Saskfarmer3 ?

[mbratrud]

Hopper I knew you would . Believe me
I would have never imagined the absolute
gutting of the program that this change
is. They may as well just said we are
going to a strictly crop insurance
program, instead of playing games and
trying to slide this by farmers hoping
they won't notice because they are busy
with Harvest.

[cottonpicken]

Sask99,i remember you being on top of this shit,any
opinion?

[cottonpicken]

I did get an email from my accountant on Friday with the changes that were announced this week.

I don't think the example is being described here is totally correct.

Remember reference margin is the amounts over your allowable expenses. So using M's example of a farm having $70 of revenue is not correct. The correct way would be revenue falling below $70 over allowable expenses which could happen. Grant it that most farms non allowable expenses and family draw runs between 80 to 150 per acre, a farm with this occurance would be a disaster and hence the program would payout.


If you have a low margin per acre these changes will benefit you. So for those that have many repeat crop failures, your margin potentially can maintain a better spread. (I'm just interpreting the email yet so its a wait and see)

If you are a high reference margin farmer (over 200-250 per acre), future benefits will be less. But then I guess they have the net worth to sustain themselves better.

Its still a matter of understanding the program, having good records and either calculating the claim year margin each year properly or have someone who knows what they are doing do it for you.

I am still amazed at people that claim the program came along and asked for money back. If you knew your correct benefit in the first place, there is never any issues. I have had 1 claim in Agristability and a couple from the former CAIS program. My accountant calculates the number I am to get or how far my margin is away from a payment each year. The amount stated is always bang on or within 5% which I feel is acceptable. Each year I also get my upcoming year's reference margin in a per acre format which helps me plan accordingly.

Its not rocket science, but many accountants just don't understand the program or have to tools to calculate any parts of it.

[cottonpicken]

Reading the email again I think I had it wrong. The reference margin is the lesser of the actual margin or the allowable expense calculation that will be defined in the future.

That means low margin farms don't have anything extra but to their enjoyment, high margin farms won't receive big payouts because of their success or "luck" as some may describe it.

The other change is 70% gov't sharing across the board instead of the 60 to as high as 80% as it was before.

[cottonpicken]

In answer to your question cotton on crop insurance and increasing coverage levels and a reply to Hopperbin:

Your statement is not true imo
First remember one thing. If you don't get the revenue from crop production, marketing, crop insurance etc, Agristability is only going to pay you 70% of the loss of income. In 2010, everyone was made when the $30 too wet pmt was issued as it would reduce Agristabilty benefits. This is true but you end up about $9 ahead as if the payment wouldn't have been made, you only would have received a portion of it or nothing at all if you didn't have a claim at all.

Because your coverage levels increase, potential payouts also increase, and since its included in your future reference margins it helps keep it higher

[Daylate]

YOU DO NOT NEED TO HAVE CROP INS. Where it
effects you is when you have a negative margin in a
claim year, your agstab will only cover you down to
$0.00. Then it is left to crop ins. to cover your
negative margin. It is designed for no program
overlap.
And as for allowable expenses, my understanding
and the way it was explained to me was dumbed
down to explain the basic process. If your allowable
expense worked out to $250/ac. as an example, the
only way they would use your allowable expense is
if you grossed over $500/ac.(at that point your ref
margin would exceed allowable expense) this all
sounds good as long as theres no hidden
percenting and dividing in the calculating of the
allowable expense cause thats something i never
asked about.
Please school me if anyone else has or gets any
info. We should all know the ins and outs so we
arent buying insurance we dont need.

[mbratrud]

Daylate,

I have yet to find any changes to the
crop insurance requirement. Previously
if crop insurance was available to you
needed to carry 70 percent coverage. In
the too wet years you were considered
covered if you were in at the 50 percent
level.

Basically they claw back anything that
did cover yourself for. For example if
you had 50 percent coverage on Canola
and had a claim, if you qualified for an
Agristability payment they would claw
back the difference of what you would
have received with 70 percent coverage.

With the New and improoved Agristabity I
have yet to calculate a scenario in
which I would qualify for and Agstabilty
payment if I held crop Insurance.
Everyone will be different, and that may
not be the case for some. I haven't had
a production claim in crop insurance in
12 years and have yet to have an
Agristabilty claim, possibly 2011 with
40 percent seeded, but I am still
waiting to find out.

I am quite confident that as producers
look at the all new Reference Margin
Calculation most will come to the same
conclusion.

It is unfortunate Agristabily could have
been tweeked to prevent abuse but
instead the blew it up!

I am stunned by the lack of awareness of
these changes. Crafty move by the
Governemt.

Its all available in black and white on
the Agristability Website.

Global Ag Risk Solutions will be given a
serious look from our farm.

[mbratrud]

The negative margin and crop insurance as described is correct. As long as you don't run a negative margin, you won't have a crop claim calculated ansd included in your Agristability, thereby reducing your benefit.

I still stand by my suggestion of carrying a reasonable amout of crop insurance to avoid getting a lesser amount in total from Agristability

[SASKFARMER3]

I agree with sask99 every farmer should
carry the low end of Crop insurance to
protect them. We go with the 70%. Its
just where I chose to be.
Last 10 years 2002 frost took crop on Aug 8 disaster. Frost 2004 took crop
very early august again, 2012 crop is
poor on all early seeded go figure the
dog f&%^rs won this year. Sit in town
and have coffee and start seeding after
the may long won. Oh well not changing
what we do.
So simply if you loose like I described
in 10 years two are total fricking shit.
One is so so and 7 are good to above.
Most will agree this is farming.
But when it froze the first few days of
august you know you will not have much
crop. Waiting for Agristablility doesn't
cut it but getting a check from crop
insurance gets you along just fine.

[vvalk]

Hopper We have two farming entities and neither has ever had a payment from Ag Stability. As for the new Ag stability I too believe it has been cut to the point that it will rarely get used. Especially in Alberta where the crop insurance is a bit better. In my opinion you should not be able to participate in any BRM program unless you have crop insurance.

[Hopperbin]

And I still think we should have a choice in ins programs. So is anyone actually going to exit agristability?

[mbratrud]

I will likely carry crop insurance and
look at something like Global Ag Risk
Solutions. Agristabilty not a chance
unless the enrollment is almost free.