UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONWashington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)ý

Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010oro

Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934For the transition period from
 to


Commission file number 001-33065

TIDELANDS BANCSHARES, INC.(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

South Carolina

02-0570232(State or other jurisdiction or
incorporation of organization)

(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)875 Lowcountry Blvd., Mount Pleasant,
South Carolina

29464(Address of principal executive offices)

(Zip Code)


Telephone
number:(843) 388-8433

Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of each class:

Name of each exchange on which registered:Common Stock, $0.01 par value per share

NASDAQ Global Market


Securities
registered under Section 12(g) of the Act:None

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

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

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 ý    No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to
be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter
period that the registrant was required to submit and post such
files). Yes o    No o

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not
be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to
this Form 10-K. o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting
company. See the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer o

Accelerated filer o

Non-accelerated filer o (Do not check if a
smaller reporting company)

Smaller reporting company ý


Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act). Yes o    No ý

As of June 30, 2010, the aggregate market value of the registrant's common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $3,715,528 based
on the closing sale price of $1.52 per share as reported on the NASDAQ Global Market.

The
number of shares outstanding of the issuer's common stock, as of March 1, 2011 was 4,277,176.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

None



---





PART I

Item 1.    Description of Business.

This report contains statements which constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities
Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements may relate to our financial condition, results of operation, plans, objectives, or future
performance. These statements are based on many assumptions and estimates and are not guarantees of future performance. Our actual results may differ materially from those projected in any
forward-looking statements, as they will depend on many factors about which we are unsure, including many factors which are beyond our control. The words "may," "would," "could," "will," "expect,"
"anticipate," "believe," "intend," "plan," and "estimate," as well as similar expressions, are meant to identify such forward-looking statements. Potential risks and uncertainties include, but are not
limited to those described below under Item 1A"Risk Factors" and the following:



2

---





We
have based our forward-looking statements on our current expectations about future events. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in our forward-looking statements are reasonable, we
cannot guarantee that these expectations will be achieved. We undertake no obligation to publicly update or otherwise revise any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information,
future events, or otherwise.

General Overview

We are a South Carolina corporation organized in 2002 to serve as the holding company for Tidelands Bank, a state-chartered banking
association under the laws of South Carolina headquartered in Mount Pleasant. We opened Tidelands Bank in October 2003 and operate seven full service banking offices located along the coast of South
Carolina. We are primarily engaged in the business of accepting demand, savings and time deposits insured by the FDIC and providing commercial, consumer and mortgage loans to the general public. Since
our inception, we have focused on serving the banking needs of professionals, entrepreneurs, small business owners and their family members in our South Carolina coastal markets. As of
December 31, 2010, we had total assets of $571.3 million, net loans of $426.2 million, deposits of $481.0 million and shareholders' equity of $23.6 million.

Our Market Area

Our primary market area is the South Carolina coast, including the Charleston (Charleston, Dorchester and Berkeley counties), Myrtle
Beach (Horry and Georgetown
County) and Hilton Head (Beaufort and Jasper County) markets areas. Our main office is located at 875 Lowcountry Boulevard, Mount Pleasant, South Carolina.

In
addition to our main office, we have six full service banking offices. In August 2004, we opened a loan production office in Summerville, South Carolina. Due to the success of this
loan production office, we converted it to a temporary full service branch in April 2005, and in April 2007, we opened the permanent full service banking office in Summerville. In January 2005, we
opened a loan production office in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, which we converted into a temporary full service branch in October 2005 and opened our permanent facility in June 2007. We opened a new
full service banking office in the Park West area of Mount Pleasant in May 2007 and converted our loan production office in the West Ashley area of Charleston to a full service banking office in July
2007. We also opened a loan production office in Bluffton, in the Hilton Head market area, in October 2006, which we converted into a temporary full service banking office in September 2007 and then
opened a permanent full service banking office in May 2008. Finally, we opened a new full service banking office in Murrells Inlet, in the Myrtle Beach market area, in July 2008.

3

---



The
following table shows key demographic information about our market areas:

Tidelands Bank

Total Market AreaAs of
December 31,
2010Projected
Growth in
Median
Household
Income(5)Total
Deposits in
Market
Area(2)Market Area(1)

Retail
Deposits

Net
Loans

Deposit
Growth(3)

2010
Population(4)

Projected
Population
Growth(5)

Median
Household
Income(4)($ in millions)Charleston (4 branches)

$
274.8

$
326.1

$
9.8B


129
%

671,833


10.28
%
$
52,032


13.04
%Hilton Head (1 branch)

$
79.9

$
37.9

$
3.7B


92
%

186,450


12.62
%
$
50,461


13.10
%Myrtle Beach (2 branches)

$
122.8

$
62.2

$
6.7B


98
%

343,448


16.90
%
$
45,414


13.43
%Total

$
477.5

$
426.2


(1)The
Charleston market area is comprised of Charleston County, Dorchester County and Berkeley County; the Hilton Head market area is comprised of Beaufort
County and Jasper County; and the Myrtle Beach market area is comprised of Horry County and Georgetown County.(2)Based
on FDIC data as of June 30, 2010.(3)Based
on FDIC data for the period June 30, 2000 through June 30, 2010.(4)As
of 2010, per SNL Financial.(5)Projected
for the period 2010-2014; per SNL Financial.


Since 2008, markets in the United States, including our market areas, have experienced extreme volatility and disruption. According to the
National Bureau of Economic Research, the United States entered an economic recession in December 2007. Declining real estate values and rising unemployment levels have strained most sectors of the
economy. Although not immune from these economic realties, we believe that the Charleston economy remains diverse and well positioned for recovery. According to the Charleston Metro Chamber of
Commerce, each year more than four million people visit Charleston because of its world class shopping and dining and historical attractions. For 18 consecutive years, readers of
Condé Nast Traveler magazine honored Charleston as a Top 10 travel destination in the U.S. with the No. 2 slottopped only by San Francisco. This ranking maintains
Charleston's spot as a premier east coast destination.

Recent
economic expansion in the manufacturing sector includes Boeing's plan to build a second final assembly plant for the new 787 Dreamliner. The company broke ground on the
584,000-square-foot facility near its existing factory in early 2010 with assembly production expected to begin in 2011. GE Aviation and the SKF Group, one of the world's
largest producers of jet engine bearings, recently opened a new facility in Charleston to manufacture and repair jets. In October 2008, Google opened a new $600 million data center facility in
the Charleston area that employees approximately 200 people. In late 2007, DuPont announced a planned $500 million investment at its facility in Berkeley County to significantly expand
production of high-performance Kevlar® para-aramid brand fiber for industrial and military uses.

Charleston
is also home to a number of academic institutions, including the Medical University of South Carolina, The Citadel, The College of Charleston, Charleston Southern University
and The Charleston School of Law. Charleston also hosts military installations for the U.S. Navy, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Army and U.S. Coast Guard.

The
Hilton Head market area, located in Beaufort County, approximately 45 miles north of Savannah, Georgia and 90 miles south of Charleston, is an internationally recognized retirement
and vacation destination famous for its championship golf courses, beaches and resorts. The Hilton Head

4

---



Chamber
of Commerce estimates that the year-round tourism industry accounts for more than 60% of local jobs and contributes in excess of $1.5 billion annually to the Hilton Head
economy.

The
Myrtle Beach area, also known as South Carolina's Grand Strand, is a 60-mile stretch of coastline extending from the South Carolina state line at Little River (Horry
County) south to Pawleys Island (Georgetown County). In recent years, both The Wall Street Journal and Money magazine rated the Grand Strand as one of the nation's top retirement locations. Myrtle
Beach was listed in the Top Ten destinations for families looking for a cool and affordable vacation in 2008 by Ask.com. In recent years, the American Automobile Association has ranked the area as the
nation's second most popular tourist destination. In 2009, the Myrtle Beach Chamber of Commerce estimated that over 13.7 million people visited the area. Because tourism for the budget
conscious traveler plays such a vital role in its local economy, we anticipate that Myrtle Beach will be our slowest market to recover from the recent economic downturn.

As
economic conditions improve, we believe the combination of full-time residents and visitors will continue to support businesses such as real estate development,
construction, manufacturing, healthcare and education in our market areas.

Our Strengths

Since our founding in 2002, we have focused on our core operating strength of relationship banking and have established the necessary
infrastructure to support the expansion of our franchise. The cornerstone of our relationship banking model is the hiring and retention of professional banking officers who know their customers and
focus on their customers' banking needs. By leveraging our banking officers' experience and personal contacts, we have been able to withstand the difficulties of this economic environment by focusing
on building banking relationships with professionals, entrepreneurs, small business owners and their family members in our markets. This relationship banking model enables us to generate both repeat
business from existing customers as well as new business from customer referrals.

We
have assembled an experienced senior management team, combining extensive market knowledge with an energetic and entrepreneurial culture. The members of our management team have close
ties to, and are actively involved in, the communities where we operate, which is critical to our relationship
banking focus. We believe this experienced senior management team has implemented the necessary risk management processes to allow us to manage nonperforming assets while we continue to diversify our
loan portfolio and increase retail deposits in our local markets. As market conditions improve, we are also optimistic that we are well positioned to enhance our franchise and reinvigorate our
earnings stream without needing to add additional executive positions.

As
we move beyond our seventh anniversary, we have established a community banking franchise consisting of seven full service banking offices in selected markets along the coast of South
Carolina. We have been careful to expand by opening new facilities only after we have identified an attractive market and hired experienced local bankers to manage our operations. Six of our seven
full service banking offices have opened since April 2007 and, as of December 31, 2010, these offices averaged approximately $60.5 million in retail deposits. During the year ended
December 31, 2010, we generated $75.9 million in local retail deposits through our branch network.

Our
goal is to continue to reduce our dependence on wholesale deposits and increase retail deposits in our local markets to fund our future growth. The amount of wholesale deposits was
$3.5 million, or 0.7% of total deposits, at December 31, 2010, compared to $189.9 million, or 32.1% of total deposits, at December 31, 2009. Going forward, we believe
retail deposit growth will be the primary component of our funding sources. Our retail deposits increased to $477.5 million at December 31, 2010 from $401.6 million at
December 31, 2009, and represented 99.3% of our total deposits at December 31, 2010 compared to 67.9% of our total deposits at December 31, 2009.

5

---



We
believe that our coastal markets need institutions that provide banking services to small businesses and local residents that the larger financial institutions are not well positioned
to provide. We anticipate that some of our competitors may be unable to survive the severity of this downturn. Population growth projections for our markets suggest that for those financial
institutions that emerge from this economic crisis, there is substantial opportunity to capture additional market share and enhance franchise value.

We
believe our relationship banking model, management team and branch infrastructure has allowed us to weather this economic storm and positions us to take advantage of future market
dislocation, consolidation and reduced competition for lending activities when the economy in our markets improves. Although we have no definitive plans for expansion, we may also engage in strategic
acquisitions if attractive opportunities arise.

Lending Activities

General.We emphasize a range of lending services, including commercial and residential real estate mortgage loans, real estate
construction loans,
commercial and industrial loans and consumer loans. Our customers are generally individuals and small to medium-sized businesses and professional firms that are located in or conduct a substantial
portion of their business in our market areas. We have focused our lending activities primarily on the professional market, including doctors, dentists, small business owners and commercial real
estate developers. At December 31, 2010, we had total loans of $437.7 million, representing 83.1% of our total earning assets. The average loan size was approximately $293,000. As of
December 31, 2010, we had 76 nonperforming loans totaling approximately $35.6 million, or 8.1% of total loans. The average size of our non-performing loans at
December 31, 2010 was approximately $468,000.

At
December 31, 2010, our loan portfolio and nonperforming assets was comprised of the following:

Loans

Nonperforming AssetsBalance
December 31,
2010

% of
Loans

Non-accrual
Loans

Other
Real
Estate

Total
Non-performing
Assets(dollars in thousands)Real estate mortgage

$
315,181


71.9
%
$
18,958

$
4,991

$
23,949Real estate construction


96,001


21.9
%

16,136


6,335


22,471Commercial and industrial


23,255


5.3
%

390


580


970Consumer


3,775


0.9
%

72





72$
438,212


100.0
%
$
35,556

$
11,906

$
47,462


Real Estate Mortgage Loans.Loans secured by real estate mortgages are the principal component of our loan portfolio. Real estate loans
are subject
to the same general risks as other loans and are particularly sensitive to fluctuations in the value of real estate. Fluctuations in the value of real estate, as well as other factors arising after a
loan has been made, could negatively affect a borrower's cash flow, creditworthiness and ability to repay the loan. We obtain a security interest in real estate whenever possible, in addition to any
other available collateral, in order to increase the likelihood of the ultimate repayment of the loan.

As
of December 31, 2010, loans secured by first or second mortgages on real estate comprised approximately $315.2 million, or 71.9%, of our loan portfolio. These loans will
generally fall into one of two categories: residential real estate loans or commercial real estate loans.

6

---



At
December 31, 2010, our real estate mortgage loan portfolio and nonperforming assets was comprised of the following:

Loans

Nonperforming AssetsBalance
December 31,
2010

% of
Loan
Category

% of
Total
Loans

Non-accrual
Loans

Other
Real
Estate

Total
Non-performing
Assets(dollars in thousands)Real Estate Mortgage LoansResidential Real EstateIncome Producing Properties

$
41,048


13.0
%

9.4
%
$
1,421

$
3,742

$
5,163Owner-occupiedFirst Lien


52,673


16.7
%

12.0
%

2,048


651


2,699Junior Lien


39,126


12.4
%

8.9
%

754


480


1,234Speculative


15,715


5.0
%

3.6
%

4,073





4,073Total Residential Real Estate


148,562


47.1
%

33.9
%

8,296


4,873


13,169Commercial Real EstateIncome Producing Properties


75,348


23.9
%

17.2
%

8,706





8,706Owner-occupiedFirst Lien


74,958


23.8
%

17.1
%

979


118


1,097Junior Lien


1,415


0.4
%

0.3
%

31





31Speculative


6,515


2.1
%

1.5
%

750





750Multi-family


8,383


2.7
%

1.9
%

196





196Total Commercial Real Estate


166,619


52.9
%

38.0
%

10,662


118


10,780Total Real Estate Mortgage Loans

$
315,181


100.0
%

71.9
%
$
18,958

$
4,991

$
23,949




7

---





Real Estate Construction Loans.We offer fixed and adjustable rate residential and commercial construction loans to builders and
developers and to
consumers who wish to build their own homes. The term of our construction and development loans generally is limited to 18 months, although payments may be structured on a longer amortization
basis. Construction and development loans generally carry a higher degree of risk than long-term financing of existing properties because repayment depends on the ultimate completion of
the project and usually on the subsequent sale of the property. Specific risks include:



We
attempt to reduce the risk associated with construction and development loans by obtaining personal guarantees and by keeping the loan-to-value ratio of the
completed project at or below 85%. Generally, we do not have interest reserves built into loan commitments but require periodic cash payments for interest from the borrower's cash flow.

8

---



At December 31, 2010, our real estate construction loans and nonperforming assets amounted to $96.0 million, or 21.9% of our total loan portfolio, and were comprised of the
following:

Loans

Nonperforming AssetsBalance
December 31,
2010

% of
Loan
Category

% of
Total
Loans

Non-
accrual
Loans

Other
Real
Estate

Total Non-
performing
Assets(dollars in thousands)Real Estate Construction LoansResidentialLandR/E Vacant LandCommercial

$
11,598


12.1
%

2.6
%
$
5,354

$
658

$
6,012R/E Vacant LandConsumer


340


0.4
%

0.1
%







R/E Lot LoanCommercial


170


0.2
%

0.1
%




773


773R/E Lot LoanConsumer


1,005


1.0
%

0.2
%

64





64Speculative


44,681


46.5
%

10.2
%

4,022


3,141


7,163Total Land


57,794


60.2
%

13.2
%

9,440


4,572


14,012ConstructionOwner-occupiedR/E Pre-soldCommercial


136


0.1
%

0.0
%







R/E ResConsumer


3,687


3.9
%

0.8
%

496





496SpeculativeR/E SpeculativeCommercial


1,554


1.6
%

0.4
%




190


190R/E SpeculativeConsumer






%


%







Total Construction


5,377


5.6
%

1.2
%

496


190


686Total R/E Residential Construction


63,171


65.8
%

14.4
%

9,936


4,762


14,698CommercialLandVacant Land


274


0.3
%

0.1
%




171


171Speculative


27,109


28.2
%

6.2
%

6,200


1,402


7,602ConstructionOwner-occupied


3,234


3.4
%

0.7
%







Speculative


2,213


2.3
%

0.5
%







Total R/E Commercial Construction


32,830


34.2
%

7.5
%

6,200


1,573


7,773Total Real Estate Construction

$
96,001


100.0
%

21.9
%
$
16,136

$
6,335

$
22,471


Residential
land loans are made to both commercial entities and consumer borrowers for the purpose of financing land upon which to build a residential home. At December 31, 2010,
total real estate construction loans ranged from approximately $11,000 to $3.7 million, with an average balance of approximately $378,000.

Residential
land loans are reclassified as residential construction loans once construction of the residential home commences. These loans are further categorized as
(i) pre-sold commercial, which is a loan to a commercial entity with a pre-identified buyer for the finished home, (ii) owner-occupied consumer, which is a loan
to an individual who intends to occupy the finished home and (iii) non owner-occupied commercial (speculative), which is a loan to a commercial entity intending to lease or sell the finished
home. At December 31, 2010, residential land loans ranged from approximately $11,000 to $2.8 million, with an average balance of approximately $325,000. At December 31, 2010,

9

---



residential
construction loans ranged from approximately $25,000 to $2.8 million, with an average balance of approximately $317,000.

Commercial
land loans are made to commercial entities for the purpose of financing land upon which to build a commercial project. These loans are for projects that typically involve
small and medium sized single and multi-use commercial buildings. At December 31, 2010, these loans ranged from approximately $45,000 to $3.7 million, with an average balance
of approximately $559,000.

Commercial
construction loans are made to the borrower for the purpose of financing the construction of a commercial development. These loans are further categorized depending on whether
the borrower intends to occupy the finished development (owner-occupied) or whether the borrower intends to lease or sell the finished development (non owner-occupied). At December 31, 2010,
these loans ranged from approximately $209,000 to $2.0 million, with an average balance of approximately $908,000.

Commercial and Industrial Loans.At December 31, 2010, these loans amounted to $23.3 million, or 5.3% of our total loan
portfolio. At
December 31, 2010, outstanding balances on these loans ranged from $1,000 to $1.1 million, with an average loan balance of approximately $98,000. We make loans for commercial purposes in
various lines of businesses, including the manufacturing industry, service industry and professional service areas. These loans are generally considered to have greater risk than first or second
mortgages on real estate because these loans may be unsecured or, if they are secured, the value of the collateral may be difficult to assess and more likely to decrease than real estate.

We
are eligible to offer small business loans utilizing government enhancements such as the Small Business Administration's ("SBA") 7(a) program and SBA's 504 programs. These loans
typically are partially guaranteed by the government, which helps to reduce their risk. Government guarantees of SBA loans do not exceed, and are generally less than, 80% of the loan. As of
December 31, 2010, we had not originated any small business loans utilizing government enhancements.

Consumer Loans.At December 31, 2010, consumer loans amounted to $3.8 million, or 0.9% of our loan portfolio. At
December 31,
2010, the outstanding balance on our individual consumer loans ranged up to approximately $475,000, with an average loan balance of approximately $19,000. We make a variety of loans to individuals for
personal and household purposes, including secured and unsecured installment loans and revolving lines of credit. Consumer loans are underwritten based on the borrower's income, current debt level,
past credit history and the availability and value of collateral. Consumer rates are both fixed and variable, with negotiable terms. Our installment loans typically amortize over periods up to
60 months. Although we typically require monthly payments of interest and a portion of the principal on our loan products, we will offer consumer loans with a single maturity date when a
specific source of repayment is available. Consumer loans are generally considered to have greater risk than first or second mortgages on real estate because they may be unsecured, or, if they are
secured, the value of the collateral may be difficult to assess and more likely to decrease in value than real estate.

Loan Portfolio Composition.We provide loans for various uses, including commercial and residential real estate, business purposes,
personal use,
home improvement, automobiles, as well as letters of credit and home equity lines of credit. Historically, we have had a concentration of commercial real estate and acquisition, development and
construction loans. Our strategy going forward is to diversify our loan portfolio by focusing on increases in our owner-occupied lending. We will also strive to continue to limit the amount of our
loans to any single customer. At December 31, 2010, we had approximately 1,500 loans, with an average loan balance of approximately $293,000. As of December 31, 2010, our 10 largest
customer loan relationships represented approximately $67.3 million, or 15.4% of our loan portfolio. We believe that operating in three separate and distinct market areas along the South
Carolina coast will provide long-term loan portfolio diversification. At December 31,

10

---



2010,
our loan portfolio was positioned within our major markets as follows: Charleston76.4%; Myrtle Beach14.8%; Hilton Head8.8%. As market conditions improve,
we believe that the diversity of economic activity in our primary markets will tend to mitigate economic volatility, which, together with the variety of purposes for which we make loans, will reduce
our risks of loss.

Underwriting.When we opened our bank, we introduced a strong credit culture based on traditional credit measures and our veteran
bankers' intimate
knowledge of our markets. We have a disciplined approach to underwriting and focus on multiple sources of repayment, including personal guarantees. Our underwriting standards vary for each type of
loan. While we generally underwrite the loans in our portfolio in accordance with our own internal underwriting guidelines and regulatory supervisory guidelines, in certain circumstances we have made
loans which exceed either our internal underwriting guidelines, supervisory guidelines, or both. We are permitted to hold loans that exceed supervisory guidelines up to 100% of bank capital, or
$44.7 million at December 31, 2010. As such, $109.8 million, or 25.1%, of our loans had loan-to-value ratios that exceeded regulatory supervisory
guidelines, of which 107 loans totaling approximately $42.6 million as of the dates of renewal had loan-to-value ratios of 100% or more. In addition, supervisory limits
on commercial loan-to-value exceptions are set at 30% of capital. At December 31, 2010, $58.7 million of our commercial loans, or 137.6% of the bank's capital,
exceeded the supervisory loan-to-value ratio. The exceptions are approved based on a combination of debt service ability, liquidity and overall balance sheet strength of the
borrower. The frequency of pre-approved exceptions has decreased due to the erosion in potential borrowers' balance sheet strength, liquidity and income due to the current economic
conditions. We expect this declining trend to continue while economic conditions remain recessionary. Recently, however, we have experienced an increase in unintended
loan-to-value exceptions in existing bank loans due to updated appraisals on loans, where the value of the applicable collateral, has decreased.

Loan Approval.Certain credit risks are inherent in making loans. These include prepayment risks, risks resulting from uncertainties in
the future
value of collateral, risks resulting from changes in economic and industry conditions, and risks inherent in dealing with individual borrowers. We attempt to mitigate repayment risks by adhering to
internal credit policies and procedures. These policies and procedures include officer and customer lending limits, a multi-layered approval process for larger loans, documentation examination and
follow-up procedures for any exceptions to credit policies. Our loan approval policies provide for various levels of officer lending authority. When the amount of aggregate loans to a
single borrower exceeds an individual officer's lending authority, the loan request will be reviewed by an officer with a higher lending authority. Between the Chief Executive Officer, Senior Credit
Officer and Chief Credit Officer, any two may combine their authority to approve credits up to $1.5 million. If the loans exceed $1.5 million, then a loan committee comprised of
Mr. Coffee and four outside directors may approve the loans up to 10% of the bank's capital and surplus. All loans in excess of this lending limit will be submitted for approval to the entire
board of directors of the bank. We do not make any loans to any director, executive officer, or principal shareholder, and the related interests of each, of the bank unless the loan is approved by the
disinterested members of the board of directors of the bank and is on terms not more favorable to such person than would be available to a similarly situated person not affiliated with the bank.

Credit Administration and Loan Review.We maintain a continuous loan review process. We apply a credit grading system to each loan, and
utilize an
independent consultant on a semi-annual basis to review the loan underwriting on a test basis to confirm the grading of each loan. Each loan officer is responsible for each loan he or she
makes, regardless of whether other individuals or
committees joined in the approval. This responsibility continues until the loan is repaid or until the loan is officially assigned to another officer. We also maintain a separate construction loan
management department that operates independently from our lenders and is responsible for authorizing draws and the continuing oversight during the construction process.

11

---



We
believe that our robust credit administration and risk management programs that we implemented at the portfolio level have allowed us to identify problem areas and respond quickly,
decisively, and more aggressively than some of our peer institutions. In response to the deteriorating economic conditions, we took several steps during the first quarter of 2009 to improve credit
administration. We designated a special assets officer to manage problem loans, instituted weekly meetings between senior credit managers and regional executives to discuss action plans for past due
credits, and initiated monthly criticized/classified asset meetings between executive management and all lending officers. At the monthly criticized/classified asset meetings, specific action plans
are discussed with respect to each loan rated "special mention" or worse. We have also aggressively pursued updated appraisals, and where appropriate, modified loan terms to facilitate continued
performance of the credit.

Lending Limits.Our lending activities are subject to a variety of lending limits imposed by federal law. In general, the bank is
subject to a legal
limit on loans to a single borrower equal to 15% of the bank's capital and unimpaired surplus. This limit will increase or decrease as the bank's capital increases or decreases. Based upon the
capitalization of the bank at December 31, 2010, our legal lending limit was approximately $7.0 million. Even though our legal lending limit was $7.0 million, we maintained an
internal lending limit of $5.2 million. Historically, we have been able to sell participations in our larger loans to other financial institutions, which has allowed us to manage the risk
involved in these loans and to meet the lending needs of our customers requiring extensions of credit in excess of these limits. In the current economic environment, however, it has been difficult to
sell participations to other financial institutions. We expect to sell participations only on a limited basis going forward.

Deposit Products

We offer a full range of deposit services that are typically available in most banks and savings institutions, including checking
accounts, commercial accounts, savings accounts and other time deposits of various types, ranging from daily money market accounts to longer-term certificates of deposit. Transaction
accounts and time deposits are tailored to and offered at rates competitive to those offered in our primary market areas. In addition, we offer certain retirement account services, such as IRAs. We
solicit accounts from individuals, businesses,
associations, organizations and governmental authorities. We believe that our branch infrastructure will assist us in obtaining retail deposits from local customers in the future. Although our total
deposits decreased by $110.6 million, our retail deposits increased by $75.9 million from $401.6 million at December 31, 2009 to $477.5 million at
December 31, 2010 as we reduced our use of wholesale funding. Our retail deposits at December 31, 2010 were 99.3% of our total deposits compared to 67.9% of our total deposits at
December 31, 2009.

12

---



The
following table shows our deposit mix at December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009:

At December 31, 2010

At December 31, 2009

Year-Over-Year ChangeAmount

Percentage
of Total

Amount

Percentage
of Total

Amount

Percentage

Average Rate at
December 31,
2010(dollars in thousands)Retail DepositsNoninterest bearing demand deposits

$
14,574


3.0
%
$
16,971


2.9
%
$
(2,397
)

(14.1
)%


%Interest bearing demand deposits


26,474


5.5
%

29,688


5.0
%

(3,214
)

(10.8
)%

0.98
%Savings and money market accounts


142,644


29.7
%

160,773


27.2
%

(18,129
)

(11.3
)%

1.49
%Time deposits less than $100,000


117,503


24.4
%

89,944


15.2
%

27,559


30.6
%

2.34
%Time deposits greater than $100,000


176,293


36.7
%

104,257


17.6
%

72,036


69.1
%

2.51
%Total Retail Deposits


477,488


99.3
%

401,633


67.9
%

75,855


18.9
%

1.87
%Wholesale DepositsSavings and money market accounts






%

76,817


13.0
%

(76,817
)

(100.0
)%

0.92
%Time deposits less than $100,000


3,505


0.7
%

111,381


18.8
%

(107,876
)

(96.9
)%

1.35
%Time deposits greater than $100,000






%

1,718


0.3
%

(1,718
)

(100.0
)%


%Total Wholesale Deposits


3,505


0.7
%

189,916


32.1
%

(186,411
)

(98.2
)%

1.20
%Total Deposits

$
480,993


100.0
%
$
591,549


100.0
%
$
(110,556
)

(18.7
)%

1.72
%


Other Banking Services

We also offer other bank services including safe deposit boxes, traveler's checks, direct deposit, United States Savings Bonds and
banking by mail. We are associated with the Cirrus, Master-Money, Pulse and Subswitch ATM networks, which are available to our customers throughout the country. We believe that by being associated
with a shared network of ATMs, we are better able to serve our customers and are able to attract customers who are accustomed to the convenience of using ATMs, although we do not believe that
maintaining this association is critical to our success. In addition, we offer courier deposit service for commercial customers and banking hours, from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. daily. We
also offer internet banking services, bill payment services and cash management services, along with remote deposit capture, ACH origination and mobile banking. We currently exercise trust powers as
trustee for the Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan, but do not expect to exercise retail trust powers during our next few years of operation.

Competition

The banking business is highly competitive, and we experience competition in our market areas from many other financial institutions.
Competition among financial institutions is based upon interest rates offered on deposit accounts, interest rates charged on loans, other credit and service charges relating to loans, the quality and
scope of the services rendered, the convenience of banking facilities, and, in the case of loans to commercial borrowers, relative lending limits. We compete with commercial banks, credit unions,
savings institutions, mortgage banking firms, consumer finance companies,

13

---



securities
brokerage firms, insurance companies, money market funds and other mutual funds, as well as other super-regional, national and international financial institutions that operate offices in
our market areas and elsewhere.

As
of June 30, 2010, there were 29 financial institutions other than us in the Charleston market area, 28 in the Myrtle Beach market area and 25 in the Hilton Head market area. We
compete with these institutions both in attracting deposits and in making loans. In addition, we have to attract our customer base from other existing financial institutions and from new residents.
Many of our competitors are well-established, larger financial institutions, such as BB&T, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Carolina First Bank and South Carolina Bank & Trust. These
institutions offer some services, such as extensive and established branch networks and trust services, which we do not provide. In addition, many of our non-bank competitors are not
subject to the same extensive federal regulations that govern bank holding companies and federally insured banks.

Employees

As of December 31, 2010, we had 82 full-time employees and 3 part-time employees.

14

---





SUPERVISION AND REGULATION

Both Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. and Tidelands Bank are subject to extensive state and federal banking regulations that impose
restrictions on and provide for general regulatory oversight of their operations. These laws generally are intended to protect depositors and not shareholders. The following summary is qualified by
reference to the statutory and regulatory provisions discussed. Changes in applicable laws or regulations may have a material effect on our business and prospects. Our operations may be affected by
legislative changes and the policies of various regulatory authorities. We cannot predict the effect that fiscal or monetary policies, economic control or new federal or state legislation may have on
our business and earnings in the future.

On
December 28, 2010, the bank entered into a consent order (the "Consent Order") with Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the "FDIC") and the South Carolina State Board of
Financial Institutions (the "State Board"). The Board of Directors and management of the Bank have been aggressively working to address the findings of the exam and will continue to work to comply
with all the requirements of the Consent Order.

The
Consent Order requires the Bank to, among other things, take the following actions: establish a board committee to monitor and coordinate compliance with the Consent Order; ensure
that the Bank has competent management in place; develop an independent assessment of the Bank's management and staffing needs; achieve Tier 1 capital at least equal to 8% of total assets and
Total Risk-Based capital at least equal to 10% of total risk-weighted assets within 150 days and establish a capital plan that includes a contingency plan to sell or
merge the Bank; implement a plan addressing liquidity, contingency funding, and asset liability management; implement a program designed to reduce the Bank's exposure in problem assets; develop a
three year strategic plan; adopt an effective internal loan review and grading system; adopt a plan to reduce concentrations of credit; implement a policy to ensure the adequacy of the Bank's
allowance for loan and lease losses; implement a written plan to improve and sustain the Bank's earnings; revise, adopt and implement a
written asset/liability management policy to provide effective guidance and control over the Bank's funds management activities; develop a written policy for managing interest rate risk; not declare
or pay any dividends or bonuses or make any distributions of interest, principal, or other sums on subordinated debentures without prior regulatory approval; not accept, renew, or rollover any
brokered deposits unless it is in compliance with regulatory requirements and adopt a plan to eliminate reliance on brokered deposits; limit asset growth to 10% per year; adopt an employee
compensation plan after undertaking an independent review of compensation paid to all the Bank's senior executive officers; and address various violations of law and regulation cited by the FDIC.

The
following discussion is not intended to be a complete list of all the activities regulated by the banking laws or of the impact of such laws and regulations on our operations. It is
intended only to briefly summarize some material provisions. Please refer to Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation for a discussion of regulatory updates in the section entitled,
"Recent Legislative and Regulatory Initiatives to Address Financial and Economic Crises."

Tidelands Bancshares, Inc.

We own 100% of the outstanding capital stock of the bank, and therefore we are required to be registered as a bank holding company
under the federal Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (the "Bank Holding Company Act"). As a result, we are primarily subject to the supervision, examination and reporting requirements of the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve (the "Federal Reserve") under the Bank Holding Company Act and its regulations promulgated thereunder. As a bank holding company located in South Carolina, the South
Carolina State Board of Financial Institutions also regulates and monitors all significant aspects of our operations.

15

---



Permitted Activities.Under the Bank Holding Company Act, a bank holding company is generally permitted to engage in, or acquire
direct or indirect
control of more than 5% of the voting shares of any company engaged in, the following activities:



Activities
that the Federal Reserve has found to be so closely related to banking as to be a proper incident to the business of banking include:



As
a bank holding company we also can elect to be treated as a "financial holding company," which would allow us to engage in a broader array of activities. In sum, a financial holding
company can engage in activities that are financial in nature or incidental or complementary to financial activities, including insurance underwriting, sales and brokerage activities, providing
financial and investment advisory services, underwriting services and limited merchant banking activities. We have not sought financial holding company status, but may elect such status in the future
as our business matures. If we were to elect in writing for financial holding company status, each insured depository institution we control would have to be well capitalized, well managed and have at
least a satisfactory rating under the CRA (discussed below).

The
Federal Reserve has the authority to order a bank holding company or its subsidiaries to terminate any of these activities or to terminate its ownership or control of any subsidiary
when it has reasonable cause to believe that the bank holding company's continued ownership, activity or control constitutes a serious risk to the financial safety, soundness or stability of it or any
of its bank subsidiaries.

Change in Control.In addition, and subject to certain exceptions, the Bank Holding Company Act and the Change in Bank Control
Act, together with
regulations promulgated there under, require Federal Reserve approval prior to any person or company acquiring "control" of a bank holding company. Control is conclusively presumed to exist if an
individual or company acquires 25% or more of any class of voting securities of a bank holding company. Following the relaxing of these restrictions

16

---



by
the Federal Reserve in September 2008, control will be rebuttably presumed to exist if a person acquires more than 33% of the total equity of a bank or bank holding company, of which it may own,
control or have the power to vote not more than 15% of any class of voting securities.

Source of Strength.In accordance with Federal Reserve Board policy, we are expected to act as a source of financial strength to
the bank and to
commit resources to support the bank in circumstances in which we might not otherwise do so. If the bank were to become "undercapitalized" (see below "Tidelands BankPrompt Corrective
Action"), we would be required to provide a guarantee of the bank's plan to return to capital adequacy. Additionally, under the Bank Holding Company Act, the Federal Reserve Board may require a bank
holding company to terminate any activity or relinquish control of a nonbank subsidiary, other than a nonbank subsidiary of a bank, upon the Federal Reserve Board's determination that such activity or
control constitutes a serious risk to the financial soundness or stability of any depository institution subsidiary of the bank holding company. Further, federal bank regulatory authorities have
additional discretion to require a bank holding company to divest itself of any bank or nonbank subsidiaries if the agency determines that divestiture may aid the depository institution's financial
condition. Further, any loans by a bank holding company to a subsidiary bank are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and certain other indebtedness of the subsidiary bank. In the event of a
bank holding company's bankruptcy, any commitment by the bank holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a subsidiary bank at a certain level would be assumed by
the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to priority payment.

Capital Requirements.The Federal Reserve Board imposes certain capital requirements on the bank holding company under the Bank
Holding Company Act,
including a minimum leverage ratio and a minimum ratio of "qualifying" capital to risk-weighted assets. These requirements are essentially the same as those that apply to the bank and are
described below under "Tidelands BankPrompt Corrective Action." Subject to our capital requirements and certain other restrictions, we are able to borrow money to make a capital
contribution to the bank, and these loans may be repaid from dividends paid from the bank to the company. Our ability to pay dividends depends on the bank's ability to pay dividends to us, which is
subject to regulatory restrictions as described below in "Tidelands BankDividends." We are also able to raise capital for contribution to the bank by issuing securities without having to
receive regulatory approval, subject to compliance with federal and state securities laws. Currently, the Company also has to obtain the prior written approval of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond
before declaring or paying any dividends.

South Carolina State Regulation.As a South Carolina bank holding company under the South Carolina Banking and Branching
Efficiency Act, we are
subject to limitations on sale or merger and to regulation by the State Board. We are not required to obtain the approval of the State Board prior to acquiring the capital stock of a national bank,
but we must notify them at least 15 days prior to doing so. We must receive the State Board's approval prior to engaging in the acquisition of a South Carolina state chartered bank or another
South Carolina bank holding company.

Tidelands Bank

The bank operates as a state bank incorporated under the laws of the State of South Carolina and is subject to examination by the State
Board and the FDIC. Deposits in the bank are insured by the FDIC up to a maximum amount, which is currently $250,000 for each non-retirement depositor (though December 31, 2013) and
$250,000 for certain retirement-account depositors.

The
State Board and the FDIC regulate or monitor virtually all areas of the bank's operations, including:



17

---





The
State Board requires the bank to maintain specified capital ratios and imposes limitations on the bank's aggregate investment in real estate, bank premises, and furniture and
fixtures. The State Board also requires the bank to prepare quarterly reports on the bank's financial condition in compliance with its minimum standards and procedures.

