FHN First Horizon Corporation

Notes to the Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements (Unaudited)

Note 1 – Financial Information

Basis of Accounting. The unaudited interim consolidated condensed financial statements of First Horizon National Corporation (“FHN”), including its subsidiaries, have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and follow general practices within the industries in which it operates. This preparation requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. These estimates and assumptions are based on information available as of the date of the financial statements and could differ from actual results. In the opinion of management, all necessary adjustments have been made for a fair presentation of financial position and results of operations for the periods presented. These adjustments are of a normal recurring nature unless otherwise disclosed in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. The operating results for the interim 2016 periods are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected going forward. For further information, refer to the audited consolidated financial statements in Exhibit 13 to FHN’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015.

Summary of Accounting Changes. Effective January 1, 2016, FHN early adopted the provisions of ASU 2016-05, “Effect of Derivative Contract Novations on Existing Hedge Accounting Relationships”, on a prospective basis. ASU 2016-05 clarifies that a change in the counterparty of a derivative instrument that has been designated as the hedging instrument in an accounting hedge relationship does not, in and of itself, require dedesignation of that hedging relationship provided that all other hedge accounting criteria continue to be met. FHN considers the revised guidance to better reflect the nature of hedge accounting relationships by clarifying that, when considered solely, the counterparty is not a critical term in a hedge relationship. Because FHN has applied specific SEC staff guidance for novation (to facilitate central clearing requirements) of derivatives to prior and existing accounting hedge relationships, adoption of ASU 2016-05 had no effect on FHN.

Effective January 1, 2016, FHN early adopted the provisions of ASU 2016-06, “Contingent Put and Call Options in Debt Instruments”, which resolves diversity in practice for the bifurcation assessment when a contingent put or call option is embedded within a hybrid debt instrument. ASU 2016-06 clarifies that an entity is not required to assess whether the triggering event is related to interest rate or credit risks when performing the bifurcation analysis. FHN’s existing bifurcation assessment process conforms to the methodology outlined in ASU 2016-06.

Effective January 1, 2016, FHN adopted the provisions of ASU 2014-12, “Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period.” ASU 2014-12 requires that a performance target that affects vesting, and that could be achieved after the requisite service period, be treated as a performance condition in determining expense recognition for the award. Thus, compensation cost is recognized over the requisite service period based on the probability of achievement of the performance condition. Expense is adjusted after the requisite service period for changes in the probability of achievement. The adoption of ASU 2014-12 had no effect on FHN.

Effective January 1, 2016, FHN adopted the provisions of ASU 2015-02, “Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis.” ASU 2015-02 revises current consolidation guidance to modify the evaluation of whether limited partnerships and similar legal entities are variable interest entities. ASU 2015-02 also eliminates the presumption that a general partner should consolidate a limited partnership, revises the consolidation analysis for reporting entities that have fee arrangements and related party relationships with variable interest entities, and provides a scope exception for entities with interests in registered money market funds. FHN has evaluated the provisions of ASU 2015-02 on its consolidation assessments and there was not a significant effect upon adoption.

Effective January 1, 2016, FHN adopted the provisions of ASU 2015-03, “Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs.” ASU 2015-03 requires that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented as a direct reduction from the carrying value of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts. ASU 2015-03 requires application on a retrospective basis, with prior periods revised to reflect the effects of adoption. Consistent with prior requirements, FHN previously classified debt issuance costs within Other assets in the Consolidated Condensed Statements of Condition. The adoption of ASU 2015-03 had no effect on FHN’s recognition of interest expense. The effects of the retrospective application of the change in presentation of debt issuance costs are summarized in the table below.

7

Table of Contents

Note 1 – Financial Information (Continued)

Accounting Changes Issued but Not Currently Effective

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers.” ASU 2014-09 does not change revenue recognition for financial instruments. The core principle of ASU 2014-09 is that an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. This is accomplished through a five-step recognition framework involving 1) the identification of contracts with customers, 2) identification of performance obligations, 3) determination of the transaction price, 4) allocation of the transaction price to the performance obligations and 5) recognition of revenue as performance obligations are satisfied. Additionally, qualitative and quantitative information is required for disclosure regarding the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from contracts with customers. In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-08, “Principal versus Agent Considerations”, which provides additional guidance on whether an entity should recognize revenue on a gross or net basis, based on which party controls the specified good or service before that good or service is transferred to a customer. In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10, “Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing”, which clarifies the original guidance included in ASU 2014-09 for identification of the goods or services provided to customers and enhances the implementation guidance for licensing arrangements. ASU 2016-12, “Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients” was issued in May 2016 to provide additional guidance for the implementation and application of ASU 2014-09. The effective date of these ASUs has been deferred to annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that reporting period. Early application is permitted for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and associated interim periods. Transition to the new requirements may be made by retroactively revising prior financial statements (with certain practical expedients permitted) or by a cumulative effect through retained earnings. If the latter option is selected, additional disclosures are required for comparability. FHN is evaluating the effects of these ASUs on its revenue recognition practices.

