TA-APH Yield Endorsement

Similar documents
THE SUPPLEMENTAL COVERAGE OPTION (SCO)

Strickler Insurance Update

Crop Insurance Decisions Gary Schnitkey, Bruce Sherrick, and Nick Paulson University of Illinois

FEDERAL CROP INSURANCE PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Crop Insurance Update

Federal Crop Insurance: A Program Update

2014 Farm Bill Overview

2014 FARM BILL COMMODITY PROGRAMS AND DECISION TOOLS

Corn & Soybean Crop Insurance Program Yield Protection (YP) & Revenue Protection (RP) Plans of Insurance - Crop Provisions

Common Crop Insurance Policy 2011 Crop Year

12/14/2009. Goals Today. Introduction. Crop Insurance, the SURE Disaster Assistance Program, and Farm Risk Management

2019 Crop Insurance Update Devils Lake, ND January 9, 2019

Supplemental Coverage Option (SCO)

The Common Crop (COMBO) Policy

Risk Management Agency

11/14/2011. Bradley D. Lubben, Ph.D. Special thanks to: Federal Budget. Economy Farm & General Economy. Politics. Super Committee (more politics)

AFPC Crop Decision Aids Data Collection Form and Instructions

Farm Bill Details and Decisions for 2014

PROCRASTINATOR'S FARM BILL UPDATE. Paul Goeringer, Extension Legal Specialist, Women in Ag Wednesday Webinar March 11, 2015

Farm Bill Meeting Stoddard County

FARM PROGRAM DECISION TOOL

Crop Insurance Program Update RMA Administrator Bill Murphy

Risk Management Agency

2014 Farm Bill How does it affect you and your operation? Section II: PLC, SCO, ARC-C, and ARC-I

Farm Bill Meeting Scott County

Farm Bill Details and Decisions

Combined SUpplemental REvenue (SURE), Average. Combined SUpplemental REvenue (SURE), with Other Risk Management Tools

Current Crop Insurance and Federal Policy Situation

Farm Bill Details and Decisions

Dependable Approved Insurance Providers. 34 full-time risk management professionals. N early $1 Billion in crop insurance coverage

Farm Bill and Texas A&M Computer Training. Nebraska Innovation Campus Conference Center January 14, 2015

Presentation Outline

Archie Flanders University of Arkansas Northeast Research and Extension Center Keiser, AR. The Farm Bill Decision Making Process

2012 Harvest Prices for Corn and Soybeans: Implications for Crop Insurance Payments

The 2014 Farm Bill. Program Selection Mitchell County. Neil Cates Livestock Extension Agent Post Rock Extension District #1

Estimated ARC and PLC Payments for 2016 Covered Commodities

Farm Safety Net. Dr. Alejandro Plastina Assistant Professor, Economics

FARM PROGRAM DECISION TOOL

The 2014 Farm Bill. Program Selection. JEWELL County. Sandra L. Wick K-State Research and Extension Post Rock District Crop Production Agent

Risk Management Agency Dave Schumann

Seed Cotton Informational Meeting. Price Loss Coverage Program (PLC)

Should Basic Underwriting Rules be Applied to Average Crop Revenue Election and Supplemental Revenue?

Commodity Programs in 2014 Farm Bill. Key Provisions

Crop Insurance & the 2012 Drought. Whitney Wiegel Ag Business Specialist MU Extension

Farm Credit Services of Mandan IMPORTANT MARCH 15 DEADLINE 2016 CROP INSURANCE UPDATE. Winter 2016

Is GRP A Good Deal For My Corn?

Crop Revenue Coverage and Group Risk Plan Additional Risk Management Tools for Wheat Growers*

The 2018 Farm Bill. Dr. Alejandro Plastina Assistant Professor, Economics

Agricultural Act of 2014

2002 FSRIA. Farm Security & Rural Investment Act. (2002 Farm Bill) How much money is spent with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)?

Looking Out for the 2012 Farm Bill

Untangling Your 2017 Crop Insurance Decisions

Farm Bill 2014 Agricultural Act of What You Need To Know Doug Yoder, IFB

Farm Credit Services of Mandan

All Approved Insurance Providers All Risk Management Agency Field Offices All Other Interested Parties

Farm Bill Meeting Cape County

Case Studies on the Use of Crop Insurance in Managing Risk

Counter-Cyclical Agricultural Program Payments: Is It Time to Look at Revenue?