All
insured institutions must undergo regular on site examinations by their appropriate banking agency. The cost of examinations of insured depository institutions and any affiliates may
be assessed by the appropriate agency against each institution or affiliate as it deems necessary or appropriate. Insured institutions are required to submit annual reports to the FDIC, their federal
regulatory agency, and their state supervisor when applicable. The FDIC has developed a method for insured depository institutions to provide supplemental disclosure of the estimated fair market value
of assets and liabilities, to the extent feasible and practicable, in any balance sheet, financial statement, report of condition or any other report of any insured depository institution. The FDIC
Improvement Act also requires the federal banking regulatory agencies to prescribe, by regulation, standards for all insured depository institutions and depository institution holding companies
relating, among other things, to the following:



Prompt Corrective Action.As an insured depository institution, the bank is required to comply with the capital requirements
promulgated under the
Federal Deposit Insurance Act and the regulations thereunder, which set forth five capital categories, each with specific regulatory consequences. Under these regulations, the categories
are:



18

---





If
the FDIC determines, after notice and an opportunity for hearing, that the bank is in an unsafe or unsound condition, the regulator is authorized to reclassify the bank to the next
lower capital category (other than critically undercapitalized) and require the submission of a plan to correct the unsafe or unsound condition.

If
the bank is not well capitalized, it cannot accept brokered deposits without prior FDIC approval. Even if approved, rate restrictions apply governing the rate the bank may be
permitted to pay on the brokered deposits. In addition, a bank that is undercapitalized cannot offer an effective yield in excess of 75 basis points over the "national rate" paid on deposits
(including brokered deposits, if approval is granted for the bank to accept them) of comparable size and maturity. The "national rate" is defined as a simple average of rates paid by insured
depository institutions and branches for which data are available and is published weekly by the FDIC. Institutions subject to the restrictions that believe they are operating in an area where the
rates paid on deposits are higher than the "national rate" can use the local market to determine the prevailing rate if they seek and receive a determination from the FDIC that it is operating in a
high-rate area. Regardless of the determination, institutions must use the national rate to determine conformance for all deposits outside their market area.

Moreover,
if the bank becomes less than adequately capitalized, it must adopt a capital restoration plan acceptable to the FDIC. The bank also would become subject to increased
regulatory oversight, and is increasingly restricted in the scope of its permissible activities. Each company having control over an undercapitalized institution also must provide a limited guarantee
that the institution will comply with its capital restoration plan. Except under limited circumstances consistent with an accepted capital restoration plan, an undercapitalized institution may not
grow. An undercapitalized institution may not acquire another institution, establish additional branch offices or engage in any new line of business unless determined by the appropriate federal
banking agency to be consistent with an accepted capital restoration plan, or unless the FDIC determines that the proposed action will further the purpose of prompt corrective action. The appropriate
federal banking agency may take any action

19

---



authorized
for a significantly undercapitalized institution if an undercapitalized institution fails to submit an acceptable capital restoration plan or fails in any material respect to implement a
plan accepted by the agency. A critically undercapitalized institution is subject to having a receiver or conservator appointed to manage its affairs and for loss of its charter to conduct banking
activities.

An
insured depository institution may not pay a management fee to a bank holding company controlling that institution or any other person having control of the institution if, after
making the payment, the institution, would be undercapitalized. In addition, an institution cannot make a capital distribution, such as a dividend or other distribution that is in substance a
distribution of capital to the owners of the institution if following such a distribution the institution would be undercapitalized. Thus, if payment of such a management fee or the making of such
would cause the bank to become undercapitalized, it could not pay a management fee or dividend to us.

As
of December 31, 2010, the bank was deemed to be "adequately capitalized." As further described below, the bank entered into a Consent Order, effective December 28, 2010,
with the FDIC and the State Board which, among other things, requires the bank to achieve Tier 1 capital at least equal to 8% of total assets and Total Risk-Based capital at least
equal to 10% of total risk-weighted assets within 150 days from the effective date of the Consent Order. As of December 31, 2010, the bank was not considered to be in
compliance with the minimum capital requirements established in the Consent Order.

Transactions with Affiliates and Insiders.The company is a legal entity separate and distinct from the bank and its other
subsidiaries. Various
legal limitations restrict the bank from lending or otherwise supplying funds to the company or its non-bank subsidiaries. The company and the bank are subject to Sections 23A and
23B of the Federal Reserve Act and Federal Reserve Regulation W. Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act places limits on the amount of loans or extensions of credit to, or investments
in, or certain other transactions with, affiliates and on the amount of advances to third parties collateralized by the securities or obligations of affiliates. The aggregate of all covered
transactions is limited in amount, as to any one affiliate, to 10% of the bank's capital and surplus and, as to all affiliates combined, to 20% of the bank's capital and surplus. Furthermore, within
the
foregoing limitations as to amount, each covered transaction must meet specified collateral requirements. The bank is forbidden to purchase low quality assets from an affiliate.

Section 23B
of the Federal Reserve Act, among other things, prohibits an institution from engaging in certain transactions with certain affiliates unless the transactions are on
terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable to such institution or its subsidiaries, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with nonaffiliated companies.

Regulation W
generally excludes all non-bank and non-savings association subsidiaries of banks from treatment as affiliates, except to the extent that the
Federal Reserve Board decides to treat these subsidiaries as affiliates. The regulation also limits the amount of loans that can be purchased by a bank from an affiliate to not more than 100% of the
bank's capital and surplus.

The
bank is also subject to certain restrictions on extensions of credit to executive officers, directors, certain principal shareholders, and their related interests. Such extensions of
credit (i) must be made on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with third parties and
(ii) must not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features.

Branching.Under current South Carolina law, we may open branch offices throughout South Carolina with the prior approval of the
State Board. In
addition, with prior regulatory approval, the bank will be able to acquire existing banking operations in South Carolina. Furthermore, federal legislation permits interstate branching, including
out-of-state acquisitions by bank holding companies, interstate branching by banks, and interstate merging by banks. The Dodd-Frank Act removes previous

20

---



state
law restrictions on de novo interstate branching in states such as South Carolina. This change permits out-of-state banks to open de novo branches in states where the
laws of the state where the de novo branch to be opened would permit a bank chartered by that state to open a de novo branch.

Anti-Tying Restrictions.Under amendments to the Bank Holding Company Act and Federal Reserve regulations, a bank is prohibited
from
engaging in certain tying or reciprocity arrangements with its customers. In general, a bank may not extend credit, lease, sell property, or furnish any services or fix or vary the consideration for
these on the condition that (i) the customer obtain or provide some additional credit, property, or services from or to the bank, the bank holding
company or subsidiaries thereof or (ii) the customer may not obtain some other credit, property, or services from a competitor, except to the extent reasonable conditions are imposed to assure
the soundness of the credit extended. Certain arrangements are permissible: a bank may offer combined-balance products and may otherwise offer more favorable terms if a customer obtains two or more
traditional bank products; and certain foreign transactions are exempt from the general rule. A bank holding company or any bank affiliate also is subject to anti-tying requirements in
connection with electronic benefit transfer services.

Community Reinvestment Act.The Community Reinvestment Act requires that, in connection with examinations of financial
institutions within their
respective jurisdictions, a financial institution's primary regulator, which is the FDIC for the bank, shall evaluate the record of each financial institution in meeting the credit needs of its local
community, including low and moderate income neighborhoods. These factors are also considered in evaluating mergers, acquisitions and applications to open a branch or facility. Failure to adequately
meet these criteria could impose additional requirements and limitations on our bank. Additionally, we must publicly disclose the terms of various Community Reinvestment Act-related
agreements.

Finance Subsidiaries.Under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (the "GLBA"), subject to certain conditions imposed by their respective
banking regulators,
national and state-chartered banks are permitted to form "financial subsidiaries" that may conduct financial or incidental activities, thereby permitting bank subsidiaries to engage in certain
activities that previously were impermissible. The GLBA imposes several safeguards and restrictions on financial subsidiaries, including that the parent bank's equity investment in the financial
subsidiary be deducted from the bank's assets and tangible equity for purposes of calculating the bank's capital adequacy. In addition, the GLBA imposes new restrictions on transactions between a bank
and its financial subsidiaries similar to restrictions applicable to transactions between banks and non-bank affiliates.

Consumer Protection Regulations.Activities of the bank are subject to a variety of statutes and regulations designed to protect
consumers. Interest
and other charges collected or contracted for by the bank are subject to state usury laws and federal laws concerning interest rates. The bank's loan operations are also subject to federal laws
applicable to credit transactions, such as the:



21

---





The
deposit operations of the bank also are subject to:



Enforcement Powers.The bank and its "institution-affiliated parties," including its management, employees, agents, independent
contractors, and
consultants such as attorneys and accountants and others who participate in the conduct of the financial institution's affairs, are subject to potential civil and criminal penalties for violations of
law, regulations or written orders of a government agency. These practices can include the failure of an institution to timely file required reports or the filing of false or misleading information or
the submission of inaccurate reports. Civil penalties may be as high as $1,375,000 a day for such violations. Criminal penalties for some financial institution crimes have been increased to
20 years. In addition, regulators are provided with greater flexibility to commence enforcement actions against institutions and institution-affiliated parties. Possible enforcement actions
include the termination of deposit insurance. Furthermore, banking agencies' power to issue cease-and-desist orders were expanded. Such orders may, among other things, require
affirmative action to correct any harm resulting from a violation or practice, including restitution, reimbursement, indemnifications or guarantees against loss. A financial institution may also be
ordered to restrict its growth, dispose of certain assets, rescind agreements or contracts, or take other actions as determined by the ordering agency to be appropriate.

Anti-Money Laundering.Financial institutions must maintain anti-money laundering programs that include established internal
policies, procedures and controls; a designated compliance officer; an ongoing employee training program; and testing of the program by an independent audit function. The company and the bank are also
prohibited from entering into specified financial transactions and account relationships and must meet enhanced standards for due diligence and "knowing your customer" in their dealings with foreign
financial institutions, foreign customers and other high risk customers. Financial institutions must take reasonable steps to conduct enhanced scrutiny of account relationships to guard against money
laundering and to report any suspicious transactions, and recent laws provide law enforcement authorities with increased access to financial information maintained by banks. Anti-money
laundering obligations have been substantially strengthened as a result of the USA PATRIOT Act, enacted in 2001 and renewed in 2006. Bank regulators routinely examine institutions for compliance with
these obligations and are required to consider compliance in connection with the regulatory review of applications. The regulatory authorities have been active in imposing "cease and desist" orders
and money penalty sanctions against institutions found to be violating these obligations.

USA PATRIOT Act.The USA PATRIOT Act became effective on October 26, 2001, amended, in part, the Bank Secrecy Act, and
provides, in part, for
the facilitation of information sharing among governmental entities and financial institutions for the purpose of combating terrorism and money laundering by enhancing anti-money
laundering and financial transparency laws, as well as enhanced information collection tools and enforcement mechanics for the U.S. government, including: (i) requiring standards for verifying
customer identification at account opening; (ii) rules to promote cooperation among financial institutions, regulators and law enforcement entities in identifying parties that may be involved
in terrorism or money laundering; (iii) reports by nonfinancial trades and

22

---



businesses
filed with the Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network for transactions exceeding $10,000; and (iv) filing suspicious activities reports by brokers and dealers if
they believe a customer may be violating U.S. laws and regulations and requires enhanced due diligence requirements for financial institutions that administer, maintain, or manage private bank
accounts or correspondent accounts for non-U.S. persons. Bank regulators routinely examine institutions for compliance with these obligations and are required to consider compliance in
connection with the regulatory review of applications.

Under
the USA PATRIOT Act, the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") can send our banking regulatory agencies lists of the names of persons suspected of involvement in terrorist
activities. The bank can be requested, to search its records for any relationships or transactions with persons on those lists. If the bank finds any relationships or transactions, it must
file a suspicious activity report and contact the FBI.

The Office of Foreign Assets Control.The Office of Foreign Assets Control ("OFAC"), which is a division of the U.S. Department
of the Treasury, is
responsible for helping to insure that United States entities do not engage in transactions with "enemies" of the United States, as defined by various Executive Orders and Acts of Congress. OFAC has
sent, and will send, our banking regulatory agencies lists of names of persons and organizations suspected of aiding, harboring or engaging in terrorist acts. If the bank finds a name on any
transaction, account or wire transfer that is on an OFAC list, it must freeze such account, file a suspicious activity report and notify the FBI. The bank has appointed an OFAC compliance
officer to oversee the inspection of its accounts and the filing of any notifications. The bank actively checks high-risk OFAC areas such as new accounts, wire transfers and customer
files. The bank performs these checks utilizing software, which is updated each time a modification is made to the lists provided by OFAC and other agencies of Specially Designated Nationals and
Blocked Persons.

Privacy and Credit Reporting.Financial institutions are required to disclose their policies for collecting and protecting
confidential information.
Customers generally may prevent financial institutions from
sharing nonpublic personal financial information with nonaffiliated third parties except under narrow circumstances, such as the processing of transactions requested by the consumer or when the
financial institution is jointly sponsoring a product or service with a nonaffiliated third party. Additionally, financial institutions generally may not disclose consumer account numbers to any
nonaffiliated third party for use in telemarketing, direct mail marketing or other marketing to consumers. It is the bank's policy not to disclose any personal information unless required by law.

Like
other lending institutions, the bank utilizes credit bureau data in its underwriting activities. Use of such data is regulated under the Federal Credit Reporting Act on a uniform,
nationwide basis, including credit reporting, prescreening, sharing of information between affiliates, and the use of credit data. The Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 (the "FACT
Act") authorizes states to enact identity theft laws that are not inconsistent with the conduct required by the provisions of the FACT Act.

Payment of Dividends.A South Carolina state bank may not pay dividends from its capital. All dividends must be paid out of
undivided profits then on
hand, after deducting expenses, including reserves for losses and bad debts. The bank is authorized to pay cash dividends up to 100% of net income in any calendar year without obtaining the prior
approval of the State Board, provided that the bank received a composite rating of one or two at the last federal or state regulatory examination. The bank must obtain approval from the State Board
prior to the payment of any other cash dividends. In addition, under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act, the bank may not pay a dividend if, after paying the dividend, the bank
would be undercapitalized. As described further below, on December 28, 2010, the bank entered into the Consent Order with the FDIC and the State Board which, among other things, prohibits the
Bank from declaring or paying any dividends or making any

23

---



distributions
of interest, principal, or other sums on subordinated debentures without the prior approval of the supervisory authorities.

Check 21.The Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act gives "substitute checks," such as a digital image of a check and
copies made from that
image, the same legal standing as the original paper check. Some of the major provisions include:



Effect of Governmental Monetary Policies.Our earnings are affected by domestic economic conditions and the monetary and fiscal
policies of the
United States government and its agencies. The Federal Reserve Board's monetary policies have had, and are likely to continue to have, an important impact on the operating results of commercial banks
through its power to implement national monetary policy in order, among other things, to curb inflation or combat a recession. The monetary policies of the Federal Reserve Board have major effects
upon the levels of bank loans, investments and deposits through its open market operations in United States government securities and through its regulation of the discount rate on borrowings of
member banks and the reserve requirements against member bank deposits. It is not possible to predict the nature or impact of future changes in monetary and fiscal policies.

Insurance of Accounts and Regulation by the FDIC.Our deposits are insured up to applicable limits by the
Deposit Insurance Fund of the FDIC. The Deposit Insurance Fund is the successor to the Bank Insurance Fund and the Savings Association Insurance Fund, which were merged effective March 31,
2006. As insurer, the FDIC imposes deposit insurance premiums and is authorized to conduct examinations of and to require reporting by FDIC insured institutions. It also may prohibit any FDIC insured
institution from engaging in any activity the FDIC determines by regulation or order to pose a serious risk to the insurance fund.

Due
to the large number of recent bank failures, and the FDIC's new Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, the FDIC adopted a revised risk-based deposit insurance assessment
schedule in February 2009, which raised deposit insurance premiums. The FDIC also implemented a five basis point special assessment of each insured depository institution's assets minus Tier 1
capital as of June 30, 2009, which special assessment amount was capped at 10 basis points times the institution's assessment base for the second quarter of 2009. In addition, the FDIC required
financial institutions like us to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010 through and including 2012 to
re-capitalize the Deposit Insurance Fund. The FDIC may exercise its discretion as supervisor and insurer to exempt an institution from the prepayment requirement if the FDIC determines
that the prepayment would adversely affect the safety and soundness of the institution. We did not request exemption from the prepayment requirement. During

24

---



2010,
we expensed $1.4 million in deposit insurance. The rule also provides for increasing the FDIC-assessment rates by three basis points effective January 1, 2011.

FDIC
insured institutions are required to pay a Financing Corporation assessment, in order to fund the interest on bonds issued to resolve thrift failures in the 1980s. For the first
quarter of 2010, the Financing Corporation assessment equaled 1.14 basis points for domestic deposits. These assessments, which may be revised based upon the level of deposits, will continue until the
bonds mature in the years 2017 through 2019.

The
FDIC may terminate the deposit insurance of any insured depository institution, including the bank, if it determines after a hearing that the institution has engaged in unsafe or
unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, order or condition imposed by the FDIC or the OCC. It also may
suspend deposit insurance temporarily during the hearing process for the permanent termination of insurance, if the institution has no tangible capital. If insurance of accounts is terminated, the
accounts at the institution at the time of the termination, less subsequent withdrawals, shall continue to be insured for a period of six months to two years, as determined by the FDIC. Management of
the bank is not aware of any practice, condition or violation that might lead to termination of the bank's deposit insurance.

Proposed Legislation and Regulatory Action.New regulations and statutes are regularly proposed that
contain wide-ranging proposals for altering the structures, regulations and competitive relationships of the nation's financial institutions. We cannot predict whether or in what form any
proposed regulation or statute will be adopted or the extent to which our business may be affected by any new regulation or statute.

25

---





Item 1A.    Risk Factors.

Our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be harmed by any of the following risks, or other risks that have
not been identified or which we believe are immaterial or unlikely. Shareholders should carefully consider the risks described below in conjunction with the other information in this
Form 10-K and the information incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K, including our consolidated financial statements and related notes.

We have become subject to a consent order that will require us to take certain actions.

On June 1, 2010, the FDIC and the State Board conducted their annual joint examination of the bank. As a result of the
examination, the bank entered into a Consent Order, effective December 28, 2010, with the FDIC and the State Board, which contains, among other things, a requirement that our bank achieve and
maintain minimum capital requirements that exceed the minimum regulatory capital ratios for "well capitalized" banks. Under this enforcement action, the bank may no longer accept, renew, or roll over
brokered deposits. In addition, under the Consent Order, we are required to obtain FDIC approval before making certain payments to departing executives and before adding new directors or senior
executives. Our regulators have considerable discretion in whether to grant required approvals, and no assurance can be given that such approvals would be forthcoming. In addition, we are required to
take certain other actions in the areas of capital, liquidity, asset quality, and interest rate risk management, as well as to file periodic reports with the FDIC and the State Board regarding our
progress in complying with the Consent Order. Any material
failure to comply with the terms of the Consent Order could result in further enforcement action by the FDIC. While we intend to take such actions as may be necessary to comply with the requirements
of the Consent Order and subsequent FDIC guidance, we may be unable to comply fully with the deadlines or other terms of the Consent Order. For further discussion of the Consent Order, please see
below.

Our bank may become subject to a federal conservatorship or receivership if it cannot comply with the Consent Order, or if its condition continues to deteriorate.

As noted above, the bank executed a Consent Order with the FDIC and the State Board. The Consent Order requires the Bank to, among
other things, implement a plan to achieve and maintain minimum capital requirements. The condition of our loan portfolio may continue to deteriorate in the current economic environment and thus
continue to deplete our capital and other financial resources. Should we fail to comply with the capital and liquidity funding requirements in the Consent Order, or suffer a continued deterioration in
our financial condition, we may be subject to being placed into a federal conservatorship or receivership by the FDIC, with the FDIC appointed as conservator or receiver. If these events occur, we
probably would suffer a complete loss of the value of our ownership interest in the bank and we subsequently may be exposed to significant claims by the FDIC. Federal conservatorship or receivership
would also result in a complete loss of your investment.

Difficult market conditions in our coastal markets and economic trends have adversely affected our industry and our business and may continue to do so.

Our business has been directly affected by market conditions, trends in industry and finance, legislative and regulatory changes, and
changes in governmental monetary and fiscal policies and inflation, all of which are beyond our control. The current economic downturn, increase in unemployment and other events that have negatively
affected both household and corporate incomes, both nationally and locally, have decreased the demand for loans and our other products and services and have increased the number of customers who fail
to pay interest and/or principal on their loans. As a result, we have experienced significant declines in our coastal real estate markets with decreasing prices and increasing delinquencies and
foreclosures, which have negatively affected the credit performance of our loans and resulted in increases in the level of our nonperforming assets and

26

---



charge-offs
of problem loans. At the same time, competition among depository institutions for deposits and quality loans has increased significantly. Bank and bank holding company stock
prices have been negatively affected, as has the ability of banks and bank holding companies to raise capital or borrow in the debt markets compared to recent years. These market conditions and the
tightening of credit have led to increased deficiencies in our loan portfolio, increased market volatility and widespread reduction in general business activity.

Our
future success significantly depends upon the growth in population, income levels, deposits and housing starts in the Charleston, Myrtle Beach and Hilton Head market areas. Unlike
many larger institutions, we are not able to spread the risks of unfavorable economic conditions across a large number of diversified economies and geographic locations. If the markets in which we
operate do not recover and grow as anticipated or if prevailing economic conditions locally or nationally do not improve, our business may continue to be negatively impacted.

A significant portion of our loan portfolio is secured by real estate, and events that negatively affect the real estate market could hurt our business.

Beginning in the second half of 2007 and continuing through 2010, the financial markets were beset by significant volatility associated
with subprime mortgages, including adverse impacts on credit quality and liquidity within the financial markets. The volatility has been exacerbated by a significant decline in the value of real
estate in our coastal markets. As of December 31, 2010, approximately 71.9% of our loans were secured by real estate mortgages. The real estate collateral for these loans provides an alternate
source of repayment in the event of default by the borrower and may deteriorate in value during the time the credit is extended. A further weakening of the real estate market in our primary market
areas could result in an increase in the number of borrowers who default on their loans and a reduction in the value of the collateral securing their loans, which in turn could have an adverse effect
on our profitability, asset quality and ultimately our capital levels. If we are required to liquidate the collateral securing a loan to satisfy the debt during a period of reduced real estate values,
our earnings and shareholder's equity could be adversely affected. Acts of nature, including hurricanes, tornados, earthquakes, fires and floods, which may cause uninsured damage and other loss of
value to real estate that secures these loans, may also negatively impact our financial condition.

We are exposed to higher credit risk by commercial real estate, commercial and industrial and construction lending.

Commercial real estate, commercial and industrial and construction lending usually involve higher credit risks than that of
single-family residential lending. As of December 31, 2010, the following loan types accounted for the stated percentages of our total loan portfolio: commercial real estate38.0%,
commercial and industrial5.3%, residential construction14.4%, and commercial construction7.5%. These types of loans involve larger loan balances to a single
borrower or groups of related borrowers. Commercial real estate loans may be affected to a greater extent than residential loans by adverse conditions in real estate markets or the economy because
commercial real estate borrowers' ability to repay their loans depends on successful development of their properties, in addition to the factors affecting residential real estate borrowers. These
loans also involve greater risk because they generally are not fully amortizing over the loan period, but have a balloon payment due at maturity. A borrower's ability to make a balloon payment
typically will depend on being able to either refinance the loan or sell the underlying property in a timely manner.

Commercial
and industrial loans are typically based on the borrowers' ability to repay the loans from the cash flow of their businesses. These loans may involve greater risk because the
availability of funds to repay each loan depends substantially on the success of the business itself. In addition, the collateral securing the loans have the following characteristics: (a) they
depreciate over time, (b) they

27

---



are
difficult to appraise and liquidate, and (c) they fluctuate in value based on the success of the business.

Risk
of loss on a construction loan depends largely upon whether our initial estimate of the property's value at completion of construction equals or exceeds the cost of the property
construction (including interest), the availability of permanent take-out financing, and the builder's ability to ultimately sell the property. During the construction phase, a number of
factors can result in delays and cost overruns. If estimates of value are inaccurate or if actual construction costs exceed estimates, the value of the property securing the loan may be insufficient
to ensure full repayment when completed through a permanent loan or by seizure of collateral.

Commercial
real estate, commercial and industrial and construction loans are more susceptible to a risk of loss during a downturn in the business cycle. Our underwriting, review and
monitoring cannot eliminate all of the risks related to these loans.

As
of December 31, 2010, our outstanding commercial real estate loans were equal to 436% of our total capital. The banking regulators are giving 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 levels as a result of commercial real estate lending growth and exposures.

If our allowance for loan losses is not sufficient to cover actual loan losses, or if credit delinquencies increase, our losses could increase.

Our success depends, to a significant extent, on the quality of our assets, particularly loans. Like other financial institutions, we
face the risk that our customers will not repay their loans, that the collateral securing the payment of those loans may be insufficient to assure repayment, and that we may be unsuccessful in
recovering the remaining loan balances. The risk of loss varies with, among other things, general economic conditions, the type of loan, the creditworthiness of the borrower over the term of the loan
and, for many of our loans, the value of the real estate and other assets serving as collateral. Management makes various assumptions and judgments about the
collectibility of our loan portfolio after considering these and other factors. Based in part on those assumptions and judgments, we maintain an allowance for loan losses in an attempt to cover any
loan losses that may occur. In determining the size of the allowance, we also rely on an analysis of our loan portfolio based on historical loss experience, volume and types of loans, trends in
classification, delinquencies and nonaccruals, national and local economic conditions and other pertinent information, including the results of external loan reviews. Despite our efforts, our loan
assessment techniques may fail to properly account for potential loan losses, and, as a result, our established loan loss reserves may prove insufficient. If we are unable to generate income to
compensate for these losses, they could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

In
addition, federal and state regulators periodically review our allowance for loan losses and may require us to increase our allowance for loan losses or recognize further loan
charge-offs, based on judgments different than those of our management. Higher charge-off rates and an increase in our allowance for loan losses may hurt our overall financial
performance and may increase our cost of funds. As of December 31, 2010, we had 76 loans on nonaccrual status totaling approximately $35.6 million, and our allowance for loan loss was
$11.5 million. For the year ended December 31, 2010, we recorded $16.3 million as a provision for loan losses, compared to $14.7 million in 2009. Our current and future
allowances for loan losses may not be adequate to cover future loan losses given current and future market conditions.

28

---



Institution-specific and/or broader industry-wide events may trigger a reduction in the availability of funding needed for day-to-day
operations, resulting in a liquidity crisis.

We require a certain level of available funding each day to meet the liquidity demands of our operations. These demands include funding
for new loan production, funding available for customer withdrawal requests and maturing time deposits not being renewed, and funding for settlement of investment portfolio transactions. Both
institution specific events such as deterioration in our credit ratings resulting from a weakened capital position or from lack of earnings and industry-wide events such as a collapse of
credit markets may result in a reduction of available funding sources sufficient to cover the liquidity demands. Such a crisis could significantly jeopardize our ability to continue operations.

Recent legislation and administrative actions authorizing the U.S. government to take direct actions within the financial services industry may not stabilize the U.S.
financial system.

Under the EESA, which was enacted on October 3, 2008, the U.S. Treasury has the authority to, among other things, invest in
financial institutions and purchase up to $700 billion of troubled assets and mortgages from financial institutions for the purpose of stabilizing and providing liquidity to the U.S. financial
markets. Under the CPP, the U.S. Treasury committed to purchase up to $250 billion of preferred stock and warrants in eligible institutions. The EESA also temporarily increased FDIC deposit
insurance coverage to $250,000 per depositor through December 31, 2009, which was recently permanently increased to $250,000 under the Dodd-Frank Act.

On
February 10, 2009, the U.S. Treasury announced the Financial Stability Plan which, among other things, provides a forward-looking supervisory capital assessment program that is
mandatory for banking institutions with over $100 billion of assets and makes capital available to financial institutions qualifying under a process and criteria similar to the CPP. In
addition, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the "ARRA") was signed into law on February 17, 2009, and includes, among other things, extensive new restrictions on the
compensation and governance arrangements of financial institutions.

On
July 21, 2010, the President signed into law the Dodd-Frank Act, a comprehensive regulatory framework that will affect every financial institution in the U.S. The
Dodd-Frank Act includes, among other measures, changes to the deposit insurance and financial regulatory systems, enhanced bank capital requirements and provisions designed to protect
consumers in financial transactions. Regulatory agencies will implement new regulations in the future which will establish the parameters of the new regulatory framework and provide a clearer
understanding of the legislation's effect on banks. The changes resulting from the Dodd-Frank Act may impact the profitability of our business activities, require changes to certain of our
business practices, impose upon us more stringent capital, liquidity, and leverage requirements or otherwise adversely affect our business. In particular, the potential impact of the
Dodd-Frank Act on our operations and activities, both currently and prospectively, include, among others:



29

---



Numerous
actions have been taken by the U.S. Congress, the Federal Reserve, the U.S. Treasury, the FDIC, the SEC and others to address the current liquidity and credit crisis that
followed the sub-prime mortgage crisis that commenced in 2007, including the Financial Stability Program adopted by the U.S. Treasury. We cannot predict the actual effects of EESA, ARRA,
the Dodd-Frank Act, and various other governmental, regulatory, monetary and fiscal initiatives which have been and may be enacted on the economy, the financial markets, or on us. The
terms and costs of these activities, or the failure of these actions to help stabilize the financial markets, asset prices, market liquidity and a continuation or worsening of current financial market
and economic conditions, could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and the price of our common stock.

Recent negative developments in the financial industry and the domestic and international credit markets may adversely affect our operations and results.

Negative developments in the global credit and securitization markets have resulted in uncertainty in the financial markets in general
with the expectation of continued uncertainty in 2011. As a result of this "credit crunch," commercial as well as consumer loan portfolio performances have deteriorated at many institutions and the
competition for deposits and quality loans has increased significantly. In addition, the values of real estate collateral supporting many commercial loans and home mortgages have declined and may
continue to decline. Global securities markets, and bank holding company stock prices in particular, have been negatively affected, as has the ability of banks and bank holding companies to raise
capital or borrow in the debt markets. Bank regulatory agencies are expected to be active in responding to concerns and trends identified in examinations, including the expected issuance of many
formal enforcement orders. Negative developments in the financial industry and the domestic and international credit markets, and the impact of new legislation in response to those developments, may
negatively impact our operations by restricting our business operations, including our ability to originate or sell loans, and adversely impact our financial
performance. We can provide no assurance regarding the manner in which any new laws and regulations will affect us.

Because of our participation in the Treasury Department's Capital Purchase Program, we are subject to several restrictions including restrictions on compensation paid to our
executives and other employees.

Under the terms of the CPP Purchase Agreement between us and the Treasury, we adopted certain standards for executive compensation and
corporate governance for the period during which the Treasury holds the equity we issued or may issue to the Treasury, including the common stock we may issue under the CPP Warrant. These standards
generally apply to our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and the three next most highly compensated senior executive officers. The standards include (1) ensuring that incentive
compensation for senior executives does not encourage unnecessary and excessive risks that threaten the value of the financial institution; (2) required clawback of any bonus or incentive
compensation paid to a senior executive and the next 20 most highly compensated employees based on statements of earnings, gains or other criteria that are later proven to be materially inaccurate;
(3) prohibition on making golden parachute payments to senior executives and the next five most highly compensated employees; and (4) agreement not to deduct for tax purposes executive
compensation in excess of $500,000 for each senior executive. In particular, the change to the deductibility limit on executive compensation will likely increase the overall cost of our compensation
programs in future periods and may make it more difficult to attract suitable candidates to serve as executive officers.

30

---



Legislation or regulatory changes could cause us to seek to repurchase the preferred stock and warrant that we sold to the U.S. Treasury under the Capital Purchase Program.

Legislation and regulation that have been adopted after we closed on our sale of Series T Preferred Stock and warrants to the
Treasury for $14.4 million under the CPP on December 19, 2008, or any legislation or regulations that may be implemented in the future, may have a material effect on the terms of our CPP
transaction with the Treasury. If we determine that any such legislation or any regulations alter the terms of our CPP transaction with the Treasury in ways that we believe are adverse to our ability
to effectively manage our business, then we may seek to unwind, in whole or in part, the CPP transaction by repurchasing some or all of the preferred stock and the warrant that we sold to the
Treasury. If we were to repurchase all or a portion of the preferred stock or warrant, then our capital levels could be materially reduced.

Our continued operations and future growth may require us to raise additional capital in the future, but that capital may not be available when we need it.

We are required by federal and state regulatory authorities to maintain adequate levels of capital to support our operations. Pursuant
to the Consent Order, the bank is required to achieve Tier 1 capital at least equal to 8% of total assets and Total Risk-Based capital at least equal to 10% of total
risk-weighted assets within 150 days. As of December 31, 2010, the bank is not in compliance with the capital requirements established in the Consent Order. We may at some
point need to raise additional capital to comply with the Consent Order, support our operations, and protect against any further deterioration in our loan portfolio. In addition, we intend to redeem
the Series T Preferred Stock that we issued to the Treasury under the CPP before the dividends on the Series T Preferred Stock increase from 5% per annum to 9% per annum in 2014, and we
may need to raise additional capital to do so. We may be unable to raise additional capital, if and when needed, on terms acceptable to us, or at all. If we cannot raise additional capital when
needed, our ability to continue our current operations or further expand our operations through internal growth and acquisitions could be materially impaired. In addition, if we decide to raise
additional equity capital, your interest could be diluted.

A large percentage of the loans in our portfolio currently include exceptions to our loan policies and supervisory guidelines.

All of the loans that we make are subject to written loan policies adopted by our board of directors and to supervisory guidelines
imposed by our regulators. Our loan policies are designed to reduce the risks associated with the loans that we make by requiring our loan officers, before closing a loan, to take certain steps that
vary depending on the type and amount of the loan. These steps include making sure the proper liens are documented and perfected on property securing a loan, and requiring proof of adequate insurance
coverage on property securing loans. Loans that do not fully comply with our loan policies are known as "exceptions." While we generally underwrite the loans in our portfolio in accordance with our
own internal underwriting guidelines and regulatory supervisory guidelines, in certain circumstances we have made loans which exceed either our internal underwriting guidelines, supervisory
guidelines, or both. We categorize exceptions as policy exceptions, financial statement exceptions and collateral exceptions. Interagency guidelines for real estate lending policies allow institutions
to originate loans in excess of the supervisory loan to value limits, however, the aggregate amount of such loans should not exceed 100% of total capital.

As
of December 31, 2010, approximately $109.8 million of our loans, or 257.1% of our bank's capital, had loan-to-value ratios that exceeded
regulatory supervisory guidelines, of which 107 loans totaling approximately $42.6 million had loan-to-value ratios of 100% or more. In addition, supervisory limits on
commercial loan to value exceptions are set at 30% of a bank's capital. At December 31, 2010, $58.7 million of our commercial loans, or 137.6% of our bank's capital, exceeded the
supervisory loan to value ratio. As of December 31, 2010, approximately 12.1% of the loans in our portfolio

31

---



included
collateral exceptions to our loan policies, which exceeds the 10% suggested by regulatory guidance. As a result of these exceptions, those loans may have a higher risk of loss than the other
loans in our portfolio that fully comply with our loan policies. In addition, we may be subject to regulatory action by federal or state banking authorities if they believe the number of exceptions in
our loan portfolio represents an unsafe banking practice. Although we have taken steps to reduce the number of exceptions in our loan portfolio, we may not be successful in reducing the number of
exceptions in our loan portfolio.

Our net interest income could be negatively affected by changes in interest rates, recent developments in the credit and real estate markets and competition in our primary
market area.

As a financial institution, our earnings significantly depend upon our net interest income, which is the difference between the income
that we earn on interest-earning assets, such as loans and investment securities, and the expense that we pay on interest-bearing liabilities, such as deposits and borrowings. Therefore, any change in
general market interest rates, including changes resulting from changes in the Federal Reserve's fiscal and monetary policies, affects us more than non-financial institutions and can have
a significant effect on our net interest income and net income.

The
Federal Reserve reduced interest rates on three occasions in 2007 by a total of 100 basis points, to 4.25%, and by another 400 basis points, to a range of 0% to 0.25%, during 2008.
Rates remained steady for 2010. On March 18, 2009, the Federal Reserve announced its decision to purchase as much as $300 billion of long-term treasuries in an effort to
maintain low interest rates. Approximately 53.6% of our loans were variable rate loans at December 31, 2010. The interest rates on a significant segment of these loans decrease when the Federal
Reserve reduces interest rates. However the interest that we earn on our assets may not change in the same amount or at the same rates as the interest rates we must pay on our sources of funds.
Accordingly, increases in interest rates may reduce our net interest income due to increasing costs of funds. In addition, an increase in interest rates may decrease the demand for loans. Furthermore,
increases in interest rates will add to the expenses of our borrowers, which may adversely affect their ability to repay their loans with us.

Increased
nonperforming loans and the decrease in interest rates reduced our net interest income during 2010 and could cause additional pressure on net interest income in future periods.
This
reduction in net interest income may also be exacerbated by the high level of competition that we face in our primary market areas. Any significant reduction in our net interest income could
negatively affect our business and could have a material adverse effect on our capital, financial condition and results of operations.

Higher FDIC Deposit Insurance premiums and assessments that we are required to pay could have an adverse effect on our earnings and our ability to pay our liabilities as
they come due.

As a member institution of the FDIC, we are required to pay quarterly deposit insurance premium assessments to the FDIC. Due to the
large number of recent bank failures, and the FDIC's new Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, the FDIC adopted a revised risk-based deposit insurance assessment schedule in February
2009, which raised deposit insurance premiums. The FDIC also implemented a five basis point special assessment of each insured depository institution's assets minus Tier 1 capital as of
June 30, 2009, which special assessment amount was capped at 10 basis points times the institution's assessment base for the second quarter of 2009. In addition, the FDIC required financial
institutions like us to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010 through and including 2012 to re-capitalize
the Deposit Insurance Fund, unless the FDIC exempted the institution from the prepayment requirement upon a determination that the prepayment would adversely affect the safety and soundness of the
institution. We did not request exemption from the prepayment requirement. During 2010, we expensed $1.4 million in deposit insurance.

