirements and prohibitions set forth in Section 956. The revised proposed rule would apply to all banks, among other institutions, with at least $1 billion in average total consolidated assets for which it would go beyond the existing Interagency Guidance on Sound Incentive Compensation Policies to (i) prohibit certain types and features of incentive-based compensation arrangements for senior executive officers, (ii) require incentive-based compensation arrangements to adhere to certain basic principles to avoid a presumption of encouraging inappropriate risk, (iii) require appropriate board or committee oversight, (iv) establish minimum recordkeeping, and (v) mandate disclosures to the appropriate federal banking agency. The comment period for these proposed rules has closed and final rules have not yet been published.

The Federal Reserve will review, as part of the regular, risk-focused examination process, the incentive compensation arrangements of financial institutions, such as the Company, that are not “large, complex banking organizations.” These reviews will be tailored to each financial institution based on the scope and complexity of the institution’s activities and the prevalence of incentive compensation arrangements. The findings of the supervisory initiatives will be included in reports of examination. Deficiencies will be incorporated into the institution’s supervisory ratings, which can affect the institution’s ability to make acquisitions and take other actions. Enforcement actions may be taken against a financial institution if its incentive compensation arrangements, or related risk-management control or governance processes, pose a risk to the institution’s safety and soundness and the financial institution is not taking prompt and effective measures to correct the deficiencies. As of December 31, 2019, the Company had not been made aware of any instances of non-compliance with the final guidance.

Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the CFPB issued a final rule effective on January 10, 2014, amending Regulation Z as implemented by the Truth in Lending Act, requiring mortgage lenders to make a reasonable and good faith determination based on verified and documented information that a consumer applying for a mortgage loan has a reasonable ability to repay the loan according to its terms. Mortgage lenders are required to determine consumers’ ability to repay in one of two ways. The first alternative requires the mortgage lender to consider the following eight underwriting factors when making the credit decision: (i) current or reasonably expected income or assets; (ii) current employment status; (iii) the monthly payment on the covered transaction; (iv) the monthly payment on any simultaneous loan; (v) the monthly payment for mortgage-related obligations; (vi) current debt obligations, alimony, and child support; (vii) the monthly debt-to-income ratio or residual income; and (viii) credit history. Alternatively, the mortgage lender can originate “qualified mortgages,” which are entitled to a presumption that the creditor making the loan satisfied the ability-to-repay requirements. In general, a “qualified mortgage” is a mortgage loan without negative amortization, interest-only payments, balloon payments, or terms exceeding 30 years. In addition, to be a qualified mortgage the points and fees paid by a consumer cannot exceed 3% of the total loan amount. Qualified mortgages that are “higher-priced” (e.g. subprime loans) garner a rebuttable presumption of compliance with the ability-to-repay rules, while qualified mortgages that are not “higher-priced” (e.g. prime loans) are given a safe harbor of compliance. The Company is predominantly an originator of compliant qualified mortgages.

In March 2015, federal regulators issued two related statements regarding cybersecurity. One statement indicates that financial institutions should design multiple layers of security controls to establish lines of defense and to ensure that their risk management processes also address the risk posed by compromised customer credentials, including security measures to reliably authenticate customers accessing internet-based services of the financial institution. The other statement indicates that a financial institution’s management is expected to maintain sufficient business continuity planning processes to ensure the rapid recovery, resumption and maintenance of the institution’s operations after a cyber-attack involving destructive malware. A financial institution is also expected to develop appropriate processes to enable recovery of data and business operations and address rebuilding network capabilities and restoring data if the institution or its critical service providers fall victim to this type of cyber-attack. If the Company fails to observe the regulatory guidance, it could be subject to various regulatory sanctions, including financial penalties.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, President Trump signed into law the CARES Act on March 27, 2020. Among other things, the CARES Act included the following provisions impacting financial institutions:

Legal Lending Limit Waiver. The CARES Act permits the OCC to waive legal lending limits to any particular borrower (i) with respect to loans to nonbank financial companies or (ii) upon a finding by the OCC that such exemption is in the public interest, with respect to any other borrower, in each case until the earlier of the termination date of the national emergency or December 31, 2020.

Community Bank Leverage Ratio. The CARES Act directs federal banking agencies to adopt interim final rules to lower the threshold under the CBLR from 9% to 8% and to provide a reasonable grace period for a community bank that falls below the threshold to regain compliance, in each case until the earlier of the termination date of the national emergency or December 31, 2020. In April 2020, the federal bank regulatory agencies issued two interim final rules implementing this directive. One interim final rule provides that, as of the second quarter 2020, banking organizations with leverage ratios of 8% or greater (and that meet the other existing qualifying criteria) may elect to use the CBLR framework. It also establishes a two-quarter grace period for qualifying community banking organizations whose leverage ratios fall below the 8% CBLR requirement, so long as the banking organization maintains a leverage ratio of 7% or greater. The second interim final rule

provides a transition from the temporary 8% CBLR requirement to a 9% CBLR requirement. It establishes a minimum CBLR of 8% for the second through fourth quarters of 2020, 8.5% for 2021, and 9% thereafter, and maintains a two-quarter grace period for qualifying community banking organizations whose leverage ratios fall no more than 100 basis points below the applicable CBLR requirement.

Temporary Troubled Debt Restructurings (“TDRs”) Relief. The CARES Act allows banks to elect to suspend requirements under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) for loan modifications related to the COVID-19 pandemic (for loans that were not more than 30 days past due as of December 31, 2019) that would otherwise be categorized as a TDR, including impairment for accounting purposes, until the earlier of 60 days after the termination date of the national emergency or December 31, 2020. Federal banking agencies are required to defer to the determination of the banks making such suspension.

Small Business Administration Paycheck Protection Program. The CARES Act created the SBA’s Paycheck Protection Program. Under the Paycheck Protection Program, $349 billion was authorized for small business loans to pay payroll and group health costs, salaries and commissions, mortgage and rent payments, utilities, and interest on other debt. The loans are provided through participating financial institutions, such as the Bank, that process loan applications and service the loans.

Congress may enact legislation from time to time that affects the regulation of the financial services industry, and state legislatures may enact legislation from time to time affecting the regulation of financial institutions chartered by or operating in those states. Federal and state regulatory agencies also periodically propose and adopt changes to their regulations or change the manner in which existing regulations are applied. The substance or impact of pending or future legislation or regulation, or the application thereof, cannot be predicted, although enactment of the proposed legislation could impact the regulatory structure under which the Company and the Bank operate and may significantly increase costs, impede the efficiency of internal business processes, require an increase in regulatory capital, require modifications to business strategy, and limit the ability to pursue business opportunities in an efficient manner. A change in statutes, regulations or regulatory policies applicable to the Company or the Bank could have a material adverse effect on the business, financial condition and results of operations of the Company and the Bank.

An investment in the Company’s common stock involves certain risks, including those described below. In addition to the other information set forth in this report, investors in the Company’s securities should carefully consider the factors discussed below. These factors, either alone or taken together, could materially and adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, liquidity, results of operations, capital position, and prospects. One or more of these could cause the Company’s actual results to differ materially from its historical results or the results contemplated by the forward-looking statements contained in this report, in which case the trading price of the Company’s securities could decline.

The outbreak of COVID-19, or the outbreak of another highly infectious or contagious disease, could adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

The Company’s business is dependent upon the willingness and ability of its customers to conduct banking and other financial transactions. Since the beginning of January 2020, the COVID-19 outbreak has caused significant disruption in the financial markets both globally and in the United States. The continuing spread of COVID-19 and the related government actions to mandate or encourage quarantines and social distancing has resulted in a significant decrease in commercial activity nationally and in the Company’s markets, and may cause customers, vendors, and counterparties to be unable to meet existing payment or other obligations to the Company and the Bank.

The national public health crisis arising from the COVID-19 pandemic (and public expectations about it), combined with certain pre-existing factors, including, but not limited to, international trade disputes, inflation risks, and oil price volatility, could further destabilize the financial markets and the markets in which the Company operates. The resulting impacts on consumers, including the sudden increase in the unemployment rate, is expected to cause changes in consumer and business spending, borrowing needs and saving habits, which will likely affect the demand for loans and other products and services the Company offers, as well as the creditworthiness of potential and current borrowers. Borrower loan defaults that adversely affect the Company’s earnings correlate with deteriorating economic conditions, which, in turn, may impact borrowers’ creditworthiness and the Bank’s ability to make loans.

The use of quarantines and social distancing methods to curtail the spread of COVID-19 – whether mandated by governmental authorities or recommended as a public health practice – may adversely affect the Company’s operations as key personnel, employees and customers avoid physical interaction. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Bank has been directing branch customers to use drive-thru windows and online banking services, and many employees are telecommuting. It is not yet known what impact these operational changes may have on the Company’s financial performance. The continued spread of COVID-19 (or an outbreak of a similar highly contagious disease) could also negatively impact the business and operations of third-party service providers who perform critical services for the Company’s business.

As a result, if COVID-19 continues to spread or the response to contain the COVID-19 pandemic is unsuccessful, the Company could experience a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, and results of operations.

The Company’s credit standards and its on-going credit assessment processes might not protect it from significant credit losses.

The Company assumes credit risk by virtue of making loans and extending loan commitments and letters of credit. The Company manages credit risk through a program of underwriting standards, the review of certain credit decisions and a continuous quality assessment process of credit already extended. The Company’s exposure to credit risk is managed through the use of consistent underwriting standards that emphasize local lending while avoiding highly leveraged transactions, as well as excessive industry and other concentrations. The Company’s credit administration function employs risk management techniques to help ensure that problem loans and leases are promptly identified. While these procedures are designed to provide the Company with the information needed to implement policy adjustments where necessary and to take appropriate corrective actions, there can be no assurance that such measures will be effective in avoiding undue credit risk.

The Bank’s allowance for loan losses may be insufficient and any increases in the allowance for loan losses may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

The Bank maintains an allowance for loan losses, which is a reserve established through a provision for loan losses charged to expense, that represents the Bank’s best estimate of probable losses that have been incurred within the existing portfolio of loans. The allowance, in the judgment of management, is necessary to reserve for estimated loan losses and risks inherent in the loan portfolio.

