BASIS OF PRESENTATION, LOAN POLICY AND RECENT DEVELOPMENTS (Policies)

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2015

Accounting Policies [Abstract]

Basis of Accounting, Policy [Policy Text Block]

BASIS OF PRESENTATION: The unaudited, consolidated financial statements as of and for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2015 include the consolidated results of operations of Community Shores Bank Corporation (“Company”) and its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Community Shores Financial Services (“CS Financial Services”), and Community Shores Bank (the “Bank”), and the Bank’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Community Shores Mortgage Company (the “Mortgage Company”) and the Mortgage Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Berryfield Development, LLC (“Berryfield”). Community Shores Capital Trust I (“the Trust”) is not consolidated and exists solely to issue capital securities. These consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the instructions for Form 10-Q and Article 8 of Regulation S-X and do not include all disclosures required by generally accepted accounting principles for a complete presentation of the Company’s financial condition and results of operations. In the opinion of management, the information reflects all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments) which are necessary in order to make the financial statements not misleading and for a fair representation of the results of operations for such periods. The results for the period ended June 30, 2015 should not be considered as indicative of results for a full year. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and footnotes included in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2014. Some items in the prior year financial statements may be reclassified to conform to the current presentation.

Finance, Loans and Leases Receivable, Policy [Policy Text Block]

LOAN POLICY: Loans that management has the intent and ability to hold for the foreseeable future or until maturity or payoff are reported at the principal balance outstanding, net of deferred loan fees and costs and an allowance for loan losses. The loan portfolio consists of the following segments:

Commercial- Loans to businesses that are sole proprietorships, partnerships, limited liability companies and corporations. These loans are for commercial, industrial, or professional purposes. The risk characteristics of these loans vary based on the borrowers business and industry as repayment is typically dependent on cash flows generated from the underlying business.

Commercial Real Estate- Loans to individuals or businesses that are secured by improved and unimproved vacant land, farmland, commercial real property, 1-4 family and multifamily residential properties, and all other conforming, nonresidential properties. Proceeds may be used for land acquisition, development or construction. These loans typically fall into two general categories: property that is owner occupied and, income or investment property. Owner occupied commercial real estate loans typically involve the same risks as commercial and industrial loans however, the underlying collateral is the real estate which is subject to changes in market value after the loan’s origination. Adverse economic events and changes in real estate market valuations generally describe the risks that accompany commercial real estate loans involving income or investment property. The ability of the borrower to repay tends to depend on the success of the underlying project or the ability of the borrower to sell or lease the property at certain anticipated values.

Consumer- Term loans or lines of credit for the purchase of consumer goods, vehicles or home improvement. The risk characteristics of the loans in this segment vary depending on the type of collateral, however repayment is expected from an individual continuing to generate a cash flow that supports the calculated payment obligation. Secondary support could involve liquidation of collateral.

Residential- Loans to purchase or refinance single family residences. The risks associated with this segment are similar to the risks for consumer loans as far as individual payment obligations, however, the underlying collateral is the real estate. Real estate is subject to changes in market valuation and can be unstable for a variety of reasons.

For all loan segments, interest income is accrued on the unpaid principal using the interest method assigned to the loan product and includes amortization of net deferred loan fees and costs over the loan term. Interest income is not reported when full loan repayment is in doubt. A loan is moved to non-accrual status when it is past due over 90 days unless the loan is well secured and in the process of collection. If a loan is not past due but deemed to be impaired it may also be moved to non-accrual status. These rules apply to loans in all segments. However, certain classes of loans in the consumer segment may simply get charged-off as opposed to moving to non-accrual status.

All interest accrued but not received for a loan placed on non-accrual is reversed against interest income at the time the loan is assigned non-accrual status. Payments received on such loans are applied to principal when there is doubt about recovering the full principal outstanding. Loans are eligible to return to accrual status after six months of timely payment and future payments are reasonably assured.

The allowance for loan losses is a valuation allowance for probable incurred credit losses, increased by the provision for loan losses and from recoveries of previously charged-off loans and decreased by charge-offs.

The allowance for loan loss analysis is performed monthly. Management’s methodology consists of specific and general components. The general component covers non-impaired loans and is based on historical loss experience adjusted for current economic factors.