32

---





In February 2011, the FDIC approved two rules that amend the deposit insurance assessment regulations. The first rule implements a provision in the Dodd-Frank Act that
changes the assessment base from one based on domestic deposits to one based on assets. The assessment base changes from adjusted domestic deposits to average consolidated total assets minus average
tangible equity. The second rule changes the deposit insurance assessment system for large institutions in conjunction with the guidance given in the Dodd-Frank Act. Since the new base
would be much larger than the current base, the FDIC will lower assessment rates, which achieves the FDIC s goal of not significantly altering the total amount of revenue collected from the industry.
Risk categories and debt ratings will be eliminated from the assessment calculation for large banks which will instead use scorecards. The scorecards will include financial measures that are
predictive of long-term performance. A large financial institution will continue to be defined as an insured depository institution with at least $10 billion in assets. Both changes
in the assessment system will be effective as of April 1, 2011 and will be payable at the end of September.

Although
we cannot predict what the insurance assessment rates will be in the future, further deterioration in either risk-based capital ratios or adjustments to the base
assessment rates could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Liquidity risks could affect operations and jeopardize our financial condition.

The goal of liquidity management is to ensure that we can meet customer loan requests, customer deposit maturities and withdrawals, and
other cash commitments under both normal operating conditions and under unpredictable circumstances of industry or market stress. To achieve this goal, our asset/liability committee establishes
liquidity guidelines that require sufficient asset-based liquidity to cover potential funding requirements and to avoid over-dependence on volatile, less reliable funding sources.

Liquidity
is essential to our business. An inability to raise funds through traditional deposits, borrowings, the sale of securities or loans, issuance of additional equity securities,
and other sources could have a substantial negative impact on our liquidity. Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance our activities and with terms acceptable to us could be
impaired by factors that impact us specifically or the financial services industry in general. Factors that could detrimentally impact access to liquidity sources include a decrease in the level of
our business activity as a result of a downturn in the markets in which our loans are concentrated, a change in our status from well-capitalized to adequately capitalized, or regulatory
action against us. Our ability to borrow could also be impaired by factors that are not specific to us, such as the current disruption in the financial markets and negative views and expectations
about the prospects for the financial services industry as a result of the continuing turmoil and deterioration in the credit markets.

Traditionally,
the primary sources of funds of our bank subsidiary have been customer deposits and loan repayments. As of December 31, 2010, we had brokered deposits of
$3.5 million, representing 0.73% of our total deposits, of which $1.9 million are scheduled to mature in the first quarter of 2011. Because of the Consent Order, we may not accept
brokered deposits unless a waiver is granted by the FDIC. We must find other sources of liquidity to replace these deposits as they mature. Secondary sources of liquidity may include proceeds from
FHLB advances and federal funds lines of credit from correspondent banks. The bank's credit risk rating at the FHLB has been negatively impacted, resulting in more restrictive borrowing requirements.
Because we are adequately capitalized, we are required to pledge additional collateral for FHLB advances.

We
actively monitor the depository institutions that hold our federal funds sold and due from banks cash balances. We cannot provide assurances that access to our cash and cash
equivalents and federal funds sold will not be impacted by adverse conditions in the financial markets. Our emphasis is primarily on safety of principal, and we diversify cash, due from banks, and
federal funds sold among

33

---



counterparties
to minimize exposure relating to any one of these entities. We routinely review the financials of our counterparties as part of our risk management process. Balances in our accounts
with financial institutions in the U.S. may exceed the FDIC insurance limits. While we monitor and adjust the balances in our accounts as appropriate, these balances could be impacted if the
correspondent financial institutions fail.

Due
to the Consent Order, we may not accept brokered deposits unless a waiver is granted by the FDIC. Although we currently do not utilize brokered deposits as a funding source, if we
were to seek to use such funding source, there is no assurance that the FDIC will grant us the approval when requested. These restrictions could have a substantial negative impact on our liquidity.
Additionally, we are restricted from offering an effective yield on deposits of more than 75 basis points over the national rates published by the FDIC weekly on their website.

There
can be no assurance that our sources of funds will be adequate for our liquidity needs, and we may be compelled to seek additional sources of financing in the future. Specifically,
we may seek additional debt in the future to achieve our business objectives. There can be no assurance that additional borrowings, if sought, would be available to us or, if available, would be on
favorable terms. Bank and holding company stock prices have been negatively impacted by the recent adverse economic conditions, as has the ability of banks and holding companies to raise capital or
borrow in the debt markets. If additional financing sources are unavailable or not available on reasonable terms, our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and future
prospects could be materially adversely impacted.

We depend on key individuals, and our continued success depends on our ability to identify and retain individuals with experience and relationships in our markets. The loss
of one or more of these key individuals could curtail our growth and adversely affect our prospects.

Robert E. Coffee, Jr., our president and chief executive officer, has extensive and long-standing ties within our market
areas and substantial experience with our operations, which has contributed significantly to our business. If we lose the services of Mr. Coffee, he would be difficult to replace, and our
business and development could be materially and adversely affected.

To
succeed in our markets, we must identify and retain experienced key management members with local expertise and relationships in these markets. We expect that competition for
qualified management in our markets will be intense and that there will be a limited number of qualified persons with knowledge of and experience in the community banking industry in these markets. In
addition, the process of identifying and recruiting individuals with the combination of skills and attributes required to carry out our strategy requires both management and financial resources and is
often lengthy. Our inability to identify, recruit and retain talented personnel to manage our offices effectively would limit our growth and could materially adversely affect our business, financial
condition and results of operations. The loss of the services of several key personnel could adversely affect our strategy and prospects to the extent we are unable to replace them.

We face strong competition for customers, which could prevent us from obtaining customers or may cause us to pay higher interest rates to attract customer
deposits.

The banking business is highly competitive, and we experience competition in our markets from many other financial institutions.
Customer loyalty can be easily influenced by a competitor's new products, especially offerings that could provide cost savings or a higher return to the customer. Moreover, this competitive industry
could become even more competitive as a result of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and continued consolidation. We compete with commercial banks, credit unions, savings and loan
associations, mortgage banking firms, consumer finance companies, securities brokerage firms, insurance companies, money market funds and other mutual funds, as well

34

---



as
super-regional, national and international financial institutions that operate offices in our primary market areas and elsewhere.

We
compete with these institutions both in attracting deposits and in making loans. In addition, we have to attract our customer base from other existing financial institutions and from
new residents. Many of our competitors are well-established, larger financial institutions, such as BB&T, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Carolina First Bank and South Carolina Bank &
Trust. These institutions offer some services that we do not provide, such as extensive and established branch networks and trust services. We also compete with local community banks in our market. We
may not be able to compete successfully with other financial institutions in our market, and we may have to pay higher interest rates to attract deposits, accept lower yields on loans to attract loans
and pay higher wages for new employees, resulting in reduced profitability. In addition, competitors that are not depository institutions are generally not subject to the extensive regulations that
apply to us.

We may not be able to compete with our larger competitors for larger customers because our lending limits are lower than theirs.

We are limited in the amount we can loan a single borrower by the amount of the bank's capital. Our legal lending limit is 15% of the
bank's capital and surplus, or $7.0 million at December 31, 2010. Our internal lending limit was $5.2 million at December 31, 2010. This is significantly less than the
limit for our larger competitors and may affect our ability to seek relationships with larger businesses in our market areas. We have been able to sell participations in our larger loans to other
financial institutions, which has allowed us to meet the lending needs of our customers requiring extensions of credit in excess of these limits. In the current economic environment, however, it has
been difficult to sell participations to other financial institutions. We expect to sell participations only on a limited basis going forward.

We will face risks with respect to future expansion and acquisitions or mergers.

Although we do not have any current plans to do so, we may seek to acquire other financial institutions or parts of those institutions.
We may also expand into new markets or lines of business or offer new products or services. These activities would involve a number of risks, including:



35

---



Although
our management team has acquisition experience at other institutions, we have never acquired another institution before, so we lack experience as an organization in handling any
of these risks. There is also a risk that any expansion effort will not be successful.

The accuracy of our financial statements and related disclosures could be affected because we are exposed to conditions or assumptions different from the judgments,
assumptions or estimates used in our critical accounting policies.

The preparation of financial statements and related disclosure in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America requires us to make judgments, assumptions and estimates that affect the amounts reported in our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Our critical
accounting policies, which we summarize in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, describe those significant accounting policies and methods
used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements that we consider "critical" because they require judgments, assumptions and estimates about the future that materially impact our
consolidated financial statements and related disclosures. For example, material estimates that are particularly susceptible to significant change relate to the determination of the allowance for
losses on loans, including valuation allowances for impaired loans, and the valuation of real estate acquired in connection with foreclosures or in satisfaction of loans. As a result, if future events
differ significantly from the judgments, assumptions and estimates in our critical accounting policies, those events or assumptions could have a material impact on our audited consolidated financial
statements and related disclosures.

The costs of being an SEC registered company are proportionately higher for smaller companies like Tidelands Bancshares because of the requirements imposed by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the related rules and regulations promulgated by the SEC have increased the scope, complexity and
cost of corporate governance, reporting and disclosure practices. These regulations are applicable to our company. We have experienced, and expect to continue to experience, increasing compliance
costs, including costs related to internal controls, as a result of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. These necessary costs are proportionately higher for a company of our size and will affect our profitability
more than that of some of our larger competitors.

We are exposed to the possibility that customers may prepay theirs loans to pay down loan balances, which could reduce our interest income and profitability.

Prepayment rates stem from consumer behavior, conditions in the housing and financial markets, general United States economic
conditions, and the relative interest rates on fixed-rate and adjustable-rate loans. Therefore, changes in prepayment rates are difficult to predict. Recognition of deferred
loan origination costs and premiums paid in originating these loans are normally recognized over the contractual life of each loan. As prepayments occur, the rate at which net deferred loan
origination costs and premiums are expensed will accelerate. The effect of the acceleration of deferred costs and premium amortization may be mitigated by prepayment penalties paid by the borrower
when the loan is paid in full within a certain period of time. If prepayment occurs after the period of time when the loan is subject to a prepayment penalty, the effect of the acceleration of premium
and deferred cost amortization is no longer mitigated. We recognize premiums paid on mortgage-backed securities as an adjustment from interest income over the expected life of the security based on
the rate of repayment of the securities. Acceleration of prepayments on the loans underlying a mortgage-backed security shortens the life of the security, increases the rate at which premiums are
expensed and further reduces interest income. We may not be able to reinvest loan and security prepayments at rates comparable to the prepaid instrument particularly in a period of declining interest
rates.

36

---



Given the geographic concentration of our operations, we could be significantly affected by any hurricane that affects coastal South Carolina.

Our
operations are concentrated in and our loan portfolio consists almost entirely of loans to persons and businesses located in coastal South Carolina. The
collateral for many
of our loans consists of real and personal property located in this area, which is susceptible to hurricanes that can cause extensive damage to the general region. Disaster conditions resulting from
any hurricane that hits in this area would adversely affect the local economies and real estate markets, which could negatively impact our business. Adverse economic conditions resulting from such a
disaster could also negatively affect the ability of our customers to repay their loans and could reduce the value of the collateral securing these loans. Furthermore, damage resulting from any
hurricane could also result in continued economic uncertainty that could negatively impact businesses in those areas. Consequently, our ability to continue to originate loans may be impaired by
adverse changes in local and regional economic conditions in this area following any hurricane.

Our ability to pay dividends on and repurchase our common stock is restricted.

Since our inception, we have not paid any cash dividends on our common stock, and we do not intend to pay cash dividends in the
foreseeable future. However, the ability of our bank to pay cash dividends to our holding company is currently prohibited by the restrictions of the Consent Order with the State Board and the FDIC.
Even if we decide to pay cash dividends in the future and our regulators permit us to do so, our ability to do so will be limited by the regulatory restrictions described in the following sentence, by
the bank's ability to pay cash dividends to us based on its capital position and profitability, and by our need to maintain sufficient capital to support the bank's operations. The ability of the bank
to pay cash dividends to us is limited by its obligations to maintain sufficient capital and by other restrictions on its cash dividends that are applicable to South Carolina state banks and banks
that are regulated by the FDIC. If we do not satisfy these regulatory requirements, we will be unable to pay cash dividends on our common stock.

In
addition, the CPP Purchase Agreement provides that before December 19, 2011, unless we have redeemed the Series T Preferred Stock or the Treasury has transferred the
Series T Preferred Stock to a third party, we must obtain the consent of the Treasury to (1) declare or pay any dividend or make any distribution on our common stock, or
(2) redeem, purchase or acquire any shares of our common stock or other equity or capital securities, other than in connection with benefit plans consistent with past practice and certain other
circumstances specified in the purchase agreement. These restrictions, together with the potentially dilutive impact of the warrant described in the next risk factor, could have a negative effect on
the value of our common stock.

The warrant we issued to the Treasury may be dilutive to holders of our common stock.

The ownership interest of the existing holders of our common stock will be diluted to the extent the CPP Warrant is exercised. The
shares of common stock underlying the warrant represent approximately 11.8% of the shares of our common stock outstanding as of March 1, 2011 (including the shares issuable upon exercise of the
warrant in total shares outstanding). Although Treasury has agreed not to vote any of the shares of common stock it receives upon exercise of the
warrant, a transferee of any portion of the warrant or of any shares of common stock acquired upon exercise of the warrant will not be bound by this restriction.

The holders of our junior subordinated debentures have rights that are senior to those of our common shareholders.

We have supported our continued growth through the issuance of trust preferred securities from two special purpose trusts and an
accompanying sale of $14.4 million junior subordinated debentures to

37

---



these
trusts. We have conditionally guaranteed payments of the principal and interest on the trust preferred securities of these trusts. We must make payments on the junior subordinated debentures
before we can pay any dividends on our common stock. In the event of our bankruptcy, dissolution or liquidation, the holders of the junior subordinated debentures must be satisfied before any
distributions can be made on our common stock. We have exercised our right to defer distributions on the junior subordinated debentures (and the related trust preferred securities), during which time
we cannot pay any dividends on our common stock.

We must respond to rapid technological changes, which may be more difficult or expensive than anticipated.

If our competitors introduce new products and services embodying new technologies, or if new industry standards and practices emerge,
our existing product and service offerings, technology and systems may become obsolete. Further, if we fail to adopt or develop new technologies or to adapt our products and services to emerging
industry standards, we may lose current and future customers, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The financial services industry
is changing rapidly, and to remain competitive, we must continue to enhance and improve the functionality and features of our products, services and technologies. These changes may be more difficult
or expensive than we anticipate.

Item 1B.    Unresolved Staff Comments.

Not applicable

38

---





Item 2.    Properties.

The following table sets forth the location of our main banking office, banking offices and operations center, as well as certain
information relating to these facilities.

Type of Office

Location

Year Opened

Total Retail
Deposits as of
December 31, 2010

Leased or
OwnedMain Office

875 Lowcountry Boulevard in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina

2004

$
94,597,000

LeasedSummerville
Branch Office

1510 Trolley Road in Summerville, South Carolina

2007

$
49,931,000

OwnedMyrtle Beach
Branch Office

1312 Professional Drive in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina

2007

$
66,828,000

LeasedPark West
Branch OfficeMount Pleasant

1100 Park West Blvd. in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina

2007

$
21,888,000

OwnedWest Ashley
Branch OfficeCharleston

946 Orleans Road in Charleston, South Carolina

2007

$
49,963,000

LeasedBluffton
Branch Office

52 Burnt Church Road in Bluffton, South Carolina

2008

$
79,863,000

LeasedMurrells Inlet
Branch Office

11915 Plaza Drive in Murrells Inlet, South Carolina

2008

$
55,989,000

LeasedOperations Center

840 Lowcountry Boulevard in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina

2007


N/A

OwnedCorporate Headquarters

830 Lowcountry Boulevard in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina

Under
Construction(1)


N/A

LeasedOkatie Crossing
Branch Site

15 Baylor Brooke Drive in Bluffton, South Carolina

Construction
Pending


N/A

Owned


(1)Estimated
remaining construction costs are approximately $739,000.


Item 3.    Legal Proceedings.

Neither the company nor the bank is a party to, nor is any of their property the subject of, any material pending legal proceedings
incidental to the business of the company or the bank.

Item 4.    (Removed and Reserved).

39

---





PART II

Item 5.    Market for Registrant's Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters and Small Business Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

In connection with our public offering in October 2006, our common stock was approved for listing on The NASDAQ Global Market under the
symbol "TDBK." Prior to October 2006, our common stock was quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol "TDBK.OB." As of December 31, 2010, we had approximately 465 shareholders of record.

The
following table shows the reported high and low closing prices for shares of our common stock published by NASDAQ beginning with the first quarter of 2009.

High

Low2010Fourth Quarter

$
1.40

$
1.00Third Quarter


1.84


1.00Second Quarter


2.64


0.96First Quarter


3.96


2.502009Fourth Quarter

$
4.24

$
2.80Third Quarter


3.40


2.75Second Quarter


3.90


2.80First Quarter


4.10


2.50


We
have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our common stock since our inception. For the foreseeable future we do not intend to declare cash dividends. We intend to retain
earnings to grow our business and strengthen our capital base. However, the ability of our bank to pay cash dividends to our holding company is currently prohibited by the restrictions of the Consent
Order with the State Board and the FDIC. Even if we decide to pay cash dividends in the future and our regulators permit us to do so, our ability to do so will be limited by the regulatory
restrictions described in the following sentence, by the bank's ability to pay cash dividends to us based on its capital position and profitability, and by our need to maintain sufficient capital to
support the bank's operations. As a South Carolina state bank, Tidelands Bank may only pay dividends out of its net profits, after deducting expenses, including losses and bad debts. In addition, the
bank is prohibited from declaring a dividend on its shares of common stock until its surplus equals its stated capital. If and when cash dividends are declared, they will be largely dependent upon our
earnings, financial condition, business projections, general business conditions, statutory and regulatory restrictions and other pertinent factors. Currently, the Company also has to obtain the prior
written approval of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond before declaring or paying any dividends.

In
addition, the CPP Purchase Agreement provides that before December 19, 2011, unless we have redeemed the Series T Preferred Stock or the Treasury has transferred the
Series T Preferred Stock to a third party, we must obtain the consent of the Treasury to declare or pay any dividend or make any distribution on our common stock.

Our
ability to pay cash dividends is further subject to our continued payment of interest that we owe on our junior subordinated debentures. As of December 31, 2010, we had
approximately $14.4 million of junior subordinated debentures outstanding. Beginning with the forth quarter 2010 payment, we have elected to defer our payments on the junior subordinated
debentures. We have the right to defer payment of interest on the junior subordinated debentures for a period not to exceed 20 consecutive quarters. If we defer, or fail to make, interest payments on
the junior subordinated debentures, we will be prohibited, subject to certain exceptions, from paying cash dividends on our

40

---



common
stock until we pay all deferred interest and resume interest payments on the junior subordinated debentures.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

The following table sets forth the equity compensation plan information at December 31, 2010. All stock option information has
been adjusted to reflect all prior stock splits and dividends. During the year ended December 31, 2010, all options that had been previously granted were voluntarily forfeited by each employee,
officer and director grantee.

Plan Category

Number of securities
to be issued upon exercise
of outstanding options,
warrants and rights(a)

Weighted-average
exercise price of
outstanding options,
warrants and rights(b)

Number of securities
remaining available for
future issuance under
equity compensation plans(c)
(excluding securities
reflected in column(a))Equity compensation plans approved by security holders(1)








782,007Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders








Total








782,007


(1)The
number of shares available for issuance under our 2004 Stock Incentive Plan automatically increases each time we issue additional shares of stock so
that the total number of shares issuable under the plan at all times equal 20% of the then outstanding shares of stock.


Item 6.    Selected Financial Data.

Not applicable

41

---





Item 7.    Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation.

The following discussion reviews our results of operations and assesses our financial condition. You should
read the following discussion and analysis in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this report. Our discussion and analysis for the years
ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 is based on our audited financial statements for such periods. The following discussion describes our results of operations for the year ended
December 31, 2010 as compared to December 31, 2009 and 2008, and also analyzes our financial condition as of December 31, 2010 as compared to December 31,
2009.

Overview

We were incorporated in January 2002 to organize and serve as the holding company for Tidelands Bank. As of December 31, 2010,
we had total assets of $571.3 million, loans of $437.7 million, deposits of $481.0 million, and shareholders' equity of $23.6 million.

The
following table sets forth selected measures of our financial performance for the periods indicated.

For the Years Ended December 31,2010

2009

2008(dollars in thousands)Net loss available to common shareholders

$
(16,504
)
$
(11,183
)
$
(4,955
)Total assets


571,290


775,412


715,182Total net loans


426,229


474,990


454,332Total deposits


480,993


591,549


561,225Shareholders' equity


23,643


38,925


51,959


Like
most community banks, we derive the majority of our income from interest received on our loans and investments. Our primary source of funds for making these loans and investments is
our deposits, on which we pay interest, and advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (FHLB).
Consequently, one of the key measures of our success is net interest income, or the difference between the income on our interest-earning assets, such as loans and investments, and the expense on our
interest-bearing liabilities, such as deposits and advances from the FHLB. Another key measure is the spread between the yield we earn on these interest-earning assets and the rate we pay on our
interest-bearing liabilities, which is called our net interest spread.

We
have included a number of tables to assist in our description of these measures. For example, the "Average Balances, Income and Expenses, and Rates" tables show for the periods
indicated the average balance for each category of our assets and liabilities, as well as the average yield we earned or the average rate we paid with respect to each category. A review of these
tables show that our loans historically have provided higher interest yields than our other types of interest-earning assets, which is why we have invested a substantial percentage of our earning
assets into our loan portfolio. Similarly, the "Rate/Volume Analysis" tables help demonstrate the impact of changing interest rates and changing volume of assets and liabilities during the periods
shown. We also track the sensitivity of our various categories of assets and liabilities to changes in interest rates, and we have included "Interest Sensitivity Analysis" tables to help explain this.
Finally, we have included a number of tables that provide detail about our investment securities, our loans, our deposits and other borrowings.

There
are risks inherent in all loans, so we maintain an allowance for loan losses to absorb probable losses on existing loans that may become uncollectible. We maintain this allowance
by charging a provision for loan losses against our operating earnings for each period. In the "Loans" and "Allowance for Loan Losses" sections, we have included a detailed discussion of this process,
as well as several tables describing our allowance for loan losses.

42

---



In
addition to earning interest on our loans and investments, we earn income through fees and other charges to our customers. We describe the various components of this noninterest
income, as well as our noninterest expense, in the "Noninterest Income" and "Noninterest Expense" sections.

Recent Legislative and Regulatory Initiatives to Address Financial and Economic Crises

Markets in the United States and elsewhere have experienced extreme volatility and disruption for more than three years. These
circumstances have exerted significant downward pressure on prices of equity securities and virtually all other asset classes, and have resulted in substantially increased market volatility, severely
constrained credit and capital markets, particularly
for financial institutions, and an overall loss of investor confidence. Loan portfolio performances have deteriorated at many institutions resulting from, among other factors, a weak economy and a
decline in the value of the collateral supporting their loans. Dramatic slowdowns in the housing industry, due in part to falling home prices and increasing foreclosures and unemployment, have created
strains on financial institutions. Many borrowers are now unable to repay their loans, and the collateral securing these loans has, in some cases, declined below the loan balance. In response to the
challenges facing the financial services sector, several regulatory and governmental actions have recently been announced including:



43

---





44

---





45

---





46

---







On
December 19, 2008, as part of the TARP CPP, we entered into a Letter Agreement and Securities Purchase Agreement (collectively, the "CPP Purchase Agreement") with the Treasury
Department, pursuant to which we sold (i) 14,448 shares of our Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series T (the "Series T Preferred Stock") and (ii) a warrant
(the "CPP Warrant") to purchase 571,821 shares of our common stock for an aggregate purchase price of $14,448,000 in cash.

The
Series T Preferred Stock will qualify as Tier 1 capital and will be entitled to cumulative dividends at a rate of 5% per annum for the first five years, and 9% per
annum thereafter. We must consult with the Federal Reserve before we may redeem the Series T Preferred Stock but, contrary to the original restrictions in the EESA, will not necessarily be
required to raise additional equity capital in order to redeem this stock. The CPP Warrant has a 10-year term and is immediately exercisable upon its issuance, with an exercise price,
subject to anti-dilution adjustments, equal to $3.79 per share of the common stock. Please see the Form 8-K we filed with the SEC on December 19, 2008, for
additional information about the Series T Preferred Stock and the CPP Warrant.

Although
the TAGP expired on December 31, 2010, a provision of the Dodd-Frank Act requires the FDIC to provide unlimited deposit insurance for all deposits in
non-interest-bearing transaction accounts. This deposit insurance mandate created by the Dodd-Frank Act took effect on December 31, 2010, and will continue through
December 31, 2012. The deposit insurance mandate created by the Dodd-Frank Act is not an extension of the TAGP. Although the TAGP and the Dodd-Frank Act

47

---



establish
unlimited deposit insurance for certain types of non-interest-bearing deposit accounts, unlike the TAGP, the coverage provided by the Dodd-Frank Act does not apply to
NOW accounts or IOLTAs and will be funded through general FDIC assessments, not special assessments.

From
time to time, various legislative and regulatory initiatives are introduced in Congress and state legislatures, as well as by regulatory agencies. Such initiatives may include
proposals to expand or contract the powers of bank holding companies and depository institutions or proposals to substantially change the financial institution regulatory system. Such legislation
could change banking statutes and the operating environment of the Company in substantial and unpredictable ways. If enacted, such legislation could increase or decrease the cost of doing business,
limit or expand permissible activities or affect the competitive balance among banks, savings associations, credit unions, and other financial institutions. We cannot predict whether any such
legislation will be enacted, and, if enacted, the effect that it, or any implementing regulations, would have on the financial condition or results of operations of the Company. A change in statutes,
regulations or regulatory policies applicable to the company or the bank could have a material effect on the business of the company.

Critical Accounting Policies

We have adopted various accounting policies that govern the application of accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States and with general practices within the banking industry in the preparation of our financial statements. Our significant accounting policies are described in the footnotes to our unaudited
consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2010.

Certain
accounting policies involve significant judgments and assumptions by us that have a material impact on the carrying value of certain assets and liabilities. We consider these
accounting policies to be critical accounting policies. The judgment and assumptions we use are based on historical experience and other factors, which we believe to be reasonable under the
circumstances. Because of the nature of the judgment and assumptions we make, actual results could differ from these judgments and estimates that could have a material impact on the carrying values of
our assets and liabilities and our results of operations.

We
believe the allowance for loan losses is the critical accounting policy that requires the most significant judgment and estimates used in preparation of our consolidated financial
statements. Some of the more critical judgments supporting the amount of our allowance for loan losses include judgments about the credit worthiness of borrowers, the estimated value of the underlying
collateral, the assumptions about cash flow, determination of loss factors for estimating credit losses, the impact of current events, and conditions and other factors impacting the level of probable
inherent losses. Under different conditions or using different assumptions, the actual amount of credit losses incurred by us may be different from management's estimates provided in our consolidated
financial statements. Refer to the portion of this discussion that addresses our allowance for loan losses for a more complete discussion of our processes and methodology for determining our allowance
for loan losses.

48

---





Recent Regulatory Development

On June 1, 2010, the FDIC and the State Board conducted their annual joint examination of the Bank. As a result of the
examination, the Bank entered into a Consent Order, effective December 28, 2010 (the "Consent Order"), with the FDIC and the State Board. The Consent Order requires the Bank to, among other
things, take the following actions:



49

---





50

---





Although
we intend to take all actions necessary to enable the Bank to comply with the requirements of the Consent Order, there can be no assurance that the Bank will be able to comply
fully with the provisions of the Consent Order. Failure to meet these requirements would result in additional regulatory requirements, which could ultimately lead to the Bank being taken into
receivership by the FDIC.

Results of Operations

Income Statement Review

Summary

Our net loss available to common shareholders was approximately $16.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2010,
compared to losses of $11.2 million and $5.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The pre-tax loss for the year ended
December 31, 2010 was $15.6 million compared to $6.9 million and $7.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. We recorded provisions
for loan losses of $16.3 million, $14.7 million and $4.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. For the year ended December 31,
2010, there was no income tax expense or benefit, reflective of establishing a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets previously recorded and currently determined, compared to a
$3.4 million tax charge in 2009 and $2.7 million tax benefit in 2008. Despite a net loss before income tax, the increase in tax expense for the year ended December 31, 2009 was a
result of the company providing for a $5.6 million deferred tax valuation allowance based on our evaluation of the likelihood of our ability to utilize net operating losses in the near term.

In
comparing December 31, 2010 and 2009, net interest income before provision expense decreased $572,000, noninterest income decreased from $6.3 million for the year ended
December 31, 2009 to $1.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 while noninterest expense increased $1.9 million. The decrease in noninterest income is primarily
attributable to $3.1 million decrease in gains on securities available for sale and a charge of $2.0 million in the extinguishment of $91.0 million of wholesale borrowings.
Noninterest expense increased in 2010 primarily as a result of the $1.8 million increase in other real estate owned expenses. From 2008 to 2009, net interest income before provision expense
increased $3.6 million, noninterest income increased from a loss of $2.8 to a gain of $6.2 million, and noninterest expense increased $1.8 million. Noninterest expense increased
in 2009 primarily as a result of the $1.0 million increase in the FDIC assessment and $1.2 million increase in loan related expenses.

Net Interest Income

During 2010, we undertook a strategy to significantly reduce the asset size of the company. Reducing total assets by
$202.1 million during the year also had significant impact on the components of our net interest income on a comparative basis. While loans have been reduced by $47.3 million, investment
securities by $172.5 million, deposits by $110.5 million and borrowings by $78.7 million, the corresponding levels of income and expense have been reduced accordingly.

51

---



Our
level of net interest income is determined by the level of earning assets and the management of our net interest margin. The growth in our loan portfolio has historically been the
primary driver of the increase in net interest income. During the year ended December 31, 2010, our loan portfolio decreased $47.3 million compared to an increase of $23.6 million
for December 31, 2009. We anticipate any growth in loans will drive the growth in assets and the growth in net interest income once economic conditions improve. However, we do not expect to
sustain the same growth rate in our loan portfolio as we have experienced in the past.

Our
loans typically provide higher interest yields than do other types of interest-earning assets, which is why we direct a substantial percentage of our earning assets into our loan
portfolio. This strategy resulted in a significant portion of our assets being in higher earning loans rather than in lower yielding investments. At December 31, 2010, loans represented 76.6%
of total assets, while securities and federal funds sold represented 15.3% of total assets. While we plan to continue our focus of maintaining the size of our loan portfolio, we also anticipate
managing the size of the investment portfolio during the ongoing economic recession as loan demand remains soft and investment yields become more attractive on a relative basis.

At
December 31, 2010, retail deposits represented $477.5 million, or 87.8% of total funding, which includes total deposits plus borrowings. Borrowings represented
$63.1 million, or 11.6% of total funding, and wholesale deposits represented $3.5 million, or 0.6% of total funding. We plan to continue to offer competitive rates on our retail deposit
accounts, including investment checking, money market accounts, savings accounts and time deposits. Our goal is to maintain a higher percentage of assets being funded by retail deposits and to
increase the percentage of low-cost transaction accounts to total deposits. No assurance can be given that these objectives will be achieved. We operate seven full service banking offices
located along the South Carolina coast. Although we anticipate that our full service banking offices will assist us in meeting these objectives, we believe that the current deposit strategies and the
opening of new offices had a dampening effect on earnings. However, we believe that over time these two strategies will provide us with additional customers in our markets and will provide a lower
alternative cost of funding.

In
addition to the growth in both assets and liabilities, and the timing of the repricing of our assets and liabilities, net interest income is also affected by the ratio of
interest-earning assets to interest-bearing liabilities and the changes in interest rates earned on our assets and interest rates paid on our liabilities. Net interest income decreased $572,000 as the
result of a decrease in investment portfolio revenue of $5.2 million, a decline in loan revenue of $1.3 million partially offset by a decrease in funding costs of $5.9 million as
compared to the prior period. For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, average interest-earning assets exceeded average interest-bearing liabilities by $8.0 million,
$15.0 million, and $18.2 million, respectively.

The
impact of the Federal Reserve's interest rate cuts since August 2007 resulted in a decrease in both the yields on our variable rate assets and the rates that we pay for our
short-term deposits and borrowings. The net interest margin increased to 2.80% during the year ended December 31, 2010, as a result of the bank reducing the rate and volume of
interest bearing liabilities. We believe the stress being exerted on our balance sheet and consequently our earnings is the result of
the current economic environment. Our net interest margins for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 were 2.80%, 2.45% and 2.50%, respectively.

Years Ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

The following table sets forth information related to our average balance sheet, average yields on assets, and average costs of
liabilities. We derived these yields by dividing income or expense by the average balance of the corresponding assets or liabilities. We derived average balances from the daily balances throughout the
periods indicated. During the three years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and

52

---



2008,
we had no securities purchased with agreements to resell. All investments were owned at an original maturity of over one year.

Average Balances, Income and Expenses, and Rates

For the Year Ended
December 31, 2010

For the Year Ended
December 31, 2009

For the Year Ended
December 31, 2008Average
Balance

Income/
Expense

Yield/
Rate

Average
Balance

Income/
Expense

Yield/
Rate

Average
Balance

Income/
Expense

Yield/
Rate(dollars in thousands)Earning assets:Interest bearing balances

$
1,886

$
24


1.26
%
$
2,440

$
3


0.11
%
$
251

$
5


2.04
%Federal funds sold


27,043


66


0.24
%

9,573


26


0.27
%

17,123


281


1.64
%Taxable investment securities


125,756


4,850


3.86
%

248,568


9,922


3.99
%

119,238


6,805


5.71
%Non-taxable investment securities


939


37


4.02
%

3,760


148


3.95
%

7,172


287


4.00
%Loans receivable(1)


467,951


24,170


5.17
%

472,025


25,513


5.40
%

433,629


27,379


6.31
%Total earning assets


623,575


29,147


4.67
%

736,366


35,612


4.84
%

577,413


34,757


6.02
%Nonearning assets:Cash and due from banks


4,914








11,984








3,863Mortgage loans held for sale


479








986








510Premises and equipment, net


20,560








19,054








19,099Other assets


31,289








27,828








18,844Allowance for loan losses


(12,046
)







(8,367
)







(4,889
)Total nonearning assets


45,196








51,485








37,427Total assets

$
668,771







$
787,851







$
614,840Interest-bearing liabilities:Interest bearing transaction accounts

$
29,044


285


0.98
%
$
40,761


643


1.58
%
$
28,576


723


2.53
%Savings & money market


193,512


2,637


1.36
%

197,356


3,357


1.70
%

173,471


4,806


2.77
%Time deposits less than $100,000


166,797


3,160


1.89
%

214,135


6,100


2.85
%

203,217


8,624


4.24
%Time deposits greater than $100,000


135,009


2,774


2.05
%

97,918


3,246


3.31
%

63,180


2,635


4.17
%Securities sold under repurchase agreement


30,514


794


2.60
%

63,090


1,053


1.67
%

35,187


1,258


3.58
%Advances from FHLB


44,430


1,208


2.72
%

91,075


2,326


2.55
%

40,915


1,436


3.51
%Junior subordinated debentures


14,434


730


5.06
%

14,434


774


5.36
%

11,493


724


6.30
%ESOP borrowings


1,839


77


4.20
%

2,480


57


2.29
%

2,774


116


4.17
%Federal funds purchased


34


1


0.58
%

106


1


1.12
%

187


8


4.25
%Other borrowings









%

45


2


3.99
%

220


12


5.53
%Total interest-bearing liabilities


615,613


11,666


1.90
%

721,400


17,559


2.43
%

559,220


20,342


3.64
%Noninterest-bearing liabilities:Demand deposits


14,988








12,516








12,272Other liabilities


4,060








4,734








3,391Shareholders' equity


34,110








49,201








39,957Total liabilities and shareholders' equity

$
668,771







$
787,851







$
614,840Net interest income




$
17,481







$
18,053







$
14,415Net interest spread








2.77
%







2.41
%







2.38
%Net interest margin








2.80
%







2.45
%







2.50
%


(1)Includes
nonaccruing loans


Our net interest spread was 2.77%, 2.41% and 2.38% for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The net interest
spread is the difference between the yield we earn on our interest-earning assets and the rate we pay on our interest-bearing liabilities.

53

---



The net interest margin is calculated as net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets. Our net interest margin for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008 was 2.80%, 2.45% and 2.50%, respectively. During 2010, interest-earning assets averaged $623.6 million, compared to $736.4 million in 2009 and $577.4 million in 2008. During
the same periods, average interest-bearing liabilities were $615.6 million, $721.4 million and $559.2 million, respectively.

Net
interest income, the largest component of our income, was $17.5 million, $18.1 million and $14.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008, respectively. The decrease in 2010 was a result of a lower volume in interest earning assets while in comparison, the increase in 2009 resulted from the net effect of higher levels of both
average earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, rather than from an increase in the net interest spread.

The
$572,000 decrease in net interest income for the year ended December 31, 2010, compared to the same period in 2009, resulted from a $5.2 million decrease in investment
portfolio revenue, $1.3 million in declining loan revenue, partially offset by a $5.9 million decrease in funding costs. The $3.6 million increase in net interest income for the
year ended December 31, 2009, compared to the same period in 2008, resulted from a $3.1 million increase in investment portfolio revenue, which offset declining loan revenue, and a
$2.8 million decrease in funding costs.

