UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C.  20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

Commission File Number 1-6887

BANK OF HAWAII CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

1-888-643-3888

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

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  x    No  o

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Yes  o    No  x

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.

Common Stock, $.01 par value; outstanding at October 20, 2006 – 49,698,331 shares

Bank of Hawaii Corporation
Form 10-Q
INDEX

Bank of Hawaii Corporation and Subsidiaries

The accompanying notes are an integral part of the Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited).

3

Bank of Hawaii Corporation and Subsidiaries

The accompanying notes are an integral part of the Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited).

4

Bank of Hawaii Corporation and Subsidiaries

The accompanying notes are an integral part of the Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited).

5

Bank of Hawaii Corporation and Subsidiaries

The accompanying notes are an integral part of the Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited).

6

Bank of Hawaii Corporation and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)

Note 1.           Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Basis of Presentation

Bank of Hawaii Corporation and its subsidiaries (the “Company”) provides a broad range of financial products and services to customers in Hawaii and the Pacific Islands (Guam, nearby islands and American Samoa).  The Company’s principal subsidiary is Bank of Hawaii (the “Bank”).  All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements of the Company have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X.  Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by GAAP for complete financial statements.  In the opinion of management, the consolidated financial statements reflect normal recurring adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of the results for the interim periods.

Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform to current period classifications.

These statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005.  Operating results for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2006.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

In February 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”) issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 155, “Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial Instruments, an amendment of FASB Statements No. 133 and 140.”  SFAS No. 155 permits, but does not require, fair value accounting for hybrid financial instruments that contain an embedded derivative that would otherwise require bifurcation in accordance with SFAS No. 133.  SFAS No. 155 also eliminates the temporary exemption for interests in securitized financial assets provided for by SFAS No. 133, Implementation Issue D1.  As a result, the Company will be required to evaluate its interests in securitized financial assets to determine whether its interest is a free standing derivative or a hybrid financial instrument that may be subject to the bifurcation requirements of SFAS No. 133.  If the Company’s interest in a securitized financial asset is determined to contain an embedded derivative, that financial instrument is eligible to be accounted for under the fair value accounting provisions of SFAS No. 155.  SFAS No. 155 is effective for all financial instruments acquired or issued after December 31, 2006 as well as to those hybrid financial instruments that had been previously bifurcated under SFAS No. 133.  As of September 30, 2006, the Company did not have any hybrid financial instruments which were bifurcated under SFAS No. 133.  As a result, the adoption of SFAS No. 155 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations and financial condition.

7

In March 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 156, “Accounting for Servicing of Financial Assets, an amendment of FASB Statement No. 140.”  SFAS No. 156 requires all separately recognized servicing assets and liabilities to be initially measured at fair value, if practicable.  Following the initial measurement at fair value, the Company is permitted to choose to either subsequently measure servicing assets at fair value and report changes in fair value in earnings, or amortize the servicing assets in proportion to and over the period of estimated net servicing income or loss and periodically assess for impairment.  The Company expects that the after-tax cumulative-effect adjustment, as of January 1, 2007, will be to increase retained earnings by approximately $7.0 million.  The Company also expects to adopt the fair value measurement provisions of SFAS No. 156 in subsequent re-measurements of the servicing asset.

In June 2006, the FASB issued Interpretation (“FIN”) No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109.”  FIN No. 48 establishes a recognition threshold and measurement for income tax positions recognized in the Company’s financial statements in accordance with SFAS No. 109.  FIN No. 48 also prescribes a two-step evaluation process for tax positions.  The first step is recognition and the second is measurement.  In evaluating a tax position for recognition, the Company judgmentally evaluates whether it is more-likely-than-not that a tax position will be sustained upon examination, including resolution of related appeals or litigation processes, based on the technical merits of the position.  If the tax position meets the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold, the tax position is measured and recognized in the Company’s financial statements as the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate resolution.  As required by the provisions of FIN No. 48, the Company plans to adopt the provisions of the Interpretation on January 1, 2007.  Management is currently evaluating the effect that the provisions of FIN No. 48 will have on the Company’s results of operations and financial condition.