The level of the allowance reflects management’s evaluation of the level of loans outstanding, the level of non-performing loans, historical loan loss experience, delinquency trends, underlying collateral values, the amount of actual losses charged to the reserve in a given period and assessment of present and anticipated economic conditions. The determination of the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses inherently involves a high degree of subjectivity and requires the Bank to make significant estimates of current credit risks and future trends, all of which may undergo material changes. The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and the unprecedented governmental response have made these subjective judgements even more difficult. Although the Bank believes the allowance for loan losses is a reasonable estimate of known and inherent losses in the loan portfolio, it cannot precisely predict such losses or be certain that the loan loss allowance will be adequate in the future. Deterioration of economic conditions affecting borrowers, new information regarding existing loans, identification of additional problem loans and other factors, both within and outside the Bank’s control, may require an increase in the allowance for loan losses. In addition, bank regulatory agencies and the Bank’s auditors periodically review its allowance for loan losses and may require an increase in the provision for loan losses or the recognition of further loan charge-offs, based on judgments different than those of management. Further, if charge-offs in future periods exceed the allowance for loan losses, the Bank will need additional provisions to increase the allowance for loan losses.

Non-performing assets take significant time to resolve and adversely affect the Company’s results of operations and financial condition.

The Company’s non-performing assets adversely affect its net income in various ways. Non-performing assets, which include non-accrual loans and other real estate owned, were $5.2 million, or 0.54% of total assets, as of December 31, 2019. When the Company receives collateral through foreclosures and similar proceedings, it is required to mark the related loan to the then fair market value of the collateral less estimated selling costs, which may result in a loss. An increased level of non-performing assets also increases the Company’s risk profile and may impact the capital levels regulators believe are appropriate in light of such risks. The Company utilizes various techniques such as workouts, restructurings and loan sales to manage problem assets. Increases in, or negative changes in, the value of these problem assets, the underlying collateral, or in the borrowers’ performance or financial condition, could adversely affect the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, the resolution of non-performing assets requires significant commitments of time from

management and staff, which can be detrimental to the performance of their other responsibilities, including generation of new loans. There can be no assurance that the Company will avoid increases in non-performing loans in the future.

The Company’s focus on lending to small to mid-sized community-based businesses may increase its credit risk.

Most of the Company’s commercial business and commercial real estate loans are made to small business or middle market customers. These businesses generally have fewer financial resources in terms of capital or borrowing capacity than larger entities and have a heightened vulnerability to economic conditions. If general economic conditions in the market areas in which the Company operates negatively impact this important customer sector, the Company’s results of operations and financial condition may be adversely affected. Moreover, a portion of these loans have been made by the Company in recent years and the borrowers may not have experienced a complete business or economic cycle. Any deterioration of the borrowers’ businesses may hinder their ability to repay their loans with the Company, which could have a material adverse effect on its financial condition and results of operations.

The Company’s concentration in loans secured by real estate may increase its future credit losses, which would negatively affect the Company’s financial results.

The Company offers a variety of secured loans, including commercial lines of credit, commercial term loans, real estate, construction, home equity, consumer and other loans. Credit risk and credit losses can increase if its loans are concentrated to borrowers who, as a group, may be uniquely or disproportionately affected by economic or market conditions. As of December 31, 2019, approximately 66.3% of the Company’s loans are secured by real estate, both residential and commercial, substantially all of which are located in its market area. A major change in the region’s real estate market, resulting in a deterioration in real estate values, or in the local or national economy, including changes caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, could adversely affect the Company customers’ ability to pay these loans, which in turn could adversely impact the Company. Risk of loan defaults and foreclosures are inherent in the banking industry, and the Company tries to limit its exposure to this risk by carefully underwriting and monitoring its extensions of credit. The Company cannot fully eliminate credit risk, and as a result credit losses may occur in the future.

The Company has a moderate concentration of credit exposure in commercial real estate and loans with this type of collateral are viewed as having more risk of default.

As of December 31, 2019, the Company had approximately $251.8 million in loans secured by commercial real estate, representing approximately 38.9% of total loans outstanding at that date. The real estate consists primarily of non-owner-operated properties and other commercial properties. These types of loans are generally viewed as having more risk of default than residential real estate loans. They are also typically larger than residential real estate loans and consumer loans and depend on cash flows from the owner’s business or the property to service the debt. It may be more difficult for commercial real estate borrowers to repay their loans in a timely manner, as commercial real estate borrowers’ abilities to repay their loans frequently depends on the successful rental of their properties. Cash flows may be affected significantly by general economic conditions, and a sustained downturn in the local economy or in occupancy rates in the local economy where the property is located could increase the likelihood of default. Because the Company’s loan portfolio contains a number of commercial real estate loans with relatively large balances, the deterioration of one or a few of these loans could cause a significant increase in its percentage of non-performing loans. An increase in non-performing loans could result in a loss of earnings from these loans, an increase in the provision for loan losses and an increase in charge-offs, all of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition.

The Company’s banking regulators generally give commercial real estate lending greater scrutiny, and may require banks with higher levels of commercial real estate loans to implement improved underwriting, internal controls, risk management policies and portfolio stress testing, as well as possibly higher levels of allowances for losses and capital as a result of commercial real estate lending growth and exposures, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations.

A portion of the Company’s loan portfolio consists of construction and land development loans, and a decline in real estate values and economic conditions would adversely affect the value of the collateral securing the loans and have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition.

At December 31, 2019, approximately 9.2% of the Company’s loan portfolio, or $64.7 million, consisted of construction and land development loans. Construction financing typically involves a higher degree of credit risk than financing on improved, owner-occupied real estate and improved, income producing real estate. Risk of loss on a construction or land development loan is largely dependent upon the accuracy of the initial estimate of the property’s value at completion of construction or development, the marketability of the property, and the bid price and estimated cost (including interest) of construction or development. If the estimate of construction or development costs proves to be inaccurate, the

Company may be required to advance funds beyond the amount originally committed to permit completion of the project. If the estimate of the value proves to be inaccurate, it may be confronted, at or prior to the maturity of the loan, with a project whose value is insufficient to assure full repayment. When lending to builders and developers, the cost breakdown of construction or development is provided by the builder or developer. Although the Company’s underwriting criteria are designed to evaluate and minimize the risks of each construction or land development loan, there can be no guarantee that these practices will have safeguarded against material delinquencies and losses to the Company’s operations. In addition, construction and land development loans are dependent on the successful completion of the projects they finance. Loans secured by vacant or unimproved land are generally riskier than loans secured by improved property. These loans are more susceptible to adverse conditions in the real estate market and local economy.

The Company’s results of operations are significantly affected by the ability of borrowers to repay their loans.

A significant source of risk for the Company is the possibility that losses will be sustained because borrowers, guarantors and related parties may fail to perform in accordance with the terms of their loan agreements. Most of the Company’s loans are secured but some loans are unsecured. With respect to the secured loans, the collateral securing the repayment of these loans may be insufficient to cover the obligations owed under such loans. Collateral values may be adversely affected by changes in economic, environmental and other conditions, including the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, declines in the value of real estate, changes in interest rates, changes in monetary and fiscal policies of the federal government, terrorist activity, environmental contamination and other external events. In addition, collateral appraisals that are out of date or that do not meet industry recognized standards may create the impression that a loan is adequately collateralized when it is not. The Company has adopted underwriting and credit monitoring procedures and policies, including regular reviews of appraisals and borrower financial statements, that management believes are appropriate to mitigate the risk of loss. An increase in non-performing loans could result in a net loss of earnings from these loans, an increase in the provision for loan losses and an increase in loan charge-offs, all of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

Changes in economic conditions, especially in the areas in which the Company conducts operations, could materially and negatively affect its business.

The Company’s business is directly impacted by economic conditions, legislative and regulatory changes, changes in government monetary and fiscal policies, and inflation, all of which are beyond its control. A deterioration in economic conditions, whether caused by global, national or local concerns (including the COVID-19 pandemic), especially within the Company’s market area, could result in the following potentially material consequences: loan delinquencies increasing; problem assets and foreclosures increasing; demand for products and services decreasing; low cost or non-interest bearing deposits decreasing; and collateral for loans, especially real estate, declining in value, in turn reducing customers’ borrowing power, and reducing the value of assets and collateral associated with existing loans. A continued economic downturn could result in losses that materially and adversely affect the Company’s business.

The Company is directly and indirectly affected by changes in market conditions. Market risk generally represents the risk that values of assets and liabilities or revenues will be adversely affected by changes in market conditions. As a financial institution, market risk is inherent in the financial instruments associated with the Company’s operations and activities, including loans, deposits, securities, short-term borrowings, long-term debt and trading account assets and liabilities. A few of the market conditions that may shift from time to time, thereby exposing the Company to market risk, include fluctuations in interest rates, equity and futures prices, and price deterioration or changes in value due to changes in market perception or actual credit quality of issuers. The Company’s investment securities portfolio, in particular, may be impacted by market conditions beyond its control, including rating agency downgrades of the securities, defaults of the issuers of the securities, lack of market pricing of the securities, and inactivity or instability in the credit markets. Any changes in these conditions, in current accounting principles or interpretations of these principles could impact the Company’s assessment of fair value and thus the determination of other-than-temporary impairment of the securities in the investment securities portfolio, which could adversely affect the Company’s earnings and capital ratios.

The Company’s business is subject to interest rate risk, and variations in interest rates and inadequate management of interest rate risk may negatively affect financial performance.

Changes in the interest rate environment may reduce the Company’s profits. It is expected that the Company will continue to realize income from the differential or “spread” between the interest earned on loans, securities, and other interest earning assets, and interest paid on deposits, borrowings and other interest-bearing liabilities. Net interest spreads are affected by the difference between the maturities and repricing characteristics of interest earning assets and interest-bearing

liabilities. In addition, loan volume and yields are affected by market interest rates on loans, and the current interest rate environment encourages extreme competition for new loan originations from qualified borrowers. The Company’s management cannot ensure that it can minimize interest rate risk. If the interest rates paid on deposits and other borrowings increase at a faster rate than the interest rates received on loans and other investments, the Company’s net interest income, and therefore earnings, could be adversely affected. Earnings could also be adversely affected if the interest rates received on loans and other investments fall more quickly than the interest rates paid on deposits and other borrowings. Accordingly, changes in levels of market interest rates could materially and adversely affect the net interest spread, asset quality, loan origination volume and the Company’s overall profitability.