Interest
income for the year ended December 31, 2010 was $29.1 million, consisting primarily of $24.2 million on loans, $4.9 million on investments and
interest bearing balances, and $66,000 on federal funds sold. Interest income for the year ended December 31, 2009 was $35.6 million, consisting primarily of $25.5 million on
loans, $10.1 million on investments and interest bearing balances, and $26,000 on federal funds sold. Interest income for the year ended December 31, 2008 was $34.8 million,
consisting primarily of $27.4 million on loans, $7.1 million on investments and interest bearing balances, and $281,000 on federal funds sold. Interest and fees on loans represented
82.9%, 71.6% and 78.8%, of total interest income for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Income from investments, federal funds sold and interest bearing balances
represented 17.1%, 28.4% and 21.2%, of total interest income for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The high percentage of interest income from loans related to our
strategy to maintain a significant portion of our
assets in higher earning loans compared to lower yielding investments. Average loans represented 75.0%, 64.1% and 75.1% of average interest-earning assets for the years ended December 31, 2010,
2009 and 2008, respectively.

During
2010, we continued to shift our focus towards local retail deposits and away from deposits that are considered brokered funds. In addition, under the Consent Order, we may not
accept brokered deposits unless a waiver is granted by the FDIC. Although local funds are more expensive than wholesale funds, the interest rate environment allowed us to reduce our dependence on
wholesale funding and yet decrease our overall cost of funding by $5.9 million. Interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2010 was approximately $11.7 million, consisting
primarily of $8.9 million related to deposits, $1.2 million related to FHLB advances, $794,000 related to securities sold under repurchase agreements, $730,000 related to junior
subordinated debentures, $77,000 related to ESOP borrowings and $1,000 federal funds purchased and other borrowings. Interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2009 was approximately
$17.6 million, consisting primarily of $13.3 million related to deposits, $2.3 million related to FHLB advances, $1.1 million related to securities sold under repurchase
agreements, $774,000 related to junior subordinated debentures, $57,000 related to ESOP borrowings and $3,000 federal funds purchased and other borrowings. Interest expense for the year ended
December 31, 2008 was approximately $20.3 million, consisting primarily of $16.8 million related to deposits, $1.4 million related to FHLB advances, $1.3 million
related to securities sold under repurchase agreements, $724,000 related to junior subordinated debentures, $116,000 related to ESOP borrowings and $20,000 federal funds purchased and other
borrowings. Interest expense on deposits for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 represented 75.9%, 76.0% and 82.5%, respectively, of total interest expense, while interest expense
on borrowings represented 24.1%, 24.0% and 17.5%,

54

---



respectively,
of total interest expense. During the year ended December 31, 2010, average interest-bearing liabilities were lower by $105.8 million than for the same period in 2009,
while other borrowings and federal funds purchased averaged $117,000 lower, FHLB advances averaged $46.6 million lower, ESOP borrowings averaged $641,000 lower and securities sold under
repurchase agreement averaged $32.6 million lower than for the same period ended December 31, 2009.

During
the year ended December 31, 2009, average interest-bearing liabilities were higher by $162.2 million than for the same period in 2008, while other borrowings and
federal funds purchased averaged $256,000 lower, FHLB advances averaged $50.2 million higher, junior subordinated debentures averaged $2.9 million higher, ESOP borrowings averaged
$294,000 lower and securities sold under repurchase agreement averaged $27.9 million higher than for the same period ended December 31, 2008.

Rate/Volume Analysis

Net interest income can be analyzed in terms of the impact of changing interest rates and changing volume. The following tables set
forth the effect which the varying levels of
interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities and the applicable rates have had on changes in net interest income for the periods presented.

Year Ended
December 31, 2010 vs. December 31, 2009

Year Ended
December 31, 2009 vs. December 31, 2008Increase (Decrease) Due to

Increase (Decrease) Due toVolume

Rate

Rate/
Volume

Total

Volume

Rate

Rate/
Volume

Total(in thousands)Interest incomeLoans

$
(220
)
$
(1,133
)
$
10

$
(1,343
)
$
2,424

$
(3,942
)
$
(349
)
$
(1,867
)Taxable investment securities


(4,903
)

(336
)

167


(5,072
)

7,381


(2,045
)

(2,219
)

3,117Non-taxable investment securities


(111
)

3


(3
)

(111
)

(136
)

(4
)

2


(138
)Federal funds sold


47


6


10


63


(124
)

(235
)

104


(255
)Interest bearing balances


(1
)

(1
)




(2
)

45


(5
)

(42
)

(2
)Total interest income


(5,188
)

(1,461
)

184


(6,465
)

9,590


(6,231
)

(2,504
)

855Interest expenseDeposits


(626
)

(4,054
)

190


(4,490
)

2,929


(5,424
)

(946
)

(3,441
)Junior subordinated debentures





(43
)




(43
)

185


(108
)

(28
)

49Advances from FHLB


(1,191
)

151


(77
)

(1,117
)

1,761


(392
)

(480
)

889Securities sold under repurchase agreements


(15
)

47


(12
)

20


998


(671
)

(532
)

(205
)Federal funds purchased


(1
)

(1
)




(2
)

(3
)

(6
)

2


(7
)ESOP borrowings


(543
)

588


(304
)

(259
)

(12
)

(52
)

5


(59
)Other borrowings


(2
)

(2
)

2


(2
)

(10
)

(3
)

3


(10
)Total interest expense


(2,378
)

(3,314
)

(201
)

(5,893
)

5,848


(6,656
)

(1,976
)

(2,784
)Net interest income

$
(2,810
)
$
1,853

$
385

$
(572
)
$
3,742

$
425

$
(528
)
$
3,639


Provision for Loan Losses

We have established an allowance for loan losses through a provision for loan losses charged as an expense on our statement of
operations. We review our loan portfolio monthly to evaluate our outstanding loans and to measure both the performance of the portfolio and the adequacy of the

55

---



allowance
for loan losses. Please see the discussion below under "Balance Sheet ReviewProvision and Allowance for Loan Losses" for a description of the factors we consider in determining
the amount of the provision we expense each period to maintain this allowance.

Included
in the statement of operations for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 is a noncash expense related to the provision for loan losses of approximately
$16.3 million, $14.7 million and $4.7 million, respectively. The allowance for loan losses was approximately $11.5 million, $10.0 million and $7.6 million, as
of December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The allowance for loan losses as a percentage of gross loans was 2.61% at December 31, 2010, 2.07% at December 31, 2009 and
1.65% at December 31, 2008. At December 31, 2010, we had 76 nonperforming loans totaling approximately $35.6 million compared to 67 loans totaling $21.3 million at
December 31, 2009. For the year ended December 31, 2010, net charge offs totaled approximately $14.8 million compared to approximately $12.3 million for 2009 and
approximately $1.2 million for 2008.

Noninterest Income (Loss)

The following table sets forth information related to our noninterest income:

Years Ended December 31,2010

2009

2008(in thousands)Service fees on deposit accounts

$
46

$
42

$
36Residential mortgage origination fees


233


356


349Origination income on mortgage loans sold


25


49


34Gain on sale of investment securities


1,742


4,857


510Loss on extinguishment of debt


(1,620
)




Other service fees and commissions


544


522


362Bank owned life insurance


558


521


484Other than temporary impairment on securities available for sale








(4,596
)Other than temporary impairment on nonmarketable equity securities





(123
)

Other


51


48


33Total noninterest income (loss)

$
1,579

$
6,272

$
(2,788
)


Noninterest
income for the year ended December 31, 2010 was approximately $1.6 million, a decrease of $4.7 million, compared to noninterest income of
$6.2 million during the same period in 2009. The decrease was attributable to a decrease in gains on sales of investment securities of $3.1 million and loss on extinguishment of debt of
$1.6 million incurred during the second quarter of 2010 as we executed on our strategic plan to reduce the asset size of the bank. Noninterest income for the year ended December 31, 2009
was approximately $6.3 million, an increase of $9.1 million, compared to noninterest loss of $2.8 million during the same period in 2008. The increase was attributable to an
increase in gains on sales of investment securities of $4.3 million in 2009 compared to an other than temporary impairment of $4.6 million incurred during the same period in 2008.
Noninterest income (loss) for the year ended December 31, 2008 was approximately $2.8 million. The loss was attributable to the impairment of the bank's preferred stocks in Federal
National Mortgage Association ("FNMA" or "Fannie Mae") and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("FHLMC" or "Freddie Mac"). As a result of recent actions by the U.S. Treasury Department and the
Federal Housing Finance Agency, effective in the third quarter of 2008, we recorded a pretax, non-cash impairment charge of $4.6 million for the
other-than-temporary impairment ("OTTI") of its investments in perpetual preferred securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

56

---



Residential
mortgage origination fees consist primarily of mortgage origination fees we receive on residential loans funded and closed by a third party. Residential mortgage origination
fees were $233,000, $356,000 and $349,000 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The decrease of $123,000 in 2010 related primarily to a decrease in volume in the
mortgage department. Origination income on mortgage loans sold includes the interest income collected on mortgage payments prior to selling these loans to investors. We received $25,000 of origination
income on mortgage loans sold in 2010, compared to $49,000 in 2009 and $34,000 in 2008. We anticipate that the level of mortgage origination fees will remain consistent if the mortgage refinancing
business and economic conditions do not improve. Further, changes in state law regarding the oversight of mortgage brokers and lenders could increase our costs of operations and affect our mortgage
origination volume which could negatively impact our noninterest income in the future.

Service
fees on deposits consist primarily of service charges on our checking, money market, and savings accounts. Deposit fees were $46,000, $42,000 and $36,000 for the years ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The additional $4,000 and $6,000 in income for 2010 and 2009, respectively, resulted from the larger number of customer accounts. Similarly,
other service fees, commissions and the fee income received from customer non-sufficient funds ("NSF") transactions increased $22,000 to $544,000 for the year ended December 31,
2010 when compared to the same period in 2009. Other service fees, commissions, and the fee income received from customer NSF transactions increased $160,000 to $522,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2009 and increased $169,000 to $362,000 for the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase is attributed to the growing number of customers to whom we provide financial
services.

An
additional $37,000 in noninterest income was primarily attributable to the income received from bank owned life insurance for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009. Other
income consists primarily of fees received on debit and credit card transactions, income from sales of checks, and the fees received on wire transfers. Other income was $51,000, $48,000 and $33,000
for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Noninterest Expense

The following table sets forth information related to our noninterest expense.

Years Ended December 31,2010

2009

2008(in thousands)Salaries and benefits

$
7,260

$
7,806

$
8,322Occupancy


1,611


1,574


1,423Furniture and equipment expense


887


855


735Other real estate owned expense


2,570


750


3Professional fees


1,693


1,234


1,180Advertising and marketing


750


462


750Insurance


314


200


200FDIC assessment


1,391


1,441


484Data processing and related costs


618


498


448Telephone


191


199


162Postage


37


21


23Office supplies, stationery and printing


93


100


151Other loan related expense


272


552


94Other


678


766


640Total noninterest expense

$
18,365

$
16,458

$
14,615


57

---



We
incurred noninterest expense of $18.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2010, compared to $16.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, and
$14.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2008. For the year ended December 31, 2010, the $1.8 million increase in other real estate owned expenses and $459,000
increase in other professional fees primarily accounted for the increase in noninterest expense compared to the same period in 2009. For the year ended December 31, 2010, the remaining
differences resulted primarily from increases of $288,000 in marketing costs, $120,000 in data processing, $114,000 in insurance expense, $37,000 in occupancy expense, $32,000 in furniture and
equipment expense, $16,000 in postage, offset by a decrease of $546,000 in salaries and benefits expense, $280,000 in other loan related expense, $7,000 in office supplies stationary and printing,
$50,000 in FDIC assessments, $8,000 in telephone expense and $88,000 in other expenses. Included in the $750,000 marketing and advertising costs was a one time expense of $335,000 related to the stock
offering withdrawn in the second quarter of 2010.

For
the year ended December 31, 2009, the $1.2 million increase in other loan related expenses and other real estate owned expenses and $1.0 million increase in the
FDIC assessment primarily accounted for the increase in noninterest expense compared to the same period in 2008. For the year ended December 31, 2009, the remaining differences resulted
primarily from increases of $151,000 in occupancy expense, $120,000 in furniture and equipment expense, $54,000 in professional fees, $50,000 in data processing and $110,000 in other expenses, offset
by a decrease of $516,000 in salaries and benefits expense and $288,000 in marketing costs.

In
2005, management committed to the expansion of the bank's branch network, including the construction of new facilities in the Charleston, Hilton Head and Myrtle Beach markets. Due to
the variable timing associated with the construction projects, the new facility construction projects during 2008 coincided with projects that were begun in 2006. Accordingly, occupancy expenses were
$1.4 million and $1.6 million for years ended 2008 and 2009, respectively. During 2010, occupancy expenses remained steady at $1.6 million. These branch locations provide
increased visibility and new customer traffic to the bank. With these new customers, both loan and deposit accounts increase, and additional revenue is generated through interest income on loans and
service charges on deposit accounts.

Salary
and benefit expense was $7.3 million, $7.8 million and $8.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Salaries and
benefits represented 39.5%, 47.4% and 56.9% of our total noninterest expense for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

The
$546,000 decrease in salaries and benefits expense in 2010 compared to 2009 resulted from the net effect of increases of $147,000 in base compensation and $2,000 in additional
incentive compensation offset by a decrease of $303,000 in other benefits cost and $392,000 in stock based compensation related to the voluntary forfeiture of outstanding stock options by employees
and directors. The $516,000 decrease in salaries and benefits expense in 2009 compared to 2008 resulted primarily from
decreases of $276,000 in base compensation and $245,000 in stock compensation expense offset by an increase of $5,000 in benefits costs.

Data
processing and related costs were $618,000, $498,000 and $448,000 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. During the year ended
December 31, 2010, our data processing costs for our core processing system were $566,000 compared to $426,000 for the year ended December 31, 2009 and $347,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2008. We have contracted with an outside computer service company to provide our core data processing services. A significant portion of the fee charged by our third party
processor is directly related to the number of loan and deposit accounts and the related number of transactions, all of which have grown commensurate with the overall growth of the bank's assets and
liabilities.

58

---



For
the year ended December 31, 2010, there was no income tax expense or benefit, reflective of establishing a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets previously recorded and
currently determined, compared to income tax expense of approximately $3.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 and an income tax benefit of $2.7 million for the year
ended December 31, 2008. Management has determined that it is more likely than not that the deferred tax asset related to continuing operations at December 31, 2010 will not be realized,
and accordingly, has established a valuation allowance.

Balance Sheet Review

General

At December 31, 2010, we had total assets of $571.3 million, consisting principally of $437.7 million in loans,
$58.0 million in investment securities, $24.1 million in federal funds sold, $22.4 million in net premises, furniture and equipment, $14.4 million in bank owned life
insurance, $11.9 million in other real estate owned and $3.7 million in cash and due from banks. Our liabilities at December 31, 2010 totaled $547.6 million, consisting
principally of $481.0 million in deposits, $20.0 million in securities sold under agreements to repurchase, $14.4 million in junior subordinated debentures,
$27.0 million in FHLB advances, and $1.6 million in borrowings related to the ESOP. At December 31, 2010, our shareholders' equity was $23.6 million.

During
the quarter ended June 30, 2010, we executed on our plan to reduce our overall risk profile. Specifically, the goals were to reduce the overall size of the balance sheet,
increase our reserves for credit exposure, reduce our dependence on brokered deposits and wholesale funding, position ourselves to return to profitability and strengthen our capital ratios over the
coming periods. As part of the execution of the plan, we sold $184.9 million of investment securities available for sale, recognizing a gain of $1.2 million. These gains were used to
partially offset the loss of $2.0 million recognized in the extinguishment of $91.0 million of wholesale borrowings.

Federal Funds Sold

At December 31, 2010, our $24.1 million in short-term investments in federal funds sold on an overnight basis
comprised 4.2% of total assets, compared to $12.5 million, or 1.6% of total assets, at December 31, 2009. We continue to monitor our short-term liquidity and closely manage
our overnight cash positions in light of the current economic environment.

Investments

At December 31, 2010, the $58.0 million in our available for sale investment securities portfolio represented
approximately 10.1% of our total assets, compared to $229.8 million, or 29.6% of total assets, at December 31, 2009. We held U.S. government agency securities, securities of government
sponsored enterprises, municipal and mortgage-backed securities with a fair value of $58.0 million and an amortized cost of $58.4 million representing a net unrealized loss of $409,000.
During 2010, we utilized the investment portfolio to provide additional income and to absorb liquidity. We anticipate maintaining an investment portfolio to provide both increased earnings and
liquidity. As deposit growth outpaces our ability to lend to creditworthy customers, we anticipate maintaining the relative size of the investment portfolio and extinguishing additional wholesale
funding liabilities.

59

---



Contractual
maturities and yields on our investments at December 31, 2010 are shown in the following table. Expected maturities may differ from contractual maturities because
issuers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties.

One year or less

After one year
through five
years

After five years
through ten
years

After ten years

TotalAmount

Yield

Amount

Yield

Amount

Yield

Amount

Yield

Amount

Yield(dollars in thousands)Available for Sale:Government-sponsored enterprises

$




%
$




%
$
2,053


4.17
%
$




%
$
2,053


4.17
%Mortgage-backed securities


4,266


(6.94
)%





%





%

51,637


3.16
%

55,903


2.39
%Total

$
4,266


(6.94
)%
$




%
$
2,053


4.17
%
$
51,637


3.16
%
$
57,956


2.45
%


At
December 31, 2010, our investments included Government sponsored enterprises, which consist of securities issued by the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation
with amortized costs of approximately $2.0 million. Mortgage-backed securities consist of securities issued by the Federal National Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation
and Government National Mortgage Association with amortized costs of approximately $17.2 million, $14.7 million and $24.5 million, respectively.

At
December 31, 2010, the fair value of investments issued by the Federal National Mortgage Association was approximately $2.1 million. Mortgage-backed securities consist
of securities issued by the Federal National Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation and Government National Mortgage Association with fair value of approximately
$16.9 million, $14.5 million and $24.5 million, respectively.

Other
nonmarketable equity securities at December 31, 2010 consisted of Federal Home Loan Bank stock with a cost of $5.2 million and other investments of approximately
$29,000.

The
amortized costs and the fair value of our investments at December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 are shown in the following table.

December 31, 2010

December 31, 2009

December 31, 2008Amortized
Cost

Fair
Value

Amortized
Cost

Fair
Value

Amortized
Cost

Fair
Value(in thousands)Available for Sale:Government-sponsored enterprises

$
2,001

$
2,053

$
89,774

$
88,613

$
61,106

$
62,215Mortgage-backed securities


56,364


55,903


134,535


133,898


102,615


104,167Municipals








7,319


7,276


5,595


5,388Total

$
58,365

$
57,956

$
231,628

$
229,787

$
169,316

$
171,770


Loans

Since loans typically provide higher interest yields than other types of interest-earning assets, a substantial percentage of our
earning assets are invested in our loan portfolio. Average loans for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 were $468.0 million and $472.0 million, respectively. Gross loans
outstanding at December 31, 2010 and 2009 were $437.7 million and $485.0 million, respectively.

60

---



Loans secured by real estate mortgages are the principal component of our loan portfolio. Most of our real estate loans are secured by residential or commercial property. We do not
generally originate traditional long term residential mortgages for the portfolio, but we do issue traditional second mortgage residential real estate loans and home equity lines of credit. We obtain
a security interest in real estate whenever possible, in addition to any other available collateral. This collateral is taken to increase the likelihood of the ultimate repayment of the loan.
Generally, we limit the loan-to-value ratio on loans we make to 85%. The current mix may not be indicative of the ongoing portfolio mix. We attempt to maintain a relatively
diversified loan portfolio to help reduce the risk inherent in concentration in certain types of collateral.

The
following table summarizes the composition of our loan portfolio:

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006(dollars in thousands)Amount

% of
Total

Amount

% of
Total

Amount

% of
Total

Amount

% of
Total

Amount

% of
TotalCommercialCommercial and industrial

$
23,255


5.3
%
$
26,687


5.5
%
$
27,443


6.0
%
$
24,350


6.2
%
$
24,631


9.0
%Real EstateMortgage


315,181


72.0
%

335,831


69.2
%

268,500


58.1
%

204,068


52.2
%

124,715


45.7
%Construction


96,001


21.9
%

118,183


24.4
%

161,298


34.9
%

159,815


40.8
%

122,210


44.7
%Total real estate


411,182


93.9
%

454,014


93.6
%

429,798


93.0
%

363,883


93.0
%

246,925


90.4
%ConsumerConsumer


3,775


0.9
%

4,985


1.0
%

4,936


1.1
%

3,467


0.9
%

1,901


0.7
%Total gross loans


438,212


100.1
%

485,686


100.1
%

461,177


100.1
%

391,700


100.1
%

273,457


100.1
%Deferred origination fees, net


(524
)

(0.1
)%

(648
)

(0.1
)%

(210
)

(0.1
)%

(350
)

(0.1
)%

(247
)

(0.1
)%Total gross loans, net of deferred fees


437,688


100.0
%

485,038


100.0
%

461,967


100.0
%

391,350


100.0
%

273,210


100.0
%Lessallowance for loan losses


(11,459
)




(10,048
)




(7,635
)




(4,158
)




(3,467
)Total loans, net

$
426,229




$
474,990




$
454,332




$
387,192




$
269,743


Maturities and Sensitivity of Loans to Changes in Interest Rates

The information in the following table is based on the contractual maturities of individual loans, including loans that may be subject
to renewal at their contractual maturity. Renewal of such loans is subject to review and credit approval, as well as modification of terms upon maturity. Actual repayments of loans may differ from the
maturities reflected below because borrowers have the right to

61

---



prepay
obligations with or without prepayment penalties. The following table summarizes the loan maturity distribution by type and related interest rate characteristics at December 31, 2010:

One year
or less

After one
but
within
five years

After five
years

Total(in thousands)Commercial

$
10,872

$
11,745

$
638

$
23,255Real estate


163,115


206,087


41,980


411,182Consumer


1,004


2,383


388


3,775Deferred origination fees, net


(501
)

(22
)

(1
)

(524
)Total gross loans, net of deferred fees

$
174,490

$
220,193

$
43,005

$
437,688Gross loans maturing after one year with:Fixed interest rates










$
138,139Floating interest rates











125,082Total










$
263,221


Allowance for Loan Losses and Provisions

We have established an allowance for loan losses through a provision for loan losses charged to expense on our statement of operations.
The allowance is maintained at a level deemed appropriate by management to provide adequately for known and inherent losses in the portfolio. The allowance for loan losses represents an amount which
we believe will be adequate to absorb probable losses on existing loans that may become uncollectible. Our judgment as to the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses is based on a number of
assumptions about future events, which we believe to be reasonable, but which may or may not prove to be accurate. Our determination of the allowance for loan losses is based on evaluations of the
collectability of loans, including consideration of factors such as the balance of impaired loans, the quality, mix, and size of our overall loan portfolio, economic conditions that may affect the
borrower's ability to repay, the amount and quality of collateral securing the loans, our historical loan loss experience, and a review of specific problem loans. We also consider subjective issues
such as changes in the lending policies and procedures, changes in the local/national economy, changes in volume or type of credits, changes in volume/severity of problem loans, quality of loan review
and board of director oversight, concentrations of credit, and peer group comparisons.

More
specifically, in determining our allowance for loan losses, we review loans for specific and impaired reserves based on current appraisals less estimated closing costs. General and
unallocated reserves are determined using historical loss trends applied to risk rated loans grouped by FDIC call report classification code. The general and unallocated reserves are calculated by
applying the appropriate historical loss ratio to the loan categories grouped by risk rating (pass, special mention, substandard and doubtful). The quantitative value of the qualitative factors, as
described below, is then applied to this amount to estimate the general and unallocated reserve for the specific loans within this rating category and particular loan category. Impaired loans are
excluded from this analysis as they are individually reviewed for valuation. The sum of all such amounts determines our general and unallocated reserves.

We
also track our portfolio and analyze loans grouped by call report categories. The first step in this process is to risk grade each and every loan in the portfolio based on a common
set of parameters. These parameters include debt to worth, liquidity of the borrower, net worth, experience in a particular field and other factors. Weight is also given to the relative strength of
any guarantors on the loan. We

62

---



have
retained an independent consultant to review the loan files on a test basis to confirm the loan grade assigned to the loan.

After
risk grading each loan, we then use fourteen qualitative factors to analyze the trends in the portfolio. These fourteen factors include both internal and external factors. The
internal factors considered are the concentration of credit across the portfolio, current delinquency ratios and trends, the experience level of management and staff, our adherence to lending policies
and procedures, current loss and recovery trends, the nature and volume of the portfolio's categories, current nonaccrual and problem loan trends, the quality of our loan review system, policy
exceptions, value of underlying collateral and other factors which include insurance shortfalls, loan fraud and unpaid tax risk. The external factors considered are regulatory and legal factors and
the current economic and business environment, which includes indicators such as national GDP, pricing indicators, employment statistics, housing statistics, market indicators, financial regulatory
economic analysis, and economic forecasts from reputable sources. A quantitative value is assigned to each of the fourteen internal and external factors, which, when added together, creates a net
qualitative weight. The net qualitative weight is then added to the minimum loss ratio. Negative trends in the loan portfolio increase the quantitative values assigned to each of the qualitative
factors and, therefore, increase the loss ratio. As a result, an increased loss ratio will result in a higher allowance for loan loss. For example, as general economic and business conditions decline,
this qualitative factor's quantitative value will increase, which will increase the net qualitative weight and the loss ratio (assuming all other qualitative factors remain constant). Similarly,
positive trends in the loan portfolio, such as an improvement in general economic and business conditions, will decrease the quantitative value assigned to this qualitative factor, thereby decreasing
the net qualitative weight (assuming all other qualitative factors remain constant). These factors are reviewed and updated by the Bank's Senior Risk Committee on a quarterly basis to arrive at a
consensus for our qualitative adjustments.

Our
methodology for determining our historical loss ratio is to analyze the most recent four quarters' losses because we believe this period encompasses the most severe economic downturn
and resulting credit losses in recent history. The resulting historical loss factor is used as a beginning point upon which we add our quantitative adjustments based on the qualitative factors
discussed above. Once the qualitative adjustments are made, we refer to the final amount as the total factor. The total factor is then multiplied by the loans outstanding for the period ended, except
for any loans classified as non-performing which are addressed specifically as discussed below, to estimate the general and unallocated reserves.

Separately,
we review all impaired loans individually to determine a specific allocation for each. In our assessment of impaired loans, we consider the primary source of repayment when
determining whether or not loans are collateral dependent. Impairment of a loan is measured based on the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan's effective interest rate or
the fair value of the collateral if the loan is collateral dependent. When management determines that a loan is impaired, the difference between our investment in the related loan and the present
value of the expected future cash flows, or the fair value of the collateral, is generally charged against the allowance for loan losses.

Periodically,
we adjust the amount of the allowance based on changing circumstances. We recognize loan losses to the allowance and add back subsequent recoveries. In addition, on a
quarterly basis we informally compare our allowance for loan losses to various peer institutions; however, we recognize that allowances will vary as financial institutions are unique in the
make-up of their loan portfolios and customers, which necessarily creates different risk profiles for the institutions. We would only consider further adjustments to our allowance for loan
losses based on this review of peers if our allowance was significantly different from our peer group. To date, we have not made any such adjustment. There can be no assurance that loan
charge-offs of loans in future periods will not exceed the allowance for loan losses as estimated at any point in time or that provisions for loan losses will not

63

---



be
significant to a particular accounting period, especially considering the overall weakness in the commercial and residential real estate markets in our market areas.

The
following table summarizes the activity related to our allowance for loan losses.

December 31,2010

2009

2008

2007

2006(dollars in thousands)Balance, beginning of year

$
10,048

$
7,635

$
4,158

$
3,467

$
2,245Provision for loan losses


16,260


14,745


4,665


1,025


1,222Charge offs, Commercial and Industrial


(498
)

(1,519
)

(313
)

(116
)

Charge offs, Real Estate Mortgage


(8,651
)

(5,629
)

(756
)




Charge offs, Real Estate Construction


(5,699
)

(5,104
)

(73
)

(218
)

Charge offs, Consumer


(311
)

(204
)

(47
)

(1
)

Recoveries, Commercial and Industrial


36


12


1


1


Recoveries, Real Estate Mortgage


184


57








Recoveries, Real Estate Construction


86


53








Recoveries, Consumer


4


2








Balance, end of year

$
11,459

$
10,048

$
7,635

$
4,158

$
3,467Total loans outstanding at end of period

$
437,688

$
485,038

$
461,967

$
391,350

$
273,210Allowance for loan losses to gross loans


2.61
%

2.07
%

1.65
%

1.06
%

1.27
%Net charge-offs to average loans


3.17
%

2.61
%

0.27
%

0.10
%

0.00
%


Nonperforming Assets

The following table sets forth our nonperforming assets.

December 31,2010

2009

2008

2007

2006(dollars in thousands)Nonaccrual loans

$
35,556

$
21,295

$
11,482

$
389

$
1,965Loans 90 days or more past due and still accruing interest














Loans restructured or otherwise impaired














Total impaired loans


35,556


21,295


11,482


389


1,965Other real estate owned


11,906


6,865


1,801





Total nonperforming assets

$
47,462

$
28,160

$
13,283

$
389

$
1,965Nonperforming assets to total assets


8.31
%

3.63
%

1.86
%

0.08
%

0.58
%


During
the fourth quarter of 2008, as the global economic environment crumbled, affecting our regional market, borrowers that had previously satisfactorily maintained their credit
positions began to have difficulty with the repayment of their obligations. As an institution concentrating in real estate lending, the slow down in the residential and commercial real estate
activities coupled with the sharp decline in stock market values exacerbated the stress on the liquidity position of our borrowers. The resulting lack of liquidity cushion manifested in our loans past
due 30-89 days and non-performing assets. Consequently, we experienced significant increases in loans on our watch list, past due loans, nonaccrual loans and other real
estate owned.

The
bank had 76 nonperforming loans at December 31, 2010 totaling $35.6 million and 67 nonperforming loans totaling $21.3 million at December 31, 2009. As of
December 31, 2008, we had

64

---



25 nonperforming
loans totaling $11.5 million. Of the 76 nonperforming loans, it is anticipated that 61 loans totaling approximately $25.4 million will move to other real estate
owned or repossessed assets through foreclosure or through our acceptance of a deed in lieu of foreclosure. An additional six loans amounting to approximately $4.0 million are expected to be
paid in full, four loans totaling approximately $3.7 million will remain in nonaccrual as troubled debt restructurings and five loans totaling approximately $2.5 million will be
refinanced either through us or elsewhere. At December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, the allowance for loan losses was $11.5 million, $10.0 million and $7.6 million,
respectively, or 2.61%, 2.07% and 1.65%, respectively, of outstanding loans. We remain committed to working with borrowers to help them overcome their difficulties and will review loans on a loan by
loan
basis. However, despite our commitment, resolution across the portfolio is dependent on improvements in employment, housing, and overall economic conditions at the local, regional and national levels.

Included
in nonperforming loans at December 31, 2010 are $8.3 million in residential properties, representing approximately 23.3% of the Bank's nonperforming loan total. As
to be expected, collateral values have declined as a result of the current economic environment. According to the Federal Housing Finance Agency's Home Price index, home prices in the Charleston and
Myrtle Beach, South Carolina markets declined 4.75% and 8.76%, respectively, during the 12 month period ended September 30, 2010. This compares to declines during that period for the
State of South Carolina and the country as a whole of 7.69% and 3.18%, respectively. To determine current collateral values we obtain new appraisals on loan renewals and potential problem loans. In
the process of estimating collateral values for non-performing loans, management evaluates markets for stagnation or distress and discounts appraised values on a property by property
basis. Currently, management does not review collateral values for properties located in stagnant or distressed residential areas if the loan is performing and not up for renewal.

As
of December 31, 2010, we had 76 loans with a current principal balance of $27.6 million on the watch list, compared to 70 loans with a current principal balance of
$37.2 million at December 31, 2009. The watch list is the classification utilized by us when we have an initial concern about the financial health of a borrower. We then gather current
financial information about the borrower and evaluate our current risk in the credit. We will then either move it to "substandard" or back to its original risk rating after a review of the
information. There are times when we may leave the loan on the "watch list," if, in management's opinion, there are risks that cannot be fully evaluated without the passage of time, and we want to
review it on a more regular basis. Loans on the watch list are not considered "potential problem loans" until they are determined by management to be classified as substandard.

Loans
past due 30-89 days amounted to $7.7 million at December 31, 2010 as compared to $10.1 million at December 31, 2009. Past due loans
are often regarded as a precursor to further credit problems which would lead to future increases in nonaccrual loans and other real estate owned. At December 31, 2010, there were no loans past
due greater than 90 days that were not already placed on nonaccrual. Generally, a loan is placed on nonaccrual status when it becomes 90 days past due as to principal or interest, or
when we believe, after considering economic and business conditions and collection efforts, that the borrower's financial condition is such that collection of the loan is doubtful. A payment of
interest on a loan that is classified as nonaccrual is applied against the principal balance. During the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, we received approximately $735,000,
$709,000 and $452,000, respectively, in interest income in relation to loans that were on nonaccrual status at the respective year end prior to them being placed on nonaccrual status. Foregone
interest income related to loans on nonaccrual status was approximately $1.0 million, $892,000 and $396,000 during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

65

---



Deposits

Our primary source of funds for loans and investments is our deposits. National and local market trends over the past several years
suggest that consumers have moved an increasing percentage of discretionary savings funds into investments such as annuities, stocks and mutual funds. Accordingly, it has become more difficult to
attract local deposits. In the past, we have chosen to obtain a portion of certificates of deposits from outside of our market. The deposits obtained outside of our market areas generally have lower
rates and maturities than those being offered for similar deposit products in our local market. Due to the Consent Order, we may not accept brokered deposits unless a waiver is granted by the FDIC. We
anticipate that our remaining $3.5 million of wholesale deposits will runoff as they mature during 2011. The amount of wholesale deposits was $3.5 million, or 0.7% of total deposits, at
December 31, 2010, compared to $189.9 million, or 32.1% of total deposits, at December 31, 2009. Our loan-to-deposit ratio was 91.0% and 82.0% at
December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Although we currently do not utilize brokered deposits as a funding source, if we were to seek to begin using such funding source, there is no
assurance that the FDIC will grant us the approval when requested. These restrictions could have a substantial negative impact on our liquidity. Additionally, we are restricted from offering an
effective yield on deposits of more than 75 basis points over the national rates published by the FDIC weekly on their website.

The
following table shows the average balance amounts and the average rates paid on deposits held by us for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

December 31, 2010

December 31, 2009

December 31, 2008Amount

Rate

Amount

Rate

Amount

Rate(dollars in thousands)Noninterest bearing demand deposits

$
14,988



%
$
12,516



%
$
12,272



%Interest bearing demand deposits


29,044


0.98
%

40,761


1.58
%

28,576


2.53
%Savings and money market accounts


193,512


1.36
%

197,356


1.70
%

173,471


2.77
%Time deposits less than $100,000


166,797


1.89
%

214,135


2.85
%

203,217


4.24
%Time deposits greater than $100,000


135,009


2.05
%

97,918


3.31
%

63,180


4.17
%Total deposits

$
539,350


1.64
%
$
562,686


2.37
%
$
480,716


3.49
%


All
of our time deposits are certificates of deposits. The maturity distribution of our time deposits of $100,000 or more at December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was as follows:

2010

2009

2008(in thousands)Three months or less

$
40,831

$
21,620

$
17,243Over three through six months


54,009


44,829


43,867Over six though twelve months


43,885


34,826


17,514Over twelve months


37,568


4,700


14,201Total

$
176,293

$
105,975

$
92,825


The
increase in time deposits of $100,000 or more for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the same period in 2009 resulted from our funding the growth of the bank with a
variety of time deposit products, including retail time deposits.

66

---





Borrowings and Other Interest-Bearing Liabilities

The following table outlines our various sources of borrowed funds during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, and
the amounts outstanding at the end of each period, the maximum amount for each component during the periods, the average amounts for each period, and the average interest rate that we paid for each
borrowing source. The maximum month-end balance represents the high indebtedness for each component of borrowed funds at any time during each of the periods shown.

Average
for the PeriodMaximum
Month
End
BalanceEnding
Balance

Period
End
RateBalance

Rate(dollars in thousands)At or for the year ended December 31, 2010:Securities sold under agreement to repurchase

$
20,000


3.76
%
$
60,000

$
30,514


2.60
%Advances from FHLB


27,000


2.00
%

85,000


44,430


2.72
%Junior subordinated debentures


14,434


4.92
%

14,434


14,434


5.06
%ESOP borrowings


1,625


4.50
%

2,300


1,839


4.20
%Federal funds purchased






%




34


0.58
%At or for the year ended December 31, 2009:Securities sold under agreement to repurchase

$
60,000


1.55
%
$
72,500

$
63,090


1.67
%Advances from FHLB


65,000


3.03
%

100,800


91,075


2.55
%Junior subordinated debentures


14,434


4.97
%

14,434


14,434


5.36
%ESOP borrowings


2,300


2.25
%

2,600


2,480


2.29
%Federal funds purchased






%




106


1.12
%Other borrowings






%




45


3.99
%At or for the year ended December 31, 2008:Securities sold under agreement to repurchase

$
20,000


3.76
%
$
50,000

$
35,187


3.58
%Advances from FHLB


60,800


2.71
%

60,800


40,915


3.51
%Junior subordinated debentures


14,434


6.98
%

14,434


11,493


6.30
%ESOP borrowings


2,600


2.25
%

2,900


2,774


4.17
%Federal funds purchased






%

2,963


187


4.25
%Other borrowings


616


4.25
%

616


220


5.53
%


We
have exercised our right to defer distributions on the junior subordinated debentures (and the related trust preferred securities), during which time we cannot pay any dividends on
our common stock. In addition, the Consent Order prohibits us from declaring or paying any dividends or making any distributions of interest, principal, or other sums on subordinated debentures
without the prior approval of the supervisory authorities.

