First Mid Bancshares - 10-K annual report

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.  [  ] Yes   [X ] No

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.  [  ] Yes  [X] No

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes [X]  No [  ]

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (Section 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes [  ]  No [  ]

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of Registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  [X]

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, 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.  (Check one):

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).  [  ] Yes  [X] No

The aggregate market value of the outstanding common stock, other than shares held by persons who may be deemed affiliates of the Registrant, as of the last business day of the Registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter was approximately $66,949,466.  Determination of stock ownership by non-affiliates was made solely for the purpose of responding to this requirement and the Registrant is not bound by this determination for any other purpose.

As of March 3, 2011, 6,077,444 shares of the Registrant’s common stock, $4.00 par value, were outstanding.

Portions of the Proxy Statement for 2011 Annual

Meeting of Shareholders to be held on April 27, 2011                                                                                                           III

First Mid-Illinois Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”) is a financial holding company.  The Company is engaged in the business of banking through its wholly owned subsidiary, First Mid-Illinois Bank & Trust, N.A. (“First Mid Bank”).  The Company provides data processing services to affiliates through another wholly owned subsidiary, Mid-Illinois Data Services, Inc. (“MIDS”).  The Company offers insurance products and services to customers through its wholly owned subsidiary, The Checkley Agency, Inc. doing business as First Mid Insurance Group (“First Mid Insurance”).  The Company also wholly owns two statutory business trusts, First Mid-Illinois Statutory Trust I (“Trust I”), and First Mid-Illinois Statutory Trust II (“Trust II”), both unconsolidated subsidiaries of the Company.

The Company, a Delaware corporation, was incorporated on September 8, 1981, and pursuant to the approval of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve Board”) became the holding company owning all of the outstanding stock of First National Bank, Mattoon (“First National”) on June 1, 1982.  First National changed its name to First Mid-Illinois Bank & Trust, N.A. in 1992. The Company acquired all of the outstanding stock of a number of community banks or thrift institutions on the following dates, and subsequently combined their operations with those of the Company:

In 1997, First Mid Bank acquired the Charleston, Illinois branch location and the customer base of First of America Bank and in 1999 acquired the Monticello, Taylorville and DeLand branch offices and deposit base of Bank One Illinois, N.A.

First Mid Bank also opened a de novo branch in Decatur, Illinois and a banking center in the Student Union of Eastern Illinois University in Charleston, Illinois (2000); de novo branches in Champaign, Illinois and Maryville, Illinois (2002), and a de novo branch in Highland, Illinois (2005).

In 2002, the Company acquired all of the outstanding stock of Checkley, an insurance agency located in Mattoon.

In 2009, the Company opened de novo branches in Decatur and Champaign.

On September 10, 2010, the Company acquired 10 Illinois branches (the “Branches”) from First Bank, a Missouri state chartered bank, located in Bartonville, Bloomington, Galesburg, Knoxville, Peoria and Quincy, Illinois.

The Company, MIDS, First Mid Insurance and First Mid Bank, collectively, employed 419 people on a full-time equivalent basis as of December 31, 2010.  The Company places a high priority on staff development, which involves extensive training, including customer service training.  New employees are selected on the basis of both technical skills and customer service capabilities.  None of the employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement with the Company. The Company offers a variety of employee benefits.

The Company has chosen to operate in three primary lines of business—community banking and wealth management through First Mid Bank and insurance brokerage through First Mid Insurance.  Of these, the community banking line contributes approximately 90% of the Company’s total revenues and profits.  Within the community banking line, the Company serves commercial, retail and agricultural customers with a broad array of deposit and loan related products.  The wealth management line provides estate planning, investment and farm management services for individuals and employee benefit services for business enterprises.  The insurance brokerage line provides commercial lines insurance to businesses as well as homeowner, automobile and other types of personal lines insurance to individuals.

All three lines emphasize a “hands on” approach to service so that products and services can be tailored to fit the specific needs of existing and potential customers.  Management believes that by emphasizing this personalized approach, the Company can, to a degree, diminish the trend towards homogeneous financial services, thereby differentiating the Company from competitors and allowing for slightly higher operating margins in each of the three lines.

Operationally, the Company centralizes many administrative and clerical tasks within its home office location in Mattoon, Illinois.  This allows branches to maintain customer focus, helps assure compliance with banking regulations, keeps fixed administrative costs at as low a level as is practicable, and better manages the various forms of risk inherent in this business.  This approach also makes use of technology in day-to-day banking activities thereby reducing the potential for human error. While the Company does not employ every new technology that is introduced, it does attempt to be near the leading edge with respect to operational technology.

The Company has a comprehensive set of operational policies and procedures that have been developed over time to address risk.  These policies are intended to be as close as possible to “best practices” of the financial services industry and are subjected to continual review by management and the Board of Directors.  The Company’s internal audit function incorporates procedures to determine compliance with these policies.

In the business of banking, credit risk is an important risk as losses from uncollectible loans can significantly diminish capital, earnings and shareholder value.  In order to address this risk, the lending function of First Mid Bank receives significant attention from executive management and the Board of Directors.  An important element of credit risk management is the quality, experience and training of the loan officers of First Mid Bank. The Company has invested, and will continue to invest, significant resources to ensure the quality, experience and training of First Mid Bank’s loan officers in order to keep credit losses at a minimum. In addition to the human element of credit risk management, the Company’s loan policies address the additional aspects of credit risk.  Most lending personnel have signature authority that allows them to lend up to a certain amount based on their own judgment as to the creditworthiness of a borrower. The amount of the signature authority is based on the lending officers’ experience and training.  The Senior Loan Committee, consisting of the most experienced lenders within the organization, must approve all underwriting decisions in excess of $1.5 million. The Board of Directors must approve all underwriting decisions in excess of $2 million.

While the underlying nature of lending will result in some amount of loan losses, First Mid Bank’s loan loss experience has been good with average net charge offs amounting to $1.6 million (.23% of average loans) over the past five years. Nonperforming loans were $10.4 million (1.3% of total loans) at December 31, 2010.  These percentages have historically compared well with peer financial institutions and continue to do so today.

Interest rate and liquidity risk are two other forms of risk embedded in the business of financial intermediation. The Company’s Asset Liability Management Committee, consisting of experienced individuals who monitor all aspects of interest rates and maturities of interest earning assets and interest paying liabilities, manages these risks.  The underlying objectives of interest rate and liquidity risk management are to shelter the Company’s net interest margin from changes in interest rates while maintaining adequate liquidity reserves to meet unanticipated funding demands.  The Company uses financial modeling technology as a tool, employing a variety of “what if” scenarios to properly plan its activities.  Despite the tools and methods used to monitor this risk, a sustained unfavorable interest rate environment will lead to some amount of compression in the net interest margin.  During 2010, the Company’s net interest margin increased to 3.51% from 3.40% in 2009. This was the result of a decrease in borrowing and deposit rates that was greater than the decrease in interest-earning asset rates.

The Company believes that growth of its revenue stream and of its customer base is vital to the goal of increasing the value of its shareholders’ investment. Management attempts to grow in two primary ways:

Virtually all of the Company’s customer-contact personnel, in each of its business lines, are engaged in organic growth efforts to one degree or another. These personnel are trained to engage in needs-based selling whereby they make an attempt to match its products and services with the particular financial needs of individual customers and prospective customers.  Most senior officers of the organization are required to attend monthly sales meetings where they report on their business development efforts and results.  Executive management uses these meetings as an educational and risk management opportunity as well.  Cross-selling opportunities are encouraged between the business lines.

Within the community banking line, the Company has focused on growing business operating and real estate loans.  Total commercial real estate loans have increased from $206 million at December 31, 2006 to $301 million at December 31, 2010 primarily due to loans acquired in the branch acquisition completed during the third quarter of 2010.  Approximately 66% of the Company’s total revenues are derived from lending activities. The Company has also focused on growing the commercial and retail deposit base through growth in checking, money markets and customer repurchase agreement balances. The wealth management line has focused its growth efforts on estate planning, investment and farm management services for individuals and employee benefit services for businesses.  The insurance brokerage line has focused on increasing property and casualty insurance for businesses and personal lines insurance to individuals.

Growth through acquisitions has been an integral part of the Company’s strategy for an extended period of time.  When reviewing acquisition possibilities, the Company focuses on those organizations where there is a cultural fit with its existing operations and where there is a strong likelihood of adding to shareholder value.  Most past acquisitions have been cash-based transactions. While the Company expects to continue this trend in the future, it would consider a stock-based acquisition if the strategic and financial metrics were compelling. The Company viewed the third quarter 2010 branch acquisitions as an unusual opportunity to acquire selected assets, add to its deposit base and expand its geographical reach. Most acquisitions have been smaller, reflecting the inherent risks accompanying acquisitions and the preference for cash financing rather than use of the Company’s common stock.

This overall growth strategy has been to grow the customer base without significantly increasing the shareholder base.  This requires a certain amount of financial leverage and the Company monitors its capital base carefully to satisfy all regulatory requirements while maintaining flexibility.  The Company has maintained a Dividend Reinvestment Plan as well as various forms of equity compensation for directors and key managers. It has also maintained an ongoing share buy back program both as a service to shareholders and a means of maintaining optimal levels of capital.

