e10vq
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
FORM 10-Q
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to .
Commission File No. 000-26719
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Michigan
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
38-3360865
(IRS Employer Identification No.) |
310 Leonard Street, NW, Grand Rapids, MI 49504
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
(616) 406-3000
(Registrants 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 þ 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 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 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer o
|
|
Accelerated filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
Smaller reporting company þ |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act).
Yes o No þ
At May 9, 2011, there were 8,605,046 shares of Common Stock outstanding.
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page No. |
|
PART I. Financial Information |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 1. Financial Statements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets -
March 31, 2011 (Unaudited) and December 31, 2010 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Operations -
Three Months Ended March 31, 2011 (Unaudited) and
March 31, 2010 (Unaudited) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders Equity -
Three Months Ended March 31, 2011 (Unaudited) and
March 31, 2010 (Unaudited) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows -
Three Months Ended March 31, 2011 (Unaudited) and
March 31, 2010 (Unaudited) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk |
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 4. Controls and Procedures |
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART II. Other Information |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 1. Legal Proceedings |
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 1A. Risk Factors |
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds |
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities |
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 4. Reserved |
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 5. Other Information |
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 6. Exhibits |
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signatures |
|
|
63 |
|
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
|
(Audited) |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks |
|
$ |
11,277,000 |
|
|
$ |
6,674,000 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
9,543,000 |
|
|
|
9,600,000 |
|
Federal funds sold |
|
|
56,068,000 |
|
|
|
47,924,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
76,888,000 |
|
|
|
64,198,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities available for sale |
|
|
207,321,000 |
|
|
|
220,830,000 |
|
Federal Home Loan Bank stock |
|
|
14,345,000 |
|
|
|
14,345,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans |
|
|
1,206,886,000 |
|
|
|
1,262,630,000 |
|
Allowance for loan losses |
|
|
(42,118,000 |
) |
|
|
(45,368,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans, net |
|
|
1,164,768,000 |
|
|
|
1,217,262,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premises and equipment, net |
|
|
27,518,000 |
|
|
|
27,873,000 |
|
Bank owned life insurance |
|
|
47,182,000 |
|
|
|
46,743,000 |
|
Accrued interest receivable |
|
|
5,885,000 |
|
|
|
5,942,000 |
|
Other real estate owned and repossessed assets |
|
|
15,884,000 |
|
|
|
16,675,000 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
17,144,000 |
|
|
|
18,553,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,576,935,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,632,421,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest-bearing |
|
$ |
136,025,000 |
|
|
$ |
112,944,000 |
|
Interest-bearing |
|
|
1,117,619,000 |
|
|
|
1,160,888,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
|
1,253,644,000 |
|
|
|
1,273,832,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
80,821,000 |
|
|
|
116,979,000 |
|
Federal Home Loan Bank advances |
|
|
65,000,000 |
|
|
|
65,000,000 |
|
Subordinated debentures |
|
|
32,990,000 |
|
|
|
32,990,000 |
|
Other borrowed money |
|
|
11,733,000 |
|
|
|
11,804,000 |
|
Accrued interest and other liabilities |
|
|
5,933,000 |
|
|
|
5,880,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
1,450,121,000 |
|
|
|
1,506,485,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, no par value; 1,000,000 shares authorized;
21,000 shares outstanding at March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 |
|
|
20,138,000 |
|
|
|
20,077,000 |
|
Common
stock, no par value; 20,000,000 shares authorized; 8,601,117 shares
outstanding at March 31, 2011 and 8,597,993 shares outstanding at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
172,732,000 |
|
|
|
172,677,000 |
|
Common stock warrant |
|
|
1,138,000 |
|
|
|
1,138,000 |
|
Retained earnings (deficit) |
|
|
(67,693,000 |
) |
|
|
(68,781,000 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
499,000 |
|
|
|
825,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
126,814,000 |
|
|
|
125,936,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
1,576,935,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,632,421,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
1
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Interest income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans, including fees |
|
$ |
16,732,000 |
|
|
$ |
20,406,000 |
|
Securities, taxable |
|
|
1,916,000 |
|
|
|
1,983,000 |
|
Securities, tax-exempt |
|
|
475,000 |
|
|
|
760,000 |
|
Federal funds sold |
|
|
30,000 |
|
|
|
31,000 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
6,000 |
|
|
|
9,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest income |
|
|
19,159,000 |
|
|
|
23,189,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
4,634,000 |
|
|
|
6,497,000 |
|
Short-term borrowings |
|
|
161,000 |
|
|
|
344,000 |
|
Federal Home Loan Bank advances |
|
|
606,000 |
|
|
|
1,696,000 |
|
Other borrowings |
|
|
309,000 |
|
|
|
346,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest expense |
|
|
5,710,000 |
|
|
|
8,883,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
|
13,449,000 |
|
|
|
14,306,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan losses |
|
|
2,200,000 |
|
|
|
8,400,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income after provision for loan losses |
|
|
11,249,000 |
|
|
|
5,906,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service charges on accounts |
|
|
422,000 |
|
|
|
466,000 |
|
Earnings on bank owned life insurance |
|
|
439,000 |
|
|
|
411,000 |
|
Rental income from other real estate owned |
|
|
186,000 |
|
|
|
401,000 |
|
Mortgage banking activities |
|
|
132,000 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
Net gain on sales of securities |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
476,000 |
|
Gain on sales of commercial loans |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
220,000 |
|
Other income |
|
|
573,000 |
|
|
|
581,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest income |
|
|
1,752,000 |
|
|
|
2,655,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and benefits |
|
|
4,371,000 |
|
|
|
4,665,000 |
|
Occupancy |
|
|
701,000 |
|
|
|
750,000 |
|
Furniture and equipment depreciation, rent and maintenance |
|
|
303,000 |
|
|
|
409,000 |
|
Nonperforming asset costs |
|
|
3,098,000 |
|
|
|
2,504,000 |
|
FDIC insurance costs |
|
|
916,000 |
|
|
|
1,186,000 |
|
Other expense |
|
|
2,192,000 |
|
|
|
2,120,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest expenses |
|
|
11,581,000 |
|
|
|
11,634,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before federal income tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
1,420,000 |
|
|
|
(3,073,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal income tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(430,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
|
1,420,000 |
|
|
|
(2,643,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock dividends and accretion |
|
|
332,000 |
|
|
|
320,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to common shares |
|
$ |
1,088,000 |
|
|
$ |
(2,963,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
2
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Basic earnings (loss) per share |
|
$ |
0.13 |
|
|
$ |
(0.35 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings (loss) per share |
|
$ |
0.12 |
|
|
$ |
(0.35 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends per share |
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average basic shares outstanding |
|
|
8,599,166 |
|
|
|
8,501,671 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average diluted shares outstanding |
|
|
8,884,675 |
|
|
|
8,501,671 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
3
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF
CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Preferred |
|
|
Common |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Shareholders |
|
($ in thousands) |
|
Stock |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Warrant |
|
|
(Deficit) |
|
|
Income (Loss) |
|
|
Equity |
|
Balances, January 1, 2011 |
|
$ |
20,077 |
|
|
$ |
172,677 |
|
|
$ |
1,138 |
|
|
$ |
(68,781 |
) |
|
$ |
825 |
|
|
$ |
125,936 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accretion of preferred stock |
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee stock purchase plan
(1,059 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock option exercises
(3,500 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividend reinvestment plan
(10 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(271 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(271 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income for the period from
January 1, 2011 through
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,420 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,420 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in net unrealized gain on
securities available for sale, net
of reclassifications and tax effect |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(326 |
) |
|
|
(326 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,094 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances, March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
20,138 |
|
|
$ |
172,732 |
|
|
$ |
1,138 |
|
|
$ |
(67,693 |
) |
|
$ |
499 |
|
|
$ |
126,814 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
4
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF
CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY (Continued)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Preferred |
|
|
Common |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Shareholders |
|
($ in thousands) |
|
Stock |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Warrant |
|
|
(Deficit) |
|
|
Income (Loss) |
|
|
Equity |
|
Balances, January 1, 2010 |
|
$ |
19,839 |
|
|
$ |
172,438 |
|
|
$ |
1,138 |
|
|
$ |
(54,170 |
) |
|
$ |
859 |
|
|
$ |
140,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accretion of preferred stock |
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(57 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee stock purchase plan
(3,003 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividend reinvestment plan
(687 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends
($0.01 per common share) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(264 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(264 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss for the period from January 1,
2010 through March 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,643 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,643 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in net unrealized gain on
securities available for sale, net
of reclassifications and tax effect |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
758 |
|
|
|
758 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gain on securities
transferred from held to maturity
to available for sale, net of tax effect |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification of unrealized gain on
interest rate swaps, net of tax effect |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,675 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances, March 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
19,896 |
|
|
$ |
172,493 |
|
|
$ |
1,138 |
|
|
$ |
(57,134 |
) |
|
$ |
1,827 |
|
|
$ |
138,220 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
5
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
1,420,000 |
|
|
$ |
(2,643,000 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss)
to net cash from operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
575,000 |
|
|
|
615,000 |
|
Provision for loan losses |
|
|
2,200,000 |
|
|
|
8,400,000 |
|
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
22,000 |
|
|
|
126,000 |
|
Proceeds from sales of mortgage loans held for sale |
|
|
9,703,000 |
|
|
|
7,297,000 |
|
Origination of mortgage loans held for sale |
|
|
(7,503,000 |
) |
|
|
(5,326,000 |
) |
Net gain from sales of mortgage loans held for sale |
|
|
(91,000 |
) |
|
|
(58,000 |
) |
Gain on sales of commercial loans |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(220,000 |
) |
Net gain on sale of held to maturity securities |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(476,000 |
) |
Net loss on sale and valuation write-down of foreclosed assets |
|
|
574,000 |
|
|
|
817,000 |
|
Recognition of unrealized gain on interest rate swaps |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(99,000 |
) |
Earnings on bank owned life insurance |
|
|
(439,000 |
) |
|
|
(411,000 |
) |
Net change in: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued interest receivable |
|
|
57,000 |
|
|
|
31,000 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
1,387,000 |
|
|
|
466,000 |
|
Accrued expenses and other liabilities |
|
|
(218,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,186,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash from operating activities |
|
|
7,687,000 |
|
|
|
7,333,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan originations and payments, net |
|
|
46,215,000 |
|
|
|
26,602,000 |
|
Purchases of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities available for sale |
|
|
(2,002,000 |
) |
|
|
(7,525,000 |
) |
Proceeds from: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturities, calls and repayments of available for sale securities |
|
|
15,043,000 |
|
|
|
17,958,000 |
|
Sales of held to maturity securities |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
20,452,000 |
|
Proceeds from sales of commercial loans |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
5,519,000 |
|
Proceeds from sales of foreclosed assets |
|
|
2,187,000 |
|
|
|
4,923,000 |
|
Purchases of premises and equipment, net |
|
|
(56,000 |
) |
|
|
(14,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash from investing activities |
|
|
61,387,000 |
|
|
|
67,915,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net decrease in time deposits |
|
|
(39,542,000 |
) |
|
|
(64,396,000 |
) |
Net increase in all other deposits |
|
|
19,354,000 |
|
|
|
82,978,000 |
|
Net decrease in securities sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
(36,158,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,136,000 |
) |
Net decrease in federal funds purchased |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(2,600,000 |
) |
Maturities of Federal Home Loan Bank advances |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(15,000,000 |
) |
Net decrease in other borrowed money |
|
|
(71,000 |
) |
|
|
(61,000 |
) |
Proceeds from stock option exercises |
|
|
22,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Employee stock purchase plan |
|
|
11,000 |
|
|
|
12,000 |
|
Dividend reinvestment plan |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
Payment of cash dividends on preferred stock |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(264,000 |
) |
Payment of cash dividends on common shares |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(85,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash for financing activities |
|
|
(56,384,000 |
) |
|
|
(550,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
6
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
Net change in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
12,690,000 |
|
|
|
74,698,000 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
64,198,000 |
|
|
|
21,735,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
76,888,000 |
|
|
$ |
96,433,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the period for: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
$ |
6,057,000 |
|
|
$ |
10,536,000 |
|
Federal income tax |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Noncash financing and investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfers from loans to foreclosed assets |
|
|
1,970,000 |
|
|
|
2,228,000 |
|
Preferred stock cash dividend accrued |
|
|
937,000 |
|
|
|
131,000 |
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
7
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
1. |
|
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES |
|
|
Basis of Presentation: The unaudited financial statements for the three months ended
March 31, 2011 include the consolidated results of operations of Mercantile Bank Corporation and
its consolidated subsidiaries. These subsidiaries include Mercantile Bank of Michigan (our
bank) and our banks three subsidiaries, Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company, LLC (our mortgage
company), Mercantile Bank Real Estate Co., LLC (our real estate company), and Mercantile
Insurance Center, Inc. (our insurance center). These consolidated financial statements have
been prepared in accordance with the instructions for Form 10-Q and Item 303(b) of Regulation
S-K and do not include all disclosures required by accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States of America for a complete presentation of our financial condition and results
of operations. In the opinion of management, the information reflects all adjustments
(consisting only of normal recurring adjustments) which are necessary in order to make the
financial statements not misleading and for a fair presentation of the results of operations for
such periods. The results for the period ended March 31, 2011 should not be considered as
indicative of results for a full year. For further information, refer to the consolidated
financial statements and footnotes included in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2010. |
|
|
We formed a business trust, Mercantile Bank Capital Trust I (the trust), in 2004 to issue
trust preferred securities. We issued subordinated debentures to the trust in return for the
proceeds raised from the issuance of the trust preferred securities. The trust is not
consolidated, but instead we report the subordinated debentures issued to the trust as a
liability. |
|
|
Earnings Per Share: Basic earnings per share is based on the weighted average number of
common shares and participating securities outstanding during the period. Diluted earnings per
share include the dilutive effect of additional potential common shares issuable under our
stock-based compensation plans and our common stock warrant, and are determined using the
treasury stock method. Our unvested restricted shares, which contain non-forfeitable rights to
dividends whether paid or accrued (i.e., participating securities), are included in the number
of shares outstanding for both basic and diluted earnings per share calculations. In the event
of a net loss, our unvested restricted shares are excluded from the calculation of both basic
and diluted earnings per share. |
|
|
Approximately 73,000 unvested restricted shares were included in determining both basic and
diluted earnings per share for the three months ended March 31, 2011. In addition, stock
options and a stock warrant for approximately 53,000 and 616,000 shares of common stock,
respectively, were included in determining diluted earnings per share for the three months ended
March 31, 2011. Stock options for approximately 205,000 shares of common stock were
antidilutive and not included in determining diluted earnings per share for the three months
ended March 31, 2011. |
|
|
Due to our prior year net loss, approximately 88,000 unvested restricted shares were not
included in determining both basic and diluted earnings per share for the three months ended
March 31, 2010. In addition, stock options and a stock warrant for approximately 292,000 and
616,000 shares of common stock, respectively, were antidilutive and not included in determining
diluted earnings per share for the three months ended March 31, 2010. Weighted average diluted
common shares outstanding equals the weighted average common shares outstanding during the three
months ended March 31, 2010 due to the net loss recorded during that time period. |
(Continued)
8
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
1. |
|
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) |
|
|
Allowance for Loan Losses: The allowance for loan losses (allowance) is a valuation
allowance for probable incurred credit losses. Loan losses are charged against the allowance
when we believe the uncollectability of a loan is confirmed. Subsequent recoveries, if any, are
credited to the allowance. We estimate the allowance balance required using past loan loss
experience, the nature and volume of the portfolio, information about specific borrower
situations and estimated collateral values, economic conditions and other factors. Allocations
of the allowance may be made for specific loans, but the entire allowance is available for any
loan that, in our judgment, should be charged-off. |
|
|
A loan is impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable we will be
unable to collect the scheduled payments of principal and interest when due according to the
contractual terms of the loan agreement. Factors considered in determining impairment include
payment status, collateral value and the probability of collecting scheduled principal and
interest payments when due. Loans that experience insignificant payment delays and payment
shortfalls generally are not classified as impaired. We determine the significance of payment
delays and payment shortfalls on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration all of the
circumstances surrounding the loan and the borrower, including the length of delay, the reasons
for delay, the borrowers prior payment record and the amount of the shortfall in relation to
the principal and interest owed. Impairment is measured on a loan-by-loan basis for commercial
and construction loans by either the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at
the loans effective interest rate, the loans obtainable market price or the fair value of
collateral if the loan is collateral dependent. Large groups of smaller balance homogeneous
loans are collectively evaluated for impairment. We do not separately identify individual
residential and consumer loans for impairment disclosures. |
|
|
Troubled Debt Restructurings: A loan is accounted for as a troubled debt restructuring
if we, for economic or legal reasons related to the borrowers financial condition, grant a
significant concession to the borrower that we would not otherwise consider. A troubled debt
restructuring may involve the receipt of assets from the debtor in partial or full satisfaction
of the loan, or a modification of terms such as a reduction of the stated interest rate or
balance of the loan, a reduction of accrued interest, an extension of the maturity date at a
stated interest rate lower than the current market rate for a new loan with similar risk, or
some combination of these concessions. Troubled debt restructurings generally remain
categorized as nonperforming loans until a six-month payment history has been maintained. |
|
|
Derivatives: Derivative financial instruments are recognized as assets or liabilities
at fair value. The accounting for changes in the fair value of derivatives depends on the use
of the derivatives and whether the derivatives qualify for hedge accounting. Historically, our
derivatives have consisted of interest rate swap agreements, which are used as part of our asset
and liability management to help manage interest rate risk. We do not use derivatives for
trading purposes. |
|
|
Changes in the fair value of derivatives that are designated as a hedge of the variability of
cash flows to be received on various loans and are effective are reported in other comprehensive
income. They are later reclassified into earnings in the same periods during which the hedged
transaction affects earnings and are included in the line item in which the hedged cash flows
are recorded. If hedge accounting does not apply, changes in the fair value of derivatives are
recognized immediately in current earnings as noninterest income or expense. |
(Continued)
9
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
1. |
|
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) |
|
|
If designated as a hedge, we formally document the relationship between derivatives as hedged
items, as well as the risk-management objective and the strategy for undertaking hedge
transactions. This documentation includes linking cash flow hedges to specific assets on the
balance sheet. If designated as a hedge, we also formally assess, both at the hedges inception
and on an ongoing basis, whether the derivative instruments that are used are highly effective
in offsetting changes in cash flows of the hedged items. Ineffective hedge gains and losses are
recognized immediately in current earnings as noninterest income or expense. We discontinue
hedge accounting when we determine the derivative is no longer effective in offsetting changes
in the cash flows of the hedged item, the derivative is settled or terminates, or treatment of
the derivatives as a hedge is no longer appropriate or intended. |
|
|
Adoption of New Accounting Standards: In January 2010, the Financial Accounting
Standards Board (FASB) issued ASU 2010-06, Improving Disclosure about Fair Value Measurements.