Following the COVID-19 outbreak, market interest rates have declined significantly, with the 10-year U.S. Treasury bond falling below 1.00% on March 3, 2020 for the first time. Such events also may adversely affect business and consumer confidence, generally, and the Company and its customers, and their respective suppliers, vendors and processors may be adversely affected. On March 3, 2020, the Federal Open Market Committee (“FOMC”) reduced the target federal funds rate by 50 basis points to 1.00% to 1.25%. Subsequently, on March 16, 2020, the FOMC further reduced the target federal funds rate by an additional 100 basis points to 0.00% to 0.25%. These reductions in interest rates and related actions in response to the COVID-19 outbreak may adversely affect the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

The Company’s mortgage banking revenue is cyclical and is sensitive to the level of interest rates, changes in economic conditions, decreased economic activity, and slowdowns in the housing market, any of which could adversely impact the Company’s profits.

Mortgage banking income, net of commissions, represented approximately 50.1% of total noninterest income for the year ended December 31, 2019. The success of the Company’s mortgage division is dependent upon its ability to originate loans and sell them to investors at or near current volumes. Loan production levels are sensitive to changes in the level of interest rates and changes in economic conditions. During the recovery from the financial crisis, revenues from mortgage banking increased due to a lowering interest rate environment that resulted in a high volume of mortgage loan refinancing activity. Subsequently, revenues were adversely affected by rising interest rates, home affordability and inventory issues, and changing incentives for homeownership. Following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, mortgage rates have generally fallen, creating the potential for renewed refinancing activity, but economic conditions have also deteriorated. Loan production levels may suffer if there is a sustained slowdown in the housing markets in which the Company conducts business or tightening credit conditions. Any sustained period of decreased activity caused by an economic downturn, fewer refinancing transactions, higher interest rates, housing price pressure or loan underwriting restrictions would adversely affect the Company’s mortgage originations and, consequently, could significantly reduce its income from mortgage banking activities. As a result, these conditions would also adversely affect the Company’s results of operations.

The Company’s liquidity needs could adversely affect results of operations and financial condition.

The Company’s primary sources of funds are deposits and loan repayments. While scheduled loan repayments are a relatively stable source of funds, they are subject to the ability of borrowers to repay the loans. The ability of borrowers to repay loans can be adversely affected by a number of factors, including, but not limited to, changes in economic conditions, adverse trends or events affecting business industry groups, reductions in real estate values or markets, availability of, and/or access to, sources of refinancing, business closings or lay-offs, pandemics or endemics, inclement weather, natural disasters and international instability. Additionally, deposit levels may be affected by a number of factors, including, but not limited to, rates paid by competitors, general interest rate levels, regulatory capital requirements, returns available to customers on alternative investments and general economic conditions. Accordingly, the Company may be required from time to time to rely on secondary sources of liquidity to meet withdrawal demands or otherwise fund operations. Such sources include Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (“FHLB”) advances, sales of securities and loans, federal funds lines of credit from correspondent banks and borrowings from the Federal Reserve Discount Window, as well as additional out-of-market time deposits and brokered deposits. While the Company believes that these sources are currently adequate, there can be no assurance they will be sufficient to meet future liquidity demands, particularly if the Company continues to grow and experiences increasing loan demand. The Company may be required to slow or discontinue loan growth, capital expenditures or other investments or liquidate assets should such sources not be adequate.

The Company may need to raise additional capital in the future and may not be able to do so on acceptable terms, or at all.

Access to sufficient capital is critical in order to enable the Company to implement its business plan, support its business, expand its operations and meet applicable capital requirements. The inability to have sufficient capital, whether internally generated through earnings or raised in the capital markets, could adversely impact the Company’s ability to support and to grow its operations. If the Company grows its operations faster than it generates capital internally, it will need

to access the capital markets. The Company may not be able to raise additional capital in the form of additional debt or equity on acceptable terms, or at all. The Company’s ability to raise additional capital, if needed, will depend on, among other things, conditions in the capital markets at that time, the Company’s financial condition and its results of operations. Economic conditions and a loss of confidence in financial institutions may increase the Company’s cost of capital and limit access to some sources of capital. Further, if the Company needs to raise capital in the future, it may have to do so when many other financial institutions are also seeking to raise capital and would then have to compete with those institutions for investors. An inability to raise additional capital on acceptable terms when needed could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Future issuances of the Company’s common stock could adversely affect the market price of the common stock and could be dilutive.

The Company’s Board, without the approval of shareholders, could from time to time decide to issue additional shares of common stock or shares of preferred stock, which may adversely affect the market price of the shares of common stock and could be dilutive to the Company’s shareholders. Any sale of additional shares of the Company’s common stock may be at prices lower than the current market value of the Company’s shares. In addition, new investors may have rights, preferences and privileges that are senior to, and that could adversely affect, the Company’s existing shareholders. For example, preferred stock would be senior to common stock in right of dividends and as to distributions in liquidation. The Company cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing, or nature of its future offerings of equity securities. Thus, the Company’s shareholders bear the risk of future offerings diluting their stock holdings, adversely affecting their rights as shareholders, and/or reducing the market price of the Company’s common stock.

The Company operates in a highly regulated industry and the laws and regulations that govern the Company’s operations, corporate governance, executive compensation and financial accounting, or reporting, including changes in them or the Company’s failure to comply with them, may adversely affect the Company.

The Company is subject to extensive regulation and supervision that govern almost all aspects of its operations. These laws and regulations, among other matters, prescribe minimum capital requirements, impose limitations on the Company’s business activities, limit the dividends or distributions that it can pay, restrict the ability of institutions to guarantee its 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 its capital than GAAP. Compliance with laws and regulations can be difficult and costly, and changes to laws and regulations often impose additional compliance costs.

The Company is currently facing increased regulation and supervision of its industry as a result of the financial crisis in the banking and financial markets. The Dodd-Frank Act instituted major changes to the banking and financial institutions regulatory regimes. Other changes to statutes, regulations or regulatory policies or supervisory guidance, including changes in interpretation or implementation of statutes, regulations, policies or supervisory guidance, could affect the Company in substantial and unpredictable ways. Such additional regulation and supervision has increased, and may continue to increase, the Company’s costs and limit its ability to pursue business opportunities. Further, the Company’s failure to comply with these laws and regulations, even if the failure was inadvertent or reflects a difference in interpretation, could subject it to restrictions on its business activities, fines and other penalties, any of which could adversely affect the Company’s results of operations, capital base and the price of its securities. Further, any new laws, rules and regulations could make compliance more difficult or expensive or otherwise adversely affect the Company’s business and financial condition.

Recently enacted capital standards, including the Basel III Capital Rules, may require the Company and the Bank to maintain higher levels of capital and liquid assets, which could adversely affect the Company’s profitability and return on equity.

The Company is subject to capital adequacy guidelines and other regulatory requirements specifying minimum amounts and types of capital that the Company and the Bank must maintain. From time to time, regulators implement changes to these regulatory capital adequacy guidelines. If the Company fails to meet these minimum capital guidelines and/or other regulatory requirements, its financial condition would be materially and adversely affected. The Basel III Capital Rules require bank holding companies and their subsidiaries to maintain significantly more capital as a result of higher required capital levels and more demanding regulatory capital risk weightings and calculations. While the Company is exempt from these capital requirements under the Federal Reserve’s SBHC Policy Statement, the Bank is not exempt and must comply. The Bank must also comply with the capital requirements set forth in the “prompt corrective action” regulations pursuant to Section 38 of the FDI Act. Satisfying capital requirements may require the Company to limit its banking operations, retain net income or reduce dividends to improve regulatory capital levels, which could negatively affect its business, financial condition and results of operations. The EGRRCPA, which became effective May 24, 2018, amended the Dodd-Frank Act to, among other things, provide relief from certain of these requirements. Although the EGRRCPA is still being implemented,

the Company does not expect the EGRRCPA and the related rulemakings to materially reduce the impact of capital requirements on its business.

Regulations issued by the CFPB could adversely impact earnings due to, among other things, increased compliance costs or costs due to noncompliance.

The CFPB has broad rulemaking authority to administer and carry out the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act with respect to financial institutions that offer covered financial products and services to consumers. The CFPB has also been directed to write rules identifying practices or acts that are unfair, deceptive or abusive in connection with any transaction with a consumer for a consumer financial product or service, or the offering of a consumer financial product or service. For example, the CFPB issued a final rule, effective January 10, 2014, requiring mortgage lenders to make a reasonable and good faith determination based on verified and documented information that a consumer applying for a mortgage loan has a reasonable ability to repay the loan according to its terms, or to originate “qualified mortgages” that meet specific requirements with respect to terms, pricing and fees. The rule also contains additional disclosure requirements at mortgage loan origination and in monthly statements. The requirements under the CFPB’s regulations and policies could limit the Company’s ability to make certain types of loans or loans to certain borrowers, or could make it more expensive and/or time consuming to make these loans, which could adversely impact the Company’s profitability.

The Company is subject to laws regarding the privacy, information security and protection of personal information and any violation of these laws or another incident involving personal, confidential or proprietary information of individuals could damage the Company’s reputation and otherwise adversely affect its business.