 

In 2009, the Company issued and sold Series B Preferred Stock to certain investors and in 2011, the Company issued and sold Series C Preferred Stock to certain investors. The Company also uses various forms of long-term debt to augment its capital when appropriate.

The Company has active competition in all areas in which First Mid Bank presently does business.  First Mid Bank competes for commercial and individual deposits, loans, and trust business with many east central Illinois banks, savings and loan associations, and credit unions.  The principal methods of competition in the banking and financial services industry are quality of services to customers, ease of access to facilities, and pricing of services, including interest rates paid on deposits, interest rates charged on loans, and fees charged for fiduciary and other banking services.

First Mid Bank operates facilities in the Illinois counties of Adams, Bond, Champaign, Christian, Coles, Cumberland, Dewitt, Douglas, Effingham, Fulton, Knox, Macon, Madison, McClean, Moultrie, Peoria and Piatt.  Each facility primarily serves the community in which it is located.  First Mid Bank serves twenty-five different communities with thirty-eight separate locations in the towns of Altamont, Arcola, Bartonville, Bloomington, Champaign, Charleston, Decatur, Effingham, Galesburg, Highland, Knoxville, Mansfield, Mahomet, Maryville, Mattoon, Monticello, Neoga, Peoria, Pocahontas, Quincy, Sullivan, Taylorville, Tuscola, Urbana, and Weldon Illinois.  Within the areas of service, there are numerous competing financial institutions and financial services companies.

The Company maintains a website at www.firstmid.com.  All periodic and current reports of the Company and amendments to these reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) can be accessed, free of charge, through this website as soon as reasonably practicable after these materials are filed with the SEC.

Financial institutions, financial services companies, and their holding companies are extensively regulated under federal and state law.  As a result, the growth and earnings performance of the Company can be affected not only by management decisions and general economic conditions, but also by the requirements of applicable state and federal statutes and regulations and the policies of various governmental regulatory authorities including, but not limited to, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the “OCC”), the Federal Reserve Board, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”), the Internal Revenue Service and state taxing authorities.  Any change in applicable laws, regulations or regulatory policies may have material effects on the business, operations and prospects of the Company and First Mid Bank.  The Company is unable to predict the nature or extent of the effects that fiscal or monetary policies, economic controls or new federal or state legislation may have on its business and earnings in the future.

Federal and state laws and regulations generally applicable to financial institutions and financial services companies, such as the Company and its subsidiaries, regulate, among other things, the scope of business, investments, reserves against deposits, capital levels relative to operations, the nature and amount of collateral for loans, the establishment of branches, mergers, consolidations and dividends. The system of supervision and regulation applicable to the Company and its subsidiaries establishes a comprehensive framework for their respective operations and is intended primarily for the protection of the FDIC’s deposit insurance fund and the depositors, rather than the stockholders, of financial institutions.

The following references to material statutes and regulations affecting the Company and its subsidiaries are brief summaries thereof and do not purport to be complete, and are qualified in their entirety by reference to such statutes and regulations.  Any change in applicable law or regulations may have a material effect on the business of the Company and its subsidiaries.

The 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (the “GLB Act”) significantly changed financial services regulation by expanding permissible non-banking activities of bank holding companies and removing certain barriers to affiliations among banks, insurance companies, securities firms and other financial services entities.  These activities and affiliations can be structured through a holding company structure or, in the case of many of the activities, through a financial subsidiary of a bank.  The GLB Act also established a system of federal and state regulation based on functional regulation, meaning that primary regulatory oversight for a particular activity generally resides with the federal or state regulator having the greatest expertise in the area.  Banking is supervised by banking regulators, insurance by state insurance regulators and securities activities by the SEC and state securities regulators.  The GLB Act also requires the disclosure of agreements reached with community groups that relate to the Community Reinvestment Act, and contains various other provisions designed to improve the delivery of financial services to consumers while maintaining an appropriate level of safety in the financial services industry.

The GLB Act repealed the anti-affiliation provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act and revises the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (the “BHCA”) to permit qualifying holding companies, called “financial holding companies,” to engage in, or to affiliate with companies engaged in, a full range of financial activities, including banking, insurance activities (including insurance portfolio investing), securities activities, merchant banking and additional activities that are “financial in nature,” incidental to financial activities or, in certain circumstances, complementary to financial activities.  A bank holding company’s subsidiary banks must be “well-capitalized” and “well-managed” and have at least a “satisfactory” Community Reinvestment Act rating for the bank holding company to elect and maintain its status as a financial holding company.

A significant component of the GLB Act’s focus on functional regulation relates to the application of federal securities laws and SEC oversight of some bank securities activities previously exempt from broker-dealer registration.  Among other things, the GLB Act amended the definitions of “broker” and “dealer” under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to remove the blanket exemption for banks.  Under the GLB Act, banks may conduct securities activities without broker-dealer registration only if the activities fall within a set of activity-based exemptions designed to allow banks to conduct only those activities traditionally considered to be primarily banking or trust activities.  Securities activities outside these exemptions, as a practical matter, need to be conducted by registered broker-dealer affiliate.  The GLB Act also amended the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to require the registration of banks that act as investment advisers for mutual funds. The Company believes that it has taken the necessary actions to comply with these requirements of the GLB Act and the regulations adopted under them.

The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 included the International Money Laundering Abatement and Anti-Terrorist Financing Act of 2001 (the “IMLAFA”). The IMLAFA contains anti-money laundering measures affecting insured depository institutions, broker-dealers, and certain other financial institutions. The IMLAFA requires U.S. financial institutions to adopt policies and procedures to combat money laundering and grants the Secretary of the Treasury broad authority to establish regulations and to impose requirements and restrictions on financial institutions’ operations. The Company has established policies and procedures for compliance with the IMLAFA and the related regulations. The Company has designated an officer solely responsible for ensuring compliance with existing regulations and monitoring changes to the regulations as they occur.

In response to unprecedented financial market turmoil, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 ("EESA") was enacted on October 3, 2008. EESA authorizes the U.S. Treasury Department to provide up to $700 billion in funding for the financial services industry. The Treasury's authority under TARP expired October 3, 2010. The Company decided to not participate in the TARP Capital Purchase Program.

On October 14, 2008, the FDIC announced the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP). The FDIC stated that the purpose of these actions is to strengthen confidence and encourage liquidity in the banking system by guaranteeing newly issued senior unsecured debt of 31 days or greater, of banks, thrifts, and certain holding companies, and by providing full FDIC insurance coverage for all non-interest bearing transaction accounts, regardless of dollar amount. Inclusion in the program was voluntary. Institutions participating in the senior unsecured debt portion of the program are assessed fees on a sliding scale, depending on length of maturity for debt actually issued.

First Mid Bank elected to participate in both parts of the TLGP, the Transaction Account Guarantee (TAG) Program and the Debt Guarantee Program, although it issued no debt under that now-terminated program.  The FDIC’s TAG Program, provided, without charge to depositors, a full guarantee on all non-interest bearing transaction accounts held by any depositor, regardless of dollar amount, through December 31, 2010.  Participation in the Transaction Account Guarantee Program cost the Company 15 basis points annually on the amount of the deposits during 2010 and cost 10 basis points annually during 2009.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) was signed into law on July 21, 2010.  Generally, the Act is effective the day after it was signed into law, but different effective dates apply to specific sections of the law.  Uncertainty remains as to the ultimate impact of the Act, which could have a material adverse impact either on the financial services industry as a whole, or on the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition.  The Act, among other things:

 

General.  As a registered bank holding company under the BHCA that has elected to become a financial holding company under the GLB Act, the Company is subject to regulation by the Federal Reserve Board.  In accordance with Federal Reserve Board policy, the Company is expected to act as a source of financial strength to First Mid Bank and to commit resources to support First Mid Bank in circumstances where the Company might not do so absent such policy.  The Company is subject to inspection, examination, and supervision by the Federal Reserve Board.

Activities.  As a financial holding company, the Company may affiliate with securities firms and insurance companies and engage in other activities that are financial in nature or incidental or complementary to activities that are financial in nature.  A bank holding company that is not also a financial holding company is limited to engaging in banking and such other activities as determined by the Federal Reserve Board to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto.

No Federal Reserve Board approval is required for the Company to acquire a company (other than a bank holding company, bank, or savings association) engaged in activities that are financial in nature or incidental to activities that are financial in nature, as determined by the Federal Reserve Board.  However, the Company generally must give the Federal Reserve Board after-the-fact notice of these activities.  Prior Federal Reserve Board approval is required before the Company may acquire beneficial ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares or substantially all of the assets of a bank holding company, bank, or savings association.

If any subsidiary bank of the Company ceases to be “well-capitalized” or “well-managed” under applicable regulatory standards, the Federal Reserve Board may, among other actions, order the Company to divest its depository institution.  Alternatively, the Company may elect to conform its activities to those permissible for a bank holding company that is not also a financial holding company.