This ASU requires new disclosures on the amount and reason for transfers in and out of Level 1
and Level 2 recurring fair value measurements. The ASU also requires disclosure of activities
(i.e., on a gross basis), including purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements, in the
reconciliation of Level 3 recurring fair value measurements. The ASU clarifies existing
disclosure requirements on levels of disaggregation and disclosures about inputs and valuation
techniques. The new disclosure regarding Level 1 and Level 2 recurring fair value measurements
and clarification of existing disclosures were effective beginning January 1, 2010. Upon
adoption of those portions of the ASU in our 2010 first quarter, we began providing the required
disclosures as currently presented in Note 10. The disclosures about the reconciliation of
information in Level 3 recurring fair value measurements are required beginning January 1, 2011.
There was no effect on our fair value disclosures presented in Note 10 upon adoption of the
final portion of the ASU in our 2011 first quarter, as we currently have no Level 3 recurring
fair value measurements. |
|
|
In July 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-20, Disclosure about the Credit Quality of Financing
Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses. In order to provide greater transparency, this
ASU requires significant new disclosures on a disaggregated basis about the allowance for credit
losses (i.e., allowance for loan losses for banks) and the credit quality of financing
receivables (i.e., loans for banks). Under the ASU, a rollforward schedule of the allowance for
loan losses, with the ending allowance balance further disaggregated on the basis of the
impairment method, along with the related ending loan balance and significant purchases and
sales of loans during the period are to be disclosed by portfolio segment. Additional
disclosures are required by class of loan, including credit quality, aging of past due loans,
nonaccrual status and impairment information. Disclosure of the nature and extent of troubled
debt restructurings (TDR) that occurred during the period and their effect on the allowance
for loan losses as well as the effect on the allowance of TDRs that occurred within the prior
twelve months and that defaulted during the current reporting period will also be required. The
disclosures are to be presented at the level of disaggregation that management uses when
assessing and monitoring the loan portfolios risk and performance. The majority of disclosures
required as of the end of a reporting period were effective as of December 31, 2010. Upon
adoption of those portions of the ASU on December 31, 2010, we began providing the required end
of period disclosures as currently presented in Note 3. The disclosures about activity are
effective January 1, 2011. Upon adoption of the final portion of the ASU in our 2011 first
quarter, we began providing the required activity disclosures, with the exception of the new TDR
related disclosures, as currently presented in Note 3. In January 2011, the FASB issued ASU
2011-01, Deferral of the Effective Date of Disclosures about Troubled Debt Restructurings in
Update No. 2010-20, which temporarily deferred the effective date for disclosures related to
TDRs. |
(Continued)
10
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
1. |
|
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) |
|
|
In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-2, A Creditors Determination of Whether a Restructuring
is a Troubled Debt Restructuring, to clarify when a loan modification or restructuring is
considered a TDR. When performing this evaluation under the ASU, a creditor must use judgment
to determine whether (1) the debtor (i.e., the borrower) is experiencing financial difficulty,
and (2) the lender has granted a concession to the borrower. The ASU amends current guidance to
include indicators that a lender should consider in determining whether a borrower is
experiencing financial difficulties. It further clarifies that a borrower could be experiencing
financial difficulty even if it is not currently in default but default is probable in the
foreseeable future. With respect to whether the lender has granted a concession to the
borrower, the ASU indicates (1) a borrowers inability to access funds at a market interest rate
for debt with similar risk characteristics as the restructured debt indicates that the
modification was executed at a below-market rate and therefore may indicate a concession was
granted, (2) a modification that permanently or temporarily increases a loans contractual
interest rate does not preclude it from being considered a concession because the rate may still
be below the market interest rate for new debt with similar risk characteristics, and (3) a
modification that results in a delay in payment that is insignificant is not considered to be a
concession. The ASU also clarifies that a creditor is precluded from using the borrowers
effective interest rate test when performing this evaluation. For TDR identification and
disclosure purposes, the guidance is effective for our 2011 third quarter and is to be applied
retrospectively to modifications occurring on or after January 1, 2011 that remain outstanding
at September 30, 2011. The effect, if any, of the change in the method of calculating
impairment will be reflected in our 2011 third quarter. The ASU requires disclosure of the
total recorded investment and allowance for loan losses for newly identified TDRs, based on the
new guidance, as of September 30, 2011. Beginning in our 2011 third quarter, we are also
required to disclose the previously deferred TDR activity related disclosures required by ASU
2010-20. Although early adoption of this ASU is permitted, we plan to adopt the new guidance in
our 2011 third quarter. We do not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material effect on
our results of operations or financial position. |
|
|
In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-03, Reconsideration of Effective Control for Repurchase
Agreements, to improve financial reporting of repurchase agreements and other agreements that
both entitle and obligate a transferor to repurchase or redeem financial assets on substantially
the agreed upon terms. This ASU eliminates consideration of the transferors ability to fulfill its
contractual rights and obligations from the criteria, as well as related implementation guidance
(i.e., that it possesses adequate collateral to fund substantially all the cost of purchasing
replacement financial assets), in determining effective control, even in the event of default by
the transferee. Other criteria applicable to the assessment of effective control are not
changed by this new guidance. This ASU is effective January 1, 2012. We do not expect the
adoption of this new ASU to have a material effect on our results of operations or financial
position. |
(Continued)
11
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
|
|
The amortized cost and fair value of available for sale securities and the related pre-tax gross
unrealized gains and losses recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) are as
follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Gains |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Value |
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Government agency
debt obligations |
|
$ |
112,641,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,344,000 |
|
|
$ |
(2,540,000 |
) |
|
$ |
111,445,000 |
|
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
40,390,000 |
|
|
|
2,585,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
42,975,000 |
|
Michigan Strategic Fund bonds |
|
|
18,105,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
18,105,000 |
|
Municipal general obligation bonds |
|
|
28,591,000 |
|
|
|
344,000 |
|
|
|
(293,000 |
) |
|
|
28,642,000 |
|
Municipal revenue bonds |
|
|
4,838,000 |
|
|
|
54,000 |
|
|
|
(10,000 |
) |
|
|
4,882,000 |
|
Mutual funds |
|
|
1,274,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(2,000 |
) |
|
|
1,272,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
205,839,000 |
|
|
$ |
4,327,000 |
|
|
$ |
(2,845,000 |
) |
|
$ |
207,321,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Government agency
debt obligations |
|
$ |
121,633,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,704,000 |
|
|
$ |
(1,775,000 |
) |
|
$ |
121,562,000 |
|
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
44,340,000 |
|
|
|
2,601,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
46,941,000 |
|
Michigan Strategic Fund bonds |
|
|
18,175,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
18,175,000 |
|
Municipal general obligation bonds |
|
|
28,594,000 |
|
|
|
227,000 |
|
|
|
(779,000 |
) |
|
|
28,042,000 |
|
Municipal revenue bonds |
|
|
4,841,000 |
|
|
|
46,000 |
|
|
|
(44,000 |
) |
|
|
4,843,000 |
|
Mutual funds |
|
|
1,264,000 |
|
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1,267,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
218,847,000 |
|
|
$ |
4,581,000 |
|
|
$ |
(2,598,000 |
) |
|
$ |
220,830,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Continued)
12
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
2. |
|
SECURITIES (Continued) |
|
|
Securities with unrealized losses at March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, aggregated by
investment category and length of time that individual securities have been in a continuous loss
position, are as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 12 Months |
|
|
12 Months or More |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
Value |
|
|
Loss |
|
|
Value |
|
|
Loss |
|
|
Value |
|
|
Loss |
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Government
agency debt
obligations |
|
$ |
62,684,000 |
|
|
$ |
(2,540,000 |
) |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
62,684,000 |
|
|
$ |
(2,540,000 |
) |
Mortgage-backed
securities |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Michigan Strategic
Fund bonds |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Municipal general
obligation bonds |
|
|
3,227,000 |
|
|
|
(64,000 |
) |
|
|
6,290,000 |
|
|
|
(229,000 |
) |
|
|
9,517,000 |
|
|
|
(293,000 |
) |
Municipal revenue
bonds |
|
|
516,000 |
|
|
|
(4,000 |
) |
|
|
234,000 |
|
|
|
(6,000 |
) |
|
|
750,000 |
|
|
|
(10,000 |
) |
Mutual funds |
|
|
1,272,000 |
|
|
|
(2,000 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1,272,000 |
|
|
|
(2,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
67,699,000 |
|
|
$ |
(2,610,000 |
) |
|
$ |
6,524,000 |
|
|
$ |
(235,000 |
) |
|
$ |
74,223,000 |
|
|
$ |
(2,845,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Government
agency debt
obligations |
|
$ |
56,588,000 |
|
|
$ |
(1,775,000 |
) |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
56,588,000 |
|
|
$ |
(1,775,000 |
) |
Mortgage-backed
securities |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Michigan Strategic
Fund bonds |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Municipal general
obligation bonds |
|
|
7,847,000 |
|
|
|
(299,000 |
) |
|
|
6,497,000 |
|
|
|
(480,000 |
) |
|
|
14,344,000 |
|
|
|
(779,000 |
) |
Municipal revenue
bonds |
|
|
811,000 |
|
|
|
(25,000 |
) |
|
|
805,000 |
|
|
|
(19,000 |
) |
|
|
1,616,000 |
|
|
|
(44,000 |
) |
Mutual funds |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
65,246,000 |
|
|
$ |
(2,099,000 |
) |
|
$ |
7,302,000 |
|
|
$ |
(499,000 |
) |
|
$ |
72,548,000 |
|
|
$ |
(2,598,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Continued)
13
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
2. |
|
SECURITIES (Continued) |
|
|
We evaluate securities for other-than-temporary impairment at least on a quarterly basis.
Consideration is given to the length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been
less than cost, the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer, and the intent
and ability we have to retain our investment in the issuer for a period of time sufficient to
allow for any anticipated recovery in fair value. For those debt securities whose fair value is
less than their amortized cost basis, we also consider our intent to sell the security, whether
it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the security before recovery and if
we do not expect to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the security. In analyzing an
issuers financial condition, we may consider whether the securities are issued by the federal
government or its agencies, whether downgrades by bond rating agencies have occurred and the
results of reviews of the issuers financial condition. |
|
|
At March 31, 2011, 76 debt securities and a mutual fund with a fair value totaling $74.2 million
have unrealized losses with aggregate depreciation of $2.8 million, or 1.4% from the amortized
cost basis of total securities. At March 31, 2011, 194 debt securities with a fair value
totaling $115.0 million have unrealized gains with aggregate appreciation of $4.3 million, or
2.1% from the amortized cost basis of total securities. After we considered whether the
securities were issued by the federal government or its agencies and whether downgrades by bond
rating agencies had occurred, we determined that unrealized losses were due to changing interest
rate environments. As we do not intend to sell our debt securities before recovery of their
cost basis and we believe it is more likely than not that we will not be required to sell our
debt securities before recovery of the cost basis, no declines are deemed to be
other-than-temporary. |
|
|
The amortized cost and fair value of debt securities at March 31, 2011, by contractual maturity,
are shown below. The contractual maturity is utilized below for U.S. Government agency debt
obligations and municipal bonds. Expected maturities may differ from contractual maturities
because borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or
prepayment fees. Securities not due at a single maturity date, primarily mortgage-backed
securities, are shown separately. |
(Continued)
14
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
2. |
|
SECURITIES (Continued) |
|
|
The maturities of securities and their weighted average yields at March 31, 2011 are also shown
in the following table. The yields for municipal securities are shown at their tax equivalent
yield. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
|
Yield |
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Value |
|
Due in 2011 |
|
|
6.89 |
% |
|
$ |
500,000 |
|
|
$ |
501,000 |
|
Due in 2012 through 2016 |
|
|
5.79 |
|
|
|
5,534,000 |
|
|
|
5,892,000 |
|
Due in 2017 through 2021 |
|
|
4.28 |
|
|
|
28,802,000 |
|
|
|
28,623,000 |
|
Due in 2022 and beyond |
|
|
4.70 |
|
|
|
111,234,000 |
|
|
|
109,953,000 |
|
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
5.14 |
|
|
|
40,390,000 |
|
|
|
42,975,000 |
|
Michigan Strategic Fund bonds |
|
|
3.04 |
|
|
|
18,105,000 |
|
|
|
18,105,000 |
|
Mutual funds |
|
|
3.10 |
|
|
|
1,274,000 |
|
|
|
1,272,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.61 |
% |
|
$ |
205,839,000 |
|
|
$ |
207,321,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At March 31, 2011, and December 31, 2010, the amortized cost of securities issued by the State
of Michigan and all its political subdivisions totaled $33.4 million, with an estimated market
value of $33.5 million and $32.9 million, respectively. Total securities of any other specific
issuer, other than the U.S. Government and its agencies, did not exceed 10% of shareholders
equity. |
|
|
The carrying value of U.S. Government agency debt obligations and mortgage-backed securities
that are pledged to secure repurchase agreements, other deposits, and letters of credit issued
on behalf of our customers was $152.0 million and $166.9 million at March 31, 2011 and December
31, 2010, respectively. In addition, substantially all of our municipal bonds have been pledged
to the Discount Window of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. Investments in Federal Home Loan
Bank stock are restricted and may only be resold or redeemed by the issuer. |
(Continued)
15
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
3. |
|
LOANS AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES |
|
|
Our total loans at March 31, 2011 were $1.21 billion compared to $1.26 billion at December 31,
2010, a decrease of $55.7 million, or 4.4%. The components of our loan portfolio disaggregated
by class of loan within the loan portfolio segments at March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, and
the percentage change in loans from the end of 2010 to the end of the first quarter of 2011, are
as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
Increase |
|
|
|
Balance |
|
|
% |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
% |
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
280,467,000 |
|
|
|
23.2 |
% |
|
$ |
288,515,000 |
|
|
|
22.8 |
% |
|
|
(2.8 |
)% |
Vacant land, land
development, and
residential construction |
|
|
80,904,000 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
83,786,000 |
|
|
|
6.6 |
|
|
|
(3.4 |
) |
Real estate owner occupied |
|
|
270,856,000 |
|
|
|
22.4 |
|
|
|
277,377,000 |
|
|
|
22.0 |
|
|
|
(2.4 |
) |
Real estate non-owner
occupied |
|
|
419,603,000 |
|
|
|
34.8 |
|
|
|
449,104,000 |
|
|
|
35.6 |
|
|
|
(6.6 |
) |
Real estate multi-family
and residential rental |
|
|
74,549,000 |
|
|
|
6.2 |
|
|
|
77,188,000 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
(3.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
1,126,379,000 |
|
|
|
93.3 |
|
|
|
1,175,970,000 |
|
|
|
93.1 |
|
|
|
(4.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity and other |
|
|
47,602,000 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
51,186,000 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
(7.0 |
) |
1-4 family mortgages |
|
|
32,905,000 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
35,474,000 |
|
|
|
2.8 |
|
|
|
(7.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total retail |
|
|
80,507,000 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
86,660,000 |
|
|
|
6.9 |
|
|
|
(7.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans |
|
$ |
1,206,886,000 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
1,262,630,000 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
(4.4 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonperforming loans as of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Loans past due 90 days or more still accruing interest |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
766,000 |
|
Nonaccrual loans, including troubled debt restructurings |
|
|
55,444,000 |
|
|
|
63,915,000 |
|
Troubled debt restructurings, accruing interest |
|
|
4,761,000 |
|
|
|
4,763,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total nonperforming loans |
|
$ |
60,205,000 |
|
|
$ |
69,444,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Continued)
16
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
3. |
|
LOANS AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES (Continued) |
|
|
The recorded principal balance of nonaccrual loans, including troubled debt restructurings, was
as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
6,677,000 |
|
|
$ |
10,128,000 |
|
Vacant land, land development, and residential construction |
|
|
12,071,000 |
|
|
|
12,441,000 |
|
Real estate owner occupied |
|
|
8,408,000 |
|
|
|
10,172,000 |
|
Real estate non-owner occupied |
|
|
20,491,000 |
|
|
|
22,609,000 |
|
Real estate multi-family and residential rental |
|
|
4,439,000 |
|
|
|
4,686,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
52,086,000 |
|
|
|
60,036,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity and other |
|
|
2,075,000 |
|
|
|
2,425,000 |
|
1-4 family mortgages |
|
|
1,283,000 |
|
|
|
1,454,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total retail |
|
|
3,358,000 |
|
|
|
3,879,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total nonaccrual loans |
|
$ |
55,444,000 |
|
|
$ |
63,915,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Continued)
17
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
3. LOANS AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES (Continued)
An age analysis of past due loans is as follows as of March 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greater |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recorded |
|
|
|
30 59 |
|
|
60 89 |
|
|
Than 89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance > 89 |
|
|
|
Days |
|
|
Days |
|
|
Days |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
Days and |
|
|
|
Past Due |
|
|
Past Due |
|
|
Past Due |
|
|
Past Due |
|
|
Current |
|
|
Loans |
|
|
Accruing |
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and
industrial |
|
$ |
608,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,001,000 |
|
|
$ |
3,310,000 |
|
|
$ |
4,919,000 |
|
|
$ |
275,548,000 |
|
|
$ |
280,467,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
Vacant land, land
development, and
residential
construction |
|
|
7,959,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
2,993,000 |
|
|
|
10,952,000 |
|
|
|
69,952,000 |
|
|
|
80,904,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Real estate
owner occupied |
|
|
96,000 |
|
|
|
1,332,000 |
|
|
|
4,628,000 |
|
|
|
6,056,000 |
|
|
|
264,800,000 |
|
|
|
270,856,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Real estate
non-owner occupied |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
13,704,000 |
|
|
|
13,704,000 |
|
|
|
405,899,000 |
|
|
|
419,603,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Real estate
multi-family and
residential rental |
|
|
323,000 |
|
|
|
91,000 |
|
|
|
2,818,000 |
|
|
|
3,232,000 |
|
|
|
71,317,000 |
|
|
|
74,549,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
8,986,000 |
|
|
|
2,424,000 |
|
|
|
27,453,000 |
|
|
|
38,863,000 |
|
|
|
1,087,516,000 |
|
|
|
1,126,379,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity
and other |
|
|
488,000 |
|
|
|
9,000 |
|
|
|
710,000 |
|
|
|
1,207,000 |
|
|
|
46,395,000 |
|
|
|
47,602,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
1-4 family mortgages |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
822,000 |
|
|
|
827,000 |
|
|
|
32,078,000 |
|
|
|
32,905,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total retail |
|
|
488,000 |
|
|
|
14,000 |
|
|
|
1,532,000 |
|
|
|
2,034,000 |
|
|
|
78,473,000 |
|
|
|
80,507,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total past
due loans |
|
$ |
9,474,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,438,000 |
|
|
$ |
28,985,000 |
|
|
$ |
40,897,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,165,989,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,206,886,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Continued)
18
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
3. LOANS AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES (Continued)
An age analysis of past due loans is as follows as of December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greater |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recorded |
|
|
|
30 59 |
|
|
60 89 |
|
|
Than 89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance > 89 |
|
|
|
Days |
|
|
Days |
|
|
Days |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
Days and |
|
|
|
Past Due |
|
|
Past Due |
|
|
Past Due |
|
|
Past Due |
|
|
Current |
|
|
Loans |
|
|
Accruing |
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and
industrial |
|
$ |
280,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,074,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,474,000 |
|
|
$ |
3,828,000 |
|
|
$ |
284,687,000 |
|
|
$ |
288,515,000 |
|
|
$ |
19,000 |
|
Vacant land, land
development, and
residential
construction |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
453,000 |
|
|
|
3,586,000 |
|
|
|
4,039,000 |
|
|
|
79,747,000 |
|
|
|
83,786,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Real estate
owner occupied |
|
|
1,194,000 |
|
|
|
574,000 |
|
|
|
6,497,000 |
|
|
|
8,265,000 |
|
|
|
269,112,000 |
|
|
|
277,377,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Real estate
non-owner occupied |
|
|
164,000 |
|
|
|
4,341,000 |
|
|
|
12,520,000 |
|
|
|
17,025,000 |
|
|
|
432,079,000 |
|
|
|
449,104,000 |
|
|
|
747,000 |
|
Real estate
multi-family and
residential rental |
|
|
672,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
2,692,000 |
|
|
|
3,364,000 |
|
|
|
73,824,000 |
|
|
|
77,188,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
2,310,000 |
|
|
|
7,442,000 |
|
|
|
26,769,000 |
|
|
|
36,521,000 |
|
|
|
1,139,449,000 |
|
|
|
1,175,970,000 |
|
|
|
766,000 |
|
Retail: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity
and other |
|
|
1,024,000 |
|
|
|
179,000 |
|
|
|
227,000 |
|
|
|
1,430,000 |
|
|
|
49,756,000 |
|
|
|
51,186,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
1-4 family mortgages |
|
|
365,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
316,000 |
|
|
|
681,000 |
|
|
|
34,793,000 |
|
|
|
35,474,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total retail |
|
|
1,389,000 |
|
|
|
179,000 |
|
|
|
543,000 |
|
|
|
2,111,000 |
|
|
|
84,549,000 |
|
|
|
86,660,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total past
due loans |
|
$ |
3,699,000 |
|
|
$ |
7,621,000 |
|
|
$ |
27,312,000 |
|
|
$ |
38,632,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,223,998,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,262,630,000 |
|
|
$ |
766,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Continued)
19
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
3. LOANS AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES (Continued)
Impaired loans were as follows as of March 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unpaid |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Contractual |
|
|
Recorded |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recorded |
|
|
|
Principal |
|
|
Principal |
|
|
Related |
|
|
Principal |
|
|
|
Balance |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
Allowance |
|
|
Balance |
|
With no related allowance recorded: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
4,598,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,310,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,223,000 |
|
Vacant land, land development and
residential construction |
|
|
3,970,000 |
|
|
|
1,321,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,696,000 |
|
Real estate owner occupied |
|
|
6,968,000 |
|
|
|
3,781,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,350,000 |
|
Real estate non-owner occupied |
|
|
16,419,000 |
|
|
|
11,171,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,473,000 |
|
Real estate multi-family and
residential rental |
|
|
1,420,000 |
|
|
|
786,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
919,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
33,375,000 |
|
|
|
19,369,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,661,000 |
|
Retail: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity and other |
|
|
684,000 |
|
|
|
678,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
414,000 |
|
1-4 family mortgages |
|
|
464,000 |
|
|
|
446,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
292,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total retail |
|
|
1,148,000 |
|
|
|
1,124,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
706,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total with no related allowance recorded |
|
$ |
34,523,000 |
|
|
$ |
20,493,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
27,367,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With an allowance recorded: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
4,195,000 |
|
|
$ |
3,976,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,787,000 |
|
|
$ |
5,449,000 |
|
Vacant land, land development and
residential construction |
|
|
14,542,000 |
|
|
|
12,754,000 |
|
|
|
2,038,000 |
|
|
|
8,562,000 |
|
Real estate owner occupied |
|
|
8,521,000 |
|
|
|
5,633,000 |
|
|
|
1,537,000 |
|
|
|
5,945,000 |
|
Real estate non-owner occupied |
|
|
17,562,000 |
|
|
|
10,359,000 |
|
|
|
2,589,000 |
|
|
|
9,117,000 |
|
Real estate multi-family and
residential rental |
|
|
5,656,000 |
|
|
|
3,497,000 |
|
|
|
772,000 |
|
|
|
3,484,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
50,476,000 |
|
|
|
36,219,000 |
|
|
|
8,723,000 |
|
|
|
32,557,000 |
|
Retail: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity and other |
|
|
1,242,000 |
|
|
|
1,222,000 |
|
|
|
412,000 |
|
|
|
1,566,000 |
|
1-4 family mortgages |
|
|
552,000 |
|
|
|
548,000 |
|
|
|
52,000 |
|
|
|
728,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total retail |
|
|
1,794,000 |
|
|
|
1,770,000 |
|
|
|
464,000 |
|
|
|
2,294,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total with an allowance recorded |
|
$ |
52,270,000 |
|
|
$ |
37,989,000 |
|
|
$ |
9,187,000 |
|
|
$ |
34,851,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total impaired loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
83,851,000 |
|
|
|
55,588,000 |
|
|
|
8,723,000 |
|
|
|
59,218,000 |
|
Retail |
|
|
2,942,000 |
|
|
|
2,894,000 |
|
|
|
464,000 |
|
|
|
3,000,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total impaired loans |
|
$ |
86,793,000 |
|
|
$ |
58,482,000 |
|
|
$ |
9,187,000 |
|
|
$ |
62,218,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income of $0.1 million was recognized on impaired loans during the first quarter of 2011.