The Company’s business requires the collection and retention of large volumes of customer data, including personally identifiable information (“PII”) in various information systems that the Company maintains and in those maintained by third party service providers. The Company also maintains important internal company data such as PII about its employees and information relating to its operations. The Company is subject to complex and evolving laws and regulations governing the privacy and protection of PII of individuals (including customers, employees and other third-parties). For example, the Company’s business is subject to the GLB Act, which, among other things: (i) imposes certain limitations on the Company’s ability to share nonpublic PII about its customers with nonaffiliated third parties; (ii) requires that the Company provides certain disclosures to customers about its information collection, sharing and security practices and afford customers the right to “opt out” of any information sharing by it with nonaffiliated third parties (with certain exceptions); and (iii) requires that the Company develops, implements and maintains a written comprehensive information security program containing appropriate safeguards based on the Company’s size and complexity, the nature and scope of its activities, and the sensitivity of customer information it processes, as well as plans for responding to data security breaches. Various federal and state banking regulators and states have also enacted data breach notification requirements with varying levels of individual, consumer, regulatory or law enforcement notification in the event of a security breach. Ensuring that the Company’s collection, use, transfer and storage of PII complies with all applicable laws and regulations can increase the Company’s costs. Furthermore, the Company may not be able to ensure that customers and other third parties have appropriate controls in place to protect the confidentiality of the information that they exchange with us, particularly where such information is transmitted by electronic means. If personal, confidential or proprietary information of customers or others were to be mishandled or misused, the Company could be exposed to litigation or regulatory sanctions under privacy and data protection laws and regulations. Concerns regarding the effectiveness of the Company’s measures to safeguard PII, or even the perception that such measures are inadequate, could cause the Company to lose customers or potential customers and thereby reduce its revenues. Accordingly, any failure, or perceived failure, to comply with applicable privacy or data protection laws and regulations may subject the Company to inquiries, examinations and investigations that could result in requirements to modify or cease certain operations or practices or in significant liabilities, fines or penalties, and could damage the Company’s reputation and otherwise adversely affect its operations, financial condition and results of operations.

The obligations associated with operating as a public company will require significant resources and management attention and will cause the Company to incur additional expenses, which will adversely affect its profitability.

The Company became a public company in connection with its acquisition of VCB in December 2019. The Company’s non-interest expenses will increase in 2020 and thereafter as a result of the additional accounting, legal and various other additional expenses usually associated with operating as a public company and complying with public company disclosure obligations. As a privately held company, the Company was not required to comply with certain corporate governance and financial reporting practices and policies required of a publicly traded company. Going forward, the Company will be required to comply with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”), the Dodd-Frank Act, NYSE American listing requirements and other applicable securities rules and regulations. The Exchange Act requires, among other things, that the Company files annual, quarterly, and current reports with respect to its business and operating results with the SEC. The Company is required to ensure that it has the ability to prepare financial statements that are fully compliant with all SEC reporting requirements on a timely basis. Compliance with

these rules and regulations will increase the Company’s legal and financial compliance costs, make some activities more difficult, time-consuming or costly and increase demand on the Company’s systems and resources. The Company might not be successful in complying with these obligations and the significant commitment of resources required for complying with them could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

The Company’s business and earnings are impacted by governmental, fiscal and monetary policy over which it has no control.

The Company is affected by domestic monetary policy. The Federal Reserve regulates the supply of money and credit in the United States and its policies determine in large part the Company’s cost of funds for lending, investing and capital raising activities and the return it earns on those loans and investments, both of which affect the Company’s net interest margin. The actions of the Federal Reserve also can materially affect the value of financial instruments that the Company holds, such as loans and debt securities, and also can affect the Company’s borrowers, potentially increasing the risk that they may fail to repay their loans. The Company’s business and earnings also are affected by the fiscal or other policies that are adopted by various regulatory authorities of the United States. Changes in fiscal or monetary policy are beyond the Company’s control and hard to predict.

The authorities that promulgate accounting standards, including the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”), the SEC and other regulatory authorities, periodically change the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of the Company’s consolidated financial statements. These changes are difficult to predict and can materially impact how the Company records and reports its financial condition and results of operations. In some cases, the Company could be required to apply a new or revised standard retroactively, resulting in the restatement of financial statements for prior periods. Such changes could also require the Company to incur additional personnel or technology costs. For information regarding recent accounting pronouncements and their effects on the Company, see “Recent Accounting Pronouncements” in Note 2 of the Company’s audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2019.

Failure to maintain effective systems of internal and disclosure control could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operation and financial condition.

Effective internal and disclosure controls are necessary for the Company to provide reliable financial reports and effectively prevent fraud and to operate successfully as a public company. The Bank is already required to establish and maintain an adequate internal control structure over financial reporting pursuant to FDIC regulations. As a public company, the Company will be required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to design and maintain a system of internal control over financial reporting and, beginning with its second annual report on Form 10-K, include management’s assessment regarding internal control over financial reporting. If the Company cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, its reputation and operating results would be harmed. As part of the Company’s ongoing monitoring of internal control, it may discover material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in its internal control that require remediation. A “material weakness” is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of a company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

The Company’s inability to maintain the operating effectiveness of the controls described above could result in a material misstatement to the Company’s financial statements or other disclosures, which could have an adverse effect on its business, financial condition or results of operations. In addition, any failure to maintain effective controls in accordance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and FDIC regulations or to timely effect any necessary improvement of the Company’s internal and disclosure controls could, among other things, result in losses from fraud or error, harm the Company’s reputation or cause investors to lose confidence in its reported financial information, all of which could have a material adverse effect on its results of operation and financial condition.

The Company qualifies as an “emerging growth company,” and the reduced reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies may make its common stock less attractive to investors.

The Company qualifies as an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the federal securities laws. For as long as it continues to be an emerging growth company, the Company may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in periodic reports and proxy statements and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden

parachute payments not previously approved. In addition, as an emerging growth company the Company has elected to take advantage of the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to a company that is not an issuer (as defined under Section 2(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act), if such standards apply to companies that are not issuers. This may make the Company’s financial statements not comparable with other public companies that are not emerging growth companies or that are emerging growth companies that have opted out of the extended transition period because of the potential differences in accounting standards used. The Company could be an emerging growth company for up to five years, although it could lose that status sooner if its gross revenues exceed $1.07 billion, if it issues more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt in a three-year period, or if the market value of its common stock held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of any June 30 before that time, in which case the Company would no longer be an emerging growth company as of the following December 31. The Company cannot predict if investors will find its common stock less attractive because it may rely on these exemptions, or if it chooses to rely on additional exemptions in the future. If some investors find the Company’s common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for its common stock and its stock price may be more volatile.

The Company also qualifies as a “smaller reporting company,” and the reduced disclosure obligations applicable to smaller reporting companies may makes its common stock less attractive to investors.

The Company also is a “smaller reporting company,” as defined in federal securities laws, and will remain a smaller reporting company until the fiscal year following the determination that its voting and non-voting common shares held by non-affiliates is more than $250 million measured on the last business day of its second fiscal quarter, or its annual revenues are less than $100 million during the most recently completed fiscal year and its voting and non-voting common shares held by non-affiliates is more than $700 million measured on the last business day of its second fiscal quarter. Similar to emerging growth companies, smaller reporting companies have reduced disclosure obligations, such as an exemption from providing selected financial data and an ability to provide simplified executive compensation information and only two years of audited financial statements. If the Company is a smaller reporting company at the time it ceases to be an emerging growth company, it may continue to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are available to smaller reporting companies. If some investors find the Company’s common stock less attractive because it may rely on these reduced disclosure obligations, there may be a less active trading market for its common stock and its stock price may be more volatile.

The Company faces strong and growing competition from financial services companies and other companies that offer banking and other financial services, which could negatively affect the Company’s business.

The Company encounters substantial competition from other financial institutions in its market area and competition is increasing. Ultimately, the Company may not be able to compete successfully against current and future competitors. Many competitors offer the same banking services that the Company offers in its service area. These competitors include national, regional and community banks. The Company also faces competition from many other types of financial institutions, including finance companies, mutual and money market fund providers, brokerage firms, insurance companies, credit unions, financial subsidiaries of certain industrial corporations, financial technology companies and mortgage companies. Increased competition may result in reduced business for the Company.

Additionally, banks and other financial institutions with larger capitalization and financial intermediaries not subject to bank regulatory restrictions have larger lending limits and are thereby able to serve the credit needs of larger customers. Areas of competition include interest rates for loans and deposits, efforts to obtain loans and deposits, and range and quality of products and services provided, including new technology-driven products and services. If the Company is unable to attract and retain banking customers, it may be unable to continue to grow loan and deposit portfolios and its results of operations and financial condition may otherwise be adversely affected.

Combining the Company and VCB may be more difficult, costly or time-consuming than expected.

The success of the Company’s acquisition of VCB will depend, in part, on the Company’s ability to realize the anticipated benefits and cost savings from combining the businesses of the Company and VCB. To realize such anticipated benefits and cost savings, the Company must successfully combine the businesses of the Company and VCB in a manner that permits growth opportunities and cost savings to be realized without materially disrupting existing customer relationships or decreasing revenues due to loss of customers. If the Company is not able to achieve these objectives, the anticipated benefits and cost savings of the merger may not be realized fully, or at all, or may take longer to realize than expected.

Until the completion of the merger in December 2019, the Company and VCB operated independently. To realize anticipated benefits from the merger, the Company will continue to integrate VCB’s business into its own. The integration process could result in the loss of key employees, the disruption of the Company’s ongoing business, or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures and policies that affect adversely the Company’s ability to maintain relationships with

customers and employees or achieve the anticipated benefits of the merger. The loss of key employees could adversely affect the Company’s ability to conduct business in the markets it entered in connection with its acquisition of VCB, which could have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial results and the value of its common stock. If the Company experiences difficulties with the integration process, the anticipated benefits of the merger may not be realized, fully or at all, or may take longer to realize than expected, which could have a material adverse effect on its results of operation and financial condition.

The Company may not be able to effectively integrate the operations of the Bank and Virginia Community Bank.

The future operating performance of the Bank will depend, in part, on the success of the merger of the Bank and Virginia Community Bank. The success of the bank merger depends on a number of factors, including the Company’s ability to (i) integrate operations and branches, (ii) retain deposits and customers, (iii) control the incremental increase in noninterest expense arising from the merger, and (iv) retain and integrate appropriate personnel and reduce overlapping personnel. The continued integration of the Bank and Virginia Community Bank will require the dedication of the time and resources of the Company’s management team and may temporarily distract the management team’s attention from the day-to-day business of the Company and the Bank. If the Bank and Virginia Community Bank are unable to successfully integrate, the Bank may not be able to realize expected operating efficiencies and eliminate redundant costs.