If any subsidiary bank of the Company receives a rating under the Community Reinvestment Act of less than “satisfactory”, the Company will be prohibited, until the rating is raised to “satisfactory” or better, from engaging in new activities or acquiring companies other than bank holding companies, banks, or savings associations.

Capital Requirements.  Bank holding companies are required to maintain minimum levels of capital in accordance with Federal Reserve Board capital adequacy guidelines.  The Federal Reserve Board’s capital guidelines establish the following minimum regulatory capital requirements for bank holding companies:  a risk-based requirement expressed as a percentage of total risk-weighted assets, and a leverage requirement expressed as a percentage of total assets.  The risk-based requirement consists of a minimum ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets of 8%, at least one-half of which must be Tier 1 capital.  The leverage requirement consists of a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets of 3% for the most highly rated companies, with minimum requirements of at least 4% for all others.  For purposes of these capital standards, Tier 1 capital consists primarily of permanent stockholders’ equity, which includes the Series B 9% Non-Cumulative Perpetual Convertible Preferred Stock issued by the Company in 2009 and the Series C 8% Non-Cumulative Perpetual Convertible Preferred Stock subsequently issued by the Company in 2011, less intangible assets (other than certain mortgage servicing rights and purchased credit card relationships), and total capital means Tier 1 capital plus certain other debt and equity instruments which do not qualify as Tier 1 capital, limited amounts of unrealized gains on equity securities and a portion of the Company’s allowance for loan and lease losses.

The risk-based and leverage standards described above are minimum requirements, and higher capital levels will be required if warranted by the particular circumstances or risk profiles of individual banking organizations. For example, the Federal Reserve Board’s capital guidelines contemplate that additional capital may be required to take adequate account of, among other things, interest rate risk, or the risks posed by concentrations of credit, nontraditional activities or securities trading activities.  Further, any banking organization experiencing or anticipating significant growth would be expected to maintain capital ratios, including tangible capital positions (i.e., Tier 1 capital less all intangible assets), well above the minimum levels.

In December 2007, the U.S. bank regulatory agencies adopted final rules that require large, internationally active financial services organizations to use the most sophisticated and complex methodology for calculating capital requirements reflected in the New Basel Capital Accord, developed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision.  These rules became operational in April 2008, but are mandatory only for “core banks,” i.e., banks with consolidated total assets of $250 billion or more.

In September 2010, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision proposed higher global minimum capital standards, including a minimum Tier 1 common capital ratio and additional capital and liquidity requirements, with rules expected to be implemented between 2013 and 2019.  Adoption in the U.S. is expected to occur over a similar timeframe, but the final form of the U.S. rules is uncertain.  While uncertainty exists in both the final form of the guidance and whether or not the Company will be required to adopt the guidelines, the Company is closely monitoring the development of the guidance.

As of December 31, 2010, the Company had regulatory capital, calculated on a consolidated basis, in excess of the Federal Reserve Board’s minimum requirements, and its capital ratios exceeded those required for categorization as well-capitalized under the capital adequacy guidelines established by bank regulatory agencies with a total risk-based capital ratio of 12.84%, a Tier 1 risk-based ratio of 11.71% and a leverage ratio of 7.42%.

Control Acquisitions.  The Change in Bank Control Act prohibits a person or group of person from acquiring “control” of a bank holding company unless the Federal Reserve Board has been notified and has not objected to the transaction.  Under a rebuttable presumption established by the Federal Reserve Board, the acquisition of 10% or more of a class of voting stock of a bank holding company with a class of securities registered under Section 12 of the Exchange Act, such as the Company, would, under the circumstances set forth in the presumption, constitute acquisition of control of the Company.

In addition, any company is required to obtain the approval of the Federal Reserve Board under the BHCA before acquiring 25% (5% in the case of an acquirer that is a bank holding company) or more of the outstanding common of the Company, or otherwise obtaining control of a “controlling influence” over the Company or First Mid Bank.

Interstate Banking and Branching.  The Dodd-Frank Act expands the authority of banks to engage in interstate branching.  The act allows a state or national bank to open a de novo branch in another state if the law of the state where the branch is to be located would permit a state bank chartered by that state to open the branch.

Privacy and Security.  The GLB Act establishes a minimum federal standard of financial privacy by, among other provisions, requiring banks to adopt and disclose privacy policies with respect to consumer information and setting forth certain rules with respect to the disclosure to third parties of consumer information.  The Company has adopted and disseminated its privacy policies pursuant to the GLB Act.  Regulations adopted under the GLB Act set standards for protecting the security, confidentiality and integrity of customer information, and require notice to regulators, and in some cases, to customers, in the event of security breaches.  A number of states have adopted their own statutes requiring notification of security breaches. In addition, the GLB Act requires the disclosure of agreements reached with community groups that relate to the CRA, and contains various other provisions designed to improve the delivery of financial services to consumers while maintaining an appropriate level of safety in the financial services industry.

General.  First Mid Bank is a national bank, chartered under the National Bank Act.  The FDIC insures the deposit accounts of First Mid Bank.  As a national bank, First Mid Bank is a member of the Federal Reserve System and is subject to the examination, supervision, reporting and enforcement requirements of the OCC, as the primary federal regulator of national banks, and the FDIC, as administrator of the deposit insurance fund.

Deposit Insurance. As an FDIC-insured institution, First Mid Bank is required to pay deposit insurance premium assessments to the FDIC.

On October 3, 2008, the FDIC temporarily increased the standard maximum deposit insurance amount (SMDIA) from $100,000 to $250,000 per depositor.  On May 20, 2009, the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act extended the temporary increase in the SMDIA through December 31, 2013. On July 21, 2010, The Dodd-Frank Act permanently raised the SMDIA to $250,000. The Company expensed $95,000, $49,000 and $0 for this program during 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

On February 27, 2009, the FDIC adopted a final rule modifying the risk-based assessment system and setting initial base assessment rates beginning April 1, 2009, at 12 to 45 basis points and, due to extraordinary circumstances, extended the period of the restoration plan to increase the deposit insurance fund to seven years. Also on February 27, 2009, the FDIC issued final rules on changes to the risk-based assessment system. The final rules both increase base assessment rates and incorporate additional assessments for excess reliance on brokered deposits and FHLB advances. The new rates increased the range of annual assessment rates from 5 to 7 basis points to 7 to 24 basis points. This new assessment took effect April 1, 2009. The Company expensed $1.31 million, $1.26 million and $47,000 for this assessment during 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Also on February 27, 2009, the FDIC adopted an interim rule to impose a 20 basis point emergency special assessment payable September 30, 2009 based on the second quarter 2009 assessment base, to help shore up the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”). This assessment equates to a one-time cost of $200,000 per $100 million in assessment base. The interim rule also allows the Board to impose possible additional special assessments of up to 10 basis points thereafter to maintain public confidence in the DIF. Subsequently, the FDIC’s Treasury borrowing authority increased from $30 billion to $100 billion, allowing the agency to cut the planned special assessment from 20 to 10 basis points. On May 22, 2009, the FDIC adopted a final rule which established a special assessment of five basis points on each FDIC-insured depository institution’s assets, minus its Tier 1 capital, as of September 30, 2009. The assessment was capped at 10 basis points of an institution’s domestic deposits so that no institution would pay an amount higher than it would have under the interim rule. The Company expensed $522,000 in 2009 for this special assessment. There were no special assessments during 2010 or 2008.

On September 29, 2009, the FDIC Board proposed a Deposit Insurance Fund restoration plan that required banks to prepay, on December 30, 2009, their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012. Under the plan—which applies to all banks except those with liquidity problems—banks were assessed through 2010 according to the risk-based premium schedule adopted in 2009. Beginning January 1, 2011, the base rate increases by 3 basis points. The Company recorded a prepaid expense asset of $4,855,000 as of December 31, 2009 as a result of this plan. This asset is being amortized to non-interest expense over three years. The balance of this asset was $3,247,000 as of December 31, 2010.

Subsequently, on February 7, 2011, the FDIC Board adopted a final rule, which redefines the deposit insurance assessment base as average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity; makes generally conforming changes to the unsecured debt and brokered deposit adjustments to assessment rates; creates a depository institution debt adjustment; eliminates the secured liability adjustment; and adopts a new assessment rate schedule effective April 1, 2011, and, in lieu of dividends, other rate schedules when the reserve ratio reaches certain levels.

OCC Assessments.  All national banks are required to pay supervisory fees to the OCC to fund the operations of the OCC.  The amount of such supervisory fees is based upon each institution’s total assets, including consolidated subsidiaries, as reported to the OCC.  During the year ended December 31, 2010, First Mid Bank paid supervisory fees to the OCC totaling $244,000.

Capital Requirements.  The OCC has established the following minimum capital standards for national banks, such as First Mid Bank:  a leverage requirement consisting of a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets of 3% for the most highly-rated banks with minimum requirements of at least 4% for all others, and a risk-based capital requirement consisting of a minimum ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets of 8%, at least one-half of which must be Tier 1 capital.  For purposes of these capital standards, Tier 1 capital and total capital consists of substantially the same components as Tier 1 capital and total capital under the Federal Reserve Board’s capital guidelines for bank holding companies (See “The Company—Capital Requirements”).