Federal Home Loan Bank Advances, Fed Funds Lines of Credit and Federal Reserve Discount Window.Our other borrowings have traditionally
included proceeds from FHLB advances and federal funds lines of credit from correspondent banks. At December 31, 2010, we had $27.0 million in total advances and lines from the FHLB with
a remaining credit availability of $114.6 million and an excess lendable collateral value of approximately $10.1 million. At December 31, 2010, we had a federal funds line of
credit with an unrelated bank totaling $4.5 million. These lines are available for general corporate purposes. These lines may be terminated at any time based on our financial condition. We
also have credit availability through the Federal Reserve Discount Window. As of December 31, 2010, $46.9 million was available, based on qualifying collateral. The Federal Reserve
Discount Window borrowing capacity has been curtailed to only overnight terms, contingent upon credit approval for each transaction. Availability of the Federal Reserve Discount Window may be
terminated at any time by the

67

---



Federal
Reserve, and we can make no assurances that this funding source will continue to be available to us.

Capital Resources

Total shareholders' equity was $23.6 million at December 31, 2010 and $38.9 million at December 31, 2009.
The decrease is attributable to the net loss of $15.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2010, the preferred stock dividend declared of $722,000, additional paid in capital related
to the ESOP of $243,000, offset by a decrease in the guarantee of ESOP borrowings of $297,000, net of current year reductions, an increase of $888,000 in the fair value of available for sale
securities and stock-based compensation expense of $63,000. Since our inception, we have not paid any cash dividends on our common shares.

The
following table shows the return on average assets (net income divided by average total assets), return on average equity (net income divided by average equity), and average equity
to average assets ratio (average equity divided by average total assets) for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008:

2010

2009

2008Return on average assets


(2.33
)%

(1.30
)%

(0.81
)%Return on average equity


(45.63
)%

(20.85
)%

(12.40
)%Equity to assets ratio


5.10
%

6.24
%

6.50
%


The
Federal Reserve and bank regulatory agencies require bank holding companies and financial institutions to maintain capital at adequate levels based on a percentage of assets and
off-balance sheet exposures, adjusted for risk weights ranging from 0% to 100%. Under the capital adequacy guidelines, regulatory capital is classified into two tiers. These guidelines
require an institution to maintain a certain level of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital to risk-weighted assets. Tier 1 capital consists of common shareholders' equity,
excluding the unrealized gain or loss on securities available for sale, minus certain intangible assets. In determining the amount of risk-weighted assets, all assets, including certain
off-balance sheet assets, are multiplied by a risk-weight factor of 0% to 100% based on the risks believed to be inherent in the type of asset. Tier 2 capital consists
of Tier 1 capital plus the general reserve for loan losses, subject to certain limitations. Our bank is required to maintain capital at a minimum level based on total average assets, which is
known as the Tier 1 leverage ratio.

To
be considered "well-capitalized," banks must maintain total risk-based capital of at least 10%, Tier 1 capital of at least 6%, and a leverage ratio of
at least 5%. To be considered "adequately capitalized" under capital guidelines, we must maintain a minimum total risk-based capital of 8%, with at least 4% being Tier 1 capital. In
addition, banking regulators have established a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of at least 4%. In addition, the Consent Order requires us to achieve and maintain Tier 1 capital at least
equal to 8% of total assets and Total Risk-Based capital at least equal to 10% of total risk-weighted assets by May 27, 2011. As of December 31, 2010, the bank is
not in compliance with the capital requirements established in the Consent Order.

The
following table sets forth the company's various capital ratios at December 31, 2010 and 2009.

Tidelands Bancshares, Inc.

2010

2009Leverage ratio


5.47
%

6.83
%Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio


7.06
%

10.22
%Total risk-based capital ratio


9.77
%

11.68
%


68

---



The
following table sets forth the bank's various capital ratios at December 31, 2010 and 2009.

Tidelands Bank

2010

2009Leverage ratio


6.38
%

6.59
%Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio


8.22
%

9.85
%Total risk-based capital ratio


9.49
%

11.11
%


To
provide the additional capital needed to support our bank's growth in assets, during the first quarter of 2005 we borrowed $2.1 million under a short-term holding
company line of credit. On March 31, 2005, we completed a private placement of 1,712,000 shares at $9.35 to increase the capital of the company and the bank. Net proceeds from the offering were
approximately $14.9 million. Upon closing the transaction, the holding company line of credit was repaid in full. On February 22, 2006, Tidelands Statutory Trust, a
non-consolidated subsidiary of the company, issued and sold floating rate capital securities of the trust, generating net proceeds of $8.0 million. The trust loaned these proceeds
to the company to use for general corporate purposes, primarily to provide capital to the bank. The junior subordinated debentures qualify as Tier 1 capital under Federal Reserve Board
guidelines. On October 10, 2006, we closed a public offering in which 1,200,000 shares of our common stock were issued at a purchase price of $15.00 per share. Net proceeds after deducting the
underwriter's discount and expenses were $16.4 million.

On
June 20, 2008, Tidelands Statutory Trust II ("Trust II"), a non-consolidated subsidiary of the company, issued and sold fixed/floating rate capital securities of
the trust, generating proceeds of $6.0 million. Trust II loaned these proceeds to the company to use for general corporate purposes, primarily to provide capital to the bank. The junior
subordinated debentures qualify as Tier I under Federal Reserve Board guidelines.

On
December 19, 2008, we entered into the CPP Purchase Agreement with the Treasury, pursuant to which the company issued and sold to Treasury (i) 14,448 shares of the
company's Series T Preferred Stock, having a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share, and (ii) a ten-year warrant to purchase up to 571,821 shares of the company's common
stock, par value $0.01 per share, at an initial exercise price of $3.79 per share, for an aggregate purchase price of $14,448,000 in cash. The Series T Preferred Stock qualifies as
Tier 1 capital under Federal Reserve Board guidelines.

Effect of Inflation and Changing Prices

The effect of relative purchasing power over time due to inflation has not been taken into account in our consolidated financial
statements. Rather, our financial statements have been prepared on an historical cost basis in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

Unlike
most industrial companies, our assets and liabilities are primarily monetary in nature. Therefore, the effect of changes in interest rates will have a more significant impact on
our performance than will the effect of changing prices and inflation in general. In addition, interest rates may generally increase as the rate of inflation increases, although not necessarily in the
same magnitude. As discussed previously, we seek to manage the relationships between interest sensitive assets and liabilities in order to protect against wide rate fluctuations, including those
resulting from inflation.

Off-Balance Sheet Risk

Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a customer as long as the customer has not violated any material condition
established in the contract. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses and may require the payment of a fee. At December 31,

69

---



2010,
unfunded commitments to extend credit were $18.6 million. A significant portion of the unfunded commitments related to consumer equity lines of credit. Based on historical experience, we
anticipate that a significant portion of these lines of credit will not be funded. We evaluate each customer's credit worthiness on a case-by-case basis. The amount of
collateral obtained, if deemed necessary by us upon extension of credit, is based on our credit evaluation of the borrower. The type of collateral varies but may include accounts receivable,
inventory, property, plant and equipment, and commercial and residential real estate.

At
December 31, 2010, there were commitments totaling approximately $609,000 under letters of credit. The credit risk and collateral involved in issuing letters of credit is
essentially the same as that involved in extending loan facilities to customers. Since most of the letters of credit are expected to expire without being drawn upon, they do not necessarily represent
future cash requirements.

Except
as disclosed in this report, we are not involved in off-balance sheet contractual relationships, unconsolidated related entities that have off-balance
sheet arrangements, or transactions that could result in liquidity needs or other commitments that significantly impact earnings.

Market Risk

Market risk is the risk of loss from adverse changes in market prices and rates, which principally arises from interest rate risk
inherent in our lending, investing, deposit gathering, and borrowing activities. Other types of market risk, such as foreign currency exchange rate risk and commodity price risk, do not generally
arise in the normal course of our business.

We
actively monitor and manage our interest rate risk exposure principally by measuring our interest sensitivity "gap," and net interest income simulations. Interest sensitivity gap is
the positive or negative dollar difference between assets and liabilities that are subject to interest rate repricing within a given period of time. Interest rate sensitivity can be managed by
repricing assets or liabilities, selling securities available for sale, replacing an asset or liability at maturity, or adjusting the interest rate during the life of an asset or liability. Managing
the amount of assets and liabilities repricing in this same time interval helps to hedge the risk and minimize the impact on net interest income of rising or falling interest rates. We generally would
benefit from increasing market rates of interest when we have an asset-sensitive gap position and generally would benefit from decreasing market rates of interest when we are liability-sensitive. We
are currently liability sensitive on a cumulative basis over the one year, five year and over five year horizon.

Approximately
53.6% of our loans were variable rate loans at December 31, 2010 and 76.1% of interest-bearing liabilities reprice within one year. However, interest rate movements
typically result in changes in interest rates on assets that are different in magnitude from the corresponding changes in rates paid on liabilities. While a substantial portion of our loans reprice
within the first three months of the year, a larger majority of our deposits will reprice within a 12-month period. However, our gap analysis is not a precise indicator of our interest
sensitivity position. The analysis presents only a static view of the timing of maturities and repricing opportunities, without taking into consideration that changes in interest rates do not affect
all assets and liabilities equally. For example, rates paid on a substantial portion of core deposits may change contractually within a relatively short time frame, but those rates are viewed by us as
significantly less interest-sensitive than market-based rates such as those paid on noncore deposits. Net interest income may be affected by other significant factors in a given interest rate
environment, including changes in the volume and mix of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities.

Liquidity and Interest Rate Sensitivity

Liquidity represents the ability of a company to convert assets into cash or cash equivalents without significant loss, and the ability
to raise additional funds by increasing liabilities. Liquidity

70

---



management
involves monitoring our sources and uses of funds in order to meet our day-to-day cash flow requirements while maximizing profits. Liquidity management is made more
complicated because different balance sheet components are subject to varying degrees of management control. For example, the timing of maturities of our investment portfolio is fairly predictable and
subject to a high degree of control at the time investment decisions are made. However, net deposit inflows and outflows are far less predictable and are not subject to the same degree of control.

At
December 31, 2010 and 2009, our liquid assets, which consist of cash and due from banks and federal funds sold, amounted to $27.7 million and $15.0 million, or
4.9% and 1.9% of total assets, respectively. Our available for sale securities at December 31, 2010 and 2009 amounted to $58.0 million and $229.8 million, or 10.1% and 29.6% of
total assets, respectively. Investment securities traditionally provide a secondary source of liquidity since they can be converted into cash in a timely manner. However, approximately
$28.4 million of these securities are pledged against outstanding debt or borrowing lines of credit. Therefore, the related debt would need to be repaid prior to the securities being sold in
order for these securities to be converted to cash.

Our
ability to maintain and expand our deposit base and borrowing capabilities serves as our primary source of liquidity. We plan to meet our future cash needs through the generation of
deposits. In addition, we receive cash upon the maturity and sale of loans and the maturity of investment securities. We maintain one federal funds purchased line of credit with a correspondent bank
totaling $4.5 million. We are also a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta, from which applications for borrowings can be made for leverage or liquidity purposes. The FHLB requires
that securities, qualifying mortgage loans, and stock of the FHLB owned by the bank be pledged to secure any advances. At December 31, 2010, we had $27.0 million in total advances and
lines from the FHLB with a remaining credit availability of $114.6 million and an excess lendable collateral value of approximately $10.1 million. In addition, we maintain a line of
credit with the Federal Reserve Bank of $70.8 million secured by certain loans in our loan portfolio.

Asset/liability
management is the process by which we monitor and control the mix and maturities of our assets and liabilities. The essential purposes of asset/liability management are
to ensure adequate liquidity and to maintain an appropriate balance between interest sensitive assets and liabilities in order to minimize potentially adverse impacts on earnings from changes in
market interest rates. Our risk management committee monitors and considers methods of managing exposure to interest rate risk.
The risk management committee is responsible for maintaining the level of interest rate sensitivity of our interest sensitive assets and liabilities within board-approved limits.

The
following table sets forth information regarding our rate sensitivity, as of December 31, 2010, at each of the time intervals. The information in the table may not be
indicative of our rate sensitivity position at other points in time. In addition, the maturity distribution implied in the table may differ from the contractual maturities of the earning assets and
interest-bearing liabilities presented due to

71

---



consideration
of prepayment speeds under various interest rate change scenarios and other embedded optionality in the application of the interest rate sensitivity methods described above.

Within
three
months

After three
but within
twelve months

After one
but within
five years

After
five
years

Total(dollars in thousands)Interest-earning assets:Federal funds sold

$
24,069

$


$


$


$
24,069Investment securities


4,698


12,883


20,372


20,003


57,956Loans


241,939


59,014


116,450


20,285


437,688Total interest-earning assets

$
270,706

$
71,897

$
136,822

$
40,288

$
519,713Interest-bearing liabilities:Money market and NOW

$
48,846

$


$


$


$
48,846Regular savings


120,273











120,273Time deposits


63,733


160,101


72,029


1,439


297,302Junior subordinated debentures


8,248








6,186


14,434Securities sold under agreements to repurchase








10,000


10,000


20,000Advances from Federal Home Loan Bank








18,000


9,000


27,000ESOP borrowings


1,625











1,625Total interest-bearing liabilities

$
242,725

$
160,101

$
100,029

$
26,625

$
529,480Period gap

$
27,981

$
(88,204
)
$
36,793

$
13,663

$
(9,767
)Cumulative gap

$
27,981

$
(60,223
)
$
(23,430
)
$
(9,767
)
$
(9,767
)Ratio of cumulative gap to total earning assets


5.38
%

(11.59
)%

(4.51
)%

(1.88
)%

(1.88
)%


Item 7A:    Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure About Market Risk.

Not applicable

72

---





Item 8:    Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

INDEX TO AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS



TIDELANDS BANCSHARES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARYReport of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm


F-2Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2010 and
2009


F-3Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31,
2010, 2009 and 2008


F-4Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders' Equity and Comprehensive Income (Loss) for the years ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008


F-5Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31,
2010, 2009 and 2008


F-6Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements


F-7


F-1

---





REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The
Board of Directors
Tidelands Bancshares, Inc.
Mount Pleasant, South Carolina

We
have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. and subsidiary as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 and the related consolidated
statements of operations, changes in shareholders' equity and comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010. These consolidated
financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits.

We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform an audit of its internal
control over financial reporting. Our audit included consideration of internal controls over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances,
but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles
used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In
our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Tidelands Bancshares, Inc., and
subsidiary as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010, in conformity with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

/s/
Elliott Davis, LLC
Greenville, South Carolina
March 4, 2011

F-2

---





Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. and Subsidiary        Consolidated Balance Sheets

December 31,
2010

December 31,
2009Assets:Cash and cash equivalents:Cash and due from banks

$
3,657,977

$
2,493,227Federal funds sold


24,069,000


12,500,000Total cash and cash equivalents


27,726,977


14,993,227Securities available-for-sale


57,955,698


229,786,787Nonmarketable equity securities


5,267,750


5,892,650Total securities


63,223,448


235,679,437Mortgage loans held for sale





617,000Loans receivable


437,688,015


485,037,761Less allowance for loan losses


11,459,047


10,048,015Loans, net


426,228,968


474,989,746Premises, furniture and equipment, net


22,422,388


18,802,701Accrued interest receivable


1,928,992


3,283,931Bank owned life insurance


14,414,626


13,856,165Other real estate owned


11,905,865


6,865,461Other assets


3,439,207


6,324,714Total assets

$
571,290,471

$
775,412,382Liabilities:Deposits:Noninterest-bearing transaction accounts

$
14,573,484

$
16,971,128Interest-bearing transaction accounts


26,474,037


29,688,124Savings and money market accounts


142,644,095


237,589,561Time deposits $100,000 and over


176,293,300


105,975,461Other time deposits


121,008,483


201,324,905Total deposits


480,993,399


591,549,179Securities sold under agreements to repurchase


20,000,000


60,000,000Advances from Federal Home Loan Bank


27,000,000


65,000,000Junior subordinated debentures


14,434,000


14,434,000ESOP borrowings


1,625,000


2,300,000Accrued interest payable


1,510,282


1,359,861Other liabilities


2,085,131


1,844,598Total liabilities


547,647,812


736,487,638Commitments and contingenciesShareholders' equity:Preferred stock, $.01 par value and liquidation value per share of $1,000, 10,000,000 shares authorized, 14,448 issued and outstanding at December 31,
2010 and 2009


13,736,892


13,529,660Common stock, $.01 par value, 10,000,000 shares authorized; 4,277,176 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2010 and 2009


42,772


42,772Common stock-warrant, 571,821 shares outstanding at December 31, 2010 and 2009


1,112,248


1,112,248Unearned ESOP shares


(1,907,361
)

(2,204,073
)Capital surplus


43,404,879


43,584,958Retained deficit


(32,504,156
)

(16,010,476
)Accumulated other comprehensive loss


(242,615
)

(1,130,345
)Total shareholders' equity


23,642,659


38,924,744Total liabilities and shareholders' equity

$
571,290,471

$
775,412,382


The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-3

---





Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. and Subsidiary        Consolidated Statements of Operations        For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

2010

2009

2008Interest income:Loans, including fees

$
24,169,733

$
25,512,610

$
27,378,906Securities available-for-sale, taxable


4,849,934


9,922,547


6,805,459Securities available-for-sale, non-taxable


37,723


148,437


286,844Federal funds sold


66,242


25,803


280,973Other interest income


23,757


2,741


5,116Total interest income


29,147,389


35,612,138


34,757,298Interest expense:Time deposits $100,000 and over


2,773,925


3,245,973


2,634,756Other deposits


6,082,310


10,100,461


14,153,141Other borrowings


2,809,700


4,212,222


3,554,669Total interest expense


11,665,935


17,558,656


20,342,566Net interest income


17,481,454


18,053,482


14,414,732Provision for loan losses


16,260,000


14,745,000


4,665,000Net interest income after provision for loan losses


1,221,454


3,308,482


9,749,732Noninterest income (loss):Service charges on deposit accounts


45,565


41,605


36,340Residential mortgage origination income


258,430


404,855


383,341Gain on sale of securities available-for-sale


1,741,539


4,857,395


509,373Other service fees and commissions


543,963


522,289


362,029Increase in cash surrender value of BOLI


558,461


520,995


484,352Loss on extinguishment of debt


(1,619,771
)




Impairment on equity securities





(122,890
)

(4,596,200
)Other


51,302


48,180


32,352Total noninterest income (loss)


1,579,489


6,272,429


(2,788,413
)Noninterest expense:Salaries and employee benefits


7,260,168


7,805,821


8,322,117Net occupancy


1,610,706


1,574,366


1,423,198Furniture and equipment


886,963


855,324


734,497Other real estate owned expense


2,569,992


750,544


3,363Other operating


6,037,162


5,472,176


4,131,727Total noninterest expense


18,364,991


16,458,231


14,614,902Loss before income taxes


(15,564,048
)

(6,877,320
)

(7,653,583
)Income tax expense (benefit)





3,379,655


(2,699,000
)Net loss

$
(15,564,048
)
$
(10,256,975
)
$
(4,954,583
)Accretion of preferred stock to redemption value


207,232


193,908


Preferred dividends declared


732,433


732,433


Net loss available to common shareholders

$
(16,503,713
)
$
(11,183,316
)
$
(4,954,583
)Loss per common shareBasic loss per share

$
(4.04
)
$
(2.75
)
$
(1.22
)Diluted loss per share

$
(4.04
)
$
(2.75
)
$
(1.22
)Weighted average common shares outstandingBasic


4,087,108


4,071,313


4,050,301Diluted


4,087,108


4,071,313


4,050,301


The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-4

---





Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. and Subsidiary

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders' Equity and Comprehensive Income (Loss)

For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

Preferred Stock



Common Stock







Accumulated
other
Comprehensive
income (loss)Common
Stock
Warrants

Unearned
ESOP
Shares

Capital
Surplus

Retained
Earnings
(Deficit)Shares

Amount

Shares

Amount

TotalBalance, December 31, 2007




$


$



4,277,176

$
42,772

$
(2,427,500
)
$
42,788,666

$
49,164

$
502,068

$
40,955,170Allocation of unearned ESOP shares




















(124,920
)







(124,920
)Stock based compensation expense




















700,509








700,509Net proceeds from issuance of preferred stock and common stock warrants


14,448


13,335,752


1,112,248




















14,448,000Guarantee of ESOP borrowings, net

















(95,360
)










(95,360
)Net loss























(4,954,583
)




(4,954,583
)Other comprehensive income, net of taxes of $631,667


























1,030,616


1,030,616Comprehensive loss





























(3,923,967
)Balance, December 31, 2008


14,448

$
13,335,752

$
1,112,248


4,277,176

$
42,772

$
(2,522,860
)
$
43,364,255

$
(4,905,419
)
$
1,532,684

$
51,959,432Allocation of unearned ESOP shares




















(234,462
)







(234,462
)Stock based compensation expense




















455,165








455,165Preferred stock, dividend paid























(654,174
)




(654,174
)Accretion of discount on preferred stock





193,908

















(193,908
)




Repayment of ESOP borrowings

















318,787











318,787Net loss























(10,256,975
)




(10,256,975
)Other comprehensive loss, net of taxes of $1,632,178


























(2,663,029
)

(2,663,029
)Comprehensive loss





























(12,920,004
)Balance, December 31, 2009


14,448

$
13,529,660

$
1,112,248


4,277,176

$
42,772

$
(2,204,073
)
$
43,584,958

$
(16,010,476
)
$
(1,130,345
)
$
38,924,744Allocation of unearned ESOP shares




















(243,146
)







(243,146
)Stock based compensation expense




















63,067








63,067Preferred stock, dividend declared























(722,400
)




(722,400
)Accretion of discount on preferred stock





207,232

















(207,232
)




Repayment of ESOP borrowings

















296,712











296,712Net loss























(15,564,048
)




(15,564,048
)Other comprehensive income, net of taxes of $544,093


























887,730


887,730Comprehensive loss





























(14,676,318
)Balance, December 31, 2010


14,448

$
13,736,892

$
1,112,248


4,277,176

$
42,772

$
(1,907,361
)
$
43,404,879

$
(32,504,156
)
$
(242,615
)
$
23,642,659


The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-5

---





Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. and Subsidiary        Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows        For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

2010

2009

2008Cash flows from operating activities:Net loss

$
(15,564,048
)
$
(10,256,975
)
$
(4,954,583
)Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities:Provision for loan losses


16,260,000


14,745,000


4,665,000Depreciation and amortization of premises, furniture and equipment


972,821


962,146


883,785Discount accretion and premium amortization, net


916,459


3,375,776


(26,587
)Stock based compensation expense


63,067


455,165


700,509Decrease (increase) in deferred income tax





3,846,223


(2,285,890
)Proceeds from sale of residential mortgages held-for-sale


15,068,475


32,568,094


28,700,877Disbursements for residential mortgages held-for-sale


(14,451,475
)

(32,943,594
)

(27,515,577
)(Increase) decrease in accrued interest receivable


1,354,939


53,729


(173,536
)Increase (decrease) in accrued interest payable


150,422


(1,481,612
)

1,500,312Increase in cash surrender value of life insurance


(558,461
)

(520,995
)

(484,352
)(Gain) loss from sale of real estate and other assets


236,756


91,038


(12,865
)Gain from sale of securities available-for-sale


(1,741,539
)

(4,857,395
)

(509,373
)Gain from extinguishment of debt


(400,000
)




Decrease in carrying value of other real estate


1,335,079


153,249


Other than temporary impairment on securities available-for-sale








4,596,200Other than temporary impairment on nonmarketable equity securities





122,890


Decrease (increase) in other assets


2,090,816


(4,168,293
)

(529,889
)Increase (decrease) in other liabilities


240,532


1,137,993


(381,714
)Net cash provided by operating activities


5,973,843


3,282,439


4,172,317Cash flows from investing activities:Purchases of nonmarketable equity securities





(2,208,400
)

(1,746,200
)Proceeds from sale of nonmarketable equity securities


624,900





Purchases of securities available-for-sale


(70,643,731
)

(575,472,552
)

(153,041,623
)Proceeds from sales of securities available-for-sale


206,508,871


369,561,934


55,037,945Proceeds from calls and maturities of securities available-for-sale


38,222,851


145,080,093


11,871,982Net (increase) decrease in loans receivable


16,815,116


(43,114,686
)

(73,885,256
)Purchase of bank owned life insurance








(5,001,662
)Proceeds from sale of other real estate owned


9,146,941


2,337,821


279,153Purchase of premises, furniture and equipment, net


(4,596,027
)

(358,236
)

(2,527,908
)Net cash provided (used) by investing activities


196,078,921


(104,174,026
)

(169,013,569
)Cash flows from financing activities:Net increase (decrease) in demand deposits, interest-bearing transaction accounts and savings accounts


(100,557,197
)

42,272,220


23,491,440Net increase (decrease) in certificates of deposit and other time


(9,998,583
)

(11,948,517
)

149,564,595Proceeds (repayments) on other borrowings





(615,837
)

615,837Proceeds from securities sold under agreements to repurchase





52,500,000


Repayments on securities sold under agreements to repurchase


(40,000,000
)

(12,500,000
)

(21,040,000
)Proceeds from FHLB advances


18,000,000


40,000,000


31,800,000Repayments on FHLB advances


(56,000,000
)

(35,800,000
)

Proceeds from issuance of junior subordinated debentures








6,186,000Proceeds from ESOP borrowings








472,500Repayment of ESOP borrowings


(275,000
)

(300,000
)

(300,000
)Decrease (increase) in unearned ESOP shares


53,566


84,325


(220,280
)Proceeds from issuance of preferred stock, net








13,335,752Proceeds from issuance of common stock-warrants








1,112,248Preferred stock-dividends paid


(541,800
)

(654,174
)

Net cash provided (used) by financing activities


(189,319,014
)

73,038,017


205,018,092Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents


12,733,750


(27,853,570
)

40,176,840Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period


14,993,227


42,846,797


2,669,957Cash and cash equivalents, end of period

$
27,726,977

$
14,993,227

$
42,846,797Supplemental cash flow information:Income taxes paid

$


$
121,582

$
Interest paid on deposits and borrowed funds

$
11,515,513

$
19,040,268

$
18,842,254Transfer of loans to foreclosed assets

$
15,685,662

$
7,641,984

$
2,074,974


The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-6

---





NOTE 1SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

OrganizationTidelands Bancshares, Inc. (the "Company") was incorporated on January 31, 2002 to
serve as a bank holding company for its subsidiary, Tidelands Bank (the "Bank"). The Company operated as a development stage company from January 31, 2002 to October 5, 2003. Tidelands
Bank commenced business on October 6, 2003. The principal business activity of the Bank is to provide banking services to domestic markets, principally in Charleston, Dorchester, Berkeley,
Horry, Georgetown, Beaufort and Jasper counties in South Carolina. The Bank is a state-chartered commercial bank, and its deposits are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The
consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the parent company and its wholly-owned subsidiary after elimination of all significant intercompany balances and transactions. The Company
formed Tidelands Statutory Trust I and Tidelands Statutory Trust II on February 22, 2006 and June 20, 2008, respectively, for the purpose of issuing trust preferred securities. In
accordance with current accounting guidance, the Trusts are not consolidated in these financial statements. As further discussed in Note 21, on December 19, 2008, as part of the Capital
Purchase Program established by the U.S. Department of the Treasury under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, the Company
issued 14,448 preferred shares and a common stock warrant to purchase 571,821 shares in return for $14.4 million in cash, to the U.S. Department of Treasury.

Management's
EstimatesThe preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management
to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the
reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Material
estimates that are particularly susceptible to significant change relate to the determination of the allowance for losses on loans, including valuation allowances for impaired loans, and the
valuation of real estate acquired in connection with foreclosures or in satisfaction of loans. In connection with the determination of the allowances for losses on loans and foreclosed real estate,
management obtains independent appraisals for significant properties. Management must also make estimates in determining the estimated useful lives and methods for depreciating premises and equipment.

While
management uses available information to recognize losses on loans and foreclosed real estate, future additions to the allowances may be necessary based on changes in local economic conditions.
In addition, regulatory agencies, as an integral part of their examination process, periodically review the Bank's allowance for losses on loans and valuation of foreclosed real estate. Such agencies
may require the Bank to recognize additions to the allowances based on their judgments about information available to them at the time of their examination. Because of these factors, it is reasonably
possible that the allowance for losses on loans and valuation of foreclosed real estate may change materially in the near term.

Concentrations of Credit RiskFinancial instruments, which potentially subject the Company to concentrations of
credit risk, consist principally of loans receivable, investment securities, federal funds sold and amounts due from banks.

The
Company makes loans to individuals and small businesses for various personal and commercial purposes primarily in the Charleston metropolitan area (which includes Charleston, Dorchester, and
Berkeley counties), Horry, Georgetown, Jasper and Beaufort counties, and additional markets along the South Carolina coast. The Company's loan portfolio is not concentrated in loans to any single
borrower or a relatively small number of borrowers. Additionally, management is not aware of any concentrations of loans to classes of borrowers or industries that would be similarly affected by
economic conditions.

F-7

---



NOTE 1SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

In
addition to monitoring potential concentrations of loans to particular borrowers or groups of borrowers, industries and geographic regions, management monitors exposure to credit risk from
concentrations of lending products and practices such as loans that subject borrowers to substantial payment increases (e.g., principal deferral periods, loans with initial
interest-only periods, etc.), and loans with high loan-to-value ratios. Additionally, there are industry practices that could subject the Company to increased
credit risk should economic conditions change over the course of a loan's life. For example, the Company makes variable rate loans and fixed rate principal-amortizing loans with maturities prior to
the loan being fully paid (i.e., balloon payment loans). These loans are underwritten and monitored to manage the associated risks. Therefore, management believes that these particular
practices do not subject the Company to unusual credit risk.

The
Company's investment portfolio consists principally of obligations of the United States and its agencies or its corporations. In the opinion of management, there is no concentration of credit risk
in its investment portfolio. The Company places its deposits and correspondent accounts with and sells its federal funds to high quality institutions. Management believes credit risk associated with
correspondent accounts is not significant.

Securities Available-for-SaleSecurities available-for-sale are
carried at amortized cost and adjusted to estimated market value by recognizing the aggregate unrealized gains or losses in a valuation account. Aggregate market valuation adjustments are recorded in
shareholders' equity net of deferred income taxes. Reductions in market value considered by management to be other than temporary are reported as a realized loss and a reduction in the cost basis of
the security. The adjusted cost basis of investments available-for-sale is determined by specific identification and is used in computing the gain or loss upon sale.

Nonmarketable Equity SecuritiesNonmarketable equity securities include the cost of the Company's investment in
the stock of the Federal Home Loan Bank and stock in community bank holding companies. The Federal Home Loan Bank stock has no quoted market value and no ready market exists. Investment in the Federal
Home Loan Bank is a condition of borrowing from the Federal Home Loan Bank, and the stock is pledged to collateralize such borrowings. Dividends received on this stock are included as interest income
on securities available-for-sale.

Loans ReceivableLoans are stated at their unpaid principal balance. Interest income on loans is computed based
upon the unpaid principal balance. Interest income is recorded in the period earned.

The
accrual of interest income is generally discontinued when a loan becomes contractually 90 days past due as to principal or interest. Management may elect to continue the accrual of interest
when the estimated net realizable value of collateral exceeds the principal balance and accrued interest. A payment of interest on a loan that is classified as nonaccrual is applied against the
principal balance. Nonaccrual loans may be restored to performing status when all principal and interest has been kept
current for six months and full repayment of the remaining contractual principal and interest is expected.

Loan
origination and commitment fees are deferred and amortized to income over the contractual life of the related loans or commitments, adjusted for prepayments, using the straight-line
method, which approximates the interest method.

Loans
are defined as impaired when it is probable that a creditor will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. All loans are subject to these
criteria except for smaller balance homogeneous loans that are collectively evaluated for impairment and loans measured at fair value or at the lower of cost or fair value. The Company considers its
consumer installment portfolio, credit card loans, and home equity lines as such exceptions.

F-8

---



NOTE 1SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

Impairment
of a loan is measured based on the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan's effective interest rate or the fair value of the collateral if the loan is collateral
dependent. When management determines that a loan is impaired, the difference between the Company's investment in the related loan and the present value of the expected future cash flows, or the fair
value of the collateral, is generally charged off with a corresponding entry to the allowance for loan losses. The accrual of interest is discontinued on an impaired loan when management determines
the borrower may be unable to meet payments as they become due.

Allowance for Loan LossesAn allowance for loan losses is maintained at a level deemed appropriate by
management to provide adequately for known and inherent losses in the loan portfolio. The allowance for loan losses represents an amount which the Company believes will be adequate to absorb probable
losses on existing loans that may become uncollectible in the future. The Company's judgment as to the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses is based on a number of assumptions about future
events, which the Company believes to be reasonable, but which may or may not prove to be accurate. The Company's determination of the allowance for loan losses is based on evaluations of the
collectability of loans, including consideration of factors such as the balance of impaired loans, the quality, mix, and size of the Company's overall loan portfolio, economic conditions that may
affect the borrower's ability to repay, the amount and quality of collateral securing the loans, the Company's historical loan loss experience, and a review of specific problem loans. The Company also
considers subjective issues such as changes in the lending policies and procedures, changes in the local/national economy, changes in volume or type of credits, changes in volume/severity of problem
loans, quality of loan review and board of director oversight, concentrations of credit, and peer group comparisons. Loans which are deemed to be uncollectible are charged off and deducted from the
allowance. The provision for loan losses and recoveries of loans previously charged off are added to the allowance. Our analysis in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP)
indicates that the level of
the allowance for loan losses is appropriate to cover estimated credit losses on individually evaluated loans as well as estimated credit losses inherent in the remainder of the portfolio.

Residential Mortgage Loans Held-for-SaleThe Company's residential mortgage lending
activities for sale in the secondary market are comprised of accepting residential mortgage loan applications, qualifying borrowers to standards established by investors, funding residential mortgage
loans and selling mortgage loans to investors under pre-existing commitments. Funded residential mortgages held temporarily for sale to investors are recorded at the lower of cost or
market value. Application and origination fees collected by the Company are recognized as income upon sale to the investor.

The
Company issues rate lock commitments to borrowers based on prices quoted by secondary market investors. When rates are locked with borrowers, a sales commitment is immediately entered (on a best
efforts basis) at a specified price with a secondary market investor. Accordingly, any potential liabilities associated with rate lock commitments are offset by sales commitments to investors.

Premises, Furniture and EquipmentPremises, furniture and equipment are stated at cost, less accumulated
depreciation. The provision for depreciation is computed by the straight-line method, based on the estimated useful lives for furniture and equipment of five to 10 years and
buildings of 40 years. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the life of the leases, which range up to 40 years. The cost of assets sold or otherwise disposed of and the related
allowance for depreciation are eliminated from the accounts and the resulting gains or losses are reflected in the income statement when incurred. Maintenance and repairs are charged to current
expense. The costs of major renewals and improvements are capitalized.

Other Real Estate OwnedOther real estate is acquired through, or in lieu of, foreclosure and is held for sale.
It is initially recorded at fair value less cost to sell at the date of foreclosure, establishing a

F-9

---



NOTE 1SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

new
cost basis. Subsequent to foreclosure, valuations are periodically performed by management and the assets are carried at the lower of carrying amount or fair value less cost to sell. Revenue and
expenses from operations are included within noninterest expense as part of other operating expense.

Securities Sold Under Agreements to RepurchaseThe Bank enters into sales of securities under agreements to
repurchase. Fixed-coupon repurchase agreements are treated as financing, with the obligation to repurchase securities sold being reflected as a liability and the securities underlying the agreements
remaining as assets.

Income TaxesIncome taxes are the sum of amounts currently payable to taxing authorities and the net changes in
income taxes payable or refundable in future years. Income taxes deferred to future years are determined utilizing a liability approach. This method gives consideration to the future tax consequences
associated with differences between financial accounting and tax bases of certain assets and liabilities which are principally the allowance for loan losses, depreciable premises and equipment, and
the net operating loss carry forward. Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance, if based on the weight of evidence available, it is more likely that not that some portion or all of a
deferred tax asset will not be realized. The Company believes that its income tax filing positions taken or expected to be taken in its tax returns will more likely than not be sustained upon audit by
the taxing authorities and does not anticipate any adjustments that will result in a material adverse impact on the Company's financial condition, results of operations, or cash flow. Therefore, no
reserves for uncertain income tax positions have been recorded.

Retirement PlanThe Company has a 401(k) profit sharing plan, which provides retirement benefits to
substantially all officers and employees who meet certain age and service requirements. The plan includes a "salary reduction" feature pursuant to Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code.
At its discretion, the Bank makes matching contributions of $.50 for every dollar contributed up to 6% of the participants' annual compensation. Additionally, the Company maintains supplemental
retirement plans for certain highly compensated employees designed to offset the impact of regulatory limits on benefits under qualified pension plans. There are supplemental retirement plans in place
for certain current employees. Effective June 30, 2010, the executive officers have agreed to cease further benefit accrual under the contracts and will only be entitled to receive benefits
accrued through June 30, 2010.

Bank Owned Life InsuranceBank owned life insurance ("BOLI") represents life insurance on the lives of certain
current and former employees who have provided positive consent allowing the Bank to be the beneficiary of such policies. The Bank purchases BOLI in order to use its earnings to help offset the costs
of the Bank's benefit expenses including pre- and post-retirement employee benefits. Increases in the cash surrender value ("CSV") of the policies, as well as death benefits
received net of any CSV, are recorded in other non-interest income, and are not subject to income taxes. The CSV of the policies are recorded as assets of the Bank. Any amounts owed to
employees from policy benefits are recorded as liabilities of the Bank. The Company reviews the financial strength of the insurance carriers prior to the purchase of BOLI and annually thereafter. BOLI
with any individual carrier is limited to 15% of tier one capital and BOLI in total is limited to 25% of tier one capital based on Company policy.