The Company may not be able to successfully manage its long-term growth, which may adversely affect its results of operations and financial condition.

A key aspect of the Company’s long-term business strategy is its continued growth and expansion. The Company’s ability to continue to grow depends, in part, upon its ability to (i) open new branch offices or acquire existing branches or other financial institutions, (ii) attract deposits to those locations, and (iii) identify attractive loan and investment opportunities.

The Company may not be able to successfully implement its growth strategy if it is unable to identify attractive markets, locations or opportunities to expand in the future, or if the Company is subject to regulatory restrictions on growth or expansion of its operations. The Company’s ability to manage its growth successfully also will depend on whether it can maintain capital levels adequate to support its growth, maintain cost controls and asset quality and successfully integrate any businesses the Company acquires into its organization. As the Company identifies opportunities to implement its growth strategy by opening new branches or acquiring branches or other banks, it may incur increased personnel, occupancy and other operating expenses. In the case of new branches, the Company must absorb those higher expenses while it begins to generate new deposits, and there is a further time lag involved in redeploying new deposits into attractively priced loans and other higher yielding assets.

The Company may consider acquiring other businesses or expanding into new product lines that it believes will help it fulfill its strategic objectives. The Company expects that other banking and financial companies, some of which have significantly greater resources, will compete with it to acquire financial services businesses. This competition could increase prices for potential acquisitions that the Company believes are attractive. Acquisitions may also be subject to various regulatory approvals. If the Company fails to receive the appropriate regulatory approvals, it will not be able to consummate acquisitions that it believes are in its best interests.

When the Company enters into new markets or new lines of business, its lack of history and familiarity with those markets, clients and lines of business may lead to unexpected challenges or difficulties that inhibit its success. The Company’s plans to expand could depress earnings in the short run, even if it efficiently executes a growth strategy leading to long-term financial benefits.

The Company depends on the accuracy and completeness of information about clients and counterparties and the Company’s financial condition could be adversely affected if it relies on misleading or incorrect information.

In deciding whether to extend credit or to enter into other transactions with clients and counterparties, the Company may rely on information furnished to it by or on behalf of clients and counterparties, including financial statements and other financial information, which it does not independently verify. The Company also may rely on representations of clients and counterparties as to the accuracy and completeness of that information and, with respect to financial statements, on reports of independent auditors. For example, in deciding whether to extend credit to clients, the Company may assume that a client’s audited financial statements conform with GAAP and present fairly, in all material respects, the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of that client. The Company’s financial condition and results of operations could be negatively impacted to the extent it relies on financial statements that do not comply with GAAP or are materially misleading.

The Company’s success depends on its management team, and the unexpected loss of any of these personnel could adversely affect operations.

The Company’s success is, and is expected to remain, highly dependent on its management team. This is particularly true because, as a community bank, the Company depends on the management team’s ties to the community and customer relationships to generate business. The Company’s growth will continue to place significant demands on management, and the loss of any such person’s services may have an adverse effect upon growth and profitability. If the Company fails to retain or continue to recruit qualified employees, growth and profitability could be adversely affected.

The success of the Company’s strategy depends on its ability to identify and retain individuals with experience and relationships in its markets.

In order to be successful, the Company must identify and retain experienced key management members and sales staff with local expertise and relationships. Competition for qualified personnel is intense and there is a limited number of qualified persons with knowledge of and experience in the community banking and mortgage industry in the Company’s chosen geographic market. Even if the Company identifies individuals that it believes could assist it in building its franchise, it may be unable to recruit these individuals away from their current employers. In addition, the process of identifying and recruiting individuals with the combination of skills and attributes required to carry out the Company’s strategy is often lengthy. The Company’s inability to identify, recruit and retain talented personnel could limit its growth and could materially adversely affect its business, financial condition and results of operations.

The Company relies on other companies to provide key components of its business infrastructure.

Third parties provide key components of the Company’s business operations such as data processing, recording and monitoring transactions, online banking interfaces and services, internet connections and network access. While the Company has selected these third-party vendors carefully, it does not control their actions. Any problem caused by these third parties, including poor performance of services, failure to provide services, disruptions in communication services provided by a vendor and failure to handle current or higher volumes, could adversely affect the Company’s ability to deliver products and services to its customers and otherwise conduct its business, and may harm its reputation. Financial or operational difficulties of a third-party vendor could also hurt the Company’s operations if those difficulties interface with the vendor’s ability to serve the Company. Replacing these third-party vendors could also create significant delay and expense. Accordingly, use of such third-parties creates an unavoidable inherent risk to the Company’s business operations.

The soundness of other financial institutions could adversely affect the Company.

The Company’s ability to engage in routine funding transactions could be adversely affected by the actions and commercial soundness of other financial institutions. Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty or other relationships. The Company has exposure to many different industries and counterparties, and routinely executes transactions with counterparties in the financial industry. As a result, defaults by, or even rumors or questions about, one or more financial services institutions, or the financial services industry generally, have led to market-wide liquidity problems and could lead to losses or defaults by the Company or by other institutions. Many of these transactions expose the Company to credit risk in the event of default of its counterparty or client. In addition, credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral held cannot be realized upon or is liquidated at prices insufficient to recover the full amount of the financial instrument exposure due. There is no assurance that any such losses would not materially and adversely affect results of operations.

The Company is subject to a variety of operational risks, including reputational risk, legal and compliance risk, and the risk of fraud or theft by employees or outsiders.

The Company is exposed to many types of operational risks, including reputational risk, legal and compliance risk, the risk of fraud or theft by employees or outsiders, unauthorized transactions by employees, operational errors, clerical or record-keeping errors, and errors resulting from faulty or disabled computer or communications systems.

Reputational risk, or the risk to the Company’s earnings and capital from negative public opinion, could result from the Company’s actual or alleged conduct in any number of activities, including lending practices, corporate governance, and from actions taken by government regulators and community organizations in response to those activities. Negative public opinion can adversely affect the Company’s ability to attract and keep customers and employees and can expose it to litigation and regulatory action.

Further, if any of the Company’s financial, accounting, or other data processing systems fail or have other significant issues, the Company could be adversely affected. The Company depends on internal systems and outsourced technology to support these data storage and processing operations. The Company’s inability to use or access these information systems at critical points in time could unfavorably impact the timeliness and efficiency of the Company’s business operations. It could be adversely affected if one of its employees causes a significant operational break-down or failure, either as a result of human error or where an individual purposefully sabotages or fraudulently manipulates its operations or systems. The Company is also at risk of the impact of natural disasters, terrorism and international hostilities on its systems and from the effects of outages or other failures involving power or communications systems operated by others. The Company may also be subject to disruptions of its operating systems arising from events that are wholly or partially beyond its control (for example, computer viruses or electrical or communications outages), which may give rise to disruption of service to customers and to financial loss or liability. In addition, there have been instances where financial institutions have been victims of fraudulent activity in which criminals pose as customers to initiate wire and automated clearinghouse transactions out of customer accounts. Although the Company has policies and procedures in place to verify the authenticity of its customers, it cannot guarantee that such policies and procedures will prevent all fraudulent transfers. Such activity can result in financial liability and harm to the Company’s reputation. If any of the foregoing risks materialize, it could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Pending litigation could result in a judgment against the Company resulting in the payment of damages.

On August 12, 2019, a former employee of VCB and participant in its Employee Stock Ownership Plan (the “ESOP”) filed a class action complaint against VCB, Virginia Community Bank, and certain individuals associated with the ESOP in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia, Charlottesville Division (Case No. 3:19-cv-00045-GEC). The complaint alleges, among other things, that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties to ESOP participants in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended. The complaint alleges that the ESOP incurred damages “that approach or exceed $12 million.” The Company automatically assumed any liability of VCB in connection with this litigation as a result of the Company’s acquisition of VCB. The outcome of this litigation is uncertain, and the plaintiff and other individuals may file additional lawsuits related to the ESOP. The defense, settlement, or adverse outcome of any such lawsuit or claim could have a material adverse financial impact on the Company.

The Company may be required to transition from the use of the LIBOR index in the future.

The Company has certain variable-rate loans indexed to LIBOR to calculate the loan interest rate. The United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority, which regulates LIBOR, has announced that the continued availability of LIBOR on the current basis is not guaranteed after 2021. It is impossible to predict whether and to what extent banks will continue to provide LIBOR submissions to the administrator of LIBOR or whether any additional reforms to LIBOR may be enacted in the United Kingdom or elsewhere. At this time, no consensus exists as to what rate or rates may become acceptable alternatives to LIBOR, and it is impossible to predict the effect of any such alternatives on the value of LIBOR-based variable-rate loans, as well as LIBOR-based securities, subordinated notes, trust preferred securities, or other securities or financial arrangements. The implementation of a substitute index or indices for the calculation of interest rates under the Company’s loan agreements with borrowers, subordinated notes that it has issued, or other financial arrangements may cause the Company to incur significant expenses in effecting the transition, may result in reduced loan balances if borrowers do not accept the substitute index or indices, and may result in disputes or litigation with customers or other counter-parties over the appropriateness or comparability to LIBOR of the substitute index or indices, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations.

In the ordinary course of business, the Company collects and stores sensitive data, including proprietary business information and personally identifiable information of its customers and employees in systems and on networks. The secure processing, maintenance, and use of this information is critical to operations and the Company’s business strategy. The Company has invested in accepted technologies, and continually reviews processes and practices that are designed to protect its networks, computers, and data from damage or unauthorized access. Despite these security measures, the Company’s computer systems and infrastructure may be vulnerable to attacks by hackers or breached due to employee error, malfeasance or other disruptions. A breach of any kind could compromise systems and the information stored there could be accessed, damaged or disclosed. A breach in security could result in legal claims, regulatory penalties, disruption in operations, and damage to the Company’s reputation, which could adversely affect its business and financial condition. Furthermore, as cyber threats continue to evolve and increase, the Company may be required to expend significant additional financial and operational resources to modify or enhance its protective measures, or to investigate and remediate any identified information security vulnerabilities.