The capital requirements described above are minimum requirements.  Higher capital levels will be required if warranted by the particular circumstances or risk profiles of individual institutions.  For example, the regulations of the OCC provide that additional capital may be required to take adequate account of, among other things, interest rate risk or the risks posed by concentrations of credit, nontraditional activities or securities trading activities.

During the year ended December 31, 2010, First Mid Bank was not required by the OCC to increase its capital to an amount in excess of the minimum regulatory requirements, and its capital ratios exceeded those required for categorization as well-capitalized under the capital adequacy guidelines established by bank regulatory agencies with a total risk-based capital ratio of 12.32%, a Tier 1 risk-based ratio of 11.19% and a leverage ratio of 7.07%.

Prompt Corrective Action. Federal law provides the federal banking regulators with broad power to take prompt corrective action to resolve the problems of undercapitalized institutions.  The extent of the regulators’ powers depends on whether the institution in question is “well-capitalized,”  “adequately-capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized” or “critically undercapitalized.” Depending upon the capital category to which an institution is assigned, the regulators’ corrective powers include:  requiring the submission of a capital restoration plan; placing limits on asset growth and restrictions on activities; requiring the institution to issue additional capital stock (including additional voting stock) or to be acquired; restricting transactions with affiliates; restricting the interest rate the institution may pay on deposits; ordering a new election of directors of the institution; requiring that senior executive officers or directors be dismissed; prohibiting the institution from accepting deposits from correspondent banks; requiring the institution to divest certain subsidiaries; prohibiting the payment of principal or interest on subordinated debt; and in the most severe cases, appointing a conservator or receiver for the institution.

Dividends.  The National Bank Act imposes limitations on the amount of dividends that may be paid by a national bank, such as First Mid Bank.  Generally, a national bank may pay dividends out of its undivided profits, in such amounts and at such times as the bank’s board of directors deems prudent.  Without prior OCC approval, however, a national bank may not pay dividends in any calendar year which, in the aggregate, exceed the bank’s year-to-date net income plus the bank’s adjusted retained net income for the two preceding years.

The payment of dividends by any financial institution or its holding company is affected by the requirement to maintain adequate capital pursuant to applicable capital adequacy guidelines and regulations, and a financial institution generally is prohibited from paying any dividends if, following payment thereof, the institution would be undercapitalized.  As described above, First Mid Bank exceeded its minimum capital requirements under applicable guidelines as of December 31, 2010.  As of December 31, 2010, approximately $16.4 million was available to be paid as dividends to the Company by First Mid Bank.  Notwithstanding the availability of funds for dividends, however, the OCC may prohibit the payment of any dividends by First Mid Bank if the OCC determines that such payment would constitute an unsafe or unsound practice.

Affiliate and Insider Transactions.  First Mid Bank is subject to certain restrictions under federal law, including Regulation W of the Federal Reserve Board, on extensions of credit to the Company and its subsidiaries, on investments in the stock or other securities of the Company and its subsidiaries and the acceptance of the stock or other securities of the Company or its subsidiaries as collateral for loans.  Certain limitations and reporting requirements are also placed on extensions of credit by First Mid Bank to its directors and officers, to directors and officers of the Company and its subsidiaries, to principal stockholders of the Company, and to “related interests” of such directors, officers and principal stockholders.

First Mid Bank is subject to restrictions under federal law that limits certain transactions with the Company, including loans, other extensions of credit, investments or asset purchases.  Such transactions by a banking subsidiary with any one affiliate are limited in amount to 10% of the bank’s capital and surplus and, with all affiliates together, to an aggregate of 20% of the bank’s capital and surplus.  Furthermore, such loans and extensions of credit, as well as certain other transactions, are required to be secured in specified amounts. These and certain other transactions, including any payment of money to the Company, must be on terms and conditions that are or in good faith would be offered to nonaffiliated companies.

In addition, federal law and regulations may affect the terms upon which any person becoming a director or officer of the Company or one of its subsidiaries or a principal stockholder of the Company may obtain credit from banks with which First Mid Bank maintains a correspondent relationship.

Safety and Soundness Standards.  The federal banking agencies have adopted guidelines that establish operational and managerial standards to promote the safety and soundness of federally insured depository institutions.  The guidelines set forth standards for internal controls, information systems, internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, compensation, fees and benefits, asset quality and earnings.  In general, the guidelines prescribe the goals to be achieved in each area, and each institution is responsible for establishing its own procedures to achieve those goals.  If an institution fails to comply with any of the standards set forth in the guidelines, the institution’s primary federal regulator may require the institution to submit a plan for achieving and maintaining compliance.  The preamble to the guidelines states that the agencies expect to require a compliance plan from an institution whose failure to meet one or more of the guidelines are of such severity that it could threaten the safety and soundness of the institution.  Failure to submit an acceptable plan, or failure to comply with a plan that has been accepted by the appropriate federal regulator, would constitute grounds for further enforcement action.

Community Reinvestment Act.  First Mid Bank is subject to the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA).  The CRA and the regulations issued thereunder are intended to encourage banks to help meet the credit needs of their service areas, including low and moderate income neighborhoods, consistent with the safe and sound operations of the banks.  These regulations also provide for regulatory assessment of a bank’s record in meeting the needs of its service area when considering applications to establish branches, merger applications and applications to acquire the assets and assume the liabilities of another bank.  The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 requires federal banking agencies to make public a rating of a bank’s performance under the CRA.  In the case of a bank holding company, the CRA performance record of its bank subsidiaries is reviewed by federal banking agencies in connection with the filing of an application to acquire ownership or control of shares or assets of a bank or thrift or to merge with any other bank holding company.  An unsatisfactory record can substantially delay or block the transaction.  First Mid Bank received a satisfactory CRA rating from its regulator in its most recent CRA examination.

Consumer Laws and Regulations.  In addition to the laws and regulations discussed above, First Mid Bank is also subject to certain consumer laws and regulations that are designed to protect consumers in transactions with banks.  While the list set forth herein is not exhaustive, these laws and regulations include the Truth in Lending Act, the Truth in Savings Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, among others.  These laws and regulations mandate certain disclosure requirements and regulate the manner in which financial institutions must deal with customers when taking deposits, making loans to or marketing to or engaging in other types of transactions with such customers.  Failure to comply with these laws and regulations could lead to substantial penalties, operating restrictions and reputational damage to the financial institution.

The executive officers of the Company are elected annually by the Company’s board of directors and are identified below.

William S. Rowland, age 64, has been Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company since May 1999.  He served as Executive Vice President of the Company from 1997 to 1999 and as Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer from 1989 to 1999.  He also serves as Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of First Mid Bank.

Michael L. Taylor, age 42, has been the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company since May 2007. He served as Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from May 2000 to May 2007. He was with AMCORE Bank in Rockford, Illinois from 1996 to 2000.

John W. Hedges, age 63, has been Executive Vice President of the Company and the President of First Mid Bank since September 1999.  He was with National City Bank in Decatur, Illinois from 1976 to 1999.

Laurel G. Allenbaugh, age 50, has been Executive Vice President of Operations since April 2008. She served as Vice President of Operations from February 2000 to April 2008.  She served as Controller of the Company and First Mid Bank from 1990 to February 2000 and has been President of MIDS since 1998.

Eric S. McRae, age 45, has been Executive Vice President of the Company and Executive Vice President, Chief Credit Officer of First Mid Bank since December 2008. He served as President of the Decatur region from 2001 to December 2008.

Charles A. LeFebvre, age 41, has been Executive Vice President of the Company since 2008 and Executive Vice President of the Trust and Wealth Management Division of First Mid Bank since 2007. He was an attorney with the law firm of Thomas, Mamer & Haughey from 2001 to 2007.

Kelly A. Downs, age 43, has been Senior Vice President of Human Resources since April 2008, has served as Vice President of Human Resources from 2001 to April 2008, and has been with the Company since 1991.

Christopher L. Slabach, age 48, has been Senior Vice President of the Company since 2007 and Senior Vice President, Risk Management of First Mid Bank since 2008. He served as Vice President, Audit from 1998-2007.

Various risks and uncertainties, some of which are difficult to predict and beyond the Company’s control, could negatively impact the Company. As a financial institution, the Company is exposed to interest rate risk, liquidity risk, credit risk, operational risk, risks from economic or market conditions, and general business risks among others. Adverse experience with these or other risks could have a material impact on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations, as well as the value of its common stock.

Difficult economic conditions and market disruption have adversely impacted the banking industry and financial markets generally and may continue to significantly affect the business, financial condition, or results of operations of the Company. The Company’s success depends, to a certain extent, upon economic and political conditions, local and national, as well as governmental monetary policies. Conditions such as inflation, recession, unemployment, changes in interest rates, money supply and other factors beyond the Company’s control may adversely affect its asset quality, deposit levels and loan demand and, therefore, its earnings.