In July 2006, the FASB issued Staff Position (“FSP”) No. 13-2 “Accounting for a Change or Projected Change in the Timing of Cash Flows Relating to Income Taxes Generated by a Leveraged Lease Transaction,” which amends SFAS No. 13.  Under the provisions of FSP No. 13-2, a material revision in the timing of expected cash flows of a leveraged lease requires a recalculation of the original lease assumptions.  As required by the provisions of FSP No. 13-2, the Company plans to adopt the provisions of this Staff Position on January 1, 2007 by recording an after-tax cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings for any leases that have been determined to have an expected change in the timing of cash flows.  After adoption, a subsequent change in the assumption of expected cash flows that results in a change in the net investment of a leveraged lease shall be recorded as a gain or loss in the period in which the assumption is changed.  The Company has entered into one leveraged lease transaction known as a Lease In/Lease Out (“LILO”) and five Sale In/Lease Out (“SILO”) transactions that are currently under review by the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”).  The IRS review of the LILO transaction has progressed further than the review of the SILO transactions. The outcome of these reviews may change the expected timing of cash flows from these leases which would subject these leases to the provisions of FSP No. 13-2.  Based on current discussions with the IRS, the estimated after-tax cumulative-effect reduction to retained earnings as of January 1, 2007 could be as much as $5.0 million for the LILO and as much as $18.0 million for the SILOs.

8

In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans, an amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R).”  This standard requires the Company to recognize in its statement of condition an asset for a plan’s overfunded status or a liability for a plan’s underfunded status.  The Company has two pension plans and a postretirement benefit plan (the “Plans”) which are subject to the provisions of SFAS No. 158.  SFAS No. 158 also requires that the Company measure the Plans’ assets and obligations that determine its funded status as of the end of the fiscal year and to recognize those changes in the year in which the changes occur as a component of other comprehensive income, net of taxes.  The adoption of SFAS No. 158, effective December 31, 2006, is expected to result in an addition to other comprehensive income, net of tax, of between $2.0 million and $6.0 million.

In September 2006, the FASB ratified the consensus reached by the Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) on Issue No. 06-5, “Accounting for Purchases of Life Insurance — Determining the Amount That Could Be Realized in Accordance with FASB Technical Bulletin No. 85-4, Accounting for Purchases of Life Insurance.”  FASB Technical Bulletin No. 85-4 requires that the amount that could be realized under the insurance contract as of the date of the statement of financial position should be reported as an asset.  Since the issuance of FASB Technical Bulletin No. 85-4, there has been diversity in practice in the calculation of the amount that could be realized under insurance contracts.  EITF Issue No. 06-5, which is effective January 1, 2007, concludes that the Company should consider any additional amounts (e.g., cash stabilization reserves and deferred acquisition cost taxes) included in the contractual terms of the insurance policy other than the cash surrender value in determining the amount that could be realized in accordance with FASB Technical Bulletin No. 85-4.  The adoption of EITF Issue No. 06-5 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations and financial condition.

Note 2.           Recently-Enacted Legislation

In May 2006, the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act (“TIPRA”) was enacted by Congress effective January 1, 2007, which resulted in the repeal of the exclusion from federal income taxation of a portion of the income from foreign sales corporations.  The Company has two leveraged leases that were affected by this legislation.  SFAS No. 13, “Accounting for Leases,” requires that the cumulative-effect of a change in a significant assumption affecting the net income recorded over the entire term of a lease, such as a change in tax law, be recognized as a cumulative-effect adjustment to the lease in the period in which the change occurs.  Accordingly, during the second quarter of 2006, the Company recorded a charge of $8.8 million to reflect the cumulative-effect of the change in tax law.  The charge was comprised of a $0.6 million reduction of lease interest income and an increase of $8.2 million in the provision for income taxes.  TIPRA is not expected to materially increase the Company’s provision for income taxes in future periods.