In addition, multiple major U.S. retailers have experienced data systems incursions reportedly resulting in the thefts of credit and debit card information, online account information and other financial or privileged data. Retailer incursions affect cards issued and deposit accounts maintained by many banks, including the Bank. Although the Company’s systems are not breached in retailer incursions, these events can cause it to reissue a significant number of cards and take other costly steps to avoid significant theft loss to the Company and its customers. In some cases, the Company may be required to reimburse customers for the losses they incur. Other possible points of intrusion or disruption not within the Company’s control include internet service providers, electronic mail portal providers, social media portals, distant-server (cloud) service providers, electronic data security providers, telecommunications companies, and smart phone manufacturers.

Consumers may increasingly decide not to use banks to complete their financial transactions, which would have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition and operations.

Technology and other changes are allowing parties to complete financial transactions through alternative methods that historically have involved banks. For example, consumers can now maintain funds that would have historically been held as bank deposits in brokerage accounts, mutual funds or general-purpose reloadable prepaid cards. Consumers can also complete transactions such as paying bills or transferring funds directly without the assistance of banks. The process of eliminating banks as intermediaries, known as “disintermediation,” could result in the loss of fee income, as well as the loss of customer deposits and the related income generated from those deposits. The loss of these revenue streams and the lower cost of deposits as a source of funds could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

The Company’s ability to operate profitably may be dependent on its ability to integrate or introduce various technologies into its operations.

The market for financial services, including banking and consumer finance services, is increasingly affected by advances in technology, including developments in telecommunications, data processing, computers, automation, online banking and tele-banking. The Company’s ability to compete successfully in its market may depend on the extent to which it is able to implement or exploit such technological changes. If the Company is not able to afford such technologies, properly or timely anticipate or implement such technologies, or effectively train its staff to use such technologies, its business, financial condition or operating results could be adversely affected.

The Company relies upon independent appraisals to determine the value of the real estate that secures a significant portion of its loans and the value of foreclosed properties carried on its books, and the values indicated by such appraisals may not be realizable if it is forced to foreclose upon such loans or liquidate such foreclosed property.

As indicated above, a significant portion of the Company’s loan portfolio consists of loans secured by real estate and it also holds a portfolio of foreclosed properties. The Company relies upon independent appraisers to estimate the value of such real estate. Appraisals are only estimates of value and the independent appraisers may make mistakes of fact or judgment that adversely affect the reliability of their appraisals. In addition, events occurring after the initial appraisal may cause the value of the real estate to increase or decrease. As a result of any of these factors, the real estate securing some of the Company’s loans and the foreclosed properties held by the Company may be more or less valuable than anticipated. If a default occurs on a loan secured by real estate that is less valuable than originally estimated, the Company may not be able to recover the outstanding balance of the loan. It may also be unable to sell its foreclosed properties for the values estimated by their appraisals.

The Company is exposed to risk of environmental liabilities with respect to properties to which it takes title.

In the course of its business, the Company may foreclose and take title to real estate, potentially becoming subject to environmental liabilities associated with the properties. The Company may be held liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation and clean-up costs or the Company may be required to investigate or clean up hazardous or toxic substances or chemical releases at a property. Costs associated with investigation or remediation activities can be substantial. If the Company is the owner or former owner of a contaminated site, it may be subject to common law claims by third parties based on damages and costs resulting from environmental contamination emanating from the property. These costs and claims could adversely affect the Company’s business.

The Company is not obligated to pay dividends and its ability to pay dividends is limited.

The Company’s ability to make dividend payments on its common stock depends primarily on certain regulatory considerations and the receipt of dividends and other distributions from the Bank. There are various regulatory restrictions on the ability of banks, such as the Bank, to pay dividends or make other payments to their holding companies. The Company is

currently paying a quarterly cash dividend to holders of its common stock at a rate of $0.1425 per share. Although the Company has historically paid a cash dividend to the holders of its common stock, holders of its common stock are not entitled to receive dividends, and the Company is not obligated to pay dividends in any particular amounts or at any particular times. Regulatory, economic and other factors may cause the Company’s board to consider, among other things, the reduction of dividends paid on its common stock. See “Business – Supervision and Regulation – Dividends.”

The Company’s common stock is thinly traded, and a more liquid market for its common stock may not develop, which may limit the ability of shareholders to sell their shares and may increase price volatility.

The Company’s common stock is listed on the NYSE American market under the symbol “BRBS.” The Company’s common stock is thinly traded and has substantially less liquidity than the trading markets for many other bank holding companies. Although the Company recently listed its common stock on the NYSE American market, the Company may be unable to maintain the listing of its common stock in the future. In addition, there can be no assurance that an active trading market for shares of the Company’s common stock will develop or if one develops, that it can be sustained. The development of a liquid public market depends on the existence of willing buyers and sellers, the presence of which is not within the Company’s control. Therefore, the Company’s shareholders may not be able to sell their shares at the volume, prices, or times that they desire. Shareholders should be financially prepared and able to hold shares for an indefinite period.

In addition, thinly traded stocks can be more volatile than more widely traded stocks. The Company’s stock price has been volatile in the past and several factors could cause the price to fluctuate substantially in the future. These factors include, but are not limited to, changes in analysts’ recommendations or projections, developments related to the Company’s business and operations, stock performance of other companies deemed to be peers, news reports of trends, concerns, irrational exuberance on the part of investors, and other issues related to the financial services industry. The Company’s stock price may fluctuate significantly in the future, and these fluctuations may be unrelated to its performance. General market declines or market volatility in the future, especially in the financial institutions sector of the economy, could adversely affect the price of the Company’s common stock, and the current market price may not be indicative of future market prices.

The Company’s governing documents and Virginia law contain provisions that may discourage or delay an acquisition of the Company even if such acquisition or transaction is supported by shareholders.

Certain provisions of the Company’s articles of incorporation could delay or make a merger, tender offer or proxy contest involving the Company more difficult, even in instances where the shareholders deem the proposed transaction to be beneficial to their interests. One provision, among others, provides that a plan of merger, share exchange, sale of all or substantially all of the Company’s assets, or similar transaction must be approved and recommended by the affirmative vote of 80% of the outstanding capital stock of the Company entitled to vote on the transaction if the transaction is with a corporation, person or entity that is a beneficial owner, directly or indirectly, of more than 5% of the shares of capital stock of the Company. In addition, certain provisions of state and federal law may also have the effect of discouraging or prohibiting a future takeover attempt in which the Company’s shareholders might otherwise receive a substantial premium for their shares over then-current market prices. To the extent that these provisions discourage or prevent takeover attempts, they may tend to reduce the market price for the Company’s common stock.

The rights of holders of the Company’s common stock are subordinate in some respects to the rights of holders of the Company’s debt securities.

As of December 31, 2019, the Company had $10 million of subordinated notes outstanding and may issue more debt securities or otherwise incur debt in the future. The rights of holders of the Company’s debt to receive payments are superior to the rights of the holders of the Company’s common stock to receive payments of dividends and payments upon a sale or liquidation of the Company. In addition, the agreements under which the subordinated notes were issued prohibit the Company from paying any dividends on its common stock or making any other distributions to its shareholders upon its failure to make any required payment of principal or interest or during the continuance of an event of default under the applicable agreement. Events of default generally consist of, among other things, certain events of bankruptcy, insolvency or liquidation relating to the Company. If the Company were to fail to make a required payment of principal or interest on its subordinated notes, it could have a material adverse effect on the market value of the Company’s common stock.

The Company’s common stock is not a bank deposit and, therefore, it is not insured against loss by the FDIC or by any other public or private entity. An investment in the Company’s common stock is inherently risky for the reasons described in this “Risk Factors” section and elsewhere in this report and is subject to the same market forces that affect the price of common stock in any company and, as a result, shareholders may lose some or all of their investment.

The Company, through its subsidiaries, owns or leases buildings and office space that are used in the normal course of business. The headquarters of the Company is located at 1807 Seminole Trail, Charlottesville, Virginia, in a building leased by the Bank. The headquarters of the Bank is located at 1 East Market Street, Martinsville, Virginia 24112 in a building leased by the Bank.

Unless otherwise noted, the properties listed below are owned by the Company and its subsidiaries as of December 31, 2019.

The Company’s properties are maintained in good operating condition and the Company believes the properties are suitable and adequate for its operational needs.

In the ordinary course of its operations, the Company is a party to various legal proceedings. As of the date of this report, there are no pending or threatened proceedings against the Company, other than as set forth below, that, if determined adversely, would have a material effect on the business, results of operations, or financial position of the Company.

On August 12, 2019, a former employee of VCB and participant in its ESOP filed a class action complaint against VCB, Virginia Community Bank, and certain individuals associated with the ESOP in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia, Charlottesville Division (Case No. 3:19-cv-00045-GEC). The complaint alleges, among other things, that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties to ESOP participants in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended. The complaint alleges that the ESOP incurred damages “that approach or exceed $12 million.” The Company automatically assumed any liability of VCB in connection with this litigation as a result of the Company’s acquisition of VCB. The Company believes the claims are without merit.

ITEM 5: MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

The Company’s common stock is listed on the NYSE American market under the symbol “BRBS.” There were 5,660,985 shares of the Company’s common stock outstanding at the close of business on April 14, 2020, which were held by approximately 650 shareholders of record.

A discussion of certain restrictions and limitations on the ability of the Bank to pay dividends to the Company, and the ability of the Company to pay dividends to shareholders of its common stock, is set forth in Part I, Item 1, Business, of this Form 10-K under the heading “Supervision and Regulation.” The Company paid four quarterly dividends of $0.1425 per share during 2019.

The dividend type, amount, and timing are established by the Company’s board of directors. In making its decisions regarding the payment of dividends on the Company’s common stock, the board of directors considers operating results, financial condition, capital adequacy, regulatory requirements, shareholder return, and other factors.


(Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)	2019		2018		2017		2016		2015
Income Statement Data:
Interest and Dividend Income	$	30,888	$	22,437	$	18,481	$	13,435	$	10,669
Interest Expense		9,520		5,152		3,931		3,081		2,045
Net Interest Income		21,368		17,285		14,550		10,354		8,624
Provision for Loan Losses		1,742		1,225		1,095		926		320
Net Interest Income After Provision for Loan Losses		19,626		16,060		13,455		9,428		8,304
Noninterest Income		18,796		10,123		7,799		2,490		1,145
Noninterest Expenses		32,845		20,464		15,847		10,676		5,903
Income before income taxes		5,577		5,719		5,407		1,242		3,546
Income tax expense		973		1,147		2,057		553		1,048
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest		(24)		(13)		-		-		-
Net income attributable to Blue Ridge Bankshares, Inc.	$	4,580	$	4,559	$	3,350	$	689	$	2,498
Per Common Share Data:
Net income-basic	$	1.10	$	1.64	$	1.22	$	0.31	$	1.19
Net income-diluted		1.10		1.64		1.22		0.31		1.19
Dividends declared		0.5700		0.5400		0.3200		0.3130		0.3070
Book value per common share		16.32		14.11		13.10		12.29		11.46
Balance Sheet Data:
Assets	$	960,811	$	539,590	$	424,122	$	418,124	$	268,910
Loans held for investment		646,834		414,868		330,805		319,628		207,284
Loans held for sale		55,646		29,233		17,220		24,656		9,315
Securities		128,897		58,750		48,995		42,607		37,957
Deposits		722,030		415,027		339,290		340,874		196,492
Subordinated Debt, net		9,800		9,766		9,733		9,699		9,665
Other borrowed funds		124,800		73,100		36,045		32,623		37,959
Stockholder's equity		92,337		39,621		36,442		33,627		24,101
Average common shares outstanding - basic		4,147		2,779		2,752		2,228		2,056
Average common shares outstanding - diluted		4,147		2,779		2,752		2,228		2,056
Financial Ratios:
Return on average assets		0.61%		0.95%		0.80%		0.20%		0.98%
Return on average equity		6.94%		12.02%		9.56%		2.39%		10.22%
Net interest margin		3.34%		3.88%		3.73%		3.14%		3.58%
Efficiency ratio		85.48%		78.16%		74.56%		89.58%		62.47%
Dividend payout ratio		51.82%		32.93%		26.23%		100.97%		25.80%
Capital and Credit Quality Ratios:
Average Equity to Average Assets		8.79%		7.89%		8.32%		8.40%		9.62%
Allowance for loan losses to loans held for investment		0.71%		0.86%		0.85%		0.63%		1.13%
Nonperforming loans to total assets		0.54%		1.39%		1.78%		0.29%		0.15%
Nonperforming assets to total assets		0.54%		1.42%		1.83%		0.44%		0.18%
Net charge-offs to total loans held for investment		0.12%		0.11%		0.09%		0.39%		0.05%

ITEM 7: MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following presents management’s discussion and analysis of the Company’s consolidated financial condition and the results of the Company’s operations. This discussion should be read in conjunction with the Company’s consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto presented in Item 8, Financial Statements and Supplementary Information, of this Form 10-K.

We make certain forward-looking statements in this Form 10-K that are subject to risks and uncertainties. These forward-looking statements represent plans, estimates, objectives, goals, guidelines, expectations, intentions, projections and statements of our beliefs concerning future events, business plans, objectives, expected operating results and the assumptions upon which those statements are based. Forward-looking statements include without limitation, any statement that may predict, forecast, indicate or imply future results, performance or achievements, and are typically identified with words such as “may,” “could,” “should,” “will,” “would,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “aim,” “intend,” “plan,” or words or phases of similar meaning. We caution that the forward-looking statements are based largely on our expectations and are subject to a number of known and unknown risks and uncertainties that are subject to change based on factors which are, in many instances, beyond our control. Actual results, performance or achievements could differ materially from those contemplated, expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.

The following factors, among others, could cause our financial performance to differ materially from that expressed in such forward-looking statements:

The foregoing factors should not be considered exhaustive and should be read together with other cautionary statements that are included in this Form 10-K, including those discussed in the section entitled "Risk Factors" in Item 1A above. If one or more of the factors affecting our forward-looking information and statements proves incorrect, then our actual results, performance or achievements could differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, forward-looking information and statements contained in this Form 10-K. Therefore, we caution you not to place undue reliance on our forward-looking information and statements. We will not update the forward-looking statements to reflect actual results or changes in the factors affecting the forward-looking statements. New risks and uncertainties may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for us to predict their occurrence or how they will affect us.

The accounting principles Blue Ridge applies under GAAP are complex and require management to apply significant judgment to various accounting, reporting and disclosure matters. Management must use assumptions, judgments and estimates when applying these principles where precise measurements are not possible or practical. These policies are critical because they are highly dependent upon subjective or complex judgments, assumptions and estimates. Changes in such judgments, assumptions and estimates may have a significant impact on the consolidated financial statements. Actual results, in fact, could differ from initial estimates.

The accounting policies Blue Ridge views as critical are those relating to judgments, assumptions and estimates regarding the determination of the allowance for loan losses, the fair value measurements of certain assets and liabilities, and accounting for other real estate owned.

The allowance for loan losses is maintained at a level believed to be adequate by Blue Ridge to absorb probable losses inherent in the portfolio and is based on the size and current risk characteristics of the loan portfolio, an assessment of individual problem loans and actual loss experience, current economic events in specific industries and other pertinent factors such as regulatory guidance and general economic conditions. The allowance is established through a provision for loan losses charged to earnings. Loans identified as losses and deemed uncollectible by management are charged to the allowance. Subsequent recoveries, if any, are credited to the allowance. The allowance for loan losses is evaluated on a regular basis by management.

The allowance consists of specific, general and unallocated components. The specific component relates to loans that are classified as impaired, for which an allowance is established when the fair value of the loan is lower than its carrying value. The general component covers non-impaired loans and is based on historical loss experience adjusted for qualitative factors. Historical losses are categorized into risk-similar loan pools and a loss ratio factor is applied to each group’s loan balances to determine the allocation.

Qualitative and environmental factors include external risk factors that Blue Ridge believes affects its overall lending environment. Environmental factors that Blue Ridge routinely analyzes include levels and trends in delinquencies and impaired loans, levels and trends in charge-offs and recoveries, trends in volume and terms of loans, effects of changes in risk selection and underwriting practices, experience, ability, depth of lending management and staff, national and local economic trends, conditions such as unemployment rates, housing statistics, banking industry conditions, and the effect of changes in credit concentrations. Determination of the allowance is inherently subjective as it requires significant estimates, including the amounts and timing of expected future cash flows on impaired loans, estimated losses on pools of homogeneous loans

based on historical loss experience and consideration of current economic trends, all of which may be susceptible to significant change.

Credit losses are an inherent part of the Company’s business and, although Blue Ridge believes the methodologies for determining the allowance for loan losses and the current level of the allowance are appropriate, it is possible that there may be unidentified losses in the portfolio at any particular time that may become evident at a future date pursuant to additional internal analysis or regulatory comment. Additional provisions for such losses, if necessary, would be recorded, and would negatively impact earnings.

Acquired loans accounted for under Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 310-30

For our acquired loans, to the extent that we experience a deterioration in borrower credit quality resulting in a decrease in our expected cash flows subsequent to the acquisition of the loans, an allowance for loan losses would be established based on our previously described allowance methodology

Subsequent to the acquisition date, we establish our allowance for loan losses through a provision for loan losses based upon an evaluation process that is similar to our evaluation process used for originated loans. This evaluation, which includes a review of loans on which full collectability may not be reasonably assured, considers, among other factors, the estimated fair value of the underlying collateral, economic conditions, historical net loan loss experience, carrying value of the loans, which includes the remaining net purchase discount or premium, and other factors that warrant recognition in determining our allowance for loan losses.

Purchased credit-impaired ("PCI") loans, which are the loans acquired in our acquisition of Virginia Community Bank, are loans acquired at a discount (that is due, in part, to credit quality). These loans are initially recorded at fair value (as determined by the present value of expected future cash flows) with no allowance for loan losses. We account for interest income on all loans acquired at a discount (that is due, in part, to credit quality) based on the acquired loans' expected cash flows. The acquired loans may be aggregated and accounted for as a pool of loans if the loans being aggregated have common risk characteristics. A pool is accounted for as a single asset with a single composite interest rate and an aggregate expectation of cash flow. The difference between the cash flows expected at acquisition and the investment in the loans, or the "accretable yield," is recognized as interest income utilizing the level-yield method over the life of each pool. Increases in expected cash flows subsequent to the acquisition are recognized prospectively through adjustment of the yield on the pool over its remaining life, while decreases in expected cash flows are recognized as impairment through a loss provision and an increase in the allowance for loan losses. Therefore, the allowance for loan losses on these impaired pools reflect only losses incurred after the acquisition (representing the present value of all cash flows that were expected at acquisition but currently are not expected to be received).

We periodically evaluate the remaining contractual required payments due and estimates of cash flows expected to be collected. These evaluations, performed quarterly, require the continued use of key assumptions and estimates, similar to the initial estimate of fair value. Changes in the contractual required payments due and estimated cash flows expected to be collected may result in changes in the accretable yield and non-accretable difference or reclassifications between accretable yield and the non-accretable difference. On an aggregate basis, if the acquired pools of PCI loans perform better than originally expected, we would expect to receive more future cash flows than originally modeled at the acquisition date. For the pools with better than expected cash flows, the forecasted increase would be recorded as an additional accretable yield that is recognized as a prospective increase to our interest income on loans.

Blue Ridge determines the fair values of financial instruments based on the fair value hierarchy, which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. The standard describes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value. the Company’s investment securities available-for-sale are recorded at fair value using reliable and unbiased evaluations by an industry-wide valuation service. This service uses evaluated pricing models that vary based on asset class and include available trade, bid, and other market information. Generally, the methodology includes broker quotes, proprietary models, vast descriptive terms and conditions databases, as well as extensive quality control programs. Depending on the availability of observable inputs and prices,

different valuation models could produce materially different fair value estimates. The values presented may not represent future fair values and may not be realizable.