The historical loss experience is determined by portfolio segment and is based on the actual loss history experienced by the Bank over the most recent 12 quarters. The historical loss experience is recalculated at the end of each quarter. This actual loss experience is supplemented with current economic factors based on the risks present for each portfolio segment. These current economic factors are also revisited at the end of each quarter and include consideration of the following: levels of and trends in delinquencies and impaired loans; levels of and trends in charge-offs and recoveries; trends in volume and terms of loans; effects of any changes in risk selection and underwriting standards; other changes in lending policies, procedures, and practices; experience, ability, and depth of lending management and other relevant staff; quality of loan review system; degree of oversight by the Board of Directors; national and local economic trends and conditions; industry conditions; competition and legal and regulatory requirements; and effects of changes in credit concentrations. There were no significant changes to this methodology in the first half of 2015.

For the commercial and commercial real estate portfolio segments, the historical loss is tracked by original loan grade. The Bank utilizes a numeric grading system for commercial and commercial real estate loans. Grades are assigned to each commercial and commercial real estate loan by assessing information about the specific borrower’s situation and the estimated collateral values. The description of the loan grade criteria is included in Note 4. In recent periods, with charge-off activity lessening, the calculated historical loss factor assigned to general allocations was considerably reduced. The reduction was large enough that management chose to define and implement a minimum loss percentage for these segments. The minimum loss percentage is meant to ensure adequate coverage for incurred losses in loan pools.

Within the commercial and industrial, and commercial real estate portfolios, there are classes of loans with like risk characteristics that are periodically segregated because management has determined that the historical losses or current factors are unique and ought to be considered separately from the entire segment.

For the consumer segment, historical loss experience is based on the actual loss history of the following four classes; general consumer loans, personal lines of credit, home equity lines of credit and credit cards. The level of delinquencies and charge-off experience directly impacts the general allocations to the consumer classes.

For the residential segment, loss experience is not segregated by grades or classes. The level of delinquencies, charge-off experience, and direction of real estate values directly impacts the general allocations to the residential real estate segment.

The specific component of the allowance for loan losses relates to loans that are individually classified as impaired. A loan is impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that the Bank will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. Loans for which the terms have been modified resulting in a concession, and for which the borrower is experiencing financial difficulties, are considered troubled debt restructurings and are classified as impaired.

Factors considered by management in determining impairment include payment status, collateral value, and the probability of collecting scheduled principal and interest payments when due. Loans that experience insignificant payment delays and payment shortfalls generally are not classified as impaired.

Management determines the significance of payment delays and payment shortfalls on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration all of the circumstances surrounding the loan and the borrower, including the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the borrower’s prior payment record, and the amount of the shortfall in relation to the principal and interest owed.

Any loan within a segment can be considered for individual impairment if it meets the above criteria. If a loan is impaired, a portion of the allowance is allocated so that the loan is reported, net, at the present value of estimated future cash flows using the loan’s existing rate or at the fair value of collateral if repayment is expected solely from the collateral. Troubled debt restructurings are separately identified for impairment disclosures and are measured at the present value of estimated future cash flows using the loan’s effective rate at inception. If a troubled debt restructuring is considered to be a collateral dependent loan, the loan is reported net, at the fair value of the collateral less costs to sell.

Allocations of the allowance may be made for specific loans and groups, but the entire allowance is available for any loan that, in management’s judgment, should be charged-off. Loan balances are generally charged against the allowance when management believes the uncollectibility of a loan balance is confirmed. Statutorily, the Bank must charge-off bad debt that reaches delinquency of 360 days. In the case of an impaired loan, management typically charges off any portion of the debt that is unsecured based on an internal analysis of future cash flows and or collateral.

New Accounting Pronouncements, Policy [Policy Text Block]

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS:

In May 2014, FASB issued ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. This ASU establishes a comprehensive revenue recognition standard for virtually all industries under U.S. GAAP, including those that previously followed industry-specific guidance such as the real estate, construction and software industries. The revenue standard’s core principle is built on the contract between a vendor and a customer for the provision of goods and services. It attempts to depict the exchange of rights and obligations between the parties in the pattern of revenue recognition based on the consideration to which the vendor is entitled. To accomplish this objective, the standard requires five basic steps: (i) identify the contract with the customer, (ii) identify the performance obligations in the contract, (iii) determine the transaction price, (iv) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract, and (v) recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation. The guidance in this ASU is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2016, with three transition methods available – full retrospective, retrospective and cumulative effect approach. At the July 9, 2015 FASB meeting, the FASB voted to delay the implementation requirement by one year. The impact of adoption of this ASU by the Company is not expected to be material.