Common Crop Insurance Policy & Area Risk Protection Insurance 1

2008 FARM BILL: FOCUS ON ACRE

AGEC 429: AGRICULTURAL POLICY LECTURE 19: ANALYSIS OF THE 2014 FARM BILL I

WORKSHOP OUTLINE Pre-Test Production Risk MPCI & IP Insurance Products Specific Crops Diversification Issues Price Risk Diversification

Margin Protection: AIPs Question and Answer Log Last updated: 09/13/2017

Supplemental Coverage Option Insurance SCO. Tim Lemmons Ext. Educator Northeast Research and Extension Center

The Potential Budgetary Costs and WTO Implications of the New Farm Bill. Joseph Glauber and Pat Westhoff

Farm Bill Meeting Bollinger County

Policies Revenue Protection (RP) Yield Protection (YP) Group Risk Income Protection (GRIP) Group Risk Protection (GRP)

Wyoming Barley Production: Opportunities to Manage Production, Quality and Revenue Risks

Why has Crop Insurance Changed from an Unpopular Policy to the Farmer Preferred Policy?

Supplemental Revenue Assistance Payments Program (SURE): Montana

Crop Insurance Strategies for

Crop Insurance 101 & Beyond

Adjusted Gross Revenue Pilot Insurance Program: Rating Procedure (Report prepared for the Risk Management Agency Board of Directors) J.

Farm Bill Details and Decisions

Crop Insurance for Milk? Dairy-Revenue Protection

Crop Insurance for Tree Fruit Producers. 1 Dyson Cornell SC Johnson College of Business

Crop Insurance. Background

ARC vs. PLC Enrollment Decisions

Options for Insuring Your Apple Crop

Agricultural Policy and Risk Management Brief

GIVING IT AWAY FREE FREE CROP INSURANCE CAN SAVE MONEY AND STRENGTHEN THE FARM SAFETY NET

National Crop Insurance Services

Reinsuring Group Revenue Insurance with. Exchange-Provided Revenue Contracts. Bruce A. Babcock, Dermot J. Hayes, and Steven Griffin

For several years the Risk

Economic Conditions & the Title 1 Programs

Federal Crop Insurance: Background

Abstract. Crop insurance premium subsidies affect patterns of crop acreage for two

igrow Soybeans Best Management Practices for Soybean Production

Farm Policy: 2012 and Beyond

2009 AgriBank Insurance Template V04

2014 FARM BILL DECISION AID

Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC) vs. Price Loss Coverage (PLC)

PROGRAM DECISION STEPS FARM BILL TOOLBOX. Gary Schnitkey, Jonathan Coppess, Nick Paulson University of Illinois

Acceptable Records of Production

Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC) vs. Price Loss Coverage (PLC)

Gardner Farm Income and Policy Simulator. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Gardner Agricultural Policy Program

Prepared for Farm Services Credit of America

Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC) vs. Price Loss Coverage (PLC)

Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC) vs. Price Loss Coverage (PLC)

Steven D. Johnson. Presentation Objectives

Transcription:

Understanding the Trend Adjusted APH Yield Endorsement Bruce J. Sherrick University of Illinois September 12, 2013 Mankato, MN TA-APH Yield Endorsement Originally Sponsored by Illinois Corn Growers Research and technical support provided by University of Illinois and ifar 1

Trend Adjusted Yield Endorsement Problem addressed: Corn and soybean yields are increasing through time APH used in crop insurance guarantees is simple average of past yields (up to 10) Average of past trending yields lags actual expected yield, which is what APH is meant to measure INTRODUCE: Trend Adjusted APH yield Trend Adjusted APH: Main Idea Ave APH APH Window Insurance Year 2

Trend Adjusted APH: Main Idea TA APH Ave APH APH Window Insurance Year TA APH Endorsement Applies to most APH-based yield and revenue policies (except organic, transitional, specialty) Does not apply to CAT Does not apply to written agreements except High-risk and UA 2012 Pilot, 14 states, selected counties 2013 expansion to larger area; added wheat, canola, cotton, grain sorghum, and rice 2014 includes sunflowers, barley, peanuts Future expansions planned for other crops ranked primarily by insured value and trend rates 3

TA APH Data Eligibility Must be in eligible county/crop (has trend in ADM) One or more actual yield in last four years Make election by sales closing date (March 15) Election made on crop/county basis Continuous unless cancelled or terminated by FCIC Transferred policies must re-elect TA APH Full Adjustment Must have at least 4 actual yields to be eligible for full adjustment Percentage of full trend adjustment: 4 or more yields in last 12: 100% 3 yields 75% 2 yields 50% 1 yield 25% Max trend APH yield can not exceed highest actual yield plus trend (e.g. max actual 190, TA =2, max TA APH = 192) 4