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15, “Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern.” ASU 2014-15 requires an entity’s management to evaluate whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued. If such events or conditions exist, additional disclosures are required and management should evaluate whether its plans sufficiently alleviate the substantial doubt. ASU 2014-15 is effective for the annual period ending after December 15, 2016 and all interim and annual periods thereafter. The provisions of ASU 2014-15 are not anticipated to affect FHN.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-01, “Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities.” ASU 2016-01 makes several revisions to the accounting, presentation and disclosure for financial instruments. Equity investments (except those accounted for under the equity method or those that result in consolidation of the investee) are required to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income. An entity may elect to measure equity investments that do not have readily determinable market values at cost minus impairment, if any, plus or minus changes resulting from observable price changes in orderly transactions for the identical or similar instruments from the same issuer. ASU 2016-01 also requires a qualitative impairment review for equity investments without readily determinable fair values, with measurement at fair value required if impairment is determined to exist. For liabilities for which fair value has been elected, ASU 2016-01 revises current accounting to record the portion of fair value changes resulting from instrument-specific credit risk within other comprehensive income rather than earnings. Additionally, ASU 2016-01 clarifies that the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale securities should be assessed in combination with all other deferred tax assets rather than being assessed in isolation. ASU 2016-01 also makes several changes to existing fair value presentation and disclosure requirements, including a provision that all disclosures must use an exit price concept in the determination of fair value. ASU 2016-01 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. FHN is evaluating the impact of ASU 2016-01 on its current accounting and disclosure practices.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases” which requires a lessee to recognize in its statement of condition a liability to make lease payments (the lease liability) and a right-of-use asset representing its right to use the underlying asset for the lease term. ASU 2016-02 leaves lessor accounting largely unchanged from prior standards. For leases with a term of 12 months or less, a lessee is permitted to make an accounting policy election by class of underlying asset not to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities. If a lessee makes this election, it should recognize lease expense for such leases generally on a straight-line basis over the lease term. All other leases must be classified as financing or operating leases which depends on the relationship of the lessee’s rights to the economic value of the leased asset. For finance leases, interest on the lease liability is recognized separately from amortization of the right-of-use asset in earnings, resulting in higher expense in the earlier portion of the lease term. For operating leases, a single lease cost is calculated so that the cost of the lease is allocated over the lease term on a generally straight-line basis.

In transition to ASU 2016-02, lessees and lessors are required to recognize and measure leases at the beginning of the earliest period presented using a modified retrospective approach. The modified retrospective approach includes a number of optional practical expedients that entities may elect to apply, which would result in continuing to account for leases that commence before the effective date in accordance with previous requirements (unless the lease is modified) except that lessees are required to recognize a right-of-

8

Table of Contents

Note 1 – Financial Information (Continued)

use asset and a lease liability for all operating leases at each reporting date based on the present value of the remaining minimum rental payments that were tracked and disclosed under previous requirements. ASU 2016-02 also requires expanded qualitative and quantitative disclosures to assess the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from lease arrangements. ASU 2016-02 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. FHN is evaluating the impact of ASU 2016-02 on its current accounting and disclosure practices.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-04, “Recognition of Breakage of Certain Prepaid Stored-Value Products” which indicates that liabilities related to the sale of prepaid-stored value products are considered financial liabilities and should have a breakage estimate applied for estimated unused funds. ASU 2016-04 does not apply to stored-value products that can only be redeemed for cash, are subject to escheatment or are linked to a segregated bank account. ASU 2016-04 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. FHN is evaluating the impact of ASU 2016-04 on its current accounting and disclosure practices.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, “Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting” which makes several revisions to equity compensation accounting. Under the new guidance all excess tax benefits and deficiencies that occur when an award vests, is exercised, or expires will be recognized in income tax expense as discrete period items. Previously, these transactions were typically recorded directly within equity. Consistent with this change, excess tax benefits and deficiencies will no longer be included within estimated proceeds when performing the treasury stock method for calculation of diluted earnings per share. Excess tax benefits will also be recognized at the time an award is exercised or vests compared to the current requirement to delay recognition until the deduction reduces taxes payable. The presentation of excess tax benefits in the statement of cash flows will shift to an operating activity from the current classification as a financing activity.

