Harold Carpenter: Yes. I think the increase in the consumer real estate allocation is primarily related to the macro case and the duration of those assets. So we’re not going to argue about whether or not we’re a big fan of CECL or not, but at the end of the day, when rates go up and those assets extend out, then the CECL model automatically penalizes those loans and the decisions you made on those loans back several years ago. Does that make sense to you, Brandon?
Brandon King: Yes. So nothing kind of qualitative here, just purely quantitative?
Harold Carpenter: To be honest, I can’t remember the last time we had any kind of loss on a one to four residential fixed rate mortgage.
Operator: The next question is coming from Catherine Mealor from KBW.
Catherine Mealor: I want to circle back to the margin and extend just your thoughts into next year. And it’s helpful to think about — or you’ve given guidance that you think NII is still flat to up in the back half of the year. But as we think about ’24, and let’s just say we get a hike in July and then we’re at that level of Fed funds, but we don’t get rate cuts as we move into next year, how do you think about how your NII might look next year in kind of a higher for longer scenario?
Harold Carpenter: Yes. Well, I think one big factor in that assumption would be what does the intermediate long end of the curve do. As you know, no banker is a fan of an inverted curve. And so it’s going to require a lot more work on our part in front of our sales force and how we price with clients and all that sort of stuff. So far, we don’t think credit is going to be we don’t see that moving going into 2024. We think we’re well positioned there. But as far as our ability to grow net interest income in kind of a mid-teens level, it would be very hard as we look at 2024. But it all depends on what we believe is going to happen at the intermediate and long end of the curve.
Catherine Mealor: And as you get to a point where you think your NII growth might pull back to maybe the low teens, maybe the high single-digit kind of pace in that scenario, how quickly do you think you’ll reconsider the expense growth going into next year to be at a lower pace count like what we saw this quarter?
Harold Carpenter: Yes, that’s a great question. We’ll have to consider a lot of things going into the expense book next year. One would be replenishment of our incentive costs whatever that ends up being for 2023 and going back to trying to figure out how to achieve a full incentive again next year. And then where we are with respect to hiring. We’re — today, we are, call it, very conservative on our — what we would call our support level positions. We’re not — as far as revenue producers, we still are out there actively looking for revenue producers. We’ve asked our support units to kind of hold it in and do what they need to do in order to meet whatever objectives they have internally, but not to get it on their hiring. I’ll just leave it with that, Catherine.
Catherine Mealor: Okay. Yes, that’s great. That’s very helpful. And then maybe just one follow-up on credit. It seems like the guidance — it feels like loan growth should still be strong, but slow a little bit in the back half of the year relative to the first half. And it didn’t feel like you expect a big increase in the reserve ratio, maybe just modest. And so is it fair to assume outside of some unexpected change in what you’re seeing on the credit front that the absolute dollar number of the provision expense should be lower in the back half of the year relative to the $30-some million number we saw this quarter?
