Overview

Central Pacific Financial Corp. ("CPF") is a Hawaii corporation and a bank holding company. Our principal business is to serve as a holding company for our bank subsidiary, Central Pacific Bank. We refer to Central Pacific Bank herein as "our bank" or "the bank," and when we say "the Company," "we," "us" or "our," we mean the holding company on a consolidated basis with the bank and our other consolidated subsidiaries.

Central Pacific Bank is a full-service community bank with 34 branches and 117 ATMs located throughout the state of Hawaii. The bank offers a broad range of products and services including accepting time and demand deposits and originating loans, including commercial loans, construction loans, commercial and residential mortgage loans, and consumer loans.

Regulatory Actions

As previously reported, in May 2011, the regulatory Consent Order (the "Consent Order") that the bank entered into with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the "FDIC") and the Hawaii Division of Financial Institutions (the "DFI") on December 9, 2009 was lifted. In place of the Consent Order, the Board of Directors of the bank entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (the "Bank MOU") with the FDIC and DFI effective May 5, 2011. The Bank MOU continues a number of the same requirements previously required by the Consent Order, including the maintenance of an adequate allowance for loan and lease losses, improvement of our asset quality, limitations on credit extensions, maintenance of qualified management and the prohibition on cash dividends to CPF, among other matters. In addition, the Bank MOU requires the bank to further reduce classified assets below the level previously required by the Consent Order. The Bank MOU lowers the minimum leverage capital ratio that the bank is required to maintain from 10% in the Consent Order to 8% and does not mandate a minimum total risk-based capital ratio.

In addition to the Bank MOU, the Company continues to be subject to a Written Agreement (the "Written Agreement") with the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (the "FRBSF") and DFI dated July 2, 2010, which superseded in its entirety the Memorandum of Understanding that the Company entered into on April 1, 2009 with the FRBSF and DFI. Among other matters, the Written Agreement provides that unless we receive the consent of the FRBSF and DFI, we cannot:
(i) pay dividends; (ii) receive dividends or payments representing a reduction in capital from the bank; (iii) directly or through our non-bank subsidiaries make any payments on subordinated debentures or trust preferred securities;
(iv) directly or through any non-bank subsidiaries incur, increase or guarantee any debt; or (v) purchase or redeem any shares of our stock. The Written Agreement requires that our Board of Directors fully utilize the Company's financial and managerial resources to ensure that the bank complies with the Bank MOU and any other supervisory action taken by the bank's regulators. We were also required to submit to the FRBSF an acceptable capital plan and cash flow projection.

Even though the Consent Order has been replaced by the Bank MOU, the bank remains subject to a number of requirements as described above. We believe that we are in compliance in all material respects with the material terms of the Bank MOU and the Written Agreement and are meeting the timeline for compliance set out in such agreements subject to our continuing efforts to improve core earnings and reduce the level of our nonperforming assets. However, we cannot assure you whether or when the Company and the bank will be in full compliance with the agreements with the regulators or whether or when the Bank MOU or the Written Agreement will be terminated. Even if terminated, we may still be subject to other agreements with regulators that restrict our activities and may also continue to impose capital ratios or other requirements on our business. The requirements and restrictions of the Bank MOU and the Written Agreement are judicially enforceable and the Company or the bank's failure to comply with such requirements and restrictions may subject the Company and the bank to additional regulatory restrictions including: the imposition of a new consent order; the imposition of civil monetary penalties; the termination of insurance of deposits; the issuance of removal and prohibition orders against institution-affiliated parties; the appointment of a conservator or receiver for the bank; the issuance of directives to increase capital or enter into a strategic transaction, whether by merger or otherwise, with a third party, if we again fall below the capital ratio requirements; and the enforcement of such actions through injunctions or restraining orders.

Recovery Plan Progress

As previously disclosed, we adopted and implemented a recovery plan in March 2010 to improve our financial health by completing a significant recapitalization, reducing our credit risk exposure and returning to profitability by focusing on our core businesses and traditional markets in Hawaii.