(Continued)
20
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
3. LOANS AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES (Continued)
Impaired loans were as follows as of December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unpaid |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contractual |
|
|
Recorded |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal |
|
|
Principal |
|
|
Related |
|
|
|
Balance |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
Allowance |
|
With no related allowance recorded: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
3,133,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,135,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Vacant land, land development and
residential construction |
|
|
13,255,000 |
|
|
|
10,071,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate owner occupied |
|
|
9,327,000 |
|
|
|
4,920,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate non-owner occupied |
|
|
23,380,000 |
|
|
|
15,775,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate multi-family and
residential rental |
|
|
1,657,000 |
|
|
|
1,052,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
50,752,000 |
|
|
|
33,953,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Retail: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity and other |
|
|
277,000 |
|
|
|
151,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
1-4 family mortgages |
|
|
151,000 |
|
|
|
137,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total retail |
|
|
428,000 |
|
|
|
288,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total with no related allowance recorded |
|
$ |
51,180,000 |
|
|
$ |
34,241,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With an allowance recorded: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
7,405,000 |
|
|
$ |
6,922,000 |
|
|
$ |
3,554,000 |
|
Vacant land, land development and
residential construction |
|
|
5,702,000 |
|
|
|
4,370,000 |
|
|
|
954,000 |
|
Real estate owner occupied |
|
|
7,047,000 |
|
|
|
6,257,000 |
|
|
|
1,996,000 |
|
Real estate non-owner occupied |
|
|
13,773,000 |
|
|
|
7,875,000 |
|
|
|
1,091,000 |
|
Real estate multi-family and
residential rental |
|
|
5,544,000 |
|
|
|
3,472,000 |
|
|
|
909,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
|
39,471,000 |
|
|
|
28,896,000 |
|
|
|
8,504,000 |
|
Retail: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity and other |
|
|
1,799,000 |
|
|
|
1,910,000 |
|
|
|
1,007,000 |
|
1-4 family mortgages |
|
|
1,141,000 |
|
|
|
909,000 |
|
|
|
191,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total retail |
|
|
2,940,000 |
|
|
|
2,819,000 |
|
|
|
1,198,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total with an allowance recorded |
|
$ |
42,411,000 |
|
|
$ |
31,715,000 |
|
|
$ |
9,702,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total impaired loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
90,223,000 |
|
|
|
62,849,000 |
|
|
|
8,504,000 |
|
Retail |
|
|
3,368,000 |
|
|
|
3,107,000 |
|
|
|
1,198,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total impaired loans |
|
$ |
93,591,000 |
|
|
$ |
65,956,000 |
|
|
$ |
9,702,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Continued)
21
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
3. LOANS AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES (Continued)
Credit Quality Indicators. We utilize a comprehensive grading system for our commercial loans.
All commercial loans are graded on a ten grade rating system. The rating system utilizes
standardized grade paradigms that analyze several critical factors such as cash flow, operating
performance, financial condition, collateral, industry condition and management. All commercial
loans are graded at inception and reviewed and, if appropriate, re-graded at various intervals
thereafter. The risk assessment for retail loans is primarily based on the type of collateral.
Loans by credit quality indicators were as follows as of March 31, 2011:
Commercial credit exposure credit risk profiled by internal credit risk grades:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vacant Land, |
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
Real Estate - |
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
Land Development, |
|
|
Real Estate - |
|
|
Real Estate - |
|
|
Multi-Family |
|
|
|
and |
|
|
and Residential |
|
|
Owner |
|
|
Non-Owner |
|
|
and Residential |
|
|
|
Industrial |
|
|
Construction |
|
|
Occupied |
|
|
Occupied |
|
|
Rental |
|
Internal credit risk grade groupings: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grades 1 4 |
|
$ |
162,445,000 |
|
|
$ |
8,226,000 |
|
|
$ |
130,933,000 |
|
|
$ |
161,492,000 |
|
|
$ |
29,670,000 |
|
Grades 5 7 |
|
|
109,678,000 |
|
|
|
55,064,000 |
|
|
|
124,127,000 |
|
|
|
222,104,000 |
|
|
|
29,544,000 |
|
Grades 8 9 |
|
|
8,344,000 |
|
|
|
17,614,000 |
|
|
|
15,796,000 |
|
|
|
36,007,000 |
|
|
|
15,335,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
$ |
280,467,000 |
|
|
$ |
80,904,000 |
|
|
$ |
270,856,000 |
|
|
$ |
419,603,000 |
|
|
$ |
74,549,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail credit exposure credit risk profiled by collateral type:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail |
|
|
Retail |
|
|
|
Home Equity |
|
|
1-4 Family |
|
|
|
and Other |
|
|
Mortgages |
|
Total retail |
|
$ |
47,602,000 |
|
|
$ |
32,905,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Continued)
22
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
3. |
|
LOANS AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES (Continued) |
|
|
|
Loans by credit quality indicators were as follows as of December 31, 2010: |
|
|
|
Commercial credit exposure credit risk profiled by internal credit risk grades: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vacant Land, |
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
Real Estate - |
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
Land Development, |
|
|
Real Estate - |
|
|
Real Estate - |
|
|
Multi-Family |
|
|
|
and |
|
|
and Residential |
|
|
Owner |
|
|
Non-Owner |
|
|
and Residential |
|
|
|
Industrial |
|
|
Construction |
|
|
Occupied |
|
|
Occupied |
|
|
Rental |
|
Internal credit risk grade groupings: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grades 1 4 |
|
$ |
161,623,000 |
|
|
$ |
8,098,000 |
|
|
$ |
137,340,000 |
|
|
$ |
160,746,000 |
|
|
$ |
29,902,000 |
|
Grades 5 7 |
|
|
113,904,000 |
|
|
|
58,326,000 |
|
|
|
123,572,000 |
|
|
|
249,246,000 |
|
|
|
31,852,000 |
|
Grades 8 9 |
|
|
12,988,000 |
|
|
|
17,362,000 |
|
|
|
16,465,000 |
|
|
|
39,112,000 |
|
|
|
15,434,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial |
|
$ |
288,515,000 |
|
|
$ |
83,786,000 |
|
|
$ |
277,377,000 |
|
|
$ |
449,104,000 |
|
|
$ |
77,188,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail credit exposure credit risk profiled by collateral type: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail |
|
|
Retail |
|
|
|
Home Equity |
|
|
1-4 Family |
|
|
|
and Other |
|
|
Mortgages |
|
Total retail |
|
$ |
51,186,000 |
|
|
$ |
35,474,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Continued)
23
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
3. |
|
LOANS AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES (Continued) |
|
|
|
All commercial loans are graded using the following number system: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grade 1.
|
|
Excellent credit rating that contain very little, if any, risk of loss. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grade 2.
|
|
Strong sources of repayment and have low repayment risk. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grade 3.
|
|
Good sources of repayment and have limited repayment risk. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grade 4.
|
|
Adequate sources of repayment and acceptable repayment risk; however,
characteristics are present that render the credit more vulnerable to a negative
event. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grade 5.
|
|
Marginally acceptable sources of repayment and exhibit defined weaknesses and
negative characteristics. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grade 6.
|
|
Well defined weaknesses which may include negative current cash flow, high leverage, or operating losses. Generally,
if the credit does not stabilize or if further deterioration is observed in the near term, the loan will likely be
downgraded and placed on the Watch List (i.e., list of lending relationships that receive increased scrutiny and
review by the Board of Directors and senior management). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grade 7.
|
|
Defined weaknesses or negative trends that merit close monitoring through Watch List status. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grade 8.
|
|
Inadequately protected by current sound net worth, paying capacity of the obligor, or pledged collateral, resulting
in a distinct possibility of loss requiring close monitoring through Watch List status. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grade 9.
|
|
Vital weaknesses exist where collection of principal is highly questionable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grade 10.
|
|
Considered uncollectible and of such little value that their continuance as an asset is not warranted. |
The primary risk elements with respect to commercial loans are the financial condition of the
borrower, the sufficiency of collateral, and timeliness of scheduled payments. We have a policy
of requesting and reviewing periodic financial statements from commercial loan customers and
employ a disciplined and formalized review of the existence of collateral and its value. The
primary risk element with respect to each residential real estate loan and consumer loan is the
timeliness of scheduled payments. We have a reporting system that monitors past due loans and
have adopted policies to pursue creditors rights in order to preserve our collateral position.
(Continued)
24
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
3. LOANS AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES (Continued)
Activity in the allowance for loan losses and the recorded investments in loans as of and during
the three months ended March 31, 2011 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
Retail |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans |
|
|
Loans |
|
|
Unallocated |
|
|
Total |
|
Allowance for loan losses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
42,359,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,972,000 |
|
|
$ |
37,000 |
|
|
$ |
45,368,000 |
|
Provision for loan losses |
|
|
1,386,000 |
|
|
|
772,000 |
|
|
|
42,000 |
|
|
|
2,200,000 |
|
Charge-offs |
|
|
(4,739,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,292,000 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(6,031,000 |
) |
Recoveries |
|
|
499,000 |
|
|
|
82,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
581,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
39,505,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,534,000 |
|
|
$ |
79,000 |
|
|
$ |
42,118,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance: individually
evaluated for impairment |
|
$ |
8,723,000 |
|
|
$ |
464,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
9,187,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance: collectively
evaluated for impairment |
|
$ |
30,782,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,070,000 |
|
|
$ |
79,000 |
|
|
$ |
32,931,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
1,126,379,000 |
|
|
$ |
80,507,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,206,886,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance: individually
evaluated for impairment |
|
$ |
55,588,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,894,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
58,482,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance: collectively
evaluated for impairment |
|
$ |
1,070,791,000 |
|
|
$ |
77,613,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,148,404,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Activity in the allowance for loan losses during the three months ended March 31, 2010 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
47,878,000 |
|
Provision for loan losses |
|
|
8,400,000 |
|
Charge-offs |
|
|
(6,846,000 |
) |
Recoveries |
|
|
694,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
50,126,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
During the three months ended March 31, 2011, there were no purchases or sales of loans or
reclassifications of loans held for sale.
(Continued)
25
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
4.
PREMISES AND EQUIPMENT, NET
Premises and equipment are comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Land and improvements |
|
$ |
8,531,000 |
|
|
$ |
8,531,000 |
|
Buildings |
|
|
24,528,000 |
|
|
|
24,528,000 |
|
Furniture and equipment |
|
|
12,478,000 |
|
|
|
12,478,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,537,000 |
|
|
|
45,537,000 |
|
Less: accumulated depreciation |
|
|
18,019,000 |
|
|
|
17,664,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premises and equipment, net |
|
$ |
27,518,000 |
|
|
$ |
27,873,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation expense totaled $0.4 million during the first quarter of 2011, compared to $0.6
million during the first quarter of 2010.
5. DEPOSITS
Our total deposits at March 31, 2011 totaled $1.25 billion compared to $1.27 billion at December
31, 2010, a decrease of $20.2 million, or 1.6%. The components of our outstanding balances at
March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, and percentage change in deposits from the end of 2010 to
the end of the first quarter of 2011, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
Increase |
|
|
|
Balance |
|
|
% |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
% |
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
Noninterest-bearing demand |
|
$ |
136,025,000 |
|
|
|
10.8 |
% |
|
$ |
112,944,000 |
|
|
|
8.9 |
% |
|
|
20.4 |
% |
Interest-bearing checking |
|
|
163,115,000 |
|
|
|
13.0 |
|
|
|
158,177,000 |
|
|
|
12.4 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
Money market |
|
|
157,476,000 |
|
|
|
12.6 |
|
|
|
150,631,000 |
|
|
|
11.8 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
Savings |
|
|
37,442,000 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
60,201,000 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
(37.8 |
) |
Time, under $100,000 |
|
|
66,578,000 |
|
|
|
5.3 |
|
|
|
75,857,000 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
(12.2 |
) |
Time,$100,000 and over |
|
|
196,476,000 |
|
|
|
15.7 |
|
|
|
206,954,000 |
|
|
|
16.2 |
|
|
|
(5.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
757,112,000 |
|
|
|
60.4 |
|
|
|
764,764,000 |
|
|
|
60.0 |
|
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Out-of-area interest-
bearing checking |
|
|
7,249,000 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
Out-of-area time,
under $100,000 |
|
|
28,939,000 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
37,253,000 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
|
(22.3 |
) |
Out-of-area time,
$100,000 and over |
|
|
460,344,000 |
|
|
|
36.7 |
|
|
|
471,815,000 |
|
|
|
37.1 |
|
|
|
(2.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
496,532,000 |
|
|
|
39.6 |
|
|
|
509,068,000 |
|
|
|
40.0 |
|
|
|
(2.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
$ |
1,253,644,000 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
1,273,832,000 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
(1.6 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Continued)
26
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
6.
SHORT-TERM BORROWINGS
Information relating to our securities sold under agreements to repurchase follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Twelve Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
Outstanding balance at end of period |
|
$ |
80,821,000 |
|
|
$ |
116,979,000 |
|
Average interest rate at end of period |
|
|
0.60 |
% |
|
|
0.69 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average daily balance during the period |
|
$ |
99,726,000 |
|
|
$ |
107,781,000 |
|
Average interest rate during the period |
|
|
0.66 |
% |
|
|
1.31 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum daily balance during the period |
|
$ |
116,397,000 |
|
|
$ |
133,280,000 |
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase (repurchase agreements) generally have original
maturities of less than one year. Repurchase agreements are treated as financings and the
obligations to repurchase securities sold are reflected as liabilities. Securities involved
with the agreements are recorded as assets of our bank and are held in safekeeping by a
correspondent bank. Repurchase agreements are offered principally to certain large deposit
customers. Repurchase agreements are secured by securities with an aggregate market value equal
to the aggregate outstanding balance.
7. FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK ADVANCES
Our outstanding balances at March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 totaled $65.0 million and
mature at varying dates from June 2011 through January 2014, with fixed rates of interest from
3.04% to 4.42% and averaging 3.73%.
Each advance is payable at its maturity date, and is subject to a prepayment fee if paid prior
to the maturity date. The advances are collateralized by residential mortgage loans, first
mortgage liens on multi-family residential property loans, first mortgage liens on commercial
real estate property loans, and substantially all other assets of our bank, under a blanket lien
arrangement. Our borrowing line of credit as of March 31, 2011 totaled about $145 million, with
availability approximating $80 million.