Dramatic declines in the housing market beginning in the latter half of 2007, with falling home prices and increasing foreclosures, unemployment and underemployment, have negatively impacted the credit performance of mortgage loans and resulted in significant write-downs of asset values by some financial institutions. The resulting write-downs to assets of financial institutions have caused many financial institutions to merge with other institutions and, in some cases, to seek government assistance or bankruptcy protection.

The capital and credit markets, including the fixed income markets, have been experiencing volatility and disruption for over two years. In some cases, the markets have produced downward pressure on stock prices and credit capacity for certain issuers without regard to those issuers’ financial strength.

Many lenders and institutional investors have reduced and, in some cases, ceased to provide funding to borrowers, including to other financial institutions because of concern about the stability of the financial markets and the strength of counterparties. It is difficult to predict how long these economic conditions will exist, and which of our markets, products or other businesses will ultimately be affected. Accordingly, the resulting lack of available credit, lack of confidence in the financial sector, decreased consumer confidence, increased volatility in the financial markets and reduced business activity could materially and adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

As a result of the challenges presented by economic conditions, the Company has faced the following risks in connection with these events:

 
 

The Company’s profitability depends significantly on economic conditions in the geographic region in which it operates. A large percentage of the Company’s loans are to individuals and businesses in Illinois, consequently, any decline in the economy of this market area could have a materially adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

Decline in the strength and stability of other financial institutions may adversely affect the Company’s business. The actions and commercial soundness of other financial institutions could affect the Company’s ability to engage in routine funding transactions. Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of clearing, counterparty or other relationships. The Company has exposure to different counterparties, and executes transactions with various counterparties in the financial industry. Recent defaults by financial services institutions, and even rumors or questions about one or more financial services institutions or the financial services industry in general, have led to market-wide liquidity problems and could lead to losses or defaults by the Company or by other institutions. Many of these transactions expose the Company to credit risk in the event of default of its counterparty or client. Any such losses could materially and adversely affect the Company’s results of operations.

Changes in interest rates may negatively affect our earnings. Changes in market interest rates and prices may adversely affect the Company’s financial condition or results of operations. The Company’s net interest income, its largest source of revenue, is highly dependent on achieving a positive spread between the interest earned on loans and investments and the interest paid on deposits and borrowings. Changes in interest rates could negatively impact the Company’s ability to attract deposits, make loans, and achieve a positive spread resulting in compression of the net interest margin.

The Company may not have sufficient cash or access to cash to satisfy current and future financial obligations, including demands for loans and deposit withdrawals, funding operating costs, payment of preferred stock dividends and for other corporate purposes. This type of liquidity risk arises whenever the maturities of financial instruments included in assets and liabilities differ. The Company’s liquidity can be affected by a variety of factors, including general economic conditions, market disruption, operational problems affecting third parties or the Company, unfavorable pricing, competition, the Company’s credit rating and regulatory restrictions. (See “Liquidity” herein for management’s actions to mitigate this risk.)

If the Company were unable to borrow funds through access to capital markets, it may not be able to meet the cash flow requirements of its depositors, creditors, and borrowers, or the operating cash needed to fund corporate expansion and other corporate activities. Starting in the middle of 2007, there has been significant turmoil and volatility in worldwide financial markets which, although there has been some improvement, is still ongoing. These conditions have resulted in a disruption in the liquidity of financial markets, and could directly impact the Company to the extent it needs to access capital markets to raise funds to support its business and overall liquidity position. This situation could affect the cost of such funds or the Company’s ability to raise such funds. If the Company were unable to access any of these funding sources when needed, it might be unable to meet customers’ needs, which could adversely impact its financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and level of regulatory-qualifying capital. For further discussion, see the “Liquidity” section.

Loan customers or other counter-parties may not be able to perform their contractual obligations resulting in a negative impact on the Company’s earnings. Overall economic conditions affecting businesses and consumers, including the current difficult economic conditions and market disruptions, could impact the Company’s credit losses. In addition, real estate valuations could also impact the Company’s credit losses as the Company maintains $588 million in loans secured by commercial, agricultural, and residential real estate. A significant decline in real estate values could have a negative effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations. In addition, the Company’s total loan balances by industry exceeded 25% of total risk-based capital for each of four industries as of December 31, 2010. A listing of these industries is contained in under “Item 6. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations -- Loans” herein. A significant change in one of these industries such as a significant decline in agricultural crop prices, could adversely impact the Company’s credit losses.

Continued deterioration in the real estate market could lead to additional losses, which could have a material adverse effect on the business, financial condition and results of operations or the Company. Commercial and commercial real estate loans generally involve higher credit risks than residential real estate and consumer loans. Because payments on loans secured by commercial real estate or equipment are often dependent upon the successful operation and management of the underlying assets, repayment of such loans may be influenced to a great extent by conditions in the market or the economy. Continued increases in commercial and consumer delinquency levels or continued declines in real estate market values would require increased net charge-offs and increases in the allowance for loan and lease losses, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and prospects.

The allowance for loan losses may prove inadequate or be negatively affected by credit risk exposures. The Company’s business depends on the creditworthiness of its customers. Management periodically reviews the allowance for loan and lease losses for adequacy considering economic conditions and trends, collateral values and credit quality indicators, including past charge-off experience and levels of past due loans and nonperforming assets. There is no certainty that the allowance for loan losses will be adequate over time to cover credit losses in the portfolio because of unanticipated adverse changes in the economy, market conditions or events adversely affecting specific customers, industries or markets. If the credit quality of the customer base materially decreases, if the risk profile of a market, industry or group of customers changes materially, or if the allowance for loan losses is not adequate, the Company’s business, financial condition, liquidity, capital, and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Declines in the value of securities held in the investment portfolio may negatively affect the Company’s earnings. The value of an investment in the portfolio could decrease due to changes in market factors. The market value of certain investment securities is volatile and future declines or other-than-temporary impairments could materially adversely affect the Company’s future earnings and regulatory capital. Continued volatility in the market value of certain of the investment securities, whether caused by changes in market perceptions of credit risk, as reflected in the expected market yield of the security, or actual defaults in the portfolio could result in significant fluctuations in the value of the securities. This could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s accumulated other comprehensive loss and shareholders’ equity depending upon the direction of the fluctuations.

Furthermore, future downgrades or defaults in these securities could result in future classifications as other-than-temporarily impaired. The Company has invested in trust preferred securities issued by financial institutions and insurance companies, corporate securities of financial institutions, and stock in the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago and Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. Deterioration of the financial stability of the underlying financial institutions for these investments could result in other-than-temporary impairment charges to the Company and could have a material impact on future earnings. For further discussion of the Company’s investments, see Note 4 – “Investment Securities.”

If the Company’s stock price declines from levels at December 31, 2010, management will evaluate the goodwill balances for impairment, and if the values of the businesses have declined, the Company could recognize an impairment charge for its goodwill.  Management performed an annual goodwill impairment assessment as of September 30, 2010. Based on these analyses, management concluded that the fair value of the Company’s reporting units exceeded the fair value of its assets and liabilities and, therefore, goodwill was not considered impaired. It is possible that management’s assumptions and conclusions regarding the valuation of the Company’s lines of business could change adversely, which could result in the recognition of impairment for goodwill, which could have a material effect on the Company’s financial position and future results of operations.

The Series B and Series C preferred stock impacts net income available to common stockholders and earnings per share.  As long as shares of the Series B and Series C preferred stock are outstanding, no dividends may be paid on the Company’s common stock unless all dividends on the Series B and Series C preferred stock have been paid in full. The dividends declared on the Series B and Series C preferred stock reduce the net income available to common stockholders and earnings per share.

Holders of the Series B and Series C preferred stock have rights that are senior to those of common stockholders. The Series B and Series C preferred stock is senior to the shares of common stock and holders of the Series B and Series C preferred stock have certain rights and preferences that are senior to holders of common stock. The Series B and Series C preferred stock will rank senior to the common stock and all other equity securities designated as ranking junior to the Series B and Series C preferred stock. So long as any shares of the Series B and Series C preferred stock remain outstanding, unless all accrued and unpaid dividends for all prior dividend periods have been paid or are contemporaneously declared and paid in full, no dividend shall be paid or declared on common stock or other junior stock, other than a dividend payable solely in common stock.

 

The Company also may not purchase, redeem or otherwise acquire for consideration any shares of its common stock or other junior stock unless it has paid in full all accrued dividends on the Series B and Series C preferred stock for all prior dividend periods. The Series B and Series C preferred stock is entitled to a liquidation preference over shares of common stock in the event of the Company’s liquidation, dissolution or winding up.

The Company may issue additional common stock or other equity securities in the future which could dilute the ownership interest of existing stockholders. In order to maintain capital at desired or regulatory-required levels or to replace existing capital, the Company may be required to issue additional shares of common stock, or securities convertible into, exchangeable for or representing rights to acquire shares of common stock. The Company may sell these shares at prices below the current market price of shares, and the sale of these shares may significantly dilute stockholder ownership. The Company could also issue additional shares in connection with acquisitions of other financial institutions.