Through June 30, 2012, we accomplished a number of key milestones in our recovery plan, including:

† On February 2, 2011, we effected a one-for-twenty reverse stock split of our common stock (the "Reverse Stock Split").

† On February 18, 2011, we successfully completed a $325 million capital raise (the "Private Placement"). Concurrently with the completion of the Private Placement, we exchanged our Troubled Assets Relief Program ("TARP") preferred stock and accrued and unpaid dividends thereon for common stock (the "TARP Exchange").

† On May 6, 2011, we successfully completed a $20 million Rights Offering (the "Rights Offering").

† In May 2011, the Consent Order was lifted and replaced with the Bank MOU.

† We improved our tier 1 risk-based capital, total risk-based capital, and leverage capital ratios as of June 30, 2012 to 23.04%, 24.32%, and 14.12%, respectively, from 22.48%, 23.80%, and 13.13%, respectively, as of June 30, 2011. Our capital ratios continue to exceed the minimum levels required by both the Bank MOU and the levels required for a "well-capitalized" regulatory designation.

† Maintained positive momentum from our turnaround in 2011 as we reported a sixth consecutive profitable quarter with net income of $10.8 million in the second quarter of 2012 and $4.6 million, $8.2 million, $11.6 million, $12.1 million and $13.5 million in the first, second, third and fourth quarters of 2011, and the first quarter of 2012, respectively.

† We had $40,000 in outstanding borrowings with the Federal Home Loan Bank of Seattle (the "FHLB") at June 30, 2012 compared to $50.0 million at December 31, 2011.

We intend to continue to execute on our recovery plan and focus on, among other things, improving our asset quality, increasing profitability from our banking operations, enhancing our cross-selling of products and services to our customers, improving our efficiency ratio and operating efficiencies and effectively competing in the Hawaii market.

Basis of Presentation

Management's discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with the accompanying consolidated financial statements under "Part I, Item 1. Financial Statements (Unaudited)." The following discussion should also be read in conjunction with the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011 filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on February 29, 2012.

Critical Accounting Policies

The preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America ("GAAP") requires that management make certain judgments and use certain estimates and assumptions that affect amounts reported and disclosures made. Accounting estimates are deemed critical when a different estimate could have reasonably been used or where changes in the estimate are reasonably likely to occur from period to period and would materially impact our consolidated financial statements as of or for the periods presented. Management has discussed the development and selection of the critical accounting estimates noted below with the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors, and the Audit Committee has reviewed the accompanying disclosures.

Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses

The allowance for loan and lease losses (the "Allowance") is management's estimate of credit losses inherent in our loan and lease portfolio at the balance sheet date. We maintain our Allowance at an amount we expect to be sufficient to absorb probable losses inherent in our loan and lease portfolio based on a projection of probable net loan charge-offs.

For loans classified as impaired, an estimated impairment loss is calculated. To estimate loan charge-offs on other loans, we evaluate the level and trend of nonperforming and potential problem loans and historical loss experience. We also consider other relevant economic conditions and borrower-specific risk characteristics, including current repayment patterns of our borrowers, the fair value of collateral securing specific loans, changes in our lending and underwriting standards and general economic factors, nationally and in the markets we serve, including the real estate market generally and the residential and commercial construction markets in particular. Estimated loss rates are determined by loan category and risk profile, and an overall required Allowance is calculated, which includes amounts for imprecision and uncertainty. Based on our estimate of the level of Allowance required, a provision for loan and lease losses (the "Provision") is recorded to maintain the Allowance at an appropriate level.

Our policy is to charge a loan off in the period in which the loan is deemed to be uncollectible. We consider a loan to be uncollectible when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the Company can make a reasonable estimate of the loss. In these instances, the likelihood of and/or timeframe for recovery of the amount due is uncertain, weak, or protracted.