Maturities of currently outstanding FHLB advances during the next 60 months are:
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
$ |
10,000,000 |
|
2012 |
|
|
40,000,000 |
|
2013 |
|
|
10,000,000 |
|
2014 |
|
|
5,000,000 |
|
2015 |
|
|
0 |
|
(Continued)
27
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
8. COMMITMENTS AND OFF-BALANCE SHEET RISK
Our bank 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 include
commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit. Loan 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. Standby letters of credit are conditional commitments issued by
our bank to guarantee the
performance of a customer to a third party. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates
or other termination clauses and may require payment of a fee. Since many of the commitments
are expected to expire without being drawn upon, the total commitment amounts do not necessarily
represent future cash requirements.
These instruments involve, to varying degrees, elements of credit risk in excess of the amount
recognized, if any, in the balance sheet. Our banks maximum exposure to loan loss in the event
of nonperformance by the other party to the financial instrument for commitments to extend
credit and standby letters of credit is represented by the contractual notional amount of those
instruments. Our bank uses the same credit policies in making commitments and conditional
obligations as it does for on-balance sheet instruments. Collateral, such as accounts
receivable, securities, inventory, and property and equipment, is generally obtained based on
our credit assessment of the borrower. If required, estimated loss exposure resulting from
these instruments is expensed and recorded as a liability. The balance of the liability was $0
as of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010.
A summary of the contractual amounts of our financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk at
March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Commercial unused lines of credit |
|
$ |
159,728,000 |
|
|
$ |
158,945,000 |
|
Unused lines of credit secured by 1 4 family
residential properties |
|
|
26,849,000 |
|
|
|
26,870,000 |
|
Credit card unused lines of credit |
|
|
7,610,000 |
|
|
|
7,768,000 |
|
Other consumer unused lines of credit |
|
|
4,432,000 |
|
|
|
4,052,000 |
|
Commitments to extend credit |
|
|
25,477,000 |
|
|
|
9,840,000 |
|
Standby letters of credit |
|
|
17,378,000 |
|
|
|
19,343,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
241,474,000 |
|
|
$ |
226,818,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Continued)
28
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
8. COMMITMENTS AND OFF-BALANCE SHEET RISK (Continued)
Certain of our commercial loan customers have entered into interest rate swap agreements
directly with our correspondent banks. To assist our commercial loan customers in these
transactions, and to encourage our correspondent banks to enter into the interest rate swap
transactions with minimal credit underwriting analyses on their part, we have entered into risk
participation agreements with the correspondent banks whereby we agree to make payments to the
correspondent banks owed by our commercial loan customers under the interest rate swap agreement
in the event that our commercial loan customers do not make the payments. We are not a party to
the interest rate swap
agreements under these arrangements. As of March 31, 2011, the total notional amount of the
underlying interest rate swap agreements was $43.4 million, with a net fair value from our
commercial loan customers perspective of negative $3.7 million. These risk participation
agreements are considered financial guarantees in accordance with applicable accounting guidance
and are therefore recorded as liabilities at fair value, generally equal to the fees collected
at the time of their execution. These liabilities are accreted into income during the term of
the interest rate swap agreements, generally ranging from four to fifteen years.
9. FAIR VALUES OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
Carrying amounts and estimated fair values of financial instruments were as follows as of March
31, 2011 and December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
Carrying |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Carrying |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
|
Values |
|
|
Values |
|
|
Values |
|
|
Values |
|
Financial assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
76,888,000 |
|
|
$ |
76,888,000 |
|
|
$ |
64,198,000 |
|
|
$ |
64,198,000 |
|
Securities available for sale |
|
|
207,321,000 |
|
|
|
207,321,000 |
|
|
|
220,830,000 |
|
|
|
220,830,000 |
|
Federal Home Loan Bank stock |
|
|
14,345,000 |
|
|
|
14,345,000 |
|
|
|
14,345,000 |
|
|
|
14,345,000 |
|
Loans, net |
|
|
1,164,768,000 |
|
|
|
1,170,475,000 |
|
|
|
1,217,262,000 |
|
|
|
1,223,911,000 |
|
Bank owned life insurance |
|
|
47,182,000 |
|
|
|
47,182,000 |
|
|
|
46,743,000 |
|
|
|
46,743,000 |
|
Accrued interest receivable |
|
|
5,885,000 |
|
|
|
5,885,000 |
|
|
|
5,942,000 |
|
|
|
5,942,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
1,253,644,000 |
|
|
|
1,263,743,000 |
|
|
|
1,273,832,000 |
|
|
|
1,284,767,000 |
|
Securities sold under agreements
to repurchase |
|
|
80,821,000 |
|
|
|
80,821,000 |
|
|
|
116,979,000 |
|
|
|
116,979,000 |
|
Federal Home Loan Bank advances |
|
|
65,000,000 |
|
|
|
66,998,000 |
|
|
|
65,000,000 |
|
|
|
67,668,000 |
|
Subordinated debentures |
|
|
32,990,000 |
|
|
|
32,990,000 |
|
|
|
32,990,000 |
|
|
|
33,006,000 |
|
Accrued interest payable |
|
|
4,403,000 |
|
|
|
4,403,000 |
|
|
|
4,749,000 |
|
|
|
4,749,000 |
|
(Continued)
29
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
9. FAIR VALUES OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS (Continued)
Carrying amount is the estimated fair value for cash and cash equivalents, Federal Home Loan
Bank stock, accrued interest receivable and payable, bank owned life insurance, demand deposits,
securities sold under agreements to repurchase, and variable rate loans and deposits that
reprice frequently and fully. Security fair values are based on market prices or dealer quotes,
and if no such information is available, on the rate and term of the security and information
about the issuer. For fixed rate loans and deposits and for variable rate loans and deposits
with infrequent repricing or repricing limits, fair value is based on discounted cash flows
using current market rates applied to the estimated life and credit risk. Fair value of
subordinated debentures and Federal Home Loan
Bank advances is based on current rates for similar financing. Fair value of off-balance sheet
items is estimated to be nominal.
Current accounting pronouncements require disclosure of the estimated fair value of financial
instruments as disclosed in Note 10. Given current market conditions, a portion of our loan
portfolio is not readily marketable and market prices do not exist. We have not attempted to
market our loans to potential buyers, if any exist, to determine the fair value of those
instruments. Since negotiated prices in illiquid markets depend upon the then present
motivations of the buyer and seller, it is reasonable to assume that actual sales prices could
vary widely from any estimate of fair value made without the benefit of negotiations.
Additionally, changes in market interest rates can dramatically impact the value of financial
instruments in a short period of time. Accordingly, the fair value measurements for loans
included in the table above are unlikely to represent the instruments liquidation values.
10. FAIR VALUES
Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a
liability in an orderly transaction between market participants. A fair value measurement
assumes that the transaction to sell the asset or transfer the liability occurs in the principal
market for the asset or liability, or in the absence of a principal market, the most
advantageous market for the asset or liability. The price of the principal (or most
advantageous) market used to measure the fair value of the asset or liability shall not be
adjusted for transaction costs. An orderly transaction is a transaction that assumes exposure
to the market for a period prior to the measurement date to allow for marketing activities that
are usual and customary for transactions involving such assets and liabilities; it is not a
forced transaction. Market participants are buyers and sellers in the principal market that are
(i) independent, (ii) knowledgeable, (iii) able to transact and (iv) willing to transact.
(Continued)
30
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
10. |
|
FAIR VALUES (Continued) |
|
|
|
We are required to use valuation techniques that are consistent with the market approach, the
income approach and/or the cost approach. The market approach uses prices and other relevant
information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets and
liabilities. The income approach uses valuation techniques to convert future amounts, such as
cash flows or earnings, to a single present amount on a discounted basis. The cost approach is
based on the amount that currently would be required to replace the service capacity of an asset
(replacement cost). Valuation techniques should be consistently applied. Inputs to valuation
techniques refer to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or
liability. Inputs may be observable, meaning those that reflect the assumptions market
participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from
independent sources, or unobservable, meaning those that reflect our own assumptions about the
assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best
information available in the circumstances. In that regard, we utilize a fair value hierarchy
for valuation inputs that gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for
identical assets or liabilities and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs. The fair value
hierarchy is as follows: |
|
|
|
Level 1: Quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that
we have the ability to access as of the measurement date. |
|
|
|
Level 2: Significant other observable inputs other than Level 1 prices such as quoted prices for
similar assets or liabilities in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar assets
or liabilities in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be
derived from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means. |
|
|
|
Level 3: Significant unobservable inputs that reflect our own assumptions about the assumptions
that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability. |
|
|
|
The following is a description of our valuation methodologies used to measure and disclose the
fair values of our financial assets and liabilities on a recurring or nonrecurring basis: |
|
|
|
Securities available for sale. Securities available for sale are recorded at fair value on a
recurring basis. Fair value measurement is based on quoted prices, if available. If quoted
prices are not available, fair values are measured using independent pricing models. Level 2
securities include U.S. Government agency bonds, mortgage-backed securities issued or guaranteed
by U.S. Government agencies, municipal general obligation and revenue bonds, Michigan Strategic
Fund bonds and mutual funds. We have no Level 1 or 3 securities. |
|
|
|
Securities held to maturity. Securities held to maturity are carried at amortized cost when we
have the positive intent and ability to hold them to maturity. The fair value of held to
maturity securities is based on quoted prices, if available. If quoted prices are not
available, fair values are measured using independent pricing models. We had no securities held
to maturity outstanding as of March 31, 2011 or December 31, 2010. |
(Continued)
31
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
10. |
|
FAIR VALUES (Continued) |
|
|
|
Mortgage loans held for sale. Mortgage loans held for sale are carried at the lower of aggregate
cost or fair value and are measured on a nonrecurring basis. Fair value is based on independent
quoted market prices, where applicable, or the prices for other mortgage whole loans with
similar characteristics. As of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, we determined that the
fair value of our mortgage loans held for sale was similar to the cost; therefore, we carried
the $0.6 million and $2.7 million, respectively, of such loans at cost so they are not included
in the nonrecurring table below. |
|
|
|
Loans. We do not record loans at fair value on a recurring basis. However, from time to time,
we record nonrecurring fair value adjustments to collateral dependent loans to reflect partial
write-downs or specific reserves that are based on the observable market price or current
estimated value of the collateral. These loans are reported in the nonrecurring table below at
initial recognition of impairment and on an ongoing basis until recovery or charge-off. |
|
|
|
Foreclosed Assets. At time of foreclosure or repossession, foreclosed and repossessed assets
are adjusted to fair value less costs to sell upon transfer of the loans to foreclosed and
repossessed assets, establishing a new cost basis. We subsequently adjust estimated fair value
of foreclosed assets on a nonrecurring basis to reflect write-downs based on revised fair value
estimates. |
|
|
|
Derivatives. For interest rate swaps, we measure fair value utilizing models that use primarily
market observable inputs, such as yield curves and option volatilities, and accordingly, are
classified as Level 2. We had no interest rate swap contracts outstanding as of March 31, 2011
or December 31, 2010. |
|
|
|
Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis |
|
|
|
The balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of March
31, 2011 are as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prices in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Markets for |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
U.S. Government agency
debt obligations |
|
$ |
111,445,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
111,445,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
42,975,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
42,975,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Michigan Strategic Fund bonds |
|
|
18,105,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
18,105,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Municipal general
obligation bonds |
|
|
28,642,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
28,642,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Municipal revenue bonds |
|
|
4,882,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
4,882,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Mutual funds |
|
|
1,272,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1,272,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
207,321,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
207,321,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There were no transfers in or out of Level 1, Level 2 or Level 3 during the first three months
of 2011.
(Continued)
32
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
10. |
|
FAIR VALUES (Continued) |
|
|
|
The balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of
December 31, 2010 are as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prices in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Markets for |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
U.S. Government agency
debt obligations |
|
$ |
121,562,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
121,562,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
46,941,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
46,941,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Michigan Strategic Fund bonds |
|
|
18,175,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
18,175,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Municipal general
obligation bonds |
|
|
28,042,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
28,042,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Municipal revenue bonds |
|
|
4,843,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
4,843,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Mutual funds |
|
|
1,267,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1,267,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
220,830,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
220,830,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There were no transfers in or out of Level 1, Level 2 or Level 3 during 2010.
Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Nonrecurring Basis
The balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis as of
March 31, 2011 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prices in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Markets for |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
Impaired loans (1) |
|
$ |
41,381,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
41,381,000 |
|
Foreclosed assets (1) |
|
|
15,884,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
15,884,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
57,265,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
57,265,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Continued)
33
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
10. |
|
FAIR VALUES (Continued) |
|
|
|
The balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis as of
December 31, 2010 are as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prices in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Markets for |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
Impaired loans (1) |
|
$ |
39,056,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
39,056,000 |
|
Foreclosed assets (1) |
|
|
16,675,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
16,675,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
55,731,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
55,731,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents carrying value and related write-downs for which
adjustments are based on the estimated value of the property or other assets. |
11. |
|
REGULATORY MATTERS |
|
|
|
We are subject to regulatory capital requirements administered by federal banking agencies.
Capital adequacy guidelines and prompt corrective action regulations involve quantitative
measures of assets, liabilities, and certain off-balance sheet items calculated under regulatory
accounting practices. Capital amounts and classifications are also subject to qualitative
judgments by regulators about components, risk weightings, and other factors, and the regulators
can lower classifications in certain cases. Failure to meet various capital requirements can
initiate regulatory action that could have a direct material effect on our financial statements. |
|
|
|
The prompt corrective action regulations provide five classifications, including well
capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized, and
critically undercapitalized, although these terms are not used to represent overall financial
condition. If an institution is not well capitalized, regulatory approval is required to accept
brokered deposits. Subject to limited exceptions, no institution may make a capital
distribution if, after making the distribution, it would be undercapitalized. If an institution
is undercapitalized, it is subject to close monitoring by its principal federal regulator, its
asset growth and expansion are restricted, and plans for capital restoration are required. In
addition, further specific types of restrictions may be imposed on the institution at the
discretion of the federal regulator. At March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, our bank was in
the well capitalized category under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action.
There are no conditions or events since March 31, 2011 that we believe have changed our banks
categorization. |
(Continued)
34
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
11. |
|
REGULATORY MATTERS (Continued) |
|
|
|
Our actual capital levels (dollars in thousands) and the minimum levels required to be
categorized as adequately and well capitalized were: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum Required |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
to be Well |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum Required |
|
|
Capitalized Under |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for Capital |
|
|
Prompt Corrective |
|
|
|
Actual |
|
|
Adequacy Purposes |
|
|
Action Regulations |
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Ratio |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Ratio |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Ratio |
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capital (to risk
weighted assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
$ |
175,536 |
|
|
|
13.0 |
% |
|
$ |
108,231 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
% |
|
$ |
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
Bank |
|
|
176,312 |
|
|
|
13.0 |
|
|
|
108,149 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
135,186 |
|
|
|
10.0 |
% |
Tier 1 capital (to risk
weighted assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
158,314 |
|
|
|
11.7 |
|
|
|
54,116 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
Bank |
|
|
159,102 |
|
|
|
11.8 |
|
|
|
54,075 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
81,112 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
Tier 1 capital (to
average assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
158,314 |
|
|
|
9.9 |
|
|
|
64,116 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
Bank |
|
|
159,102 |
|
|
|
9.9 |
|
|
|
64,077 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
80,096 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capital (to risk
weighted assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
$ |
175,029 |
|
|
|
12.5 |
% |
|
$ |
112,480 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
% |
|
$ |
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
Bank |
|
|
175,122 |
|
|
|
12.5 |
|
|
|
112,398 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
140,497 |
|
|
|
10.0 |
% |
Tier 1 capital (to risk
weighted assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
157,111 |
|
|
|
11.2 |
|
|
|
56,240 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
Bank |
|
|
157,217 |
|
|
|
11.2 |
|
|
|
56,199 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
84,299 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
Tier 1 capital (to
average assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
157,111 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
69,135 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
NA |
|
Bank |
|
|
157,217 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
69,112 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
86,389 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
(Continued)
35
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
11. |
|
REGULATORY MATTERS (Continued) |
|
|
|
Our consolidated capital levels as of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 include $32.0 million
of trust preferred securities issued by the trust in September 2004 and December 2004 subject to
certain limitations. Under applicable Federal Reserve guidelines, the trust preferred
securities constitute a restricted core capital element. The guidelines provide that the
aggregate amount of restricted core elements that may be included in our Tier 1 capital must not
exceed 25% of the sum of all core capital elements, including restricted core capital elements,
net of goodwill less any associated deferred tax liability. Our ability to include the trust
preferred securities in Tier 1 capital in accordance with the guidelines is not affected by the
provision of the Dodd-Frank Act generally restricting such treatment, because (i) the trust
preferred securities were issued before May 19, 2010, and ii) our total consolidated assets as
of December 31, 2009 were less than $15.0 billion. As of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010,
all $32.0 million of the trust preferred securities were included in our consolidated Tier 1
capital. |
|
|
|
On July 9, 2010, we announced via a Form 8-K filed with the SEC that we were deferring regularly
scheduled quarterly interest payments on our subordinated debentures beginning with the
quarterly interest payment scheduled to be paid on July 18, 2010. The deferral of interest
payments on the subordinated debentures results in the deferral of distributions on our trust
preferred securities. We also announced that we were deferring regularly scheduled quarterly
dividend payments on our preferred stock beginning with the quarterly dividend payment scheduled
to be paid on August 15, 2010. We have not determined the duration of the deferral period. |
|
|
|
Our and our banks ability to pay cash and stock dividends is subject to limitations under
various laws and regulations and to prudent and sound banking practices. In April 2010, we
suspended future payments of cash dividends on our common stock until economic conditions and
our financial performance improve. In addition, we are precluded from paying dividends on our
common stock and preferred stock because, under the terms of our subordinated debentures, we
cannot pay dividends during periods when we have deferred the payment of interest on our
subordinated debentures; and, as indicated above in this Note 11, we are now deferring such
interest payments. Also, pursuant to our Articles of Incorporation, we are precluded from
paying dividends on our common stock while any dividends accrued on our preferred stock have not
been declared and paid. Because, as indicated above in this Note 11, we have suspended the
payment of dividends on our preferred stock, we are precluded from paying dividends on our
common stock. |
36
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Forward Looking Statements
This report contains forward-looking statements that are based on managements beliefs,
assumptions, current expectations, estimates and projections about the financial services industry,
the economy, and our company. Words such as anticipates, believes, estimates, expects,
forecasts, intends, is likely, plans, projects, and variations of such words and similar
expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. These statements are not
guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions (Future
Factors) that are difficult to predict with regard to timing, extent, likelihood and degree of
occurrence. Therefore, actual results and outcomes may materially differ from what may be
expressed or forecasted in such forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to update,
amend, or clarify forward looking-statements, whether as a result of new information, future events
(whether anticipated or unanticipated), or otherwise.