Stock Option PlanOn May 10, 2004, the Company established the 2004 Tidelands Bancshares, Inc.
Stock Incentive Plan ("Stock Plan") that provides for the granting of options to purchase 20% of the outstanding shares of the Company's common stock to directors, officers, or employees of the
Company. The per-share exercise price of incentive stock options granted under the Stock Plan may not be less than the fair market value of a share on the date of grant and vest based on
continued service with the Company for a specified period, generally two to five years following the date of grant. The per-share exercise price of stock options granted is determined by a
committee appointed by the

F-10

---



NOTE 1SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

Board
of Directors. The expiration date of any option may not be greater than 10 years from the date of grant. Options that expire unexercised or are forfeited become available for reissuance.

Employee Stock Ownership PlanThe Company established the Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. Employee Stock
Ownership Plan ("ESOP") for the exclusive benefit of all eligible employees and their beneficiaries subject to authority to amend, from time to time, or terminate, the ESOP. The ESOP is primarily
designed to invest in common stock of the Company and is permitted to purchase Company common stock with contributions to the ESOP made by the Company. Also, the ESOP is permitted to borrow money and
use the loan proceeds to purchase Company common stock. The money and Company common stock in the ESOP is intended to grow tax free until retirement, death, permanent disability or other severance of
employment with the Company. When an employee retires, he/she will receive the value of the accounts that have been set up for the contributions to the ESOP. An employee may also be eligible for
benefits in the event of death, permanent disability or other severance from employment with the Company. The employee must pay taxes when the money is paid following one of these events or any other
distributable event described in the ESOP unless it is transferred to another tax-qualified retirement plan or an IRA.

Earnings (loss) per shareBasic earnings (loss) per share represent income available to common shareholders
divided by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Dilutive earnings (loss) per share reflect additional common shares that would have been outstanding if dilutive
potential common shares had been issued. Potential common shares that may be issued by the Company relate solely to outstanding stock options and warrants and are determined using the treasury stock
method. Weighted average shares outstanding are reduced for shares encumbered by the ESOP borrowings.

Comprehensive IncomeAccounting principles generally require that recognized income, expenses, gains, and
losses be included in net income. Although certain changes in assets and liabilities, such as unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities, are reported as a
separate component of the equity section of the balance sheet, such items, along with net income, are components of comprehensive income.

Statements of Cash FlowsFor purposes of reporting cash flows in the financial statements, the Company
considers certain highly liquid debt instruments purchased with a maturity of
three months or less to be cash equivalents. Cash equivalents include amounts due from banks and federal funds sold. Generally, federal funds are sold for one-day periods.

Changes
in the valuation account of securities available-for-sale, including the deferred tax effects, are considered noncash transactions for purposes of the statement of cash
flows and are presented in detail in the notes to the consolidated financial statements.

Off-Balance Sheet Financial InstrumentsIn the ordinary course of business, the Company enters into
off-balance sheet financial instruments consisting of commitments to extend credit and letters of credit. These financial instruments are recorded in the financial statements when they
become payable by the customer.

Recently Issued Accounting PronouncementsThe following is a summary of recent authoritative pronouncements
that could impact the accounting, reporting, and / or disclosure of financial information by the Company.

In
January 2010, fair value guidance was amended to require disclosures for significant amounts transferred in and out of Levels 1 and 2 and the reasons for such transfers and to require that
gross amounts of purchases, sales, issuances and settlements be provided in the Level 3 reconciliation.

F-11

---



NOTE 1SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

Disaggregation
of classes of assets and liabilities is also required. The new disclosures are effective for the Company for the current year and have been reflected in the Fair Value footnote.

In
July 2010, the Receivables topic of the ASC was amended to require expanded disclosures related to a company's allowance for credit losses and the credit quality of its financing receivables. The
amendments will require the allowance disclosures to be provided on a disaggregated basis.

On
July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the "Dodd-Frank Act"), which significantly changes the
regulation of financial institutions and the financial services industry. The Dodd-Frank Act includes several provisions that will affect how community banks, thrifts, and small bank and
thrift holding companies will be regulated in the future. Among other things, these provisions abolish the Office of Thrift Supervision and transfer its functions to the other federal banking
agencies, relax rules regarding interstate branching, allow financial institutions to pay interest on business checking accounts, change the scope of federal deposit insurance coverage, and impose new
capital requirements on bank and thrift holding companies. The Dodd-Frank Act also establishes the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection as an independent entity within the Federal
Reserve, which will be given the authority to promulgate consumer protection regulations applicable to all entities offering
consumer financial services or products, including banks. Additionally, the Dodd-Frank Act includes a series of provisions covering mortgage loan origination standards affecting originator
compensation, minimum repayment standards, and pre-payments. Management is actively reviewing the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and assessing its probable impact on our
business, financial condition, and results of operations.

In
August 2010, two updates were issued to amend various SEC rules and schedules pursuant to Release No. 33-9026: Technical Amendments to Rules, Forms, Schedules and Codification of
Financial Reporting Policies and based on the issuance of SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin 112. The amendments related primarily to business combinations and removed references to "minority interest" and
added references to "controlling" and "noncontrolling interests(s)". The updates were effective upon issuance but had no impact on the Company's financial statements.

In
December 2010, the Intangibles topic of the ASC was amended to modify Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. For those reporting units,
an entity is required to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists. Any resulting goodwill impairment should be recorded as a
cumulative-effect adjustment to beginning retained earnings upon adoption. Impairments occurring subsequent to adoption should be included in earnings. The amendment is effective for the Company
beginning January 1, 2011. Early adoption is not permitted. The Company does not expect the amendment to have any impact on the financial statements.

Also
in December 2010, the Business Combinations topic of the ASC was amended to specify that if a public entity presents comparative financial statements, the entity should disclose revenue and
earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period only. The
amendment also requires that the supplemental pro forma disclosures include a description of the nature and amount of any material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the
business combination included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings. This amendment is effective for the Company for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after
January 1, 2011, although early adoption is permitted. The Company does not expect the amendment to have any impact on the financial statements.

F-12

---



NOTE 1SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

Other
accounting standards that have been issued or proposed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") or other standards-setting bodies are not expected to have a material impact on the
Company's financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Risks and UncertaintiesIn the normal course of its business, the Company encounters two significant types of
risks: economic and regulatory. There are three main components of economic risk: interest rate risk, credit risk and market risk. The Company is subject to interest rate risk to the degree that its
interest-bearing liabilities mature or reprice at different speeds, or on different basis, than its interest-earning assets. Credit risk is the risk of default on the loan portfolio that results from
borrower's inability or unwillingness to make contractually required payments. Market risk reflects changes in the value of collateral underlying loans receivable and the valuation of real estate held
by the Company.

The
Company is subject to the regulations of various governmental agencies. These regulations can and do change significantly from period to period. Periodic examinations by the regulatory agencies
may subject the company to further changes with respect to asset valuations, amounts of required loss allowances and operating restrictions from the regulators' judgments based on information
available to them at the time of their examination.

ReclassificationsCertain captions and amounts in the 2009 and 2008 financial statements were reclassified to
conform to the 2010 presentation. These reclassifications had no effect on shareholders' equity or results of operations as previously presented.

NOTE 2OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

The
change in the components of other comprehensive income (loss) and related tax effects are as follows:

Year Ended December 31,2010

2009

2008Change in unrealized gains (losses) on securities available-for-sale

$
3,173,362

$
562,188

$
(2,424,544
)Reclassification adjustment for gains realized in net income


(1,741,539
)

(4,857,395
)

(509,373
)Impairment on securities available-for-sale








4,596,200Net change in unrealized gains (losses) on securities


1,431,823


(4,295,207
)

1,662,283Tax effect


(544,093
)

1,632,178


(631,667
)Net-of-tax amount

$
887,730

$
(2,663,029
)
$
1,030,616


NOTE 3FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS

The
current accounting literature requires the disclosure of fair value information for financial instruments, whether or not they are recognized in the consolidated balance sheets, when it is
practical to estimate the fair value. The guidance defines a financial instrument as cash, evidence of an ownership interest in an entity or contractual obligations which require the exchange of cash
or other financial instruments. Certain items are specifically excluded from the disclosure requirements, including the Company's common stock, premises and equipment, accrued interest receivable and
payable, and other assets and liabilities.

F-13

---



NOTE 3FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS (Continued)

The
fair value of a financial instrument is the amount at which the asset or obligation could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced or liquidation sale.
Fair value estimates are made at a specific point in time based on relevant market information and information about the financial instruments. Because no market value exists for a significant portion
of the financial instruments, fair value estimates are based on judgments regarding future expected loss experience, current economic conditions, risk characteristics of various financial instruments,
and other factors.

The
Company has used management's best estimate of fair value based on the above assumptions. Thus, the fair values presented may not be the amounts, which could be realized, in an immediate sale
or settlement of the instrument. In addition, any income taxes or other expenses, which would be incurred in an actual sale or settlement, are not taken into consideration in the fair values
presented.

The
following methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair value of significant financial instruments:

Cash and Due from BanksThe carrying amount for cash and due from banks is a reasonable estimate of fair value.

Federal Funds SoldFederal funds sold are for a term of one day, and the carrying amount approximates the fair value.

Securities Available-for-saleInvestment securities available-for-sale are recorded at fair
value on a recurring basis. Fair value measurement is based upon quoted prices, if available. If quoted prices are not available, fair values are measured using independent pricing models or other
model-based valuation techniques such as the present value of future cash flows, adjusted for the security's credit rating, prepayment assumptions and other factors such as credit loss assumptions.

With
respect to securities available-for-sale, Level 1 includes those securities traded on an active exchange, such as the New York Stock Exchange, U.S. Treasury
securities that are traded by dealers or brokers in active over-the-counter markets and money market funds. Level 2 securities include mortgage-backed securities issued
by government sponsored entities, municipal bonds and corporate debt securities. Securities classified as Level 3 include asset-backed securities in less liquid markets.

Nonmarketable Equity SecuritiesThe carrying amount for nonmarketable equity securities approximates the fair value since no readily
available market exists for these securities.

Mortgage Loans Held for SaleThe carrying value for mortgage loans held for sale is a reasonable estimate for fair value considering the
short time these loans are carried on the books. Management determined that only minor fluctuations occurred in fixed rate mortgage loans; therefore the carrying amount approximates fair value.

Loans ReceivableFor certain categories of loans, such as variable rate loans which are repriced frequently and have no significant change
in credit risk, fair values are based on the carrying amounts. The fair value of other types of loans is estimated by discounting the future cash flows using the current rates at which similar loans
would be made to borrowers with similar credit ratings and for
the same remaining maturities. However, from time to time, a loan is considered impaired and an allowance for loan losses is established. Loans for which it is probable that payment of interest and
principal will not be made in accordance with the contractual terms of the loan agreement are considered impaired. The fair value of impaired loans is estimated using one of several methods, including
collateral value, market value of similar debt, enterprise value, liquidation value and discounted cash flows. Those impaired loans not requiring an allowance represent loans for which the fair value
of the expected repayments or collateral exceeds the recorded investments in such loans.

F-14

---



NOTE 3FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS (Continued)

DepositsThe fair value of demand deposits, savings, and money market accounts is the amount payable on demand at the reporting date. The
fair values of certificates of deposit are estimated using a discounted cash flow calculation that applies current interest rates to a schedule of aggregated expected maturities.

Securities Sold Under Agreements to RepurchaseThese repurchase agreements have a fixed rate. Due to the minor change in interest rates,
management estimated the fair value using a discounted cash flow calculation that applies the Company's current borrowing rate for the securities sold under agreements to repurchase.

Advances from Federal Home Loan BankThe fair values of fixed rate borrowings are estimated using a discounted cash flow calculation that
applies the Company's current borrowing rate
from the Federal Home Loan Bank. The carrying amounts of variable rate borrowings are reasonable estimates of fair value because they can be repriced frequently.

Junior Subordinated DebenturesThe fair values of fixed rate junior subordinated debentures are estimated using a discounted cash flow
calculation that applies the Company's current borrowing rate. The carrying amounts of variable rate borrowings are reasonable estimates of fair value because they can be repriced frequently.

Employee Stock Ownership Plan BorrowingsThe carrying value of the ESOP borrowing is a reasonable estimate of fair value because they can be
repriced frequently.

Off-Balance Sheet Financial InstrumentsFair values for off-balance sheet, credit-related financial instruments are
based on fees currently charged to enter into similar agreements, taking into account the remaining terms of the agreements and the counterparties' credit standing.

The
carrying values and estimated fair values of the Company's financial instruments are as follows:

December 31, 2010

December 31, 2009Carrying
Amount

Estimated
Fair Value

Carrying
Amount

Estimated
Fair ValueFinancial Assets:Cash and due from banks

$
3,657,977

$
3,657,977

$
2,493,227

$
2,493,227Federal funds sold


24,069,000


24,069,000


12,500,000


12,500,000Securities available-for-sale


57,955,698


57,955,698


229,786,787


229,786,787Nonmarketable equity securities


5,267,750


5,267,750


5,892,650


5,892,650Mortgage loans held for sale








617,000


617,000Loans receivable


437,688,015


439,742,015


485,037,761


490,427,761Financial Liabilities:Demand deposit, interest-bearing transaction, and savings accounts

$
183,691,616

$
183,691,616

$
284,248,813

$
284,248,813Certificates of deposit and other time deposits


297,301,783


298,565,783


307,300,366


309,914,366Securities sold under agreements to repurchase


20,000,000


21,343,000


60,000,000


60,241,000Advances from Federal Home Loan Bank


27,000,000


26,700,000


65,000,000


64,360,000Junior subordinated debentures


14,434,000


15,291,018


14,434,000


15,615,503ESOP borrowings


1,625,000


1,625,000


2,300,000


2,300,000


F-15

---



NOTE 3FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS (Continued)



Notional
Amount

Estimated
Fair Value

Notional
Amount

Estimated
Fair ValueOff-Balance Sheet Financial Instruments:Commitments to extend credit

$
18,564,489

$


$
28,429,383

$
Letters of credit


608,604





466,739





Assets
and liabilities that are carried at fair value are classified in one of the following three categories based on a hierarchy for ranking the quality and reliability of the information used to
determine fair value:



In
determining appropriate levels, the Company performs a detailed analysis of the assets and liabilities that are subject to fair value disclosures. At each reporting period, all assets and
liabilities for which the fair value measurement is based on significant unobservable inputs are classified as Level 3.

Assets
measured at fair value on a recurring basis are as follows as of December 31, 2010 and 2009:

Quoted market price
in active markets
(Level 1)

Significant other
observable inputs
(Level 2)

Significant
unobservable inputs
(Level 3)December 31, 2010Government sponsored enterprises

$


$
2,052,726

$
Mortgage-backed securities





55,902,972


Available-for-sale investment securities





57,955,698


Mortgage loans held for sale








Total

$


$
57,955,698

$
December 31, 2009Government sponsored enterprises

$


$
88,612,765

$
Mortgage-backed securities





133,898,555


Municipals





7,275,467


Available-for-sale investment securities




$
229,786,787


Mortgage loans held for sale





617,000


Total

$


$
230,403,787

$



F-16

---



NOTE 3FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS (Continued)

Assets
measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis are as follows as of December 31, 2010 and 2009:

Quoted market price
in active markets
(Level 1)

Significant other
observable inputs
(Level 2)

Significant
unobservable inputs
(Level 3)December 31, 2010Impaired loans

$


$
33,494,811

$
Other real estate owned





11,905,865


Total

$


$
45,400,676

$
December 31, 2009Impaired loans

$


$
20,044,008

$
Other real estate owned





6,865,461


Total

$


$
26,909,469

$



The
Company has no assets or liabilities whose fair values are measured using level 3 inputs.

NOTE 4CASH AND DUE FROM BANKS

The
Company maintains cash balances with its correspondent banks to meet reserve requirements determined by the Federal Reserve. At December 31, 2010, the reserve requirement was met by the
cash balance in the vault compared to $224,000 the Bank had on deposit with the Federal Reserve Bank to meet this requirement at December 31, 2009. At December 31, 2010, the bank had
$1.0 million in actual currency and cash on hand, $877,000 in due from non-interest bearing balances and $1.8 million in due from interest bearing balances. At
December 31, 2010, the Company maintained compensating balances totaling $426,000 with a correspondent bank. At December 31, 2010, the Company had $1.3 million in interest bearing
balances which are pledged as collateral against the ESOP borrowing.

NOTE 5INVESTMENT SECURITIES

The
amortized cost and estimated fair values of securities available-for-sale were:

Gross UnrealizedAmortized
Cost

Estimated
Fair ValueGains

LossesDecember 31, 2010Government-sponsored enterprises

$
2,001,429

$
51,297

$


$
2,052,726Mortgage-backed securities


56,363,546


36,494


497,068


55,902,972Total

$
58,364,975

$
87,791

$
497,068

$
57,955,698December 31, 2009Government-sponsored enterprises

$
89,774,279

$
47,186

$
1,208,700

$
88,612,765Mortgage-backed securities


134,534,637


160,950


797,032


133,898,555Municipals


7,318,970


6,336


49,839


7,275,467Total

$
231,627,886

$
214,472

$
2,055,571

$
229,786,787


The
amortized cost and estimated fair values of investment securities at December 31, 2010, by contractual maturity dates, are shown in the following table. Actual maturities may differ from
contractual maturities because borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or

F-17

---



NOTE 5INVESTMENT SECURITIES (Continued)

without
penalty. Mortgage-backed securities are presented as a separate line item since pay downs are expected before contractual maturity dates.

Amortized Cost

Fair ValueDue within one year

$


$
Due after one year through five years





Due after five years through ten years


2,001,429


2,052,726Due after ten years





Subtotal


2,001,429


2,052,726Mortgage-backed securities


56,363,546


55,902,972Total Securities

$
58,364,975

$
57,955,698


At
December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, investment securities with book values of $28,595,999 and $111,038,524 and market values of $28,365,631 and $110,043,275, respectively, were
pledged as collateral for securities sold under agreements to repurchase and a fed funds line. Gross proceeds from the sale of investment securities totaled $206,508,871, $369,561,934, and $55,037,945
for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The gross realized gain on the sale of investment securities totaled $1,811,426 with $69,887 gross realized losses resulting
in a net realized gain of $1,741,539 for the year ended December 31, 2010. The gross realized gain on the sale of investment securities totaled $5,085,640 with gross realized losses of $228,245
resulting in a net realized gain of $4,857,395 for the year ended December 31, 2009. The gross realized gain on the sale of investment securities totaled $633,070 with gross realized losses of
$123,697 resulting in a net realized
gain of $509,373 for the year ended December 31, 2008. The cost of investments sold is determined using the specific identification method.

For
investments where fair value is less than amortized cost the following table shows gross unrealized losses and fair value, aggregated by investment category, and length of time that individual
securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position, at December 31, 2010 and 2009.

Less than
Twelve months

Twelve months or more

TotalFair value

Unrealized
losses

Fair value

Unrealized
losses

Fair value

Unrealized
lossesDecember 31, 2010Government-sponsored enterprises

$


$


$


$


$


$
Mortgage-backed securities


30,982,279


497,068








30,982,279


497,068$
30,982,279

$
497,068

$


$


$
30,982,279

$
497,068


F-18

---



NOTE 5INVESTMENT SECURITIES (Continued)



Less than
Twelve months

Twelve months or more

TotalFair value

Unrealized
losses

Fair value

Unrealized
losses

Fair value

Unrealized
lossesDecember 31, 2009Government-sponsored enterprises

$
61,020,580

$
1,208,700

$


$


$
61,020,580

$
1,208,700Mortgage-backed securities


90,910,751


797,032








90,910,751


797,032Municipals


4,879,928


49,839








4,879,928


49,839$
156,811,259

$
2,055,571

$


$


$
156,811,259

$
2,055,571


Securities
classified as available-for-sale are recorded at fair market value. Of the securities in an unrealized loss position, there were no securities in a
continuous loss position for 12 months or more at December 31, 2010 and 2009. The Company does not intend to sell these securities and it is more likely than not that the Company will
not be required to sell these securities before recovery of their amortized cost. The Company believes, based on industry analyst reports and credit ratings, that the deterioration in value is
attributable to changes in market interest rates and not in the credit quality of the issuer and therefore, these losses are not considered other-than-temporary.

Nonmarketable
equity securities include the cost of the Company's investment in the stock of the Federal Home Loan Bank and $28,750 of stock in community bank holding companies as of
December 31, 2010 and 2009. The Federal Home Loan Bank stock has no quoted market value and no ready market exists. Investment in the Federal Home Loan Bank is a condition of borrowing from the
Federal Home Loan Bank, and the stock is pledged to collateralize such borrowings. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Company's investment in Federal Home Loan Bank stock was $5,239,000 and
$5,863,900, respectively.

The
Company reviews its investment securities portfolio at least quarterly and more frequently when economic conditions warrant, assessing whether there is any indication of
other-than-temporary impairment ("OTTI"). Factors considered in the review include estimated future cash flows, length of time and extent to which market value has been less
than cost, the financial condition and near term prospects of the issuer, and our intent and ability to retain the security to allow for an anticipated recovery in market value. If the review
determines that there is OTTI, then an impairment loss is recognized in earnings equal to the difference between the investment's cost and its fair value at the balance sheet date of the reporting
period for which the assessment is made, or a portion may be recognized in other comprehensive income. The fair value of investments on which OTTI is recognized then becomes the new cost basis of the
investment.

F-19

---



NOTE 6LOANS RECEIVABLE AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSS

Major
classifications of loans receivable are summarized as follows:

December 31,2010

2009Real estateconstruction

$
96,000,731

$
118,182,732Real estatemortgage


315,181,037


335,830,858Commercial and industrial


23,254,691


26,687,273Consumer and other


3,775,226


4,985,427Total loans receivable, gross


438,211,685


485,686,290Deferred origination fees, net


(523,670
)

(648,529
)Total loans receivable, net of deferred origination fees


437,688,015


485,037,761Less allowance for loan loss


11,459,047


10,048,015Total loans receivable, net of allowance for loan loss

$
426,228,968

$
474,989,746


The
composition of gross loans by rate type is as follows:

December 31,2010

2009Variable rate loans

$
234,664,835

$
272,166,474Fixed rate loans


203,023,180


212,871,287Total gross loans

$
437,688,015

$
485,037,761


The
following is an analysis of our loan portfolio by credit quality indicators at December 31:

Commercial

Commercial Real Estate

Commercial Real Estate
Construction2010

2009

2010

2009

2010

2009Grade:Pass

$
21,639,164

$
25,574,726

$
132,661,084

$
149,822,988

$
24,571,638

$
26,355,258Special Mention


857,928


83,870


8,911,465


12,827,726


1,609,322


2,942,371Substandard


757,599


1,028,677


25,046,004


7,917,000


6,648,612


5,804,003Doubtful

















Loss

















Total

$
23,254,691

$
26,687,273

$
166,618,553

$
170,567,714

$
32,829,572

$
35,101,632




Residential Real Estate

Real Estate
Residential Construction

Consumer2010

2009

2010

2009

2010

2009Grade:Pass

$
118,213,574

$
135,487,563

$
43,456,079

$
56,125,584

$
3,470,084

$
4,769,434Special Mention


11,590,966


9,436,011


4,436,972


11,836,447


177,537


101,409Substandard


18,757,944


20,339,570


15,278,108


15,119,069


127,605


114,584Doubtful

















Loss

















Total

$
148,562,484

$
165,263,144

$
63,171,159

$
83,081,100

$
3,775,226

$
4,985,427


F-20

---



NOTE 6LOANS RECEIVABLE AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSS (Continued)

The
following is an aging analysis of our loan portfolio:

Commercial

Commercial
Real Estate

Commercial
Real Estate
Construction

Residential
Real Estate

Residential
Real Estate
Construction

Consumer

TotalDecember 31, 2010Accruing Loans Paid Current

$
22,717,016

$
154,616,125

$
26,629,782

$
137,402,328

$
49,918,038

$
3,695,622

$
394,978,911Accruing Loans Past Due:30 - 59 Days


147,363


1,340,381





2,380,945


3,316,760


7,104


7,192,55360 - 89 Days











483,410








483,410>90 Days




















Total Loans Past Due


147,363


1,340,381





2,864,355


3,316,760


7,104


7,675,963Loans Receivable on Nonaccrual Status

$
390,312

$
10,662,047

$
6,199,790

$
8,295,801

$
9,936,361

$
72,500

$
35,556,811Recorded Investment >90 Days and Accruing

$


$


$


$


$


$


$
Total Loans Receivable

$
23,254,691

$
166,618,553

$
32,829,572

$
148,562,484

$
63,171,159

$
3,775,226

$
438,211,685December 31, 2009Accruing Loans Paid Current

$
25,787,500

$
164,896,850

$
33,184,191

$
151,198,265

$
74,216,678

$
4,985,427

$
454,268,911Accruing Loans Past Due:30 - 59 Days


355,838


649,510





2,536,737


518,483





4,060,56860 - 89 Days


121,420


4,487,479





1,248,978


204,037





6,061,914>90 Days




















Total Loans Past Due


477,258


5,136,989





3,785,715


722,520





10,122,482Loans Receivable on Nonaccrual Status

$
422,515

$
533,875

$
1,917,441

$
10,279,164

$
8,141,902

$


$
21,294,897Recorded Investment >90 Days and Accruing

$


$


$


$


$


$


$
Total Loans Receivable

$
26,687,273

$
170,567,714

$
35,101,632

$
165,263,144

$
83,081,100

$
4,985,427

$
485,686,290


The following is a summary of information pertaining to impaired and nonaccrual loans at December 31:

2010

2009

2008Impaired loans without a valuation allowance

$
28,709,423

$
17,287,480

$
5,662,064Impaired loans with a valuation allowance


6,847,388


4,007,417


5,819,495Total impaired loans

$
35,556,811

$
21,294,897

$
11,481,559Valuation allowance related to impaired loans

$
2,062,000

$
1,250,889

$
1,675,496Average of impaired loans during the year

$
42,433,130

$
15,294,975

$
12,364,627Total nonaccrual loans

$
35,556,811

$
21,294,897

$
11,481,559Total loans past due 90 days and still accruing interest

$


$


$



F-21

---



NOTE 6LOANS RECEIVABLE AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSS (Continued)

The
following is an analysis of our impaired loan portfolio detailing the related allowance recorded at December 31:

December 31, 2010

Commercial

Commercial
Real Estate

Commercial
Real Estate
Construction

Residential
Real Estate

Residential
Real Estate
Construction

Consumer

TotalWith no related allowance recorded:Recorded Investment

$
146,596

$
8,686,796

$
4,691,306

$
6,773,924

$
8,338,301

$
72,500

$
28,709,423Unpaid Principal Balance


583,700


9,100,786


6,202,434


9,760,176


9,767,450


82,588


35,497,134Related Allowance




















Average Recorded Investment


224,686


9,698,268


4,961,909


8,692,352


11,532,629


72,500


35,182,344Interest Income Recognized




















With an allowance recorded:Recorded Investment

$
243,716

$
1,975,251

$
1,508,484

$
1,521,877

$
1,598,060

$


$
6,847,388Unpaid Principal Balance


268,577


2,358,754


1,524,312


1,571,772


1,598,060





7,321,475Related Allowance


154,616


710,000


9,084


483,567


704,733





2,062,000Average Recorded Investment


243,716


1,976,494


1,508,484


1,905,456


1,616,636





7,250,786Interest Income Recognized




















Total:Recorded Investment

$
390,312

$
10,662,047

$
6,199,790

$
8,295,801

$
9,936,361

$
72,500

$
35,556,811Unpaid Principal Balance


852,277


11,459,540


7,726,746


11,331,948


11,365,510


82,588


42,818,609Related Allowance


154,616


710,000


9,084


483,567


704,733





2,062,000Average Recorded Investment


468,402


11,674,762


6,470,393


10,597,808


13,149,265


72,500


42,433,130Interest Income Recognized























Transactions in the allowance for loan losses during 2010, 2009 and 2008 are summarized below:

2010

2009

2008Balance, beginning of year

$
10,048,015

$
7,635,173

$
4,158,324Provision charged to operations


16,260,000


14,745,000


4,665,000Loan charge offs


(15,159,048
)

(12,456,461
)

(1,188,651
)Loan recoveries


310,080


124,303


500Balance, end of year

$
11,459,047

$
10,048,015

$
7,635,173Loans, net of deferred fees

$
437,688,015

$
485,037,761

$
461,967,217


F-22

---



NOTE 6LOANS RECEIVABLE AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSS (Continued)

The
following is a summary of information pertaining to our allowance for loan losses:

December 31, 2010

Commercial

Commercial
Real Estate

Commercial
Real Estate
Construction

Residential
Real Estate

Residential
Real Estate
Construction

Consumer

Unallocated

TotalAllowance for loan losses:Beginning Balance

$
380,812

$
2,015,077

$
641,226

$
3,796,115

$
3,014,068

$
170,576

$
30,141

$
10,048,015Charge-offs


(498,225
)

(1,125,696
)

(468,715
)

(7,524,906
)

(5,230,153
)

(311,353
)




(15,159,048
)Recoveries


35,547








184,296


85,837


4,400





310,080Provision


525,320


1,788,810


170,732


7,917,688


4,928,291


200,086


729,073


16,260,000Ending Balance

$
443,454

$
2,678,191

$
343,243

$
4,373,193

$
2,798,043

$
63,709

$
759,214

$
11,459,047Loans Receivable:Ending Balance

$
23,254,691

$
166,618,553

$
32,829,572

$
148,562,484

$
63,171,159

$
3,775,226




$
438,211,685Individually evaluated for impairment

$
390,312

$
10,662,047

$
6,199,790

$
8,295,801

$
9,936,361

$
72,500




$
35,556,811Collectively evaluated for impairment

$


$


$


$


$


$





$
Loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality

$


$


$


$


$


$





$



The allowance for loan losses, as a percent of loans, net of deferred fees, was 2.61%, 2.07% and 1.65% at December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
At December 31, 2010, the Bank had seventy-six impaired loans totaling $35,556,811, or 8.12% of loans, net of deferred origination fees, in nonaccrual status, of which $2,968,604
were deemed to be troubled debt restructurings. There was one loan totaling $250,000 deemed to be troubled debt restructurings not in nonaccrual status at December 31, 2010. At
December 31, 2009, the Bank had sixty-seven impaired loans totaling $21,294,897, or 4.39% of gross loans, in nonaccrual status, of which $4,142,694 were deemed to be troubled debt
restructurings. There were no loans contractually past due 90 days or more still accruing interest at December 31, 2010 or 2009. Our analysis under generally accepted accounting
principles indicates that the level of the allowance for loan losses is appropriate to cover estimated credit losses on individually evaluated loans as well as estimated credit losses inherent in the
remainder of the portfolio. We do not recognize interest income on loans that are nonaccrual. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Bank had $225,000 and $275,000, respectively, reserved for
off-balance sheet credit exposure related to unfunded commitments included in other liabilities on our consolidated balance sheet.

At
December 31, 2010, loans totaling $53.8 million were pledged as collateral at the Federal Home Loan Bank and $70.8 million to maintain a line of credit with the Federal Reserve
Bank.

F-23

---



NOTE 7OTHER REAL ESTATE OWNED

Transactions
in other real estate owned for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 are summarized below:

December 31,2010

2009Balance, beginning of year

$
6,865,461

$
1,800,604Additions


15,518,475


7,641,984Sales


(9,142,992
)

(2,423,878
)Write-downs


(1,335,079
)

(153,249
)Balance, end of year

$
11,905,865

$
6,865,461


NOTE 8PREMISES, FURNITURE AND EQUIPMENT

Premises,
furniture and equipment consist of the following:

December 31,2010

2009Land and land improvements

$
3,265,318

$
3,265,318Building and leasehold improvements


13,300,833


13,291,654Furniture and equipment


4,193,106


4,061,487Software


724,274


684,421Construction in progress


4,809,899


425,701Total


26,293,430


21,728,581Less, accumulated depreciation


3,871,042


2,925,880Premises, furniture and equipment, net

$
22,422,388

$
18,802,701


Depreciation
expense for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 amounted to $972,821, $962,146 and $883,785, respectively. Construction in progress relates to the ongoing construction
of an executive office building located at 830 Lowcountry Boulevard. Remaining estimated construction costs for the project are expected to be approximately $739,000. For the years ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, the Bank capitalized $41,105, $6,801 and $42,280 respectively, in interest related to the construction of our new branch locations and the aforementioned
executive offices.

NOTE 9DEPOSITS

At
December 31, 2010, the scheduled maturities of certificates of deposit were as follows:

AmountMaturing:2011

$
224,378,7022012


66,693,1072013


4,201,2302014


69,1542015


1,860,590Thereafter


99,000Total

$
297,301,783


F-24

---



NOTE 10SECURITIES SOLD UNDER AGREEMENTS TO REPURCHASE

The
Bank has entered into sales of securities under agreements to repurchase. These obligations to repurchase securities sold are reflected as liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets and
consist of two obligations totaling $20.0 million at December 31, 2010. On September 21, 2007, the Bank borrowed $10.0 million under a five-year repurchase
agreement at a fixed rate of 4.01%. On November 14, 2007, the Bank borrowed $10.0 million under a nine-year repurchase agreement at a fixed rate of 3.50%. All repurchase
agreements require quarterly interest only payments with principal and interest due on maturity. The dollar amounts of securities underlying the agreements are book entry securities. U.S. government
agency securities with book values of $23,649,693 and $73,349,838 and fair values of $23,480,827 and $72,884,324 at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, are used as collateral for the
agreements.

Securities
sold under repurchase agreements are summarized as follows for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009:

2010

2009Amount outstanding at year end

$
20,000,000

$
60,000,000Average amount outstanding during year


30,513,992


63,090,274Maximum outstanding at any month-end


60,000,000


72,500,000Weighted average rate paid at year-end


3.76
%

1.55
%Weighted average rate paid during the year


2.60
%

1.67
%


NOTE 11JUNIOR SUBORDINATED DEBENTURES

On
February 22, 2006, Tidelands Statutory Trust (the "Trust I"), a non-consolidated subsidiary of the Company, issued and sold floating rate capital securities of the trust (the
"Trust I Securities"), generating proceeds of $8.0 million. The Trust I loaned these proceeds to the Company to use for general corporate purposes, primarily to provide capital to the Bank. The
debentures qualify as Tier 1 capital under Federal Reserve Board guidelines.

The
Trust I Securities in the transaction accrue and pay distributions quarterly at a rate per annum equal to the three-month LIBOR plus 1.38%, which was 1.669% at the period ended December 31,
2010. The distribution rate payable on the Trust I Securities is cumulative and payable quarterly in arrears. The Company has the right, subject to events of default, to defer payments of interest on
the Trust I Securities for a period not to exceed 20 consecutive quarterly periods, provided that no extension period may extend beyond the maturity date of March 30, 2036.

The
Trust I Securities mature or are mandatorily redeemable upon maturity on March 30, 2036 or upon earlier optional redemption as provided in the indenture. The Company has the right to redeem
the Trust I Securities in whole or in part, on or after March 30, 2011. The Company may also redeem the Trust I Securities prior to such dates upon occurrence of specified conditions and the
payment of a redemption premium.

On
June 20, 2008, Tidelands Statutory Trust II (the "Trust II"), a non-consolidated subsidiary of the Company, issued and sold floating rate capital securities of the trust (the
"Trust II Securities"), generating proceeds of $6.0 million. The Trust II loaned these proceeds to the Company to use for general corporate purposes, primarily to provide capital to the Bank.
The debentures qualify as Tier 1 Capital under Federal Reserve Board guidelines.

The
Trust II Securities accrue and pay distributions quarterly at a rate equal to (i) 9.425% fixed for the first 5 years, and (ii) the three-month LIBOR rate plus 5.075%
thereafter. The distribution rate payable on the Trust II Securities is cumulative and payable quarterly in arrears. The Company has the right,

F-25

---



NOTE 11JUNIOR SUBORDINATED DEBENTURES (Continued)

subject
to events of default, to defer payments of interest on the Trust II Securities for a period not to exceed 20 consecutive quarterly periods, provided that no extension period may extend beyond
the maturity date of June 30, 2038.

The
Trust II Securities mature or are mandatorily redeemable upon maturity on June 30, 2038 or upon earlier optional redemption as provided in the indenture. The Company has the right to redeem
the Trust II Securities in whole or in part, on or after June 30, 2013. The Company may also redeem the Trust II Securities prior to such dates upon occurrence of specified conditions and the
payment of a redemption premium.

Beginning
with the scheduled payment date of December 30, 2010, the Company has deferred the payment of interest on its outstanding subordinated debentures for an indefinite period (which can
be no longer than 20 consecutive quarterly periods). This and any future deferred distributions will continue to accrue interest. Distributions on the trust preferred securities are cumulative.
Therefore, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, the Company will continue to accrue the monthly cost of the trust preferred securities as it has since issuance.