In June 2014, FASB issued ASU 2014-11, Repurchase-to-Maturity Transactions, Repurchase Financings, and Disclosures. This ASU requires two accounting changes. First, repurchase-to-maturity transactions will be accounted for as secured borrowing transactions on the balance sheet, rather than sales. Second, for repurchase financing arrangements, the ASU requires separate accounting for a transfer of a financial asset executed contemporaneously with (or in contemplation of) a repurchase agreement with the same counterparty, which also will generally result in secured borrowing accounting for the repurchase agreement. The ASU also introduces new disclosures to increase transparency about the types of collateral pledged for repurchase agreements, securities lending transactions, and repurchase-to-maturity transactions that are accounted for as secured borrowings. The ASU also requires a transferor to disclose information about transactions accounted for as a sale in which the transferor retains substantially all of the exposure to the economic return on the transferred financial assets through an agreement with the transferee. The accounting changes and disclosure for certain transactions accounted for as a sale are effective for the first interim period beginning in 2015. The disclosure for transactions accounted for as secured borrowings is required for interim periods beginning after March 15, 2015. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

In June 2015, FASB issued ASU 2015-10, Technical Corrections and Improvements. This ASU contains amendments that will clarify and affect a variety of Topics in the FASB Accounting Standards Codification. The amendments in this Update that require transition guidance are effective for all entities for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted. All other amendments will be effective upon the issuance of this guidance. The adoption of this guidance will not have a material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

Other issued but not yet accounting standards were reviewed and management has concluded that none apply or will be material to the Company’s financial statements.

In spite of the improved financial outcome for the last several quarters, the Company’s significant consolidated losses from 2007 through 2011, stemming primarily from deteriorating asset quality, resulted in additional regulatory scrutiny. On September 2, 2010, the Bank entered into a Consent Order with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) and the State of Michigan’s Department of Insurance and Financial Services (“DIFS”), its primary regulators. The Bank agreed to the terms of the Consent Order without admitting or denying any charge of unsafe or unsound banking practices relating to capital, asset quality, or earnings. The Consent Order imposes no fines or penalties on the Bank. The Consent Order will remain in effect and enforceable until it is modified, terminated, suspended, or set aside by the FDIC and DIFS. Under the Consent Order, the Bank was required, within 90 days of September 2, 2010, to have and maintain its level of Tier 1 capital, as a percentage of its total assets, at a minimum of 8.5%, and its level of qualifying total capital, as a percentage of risk-weighted assets, at a minimum of 11%. The Bank was not able to meet these requirements within the required 90-day period and remained out of compliance with the Consent Order as of June 30, 2015.

The lack of financial soundness of the Bank and the Company’s inability to serve as a source of strength for the Bank resulted in the board of directors entering into a Written Agreement with the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (the “FRB”), one of the Company’s primary regulators. The Written Agreement became effective on December 16, 2010, when it was executed by the FRB. The Written Agreement provides that: (i) the Company must take appropriate steps to fully utilize its financial and managerial resources to serve as a source of strength to the Bank; (ii) the Company may not declare or pay any dividends or take dividends or any other payment representing a reduction in capital from the Bank or make any distributions of interest, principal or other sums on subordinated debentures or trust preferred securities without prior FRB approval; (iii) the Company may not incur, increase or guarantee any debt or purchase or redeem any shares of its stock without prior FRB approval; (iv) the Company must submit a written statement of its planned sources and uses of cash for debt service, operating expenses and other purposes to the FRB within 30 days of the Written Agreement; (v) the Company shall take all necessary actions to ensure that the Bank, the Company and all nonbank subsidiaries of both the Bank and the Company comply with sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and Regulation W of the Board of Governors (12 C.F.R. Part 223) in all transactions between affiliates; (vi) the Company may not appoint any new director or senior executive officer, or change the responsibilities of any senior executive officer so that the officer would assume a different senior executive officer position, without prior regulatory approval; and finally (vii) within 30 days after the end of each calendar quarter following the date of the Written Agreement, the board of directors shall submit to the FRB written progress reports detailing the form and manner of all actions taken to secure compliance with the provisions of the Written Agreement as well as current copies of the parent company only financial statements. The Company has not yet been able to meet the obligation detailed in part (i) above; as the Company currently has limited resources with which to assist the Bank in achieving the capital level required by the Consent Order. The Company’s main liquidity resource is its cash account balance which, as of June 30, 2015, was approximately $158,000.

Failure to comply with the stipulated capital levels of the Consent Order or the provisions of the Written Agreement may subject the Bank to further regulatory enforcement action.