Future Factors include, among others, changes in interest rates and interest rate relationships;
demand for products and services; the degree of competition by traditional and non-traditional
competitors; changes in banking regulation or actions by bank regulators; changes in tax laws;
changes in prices, levies, and assessments; the impact of technological advances; governmental and
regulatory policy changes; the outcomes of contingencies; trends in customer behavior as well as
their ability to repay loans; changes in local real estate values; changes in the national and
local economies; and risk factors described in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2010 or in this report. These are representative of the Future Factors that could
cause a difference between an ultimate actual outcome and a forward-looking statement.
Introduction
The following discussion compares the financial condition of Mercantile Bank Corporation and its
consolidated subsidiaries, Mercantile Bank of Michigan (our bank), our banks three subsidiaries,
Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company, LLC (our mortgage company), Mercantile Bank Real Estate Co.,
LLC (our real estate company) and Mercantile Insurance Center, Inc. (our insurance company), at
March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 and the results of operations for the three months ended March
31, 2011 and March 31, 2010. This discussion should be read in conjunction with the interim
consolidated financial statements and footnotes included in this report. Unless the text clearly
suggests otherwise, references in this report to us, we, our or the company include
Mercantile Bank Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries referred to above.
Critical Accounting Policies
Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America are complex and require us
to apply significant judgment to various accounting, reporting and disclosure matters. We must use
assumptions and estimates to apply these principles where actual measurements are not possible or
practical. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
should be read in conjunction with our unaudited financial statements included in this report. For
a discussion of our significant accounting policies, see Note 1 of the Notes to our Consolidated
Financial Statements included on pages F-46 through F-51 in our Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2010 (Commission file number 000-26719). Our allowance for loan losses policy and
accounting for income taxes are highly dependent upon subjective or complex judgments, assumptions
and estimates. Changes in such estimates may have a significant impact on the financial
statements, and actual results may differ from those estimates. We have reviewed the application
of these policies with the Audit Committee of our Board of Directors.
37
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
Allowance for Loan Losses: The allowance for loan losses (allowance) is maintained at a
level we believe is adequate to absorb probable incurred losses identified and inherent in the loan
portfolio. Our
evaluation of the adequacy of the allowance is an estimate based on past loan loss experience, the
nature and volume of the loan portfolio, information about specific borrower situations and
estimated collateral values, guidance from bank regulatory agencies, and assessments of the impact
of current and anticipated economic conditions on the loan portfolio. Allocations of the allowance
may be made for specific loans, but the entire allowance is available for any loan that, in our
judgment, should be charged-off. Loan losses are charged against the allowance when we believe the
uncollectability of a loan is likely. The balance of the allowance represents our best estimate,
but significant downturns in circumstances relating to loan quality or economic conditions could
result in a requirement for an increased allowance in the future. Likewise, an upturn in loan
quality or improved economic conditions may result in a decline in the required allowance in the
future. In either instance, unanticipated changes could have a significant impact on operating
earnings.
The allowance is increased through a provision charged to operating expense. Uncollectable loans
are charged-off through the allowance. Recoveries of loans previously charged-off are added to the
allowance. A loan is considered impaired when it is probable that contractual interest and
principal payments will not be collected either for the amounts or by the dates as scheduled in the
loan agreement. Impairment is evaluated in aggregate for smaller-balance loans of similar nature
such as residential mortgage, consumer and credit card loans, and on an individual loan basis for
other loans. If a loan is impaired, a portion of the allowance is allocated so that the loan is
reported, net, at the present value of estimated future cash flows using the loans existing rate
or at the fair value of collateral if repayment is expected solely from the collateral. The timing
of obtaining outside appraisals varies, generally depending on the nature and complexity of the
property being evaluated, general breadth of activity within the marketplace and the age of the
most recent appraisal. For collateral dependent impaired loans, in most cases we obtain and use
the as is value as indicated in the appraisal report, adjusting for any expected selling costs.
In certain circumstances, we may internally update outside appraisals based on recent information
impacting a particular or similar property, or due to identifiable trends (e.g., recent sales of
similar properties) within our markets. The expected future cash flows exclude potential cash
flows from certain guarantors. To the extent these guarantors provide repayments, a recovery would
be recorded upon receipt. Loans are evaluated for impairment when payments are delayed, typically
30 days or more, or when serious deficiencies are identified within the credit relationship. Our
policy for recognizing income on impaired loans is to accrue interest unless a loan is placed on
nonaccrual status. We put loans into nonaccrual status when the full collection of principal and
interest is not expected.
Income Tax Accounting: Current income tax liabilities or assets are established for the
amount of taxes payable or refundable for the current year. In the preparation of income tax
returns, tax positions are taken based on interpretation of federal and state income tax laws for
which the outcome may be uncertain. We periodically review and evaluate the status of our tax
positions and make adjustments as necessary. Deferred income tax liabilities and assets are also
established for the future tax consequences of events that have been recognized in our financial
statements or tax returns. A deferred income tax liability or asset is recognized for the
estimated future tax effects attributable to temporary differences that can be carried forward
(used) in future years. The valuation of our net deferred income tax asset is considered critical
as it requires us to make estimates based on provisions of the enacted tax laws. The assessment of
the realizability of the net deferred income tax asset involves the use of estimates, assumptions,
interpretations and judgments concerning accounting pronouncements, federal and state tax codes and
the extent of future taxable income. There can be no assurance that future events, such as court
decisions, positions of federal and state tax authorities, and the extent of future taxable income
will not differ from our current assessment, the impact of which could be significant to the
consolidated results of operations and reported earnings.
38
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
Accounting guidance requires that we assess whether a valuation allowance should be established
against our net deferred tax asset based on the consideration of all available evidence using a
more likely than not standard. In making such judgments, we consider both positive and negative
evidence and analyze changes in near-term market conditions as well as other factors which may
impact future operating results. Significant weight is given to evidence that can be objectively
verified. Despite
improvements in key areas such as an expanded net interest margin, increased regulatory capital
levels, a continued shift to local funding sources and reduced controllable overhead costs, the
loan provision expense and problem asset administrative costs remain sizable. The continuing
impact from the distressed operating environment has restricted our ability to rely on projections
of future taxable income to support the recovery of our deferred tax asset. Consequently, we have
determined it necessary to establish and maintain a valuation allowance against our entire net
deferred tax asset as of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010. We will continue to monitor our net
deferred tax asset quarterly for changes affecting its realizability.
Financial Overview
Over the past several years, our earnings performance has been negatively impacted by substantial
provisions to the allowance for loan losses as well as administrative costs associated with problem
assets. Ongoing state, regional and national economic struggles have negatively impacted some of
our borrowers cash flows and underlying collateral values, leading to an elevated level of
nonperforming assets, higher loan charge-offs and increased overall credit risk within our loan
portfolio. We have worked with our borrowers to develop constructive dialogue to strengthen our
relationships and enhance our ability to resolve complex issues; however, with the environment for
the banking industry likely to remain stressed until economic conditions improve, credit quality
will continue to be our major concern. We will remain vigilant in the identification and
administration of problem assets, but provisions to the allowance and problem asset administration
costs will likely remain above historical levels for some period of time, dampening future earnings
performance.
We recorded a net profit during the first quarter of 2011, our first quarterly net profit since the
fourth quarter of 2008. A significantly lower provision expense primarily provided for the
positive earnings performance; however, our improved earnings performance also reflects the many
positive steps we have taken over the past several years to not only partially mitigate the impact
of asset quality-related costs in the near term, but to benefit us on a longer-term basis as well.
First, our net interest margin has been expanding as we have replaced maturing high-rate deposits
and borrowed funds with lower-cost funds, while at the same time our commercial loan pricing
initiatives offset the negative impact of a relatively high level of nonaccrual loans. Next, our
regulatory risk-based capital ratios are increasing, as the sale of preferred stock under the
Department of Treasurys Capital Purchase Program and the reduction of loans outstanding have more
than offset the impact of our cumulative net losses. In addition, we are increasing our local
deposit balances, reflecting the successful implementation of various initiatives, campaigns and
product enhancements. The local deposit growth, combined with the reduction of loans outstanding,
are providing for a substantial reduction of, and reliance on, wholesale funds. Lastly, we are
seeing the positive effect of our branch consolidation and other overhead cost reduction
initiatives, as we continue to make strides to reduce controllable noninterest expense.
Our asset quality metrics are on an improving trend, and we are cautiously optimistic that the
positive trends will continue. In aggregate dollar amounts, nonperforming asset levels have been
declining over the past four quarters, and as of March 31, 2011 were at the lowest level since
March 31, 2009. Progress in the stabilization of economic and real estate market conditions has
provided for numerous loan rating upgrades and significantly lower volumes of loan rating
downgrades, providing for a substantially lower provision expense during the first quarter of 2011.
We believe a continuation of improved market conditions will provide for lower future period
provision expense and problem asset administration costs when compared to levels over the past
several years.
39
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
Financial Condition
During the first three months of 2011, our total assets decreased $55.5 million, and totaled $1.58
billion as of March 31, 2011. The decline in total assets was comprised primarily of a $55.7
million reduction in total loans and a $13.5 million decrease in securities, more than offsetting a
$12.7 million increase in cash and cash equivalents. Total deposits declined $20.2 million and
securities sold under agreements to repurchase (repurchase agreements) decreased $36.2 million.
Commercial loans declined $49.6 million during the first three months of 2011, and at March 31,
2011 totaled $1.13 billion, or 93.3% of the loan portfolio. The decline in outstanding balances
primarily reflects the impact of a concerted effort on our part to reduce exposure to certain
non-owner occupied commercial real estate (CRE) lending and the sluggishness in business activity
in our markets. During the first three months of 2011, commercial loans collateralized by
non-owner occupied CRE declined $32.1 million. Our systematic approach to reducing our exposure to
certain non-owner occupied CRE lending will be prolonged, given the nature of CRE lending and
depressed economic conditions; however, we believe that such a reduction is in our best interest
when taking into account the increased inherent credit risk and nominal deposit balances generally
associated with the targeted borrowing relationships. Our commercial and industrial (C&I) loan
portfolio declined $8.0 million during the first three months of 2011, in large part reflecting
ongoing sluggish business activity and a corresponding reduction in accounts receivable and
inventory financings. We would expect to see an increase in commercial line of credit usage when
economic conditions improve. Also during the first three months of 2011, commercial loans
collateralized by owner-occupied CRE declined $6.5 million and commercial loans related to vacant
land, land development and residential construction decreased by $2.9 million.
The commercial loan portfolio represents loans to businesses generally located within our market
areas. Approximately 75% of the commercial loan portfolio is primarily secured by real estate
properties, with the remaining generally secured by other business assets such as accounts
receivable, inventory and equipment. The continued concentration of the loan portfolio in
commercial loans is consistent with our strategy of focusing a substantial amount of our efforts on
commercial banking. Corporate and business lending is an area of expertise for our senior
management team, and our commercial lenders have extensive commercial lending experience, with most
having at least ten years experience. Of each of the loan categories that we originate,
commercial loans are most efficiently originated and managed, thus limiting overhead costs by
necessitating the attention of fewer employees. Our commercial lending business generates the
largest portion of local deposits and is our primary source of demand deposits.
40
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
The following table summarizes our loans secured by real estate, excluding residential mortgage
loans representing permanent financing of owner occupied dwellings and home equity lines of credit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3/31/11 |
|
|
12/31/10 |
|
|
9/30/10 |
|
|
6/30/10 |
|
|
3/31/10 |
|
Residential-Related: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vacant Land |
|
$ |
16,321,000 |
|
|
$ |
17,201,000 |
|
|
$ |
18,013,000 |
|
|
$ |
20,351,000 |
|
|
$ |
20,871,000 |
|
Land Development |
|
|
27,171,000 |
|
|
|
28,147,000 |
|
|
|
29,735,000 |
|
|
|
29,627,000 |
|
|
|
32,199,000 |
|
Construction |
|
|
4,906,000 |
|
|
|
5,621,000 |
|
|
|
5,854,000 |
|
|
|
6,627,000 |
|
|
|
7,872,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,398,000 |
|
|
|
50,969,000 |
|
|
|
53,602,000 |
|
|
|
56,605,000 |
|
|
|
60,942,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comml Non-Owner Occupied: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vacant Land |
|
|
13,669,000 |
|
|
|
14,293,000 |
|
|
|
15,416,000 |
|
|
|
19,812,000 |
|
|
|
22,304,000 |
|
Land Development |
|
|
16,492,000 |
|
|
|
17,807,000 |
|
|
|
18,221,000 |
|
|
|
18,585,000 |
|
|
|
19,058,000 |
|
Construction |
|
|
10,046,000 |
|
|
|
31,827,000 |
|
|
|
39,620,000 |
|
|
|
52,295,000 |
|
|
|
52,107,000 |
|
Commercial Buildings |
|
|
484,629,000 |
|
|
|
489,371,000 |
|
|
|
509,777,000 |
|
|
|
512,816,000 |
|
|
|
539,284,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
524,836,000 |
|
|
|
553,298,000 |
|
|
|
583,034,000 |
|
|
|
603,508,000 |
|
|
|
632,753,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comml Owner Occupied: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
|
1,404,000 |
|
|
|
672,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1,360,000 |
|
|
|
1,651,000 |
|
Commercial Buildings |
|
|
273,739,000 |
|
|
|
282,388,000 |
|
|
|
298,846,000 |
|
|
|
302,768,000 |
|
|
|
316,302,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
275,143,000 |
|
|
|
283,060,000 |
|
|
|
298,846,000 |
|
|
|
304,128,000 |
|
|
|
317,953,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
848,377,000 |
|
|
$ |
887,327,000 |
|
|
$ |
935,482,000 |
|
|
$ |
964,241,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,011,648,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans and consumer loans declined in aggregate $6.2 million during the
first three months of 2011, and at March 31, 2011, totaled $80.5 million, or 6.7% of the total loan
portfolio. Although residential mortgage loan and consumer loan portfolios may increase in future
periods, we expect the commercial sector of the lending efforts and resultant assets to remain the
dominant loan portfolio category.
Our credit policies establish guidelines to manage credit risk and asset quality. These guidelines
include loan review and early identification of problem loans to provide appropriate loan portfolio
administration. The credit policies and procedures are meant to minimize the risk and
uncertainties inherent in lending. In following these policies and procedures, we must rely on
estimates, appraisals and evaluations of loans and the possibility that changes in these could
occur quickly because of changing economic conditions. Identified problem loans, which exhibit
characteristics (financial or otherwise) that could cause the loans to become nonperforming or
require restructuring in the future, are included on the internal watch list. Senior management
and the Board of Directors review this list regularly. Market value estimates of collateral on
impaired loans, as well as on foreclosed and repossessed assets, are reviewed periodically;
however, we have a process in place to monitor whether value estimates at each quarter-end are
reflective of current market conditions. Our credit policies establish criteria for obtaining
appraisals and determining internal value estimates. We may also adjust outside and internal
valuations based on identifiable trends within our markets, such as recent sales of similar
properties or assets, listing prices and offers received. In addition, we may discount certain
appraised and internal value estimates to address distressed market conditions.
41
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
The levels of net loan charge-offs and nonperforming assets have been elevated since early 2007.
The substantial and rapid collapse of the residential real estate market that started in 2007 had a
significant
negative impact on the residential real estate development lending portion of our business. The
resulting decline in real estate prices and slowdown in sales have stretched the cash flow of our
local developers and eroded the value of our underlying collateral, causing elevated levels of
nonperforming assets and net loan charge-offs. In addition, we have witnessed stressed economic
conditions in Michigan and throughout the country over the past several years. The resulting
decline in business revenue has negatively impacted the cash flows of many of our borrowers, some
to the point where loan payments have become past due or will likely become delinquent in future
periods. In addition, real estate prices have fallen significantly, thereby exposing us to
larger-than-typical losses in those instances where the sale of collateral is the primary source of
repayment. Also during this time, we have seen deterioration in guarantors financial capacities
to fund deficient cash flows and reduce or eliminate collateral deficiencies. It is likely that
the net loan charge-offs and nonperforming assets will remain elevated in comparison to our
historical levels until economic conditions improve.
Throughout 2008, we experienced a rapid deterioration in a number of commercial loan relationships
which previously had been performing satisfactorily. Analysis of certain commercial borrowers
revealed a reduced capability on the part of these borrowers to make required payments as indicated
by factors such as delinquent loan payments, diminished cash flow, deteriorating financial
performance, or past due property taxes, and in the case of commercial and residential development
projects slow absorption or sales trends. In addition, commercial real estate is the primary
source of collateral for many of these borrowing relationships and updated evaluations and
appraisals in many cases reflected significant declines from the original estimated values.
Throughout 2009, 2010 and during the first three months of 2011, we saw a continuation of the
stresses caused by the poor economic conditions, especially in the CRE markets. High vacancy rates
or slow absorption have resulted in inadequate cash flow generated from some real estate projects
we have financed, and have required guarantors to provide personal funds to make full contractual
loan payments and pay other operating costs. In some cases, the guarantors cash and other liquid
reserves have become seriously diminished. In other cases, sale of the collateral, either by the
borrower or us, is our primary source of repayment.
We are, however, encouraged by the apparent credit quality stabilization within our loan portfolio
during the past several quarters. After a period of significant and ongoing increases from 2007
through September 30, 2009, the level of nonperforming assets was relatively unchanged from
September 30, 2009 through June 30, 2010, and then declined during the third and fourth quarters of
2010 and first quarter of 2011. Of particular note are the reduced level of additions to the
nonperforming asset category and an increased level of interest in, and sales of, foreclosed
properties and assets securing nonperforming loans.
As of March 31, 2011, nonperforming assets totaled $76.1 million, or 4.8% of total assets, compared
to $86.1 million (5.3% of total assets) and $117.6 million (6.2% of total assets) as of December
31, 2010 and March 31, 2010, respectively. The $10.0 million reduction during the first three
months of 2011 and the $41.5 million decline during the twelve-month period ended March 31, 2011
are primarily associated with loans on, and properties consisting of, non-owner occupied CRE and
residential-related development. As of March 31, 2011, nonperforming loans secured by, and
foreclosed properties consisting of, non-owner occupied CRE properties totaled $30.1 million,
reflecting reductions of $4.1 million and $16.5 million from December 31, 2010 and March 31, 2010,
respectively. Nonperforming loans and foreclosed properties associated with the development of
residential-related real estate totaled $16.5 million as of March 31, 2011, reflecting reductions
of $0.4 million and $17.7 million from December 31, 2010 and March 31, 2010, respectively.
Nonperforming C&I loans and repossessed assets totaled $4.8 million as of March 31, 2011, a
reduction of $3.5 million from December 31, 2010 and $4.6 million from March 31, 2010.