NOTE 12ADVANCES FROM FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK

At
December 31, 2010, advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank ("FHLB") were comprised of two advances totaling $27.0 million. On September 21, 2007, the Bank borrowed
$9.0 million under a 10-year convertible advance at a fixed rate of 3.96%. On September 22, 2010, the Bank
borrowed $18.0 million under a 3-year advance at a fixed rate of 1.02%. All advances require interest only payments with principal and interest due on maturity. The advances are
collateralized by pledged FHLB stock and certain loans. At December 31, 2010, loans totaling $53.8 million were pledged as collateral at the Federal Home Loan Bank. FHLB advances are
summarized as follows for the periods ended December 31, 2010 and 2009:

2010

2009Amount outstanding at period end

$
27,000,000

$
65,000,000Average amount outstanding during the year


44,430,137


91,074,521Maximum outstanding at any month-end


85,000,000


100,800,000Weighted average rate at year-end


2.00
%

3.03
%Weighted average rate during the year


2.72
%

2.55
%


F-26

---



NOTE 13OTHER OPERATING EXPENSES

Other
operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 are summarized below:

2010

2009

2008Professional fees

$
1,692,975

$
1,234,219

$
1,180,078Telephone expenses


191,510


199,121


162,106Office supplies, stationery, and printing


92,512


99,512


151,136Insurance


314,425


199,996


199,643Postage


36,581


21,454


22,965Data processing


618,041


497,951


448,010Advertising and marketing


750,529


461,880


750,042FDIC Assessment


1,390,603


1,440,629


484,000Other loan related expense


271,626


551,713


93,656Other


678,360


765,701


640,091Total

$
6,037,162

$
5,472,176

$
4,131,727


NOTE 14INCOME TAXES

For
the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 income tax expense consisted of the following:

2010

2009

2008Current portion:Federal

$


$
(445,909
)
$
52,806State








Total current





(445,909
)

52,806Deferred income taxes





3,825,564


(2,751,806
)Income tax expense (benefit)

$


$
3,379,655

$
(2,699,000
)


Deferred
tax assets represent the future tax benefit of deductible differences and, if it is more likely than not that a tax asset will not be realized, a valuation allowance is required to reduce the
recorded deferred tax assets to net realizable value. As of December 31, 2010, the Company had stated net
operating losses for tax purposes of $18,810,155. These net operating losses begin expiring in 2025. Management has determined that is more likely than not that the deferred tax asset related to
continuing operations at December 31, 2010 will not be realized, and accordingly, has established a valuation allowance. As of December 31, 2009, the Company has stated net operating
losses for tax purposes of $1,598,010. These net operating losses begin expiring in 2025. Management has determined that is more likely than not that the deferred tax asset related to continuing
operations at December 31, 2009 will not be realized, and accordingly, established a valuation allowance.

F-27

---



NOTE 14INCOME TAXES (Continued)

At
December 31, 2010, income tax returns from 2009, 2008 and 2007 remain subject to review by tax authorities. The gross amounts of deferred tax assets and deferred tax liabilities are as
follows:

December 31,2010

2009

2008Deferred tax assets:Allowance for loan losses

$
3,896,076

$
3,225,488

$
2,261,996Net operating loss carry forward


6,546,893


660,365


82,714Loan fees and costs


2,089


44,541


71,320Interest on nonaccrual loans


211,735


140,053


75,307Tax credit


290,718


306,799


95,753Stock option expense


46,226


45,269


34,997Deferred compensation


311,650


244,919


96,688Other than temporary impairment (OTTI)





1,562,708


1,562,708Unrealized loss on securities available-for-sale


166,661


710,754


Other real estate owned


377,734


52,105


Other


310,677


218,827


30,600Total deferred tax assets


12,160,459


7,211,828


4,312,083Valuation allowance


11,485,652


6,012,385


82,714Total net deferred tax assets


674,807


1,199,443


4,229,369Deferred tax liabilities:Accumulated depreciation


365,167


386,711


342,381Prepaid expenses


142,979


101,978


61,424Unrealized gain on securities available-for-sale








921,424Total deferred tax liabilities


508,146


488,689


1,325,229Net deferred tax asset

$
166,661

$
710,754

$
2,904,140


A
reconciliation between the income tax expense and the amount computed by applying the federal statutory rate of 34% for 2010, 2009 and 2008 to income before income taxes follows:

2010

2009

2008Amount

Rate

Amount

Rate

Amount

RateTax expense (benefit) at statutory rate

$
(5,291,776
)

(34.0
)%
$
(2,338,289
)

(34.0
)%
$
(2,602,218
)

(34.0
)%State income tax, net of federal income tax effect


(36,076
)

(0.23
)%

(33,644
)

(0.5
)%





%Cash value of life insurance


(189,877
)

(1.22
)%

(177,138
)

(2.6
)%

(164,680
)

(2.2
)%Stock based compensation expense


20,571


0.13
%

145,393


2.1
%

226,216


3.0
%Tax exempt interest


(11,804
)

(0.08
)%

(45,066
)

(0.6
)%

(97,527
)

(1.3
)%Valuation allowance


5,473,267


35.17
%

5,929,671


86.2
%





%Other


35,695


0.23
%

(101,272
)

(1.5
)%

(60,791
)

(0.8
)%Income tax expense (benefit)

$




%
$
3,379,655


49.1
%
$
(2,699,000
)

(35.3
)%


F-28

---



NOTE 15LEASES

The
lease on the Bank's main branch was originated on March 24, 2004 and had an initial 10-year term. The lease required monthly payments of $14,840 for the first three years,
increased 9% in year four and 3% every year thereafter. The lease is renewable at the bank's option for two five-year terms. Rental expense on this facility was $205,924, $204,781 and
$198,956 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

The
Bank leases a building for the Myrtle Beach branch location from a lessor in which a Company director has a 50% ownership. The lease commenced on July 1, 2007 and has a 20-year
term at a monthly expense of $12,500. The lease may be extended at the Bank's option for two additional ten-year terms. Rental expense under these operating lease agreements was $150,000,
$150,000 and $150,000 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

The
Bank has entered into a land lease for its West Ashley branch, which opened in July 2007. The lease was originated on December 22, 2005 and has an initial 20-year term. The
lease may be extended at the Bank's option for four additional five-year terms. The lease requires monthly payments of $6,067 for the first five years and increases 12% every fifth year
thereafter. Rental expense under these operating lease agreements was $72,800, $72,800 and $73,037 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

The
Bank leases office space for the Bluffton branch location. The lease was originated on June 13, 2007 and has a 20-year term with four five-year renewal options. The
lease requires monthly payments of $13,189. Rental expense under these operating lease agreements was $154,968, $157,402 and $167,440 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

The
Bank has entered into a land lease for office space located at 830 Lowcountry Boulevard, Mount Pleasant, SC for the building of executive offices. The lease was originated on April 24, 2007
and has a
20-year term with four five-year renewal options. The lease requires monthly payments of $9,167 for the first five years, increased 71/2% every fifth year
thereafter. Rental expense under this operating lease agreement was $110,000, $110,000 and $110,000 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

The
Bank also leases office space for its Murrells Inlet branch location. The lease was originated on March 20, 2007 and has a 20-year term. The lease may be extended at the Bank's
option for one additional ten-year term. The lease requires monthly payments of $10,000 that began on June 26, 2008. Rental expense under this operating lease agreement was
$120,000, $120,000 and $76,904 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

Future
minimum lease payments under these operating leases are summarized as follows:

2011

$
828,4672012


842,3802013


855,5572014


663,5412015


624,912Thereafter


7,512,365$
11,327,222


F-29

---



NOTE 16RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

Certain
parties (principally certain directors and executive officers of the Company, their immediate families and business interests) were loan customers of and had other transactions in the normal
course of business with the Company. Related party loans are made on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions
with unrelated persons and do not involve more than the normal risk of collectibility.

Related
party loan transactions for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 are summarized below:

December 31,2010

2009Balance, beginning of year

$
14,547,426

$
16,569,531New loans


2,603,915


13,256,859Less loan repayments


(2,868,828
)

(8,430,776
)Other changes due to changes in directors and officers


(74,445
)

(6,848,188
)Balance, end of year

$
14,208,068

$
14,547,426


Deposits
from directors and executive officers and their related interests totaled $1,096,115 and $1,114,506, at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. As mentioned in Note 15, one of
the Company's directors is a 50% owner of an office building in Myrtle Beach, SC in which Tidelands Bank is a tenant.

NOTE 17COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

The
Company is subject to claims and lawsuits which arise primarily in the ordinary course of business. Management is not aware of any legal proceedings which would have a material adverse effect on
the financial position or operating results of the Company.

NOTE 18LOSS PER SHARE

Basic
loss per share is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding. Diluted loss per share is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted-average
number of common shares outstanding and dilutive common share equivalents using the treasury stock method. Potentially dilutive common share equivalents include common shares issuable upon the
exercise of outstanding stock options and warrants.

F-30

---



NOTE 18LOSS PER SHARE (Continued)

Basic
and diluted loss per share is computed below:

Year Ended December 31,2010

2009

2008Basic loss per share computation:Net loss available to common shareholders

$
(16,503,713
)
$
(11,183,316
)
$
(4,954,583
)Average common shares outstandingbasic


4,087,108


4,071,313


4,050,301Basic net loss per share

$
(4.04
)
$
(2.75
)
$
(1.22
)Diluted loss per share computation:Net loss available to common shareholders

$
(16,503,713
)
$
(11,183,316
)
$
(4,954,583
)Average common shares outstandingbasic


4,087,108


4,071,313


4,050,301Incremental shares from assumed conversions:Stock options and warrants








Average common shares outstandingdiluted


4,087,108


4,071,313


4,050,301Diluted loss per share

$
(4.04
)
$
(2.75
)
$
(1.22
)


For
the period ended December 31, 2010, there were no stock options outstanding that were anti-dilutive compared to 742,060 and 777,537 stock options outstanding that were
anti-dilutive for the period ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, there were 571,821 warrant shares outstanding that were
anti-dilutive. Options and warrants are considered anti-dilutive because the exercise price exceeds the average market price for the period. During the quarter ended
June 30, 2010, all options that had been previously granted were voluntarily forfeited by each employee, officer and director grantee.

NOTE 19REGULATORY MATTERS

Regulatory Actions

On
June 1, 2010, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the "FDIC") and the South Carolina State Board of Financial Institutions (the "State Board") conducted their annual joint examination
of the Bank. As a result of the examination, the Bank entered into a Consent Order, effective December 28, 2010 (the "Consent Order"), with the FDIC and the State Board. Based on information
included in the FDIC's report, the Bank's credit risk rating at the FHLB has been negatively impacted, resulting in reduced borrowing capacity. This action also restricts the Bank's ability to accept,
renew, or roll over brokered deposits. In addition, the Bank's ability to borrow funds from the Federal Reserve Bank Discount Window as a source of short-term liquidity is not guaranteed.
The Federal Reserve Discount Window borrowing capacity has been curtailed to only overnight terms, contingent upon credit approval for each transaction.

The
Consent Order requires the Bank to, among other things, take the following actions: establish a board committee to monitor and coordinate compliance with the Consent Order; ensure that the Bank
has competent management in place; develop an independent assessment of the Bank's management and staffing needs; achieve Tier 1 capital at least equal to 8% of total assets and Total
Risk-Based capital at least equal to 10% of total risk-weighted assets within 150 days and establish a capital plan that includes a contingency plan to sell or merge the
Bank; implement a plan addressing liquidity, contingency funding, and asset liability management; implement a program designed to reduce the Bank's exposure in problem assets; develop a three year
strategic plan; adopt an effective internal loan

F-31

---



NOTE 19REGULATORY MATTERS (Continued)

review
and grading system; adopt a plan to reduce concentrations of credit; implement a policy to ensure the adequacy of the Bank's allowance for loan and lease losses; implement a written plan to
improve and sustain the Bank's earnings; revise, adopt and implement a written asset/liability management policy to provide effective guidance and control over the Bank's funds management activities;
develop a written policy for managing interest rate risk; not declare or pay any dividends or bonuses or make any distributions of interest, principal, or other sums on subordinated debentures without
prior regulatory approval; not accept, renew, or rollover any brokered deposits unless it is in compliance with regulatory requirements and adopt a plan to eliminate reliance on brokered deposits;
limit asset growth to 10% per year; adopt an employee compensation plan after undertaking an independent review of compensation paid to all the Bank's senior executive officers; and address various
violations of law and regulation cited by the FDIC.

The
Company intends to take all actions necessary to enable the Bank to comply with the requirements of the Consent Order. There can be no assurance that the Bank will be able to comply fully with the
provisions of the Consent Order, and the determination of our compliance will be made by the FDIC and the State Board. Failure to meet the requirements of the Consent Order could result in additional
regulatory requirements, which could ultimately lead to the Bank being taken into receivership by the FDIC.

Regulatory Capital Requirements

The
Company and Bank are subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by the federal banking agencies. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory
and possibly additional discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a direct adverse material effect on the Company's or Bank's financial statements. Under capital adequacy
guidelines and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action, the Company and Bank must meet specific capital guidelines that involve quantitative measures of the Company's and Bank's assets,
liabilities, and certain off-balance sheet items as calculated under regulatory accounting practices. The Company's and Bank's capital amounts and classification are also subject to
qualitative judgments by the regulators about components, risk weightings, and other factors.

Quantitative
measures established by regulation to ensure capital adequacy require the Company and Bank to maintain minimum ratios of Tier 1 and total capital as a percentage of assets and
off-balance sheet exposures, adjusted for risk weights ranging from 0% to 100%. Tier 1 capital consists of common shareholders' equity, excluding the unrealized gain or loss on
securities available-for-sale, minus certain intangible assets. Tier 2 capital consists of the allowance for loan losses subject to certain limitations. Total capital
for purposes of computing the capital ratios consists of the sum of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital. The regulatory minimum requirements are 4% for Tier 1 and 8% for total
risk-based capital.

The
Company and Bank are also required to maintain capital at a minimum level based on total assets, which is known as the leverage ratio. Only the strongest institutions are allowed to maintain
capital at the minimum requirement of 3%. All others are subject to maintaining ratios 1% to 2% above the minimum.

To
be considered "well-capitalized," generally a bank must maintain a Leverage Capital ratio of at least 5%, Tier 1 Capital of at least 6%, and Total Risk-Based Capital
of at least 10%. The Consent Order, however, includes a requirement that the Bank achieve and maintain minimum capital requirements that exceed the minimum regulatory capital ratios for "well
capitalized" banks.

F-32

---



NOTE 19REGULATORY MATTERS (Continued)

As
of December 31, 2010 and 2009, the following table summarizes the capital amounts and ratios of the Company and the regulatory minimum requirements:

Actual

For Capital
Adequacy Purposes

To Be Well-
Capitalized Under
Prompt Corrective
Action ProvisionsTidelands Bancshares, Inc.

Amount

Ratio

Amount

Ratio

Amount

RatioDecember 31, 2010Total capital (to risk-weighted assets)

$
44,030,000


9.77
%
$
36,072,320


8.00
%

N/A


N/ATier 1 capital (to risk-weighted assets)


31,847,000


7.06
%

18,036,160


4.00
%

N/A


N/ATier 1 capital (to average assets)


31,847,000


5.47
%

23,300,480


4.00
%

N/A


N/ADecember 31, 2009Total capital (to risk-weighted assets)

$
61,070,000


11.68
%
$
41,818,640


8.00
%

N/A


N/ATier 1 capital (to risk-weighted assets)


53,407,000


10.22
%

20,909,320


4.00
%

N/A


N/ATier 1 capital (to average assets)


53,407,000


6.83
%

31,257,760


4.00
%

N/A


N/A


The following table summarizes the capital amounts and ratios of the Bank and the regulatory minimum requirements at December 31, 2010 and 2009:

Actual

For Capital
Adequacy Purposes

To Be Well-
Capitalized Under
Prompt Corrective
Action ProvisionsTidelands Bank

Amount

Ratio

Amount

Ratio

Amount

RatioDecember 31, 2010Total capital (to risk-weighted assets)

$
42,703,000


9.49
%
$
36,009,620


8.00
%
$
45,012,020


10.00
%Tier 1 capital (to risk-weighted assets)


37,002,000


8.22
%

18,004,810


4.00
%

27,007,210


6.00
%Tier 1 capital (to average assets)


37,002,000


6.38
%

23,215,640


4.00
%

29,019,550


5.00
%December 31, 2009Total capital (to risk-weighted assets)

$
57,983,000


11.11
%
$
41,751,730


8.00
%
$
52,189,660


10.00
%Tier 1 capital (to risk-weighted assets)


51,412,000


9.85
%

20,875,860


4.00
%

31,313,800


6.00
%Tier 1 capital (to average assets)


51,412,000


6.59
%

31,225,960


4.00
%

39,032,450


5.00
%


To be considered "well-capitalized" per the requirements of the Consent Order, the Bank must obtain a minimum amount of $45,012,020 in total capital
in order to maintain a Total Risk-Based Capital of 10%. In addition, the Bank would need $46,431,280 of Tier 1 capital in order to maintain a minimum Leverage Capital ratio of 8%.
As of December 31, 2010, the bank was deemed "adequately capitalized. As such, the Bank was not considered in compliance with the capital requirements of the Consent Order.

NOTE 20UNUSED LINES OF CREDIT

As
of December 31, 2010, the Bank had an unused line of credit to purchase federal funds from unrelated banks totaling $4.5 million. There was no balance outstanding related to this line
of credit as of December 31, 2010. This line of credit is available on a one to 14 day basis for general corporate purposes. In addition to this credit line, lines of credit are
available from the FHLB with a remaining credit availability of $114.6 million and an excess lendable collateral value of approximately $10.1 million at December 31, 2010. In
addition, we maintain a $70.8 million line of credit with the

F-33

---



NOTE 20UNUSED LINES OF CREDIT (Continued)

Federal
Reserve Bank with a lendable collateral value of approximately $46.9 million secured by loans in our loan portfolio.

NOTE 21SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY

Preferred StockIn December 2008, in connection with the Troubled Asset Relief Program (the "TARP") Capital
Purchase Program (the "CPP"), established as part of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, the Company issued to the U.S. Treasury 14,448 shares of the Company's Fixed Rate Cumulative
Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series T (the "Preferred Stock"), having a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share. The Preferred Stock has a dividend rate of 5% for the first five years and 9%
thereafter. The Preferred Stock has a call feature after three years.

In
connection with the sale of the Preferred Stock, the Company also issued to the U.S. Treasury a ten-year warrant to purchase up to 571,821 shares of the Company's common stock (the
"Warrants"), par value $0.01 per share at an initial exercise price of $3.79 per share.

As
required under the TARP Capital Purchase Program, dividend payments on and repurchase of the Company's common stock are subject to certain restrictions. For as long as the Preferred Stock is
outstanding, no dividends may be declared or paid on the Company's common stock until all accrued and unpaid dividends on the Preferred Stock are fully paid. In addition, the U.S. Treasury's consent
is required for any increase in dividends on common stock before the third anniversary of issuance of the Preferred Stock and for any repurchase of any common stock except for repurchases of common
shares in connection with benefit plans.

The
Preferred Stock and Warrants were sold to the U.S. Treasury for an aggregate purchase price of $14,448,000 in cash. The purchase price was allocated between the Preferred Stock and the Warrants
based upon the relative fair values of each to arrive at the amounts recorded by the Company. This resulted in the Preferred Stock being issued at a discount which is being amortized on a level yield
basis as a charge to retained earnings over an assumed life of five years.

Beginning
with the payment date of November 15, 2010, the Company deferred dividend payments on the TARP Preferred Stock. Although the Company may defer dividend payments, the dividend is a
cumulative dividend and failure to pay dividends for six dividend periods would trigger board appointment rights for the holder of the TARP Preferred Stock.

Restrictions on DividendsA South Carolina state bank may not pay dividends from its capital. All dividends
must be paid out of undivided profits then on hand, after deducting expenses, including reserves for losses and bad debts. The Bank is authorized to pay cash dividends up to 100% of net income in any
calendar year without obtaining the prior approval of the State Board, provided that the Bank received a composite rating of one or two at the last federal or state regulatory examination. The Bank
must obtain approval from the State Board prior to the payment of any other cash dividends. In addition, under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act, the Bank may not pay a
dividend if, after paying the dividend, the Bank would be undercapitalized. As described above on December 28, 2010, the Bank entered into the Consent Order with the FDIC and the State Board
which, among other things, prohibits the Bank from declaring or paying any dividends or making any distributions of interest, principal, or other sums on subordinated debentures without the prior
approval of the supervisory authorities.

F-34

---





NOTE 22FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS WITH OFF-BALANCE-SHEET RISK

The
Company is a party to financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk in the normal course of business to meet the financing needs of its customers. These financial instruments
consist of commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit. Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a customer as long as there is no violation of any condition established
in the contract. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses and may require payment of a fee. A commitment involves, to varying degrees, elements of credit and
interest rate risk in excess of the amount recognized in the balance sheet. The Company's exposure to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by the other party to the instrument is represented by
the contractual notional amount of the instrument. Since certain commitments are expected to expire without being drawn upon, the total commitment amounts do not necessarily represent future cash
requirements. The Company uses the same credit policies in making commitments to extend credit as it does for on-balance-sheet instruments. Standby letters of credit are conditional
commitments issued to guarantee a customer's performance to a third party and have essentially the same credit risk as other lending facilities. At December 31, 2010, the Bank had $225,000
reserved for
off-balance sheet credit exposure related to unfunded commitments included in other liabilities on our consolidated balance sheet.

Collateral
held for commitments to extend credit and letters of credit varies but may include accounts receivable, inventory, property, plant, equipment and income-producing commercial properties.

The
following table sets forth unused commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit at December 31, 2010 and 2009:

2010

2009Commitments to extend credit

$
18,564,489

$
28,429,383Standby letters of credit


608,604


466,739Total

$
19,173,093

$
28,896,122


NOTE 23STOCK COMPENSATION PLANS

On
May 10, 2004, the Company established the 2004 Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. Stock Incentive Plan ("Stock Plan") that provides for the granting of options to purchase 20% of the
outstanding shares of the Company's common stock to directors, officers, or employees of the Company. The plan was amended during 2005 to provide for the designation of an additional 348,997 shares as
incentive stock options. The per-share exercise price of incentive stock options granted under the Stock Plan may not be less than the fair market value of a share on the date of grant and
vest based on continued service with the Company for a specified period, generally two to five years following the date of grant. The per-share exercise price of stock options granted is
determined by a committee appointed by the Board of Directors. The expiration date of any option may not be greater than 10 years from the date of grant. Options that expire unexercised or are
forfeited become available
for reissuance. During the quarter ended June 30, 2010, all options that had been previously granted were voluntarily forfeited by each employee, officer and director grantee.

F-35

---



NOTE 23STOCK COMPENSATION PLANS (Continued)

The
fair value of options granted is estimated as of the date granted using the Binomial option valuation model with the following weighted-average assumptions used for grants:

2010

2009

2008Dividend yield

N/A

N/A

0.00%Expected volatility

N/A

N/A

22.0 - 73.8%Risk-free interest rate

N/A

N/A

1.79%Expected life (in years)

N/A

N/A

3.0 - 8.0


The
Company did not grant options during the year ended December 31, 2010 and 2009. The weighted-average fair value of options granted during the year 2008 is $2.11. There were no options
exercised during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

A
summary of the status of the Company's Stock Plan as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 is presented below:

2010

2009Options

Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price

Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value

Options

Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price

Aggregate
Intrinsic
ValueOutstanding at beginning of year


742,060

$
10.28





777,537

$
10.31Granted














Exercised














Forfeited


(742,060
)

10.28





(35,477
)

11.05Outstanding at end of year




$


$



742,060

$
10.28

$
Options exercisable at year-end







$



460,103




$
Shares available for grant(1)


782,007








41,446


(1)20%
of outstanding shares less options exercised


The
aggregate intrinsic value in the table above represents the total pre-tax intrinsic value (the difference between the Company's closing stock price on the last trading day of 2010 and
the exercise price, multiplied by the number of in-the-money options) that would be received by the option holders had all options holders exercised their options on
December 31, 2010. This amount changes based on the fair value of the Company's stock. For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, there was $63,067, $455,165 and $700,509 of
total recognized compensation cost related to the share-based compensation arrangements granted under the Stock Plan.

F-36

---



NOTE 23STOCK COMPENSATION PLANS (Continued)

A
summary of the status of the Company's nonvested options as of December 31, 2010 is presented below:

Nonvested Options

Shares

Weighted
Average
Grant-Date
Fair ValueNonvested at beginning of year


281,957

$
3.52Granted





Vested


(11,760
)

4.47Forfeited


(270,197
)

3.48Nonvested at end of year




$



As
of December 31, 2010, there was no unrecognized compensation cost related to nonvested share-based compensation arrangements granted under the Stock Plan. The total fair value of shares
vested during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, was $52,601, $402,507 and $436,949, respectively.

NOTE 24EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN

On
May 17, 2007, the Company announced the formation of the Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan ("ESOP"), a non-contributory plan, for its employees. The
ESOP will purchase shares of the Company's common stock on the open market from time to time with funds borrowed from a loan from a third party lender. All employees of the Company meeting certain
tenure requirements are entitled to participate in the ESOP. Compensation expense related to the ESOP was $53,566, $209,324 and $252,220 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008. At
December 31, 2010, the ESOP has outstanding loans amounting to $1,625,000.

A
summary of the unallocated share activity of the Company's ESOP is presented below:

December 31,2010

2009

2008Balance, beginning of year


178,069


203,308


189,107New share purchases


15,042


18,701


43,883Shares released to participants


(2,180
)

(330
)

Shares allocated to participants


(40,400
)

(43,610
)

(29,682
)Balance, end of year


150,531


178,069


203,308


The
aggregate fair value of the 150,531 unallocated shares was $156,552 based on the $1.04 closing price of our common stock on December 31, 2010. The aggregate fair value of the 178,069
unallocated shares was $658,855 based on the $3.70 closing price of our common stock on December 31, 2009. The aggregate fair value of the 203,308 unallocated shares was $801,035 based on the
$3.94 closing price of our common stock on December 31, 2008.

NOTE 25RETIREMENT PLANS

The
Company has a 401(k) profit sharing plan, which provides retirement benefits to a majority of officers and employees who meet certain age and service requirements. The plan includes a "salary
reduction" feature pursuant to Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code. At its discretion, the Bank may make matching contributions of $.50 for every dollar contributed up to 6% of the

F-37

---



NOTE 25RETIREMENT PLANS (Continued)

participants'
annual compensation. Expenses charged to earnings for the 401(k) profit sharing plan were approximately $122,364, $119,077 and $60,075 in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

The
Bank has a Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (Supplemental Plan). This plan provides an annual post-retirement cash payment beginning after a chosen retirement date for certain
officers of the Bank. The officer will receive an annual payment from the Bank equal to the promised benefits. In connection with this plan, life insurance contracts were purchased on the officers.
Effective June 30, 2010, the executive officers have agreed to cease further benefit accrual under the contracts and will only be entitled to receive benefits accrued through June 30,
2010. There was $196,268, $435,976 and $284,375 of expense related to the plan in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

As
of December 31, 2010, total benefits expected to be paid in future periods equal $916,619, such payments commence in the year 2013 totaling $26,863. Total benefits expected to be paid
between the years 2014 and 2018 equal $204,910 with $684,846 remaining in the years thereafter.

NOTE 26TIDELANDS BANCSHARES, INC. (PARENT COMPANY ONLY)

Presented
below are the condensed financial statements for Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. (Parent Company Only).

Condensed Balance Sheets

December 31,2010

2009Assets:Cash and due from banks

$
2,694,509

$
4,452,222Other equity securities


28,750


28,750Investment in banking subsidiary


36,759,033


50,281,637Other assets


589,886


907,136Total assets

$
40,072,178

$
55,669,745Liabilities and shareholders' equity:Junior subordinated debentures

$
14,434,000

$
14,434,000ESOP borrowings


1,625,000


2,300,000Other borrowings





Other liabilities


370,520


11,001Shareholders' equity


23,642,659


38,924,744Total liabilities and shareholders' equity

$
40,072,178

$
55,669,745


F-38

---



NOTE 26TIDELANDS BANCSHARES, INC. (PARENT COMPANY ONLY) (Continued)

Condensed Statements of Operations

For the Years Ended December 31,2010

2009

2008Income:Income on trust preferred securities

$
16,429

$
23,247

$
21,602Income on securities available-for-sale





167,599


Gain on sale of available-for-sale securities





105,677


Impairment on nonmarketable equity securities





(122,890
)

Gain from extinguishment of debt


400,000





Other investment income


22,619





Dividend paid from subsidiary








396,575Total income


439,048


173,633


418,177Expense:Stock based compensation


63,067


455,165


700,509Junior subordinated debentures


730,321


773,550


724,023ESOP compensation


53,566


209,324


252,220Other borrowings


77,172


58,508


127,831Other


668,637


124,226


89,990Total expense


1,592,763


1,620,773


1,894,573Loss before income taxes and equity in undistributed losses of banking subsidiary


(1,153,715
)

(1,447,140
)

(1,476,396
)Income tax benefit





(347,813
)

(466,000
)Equity in undistributed losses of banking subsidiary


(14,410,333
)

(9,157,648
)

(3,944,187
)Net loss

$
(15,564,048
)
$
(10,256,975
)
$
(4,954,583
)


F-39

---



NOTE 26TIDELANDS BANCSHARES, INC. (PARENT COMPANY ONLY) (Continued)

Condensed Statements of Cash Flows

For the Years Ended December 31,2010

2009

2008Cash flows from operating activities:Net loss

$
(15,564,048
)
$
(10,256,975
)
$
(4,954,583
)Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used by operating activities:Discount accretion and premium amortization





80,144


Gain from sale of securities available-for-sale





(105,677
)

Impairment on securities





122,890


Gain from extinguishment of debt


(400,000
)




(Increase) decrease in other assets


317,251


(97,476
)

(516,392
)Increase in other liabilities


178,918


5,406


5,595Equity in undistributed loss of subsidiary


14,410,333


9,157,648


3,944,187Intercompany tax sharing payment





(1,074,889
)

(Increase) decrease in deferred income taxes





1,507,451


(466,000
)Stock based compensation expense


63,067


455,165


700,509Net cash used by operating activities


(994,479
)

(206,313
)

(1,286,684
)Cash flows from investing activities:Purchases of securities available-for-sale





(10,293,963
)

Proceeds from sales of securities available-for-sale





8,484,061


Proceeds from calls and maturities of securities available-for-sale





1,835,435


Purchase of Tidelands Bank stock





(8,000,014
)

(6,000,005
)Net cash used by investing activities





(7,974,481
)

(6,000,005
)Cash flows from financing activities:Proceeds (repayments) from other borrowings





(615,837
)

615,837Proceeds from junior subordinated debentures








6,186,000Proceeds from preferred stock, net








13,335,752Proceeds from issuance of common stock-warrants








1,112,248Preferred stock-dividends paid


(541,800
)

(654,174
)

Proceeds from ESOP borrowings








472,500Repayment of ESOP borrowings


(275,000
)

(300,000
)

(300,000
)(Increase) decrease in unearned ESOP shares


53,566


84,325


(220,280
)Net cash (used) provided by financing activities


(763,234
)

(1,485,686
)

21,202,057Net increase (decrease) in cash


(1,757,713
)

(9,666,480
)

13,915,368Cash, beginning of period


4,452,222


14,118,702


203,334Cash, end of period

$
2,694,509

$
4,452,222

$
14,118,702


F-40

---





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

None

Item 9A.    Controls and Procedures.

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

As of the end of the period covered by this report, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of
our management, including our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e). Based upon that evaluation,
our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our current disclosure controls and procedures are effective as of December 31, 2010. There have been no significant
changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the fourth fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2010 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect,
our internal control over financial reporting.

The
design of any system of controls and procedures is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events. There can be no assurance that any design will
succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions, regardless of how remote.

Management's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined
in the Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f). A system of internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of
financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

Under
the supervision and with the participation of management, including the principal executive officer and the principal financial officer, our management has evaluated the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010 based on the criteria established in a report entitled "Internal ControlIntegrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission" and the interpretive guidance issued by the Commission in Release No. 34-55929. Based on this
evaluation, our management has evaluated and concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2010.

We
are continuously seeking to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our operations and of our internal controls. This results in modifications to our processes throughout the
company. However, there has been no change in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during our most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

This
annual report does not include an attestation report of the company's registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management's report was
not subject to attestation by the company's registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the
Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the company to provide only management's report in this annual report.

Item 9B.    Other Information.

None

73

---





PART III

Item 10.    Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.

Biographical Information Regarding Our Directors and Executive Officers

Michael W. Burrell, 60,has been a resident of the Charleston area since 1977.
Mr. Burrell graduated from Georgia State University in 1973 and completed his graduate work and earned his Masters Degree in Education in 1978 and his Educational Specialist degree in 1983 from
The Citadel Military College in Charleston, South Carolina. He has served as an elementary school principal in Summerville since 1980 and before his retirement in 2002 served as the coordinator for
federal and state programs on the district level. He currently serves as an Evening School principal for Dorchester School District Two. Mr. Burrell and his wife started a local
pre-school and childcare center, Gazebo School, Inc., which has been in operation since 1977. They sold the business in 2003 in order to pursue other interests. His community
service in the area began with the formation of the first Boy Scout Troop for the disabled in 1977. Mr. Burrell is an active member in the Summerville Sertoma Club where he has served as
president, treasurer, and on-going
board member since 1978. He and his wife have been active in MS Challenge Walk for the past four years. He is a member of Bethany United Methodist Church where he has taught Sunday school for both
children and adults. Mr. Burrell has served on our board since the company's formation and has been a resident of Charleston for over 33 years. His long-standing ties to the
bank's largest market area provide him with personal contacts and an awareness of the social environment within which the company operates, which are valuable assets to the board.

James M. (Jim) Bedsole, CRCM, CBA, CFSA, 52,has served as chief risk officer of our company and our bank since 2005 and has been an
executive vice president since February 2009. Mr. Bedsole is a 1986 graduate of The Citadel, with a B.S. degree in Business Administration. He is also a graduate of the ABA National Graduate
School of Compliance Management at Indiana University/Purdue University, Indianapolis. He is a Certified Regulatory Compliance Manager, Certified Bank Auditor and Certified Financial Services Auditor.
Mr. Bedsole is a nationally recognized speaker on the topics of compliance, consumer protection regulations, auditing, risk management and Internet banking. He is a former chairman of the South
Carolina Bankers Association Compliance and Regulatory Committee and the South Carolina Bankers Association Disaster Recovery Committee. Mr. Bedsole currently co-chairs the American
Bankers Association Enterprise Risk Management Working Group. He has served on the faculty of the ABA National Compliance School and the North Carolina School of Banking. He had authored articles
appearing in both regional and national publications, including ABA Bank Compliance Magazine, Palmetto Banker and numerous Internet web sites. He is a member of Seacoast Church in Mt. Pleasant and a
member of the East Cooper Pilots Association.

Alan D. Clemmons, 52,is a native of Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. He graduated in 1982 from Coastal Carolina University's School of
Business Administration. He received his Juris Doctorate in 1989 from Hamline University of Saint Paul, Minnesota. Mr. Clemmons has been engaged in the practice of law with an emphasis on real
estate and development with the Clemmons Law Firm, LLC since 2005. Prior to that time Mr. Clemmons practiced law as a partner at McCrackin, Barnett, Richardson and Clemmons, LLP
from 1990. Mr. Clemmons, an Eagle Scout, has served as a volunteer to the Boy Scouts of America for almost 30 years and has served in positions ranging from scoutmaster to counsel
president and national committeeman. He served as a volunteer to the Maya Indians from 1978 to 1980 as a lay Christian Services Missionary in Southern Mexico with The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints. Mr. Clemmons is a past member of the Horry County Planning Commission and ex-oficio member of the Myrtle Beach Planning Commission.
Mr. Clemmons was an officer of the Horry County Republican Party for many years, and served as chairman from 1997 through 2000. He was elected to represent South Carolina as a delegate or
alternate-delegate to the 2000, 2004 and 2008 Republican National Conventions. Mr. Clemmons was first elected to the South

74

---



Carolina
House of Representatives in 2002 and has served continuously since that time representing the area including the municipalities of Myrtle Beach and Briarcliffe Acres. He is past chairman of
the House Freshman Caucus and secretary/treasurer of the House Republican Caucus. He currently serves in the South Carolina General Assembly as the Election Laws Subcommittee Chairman of the House
Judiciary Committee, Vice-chair of the Rules Committee and legislative member of the Judicial Selection Commission. His legislative and community service has resulted in recognition by
various entities, including: South Carolina Hero, 2008, by the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP); Legislator of the Year, 2006, by the South Carolina Association of Realtors; Legislator
of the
Year, 2005, by the Association of Drug Stores; Special Legislative Commendation, 2004, by the South Carolina Silver Haired Legislature; and Distinguished Alumnus of the Year, 2004, by Coastal Carolina
University. Mr. Clemmons also serves as chairman of the Interstate 73 Corridor Association. He has served on our board since the company's formation and is a native of Myrtle Beach. His
extensive personal understanding of the markets that we serve is a valuable asset to the board. Mr. Clemmon's professional experience as a real estate and development attorney provides the
board with legal insight, and his strong analytical skills are helpful to the board's ability to manage the affairs of a highly regulated company.

Robert E. (Chip) Coffee, Jr., 63,has served as a director and the president and chief executive officer of our company and our bank since
February of 2003. Mr. Coffee is a native of Camden, South Carolina. Mr. Coffee graduated from The Citadel in 1970 with a B.S. in Business Administration. He began his banking career in
the Management Training program with South Carolina National Bank in 1970. Mr. Coffee furthered his banking education and graduated from The Stonier Graduate School of Banking at Rutgers
University in 1978 and The National Commercial Lending Graduate School at the University of Oklahoma, with distinction, in 1982. In 1980, he joined the Bank of Beaufort and began the community banking
phase of his career. Between 1982 and 1985, Mr. Coffee worked with the Bank of Hartsville and managed the commercial loan portfolio of that bank. In 1986, he was part of a group of investors
who founded 1ST Atlantic Bank in Little River, South Carolina. Mr. Coffee served as president, chief executive officer, and was a director until 1ST Atlantic merged
with Anchor Bank in December of 1993. He became executive vice president and chief administrative officer and was a director of Anchor Bank, operating in that capacity until Anchor Bank merged with
The South Financial Group in April of 2000. Including his stint in Beaufort, Mr. Coffee has been involved in banking along South Carolina's coast for over 30 years. Mr. Coffee has
served on numerous boards and professional organizations including The South Carolina Bankers Association, Chairman of the South Carolina Bankers' School, The Citizens Advisory Council of the Hollings
Cancer Center, The Citadel School of Business Advisory Board, DeBordieu Club and The South Carolina State Board of Financial Institutions from 1992 until 2000. Mr. Coffee's breadth of
experience and institutional knowledge of the company is critical to lead the board through the current challenging economic climate.