Human error, inadequate or failed internal processes and systems, and external events may have adverse effects on the Company. Operational risk includes compliance or legal risk, which is the risk of loss from violations of, or noncompliance with, laws, rules, regulations, prescribed practices, or ethical standards. Operational risk also encompasses transaction risk, which includes losses from fraud, error, the inability to deliver products or services, and loss or theft of information. Losses resulting from operational risk could take the form of explicit charges, increased operational costs, harm to the Company’s reputation or forgone opportunities. Any of these could potentially have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

The Company is exposed to various business risks that could have a negative effect on the financial performance of the Company. These risks include: changes in customer behavior, changes in competition, new litigation or changes to existing litigation, claims and assessments, environmental liabilities, real or threatened acts of war or terrorist activity, adverse weather, changes in accounting standards, legislative or regulatory changes, taxing authority interpretations, and an inability on the Company’s part to retain and attract skilled employees.

In addition to these risks identified by the Company, investments in the Company’s common stock involve risk. The market price of the Company’s common stock may fluctuate significantly in response to a number of factors including: volatility of stock market prices and volumes, rumors or erroneous information, changes in market valuations of similar companies, changes in securities analysts’ estimates of financial performance, and variations in quarterly or annual operating results.

None.

The headquarters of the Company is located at 1520 Charleston Avenue, Mattoon Illinois. The building is owned by the Bank. This facility is also used by MIDS for its data processing and back room operations for the Company and the Bank.

The main office of the Bank is located at 1515 Charleston Avenue, Mattoon, Illinois and is also owned by the Bank. The Bank also conducts business through numerous facilities, owned and leased, located in seventeen counties throughout Illinois.  Of the thirty-six other banking offices operated by the Bank, twenty-three are owned and thirteen are leased from non-affiliated third parties.

In addition, the Company owns a facility located at 1500 Wabash Avenue, Mattoon, Illinois, which is used by the loan and deposit services departments of First Mid Bank and First Mid Insurance leases a facility located at 100 Lerna Road South, Mattoon, Illinois.

None of the properties owned by the Corporation are subject to any major encumbrances. The Company believes these facilities are suitable and adequate to operate its banking and related business. The net investment of the Company and subsidiaries in real estate and equipment at December 31, 2010 was $28,544,000.

Since First Mid Bank acts as a depository of funds, it is named from time to time as a defendant in lawsuits (such as garnishment proceedings) involving claims to the ownership of funds in particular accounts.  Management believes that all such litigation as well as other pending legal proceedings, in which the Company is involved, constitute ordinary routine litigation incidental to the business of the Company and that such litigation will not materially adversely affect the Company’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

The following table summarizes share repurchase activity for the fourth quarter of 2010:

Since August 5, 1998, the Board of Directors has approved repurchase programs pursuant to which the Company may repurchase a total of approximately $56.7 million of the Company’s common stock.  The repurchase programs approved by the Board of Directors are as follows:

 

 

Subsequently, on February 22, 2011, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of $5 million of additional shares of the Company’s common stock bringing the total amount of common stock that the Company is authorized to repurchase on that date to approximately $5,918,000.

The following sets forth a five-year comparison of selected financial data (dollars in thousands, except per share data).

The following discussion and analysis is intended to provide a better understanding of the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company and its subsidiaries for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.  This discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements, related notes and selected financial data appearing elsewhere in this report.

This report may contain certain forward-looking statements, such as discussions of the Company’s pricing and fee trends, credit quality and outlook, liquidity, new business results, expansion plans, anticipated expenses and planned schedules. The Company intends such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1955. Forward-looking statements, which are based on certain assumptions and describe future plans, strategies and expectations of the Company, are identified by use of the words “believe,” ”expect,” ”intend,” ”anticipate,” ”estimate,” ”project,” or similar expressions. Actual results could differ materially from the results indicated by these statements because the realization of those results is subject to many risks and uncertainties, including those described in Item 1A-“Risk Factors” and other sections of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K and the Company’s other filings with the SEC, and changes in interest rates, general economic conditions and those in the Company’s market area, legislative/regulatory changes, monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. Government, including policies of the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board, the quality or composition of the loan or investment portfolios and the valuation of the investment portfolio, the Company’s success in raising capital, demand for loan products, deposit flows, competition, demand for financial services in the Company’s market area and accounting principles, policies and guidelines. Furthermore, forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made. Except as required under the federal securities laws or the rules and regulations of the SEC, we do not undertake any obligation to update or review any forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

This overview of management’s discussion and analysis highlights selected information in this document and may not contain all of the information that is important to you. For a more complete understanding of trends, events, commitments, uncertainties, liquidity, capital resources, and critical accounting estimates, you should carefully read this entire document. These have an impact on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

Net income was $8.76 million, $8.21 million, and $10.52 million and diluted earnings per share were $1.07, $1.04, and $1.67 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, respectively. The increases in net income and earnings per share in 2010 was primarily the result of an increase in net interest income due to lower interest rates on deposit balances resulting in less interest expense for the year. The following table shows the Company’s annualized performance ratios for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008:

Total assets at December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008 were $1,468.2 million, $1,095.2 million, and $1,049.7 million, respectively. The increase in net assets during 2010 was due to the branch acquisition completed during the third quarter. Net loan balances increased to $794.2 million at December 31, 2010, from $691.3 million at December 31, 2009 and compared to $734.4 million at December 31, 2008.  The increase in 2010 of $103 million or 14.9% was due to $133 million of loan balances acquired in the acquisition offset by a decline in the balances of loans secured by real estate.  Total deposit balances increased to $1,212.7 million at December 31, 2010 from $840.4 million at December 31, 2009 and from $806.4 million at December 31, 2008. The increase in 2010 was primarily due to balances acquired in the acquisition of $337 million, as well as, increases in interest bearing transaction accounts and money market accounts offset by declines in consumer time deposits.

Net interest margin, defined as net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets, was 3.51% for 2010, 3.40% for 2009 and 3.73% for 2008. The increase in interest margin during 2010 was due to a greater decline in interest-earning liabilities rates compared to the decline in rates on interest-earning assets.

Net interest income increased to $40.1 million in 2010 from $35.6 million in 2009 and $35.7 million in 2008.  The ability of the Company to continue to grow net interest income is largely dependent on management’s ability to succeed in its overall business development efforts.  Management expects these efforts to continue but does not intend to compromise credit quality and prudent management of the maturities of interest-earning assets and interest-paying liabilities in order to achieve growth.

Non-interest income increased to $13.8 million in 2010 compared to $13.5 million in 2009 and $15.3 million in 2008. The primary reasons for the increase of $.3 million or 2.7% from 2009 to 2010 were increases in ATM and debit fees, an increase in trust revenues and less other-than-temporary impairment charges on investment securities offset by no non-recurring gain such as occurred in 2009. The primary reasons for the decrease of $1.8 million or 11.9% from 2008 to 2009 were decreases in trust revenues and brokerage commissions and other-than-temporary impairment charges on investment securities offset by a $1 million gain on the sale of the Bank’s merchant card servicing portfolio.

 

Non-interest expenses increased $3.7 million, to $36.9 million in 2010 compared to $33.2 million in 2009 and $31.5 million in 2008.  The primary factor for the increase during 2010 was an additional expenses incurred as a result of the branch acquisition offset by the special FDIC assessment during 2009 that did not occur in 2010. The primary factor for the increase during 2009 was an increase in FDIC insurance assessments.

Following is a summary of the factors that contributed to the changes in net income (in thousands):

Credit quality is an area of importance to the Company. Year-end total nonperforming loans were $10.4 million at December 31, 2010 compared to $12.7 million at December 31, 2009 and $7.3 million at December 31, 2008.  The decrease in 2010 was primarily a result of loans that paid-off or became current during the year and loans transferred to other real estate owned during the year as a result of continued deterioration in economic conditions including increased unemployment, reduction in cash flow from increased vacancies in commercial properties, and declines in property values. Other real estate owned balances totaled $6.1 million at December 31, 2010 compared to $2.9 million at December 31, 2009. The Company’s provision for loan losses was $3.7 million for 2010 compared to $3.6 million for 2009.  At December 31, 2010, the composition of the loan portfolio remained similar to 2009.  Loans secured by both commercial and residential real estate comprised 73% and 74% of the loan portfolio as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

The Company also held investments in four trust preferred securities with a fair value of $581,000 and unrealized losses of $6 million at December 31, 2010 compared to a fair value of $3.2 million and unrealized losses of $4.6 million at December 31, 2009. During 2010, the Company recorded $1.4 million of other-than-temporary impairment charges for the credit portion of the unrealized losses of these securities compared to $1.8 million during 2009. These charges established a new, lower amortized cost basis for these securities and reduced non-interest income. See Note 4 – “Investment Securities” for additional details regarding these investments.