42
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
The following table summarizes nonperforming loans, including troubled debt restructurings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3/31/11 |
|
|
12/31/10 |
|
|
9/30/10 |
|
|
6/30/10 |
|
|
3/31/10 |
|
Past due 90 days or more and
accruing interest |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
766,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
24,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
Nonaccrual, including troubled
debt restructurings |
|
|
55,444,000 |
|
|
|
63,915,000 |
|
|
|
64,639,000 |
|
|
|
81,543,000 |
|
|
|
88,450,000 |
|
Troubled debt restructurings,
accruing interest |
|
|
4,761,000 |
|
|
|
4,763,000 |
|
|
|
5,862,000 |
|
|
|
5,946,000 |
|
|
|
6,011,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
60,205,000 |
|
|
$ |
69,444,000 |
|
|
$ |
70,501,000 |
|
|
$ |
87,513,000 |
|
|
$ |
94,461,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table provides a breakdown of nonperforming assets by property type:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3/31/11 |
|
|
12/31/10 |
|
|
9/30/10 |
|
|
6/30/10 |
|
|
3/31/10 |
|
Residential Real Estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land Development |
|
$ |
14,252,000 |
|
|
$ |
14,547,000 |
|
|
$ |
16,746,000 |
|
|
$ |
21,551,000 |
|
|
$ |
22,781,000 |
|
Construction |
|
|
2,268,000 |
|
|
|
2,333,000 |
|
|
|
2,924,000 |
|
|
|
10,231,000 |
|
|
|
11,425,000 |
|
Owner Occupied / Rental |
|
|
8,893,000 |
|
|
|
9,454,000 |
|
|
|
7,251,000 |
|
|
|
6,159,000 |
|
|
|
5,908,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,413,000 |
|
|
|
26,334,000 |
|
|
|
26,921,000 |
|
|
|
37,941,000 |
|
|
|
40,114,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial Real Estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land Development |
|
|
2,422,000 |
|
|
|
2,454,000 |
|
|
|
2,277,000 |
|
|
|
2,050,000 |
|
|
|
3,031,000 |
|
Construction |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
571,000 |
|
|
|
1,238,000 |
|
Owner Occupied |
|
|
13,389,000 |
|
|
|
14,740,000 |
|
|
|
15,083,000 |
|
|
|
16,216,000 |
|
|
|
17,311,000 |
|
Non-Owner Occupied |
|
|
30,086,000 |
|
|
|
34,209,000 |
|
|
|
41,725,000 |
|
|
|
46,706,000 |
|
|
|
46,552,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,897,000 |
|
|
|
51,403,000 |
|
|
|
59,085,000 |
|
|
|
65,543,000 |
|
|
|
68,132,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Real Estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial Assets |
|
|
4,728,000 |
|
|
|
8,221,000 |
|
|
|
6,386,000 |
|
|
|
7,049,000 |
|
|
|
9,303,000 |
|
Consumer Assets |
|
|
51,000 |
|
|
|
161,000 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
8,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,779,000 |
|
|
|
8,382,000 |
|
|
|
6,391,000 |
|
|
|
7,049,000 |
|
|
|
9,311,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
76,089,000 |
|
|
$ |
86,119,000 |
|
|
$ |
92,397,000 |
|
|
$ |
110,533,000 |
|
|
$ |
117,557,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
The following table provides a reconciliation of nonperforming assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Qtr |
|
|
4th Qtr |
|
|
3rd Qtr |
|
|
2nd Qtr |
|
|
1st Qtr |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
86,119,000 |
|
|
$ |
92,397,000 |
|
|
$ |
110,533,000 |
|
|
$ |
117,557,000 |
|
|
$ |
111,658,000 |
|
Additions |
|
|
3,848,000 |
|
|
|
13,602,000 |
|
|
|
10,905,000 |
|
|
|
13,101,000 |
|
|
|
23,054,000 |
|
Returns to performing
status |
|
|
(766,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,019,000 |
) |
|
|
(7,938,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,356,000 |
) |
|
|
(811,000 |
) |
Principal payments |
|
|
(5,555,000 |
) |
|
|
(7,217,000 |
) |
|
|
(5,422,000 |
) |
|
|
(7,332,000 |
) |
|
|
(4,242,000 |
) |
Sale proceeds |
|
|
(2,085,000 |
) |
|
|
(5,282,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,209,000 |
) |
|
|
(2,398,000 |
) |
|
|
(5,080,000 |
) |
Loan charge-offs |
|
|
(4,800,000 |
) |
|
|
(4,650,000 |
) |
|
|
(12,829,000 |
) |
|
|
(8,176,000 |
) |
|
|
(6,117,000 |
) |
Valuation write-downs |
|
|
(672,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,712,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,643,000 |
) |
|
|
(863,000 |
) |
|
|
(905,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
76,089,000 |
|
|
$ |
86,119,000 |
|
|
$ |
92,397,000 |
|
|
$ |
110,533,000 |
|
|
$ |
117,557,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loan charge-offs during the first quarter of 2011 totaled $5.4 million, or an annualized
1.79% of average total loans. For comparative purposes, net loan charge-offs equaled 2.43% and
2.24% of average loans during 2010 and 2009, respectively. Approximately 60% of the loan
charge-offs during the first quarter of 2011 represent the charge-off of specific reserves that
were created through provision expense in prior periods. Net loan charge-offs in at least the next
few quarters are expected to remain elevated compared to historical averages due to the higher
volume of nonperforming loans and stressed economic conditions.
The following table provides a breakdown of net loan charge-offs (recoveries) by collateral type:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Qtr |
|
|
4th Qtr |
|
|
3rd Qtr |
|
|
2nd Qtr |
|
|
1st Qtr |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Residential Real Estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land Development |
|
$ |
(2,000 |
) |
|
$ |
312,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,115,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,254,000 |
|
|
$ |
565,000 |
|
Construction |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
173,000 |
|
|
|
93,000 |
|
|
|
649,000 |
|
|
|
587,000 |
|
Owner Occupied / Rental |
|
|
1,208,000 |
|
|
|
120,000 |
|
|
|
1,212,000 |
|
|
|
407,000 |
|
|
|
326,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,206,000 |
|
|
|
605,000 |
|
|
|
3,420,000 |
|
|
|
2,310,000 |
|
|
|
1,478,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial Real Estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land Development |
|
|
(73,000 |
) |
|
|
219,000 |
|
|
|
360,000 |
|
|
|
674,000 |
|
|
|
617,000 |
|
Construction |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
660,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Owner Occupied |
|
|
1,436,000 |
|
|
|
976,000 |
|
|
|
2,159,000 |
|
|
|
726,000 |
|
|
|
1,091,000 |
|
Non-Owner Occupied |
|
|
(40,000 |
) |
|
|
2,642,000 |
|
|
|
6,805,000 |
|
|
|
2,551,000 |
|
|
|
1,945,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,323,000 |
|
|
|
3,837,000 |
|
|
|
9,324,000 |
|
|
|
4,611,000 |
|
|
|
3,653,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Real Estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial Assets |
|
|
2,794,000 |
|
|
|
819,000 |
|
|
|
1,517,000 |
|
|
|
1,670,000 |
|
|
|
1,012,000 |
|
Consumer Assets |
|
|
126,000 |
|
|
|
47,000 |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
(3,000 |
) |
|
|
9,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,920,000 |
|
|
|
866,000 |
|
|
|
1,518,000 |
|
|
|
1,667,000 |
|
|
|
1,021,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
5,449,000 |
|
|
$ |
5,308,000 |
|
|
$ |
14,262,000 |
|
|
$ |
8,588,000 |
|
|
$ |
6,152,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
In each accounting period, we adjust the allowance to the amount we believe is necessary to
maintain the allowance at adequate levels. Through the loan review and credit departments, we
attempt to establish portions of the allowance based on specifically identifiable problem loans.
The evaluation of the allowance is further based on, but not limited to, consideration of the
internally prepared Allowance Analysis, loan loss migration analysis, composition of the loan
portfolio, third party analysis of the loan administration processes and portfolio, and general
economic conditions.
The Allowance Analysis applies reserve allocation factors to non-impaired outstanding loan
balances, which is combined with specific reserves to calculate an overall allowance dollar amount.
For non-impaired commercial loans, which continue to comprise a vast majority of our total loans,
reserve allocation factors are based on the loan ratings as determined by our standardized grade
paradigms and by loan purpose. We have divided our commercial loan portfolio into five classes: 1)
commercial and industrial loans; 2) vacant land, land development and residential construction
loans; 3) owner occupied real estate loans; 4) non-owner occupied real estate loans; and 5)
multi-family and residential rental property loans. The reserve allocation factors are primarily
based on the historical trends of net loan charge-offs through a migration analysis whereby net
loan losses are tracked via assigned grades over various time periods, with adjustments made for
environmental factors reflecting the current status of, or recent changes in, items such as:
lending policies and procedures; economic conditions; nature and volume of the loan portfolio;
experience, ability and depth of management and lending staff; volume and severity of past due,
nonaccrual and adversely classified loans; effectiveness of the loan review program; value of
underlying collateral; loan concentrations; and other external factors such as competition and
regulatory environment. Adjustments for specific lending relationships, particularly impaired
loans, are made on a case-by-case basis. Non-impaired retail loan reserve allocations are
determined in a similar fashion as those for non-impaired commercial loans, except that retail
loans are segmented by type of credit and not a grading system. We regularly review the Allowance
Analysis and make adjustments periodically based upon identifiable trends and experience.
A migration analysis is completed quarterly to assist us in determining appropriate reserve
allocation factors for non-impaired commercial loans. Our migration takes into account various
time periods, and while we generally place most weight on the eight-quarter time frame as that
period is close to the average duration of our loan portfolio, consideration is given to other time
periods as part of our assessment. Although the migration analysis provides an accurate historical
accounting of our net loan losses, it is not able to fully account for environmental factors that
will also very likely impact the collectability of our commercial loans as of any quarter-end date.
Therefore, we incorporate the environmental factors as adjustments to the historical data.
Environmental factors include both internal and external items. We believe the most significant
internal environmental factor is our credit culture and the relative aggressiveness in assigning
and revising commercial loan risk ratings. Although we have been consistent in our approach to
commercial loan ratings, ongoing stressed economic conditions have resulted in an even higher sense
of aggressiveness with regards to the downgrading of lending relationships. In addition, we made
revisions to our grading paradigms in early 2009 that mathematically resulted in commercial loan
relationships being more quickly downgraded when signs of stress are noted, such as slower sales
activity for construction and land development CRE relationships and reduced operating
performance/cash flow coverage for C&I relationships. These changes, coupled with the stressed
economic environment, have resulted in significant downgrades and the need for substantial
provisions to the allowance over the past several years. To more effectively manage our commercial
loan portfolio, we created two specific groups tasked with managing our higher exposure lending
relationships. One team manages the most distressed credits, while the other team manages larger
weakened credit relationships.
45
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
The most significant external environmental factor is the assessment of the current economic
environment and the resulting implications on our commercial loan portfolio. Currently, we believe
conditions remain stressed for non-owner occupied CRE; however, recent data and performance reflect
a level of stability in the C&I segment of our loan portfolio.
The primary risk elements with respect to commercial loans are the financial condition of the
borrower, the sufficiency of collateral, and timeliness of scheduled payments. We have a policy of
requesting and reviewing periodic financial statements from commercial loan customers, and we have
a disciplined and formalized review of the existence of collateral and its value. The primary risk
element with respect to each residential real estate loan and consumer loan is the timeliness of
scheduled payments. We have a
reporting system that monitors past due loans and have adopted policies to pursue creditors rights
in order to preserve our collateral position.
Reflecting the stressed economic conditions and resulting negative impact on our loan portfolio, we
have substantially increased the allowance as a percent of the loan portfolio over the past several
years. The allowance equaled $42.1 million, or 3.49% of total loans outstanding, as of March 31,
2011, compared to 3.59%, 3.11%, 1.46% and 1.43% at year-end 2010, 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively. As of March 31, 2011, the allowance was comprised of $32.9 million in general
reserves relating to non-impaired loans and $9.2 million in specific reserve allocations relating
to impaired loans. Impaired loans with an aggregate carrying value of $30.3 million as of March
31, 2011 had been subject to previous partial charge-offs aggregating $33.0 million. Those partial
charge-offs were recorded as follows: $3.7 million in first quarter of 2011, $23.6 million in 2010,
$4.4 million in 2009 and $1.3 million in 2008. As of March 31, 2011, specific reserves allocated
to impaired loans that had been subject to a previous partial charge-off totaled $2.6 million.
Although we believe the allowance is adequate to absorb loan losses as they arise, there can be no
assurance that we will not sustain loan losses in any given period that could be substantial in
relation to, or greater than, the size of the allowance.
Securities decreased by $13.5 million during the first three months of 2011, totaling $221.7
million as of March 31, 2011. Proceeds from called U.S. Government agency bonds during the first
three months of 2011 totaled $11.0 million, with another $4.0 million received from principal
paydowns on mortgage-backed securities and $0.1 million from matured Michigan Strategic Fund bonds.
Purchases during the first three months of 2011, consisting almost exclusively of U.S. Government
agency bonds, totaled $2.0 million. At March 31, 2011, the portfolio was comprised of U.S.
Government agency bonds (50%), U.S. Government agency issued or guaranteed mortgage-backed
securities (20%), tax-exempt municipal general obligation and revenue bonds (15%), Michigan
Strategic Fund bonds (8%), Federal Home Loan Bank stock (6%) and mutual funds (1%). All of our
securities, exclusive of FHLB stock, are currently designated as available for sale, and are
therefore stated at fair value. The fair value of securities designated as available for sale at
March 31, 2011 totaled $207.3 million, including a net unrealized gain of $1.5 million. We
maintain the securities portfolio at levels to provide adequate pledging and secondary liquidity
for our daily operations. In addition, the securities portfolio serves a primary interest rate
risk management function.
FHLB stock totaled $14.3 million as of March 31, 2011, unchanged from December 31, 2010 but down
$1.3 million from December 31, 2009 reflecting an unsolicited redemption in late 2010. Our
investment in FHLB stock is necessary to engage in their advance and other financing programs. We
received a quarterly cash dividend at a rate of 2.50% during the first quarter of 2011 and at an
average rate of 2.00% per annum during 2010, and we believe a cash dividend will continue to be
paid in future quarters.
46
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
Market values on our U.S. Government agency bonds, mortgage-backed securities issued or guaranteed
by U.S. Government agencies and tax-exempt general obligation and revenue municipal bonds are
determined on a monthly basis with the assistance of a third party vendor. Evaluated pricing
models that vary by type of security and incorporate available market data are utilized. Standard
inputs include issuer and type of security, benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes
and issuer spreads. The market value of other securities is estimated at carrying value as those
financial instruments are generally bought and sold at par value. We believe our valuation
methodology provides for a reasonable estimation of market value, and that it is consistent with
the requirements of accounting guidelines.
Federal funds sold, consisting of excess funds sold overnight to a correspondent bank, along with
investments in interest-bearing deposits at correspondent banks, are used to manage daily liquidity
needs and interest rate sensitivity. During the first three months of 2011, the average balance of
these funds equaled $57.3 million, or 3.8% of average earning assets. This level is relatively
similar to the 4.5% and
3.0% of average earning assets maintained during 2010 and 2009, respectively, but considerably
higher than the historical average of less than 1.0%. Given the stressed market and economic
conditions, we made the decision in early 2009 to operate with a higher than traditional balance of
federal funds sold and interest-bearing deposits. We expect to maintain the higher balance of
federal funds sold and other interest-bearing deposits, likely 2.5% to 3.5% of average earning
assets, until market and economic conditions return to more normalized levels.
Premises and equipment at March 31, 2011 equaled $27.5 million, a decrease of $0.4 million during
the first three months of 2011. Purchases of premises and equipment during the first three months
of 2011 were nominal in amount, while depreciation expense totaled $0.4 million. On December 30,
2009, all FDIC-insured financial institutions were required to prepay estimated FDIC deposit
insurance assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and the years 2010, 2011 and 2012. The amount
we paid equaled $16.3 million, which is being expensed over the future quarterly assessment
periods. As of March 31, 2011, the balance of this prepaid asset was $11.2 million. Under current
regulation, any unused portion of the amount prepaid remaining after payment of amounts due on June
30, 2013 will be returned to us by the FDIC.
Foreclosed and repossessed assets totaled $15.9 million at March 31, 2011, compared to $16.7
million and $26.6 million on December 31, 2010, and December 31, 2009, respectively. The $0.8
million reduction during the first three months of 2011 consisted of $2.2 million in sales proceeds
and $0.6 million in valuation write-downs, offset by $2.0 million in transfers from the loan
portfolio. We expect foreclosed and repossessed assets to remain at elevated levels as we move
through the stressed economic environment and in certain situations elect to foreclose or repossess
collateral. The State of Michigan has a relatively protracted foreclosure process that generally
takes six to twelve months before deed is obtained. While we expect further transfers from loans
to foreclosed and repossessed assets in future periods reflecting our collection efforts on
impaired lending relationships, we are hopeful that the increased sales activity we witnessed
during 2010 and the first three months of 2011 will continue and limit the overall increase in and
average balance of this nonperforming asset category.
47
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
Deposits decreased $20.2 million during the first three months of 2011, totaling $1.25 billion at
March 31, 2011. Local deposits decreased $7.7 million, while out-of-area deposits decreased $12.5
million. As a percent of total deposits, local deposits equaled 60.4% on March 31, 2011, compared
to 60.0%, 48.3% and 29.4% on December 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008,
respectively. In comparing balances as of March 31, 2011 to those at December 31, 2008, total
deposits have declined by $345.9 million, consisting of a $286.8 million increase in local deposits
and a $632.7 million decrease in out-of-area deposits. The decline in out-of-area deposits
primarily results from the decline in total loans and the increase in local deposits. The increase
in local deposits reflects various programs and initiatives we have implemented over the past
several years, including: certificate of deposit campaign; implementation of several
deposit-gathering initiatives in our commercial lending function; introduction of new
deposit-related products and services; and the continuation of providing our customers with the
latest in technological advances that give improved information, convenience and timeliness.
Noninterest-bearing checking deposit accounts increased during the first three months of 2011 after
having been relatively stable over the past several years. Noninterest-bearing checking accounts
averaged $125.5 million during the first three months of 2011, compared to an average balance of
$110
million to $120 million over the past several years. In fact, during the latter part of the first
quarter of 2011, the average balance was closer to the quarter-end balance of about $136 million.
A majority of the increase represents transfers from our repurchase agreement product, reflecting a
late 2010 rate change offered on the repurchase agreement product whereby for certain lower-balance
customers, maintaining their relationship with us in a noninterest-bearing checking account was
less expensive for them than keeping their funds in the repurchase agreement product when taking
into account the rate paid and fees assessed. We proactively worked with these customers,
resulting in approximately $12 million being transferred during the first three months of 2011.
Local interest-bearing checking accounts, in large part reflecting the continued success of our
executive banking product, increased $4.9 million during the first three months of 2011, and are up
$76.8 million since year-end 2009. Money market deposit accounts increased $6.8 million during the
first three months of 2011, and are up $125.5 million since year-end 2009. The increases in both
interest-bearing checking accounts and money market deposit accounts reflect our enhanced marketing
program and relatively aggressive rates which resulted in many new individual, business and
municipality deposits and increased balances from existing depositors, as well as transfers from
maturing certificates of deposit. Savings deposits decreased $22.8 million during the first three
months of 2011, but are down just $1.2 million since year-end 2009. A vast majority of the
increase in savings accounts during 2010 occurred during the latter part of the year, and was
comprised primarily of property tax deposits made by several local municipal customers. As
expected, a majority of these funds were withdrawn during the first quarter of 2011.
Certificates of deposit purchased by customers located within our market areas declined $19.8
million during the first three months of 2011, after decreasing $115.8 million during 2010. A
majority of the decline during both time periods reflects funds from maturing certificates of
deposit being transferred to interest-bearing checking and money market deposit accounts, and we
expect that trend to continue in future periods.