ASU 2016-09 also provides an accounting policy election to recognize forfeitures of awards as they occur rather than the current requirement to estimate forfeitures from inception. Further, ASU 2016-09 permits employers to use a net-settlement feature to withhold taxes on equity compensation awards up to the maximum statutory tax rate without affecting the equity classification of the award. Under current guidance, withholding of equity awards in excess of the minimum statutory requirement results in liability classification for the entire award. The related cash remittance by the employer for employee taxes will be treated as a financing activity in the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-09 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. Transition to the new guidance will be accomplished through a combination of retrospective, cumulative-effect adjustment to equity and prospective methodologies. FHN is evaluating the impact of ASU 2016-09 on its current equity compensation accounting and disclosure practices.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, “Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments” which revises the measurement and recognition of credit losses for assets measured at amortized cost (e.g., held-to-maturity (“HTM”) loans and debt securities) and available-for-sale (“AFS”) debt securities. Under ASU 2016-13, for assets measured at amortized cost, the current expected credit loss (“CECL”) is measured as the difference between amortized cost and the net amount expected to be collected. This represents a departure from existing GAAP as the “incurred loss” methodology for recognizing credit losses delays recognition until it is probable a loss has been incurred. The measurement of current expected credit losses is based on relevant information about past events, including historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts that affect the collectability of the reported amount. Additionally, current disclosures of credit quality indicators in relation to the amortized cost of financing receivables will be further disaggregated by year of origination. ASU 2016-13 leaves the methodology for measuring credit losses on AFS debt securities largely unchanged, with the maximum credit loss representing the difference between amortized cost and fair value. However, such credit losses will be recognized through an allowance for credit losses, which permits recovery of previously recognized credit losses if circumstances change.

ASU 2016-13 also revises the recognition of credit losses for purchased financial assets with a more-than insignificant amount of credit deterioration since origination (“PCD assets”). For PCD assets the initial allowance for credit losses is added to the purchase price. Only subsequent changes in the allowance for credit losses are recorded as a credit loss expense for PCD assets. Interest income for PCD assets will be recognized based on the effective interest rate, excluding the discount embedded in the purchase price that is attributable to the acquirer’s assessment of credit losses at acquisition. Currently, credit losses for purchased credit-impaired assets are included in the initial basis of the assets with subsequent declines in credit resulting in expense while subsequent improvements in credit are reflected as an increase in the future yield from the assets.

The provisions of ASU 2016-13 will be generally be adopted through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in the year of adoption. Prospective implementation is required for debt securities for which an other-than-temporary-impairment (“OTTI”) had been previously recognized. Amounts previously recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) as of the date of adoption that relate to improvements in cash flows expected to be collected will continue to be accreted into income over the remaining life of the asset. Recoveries of amounts previously written off relating to improvements in cash flows after the date of adoption will be recorded in earnings when received. A prospective transition approach

9

Table of Contents

Note 1 – Financial Information (Continued)

will be used for existing PCD assets where upon adoption, the amortized cost basis will be adjusted to reflect the addition of the allowance for credit losses. Thus, an entity will not be required to reassess its purchased financial assets that exist as of the date of adoption to determine whether they would have met at acquisition the new criteria of more-than insignificant credit deterioration since origination. An entity will accrete the remaining noncredit discount (based on the revised amortized cost basis) into interest income at the effective interest rate at the adoption date.

ASU 2016-13 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. FHN is evaluating the impact of ASU 2016-13 on its current accounting and disclosure practices. Since the CECL methodology encompasses a “life of loan” requirement for the recognition of credit losses, the estimated amount of such losses will be larger than the estimate of probable incurred losses under current standards. The extent of this difference will be dependent upon economic considerations and loan portfolio characteristics at the time of adoption.

10

Table of Contents

Note 2 – Acquisitions and Divestitures

On October 2, 2015, FHN completed its acquisition of TrustAtlantic Financial Corporation (“TrustAtlantic Financial” or “TAF”), and its wholly-owned bank subsidiary TrustAtlantic Bank (“TAB”), for an aggregate of 5,093,657 shares of FHN common stock and $23.9 million in cash in a transaction valued at $96.7 million. Prior to the acquisition TAF and TAB were headquartered in Raleigh, North Carolina, where TAB had five branches located in the communities of Raleigh, Cary and Greenville. In relation to the acquisition, FHN acquired approximately $400 million in assets, including approximately $282 million in loans, and assumed approximately $344 million of TAB deposits. FHN recorded $45.4 million in goodwill associated with the acquisition, representing the excess of acquisition consideration over the estimated fair value of net assets acquired.

See Note 2 – Acquisitions and Divestitures in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015, for additional information about the TAF acquisition.

In second quarter 2016, FTBNA signed an agreement with GE Capital to purchase two regional groups of restaurant franchise loans totaling approximately $.6 billion. The acquired loans will be combined with existing FTBNA relationships to establish a restaurant franchise finance specialty lending business. The transaction is expected to close in third quarter 2016.

In addition to the transaction mentioned above, FHN acquires or divests assets from time to time in transactions that are considered business combination or divestitures but are not material to FHN individually or in the aggregate.

11

Table of Contents

12

Table of Contents