Real estate acquired through, or in lieu of, foreclosure is held for sale and is stated at fair value of the property, less estimated disposal costs, if any. Any excess of cost over the fair value less costs to sell at the time of acquisition is charged to the allowance for loan losses. The fair value is reviewed periodically by management and any write downs are charged against current earnings.

Blue Ridge qualifies as an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the federal securities laws. For as long as it continues to be an emerging growth company, Blue Ridge may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in periodic reports and proxy statements, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. In addition, as an emerging growth company, Blue Ridge has elected to take advantage of the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to a company that is not an issuer (as defined under Section 2(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act), if such standards apply to companies that are not issuers. This may make the Company’s financial statements not comparable with other public companies that are not emerging growth companies or that are emerging growth companies that have opted out of the extended transition period because of the potential differences in accounting standards used. Blue Ridge could be an emerging growth company for up to five years, although it could lose that status sooner if its gross revenues exceed $1.07 billion, if it issues more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt in a three-year period, or if the market value of its common stock held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of any June 30 before that time, in which case Blue Ridge would no longer be an emerging growth company as of the following December 31.

Comparison of Results of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2019 and 2018

For the year ended December 31, 2019, Blue Ridge reported net income of $4.8 million, compared to $4.6 million reported for 2018. Basic and diluted earnings per share were $1.14 in 2019 compared to $1.64 in 2018.

Net Interest Income. Net interest income is the excess of interest earned on loans and investments over the interest paid on deposits and borrowings and is the Company’s primary revenue source. Net interest income is thereby affected by overall balance sheet growth, changes in interest rates and changes in the mix of investments, loans, deposits and borrowings.

Net interest income was $21.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to $17.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. Net interest margin was 3.48% for the year ended December 31, 2019 compared to 3.88% for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase in net interest income in 2019 was primarily due to continued growth in the loan portfolio in addition to significant growth in the investment portfolio.

The following table shows the average balance sheets for each of the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017. In addition, the amounts of interest earned on interest-earning assets, with related yields, and interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities, with related rates, are shown.


	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2019								2018								2017
(Dollars in thousands)	Average Balance			Interest		Yield/ Rate			Average Balance			Interest		Yield/ Rate			Average Balance			Interest		Yield/ Rate
Assets:
Taxable investments (1)	$	103,698		$	3,286		3.17	%	$	46,940		$	1,574		3.35	%	$	36,031		$	1,132		3.14	%
Tax-free investments (1)		7,832			285		3.64	%		9,497			353		3.72	%		7,951			336		4.22	%
Total securities		111,530			3,571		3.20	%		56,437			1,927		3.42	%		43,982			1,468		3.34	%
Interest-bearing deposits in other banks		15,530			266		1.71	%		9,051			75		0.83	%		17,040			146		0.85	%
Federal funds sold		313			10		3.06	%		882			17		1.93	%		1,552			17		1.08	%
Loans available for sale		53,148			1,940		3.65	%		18,381			786		4.28	%		15,583			505		3.24	%
Loans held for investment (including loan fees) (2)		458,927			25,150		5.48	%		360,872			19,693		5.46	%		312,435			16,430		5.26	%
Total interest-earning assets		639,448			30,937		4.84	%		445,623			22,498		5.05	%		390,592			18,566		4.75	%
Less allowance for loan losses		(4,572	)							(3,580	)							(2,802	)
Total noninterest earning assets		41,611								21,597								20,079
Total assets	$	676,487							$	463,640							$	407,869
Liabilities and shareholders’ equity:
Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits	$	170,251		$	1,663		0.98	%	$	133,431		$	814		0.61	%	$	115,455		$	490		0.42	%
Time deposits		216,313			4,546		2.10	%		165,317			2,698		1.63	%		159,202			2,238		1.41	%
Total interest-bearing deposits		386,564			6,209		1.61	%		298,748			3,512		1.18	%		274,657			2,728		0.99	%
Other borrowings		121,201			3,310		2.73	%		53,509			1,640		3.06	%		37,168			1,203		3.24	%
Total interest-bearing liabilities		507,765			9,519		1.87	%		352,257			5,152		1.46	%		311,825			3,931		1.26	%
Other noninterest bearing liabilities		108,728								73,552								60,787
Shareholders’ equity		59,994								37,831								35,257
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity	$	676,487							$	463,640							$	407,869
Interest rate spread							2.96	%							3.59	%							3.49	%
Net interest income and margin				$	21,418		3.34	%				$	17,346		3.88	%				$	14,635		3.73	%

Interest income and expense are affected by changes in interest rates, by changes in the volumes of earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, and by changes in the mix of these assets and liabilities. The following rate-volume variance analysis shows the year-to-year changes in the components of net interest income:

	2019 compared to 2018									2018 compared to 2017
	Increase/(Decrease) Due to						Total Increase/ (Decrease)			Increase/(Decrease) Due to						Total Increase/ (Decrease)
(Dollars in thousands)	Volume			Rate			Total Increase/ (Decrease)			Volume			Rate			Total Increase/ (Decrease)
Interest Income
Taxable investments	$	1,904		$	(192	)	$	1,712		$	366		$	76		$	442
Tax-free investments		(62	)		(6	)		(68	)		57			(40	)		17
Interest bearing deposits in other banks		54			137			191			(66	)		(4	)		(70	)
Federal funds sold		(11	)		4			(7)			(13	)		13			—
Loans available for sale		1,486			(332	)		1,154			120			161			281
Loans held for investment		5,350			107			5,457			2,643			619			3,262
Total interest income	$	8,721		$	(282)		$	8,439		$	3,107		$	825		$	3,932

Interest Expense
Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits:	$	225		$	625		$	850		$	110			213		$	323
Time deposits		832			1,015			1,847			100			361			461
FHLB advances and other borrowings		2,074			(404	)		1,670			501			(64	)		(437	)
Total interest expense		3,131			1,236			4,367			711			510			1,221
Change in Net Interest Income	$	5,590		$	(1,518	)	$	4,072		$	2,396		$	315		$	2,711

Provision for Loan Losses. The provision for loan losses was $1.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2019 as compared to $1.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2018. Net charge-offs amounted to $750 thousand during the year ended December 31, 2019 and $448 thousand for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase in the provision for loan losses during 2019 compared to the like period in 2018 was due to overall loan portfolio growth as well as changes in portfolio mix.

Non-Interest Income. The Company’s non-interest income sources include deposit service charges and other fees, gains/losses on sales of mortgages, and income from bank owned life insurance. Non-interest income totaled $18.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to $10.1 million for the like period in 2018. The increase in non-interest income was largely due to an increase of $7.2 million related to the origination and sale of held for sale mortgages. Additionally, earnings on investment in life insurance increased $735 thousand largely due to Blue Ridge receiving life insurance proceeds. The following table provides detail for non-interest income for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018:

Non-Interest Expense. Non-interest expense totaled $32.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2019 as compared to $20.5 million for the same period in 2018, a 60.5% increase. This was primarily due to an increase in salaries and employee benefits of $7.5 million, or 63.2%, which was a result of Blue Ridge hiring individuals in key positions to expand its team, in addition to hiring individuals to lead its new branch in Greensboro, North Carolina, and expanding its mortgage operations in Northern Virginia. Additionally, occupancy expenses increased $924 thousand, or 57.2%, due to additional leased locations for the expanded mortgage division, and a full year of lease expense for the branch in Greensboro, North Carolina. Legal and other professional fees increased $1.4 million, or 329.8%, as a result of expenses associated with the acquisition of VCB. Data processing costs increased $791 thousand, or 71.3%, a majority of which is related to the fees associated with integrating VCB’s core processing system with Blue Ridge. The following table provides detail for non-interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018:


Virginia		54-1470908
State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization		I.R.S. Employer Identification No.

1807 Seminole Trail, Charlottesville, Virginia		22901
Address of Principal Executive Offices		Zip Code


Title of each class	Trading Symbol(s)	Name of each exchange on which registered
Common stock, no par value	BRBS	NYSE American


Large accelerated filer ☐	Accelerated filer ☐
Non-accelerated filer ☒	Smaller reporting company ☒
	Emerging growth company ☒


PART I

Item 1:	Business	1

Item 1A:	Risk Factors	12

Item 1B:	Unresolved Staff Comments	26

Item 2:	Properties	26

Item 3:	Legal Proceedings	26

Item 4:	Mine Safety Disclosures	26

PART II

Item 5:	Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Shareholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities	27

Item 6:	Selected Financial Data	27

Item 7:	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	28

Item 7A:	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk	45

Item 8:	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data	46

Item 9:	Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure	87

Item 9A:	Controls and Procedures	87

Item 9B:	Other Information	88

PART III

Item 10:	Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance	88

Item 11:	Executive Compensation	88

Item 12:	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters	88

Item 13:	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence	89

Item 14:	Principal Accounting Fees and Services	89

PART IV

Item 15:	Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules	89

Item 16:	Form 10-K Summary	91


	For the years ended December 31,
Non-Interest Income (in thousands)	2019			2018
Service charges on deposit accounts	$	651		$	635
Earnings on investment in life insurance		936			200
Mortgage brokerage income		4,046			2,724
Gain on sale of mortgages		10,387			4,541
Gain on disposal of assets		1			1
Gain on sale of securities		451			5
Loss on sale of OREO		(43	)		—
Gain on sale of guaranteed USDA loans		298			—
Small business investment company fund income		49			208
Payroll processing income through MoneyWise Payroll Solutions		980			1,015
Interchange income		642			513
Insurance income		97			—
Credit mark recovery income		200			200
Other income		101			81
Total Non-interest Income	$	18,796		$	10,123


	For the years ended December 31,
Non-Interest Expense (in thousands)	2019		2018
Salaries and employee benefits	$	19,328	$	11,843
Occupancy and equipment expenses		2,538		1,614
Data processing		1,902		1,111
Legal and other professional fees		1,778		413
Advertising expense		810		485
Communications		441		401

Section 1: 10-K (10-K)