48
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
Deposits obtained from customers located outside of our market areas decreased $12.5 million during
the first three months of 2011, and have declined $228.3 million since year-end 2009. As of March
31, 2011, out-of-area deposits totaled $496.5 million. Out-of-area deposits primarily consist of
certificates of deposit obtained from depositors located outside our market areas and placed by
deposit brokers for a fee, but also include certificates of deposit obtained from the deposit
owners directly. The owners of out-of-area deposits include individuals, businesses and
municipalities located throughout the United States. In addition, during the first quarter of
2011, we established an interest-bearing checking account relationship with an out-of-area
depositor engaged in the management of retirement accounts. This custodial relationship totaled
$7.2 million as of March 31, 2011, and is expected to approximate $25 million by June 30, 2011. We
expect this to be a long-term relationship. The significant decline in out-of-area deposits since
year-end 2009 primarily reflects the influx of cash resulting from the reduction in total loans and
from the increase in local deposits.
Repurchase agreements decreased $36.2 million during the first three months of 2011, totaling $80.8
million as of March 31, 2011. About one-third of the decline represents transfers to
noninterest-bearing checking accounts, while the remainder primarily reflects expected seasonal
withdrawals as business customers use funds for tax and bonus payments. As part of our sweep
account program, collected funds from certain business noninterest-bearing checking accounts are
invested into over-night interest-bearing repurchase agreements. Such repurchase agreements are
not deposit accounts and are not afforded federal deposit insurance.
FHLB advances were unchanged during the first three months of 2011, but are down $140.0 million
since year-end 2009. As of March 31, 2011, FHLB advances totaled $65.0 million. The decline in
FHLB advances since year-end 2009 primarily reflects the influx of cash resulting from the
reduction in total loans and from the increase in local deposits. The FHLB advances are
collateralized by residential mortgage loans, first mortgage liens on multi-family residential
property loans, first mortgage liens on commercial real estate property loans, and substantially
all other assets of our bank, under a blanket lien arrangement. Our borrowing line of credit as of
March 31, 2011 totaled about $145 million, with availability approximating $80 million.
Liquidity
Liquidity is measured by our ability to raise funds through deposits, borrowed funds, capital or
cash flow from the repayment of loans and securities. These funds are used to fund loans, meet
deposit withdrawals, maintain reserve requirements and operate our company. Liquidity is primarily
achieved through local and out-of-area deposits and liquid assets such as securities available for
sale, matured and called securities, and federal funds sold. Asset and liability management is the
process of managing our balance sheet to achieve a mix of earning assets and liabilities that
maximizes profitability, while providing adequate liquidity.
To assist in providing needed funds, we have regularly obtained monies from wholesale funding
sources. Wholesale funds, comprised primarily of deposits from customers outside of our market
areas and advances from the FHLB, totaled $571.5 million, or 40.5% of combined deposits and
borrowed funds, as of March 31, 2011, compared to $584.1 million, or 39.8% of combined deposits and
borrowed funds as of December 31, 2010, $944.9 million, or 54.8% of combined deposits and borrowed
funds as of December 31, 2009, and $1.41 billion, or 71.5% of combined deposits and borrowed funds
as of December 31, 2008. The significant decline since year-end 2008 primarily reflects the influx
of cash resulting from the reduction in total loans and from increased local deposits.
49
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
Although local deposits have generally increased as new business, municipality and individual
deposit relationships are established and as existing customers increase the balances in their
accounts, and we witnessed significant local deposit growth during the past several years, the
relatively high reliance on wholesale funds will likely remain. As part of our interest rate risk
management strategy, a majority of our wholesale funds have a fixed interest rate and mature within
one year, reflecting the fact that a majority of our loans have a floating rate tied to either the
Mercantile Bank Prime Rate or LIBOR rates. While this maturity strategy increases inherent
liquidity risk, we believe the increased liquidity risk is sufficiently mitigated by the benefits
derived from an interest rate risk management standpoint. In addition, we have developed a
comprehensive contingency funding plan which we believe further mitigates the increased liquidity
risk.
Wholesale funds are generally a lower all-in cost source of funds when compared to the interest
rates that would have to be offered in our local markets to generate a commensurate level of funds.
Interest rates paid on new out-of-area deposits and FHLB advances have historically been similar
to interest rates paid on new certificates of deposit issued to local customers. In addition, the
overhead costs associated with wholesale funds are considerably less than the overhead costs that
would be incurred to attract and administer a similar level of local deposits, especially if the
estimated costs of a needed expanded branching network were taken into account.
As part of our sweep account program, collected funds from certain business noninterest-bearing
checking accounts are invested into over-night interest-bearing repurchase agreements. Such
repurchase agreements are not deposit accounts and are not afforded federal deposit insurance.
Repurchase agreements decreased $36.2 million during the first three months of 2011, totaling $80.8
million as of March 31, 2011. Approximately one-third of the decline represents transfers to
noninterest-bearing
checking accounts, reflecting a late 2010 rate change offered on the repurchase agreement product
whereby for certain lower-balance customers, maintaining their relationship with us in a
noninterest-bearing checking account was less expensive for them than keeping their funds in the
repurchase agreement product when taking into account the rate paid and fees assessed. We
proactively worked with these customers, resulting in approximately $12 million being transferred
during the first three months of 2011. The remainder of the decline primarily reflects expected
seasonal withdrawals as business customers use funds for tax and bonus payments. Generally, we see
an increase in the repurchase agreement aggregate balance throughout the calendar year, and then a
decline during the first quarter of each calendar year. Information regarding our repurchase
agreements as of March 31, 2011 and during the first three months of 2011 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding balance at March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
80,821,000 |
|
Weighted average interest rate at March 31, 2011 |
|
|
0.60 |
% |
Maximum daily balance three months ended March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
116,397,000 |
|
Average daily balance for three months ended March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
99,726,000 |
|
Weighted average interest rate for three months ended March 31, 2011 |
|
|
0.66 |
% |
As a member of the FHLB, we have access to the FHLB advance borrowing programs. FHLB advances
were unchanged during the first three months of 2011, but are down $140.0 million since December
31, 2009 and $205.0 million since December 31, 2008. As of March 31, 2011, FHLB advances totaled
$65.0 million. The decline in FHLB advances since year-end 2008 primarily reflects the influx of
cash resulting from the reduction in total loans and from the increase in local deposits. Based on
available collateral at March 31, 2011, we could borrow an additional $80.0 million.
50
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
We also have the ability to borrow up to $30.0 million on a daily basis through a correspondent
bank using an established unsecured federal funds purchased line of credit. At no time during the
first three months of 2011 did we access the federal funds purchased line of credit; in fact, we
have not accessed this line of credit since January of 2010. In contrast, federal funds sold
averaged $47.6 million during the first three months of 2011 and $69.3 million during all of 2010,
with another $9.7 million invested in interest-bearing deposits at correspondent banks during the
first three months of 2011 and $9.3 million during all of 2010. Given the volatile market and
stressed economic conditions, we have been operating with a higher than normal balance of federal
funds sold and other short-term investments. It is expected that we will maintain the higher
balance of liquid funds, likely to average 2.5% to 3.5% of average earning assets, until market and
economic conditions return to more normalized levels. As a result, we expect the use of our
federal funds purchased line of credit, in at least the near future, will be rare, if at all.
We have a line of credit through the Discount Window of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. Using
a substantial majority of our tax-exempt municipal securities as collateral, we could have borrowed
up to $28.6 million for terms of 1 to 28 days at March 31, 2011. We did not utilize this line of
credit during the first three months of 2011 or at any time during 2010 and 2009, and do not plan
to access this line of credit in future periods.
The following table reflects, as of March 31, 2011, significant fixed and determinable contractual
obligations to third parties by payment date, excluding accrued interest:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One Year |
|
|
One to |
|
|
Three to |
|
|
Over |
|
|
|
|
|
|
or Less |
|
|
Three Years |
|
|
Five Years |
|
|
Five Years |
|
|
Total |
|
Deposits without a stated
maturity |
|
$ |
501,307,000 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
501,307,000 |
|
Certificates of deposit |
|
|
470,074,000 |
|
|
|
219,994,000 |
|
|
|
62,269,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
752,337,000 |
|
Short-term borrowings |
|
|
80,821,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
80,821,000 |
|
Federal Home Loan Bank
advances |
|
|
30,000,000 |
|
|
|
35,000,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
65,000,000 |
|
Subordinated debentures |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
32,990,000 |
|
|
|
32,990,000 |
|
Other borrowed money |
|
|
10,000,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1,733,000 |
|
|
|
11,733,000 |
|
In addition to normal loan funding and deposit flow, we must maintain liquidity to meet the
demands of certain unfunded loan commitments and standby letters of credit. As of March 31, 2011,
we had a total of $224.1 million in unfunded loan commitments and $17.4 million in unfunded standby
letters of credit. Of the total unfunded loan commitments, $198.6 million were commitments
available as lines of credit to be drawn at any time as customers cash needs vary, and $25.5
million were for loan commitments expected to close and become funded within the next twelve
months. The level of commitments to make loans has declined significantly when compared to
historical levels, primarily reflecting stressed economic conditions. We regularly monitor
fluctuations in loan balances and commitment levels, and include such data in our overall liquidity
management.
We monitor our liquidity position and funding strategies on an ongoing basis, but recognize that
unexpected events, changes in economic or market conditions, reduction in earnings performance,
declining capital levels or situations beyond our control could cause liquidity challenges. While
we believe it is unlikely that a funding crisis of any significant degree is likely to materialize,
we have developed a comprehensive contingency funding plan that provides a framework for meeting
liquidity disruptions.
51
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
Capital Resources
Shareholders equity is a noninterest-bearing source of funds that can provide support for asset
growth. Shareholders equity was $126.8 million at March 31, 2011, compared to $125.9 million at
December 31, 2010. The $0.9 million increase during the first three months of 2011 is primarily
due to net income attributable to common shares of $1.1 million, partially offset by a $0.3 million
tax-adjusted decrease in the market value of our available for sale securities portfolio.
The increase in shareholders equity during the first three months of 2011 provided for improved
regulatory capital ratios, and our bank remains well capitalized. As of March 31, 2011, our
banks total risk-based capital ratio was 13.0%, compared to 12.5% at December 31, 2010. Our
banks total regulatory capital, consisting of shareholders equity plus a portion of the
allowance, increased by $1.2 million during the first three months of 2011, reflecting net income
of $1.9 million and a reduction of $0.7 million in eligible allowance due to a decline in total
risk-weighted assets. In addition to the increased total regulatory capital, our banks total
risk-based capital ratio increased due to a decline of $53.1 million in total risk-weighted assets,
primarily resulting from a reduction in commercial loans. As of March 31, 2011, our banks total
regulatory capital equaled $176.3 million, or approximately $41 million in excess of the 10.0%
minimum which is among the requirements to be categorized as well capitalized. Our and our
banks capital ratios as of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are disclosed in Note 11 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
On July 9, 2010, we announced via a Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission that
we were deferring regularly scheduled quarterly interest payments on our subordinated debentures
beginning with the quarterly interest payment to have been paid on July 18, 2010. The deferral of
interest payments on the subordinated debentures results in the deferral of distributions on our
trust preferred securities. We also announced that we were deferring regularly scheduled quarterly
dividend payments on our preferred stock beginning with the quarterly dividend payment scheduled to
have been paid on August 15, 2010. We have not determined the duration of the deferral period.
We and our bank are subject to regulatory capital requirements administered by state and federal
banking agencies. Failure to meet the various capital requirements can initiate regulatory action
that could have a direct material effect on the financial statements. Our banks ability to pay
cash and stock dividends is subject to limitations under various laws and regulations, to prudent
and sound banking practices, and to contractual provisions relating to our subordinated debentures
and participation in the Capital Purchase Program. In April 2010, we suspended future payments of
cash dividends on our common stock until economic conditions and our financial condition improve.
In addition, we are precluded from paying cash dividends on our common stock and preferred stock
because, under the terms of our subordinated debentures, we cannot pay cash dividends during
periods when we have deferred the payment of interest on our subordinated debentures, and, we are
now deferring such interest payments. Also, pursuant to our Articles of Incorporation, we are
precluded from paying cash dividends on our common stock while any dividends accrued on our
preferred stock have not been declared and paid. Because we have suspended the payment of
dividends on our preferred stock, we are precluded from paying cash dividends on our common stock.
Results of Operations
We recorded net income attributable to common shares of $1.1 million for the first quarter of 2011
($0.13 per basic share and $0.12 per diluted share), compared with a net loss attributable to
common shares of $3.0 million ($0.35 per basic and diluted share) recorded during the first quarter
of 2010.
52
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
The improved earnings performance in the first quarter of 2011 compared to the prior-year first
quarter primarily resulted from a lower provision to the allowance for loan losses. The decreased
provision expense reflects lower volumes of loan rating downgrades and nonperforming loans, as well
as progress in the stabilization of economic and real estate market conditions and resulting
collateral valuations. An increased net interest margin, which partially mitigated the negative
impact of a lower level of average earning assets, and a reduction in controllable overhead
expenses also contributed to the improved earnings performance.
Our earnings performance continues to be hindered by substantial provisions to the allowance for
loan losses and costs associated with the administration and resolution of problem assets,
reflecting continuing difficulties in the loan portfolio, most notably in the CRE segment. Ongoing
state, regional and national economic struggles have significantly hampered certain of our
borrowers cash flows and negatively impacted real estate values, resulting in elevated levels of
nonperforming assets and net loan charge-offs when compared to pre-2007 reporting periods.
Interest income during the first quarter of 2011 was $19.2 million, a decrease of $4.0 million, or
17.4%, from the $23.2 million earned during the first quarter of 2010. The reduction in interest
income is primarily attributable to a significant decrease in earning assets, and to a much lesser
extent, a declining yield on earning assets. During the first quarter of 2011, earning assets
averaged $1.52 billion, a decline of $304.5 million, or 16.7%, from the $1.82 billion in average
earning assets during the first quarter of 2010. Average loans were down $283.9 million, average
securities decreased $19.5 million, average federal funds sold decreased $2.9 million, and average
short-term investments increased $1.8 million.
During the first quarter of 2011 and 2010, earning assets had a weighted average yield (tax
equivalent-adjusted basis) of 5.16% and 5.22%, respectively. The decline in earning asset yield in
the first quarter of 2011 compared to the prior-year first quarter primarily resulted from a
decreased yield on average securities and an unfavorable change in average earning asset mix, which
more than offset the positive impact of an increased yield on average loans. The yield on average
securities was 4.49% in the first quarter of 2011 compared to 4.89% in the respective 2010 period.
The lower yield on average securities in the first quarter of 2011 compared to the prior-year first
quarter mainly resulted from a decreased yield
on U.S. Government agency bonds, reflecting a decrease in market rates, and a shift in the
securities portfolio mix from higher-yielding municipal securities to lower-yielding U.S.
Government agency bonds. After analyzing our current and forecasted federal income tax position,
we decided to sell certain tax-exempt municipal bonds with an aggregate book value of $20.0 million
in late March 2010. A vast majority of the sales proceeds were used to purchase U.S. Government
agency bonds during April and early May. Average loans equaled 81.2% of average earning assets
during the first quarter of 2011, while average securities, federal funds sold, and short-term
investments equaled 15.1%, 3.1%, and 0.6%, respectively. During the first quarter of 2010, average
loans, securities, federal funds sold, and short-term investments represented 83.2%, 13.6%, 2.8%,
and 0.4%, respectively, of average earning assets. The yield on average loans equaled 5.50% during
the first quarter of 2011 compared to 5.46% during the respective 2010 period. A lower average
balance of nonaccrual loans during the first quarter of 2011 compared to the prior-year first
quarter resulted in the higher yield on loans.
Interest expense during the first quarter of 2011 was $5.7 million, a decrease of $3.2 million, or
35.7%, from the $8.9 million expensed during the first quarter of 2010. The reduction in interest
expense is attributable to a decrease in the volume of interest-bearing liabilities and a decline
in the weighted average cost of interest-bearing liabilities. During the first quarter of 2011,
interest-bearing liabilities averaged $1.35 billion, or $315.2 million lower than average
interest-bearing liabilities of $1.66 billion during the same time period in 2010. Average
interest-bearing deposits were down $182.5 million, while average FHLB advances decreased $128.2
million, average other borrowings decreased $5.1 million, and average short-term borrowings
increased $0.6 million.
53
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
During the first quarter of 2011 and 2010, interest-bearing liabilities had a weighted average rate
of 1.72% and 2.17%, respectively. The lower weighted average cost of interest-bearing liabilities
in the first quarter of 2011 compared to the prior-year quarter is primarily due to the decline in
market interest rates that began late in the third quarter of 2007 and continued through December
of 2008. Market interest rates remained low during 2009, 2010, and the first quarter of 2011.
Maturing fixed-rate certificates of deposit and borrowings were renewed at lower rates, replaced by
lower-costing funds, or allowed to runoff during the twelve-month period ending March 31, 2011.
Net interest income during the first quarter of 2011 was $13.4 million, a decrease of $0.9 million,
or 6.0%, from the $14.3 million earned during the first quarter of 2010. The decrease in net
interest income was due to a decrease in earning assets, which more than offset an increase in the
net interest margin. Average earning assets were $1.52 billion during the first quarter of 2011, a
decrease of $304.5 million, or 16.7%, from the $1.82 billion in average earning assets during the
first quarter of 2010; the $283.9 million decline in average total loans accounted for
approximately 93% of the total reduction in average earning assets during this time period. The
net interest margin during the first quarter of 2011 was 3.64%, compared to 3.25% during the first
quarter of 2010. The improved net interest margin in the first quarter of 2011 compared to the
respective prior-year period reflects a reduction in our cost of funds, which more than offset the
decreased yield on earning assets. Although our yield on earning assets declined in the first
quarter of 2011 compared to the respective prior-year period, our cost of funds declined at a
significantly greater rate, resulting in the improved net interest margin. The cost of funds
primarily decreased as a result of higher-costing matured certificates of deposit and FHLB advances
being renewed at lower rates, replaced by lower-costing funds, or allowed to runoff.
The following table sets forth certain information relating to our consolidated average
interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities and reflects the average yield on assets
and average cost of liabilities for the first quarter of 2011 and 2010. Such yields and costs are
derived by dividing income or expense by the average daily balance of assets or liabilities,
respectively, for the period presented. Tax-exempt securities interest income and yield have been
computed on a tax equivalent basis using a marginal tax rate of 35%. Securities interest income
was increased by $180,000 and $296,000 in the first quarter of 2011 and 2010, respectively, for
this adjustment.