The Company’s capital position remains strong and the Company has consistently maintained regulatory capital ratios above the “well-capitalized” standards. The Company’s Tier 1 capital ratio to risk weighted assets ratio at December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008 was 11.71%, 14.57%, and 11.02%, respectively. The Company’s total capital to risk weighted assets ratio at December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008 was 12.84%, 15.76%, and 11.99%, respectively. The decrease in 2010 was primarily the result of an increase in risk weighted assets that resulted from the branch acquisition. The increase in 2009 was primarily the result of an increase in retained earnings due to the Company’s net income and the issuance of $24,635,000 of Series B 9% Non-Cumulative Perpetual Convertible Preferred Stock. (See “Preferred Stock” in Note 1 to consolidated financial statements for more detailed information.)

The Company’s liquidity position remains sufficient to fund operations and meet the requirements of borrowers, depositors, and creditors. The Company maintains various sources of liquidity to fund its cash needs. See “Liquidity” herein for a full listing of its sources and anticipated significant contractual obligations.

The Company enters into 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 lines of credit, letters of credit and other commitments to extend credit.  The total outstanding commitments at December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 were $169.3 million, $132.9 million and $152.9 million, respectively.  See Note 19 – “Commitments and Contingent Liabilities” herein for further information.

The Company has established various accounting policies that govern the application of U.S. generally accepted accounting principles in the preparation of the Company’s financial statements. The significant accounting policies of the Company are described in the footnotes to the consolidated financial statements. Certain accounting policies involve significant judgments and assumptions by management that have a material impact on the carrying value of certain assets and liabilities; management considers such accounting policies to be critical accounting policies. The judgments and assumptions used by management are based on historical experience and other factors, which are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. Because of the nature of the judgments and assumptions made by management, actual results could differ from these judgments and assumptions, which could have a material impact on the carrying values of assets and liabilities and the results of operations of the Company.

Allowance for Loan Losses. The Company believes the allowance for loan losses is the critical accounting policy that requires the most significant judgments and assumptions used in the preparation of its consolidated financial statements. An estimate of potential losses inherent in the loan portfolio are determined and an allowance for those losses is established by considering factors including historical loss rates, expected cash flows and estimated collateral values. In assessing these factors, the Company use organizational history and experience with credit decisions and related outcomes. The allowance for loan losses represents the best estimate of losses inherent in the existing loan portfolio. The allowance for loan losses is increased by the provision for loan losses charged to expense and reduced by loans charged off, net of recoveries. The Company evaluates the allowance for loan losses quarterly. If the underlying assumptions later prove to be inaccurate based on subsequent loss evaluations, the allowance for loan losses is adjusted.

The Company estimates the appropriate level of allowance for loan losses by separately evaluating impaired and nonimpaired loans. A specific allowance is assigned to an impaired loan when expected cash flows or collateral do not justify the carrying amount of the loan. The methodology used to assign an allowance to a nonimpaired loan is more subjective. Generally, the allowance assigned to nonimpaired loans is determined by applying historical loss rates to existing loans with similar risk characteristics, adjusted for qualitative factors including the volume and severity of identified classified loans, changes in economic conditions, changes in credit policies or underwriting standards, and changes in the level of credit risk associated with specific industries and markets. Because the economic and business climate in any given industry or market, and its impact on any given borrower, can change rapidly, the risk profile of the loan portfolio is continually assessed and adjusted when appropriate. Notwithstanding these procedures, there still exists the possibility that the assessment could prove to be significantly incorrect and that an immediate adjustment to the allowance for loan losses would be required.

Other Real Estate Owned. Other real estate owned acquired through loan foreclosure is initially recorded at fair value less costs to sell when acquired, establishing a new cost basis. The adjustment at the time of foreclosure is recorded through the allowance for loan losses. Due to the subjective nature of establishing the fair value when the asset is acquired, the actual fair value of the other real estate owned or foreclosed asset could differ from the original estimate. If it is determined that fair value temporarily declines subsequent to foreclosure, a valuation allowance is recorded through noninterest expense. Operating costs associated with the assets after acquisition are also recorded as noninterest expense. Gains and losses on the disposition of other real estate owned and foreclosed assets are netted and posted to other noninterest expense.

Investment in Debt and Equity Securities. The Company classifies its investments in debt and equity securities as either held-to-maturity or available-for-sale in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting  Standards (SFAS) No. 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities,” which was codified into ASC 320. Securities classified as held-to-maturity are recorded at cost or amortized cost. Available-for-sale securities are carried at fair value. Fair value calculations are based on quoted market prices when such prices are available. If quoted market prices are not available, estimates of fair value are computed using a variety of techniques, including extrapolation from the quoted prices of similar instruments or recent trades for thinly traded securities, fundamental analysis, or through obtaining purchase quotes. Due to the subjective nature of the valuation process, it is possible that the actual fair values of these investments could differ from the estimated amounts, thereby affecting the financial position, results of operations and cash flows of the Company. If the estimated value of investments is less than the cost or amortized cost, the Company evaluates whether an event or change in circumstances has occurred that may have a significant adverse effect on the fair value of the investment. If such an event or change has occurred and the Company determines that the impairment is other-than-temporary, a further determination is made as to the portion of impairment that is related to credit loss. The impairment of the investment that is related to the credit loss is expensed in the period in which the event or change occurred. The remainder of the impairment is recorded in other comprehensive income.

Deferred Income Tax Assets/Liabilities. The Company’s net deferred income tax asset arises from differences in the dates that items of income and expense enter into our reported income and taxable income. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are established for these items as they arise. From an accounting standpoint, deferred tax assets are reviewed to determine if they are realizable based on the historical level of taxable income, estimates of future taxable income and the reversals of deferred tax liabilities. In most cases, the realization of the deferred tax asset is based on future profitability. If the Company were to experience net operating losses for tax purposes in a future period, the realization of deferred tax assets would be evaluated for a potential valuation reserve.

Additionally, the Company reviews its uncertain tax positions annually under FASB Interpretation No. 48 (FIN No. 48), “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” codified within ASC 740. An uncertain tax position is recognized as a benefit only if it is "more likely than not" that the tax position would be sustained in a tax examination, with a tax examination being presumed to occur. The amount actually recognized is the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely to be recognized on examination. For tax positions not meeting the "more likely than not" test, no tax benefit is recorded. A significant amount of judgment is applied to determine both whether the tax position meets the "more likely than not" test as well as to determine the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely to be recognized. Differences between the position taken by management and that of taxing authorities could result in a reduction of a tax benefit or increase to tax liability, which could adversely affect future income tax expense.

Impairment of Goodwill and Intangible Assets. Core deposit and customer relationships, which are intangible assets with a finite life, are recorded on the Company’s balance sheets. These intangible assets were capitalized as a result of past acquisitions and are being amortized over their estimated useful lives of up to 15 years. Core deposit intangible assets, with finite lives will be tested for impairment when changes in events or circumstances indicate that its carrying amount may not be recoverable. Core deposit intangible assets were tested for impairment during 2010 as part of the goodwill impairment test and no impairment was deemed necessary.

As a result of the Company’s acquisition activity, goodwill, an intangible asset with an indefinite life, is reflected on the balance sheets. Goodwill is evaluated for impairment annually, unless there are factors present that indicate a potential impairment, in which case, the goodwill impairment test is performed more frequently than annually.

Fair Value Measurements. The fair value of a financial instrument is defined as the amount at which the instrument could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced or liquidation sale. The Company estimates the fair value of a financial instrument using a variety of valuation methods. Where financial instruments are actively traded and have quoted market prices, quoted market prices are used for fair value. When the financial instruments are not actively traded, other observable market inputs, such as quoted prices of securities with similar characteristics, may be used, if available, to determine fair value. When observable market prices do not exist, the Company estimates fair value. The Company’s valuation methods consider factors such as liquidity and concentration concerns. Other factors such as model assumptions, market dislocations, and unexpected correlations can affect estimates of fair value. Imprecision in estimating these factors can impact the amount of revenue or loss recorded.

SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements”, which was codified into ASC 820, establishes a framework for measuring the fair value of financial instruments that considers the attributes specific to particular assets or liabilities and establishes a three-level hierarchy for determining fair value based on the transparency of inputs to each valuation as of the fair value measurement date. The three levels are defined as follows:

At the end of each quarter, the Company assesses the valuation hierarchy for each asset or liability measured. From time to time, assets or liabilities may be transferred within hierarchy levels due to changes in availability of observable market inputs to measure fair value at the measurement date. Transfers into or out of hierarchy levels are based upon the fair value at the beginning of the reporting period. A more detailed description of the fair values measured at each level of the fair value hierarchy can be found in Note 12 – “Disclosures of Fair Values of Financial Instruments.”

On September 29, 2007, the Company closed its facilities located at 435 South Hamilton, Sullivan, Illinois in the IGA and at 220 North Highway Avenue, DeLand, Illinois. The customers and operations of both of these facilities were moved to other facilities in Sullivan and Monticello, Illinois. These actions did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

During the first quarter of 2008, the Company obtained an independent appraisal of the DeLand property in anticipation of possibly donating or selling this property.  Subsequently, the Company adjusted its carrying value of the property to the appraised value which resulted in a loss of $132,000 in the consolidated financial statements. The property was sold during the first quarter of 2009 for its appraised value of $50,000.