John W. Gandy, CPA, 57, is a native of Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. Mr. Gandy graduated from Wofford College in 1976 and obtained
an MBA from the Babcock Graduate School of Management at Wake Forest University in 1978. Mr. Gandy has been the owner of Gandy CPA Group, LLC since January of 2000. He began his career
in the audit division of Arthur Andersen & Co., a former "Big Eight" international accounting firm. In 1980, he returned home to Myrtle Beach where he spent the next 16 years
working with the Jackson Companies, a diversified group of companies in resort tourism, golf, rental management and real estate development. Beginning in 1996, interest in new ventures moved
Mr. Gandy to go into the consulting business. Over the next four years, he was involved in numerous financial transactions and planning for real estate developments, golf courses, vacation
destination marketing and private placements for several small and start-up companies. He is currently a partner or shareholder in Gandy Associates, LLC, Hospitality
Lodging, Inc., Coastal Direct, LLC (a design, printing and mailing operation), Office Developers, LLC, and various real estate related investments. He is active in a number
of civic, professional and church activities in the Myrtle Beach area. Mr. Gandy has served on our board since 2007 and is a certificated public accountant. His

75

---



professional
experience and knowledge of financial reporting requirements are assets to the board. He also has extensive experience in various real estate related development projects, which provides
unique knowledge of the markets in which we operate.

J. Louis Grant, CPA, 64,is a native of Andrews, SC. Mr. Grant obtained his B.S. degree in Business Administration from The Citadel
in 1972 and obtained his Certified Public Accountant Certificate in 1974. He served as the chief executive officer and president of Robinson Grant & Co., P.A., Certified Public
Accountants, from July 1982 to September 30, 2009. He currently serves as a board member and vice-president. Robinson Grant & Co., P.A. is the largest locally owned
CPA firm in Beaufort County, SC. He is a member of the American Institute of CPA's, the S.C. Association of CPA's, as well as a number of other professional and civic organizations in the Hilton Head
Island area. He is a member of St. Paul's United Methodist Church and recently was elected to Coastal Carolina Hospital Board of Directors. Mr. Grant has served on our board since 2007.
He has been a certified public accountant for over 36 years, over 26 of which was as the president and chief executive officer of the largest locally owned CPA firm in Beaufort County, South
Carolina. Mr. Grant brings essential financial acumen to the board.

Alan W. Jackson, CPA, 49,has served as executive vice president and chief financial officer of our company and our bank since 2003.
Mr. Jackson graduated from West Virginia Wesleyan College in 1983 with a B.A. degree in Accounting and received a Master of Accountancy from Virginia Polytechnic Institute in 1985.
Mr. Jackson furthered his banking education and graduated from the Graduate School of Banking at Colorado at the University of Colorado in 1997. Mr. Jackson began his involvement in
community banking in 1984 as an auditor with KPMG. From 1988 to 1991, Mr. Jackson was employed by Security Bank and Trust Co., Salisbury, North Carolina. Mr. Jackson joined
Community Bank and Trust Co. in Marion, North Carolina in 1991 and served as the chief financial officer until it merged with Carolina First Bancshares in 1998. At the time of the merger,
Mr. Jackson joined a group of investors who founded High Country Bank in Boone, North Carolina. Mr. Jackson served as the chief financial officer and chief operations officer to High
Country Bank from 1998 to 2002. From 2002 until joining us in May 2003, Mr. Jackson had a consulting practice serving community banks in the areas of asset liability management, operations,
technology, financial reporting and budgeting.

Thomas H. Lyles, 61, has served as executive vice president and chief administrative officer of our company since 2007. Mr. Lyles
is a graduate of Wofford College, The School of Bank Administration at the University of Wisconsin, and he has an MBA from the University of South Carolina. He was retired from 2006 until joining our
bank in April of 2007. Mr. Lyles has over 38 years of banking experience. He served as the President, COO and a director of Peoples Community Bank in Aiken, South Carolina from 2001
until its sale to First Citizens Corporation in 2005. From 1989 until 2001, Mr. Lyles served in various capacities for Carolina Southern Bank in Spartanburg, South Carolina, including Executive
Vice President, CFO, COO and director until Carolina Southern Bank's sale to Synovus Corporation. From 1973 until 1989, he held various positions with Bankers Trust of SC/Bank of America.
Mr. Lyles is also a member of the Rotary Club of Charleston.

Robert H. (Bobby) Mathewes, Jr., 44,has served as executive vice president and senior credit officer since our formation.
Mr. Mathewes grew up in Mount Pleasant and graduated from the University of South Carolina in 1988 with a B.S. degree in Finance. He is also a graduate of the South Carolina Bankers School, as
well as Leadership Charleston in 1999. He has 20 years of banking experience, 17 of which have been spent in Charleston. He has also held positions with NationsBank, SouthTrust Bank and BB&T.
Mr. Mathewes started his banking career with C&S Bank in Charleston in 1990. Mr. Mathewes has been involved in Junior Achievement, Jaycees and the Chamber of Commerce. He coached little
league soccer and baseball through the recreational department in Mount Pleasant. He is an active member of Seacoast Church.

76

---



John T. Parker, Jr., 47,has been a resident of Mount Pleasant since 1986. Mr. Parker graduated from Emory at Oxford in 1984 with
an Associate of Arts degree, and subsequently graduated from Emory University in 1986 with a B.A. degree in Psychology. He worked at Georgia Mental Health in Atlanta before returning to Charleston to
join Parker Marine Contracting Corporation, a family owned business that manufactures, builds , and installs concrete foundation pile, bridges, deep foundations, marine utilities and other
construction services. He has been the vice president of Parker Marine for 15 years. Mr. Parker was the 2000-2002 president of the American Subcontractors Association (ASA),
Charleston Chapter and he is past vice president and president of the board of directors for ASA of North and South Carolina. At present, he is on the Board of Directors for ASAC. Mr. Parker
currently serves on the Scholarship Golf Tournament and Education Committees for ASA. Mr. Parker served as past president of the Board of Directors for the Pile Driving Contractors Association
of South Carolina and is a national PDCA board member. He is a member of St. Andrews Episcopal Church in Mount Pleasant. Mr. Parker has served on our board since the company's formation.
His business experience provides the board with insight into the challenges facing small business owners in our markets.

Mary V. Propes, 58, is a native of Kentucky. Ms. Propes has served as chief executive officer of MVP Group
International, Inc., MVP Natural Stone and MVP Textiles & Apparel since 1998. She entered the
workforce in 1984 as a Chamber of Commerce Director in Graves County, Kentucky. Throughout her career, she was very successful in recruiting large industrial companies in the towns and cities she
served. She is an active member and also serves on the board of trustees for Seacoast Church. In addition, she serves on the boards of numerous private companies and organizations, both domestically
and abroad. Ms. Propes joined our board in 2007. She has served as the chief executive officer of three manufacturing businesses and led five start-up ventures. Ms. Propes'
professional experience as a successful entrepreneur provides the board with business insight and analytical skills that are necessary to manage the company's affairs in this difficult economic
environment.

Tanya D. Robinson,57, is a resident of Summerville. Mrs. Robinson graduated from
Brigham Young University with a B.A. in Communications. She worked part-time for Dorchester District Two Schools as a Public Information Specialist from 2000 until her recent election as a
Board of Trustee for Dorchester District Two Schools. Mrs. Robinson was elected for the 2009-2010 term to serve as South Carolina's Goals and Awards Chairman for the Congress of
Parents and Teachers where she oversees the Awards and Goals program throughout the state. She was elected in the spring of 2010 to become the PTA Vice-President for South Carolina for a
two year term. She was elected District President for Dorchester and Colleton County Schools in 2002-2004, which took her into 21 schools to organize and train PTA personnel.
Mrs. Robinson is a member of the Junior League of Summerville where she held the position of Community Service Chairman working closely with 25 local agencies. She presently is serving as
Summerville High School's PTSA President and is in the Presidency of the Charleston area Women's Organization of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. For the past five years, she has
chaired the Trident United Way for Dorchester District Two Schools and has acted as a liaison for Trident United Way's Day of Caring. She is married to Kent Robinson and they have four children.
Ms. Robinson has served on our board since the company's formation. She is very active in charitable endeavors in the community and has played a critical role in the educational system in our
market area. These roles provide her with personal contacts and a unique perspective of the markets in which the company operates.

Milon C. Smith, 60,has served as executive vice president and chief credit officer of our company and our bank since October 2005.
Mr. Smith graduated from the University of South Carolina in 1972 with a B.S. degree in Banking and Finance. Mr. Smith furthered his banking education and attended continuing education
classes through RMA, University of Oklahoma and BAI. Mr. Smith began his involvement in community banking in 1973 as a management trainee at Bankers Trust of South Carolina. Mr. Smith
spent 28 years, of his 37 years in banking, at Bank of America, or its predecessor banks, as a commercial lending officer, credit risk officer and credit products officer. From 2002 to
2005, Mr. Smith served as chief credit risk officer of People's Community Bank of South Carolina in

77

---



Aiken,
South Carolina. Mr. Smith has been involved in the Columbia, Charleston and South Carolina state boards for community schools. He currently serves on the South Carolina Medical
Malpractice PCF Board.

Larry W. Tarleton, 67, is a native of Wadesboro, North Carolina and a graduate of the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill. In
April 2009, he retired from The Post and Courier, South Carolina's
largest newspaper, where he worked since 1988, first as editor for 10 years and then as publisher for 11 years. He had previously been an editor for newspapers in Charlotte, Miami and
Dallas. He is very active in community affairs and currently serves on the board of the Coastal Carolina chapter of the Boy Scouts of America and is the chairman of the Boy Scouts Tenderfoot Classic
golf tournament. He has served as chairman of the Trident United Way and on the board of the Charleston Metro Chamber of Commerce. He is a former president of the Country Club of Charleston and is a
member of the Carolina Yacht Club. Mr. Tarleton has served on our board since 2006. His business and personal ties provide him with awareness of both the business and social environment within
which the company operates.

There
are no family relationships among any of the directors and any executive officers of the Company.

Code of Ethics

We expect all of our employees to conduct themselves honestly and ethically, particularly in handling actual and apparent conflicts of
interests and providing full, accurate, and timely disclosure to the public.

We
have adopted a Code of Ethics that applies to our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar
functions. A copy of this Code of Ethics is available without charge to shareholders upon request to our chief financial officer, Alan W. Jackson, at Tidelands Bancshares, Inc., 875 Lowcountry
Boulevard, Mount Pleasant, South Carolina 29464.

Audit Committee

Our audit committee is composed of four independent directors and operates under a written charter adopted by the board in
February2005. The board of directors has determined that Messrs. Burrell, Gandy, and Parker and Ms. Robinson, are independent, as contemplated in the listing standards of The NASDAQ
Global Market. John W. Gandy was approved as an "audit committee financial expert" as defined under the rules of the SEC. As a relatively small public company, it is difficult to identify potential
qualified candidates that are willing to serve on our board and otherwise meet our requirements for service. The board has determined that each member is fully qualified to monitor the performance of
management, the public disclosures by the company of its financial condition and performance, our internal accounting operations and our independent auditors.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

As required by Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, our directors and executive officers, and certain other
individuals are required to report periodically their ownership of our common stock and any changes in ownership to the SEC. Based on a review of Forms 3, 4, and 5 and any representations made
to us, we believe that all such reports for these persons were filed in a timely fashion during 2010 for transactions occurring in 2010, with the exception of the following:

A
Form 4 was filed on April 20, 2010 to reflect that the reporting of 5,000 shares of stock purchased by Robert E. Coffee, Jr. on July 25, 2008 (reflected on
Form 4 filed on July 28, 2008) were subsequently gifted to spouse on same day.

A
Form 5 was filed on January 10, 2011 to reflect the late reporting of 3,500 shares of stock purchased by Michael W. Burrell on June 7, 2010.

78

---





Item 11.    Executive Compensation.

Summary of Cash and Certain Other Compensation

The following table shows the compensation we paid for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 to our principal executive
officer, our principal financial officer and each of our three other most highly compensated executive officers who were serving as executive officers at the end of 2010. For a description of
executive compensation arrangements entered into between the company and Messrs. Coffee, Jackson, Lyles, Mathewes and Smith, please see the discussion below entitled "Executive Compensation
Arrangements."

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE

Name and Principal Position

Year

Salary
($)

Bonus
($)

Stock
Awards
($)

Option
Awards
($)(1)

All Other
Compensation
($)

Total
($)Robert E. Coffee, Jr.


2010

$
325,600

$


$


$


$
141,930
(2)
$
467,530President/Chief Executive Officer


2009


296,000











226,396


522,396Alan W. Jackson


2010


228,800











59,891
(3)

288,691Chief Financial Officer/Executive Vice


2009


208,000











75,913


283,913PresidentThomas H. Lyles


2010


203,840











63,778
(4)

267,618Chief Administrative Officer/Executive Vice


2009


182,000











128,511


310,511PresidentRobert H. Mathewes, Jr.


2010


208,780











50,478
(5)

259,258Senior Credit Officer/Executive Vice


2009


189,800











65,010


254,810PresidentMilon C. Smith


2010


211,640











67,296
(6)

278,936Chief Credit Officer/Executive Vice


2009


192,400











95,305


287,705President


(1)Stock
option awards have been granted to our named executive officers from time to time to reward performance and promote our long-term success.
Each named executive officer voluntarily forfeited all of his options in June 2010.(2)Includes
personal usage of company automobile of $866, club dues and related fees of $8,499, insurance of $14,011, the dollar value of term insurance
premiums paid by, or on behalf of Mr. Coffee of $3,240, 401(k) match of $6,539, personal usage of company cell phone expense of $491, 1,954 ESOP shares granted at $3.70 and SERP expense of
$101,054.(3)Includes
personal usage of company automobile of $3,059, club dues and related fees of $2,429, insurance of $16,503, the dollar value of term insurance
premiums paid by, or on behalf of Mr. Jackson of $880, 401(k) match of $6,968, personal usage of company cell phone expense of $425, 1,688 ESOP shares granted at $3.70 and SERP expense of
$23,381.(4)Includes
personal usage of company automobile of $1,035, club dues and related fees of $809, insurance of $13,434, 401(k) match of $6,154, personal usage of
company cell phone expense of $246, 1,677 ESOP shares granted at $3.70 and SERP expense of $35,895.(5)Includes
personal usage of company automobile of $1,687, club dues and related fees of $5,680, insurance of $16,271, the dollar value of term insurance
premiums paid by, or on behalf of


79

---



Mr. Mathewes
of $590, 401(k) match of $4,219, personal usage of company cell phone expense of $493, 1,534 ESOP shares granted at $3.70 and SERP expense of $15,862. (6)Includes
car allowance of $12,000, insurance of $7,315, 401(k) match of $6,722, personal usage of company cell phone expense of $428, 1,630 ESOP shares
granted at $3.70 and SERP expense of $34,800.


Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

There were no outstanding equity awards at fiscal year-end for any of the named executive officers. Each named executive
officer voluntarily forfeited all of his options in June 2010.

There
were no outstanding equity awards at fiscal year-end for any of the named executive officers. Each named executive officer voluntarily forfeited all of his options in
June 2010 as a means to help us reduce expenses. We are currently examining additional means to provide incentives
to key employees to increase shareholder value and therefore further align the interests of these employees with those of our shareholders.

Executive Compensation Arrangements

Employment Agreements

On May 1, 2008, we entered into employment agreements with Messrs. Coffee, Jackson, Lyles, Mathewes and Smith, as well as
with five other officers. The employment agreements have perpetual three-year terms but terminate no later than the time an executive attains age 65. The employment agreements provide
Messrs. Coffee, Jackson, Lyles, Mathewes and Smith with annual base salaries for 2011 of $309,320, $217,360, $193,648, $198,341 and $201,058, respectively. However, compensation must be
reviewed annually by the board of directors and may be increased to account for cost of living expenses. Each executive is also entitled to participate in all of our compensation, bonus, incentive and
other benefit programs.

Each
executive is entitled to cash severance if he is terminated without cause or if he terminates voluntarily but for good reason, meaning voluntary termination because of adverse
changes in employment circumstances, such as reduced compensation or responsibilities. In the case of Messrs. Coffee, Jackson, Lyles, Mathewes and Smith, the severance compensation consists of
a lump-sum payment equal to three times base salary, any bonus that may have been earned or accrued through the date of termination (including any amounts awarded for previous years that
have not yet vested), and a pro rata share of any bonus for the current fiscal year. Messrs. Coffee, Jackson, Lyles, Mathewes and Smith would also be entitled to continued medical, dental and
hospitalization insurance coverage for up to three years after termination.

If
a change in control occurs, Messrs. Coffee, Jackson, Lyles, Mathewes and Smith would be entitled to a lump-sum cash payment equal to three times the sum of their
base salary and most recent bonus. The employment agreements also provide for accelerated vesting in benefit plans after a change in control. For purposes of the employment agreements, the term change
in control means (i) an occurrence of a change in ownership of Tidelands Bancshares, (ii) a change in effective control of Tidelands Bancshares, or (iii) a change in the ownership
of a substantial portion of Tidelands Bancshares' assets, as defined consistent with Internal Revenue Code section 409A. The change-in-control benefit under the
employment agreements is a single-trigger benefit, in contrast to a double-trigger benefit payable solely after separation from service following a change in control. Messrs. Coffee, Jackson
and Mathewes would also be entitled to a tax gross-up benefit if the aggregate benefits payable to them after a change in control are subject to excise taxes under sections 280G and
4999 of the Internal Revenue Code. In general terms, benefits received by an executive after a change in control are subject to a 20% excise tax under section 4999 if the benefits payable on
account of the

80

---



change
in control exceed three times the executive's five-year average taxable compensation. If total benefits equal or exceed that threshold, the executive must pay a 20% excise tax on
benefits exceeding his five-year average taxable compensation and under section 280G the employer forfeits the compensation deduction for benefits on which the excise tax is
imposed. The tax gross-up benefit compensates an executive for excise taxes imposed but it increases the employer's non-deductible payments.

The
employment agreements prohibit competition after employment termination, but the prohibition against competition is void after a change in control. The period during which
competition is prohibited is two years for Messrs. Coffee, Jackson, Lyles, Mathewes and Smith. Lastly, the employment agreements provide for reimbursement of the executives' legal fees if the
employment agreements are challenged after a change in control, up to a maximum of $500,000 for Messrs. Coffee, Jackson and Mathewes and $100,000 for Messrs. Lyles and Smith.

Salary Continuation Agreements

On May 1, 2008, we also entered into salary continuation agreements with Messrs. Coffee, Jackson, Lyles, Mathewes and
Smith. With the aid of a compensation consultant we determined the salary continuation agreement retirement benefit by first projecting the executive's final pay at retirement, assuming retirement at
age 65. Payable for 15 years in monthly installments beginning at age 65, the annual retirement benefits under the salary continuation agreements are $26,863 for Mr. Coffee, $6,215 for
Mr. Jackson, $9,542 for Mr. Lyles, $4,217 for Mr. Mathewes and $9,251 for Mr. Smith. The benefit for termination before age 65 is a reduced amount that is calculated based
on the bank's liability accrual balance existing when employment termination occurs, also payable in monthly installments for 15 years beginning at age 65. If a change in control of the company
occurs, each executive will be entitled under his salary continuation agreement to an amount equal to the bank's liability accrual balance existing when the change in control occurs. Because the
agreement's
change-in-control benefit payment cannot exceed the current liability accrual balance maintained by the bank under the agreement, the benefit payment is cost neutral to the
acquirer. In June 2010, benefits accruing under these agreements were capped at their existing levels.

Endorsement Split Dollar Agreements

We consider adequate life insurance coverage for executives to be an essential element of the compensation necessary to retain, attract
and reward excellent service. On May 1, 2008, we entered into endorsement split dollar insurance agreements with Messrs. Coffee, Jackson, Lyles, Mathewes and Smith, entitling each
executive to designate the beneficiary of a specified portion of the death benefits payable under bank-owned policies on the executive's life. The executive's right to designate a
beneficiary of the life insurance death benefit expires when the executive's employment terminates or when the executive attains age 65, whichever occurs first. The death benefit payable to the
executive's beneficiary is the lesser of (x) 100% of the policy's net death proceeds, meaning the total death benefit minus the policy's cash surrender
value, or (y) the portion of the net death proceeds equal to 100% of the accrual balance required at age 65 under the executive's salary continuation
agreement. The bank is entitled to all insurance policy death proceeds remaining after payment of the death benefit to the executive's beneficiary.

This
bank-owned life insurance financing method is not expected to result in any material cost to the bank, but it is expected to increase the bank's non-interest
income in future operating periods. Because the bank intends to hold the bank-owned life insurance until the death of the insured's, the increase of cash surrender value should be
tax-free income under current Federal income tax law. The collection of death benefits on the life insurance policies, which is likewise tax free under current Federal and state income
taxation, is expected to enhance the company's return as well. The combination of tax-preferred income generated by the increasing cash value of the insurance policy, the

81

---



tax-free
insurance death benefit, and fully tax-deductible benefit payments to participants enables a bank to provide this significant benefit to executives through attractive
cost-recovery financing.

TARP Executive Compensation Restrictions

Under the terms of the CPP Purchase Agreement between us and the Treasury, we adopted certain standards for executive compensation and
corporate governance for the period during which the Treasury holds the equity we issued or may issue to the Treasury, including the common stock we may issue under the CPP Warrant. These standards
generally apply to our chief executive officer, chief financial officer and the three next most highly compensated senior executive officers. The standards include (1) ensuring that incentive
compensation for senior executives does not encourage unnecessary and excessive risks that threaten the value of the financial institution; (2) required clawback of any bonus or incentive
compensation paid to a senior executive and the next 20 most highly compensated employees based on statements of earnings, gains or other criteria that are later proven to be materially inaccurate;
(3) prohibition on making golden parachute payments to senior executives and the next five most highly compensated employees; and (4) agreement not to deduct for tax purposes executive
compensation in excess of $500,000 for each senior executive.

As
our most highly compensated employee, Mr. Coffee will be ineligible for any bonuses or incentive awards other than restricted stock as long as the equity issued under the CPP
is held by the Treasury and he remains our most highly compensated employee. Any restricted stock awards made to Mr. Coffee while the Treasury holds our equity would be subject to the following
limitations: (i) the restricted stock cannot become fully vested until the Treasury no longer holds the preferred stock, and (ii) the value of the restricted stock award cannot exceed
one third of Mr. Coffee's total annual compensation.

Our
executive compensation arrangements also provide for post-termination benefits and change-in-control benefits through employment agreements and
salary continuation agreements, as well as a potential death benefit under split dollar life insurance agreements for death occurring both before employment termination and before normal retirement
age. These severance benefits will not be payable, however, for our five senior executive officers and our next five most highly compensated employees upon termination occurring while the equity
issued under the CPP is held by the Treasury.

Director Compensation

Our bylaws permit our directors to receive reasonable compensation as determined by a resolution of the board of directors. Pursuant to
our bylaws, we began compensating our directors in May of 2007. Compensation information with respect to our president and chief executive officer, Robert E. Coffee, Jr., who is also a
director, is set forth above rather than in the table below. We pay our non-employee directors a fee of $500 for each board meeting attended and $250 for each committee meeting attended.
We pay the chairman of the board of directors an additional chairman's fee of $250 for each board meeting attended. On July 19, 2010, the board of directors voted to reduce the directors' fees
through December 31, 2010 by 10%, to $450 for each board meeting attended, $225 for each committee meeting attended and $225 for the chairman's fee. On December 20, 2010, the board

82

---



of
directors voted to extend the 10% reduction in fees for another six months and to readdress the issue at the scheduled July board meeting.

Name

Fees
Earned
or Paid
in Cash
($)

Option
Awards
($)

Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation
($)

Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
($)

All Other
Compensation
($)(1)

Total
($)Michael W. Burrell


9,600














9,600John N. Cagle, III, DMD(2)


14,950














14,950Alan D. Clemmons


12,725











1,141


13,866John W. Gandy, CPA


11,950











1,053


13,003J. Louis Grant, CPA


14,875











1,037


15,912John T. Parker, Jr.


10,950














10,950Mary V. Propes


9,400














9,400Tanya D. Robinson


9,850














9,850Larry W. Tarleton


14,325














14,325


(1)These
amounts represent the dollar amount paid to directors for mileage reimbursement.(2)Dr. Cagle
resigned from the board of directors on January 11, 2011.


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

Our equity compensation plan information is included under Item 5 of Part II of this Form 10-K.

83

---





SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN  BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT

General

The following table shows owners of more than 5% of our outstanding common stock, as of March 1, 2011.

Name and Address

Number of
Shares Owned

Right to
Acquire

Percentage of
Beneficial Ownership(5)Endicott Management Company(1)


421,751





9.86
%Service Capital Partners LP(2)


415,000





9.70
%Financial Stocks Capital Partners LP(3)


300,000





7.01
%Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. (ESOP)(4)


273,149





6.39
%


(1)623
Fifth Avenue, Suite 3104, New York, NY 10022(2)1700
Pacific Avenue, Suite 2000, Dallas, TX 75201(3)441
Vine Street, Cincinnati, OH 45202(4)875
Lowcountry Blvd, Mount Pleasant, SC 29464(5)The
calculations are based on 4,277,176 shares of common stock outstanding on March 1, 2011.


The
following tables show how much common stock in our company is owned by the directors, the named executive officers and the directors and executive officers as a group, as of
March 1, 2011.

Name

Number of
Shares Owned(1)

Right to
Acquire

Percentage of
Beneficial OwnershipJames M. (Jim) Bedsole


6,919





0.16
%Michael W. Burrell(1)


35,168





0.82
%Alan D. Clemmons


62,120





1.45
%Robert E. (Chip) Coffee, Jr.(1)(a)


130,309





3.05
%John W. Gandy, CPA


8,125





0.19
%J. Louis Grant, CPA


40,292





0.94
%Alan W. Jackson, CPA


11,398





0.27
%Thomas H. Lyles


48,101





1.12
%Robert H. (Bobby) Mathewes, Jr.(1)(b)


12,066





0.28
%John T. Parker, Jr.


29,867





0.70
%Mary V. Propes


4,500





0.11
%Tanya D. Robinson


11,300





0.26
%Milon C. Smith


8,068





0.19
%Larry W. Tarleton


28,584





0.67
%Executive officers and directors as a group (14 persons)


436,817





10.21
%


(1)Includes
shares for which the named person has sole voting and investment power, has shared voting and investment power, or holds in an IRA or other
retirement plan program or allocated ESOP shares, unless otherwise indicated in these footnotes. To the company's knowledge, each person has sole voting and investment power, has shared voting and
investment power, or holds in an IRA or other retirement plan program the


84

---



securities
shown as beneficially owned by the person, except for the following shares which the individual has reported as indirectly owned:

(a)23,750
shares are indirectly owned by spouse, held in trust.(b)100
shares are indirectly owned by spouse. (2)The
calculations are based on 4,277,176 shares of common stock outstanding on March 1, 2011.


Item 13.    Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence.

Interests of Management and Others in Certain Transactions

We make loans and enter into other transactions in the ordinary course of business with our directors and officers and their
affiliates. As of December 31, 2010, these borrowings totaled $14.2 million. It is our policy that these loans and other transactions be made in the ordinary course of business, on
substantially the same terms (including price or interest rates and collateral) as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with unrelated parties. We do not expect these transactions
to involve more than the normal risk of collectibility nor present other unfavorable features to us. Loans to individual directors and officers must also comply with our lending policies and statutory
lending limits, and directors with a personal interest in any loan application are excluded from the consideration of the loan application. Our policy is that all of our transactions with our
affiliates will be on terms no less favorable to us than could be obtained from an unaffiliated third party and will be approved by a majority of disinterested directors.

Director
John W. Gandy is a 50% partner in Office Developers, LLC, which is the owner of an office building located at 1312 Professional Drive in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina in
which Tidelands Bank is a tenant and is leasing the site for a period of 20 years. The monthly rent under the lease is $12,500 per month. We believe the terms to be no less favorable to us than
could be obtained from an unaffiliated third party.

Independence

Our board of directors has determined that Michael W. Burrell, Alan D. Clemmons, John W. Gandy, J. Louis Grant, John T. Parker, Jr.,
Mary V. Propes, Tanya D. Robinson and Larry W. Tarleton are "independent" directors, based upon the independence criteria set forth in the corporate governance listing standards of The NASDAQ Global
Market, the exchange that we selected in order to determine whether our directors and committee members meet the independence criteria of a national securities exchange, as required by
Item 407(a) of Regulation S-K. All members of our compensation, nominating and corporate governance, and audit committees are independent.

Item 14.    Principal Accounting Fees and Services.

The following table shows the fees that we paid or expect to pay to Elliott Davis, LLC for services performed in fiscal years
ended December 31, 2010 and 2009:

Year Ended
December 31, 2010

Year Ended
December 31, 2009Audit Fees

$
92,100

$
90,197Audit-Related Fees


33,000


Tax Fees


10,690


10,785All Other Fees





Total

$
135,790

$
100,982


85

---



Audit Fees.This category includes the aggregate fees billed or to be billed for each of the last two fiscal years for professional
services rendered
by Elliott Davis, LLC for the audit of our annual financial statements and for reviews of the condensed financial statements included in our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q.

Audit-Related Fees.This category includes the aggregate fees billed for non-audit services, exclusive of the fees disclosed relating
to
audit fees, rendered by Elliott Davis, LLC during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009. The fees for 2010 were for services provided related to the
Form S-1 filing, including the issuance of a comfort letter thereon. No such services were rendered during 2009.

Tax Fees.This category includes the aggregate fees billed or to be billed for tax services rendered by Elliott Davis, LLC for the
fiscal
years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009. These services include preparation of state and federal tax returns for the company and its subsidiary and miscellaneous tax research and assistance.

All Other Fees.This category includes the aggregate fees billed for all other services, exclusive of the fees disclosed above,
rendered by Elliott
Davis, LLC during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009. No such services were rendered during either year.

Oversight of Accountants; Approval of Accounting Fees.

Under the provisions of its charter, the audit committee is responsible for the appointment, compensation, retention and oversight of
the work of the independent auditor. The charter provides that the audit committee must pre-approve the fees paid for the audit. The audit committee has delegated approval of
non-audit services and fees to the chairman of the audit committee provided that the estimated fee for any such proposed service does not exceed $15,000. The chairman is required to report
such pre-approval decisions to the full audit committee at the next scheduled meeting. The policy specifically prohibits certain non-audit services that are prohibited by
securities laws from being provided by an independent auditor.

All
of the accounting services and fees reflected in the table above were reviewed and approved by the audit committee, and none of the services were performed by individuals who were
not employees of the independent auditor.

86

---





PART IV

Item 15.    Exhibits.

3.1.

Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 16, 2008).3.2

Articles of Amendment to the Company's Restated Articles of Incorporation establishing the terms of the Series T Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference as Exhibit 3.1 to the Company's Form 8-K filed
on December 19, 2008).3.3.

Articles of Amendment to the Company's Restated Articles of Incorporation increasing the authorized shares of common stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.3 of the Company's Form S-1/A filed on
April 21, 2010).3.4

Amended and Restated Bylaws of Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 16, 2008).4.1.

See Exhibits 3.1 - 3.4 for provisions in Tidelands Bancshares, Inc.'s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws defining the rights of holders of the common stock.4.2.

Form of certificate of common stock (incorporated by reference as Exhibit 4.2 to the Company's Form SB-2 filed with the SEC, File No. 333-97035).4.3

Warrant to Purchase up to 571,821 shares of Common Stock (incorporated by reference as Exhibit 4.1 to the Company's Form 8-K filed on December 19, 2008).4.4

Form of certificate of Series T Preferred Stock Certificate (incorporated by reference as Exhibit 4.2 to the Company's Form 8-K filed on December 19, 2008).4.5

Indenture between Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. and Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee dated as of June 20, 2008 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on June 26, 2008).4.6

Junior Subordinated Indenture between Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. and Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee dated as of February 22, 2006 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company's Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on dated February 28, 2006).10.1

Lease Agreement between Savings Associates and Tidelands Bank (incorporated by reference as Exhibit 10.1 to the Company's Form 10-KSB filed with the SEC for the period ended December 31,
2004).10.2

Employment Agreement of Robert H. Mathewes Jr. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.3

Employment Agreement of Robert E. Coffee Jr. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.4

Employment Agreement of Alan W. Jackson (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.5

Employment Agreement of Thomas H. Lyles (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.6

Employment Agreement of Milon C. Smith (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.7

Employment Agreement of James M. Bedsole (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6 of the Company's Form 10-K filed on February 26, 2010).


87

---



10.8

Salary Continuation Agreement of Robert E. Coffee Jr. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.14 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.9

Salary Continuation Agreement of Robert H. Mathewes Jr. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.10

Salary Continuation Agreement of Alan W. Jackson (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.11

Salary Continuation Agreement of Thomas H. Lyles (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.12

Salary Continuation Agreement of Milon C. Smith (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.13

Salary Continuation Agreement of James M. Bedsole (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 of the Company's Form 10-K filed on February 26, 2010).10.14

Endorsement Split Dollar Agreement of Robert E. Coffee Jr. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.19 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.15

Endorsement Split Dollar Agreement of Robert H. Mathewes Jr. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.20 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.16

Endorsement Split Dollar Agreement of Alan W. Jackson (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.17

Endorsement Split Dollar Agreement of Thomas H. Lyles (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.18

Endorsement Split Dollar Agreement of Milon C. Smith (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.23 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 7, 2008).10.19

Endorsement Split Dollar Agreement of James M. Bedsole (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18 of the Company's Form 10-K filed on February 26, 2010).10.20

Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust among Tidelands Bancshares, Inc., as sponsor, Wilmington Trust Company, as institutional trustee, Wilmington Trust Company, as Delaware trustee, and the Administrators
named therein (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 26, 2008).10.21

Guarantee Agreement between Tidelands Bancshares, Inc., as guarantor, and Wilmington Trust Company, as guarantee trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of the Company's Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on June 26, 2008).10.22

Amended and Restated Trust Agreement among Tidelands Bancshares, Inc., as depositor, Wilmington Trust Company, as property trustee, Wilmington Trust Company, as Delaware trustee, and the administrative trustees
named therein, including exhibits containing the related forms of the Tidelands Statutory Trust I Common Securities Certificate and the Preferred Securities Certificate (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company's Form 8-K
filed on February 28, 2006).10.23

Guarantee Agreement between Tidelands Bancshares, Inc., as guarantor, and Wilmington Trust Company, as guarantee trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company's Form 8-K filed on
February 28, 2006).


88

---



10.24

Letter Agreement, dated December 19, 2008, including Securities Purchase AgreementStandard Terms incorporated by reference therein, between the Company and the United States Department of the Treasury
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company's Form 8-K filed on December 19, 2008).10.25

Form of Waiver, executed by each of Messrs. Robert E. Coffee, Jr., Alan W. Jackson, Thomas H. Lyles, Milon C. Smith, and Robert H. Mathewes, Jr. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the
Company's Form 8-K filed on December 19, 2008).10.26

Form of Letter Agreement, executed by each of Messrs. Robert E. Coffee, Jr., Alan W. Jackson, Thomas H. Lyles, Milon C. Smith, and Robert H. Mathewes, Jr. with the Company (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.3 to the Company's Form 8-K filed on December 19, 2008).10.27

Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. 2004 Stock Incentive Plan and Form of Stock Option Agreement (Amendment No .1) as adopted by the Board of Directors November 20, 2006 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 of the Company's Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007)10.28

Amendment No. 2 to the 2004 Stock Incentive Plan for Tidelands Bancshares, Inc. as adopted by the Board of Directors October 20, 2008 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16 of the Company's
Form 10-K filed on March 30, 2009).10.29

Standard Form of Agreement between Tidelands Bank and Hill Construction dated November 17, 2009 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.29 of the Company's Form 10-K filed on February 26,
2010).10.30

Consent Order, effective December 28, 2010, between the FDIC, the South Carolina State Board of Financial Institutions, and Tidelands Bank (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the Company's
Form 8-K filed on December 30, 2010).21.1

Subsidiaries of the Company.23

Consent of Independent Public Accounting Firm.24

Power of Attorney (contained on the signature page hereof).31.1

Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief Executive Officer.31.2

Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief Financial Officer.32

Section 1350 Certifications.99.1

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 111(b)(4) of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.99.2

Certification of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 111(b)(4) of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.


89

---





SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this
report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

TIDELANDS BANCSHARES, INC.Date: February 21, 2011

By:

/s/ ROBERT E. COFFEE, JR. Robert E. Coffee, Jr. President and Chief Executive Officer


KNOW
ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears below constitutes and appoints Robert E. Coffee, Jr., his true and lawful
attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign any and all
amendments to this Form 10-K, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting
unto attorney-in-fact and agent full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite or necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to
all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that attorney-in-fact and agent, or his substitute or substitutes, may lawfully
do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on
the dates indicated.

Signature

Title

Date/s/ MICHAEL W. BURRELL Michael W. Burrell

Director

February 21, 2011/s/ ALAN D. CLEMMONS Alan D. Clemmons

Director

February 21, 2011/s/ ROBERT E. COFFEE, JR. Robert E. Coffee, Jr.

Director, President, and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)

February 21, 2011/s/ JOHN W. GANDY John W. Gandy

Director

February 21, 2011/s/ J. LOUIS GRANT J. Louis Grant

Director

February 21, 2011


90

---



Signature

Title

Date/s/ ALAN W. JACKSON Alan W. Jackson

Principal Accounting and Chief Financial Officer

February 21, 2011/s/ JOHN T. PARKER, JR. John T. Parker, Jr.

Director

February 21, 2011/s/ MARY V. PROPES Mary V. Propes

Director

February 21, 2011/s/ TANYA D. ROBINSON Tanya D. Robinson

Director

February 21, 2011/s/ LARRY W. TARLETON Larry W. Tarleton

Director

February 21, 2011


91

---





Exhibit List

21.1

Subsidiaries of the Company.23

Consent of Independent Public Accounting Firm.24

Power of Attorney (contained on the signature page hereof).31.1

Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief Executive Officer.31.2

Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief Financial Officer.32

Section 1350 Certifications.99.1

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 111(b)(4) of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.99.2

Certification of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 111(b)(4) of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.


---