Yields Counting Toward Actual For 1 in 4 determination A -- actual yield AY A but less than 60% T NA AY did not elect PA prorated production DA duplicate actual prod NW -- wgt avg PW wgt. avg WY wgt. avg AX simple avg P assigned yields J temporary yield Receive adjustment A AY NA PA DA NW PW WY Details Cups and Floors do not apply to TA APH Rare case could result in better floors than actual yields adjusted for trend T (and S,E,N) yields not adjusted Yield reductions Excessive yield reductions still apply Reductions in approved APH still apply Other restrictions intended to encourage additional accumulation of data 5

TA APH yield Applicable to Enterprise, Basic, and Optional units Does not impact yield database TA-APH calculated for each database Trend rates updated annually Trend Adjustment Examples Generated with farmdoc Crop Insurance Decision Tool Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, annual release, calculates premiums, what-if scenarios, historic performance and other features of current programs. Available for download in FAST section of farmdoc website. 6

/cropins/index.asp 10-Year Consecutive All Actual 7

10-Year Consecutive 2 nonactual yields 10-Year Skip All Actual 8

4-year Not all actual Establish Trend Rates Based on NASS county and Crop Reporting District yields from 1976 though 2012 in 2014CY. County data screens for number of yields, acreage and other quality conditions. Fit trends through data with controls for: Weather Geographical weighting (spatial weights) Trend rates are capped at 90 th percentile or lower based on crop, and statistical properties 9

Trend Rates 2014 - Corn Trend - bu./acre 0.00 to 0.88 0.88 to 1.25 1.25 to 1.60 1.60 to 2.00 2.00 to 2.36 No data Trend Rates 2014 - Soybeans Trend - bu./acre 0.00 to 0.26 0.26 to 0.40 0.40 to 0.46 0.46 to 0.50 0.50 to 0.57 No data 10

Trend Rates 2014 Spring Wheat Trends bu./ac - to 0.20 0.20 to 0.40 0.40 to 0.60 0.60 to 0.80 No data Trend Rates 2014 - Canola Trend - lbs./acre 0 to 27 27 to 33 33 to 37 37 to 40 40 to 42 No data 11

Premium effects of TA Total premium is the same for identical rate yield guarantee given APH or TA-APH Use of TA-APH will lower farmer-paid premium at given yield because subsidy levels are lower for higher coverage levels Always to advantage to elect TA endorsement if not on floor Risk Subsidies (Percent of Total) Coverage Level Basic, Optional Enterprise 50% 67% 80% 55% 64% 80% 60% 64% 80% 65% 59% 80% 70% 59% 80% 75% 55% 77% 80% 48% 68% 85% 38% 53% Example of Actual Premiums, Corn APH Yield = 178.0 TA APH Yield = 189.9 Coverage Bu. Trigger Premium Bu. Trigger Premium bu/acre $/acre bu/acre $/acre 50% 89 0.51 94.5 0.69 55% 97.9 0.78 104 1.00 60% 106.8 1.22 113.4 1.82 65% 115.7 2.01 122.9 2.97 70% 124.6 3.26 132.3 4.61 75% 133.5 5.74 141.8 8.16 80% 142.4 11.61 151.2 15.26 85% 151.3 22.82 160.7 29.08 12

TA-APH Q/A and Summary Ongoing efforts by RMA to reflect actual yield within insurance contracts Intended to create incentive for accurate data/reporting. No impact on premium structure, only on amount of insurance Applies to actuals in added land, not to SA-T. PTY not trended. No limit on age of records. TA-APH Q/A and Summary Each database treated separately. Max TA does not force lower than APH in cases where T-yields are higher than actual. 2012 yields are included in estimation of 2014 trends. Weather adjustment mitigated influence on trend. Trend E(level of APH). Trend rates can be high where yields are lower. Always room to add Good ideas. 13

Questions? Thanks! Feel free to email questions/comments to: sherrick@illinois.edu Visit us on the web at: www.farmdocdaily.illinois.edu Acres Covered by Crop: 14

Growing Program: Total Premium Total Liability (amount of insurance) 15

Total Payments by crop through time Total Payments by crop through time 16

Ratings System Explained in a Nutshell Rating System (Overly)Simplified Based on a Loss Cost Ratio (LCR) system initiated in 1980s for a single product (65% yield) fixed indemnity-price policy. Modified for product types, extended to several dimensions, numerous internal controls, tied to exceptionally complex data through time, but still Idea each year t : Losses/liability = rate t then ave(rates) liability = premiums. Over time, premiums should equal losses. Loss ratio target =1 Main components used as rate components: farmer risk relative to county, reference yield, exponent, coverage level differential, and loads for CAT, PP, RP, and QA; and price level, vol. & deviates (correlation) for RP related. 17

Ratings system - so how are we doing? Recall Basic Idea: n Loss Ratio Should be equal to 1.0 if rates are correct, rates correct if losses correctly converted to rates. Should have no discernible patterns across geography or crops 18

19

20

21

22

23

24