9

Note 3.           Share-Based Compensation

The Company adopted SFAS No. 123(R), “Share-Based Payment,” on January 1, 2006 using the “modified prospective” method.  Under this method, stock-based awards that are granted, modified, or settled after December 31, 2005, are measured and accounted for in accordance with SFAS No. 123(R).  Also under this method, expense is recognized for unvested awards that were granted prior to January 1, 2006, based upon the fair value determined at the grant date under SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.”  Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R), the Company accounted for share-based compensation under the intrinsic value method as permitted by APB Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees” and related interpretations.  Accordingly, the Company previously recognized no compensation expense for employee stock options that were granted with an exercise price equal to the fair value of the underlying common stock on the date of grant.

The following table illustrates the effect on net income and earnings per share if the Company had applied the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123(R) in 2005.

1    Prior period amounts restated to account for forfeitures and adjustment to dividend yield calculations.

2    A Black-Scholes option pricing model was used to determine the fair value of the options granted.

There was no material impact to the Company’s income before provision for income taxes and net income from the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) on January 1, 2006.  Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R), the Company presented all tax benefits of deductions resulting from the exercise of stock options and the vesting of restricted stock as operating cash flows in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.  SFAS No. 123(R) requires that the cash flows from the tax benefits resulting from tax deductions in excess of the compensation expense recognized for those stock options and restricted stock (excess tax benefits) to be reported as financing cash flows.  An excess tax benefit of approximately $5.4 million is classified as financing cash inflows for the nine months ended September 30, 2006.

Employee and director share-based compensation expense recognized for stock options and restricted stock was $4.0 million and $4.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2005, respectively.  The related income tax benefit recognized was $1.7 million and $1.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2005, respectively.

10

Director Stock Compensation Program

The Company has a Director Stock Compensation Program that annually grants shares of restricted common stock (“Restricted Shares”) and stock options to purchase common shares to each non-employee director.  The exercise price of the stock options is based on the closing market price of the shares on the date that the options are granted.  The Restricted Shares and the stock options are generally not transferable.  The total number of shares authorized for awards under the Director Stock Compensation Program was 471,900 as of September 30, 2006.

Stock options granted in 2005 and 2006 vest ratably over three years and expire at the earliest of 1) three months after termination of the director’s membership on the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) for any reason other than death or disability; 2) one year after termination of the director’s membership on the Board due to death or disability; or 3) ten years after the date of grant.  The Restricted Shares vest after three years or upon death or disability, if earlier.

Stock options granted prior to 2005 are immediately exercisable and expire ten years from the date of grant. However, the shares received upon exercise of the stock options (“Option Shares”) are restricted.  The restriction period for both Restricted Shares and Option Shares continues as long as the director remains on the Board.  If an optionee ceases to serve as a director prior to the end of his or her term, for any reason other than death, disability or change in control of the Company, the Option Shares will be redeemed by the Company at the exercise price and any unexercised options and restricted shares are forfeited.  As of September 30, 2006, there were 214,571 stock options and 28,263 Restricted Shares outstanding under this program.

Employee Stock Option Plans

The Company’s employee stock option plans are shareholder approved and administered by the Compensation Committee of the Board.  Awards under the employee stock option plans may include stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock and restricted stock units.  The total number of shares authorized for awards under the 2004 Employee Stock Option Plan is 1.7 million as of September 30, 2006.

Stock Options

Stock options provide grantees the option to purchase shares of common stock at a specified exercise price and, generally, expire ten years from the date of grant.  Stock option grants include incentive and nonqualified stock options whose vesting may be based on a service period and/or Company performance measures.  Generally, options granted prior to December 2005 had vesting terms of one or three years.  Options granted in December 2005 and in prior years were fully vested as of December 31, 2005.  The exercise prices were equal to the fair value of the shares on the dates the options were granted.  The Company recognizes compensation expense, measured as the fair value of the stock option on the date of grant, on a straight-line basis over the vesting period.