54
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarters ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Balance |
|
|
Interest |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
Interest |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans |
|
$ |
1,233,037 |
|
|
$ |
16,732 |
|
|
|
5.50 |
% |
|
$ |
1,516,898 |
|
|
$ |
20,406 |
|
|
|
5.46 |
% |
Investment securities |
|
|
228,965 |
|
|
|
2,571 |
|
|
|
4.49 |
|
|
|
248,483 |
|
|
|
3,039 |
|
|
|
4.89 |
|
Federal funds sold |
|
|
47,622 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
0.25 |
|
|
|
50,511 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
0.25 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
9,680 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
0.24 |
|
|
|
7,937 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
0.44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest earning
assets |
|
|
1,519,304 |
|
|
|
19,339 |
|
|
|
5.16 |
|
|
|
1,823,829 |
|
|
|
23,485 |
|
|
|
5.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses |
|
|
(45,471 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(51,224 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
129,049 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
148,146 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,602,882 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,920,751 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND
SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing
deposits |
|
$ |
1,136,116 |
|
|
$ |
4,634 |
|
|
|
1.65 |
% |
|
$ |
1,318,607 |
|
|
$ |
6,497 |
|
|
|
2.00 |
% |
Short-term borrowings |
|
|
99,726 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
0.66 |
|
|
|
99,128 |
|
|
|
344 |
|
|
|
1.41 |
|
Federal Home Loan
Bank advances |
|
|
65,000 |
|
|
|
606 |
|
|
|
3.73 |
|
|
|
193,222 |
|
|
|
1,696 |
|
|
|
3.51 |
|
Other borrowings |
|
|
44,765 |
|
|
|
309 |
|
|
|
2.76 |
|
|
|
49,853 |
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
2.78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing
liabilities |
|
|
1,345,607 |
|
|
|
5,710 |
|
|
|
1.72 |
|
|
|
1,660,810 |
|
|
|
8,883 |
|
|
|
2.17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest-bearing
deposits |
|
|
125,475 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
114,484 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
5,388 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,972 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity |
|
|
126,412 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
139,485 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and
shareholders equity |
|
$ |
1,602,882 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,920,751 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
13,629 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
14,602 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest rate spread |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.44 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.05 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest spread on average assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.45 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.08 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest margin on
earning assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.64 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.25 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provisions for loan losses during the first quarter of 2011 were $2.2 million, compared to
$8.4 million during the first quarter of 2010. The reduced provision expense reflects a lower
level of nonperforming loans, a decline in loan rating downgrades, an increase in loan rating
upgrades resulting from improving economic conditions, and progress in the stabilization of
economic and real estate market conditions and resulting collateral valuations. Net loan
charge-offs of $5.4 million were recorded during the first quarter of 2011, compared to $6.2
million during the prior-year first quarter. Of the $6.0 million in gross loans charged-off during
the first quarter of 2011, $3.6 million, or about 60%, represents the elimination of specific
reserves that were established through provision expense in earlier periods.
The allowance, as a percentage of total loans outstanding, was 3.49% as of March 31, 2011, compared
to 3.59% as of December 31, 2010 and 3.35% as of March 31, 2010.
55
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
Noninterest income during the first quarter of 2011 was $1.8 million, a decrease of $0.9 million,
or 34.0%, from the $2.7 million earned during the first quarter of 2010. Noninterest income during
the first quarter of 2010 includes gains totaling $0.7 million from the sales of tax-exempt
municipal bonds and guaranteed portions of certain Small Business Administration-guaranteed loans.
Excluding these gains, noninterest income during the first quarter of 2011 decreased $0.2 million,
or 10.6%, compared to the prior-year first quarter. The decline in noninterest income was mainly
due to lower rental income from foreclosed properties. Sales of foreclosed properties during the
twelve-month period ending March 31, 2011, resulted in the decreased rental income.
Noninterest expense during the first quarters of 2011 and 2010 was $11.6 million. Reduced
controllable operating expenses, including salary and benefit, occupancy, and furniture and
equipment costs, and lower FDIC insurance premiums, were substantially offset by increased
nonperforming asset administration and resolution costs, including legal expenses, property tax
payments, appraisal fees, and write-downs on foreclosed properties.
Controllable operating expenses declined $0.5 million, or 7.7%, during the first quarter of 2011
compared to the prior-year first quarter. Salary and benefit costs, which decreased $0.3 million
in the first quarter of 2011 compared to the first quarter of 2010, were positively impacted by a
reduction in full-time equivalent employees from 251 at first quarter-end 2010 to 241 at first
quarter-end 2011. Occupancy and furniture and equipment costs declined by $0.2 million in the
first quarter of 2011 compared to the respective 2010 period, primarily resulting from an aggregate
reduction in depreciation expense. FDIC insurance premiums were $0.9 million during the first
quarter of 2011, compared to $1.2 million during the respective 2010 period; the lower premiums
primarily resulted from a decreased assessment base and rate. In light of the FDICs revised
risk-based assessment system, which is effective April 1, 2011, second quarter 2011 insurance
premiums are expected to decline approximately $0.2 million when compared to first quarter 2011
insurance premiums. However, given the large number of insured institution failures in recent
years, the increase in per-depositor insurance coverage, the temporary unlimited insurance of
noninterest-bearing deposit accounts, and other changes in federal deposit insurance made by the
Dodd-Frank Act, it is difficult to predict the level of our future deposit insurance assessments.
Nonperforming asset administration and resolution costs totaled $3.1 million during the first
quarter of 2011, an increase of $0.6 million, or 23.7%, from the $2.5 million in costs incurred
during the first quarter of 2010. As a result of the significant level of nonperforming assets,
these costs remain elevated; however, the costs are expected to decrease in future periods if the
level of nonperforming assets continues to decline.
During the first quarter of 2011, we recorded net income before federal income tax of $1.4 million
and no federal income tax expense or benefit. During the first quarter of 2010, we recorded a loss
before federal income tax of $3.1 million and a federal income tax benefit of $0.4 million.
Although we recorded taxable income during the first quarter of 2011, the existence of a net
operating loss carryforward resulted in no tax expense being recognized. Our ability to recognize
federal income tax benefits during periods in which net losses are recorded is significantly
limited due to the establishment of a valuation allowance against the entire balance of our net
deferred tax asset in the fourth quarter of 2009. Generally, the calculation for the federal
income tax provision (benefit) does not consider the tax effects of changes in other comprehensive
income (OCI), which is a component of shareholders equity on the balance sheet. However, an
exception is provided in certain circumstances, such as when there is a pre-tax loss from
continuing operations. In such cases, pre-tax income from other categories (such as changes in
OCI) is included in the calculation of the federal income tax provision (benefit) for the current
year. This resulted in the recognition of the $0.4 million federal income tax benefit in the first
quarter of 2010.
56
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Our primary market risk exposure is interest rate risk and, to a lesser extent, liquidity risk.
All of our transactions are denominated in U.S. dollars with no specific foreign exchange exposure.
We have only limited agricultural-related loan assets and therefore have no significant exposure
to changes in commodity prices. Any impact that changes in foreign exchange rates and commodity
prices would have on interest rates is assumed to be insignificant. Interest rate risk is the
exposure of our financial condition to adverse movements in interest rates. We derive our income
primarily from the excess of interest collected on our interest-earning assets over the interest
paid on our interest-bearing liabilities. The rates of interest we earn on our assets and owe on
our liabilities generally are established contractually for a period of time. Since market interest
rates change over time, we are exposed to lower profitability if we cannot adapt to interest rate
changes. Accepting interest rate risk can be an important source of profitability and shareholder
value; however, excessive levels of interest rate risk could pose a significant threat to our
earnings and capital base. Accordingly, effective risk management that maintains interest rate
risk at prudent levels is essential to our safety and soundness.
Evaluating the exposure to changes in interest rates includes assessing both the adequacy of the
process used to control interest rate risk and the quantitative level of exposure. Our interest
rate risk management process seeks to ensure that appropriate policies, procedures, management
information systems and internal controls are in place to maintain interest rate risk at prudent
levels with consistency and continuity. In evaluating the quantitative level of interest rate
risk, we assess the existing and potential future effects of changes in interest rates on our
financial condition, including capital adequacy, earnings, liquidity and asset quality.
We use two interest rate risk measurement techniques. The first, which is commonly referred to as
GAP analysis, measures the difference between the dollar amounts of interest sensitive assets and
liabilities that will be refinanced or repriced during a given time period. A significant
repricing gap could result in a negative impact to our net interest margin during periods of
changing market interest rates.
57
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
The following table depicts our GAP position as of March 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Within |
|
|
Three to |
|
|
One to |
|
|
After |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three |
|
|
Twelve |
|
|
Five |
|
|
Five |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Months |
|
|
Months |
|
|
Years |
|
|
Years |
|
|
Total |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial loans (1) |
|
$ |
304,138,000 |
|
|
$ |
251,894,000 |
|
|
$ |
522,193,000 |
|
|
$ |
20,938,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,099,163,000 |
|
Residential real estate loans |
|
|
38,542,000 |
|
|
|
6,313,000 |
|
|
|
51,558,000 |
|
|
|
6,704,000 |
|
|
|
103,117,000 |
|
Consumer loans |
|
|
1,547,000 |
|
|
|
771,000 |
|
|
|
2,166,000 |
|
|
|
122,000 |
|
|
|
4,606,000 |
|
Securities (2) |
|
|
34,223,000 |
|
|
|
145,000 |
|
|
|
46,132,000 |
|
|
|
141,166,000 |
|
|
|
221,666,000 |
|
Federal funds sold |
|
|
56,068,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
56,068,000 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
9,543,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
9,543,000 |
|
Allowance for loan losses |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(42,118,000 |
) |
Other assets |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
124,890,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
|
444,061,000 |
|
|
|
259,123,000 |
|
|
|
622,049,000 |
|
|
|
168,930,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,576,935,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing checking |
|
|
170,364,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
170,364,000 |
|
Savings deposits |
|
|
37,442,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
37,442,000 |
|
Money market accounts |
|
|
157,476,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
157,476,000 |
|
Time deposits under $100,000 |
|
|
15,860,000 |
|
|
|
43,724,000 |
|
|
|
35,933,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
95,517,000 |
|
Time deposits $100,000 & over |
|
|
131,763,000 |
|
|
|
278,727,000 |
|
|
|
246,330,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
656,820,000 |
|
Short-term borrowings |
|
|
80,821,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
80,821,000 |
|
Federal Home Loan Bank advances |
|
|
10,000,000 |
|
|
|
20,000,000 |
|
|
|
35,000,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
65,000,000 |
|
Other borrowed money |
|
|
44,723,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
44,723,000 |
|
Noninterest-bearing checking |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
136,025,000 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
5,933,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
648,449,000 |
|
|
|
342,451,000 |
|
|
|
317,263,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1,450,121,000 |
|
Shareholders equity |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
126,814,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities & shareholders
equity |
|
|
648,449,000 |
|
|
|
342,451,000 |
|
|
|
317,263,000 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
$ |
1,576,935,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net asset (liability) GAP |
|
$ |
(204,388,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(83,328,000 |
) |
|
$ |
304,786,000 |
|
|
$ |
168,930,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative GAP |
|
$ |
(204,388,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(287,716,000 |
) |
|
$ |
17,070,000 |
|
|
$ |
186,000,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of cumulative GAP to
total assets |
|
|
(12.9 |
%) |
|
|
(18.2 |
%) |
|
|
1.1 |
% |
|
|
11.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Floating rate loans that are currently at interest rate floors are treated
as fixed rate loans and are reflected using maturity date and not repricing frequency. |
|
(2) |
|
Mortgage-backed securities are categorized by average life calculations
based upon prepayment trends as of March 31, 2011. |
58
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
The second interest rate risk measurement we use is commonly referred to as net interest income
simulation analysis. We believe that this methodology provides a more accurate measurement of
interest rate risk than the GAP analysis, and therefore, it serves as our primary interest rate
risk measurement technique. The simulation model assesses the direction and magnitude of
variations in net interest income resulting from potential changes in market interest rates. Key
assumptions in the model include prepayment speeds on various loan and investment assets; cash
flows and maturities of interest sensitive assets and liabilities; and changes in market conditions
impacting loan and deposit volume and pricing. These assumptions are inherently uncertain, subject
to fluctuation and revision in a dynamic environment; therefore, the model cannot precisely
estimate net interest income or exactly predict the impact of higher or lower interest rates on net
interest income. Actual results will differ from simulated results due to timing, magnitude, and
frequency of interest rate changes and changes in market conditions and our strategies, among other
factors.
We conducted multiple simulations as of March 31, 2011, in which it was assumed that changes in
market interest rates occurred ranging from up 400 basis points to down 400 basis points in equal
quarterly instalments over the next twelve months. The following table reflects the suggested
impact on net interest income over the next twelve months in comparison to estimated net interest
income based on our balance sheet structure, including the balances and interest rates associated
with our specific loans, securities, deposits and borrowed funds, as of March 31, 2011. The
resulting estimates are well within our policy parameters established to manage and monitor
interest rate risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dollar Change |
|
|
Percent Change |
|
|
|
In Net |
|
|
In Net |
|
Interest Rate Scenario |
|
Interest Income |
|
|
Interest Income |
|
Interest rates down 400 basis points |
|
$ |
(135,000 |
) |
|
|
(0.3 |
%) |
Interest rates down 300 basis points |
|
|
435,000 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
Interest rates down 200 basis points |
|
|
945,000 |
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
Interest rates down 100 basis points |
|
|
1,375,000 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
No change in interest rates |
|
|
1,840,000 |
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
Interest rates up 100 basis points |
|
|
330,000 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
Interest rates up 200 basis points |
|
|
205,000 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
Interest rates up 300 basis points |
|
|
1,190,000 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
Interest rates up 400 basis points |
|
|
970,000 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
59
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
The resulting estimates have been significantly impacted by the current interest rate and economic
environments, as adjustments have been made to critical model inputs with regards to traditional
interest rate relationships. This is especially important as it relates to floating rate
commercial loans and brokered certificates of deposit, which comprise a substantial portion of our
balance sheet. As of March 31, 2011, the Mercantile Bank Prime Rate is 4.50% as compared to the
Wall Street Journal Prime Rate of 3.25%. Historically, the two indices have been equal; however,
we elected not to reduce the Mercantile Bank Prime Rate in late October and mid-December of 2008
when the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate declined by 50 and 75 basis points, respectively. In
conducting our simulations since year-end 2008, we have made the assumption that the Mercantile
Bank Prime Rate will remain unchanged until the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate equals the
Mercantile Bank Prime Rate, at which time the two indices will remain equal in the increasing
interest rate scenarios. Also, brokered certificate of deposit rates have substantially decreased
since December of 2008, with part of the decline attributable to a significant imbalance whereby
the supply of available funds far outweighs the demand from banks looking to raise funds. As a
result, we have substantially limited further reductions in brokered certificate of deposit rates
in the declining interest rate scenarios.
In addition to changes in interest rates, the level of future net interest income is also dependent
on a number of other variables, including: the growth, composition and absolute levels of loans,
deposits, and other earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities; level of nonperforming assets;
economic and competitive conditions; potential changes in lending, investing, and deposit gathering
strategies; client preferences; and other factors.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
As of March 31, 2011, an evaluation was performed under the supervision of and with the
participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,
of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures. Based
on that evaluation, our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of March 31, 2011.
There have been no significant changes in our controls over financial reporting during the quarter
ended March 31, 2011 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect,
our internal controls over financial reporting.
60
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings.
From time to time, we may be involved in various legal proceedings that are incidental to our
business. In our opinion, we are not a party to any current legal proceedings that are material to
our financial condition, either individually or in the aggregate.
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
There have been no material changes in our risk factors from those previously disclosed in our
annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds.
We made no unregistered sale of equity securities, nor did we purchase our equity securities,
during the quarter ended March 31, 2011.
In April 2010, our Board of Directors suspended future payments of cash dividends on our common
stock until economic conditions and our financial performance improve. Holders of our common stock
are entitled to receive cash dividends to the extent that they are declared from time to time by
our Board of Directors. Holders of our preferred stock are entitled to receive cash dividends in
the amount provided for in our Articles of Incorporation, to the extent that they are declared by
the Board of Directors. We may only pay cash dividends out of funds that are legally available for
that purpose. We are a holding company and substantially all of our assets are held by our
subsidiaries. Our ability to pay cash dividends to our shareholders depends primarily on our
banks ability to pay cash dividends to us. Cash dividend payments and extensions of credit to us
from our bank are subject to legal and regulatory limitations, generally based on capital levels
and current and retained earnings, imposed by law and regulatory agencies with authority over our
bank. The ability of our bank to pay cash dividends is also subject to its profitability,
financial condition, capital expenditures and other cash flow requirements.
In addition, under the terms of the subordinated debentures that we issued to the trust, we are
precluded from paying cash dividends on our common stock or preferred stock if an event of default
has occurred and is continuing under the subordinated debentures, or if we have exercised our right
to defer payments of interest on the subordinated debentures, until the deferral ends. On July 9,
2010, we gave notice that we were deferring the regularly scheduled quarterly interest payments on
our subordinated debentures beginning with the quarterly interest payment that was scheduled to be
paid on July 18, 2010. So until the deferral ends, the terms of the subordinated debentures
preclude us from paying any dividends on our common stock or preferred stock.
Our outstanding preferred stock was issued on May 15, 2009 pursuant to the United State Treasury
Departments Capital Purchase Program. The provisions of our Articles of Incorporation relating to
our preferred stock preclude us from paying any cash dividends on our common stock while any
dividends accrued on our preferred stock have not been declared and paid. We have suspended the
payment of dividends on our preferred stock, beginning with the dividend that would have been paid
on August 15, 2010. Accordingly, the provisions of our Articles of Incorporation relating to our
preferred stock preclude us from paying dividends on our common stock until all accrued and unpaid
dividends on our preferred stock have been paid.
61
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
Also, in connection with our participation in the Capital Purchase Program, we agreed that we would
not, without the Treasury Departments consent, pay a cash dividend on our common stock, other than
a regular quarterly dividend of not more than $0.04 per share. This limit on paying dividends
without the Treasury Departments consent remains in effect until the earlier of (i) May 15, 2012,
or (ii) when all of the preferred stock that we sold to the Treasury Department has been redeemed
by us or transferred by the Treasury Department to third parties.
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities.
As indicated in Item 2 above, we suspended the payment of dividends on our preferred stock
beginning with the dividend that would have been paid on August 15, 2010. Our outstanding
preferred stock is designated as Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A. As of
the date of filing of this report, our aggregate arrearage in the payment of cumulative quarterly
dividends on our preferred stock is approximately $790,000.
Item 4. Reserved
Not applicable.
Item 5. Other Information.
Not applicable.
Item 6. Exhibits
|
|
|
|
|
EXHIBIT NO. |
|
EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION |
|
3.1 |
|
|
Our Articles of Incorporation are incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.1 of our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
Our Amended and Restated Bylaws dated as of January 16, 2003
are incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 of our
Registration Statement on Form S-3 (Commission File No.
333-103376) that became effective on February 21, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
Rule 13a-14(a) Certifications |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.1 |
|
|
Section 1350 Chief Executive Officer Certification |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.2 |
|
|
Section 1350 Chief Financial Officer Certification |
62
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements 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, on May 9,
2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Michael H. Price
|
|
|
|
Michael H. Price |
|
|
|
Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Charles E. Christmas
|
|
|
|
Charles E. Christmas |
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |
|
63
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
EXHIBIT NO. |
|
EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION |
|
3.1 |
|
|
Our Articles of Incorporation are incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.1 of our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
Our Amended and Restated Bylaws dated as of January 16, 2003
are incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 of our
Registration Statement on Form S-3 (Commission File No.
333-103376) that became effective on February 21, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
Rule 13a-14(a) Certifications |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.1 |
|
|
Section 1350 Chief Executive Officer Certification |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.2 |
|
|
Section 1350 Chief Financial Officer Certification |