On September 10, 2010, First Mid Bank completed the acquisition of certain assets and the assumption of certain liabilities with respect to 10 branches of First Bank located in Bartonville, Bloomington, Galesburg, Knoxville, Peoria and Quincy, Illinois.  Excluding the purchase accounting adjustments, the acquisition included the assumption of approximately $336 million in deposits and the purchase of approximately $135 million of loans and $5.3 million of premises and equipment associated with the acquired branch locations. First Mid Bank received cash of $178.3 million to assume the net liabilities less the purchase price of $15.7 million (4.77% of core deposits assumed).  The acquisition resulted in goodwill of $8.4 million. See Note 21—“Business Combinations” in the notes to the financial statements for additional information related to the transaction.

The largest source of operating revenue for the Company is net interest income.  Net interest income represents the difference between total interest income earned on earning assets and total interest expense paid on interest-bearing liabilities.  The amount of interest income is dependent upon many factors, including the volume and mix of earning assets, the general level of interest rates and the dynamics of changes in interest rates.  The cost of funds necessary to support earning assets varies with the volume and mix of interest-bearing liabilities and the rates paid to attract and retain such funds.

The Company’s average balances, interest income and expense and rates earned or paid for major balance sheet categories are set forth in the following table (dollars in thousands):

Changes in net interest income may also be analyzed by segregating the volume and rate components of interest income and interest expense.  The following table summarizes the approximate relative contribution of changes in average volume and interest rates to changes in net interest income for the past two years (in thousands):

Net interest income increased $4.6 million, or 12.8% in 2010, compared to a decrease of $150,000, or .4% in 2009.  The increase in net interest income in 2010 was primarily due to a greater decline in rates on interest-bearing liabilities than the decline in rates on interest-bearing assets. The decrease in net interest income in 2009 was primarily due to a greater decline in rates on interest-bearing assets than the decline in rates on interest-bearing liabilities and the Company maintained a greater amount of liquidity at a reduced margin.

In 2010, average earning assets increased by $96.1 million, or 9.2%, and average interest-bearing liabilities increased $79.9 million or 9.1% compared with 2009. In 2009, average earning assets increased by $88.0 million, or 9.2%, and average interest-bearing liabilities increased $60.7 million or 7.5% compared with 2008. Changes in average balances are shown below:

 

 

To compare the tax-exempt yields on interest-earning assets to taxable yields, the Company also computes non-GAAP net interest income on a tax equivalent basis where the interest earned on tax-exempt securities is adjusted to an amount comparable to interest subject to normal income taxes, assuming a federal tax rate of 34% (referred to as the tax equivalent adjustment). The tax equivalent basis adjustments to net interest income for 2010, 2009 and 2008 were $491,000, $497,000 and $430,000, respectively. The net yield on interest-earning assets on a tax equivalent basis was 3.57% in 2010, 3.46% in 2009 and 3.79% in 2008.

The provision for loan losses in 2010 was $3,737,000 compared to $3,594,000 in 2009 and $3,559,000 in 2008. Nonperforming loans decreased to $10,434,000 at December 31, 2010 from $12,720,000 at December 31, 2009 and compared to $7,285,000 at December 31, 2008.  The decrease in 2010 was primarily due to loans that paid-off or became current during the year and loans transferred to other real estate owned during the year. The increase in 2009 occurred as a result of loans that became nonperforming during the year due to continued deterioration in economic conditions including increased unemployment, reduction in cash flow from increased vacancies in commercial properties and declines in property values. Net charge-offs were $2,806,000 during 2010, $1,719,000 during 2009, and $2,090,000 during 2008. For information on loan loss experience and nonperforming loans, see “Nonperforming Loans and Repossessed Assets” and “Loan Quality and Allowance for Loan Losses” herein.

An important source of the Company’s revenue is derived from other income. The following table sets forth the major components of other income for the last three years (in thousands):

Total non-interest income increased to $13,820,000 in 2010 compared to $13,455,000 in 2009 and $15,264,000 in 2008.  The primary reasons for the more significant year-to-year changes in other income components are as follows:

The major categories of other expense include salaries and employee benefits, occupancy and equipment expenses and other operating expenses associated with day-to-day operations. The following table sets forth the major components of other expense for the last three years (in thousands):

Total non-interest expense increased to $36,927,000 in 2010 from $33,212,000 in 2009 and $31,460,000 in 2008.  The primary reasons for the more significant year-to-year changes in other expense components are as follows:

 

Income tax expense amounted to $4,522,000 in 2010 compared to $4,007,000 in 2009 and $5,443,000 in 2008.  Effective tax rates were 34.0%, 32.8% and 34.1%, respectively, for 2010, 2009 and 2008.

The Company adopted the provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 48 (FIN 48), “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” which was codified within ASC 740, on January 1, 2007.  The implementation of FIN 48 did not impact the Company’s financial statements. The Company files U.S. federal and state of Illinois income tax returns.  The Company is no longer subject to U.S. federal or state income tax examinations by tax authorities for years before 2007.

The loan portfolio (net of unearned discount) is the largest category of the Company’s earning assets.  The following table summarizes the composition of the loan portfolio for the last five years (in thousands):

All of the loans acquired in the branch acquisition were performing loans. The fair value of the loans acquired was determined using a discounted cash flow analysis. The difference between the fair value and acquired value of the purchased loans of $2.1 million (a discount of approximately 1.6% of the total loans acquired) is being accreted to interest income over the remaining term of the loans.  The balance of the loan discount as of December 31, 2010 is $1.75 million.

 

Commercial and commercial real estate loans generally involve higher credit risks than residential real estate and consumer loans. Because payments on loans secured by commercial real estate or equipment are often dependent upon the successful operation and management of the underlying assets, repayment of such loans may be influenced to a great extent by conditions in the market or the economy. The Company does not have any sub-prime mortgages or credit card loans outstanding which are also generally considered to be higher credit risk.

The following table summarizes the loan portfolio geographically by branch region as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 (dollars in thousands):

Loans are geographically dispersed among these regions located in central and southwestern Illinois. While these regions have experienced some economic stress during 2010 and 2009, the Company does not consider these locations high risk areas since these regions have not experienced the significant declines in real estate values seen in other areas in the United States.

The Company does not have a concentration, as defined by the regulatory agencies, in construction and land development loans or commercial real estate loans as a percentage of total risk-based capital for the periods shown above. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Company did have industry loan concentrations in excess of 25% of total risk-based capital in the following industries (dollars in thousands):

The Company had no further industry loan concentrations in excess of 25% of total risk-based capital.

The following table presents the balance of loans outstanding as of December 31, 2010, by contractual maturities (in thousands):

As of December 31, 2010, loans with maturities over one year consisted of $522 million in fixed rate loans and $58 million in variable rate loans.  The loan maturities noted above are based on the contractual provisions of the individual loans.  The Company has no general policy regarding renewals and borrower requests, which are handled on a case-by-case basis.

Nonperforming loans include: (a) loans accounted for on a nonaccrual basis; (b) accruing loans contractually past due ninety days or more as to interest or principal payments; and (c) loans not included in (a) and (b) above which are defined as “restructured loans”. Repossessed assets include primarily repossessed real estate and automobiles.

The Company’s policy is to discontinue the accrual of interest income on any loan for which principal or interest is ninety days past due.  The accrual of interest is discontinued earlier when, in the opinion of management, there is reasonable doubt as to the timely collection of interest or principal.  Once interest accruals are discontinued, accrued but uncollected interest is charged to current year income. Subsequent receipts on non-accrual loans are recorded as a reduction of principal, and interest income is recorded only after principal recovery is reasonably assured. Nonaccrual loans are returned to accrual status when, in the opinion of management, the financial position of the borrower indicates there is no longer any reasonable doubt as to the timely collection of interest or principal.

Restructured loans are loans on which, due to deterioration in the borrower’s financial condition, the original terms have been modified in favor of the borrower or either principal or interest has been forgiven.

Repossessed assets represent property acquired as the result of borrower defaults on loans. These assets are recorded at estimated fair value, less estimated selling costs, at the time of foreclosure or repossession.  Write-downs occurring at foreclosure are charged against the allowance for loan losses. On an ongoing basis, properties are appraised as required by market indications and applicable regulations. Write-downs for subsequent declines in value are recorded in non-interest expense in other real estate owned along with other expenses related to maintaining the properties.

The following table presents information concerning the aggregate amount of nonperforming loans and repossessed assets (in thousands):

The $3,388,000 decrease in nonaccrual loans during 2010 resulted from the net of $7,450,000 of loans put on nonaccrual status, offset by $3,446,000 of loans transferred to other real estate owned, $2,496,000 of loans charged off and $4,896,000 of loans becoming current or paid-off. The following table summarizes the composition of nonaccrual loans (in thousands):

Interest income that would have been reported if nonaccrual and restructured loans had been performing totaled $428,000, $672,000 and $274,000 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

The $3,303,000 increase in repossessed assets during 2010 resulted from the net of $9,996,000 of additional assets repossessed, $119,000 of further write-downs of repossessed assets to current market value and $6,574,000 of repossessed assets sold. The following table summarizes the composition of repossessed assets (in thousands):