Our process for determining the reserve for unfunded commitments is consistent with our process for determining the Allowance and is adjusted for estimated loan funding probabilities. Reserves for unfunded commitments are recorded separately through a valuation allowance included in other liabilities. Credit losses for off-balance sheet credit exposures are deducted from the allowance for credit losses on off-balance sheet credit exposures in the period in which the liability is settled. The allowance for credit losses on off-balance sheet credit losses is established by a charge to other operating expense.

In the second quarter of 2012, we recorded a credit to the Provision of $6.6 million. We had an Allowance as a percentage of total loans and leases of 4.94% at June 30, 2012, compared to 5.91% at December 31, 2011. Although other factors of our overall risk profile have improved in recent quarters and general economic trends and market conditions have shown signs of stabilization to some degree, as further described in the "Material Trends" section below, concerns over the global and U.S. economies still remain. Accordingly, it is possible that the Hawaii or California real estate markets could begin to deteriorate further. If this occurs, it would result in an increase in loan delinquencies, an increase in loan charge-offs or a need for additional increases in our Allowance. Even if economic conditions improve or stay the same, it is possible that we may experience material credit losses and in turn, increases to our Allowance and Provision, due to the elevated risk still inherent in our existing loan portfolio resulting from our high concentration of commercial real estate and construction loans.

Additionally, when establishing our Allowance, we make certain assumptions and judgments with respect to the quality of our loan portfolio. As the economy began to deteriorate in the second half of 2007 and real estate values declined, we found that many of the assumptions and judgments that we made at the time needed to be materially changed in subsequent periods, which resulted in rapid negative credit migration and substantial losses in fiscal years 2008 though 2010. Because of the potential volatility that still exists in the marketplace, we are not able to predict the potential increases that we may need to incur in our Allowance if real estate values do not improve or continue to decline in the markets that we serve, or if the financial condition of our borrowers declines as a result of their continued exposure to the real estate markets and other financial stresses.

Since we cannot predict with certainty the amount of loan and lease charge-offs that will be incurred and because the eventual level of loan and lease charge-offs are impacted by numerous conditions beyond our control, we use our historical loss experience adjusted for current conditions to determine the Allowance and Provision. In addition, various regulatory agencies, as an integral part of their examination processes, periodically review our Allowance. The determination of the Allowance requires us to make estimates of losses that are highly uncertain and involves a high degree of judgment. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates. Changes in the estimate of the Allowance and related Provision could materially affect our operating results.

Loans Held for Sale

Loans held for sale consists of the following two types: (1) Hawaii residential mortgage loans that are originated with the intent to sell them in the secondary market and (2) Hawaii and Mainland construction and commercial real estate loans that were originated with the intent to be held in our portfolio but were subsequently transferred to the held for sale category. Hawaii residential mortgage loans classified as held for sale are carried at the lower of cost or fair value on an aggregate basis while the Hawaii and Mainland construction and commercial real estate loans are recorded at the lower of cost or fair value on an individual basis.

When a construction or commercial real estate loan is transferred to the held for sale category, the loan is recorded at the lower of cost or fair value. Any reduction in the loan's value is reflected as a write-down of the recorded investment resulting in a new cost basis, with a corresponding reduction in the Allowance. In subsequent periods, if the fair value of a loan classified as held for sale is less than its cost basis, a valuation adjustment is recognized in our consolidated statement of income in other operating expense and the carrying value of the loan is adjusted accordingly. The valuation adjustment may be recovered in the event that the fair value increases, which is also recognized in our consolidated statement of income in other operating expense.

The fair value of loans classified as held for sale are generally based upon quoted prices for similar assets in active markets, acceptance of firm offer letters with agreed upon purchase prices, discounted cash flow models that take into account market observable assumptions, or independent appraisals of the underlying collateral securing the loans. We report the fair values of Hawaii and mainland construction and commercial real estate loans net of applicable selling costs on our consolidated balance sheets.