The fair value of each stock option award is estimated on the date of grant using a Black-Scholes option pricing model that uses the assumptions noted in the following table.  Expected volatilities are based on the historical volatility of the Company’s common stock over the expected term of the options, excluding the interim years 2000-2003.  The Company uses historical data to estimate option exercise and employee termination within the option pricing model.  The expected term of stock options granted is derived from the output of the option pricing model and represents the period of time that stock options granted are expected to be outstanding.  The risk-free rate for periods within the contractual life of the stock option is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the date of grant.

11

The following table presents the activity related to stock options under all plans for the nine months ended September 30, 2006.

The total intrinsic value (i.e., the amount by which the fair value of the underlying common stock exceeds the exercise price of a stock option on exercise date) of stock options exercised during the nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2005 were $10.8 million and $15.2 million, respectively.

Cash received from stock option exercises for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2005 were $16.3 million and $15.1 million, respectively.  The tax benefit realized for the deductions related to the stock option exercises were $4.2 million and $5.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2005, respectively.

The Company reissues treasury stock to satisfy stock option exercises.

Restricted Stock

Restricted Stock provides grantees with rights to shares of common stock upon completion of a service period or achievement of Company performance measures.  During the restriction period, all shares are considered outstanding and dividends are paid on the Restricted Stock.  The Restricted Stock vests over periods ranging from three to ten years from the date of grant, although accelerated vesting was provided for in certain grants, based on the attainment of defined Company performance measures.  The Company recognizes compensation expense, measured as the quoted market price of the Restricted Stock on the date of grant, on a straight-line basis over the vesting period for service period vesting, plus additional recognition of the costs associated with accelerated vesting based upon projected attainment of Company performance measures.  Restricted Stock is forfeited if an employee terminates prior to vesting.

As of September 30, 2006, unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested Restricted Stock was $7.0 million.  The cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 2.2 years.  The total grant date fair value of Restricted Stock which vested during the nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2005 was $4.0 million and $5.2 million, respectively.

12

The following table presents the activity for Restricted Stock for the nine months ended September 30, 2006.

Restricted Stock Units

Restricted Stock Units (“RSUs”) entitle grantees to a cash payment based upon the fair value of the Company’s common stock at the time the award vests.  During the vesting period, the participant is entitled to dividend equivalent payments equal to dividends declared on the Company’s common stock.  Expenses associated with RSUs are considered share-based compensation expense and are recognized over the vesting period.  The primary RSU grant was made in 2003.  Under this grant, with the achievement of certain performance objectives, 50% of the grant vested April 30, 2004 and the remaining 50% vested March 31, 2005.  For certain grantees, the original award is supplemented with additional RSUs after the original vesting period, based upon the achievement of certain additional performance objectives.  Total expense recognized by the Company for RSUs for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2005 was $0.4 million and $1.5 million, respectively.

The following table presents the activity for RSUs for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2005.

Note 4.           Business Segments

The Company’s business segments are defined as Retail Banking, Commercial Banking, Investment Services Group, and Treasury and Other Corporate.  The Company’s internal management accounting process measures the performance of the business segments based on the management structure of the Company.  This process, which is not necessarily comparable with similar information for any other financial institution, uses various techniques to assign balance sheet and income statement amounts to the business segments, including allocations of interest income, expense overhead, the provision for credit losses and capital.  This process is dynamic and requires certain allocations based on judgment and other subjective factors.  Unlike financial accounting, there is no comprehensive, authoritative guidance for management accounting that is equivalent to GAAP.  Previously reported results have been reclassified to conform to the current organizational reporting structure.

13

Selected financial information for each segment is presented below for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2005.