Reserve for Residential Mortgage Loan Repurchase Losses

We sell residential mortgage loans on a "whole-loan" basis to government-sponsored entities ("GSEs" or "Agencies") Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and also to non-agency investors. These loan sales occur under industry standard contractual provisions that include various representations and warranties, which typically cover ownership of the loan, compliance with loan criteria set forth in the applicable agreement, validity of the lien securing the loan, and other similar matters. We may be required to repurchase certain loans sold with identified defects, indemnify the investor, or reimburse the investor for any credit losses incurred. We establish mortgage repurchase reserves related to various representations and warranties that reflect management's estimate for which we could have repurchase obligations. The reserves are established by a charge to other operating expense in our consolidated statements of operation. At June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, this reserve totaled $5.8 million and $6.8 million, respectively, and is included in other liabilities on our consolidated balance sheets.

The repurchase reserve is applicable to loans we originated and sold with representations and warranties, which is representative of the entire sold portfolio. Originations for agency and non-agency for vintages 2005 through June 30, 2012 were approximately $3.7 billion and $3.1 billion, respectively. Representations and warranties relating to borrower fraud generally are enforceable for the life of the loan, whereas early payment default clauses generally expire after 90 days, depending on the sales contract. We estimate that outstanding loans sold that have early payment default clauses as of June 30, 2012 total approximately $110.1 million.

The repurchase loss liability is estimated by origination year to capture certain characteristics of each vintage. To the extent that repurchase demands are made by investors, we may be able to successfully appeal such repurchase demands. However, our appeals success may be affected by the reasons for repurchase demands, the quality of the demands, and our appeals strategies. Repurchase and loss estimates are stratified by vintage, based on actual experience and certain assumptions relative to potential investor demand volume, appeals success rates, and losses recognized on successful repurchase demands.

Loans repurchased during the three and six months ended June 30, 2012 totaled approximately $1.0 million and $2.6 million, respectively. In the first half of 2012, additional reserves were established to account for potential losses resulting from the recent emergence of make-whole demands. While our historical losses from make-whole demands are limited, based on recent investor requests, additional make-whole demands are anticipated and the establishment of additional reserves considers the potential for future losses related to this risk.

Repurchase activity by vintage and investor type are depicted in the table below.

Repurchase Demands, Appeals Granted, Repurchased and Pending Resolution [1]

For the six months ended June 30, 2012



                      Government Sponsored Entities ("GSE")                       Non-GSE Investors
                 Repurchase   Appeals                  Pending     Repurchase   Appeals                  Pending
Vintage           Demands     Granted   Repurchased   Resolution    Demands     Granted   Repurchased   Resolution
2005 and prior            -         -             -            -            -         -             -            -
2006                      2         -             1            1            1         1             -            -
2007                      2         1             -            1            1         -             -            1
2008                      2         2             -            -            2         -             -            2
2009                      -         -             -            -            -         -             -            -
2010                      1         -             -            1            -         -             -            -
2011                      5         3             1            1            -         -             -            -
2012                      1         -             1            -            -         -             -            -
         Total           13         6             3            4            4         1             -            3

The reserve for residential mortgage loan repurchase losses of $5.8 million at June 30, 2012 represents our best estimate of the probable loss that we may incur due to the representations and warranties in our loan sales contracts with investors. This represents a decrease of $1.0 from December 31, 2011. The table below shows changes in the repurchase losses liability since initial establishment.

                                  Six Months Ended June 30,              Year Ended December 31,
                                    2012             2011            2011          2010         2009
                                                        (Dollars in thousands)

Balance, beginning of period    $       6,802    $       5,014    $    5,014    $      183    $      22
Change in estimate                       (158 )          2,840         5,065         6,071          161
Utilizations                             (838 )         (1,198 )      (3,277 )      (1,240 )          -
Balance, end of period          $       5,806    $       6,656    $    6,802    $    5,014    $     183

Our capacity to estimate repurchase losses is advancing as we record additional experience. Repurchase losses depend upon economic factors and other external conditions that may change over the life of the underlying loans. Additionally, lack of access to the servicing records of loans sold on a service released basis adds difficulty to the estimation process, thus requiring considerable management judgment. To the extent that future investor repurchase demand and appeals success differ from past experience, we could have increased demands and increased loss severities on repurchases, causing future additions to the repurchase reserve.

Other Intangible Assets

Other intangible assets include a core deposit premium, mortgage servicing rights, customer relationships and non-compete agreements. We perform an impairment assessment of our other intangible assets whenever events or changes in circumstance indicate that the carrying value of those assets may not be recoverable. Our impairment assessments involve, among other valuation methods, the estimation of future cash flows and other methods of determining fair value. Estimating future cash flows and determining fair values is subject to judgment and often involves the use of significant estimates and assumptions. The variability of the factors we use to perform our impairment tests depend on a number of conditions, including the uncertainty about future events and cash flows. All such factors are interdependent and, therefore, do not change in isolation. Accordingly, our accounting estimates may materially change from period to period due to changing market factors.

During the second quarter of 2012, we evaluated the recoverability of the intangible assets related to our customer relationships and non-compete agreements. Upon completion of this review, we determined that the intangible assets related to our customer relationships and non-compete agreements were both fully impaired, and thus, we recorded impairment charges to other operating expense totaling $0.9 million during the second quarter of 2012.

Deferred Tax Assets and Tax Contingencies

Deferred tax assets ("DTAs") and liabilities are recognized for the estimated future tax effects attributable to temporary differences and carryforwards. A valuation allowance may be required if, based on the weight of available evidence, it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the DTAs will not be realized. In determining whether a valuation allowance is necessary, we consider the level of taxable income in prior years, to the extent that carrybacks are permitted under current tax laws, as well as estimates of future taxable income and tax planning strategies that could be implemented to accelerate taxable income, if necessary. If our estimates of future taxable income were materially overstated or if our assumptions regarding the tax consequences of tax planning strategies were inaccurate, some or all of our DTAs may not be realized, which would result in a charge to earnings. In 2009, we established a full valuation allowance against our net DTAs. See "- Results of Operations - Income Taxes" below.

We have established income tax contingency reserves for potential tax liabilities related to uncertain tax positions. Tax benefits are recognized when we determine that it is more likely than not that such benefits will be realized. Where uncertainty exists due to the complexity of income tax statutes and where the potential tax amounts are significant, we generally seek independent tax opinions to support our positions. If our evaluation of the likelihood of the realization of benefits is inaccurate, we could incur additional income tax and interest expense that would adversely impact earnings, or we could receive tax benefits greater than anticipated which would positively impact earnings.

Defined Benefit Retirement Plan

Defined benefit plan obligations and related assets of our defined benefit retirement plan are presented in Note 14 to the consolidated financial statements. In 2002, the defined benefit retirement plan was curtailed and all plan benefits were fixed as of that date. Plan assets, which consist primarily of marketable equity and debt securities, are typically valued using market quotations. Plan obligations and the annual pension expense are determined by independent actuaries through the use of a number of assumptions. Key assumptions in measuring the plan obligations include the discount rate and the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets. In determining the discount rate, we utilize a yield that reflects the top 50% of the universe of bonds, ranked in the order of the highest yield. Asset returns are based upon the anticipated average rate of earnings expected on the invested funds of the plans.

At December 31, 2011, we used a weighted-average discount rate of 4.8% and an expected long-term rate of return on plan assets of 8.0%, which affected the amount of pension liability recorded as of year-end 2011 and the amount of pension expense to be recorded in 2012. For both the discount rate and the asset return rate, a range of estimates could reasonably have been used which would affect the amount of pension expense and pension liability recorded.

An increase in the discount rate or asset return rate would reduce pension expense in 2012, while a decrease in the discount rate or asset return rate would have the opposite effect. A 0.25% change in the discount rate assumption would impact 2012 pension expense by less than $0.1 million and year-end 2011 pension liability by $0.9 million, while a 0.25% change in the asset return rate would impact 2012 pension expense by less than $0.1 million.

Impact of Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements on Future Filings

In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-11, "Disclosures About Offsetting . . .