Search
Displaying 1 - 10 of 13
February 6, 2017
Cost
2015
$312
$225
$180
2014
$322
$229
$172
2013
$308
$224
$182
2012
$325
$202
$183
2011
$281
$192
$158
2010
$268
$176
$148
2009
$267
$173
$160
2008
$265
$167
$153
2007
$231
$145
$117
2006
$191
$125
$98
2005
$188
$118
$95
Kansas Farm … Probability of Default
Change in Risk Rating 2014 to 2015
Repayment …
December 1, 2015
KFMA Newsletters
As I write this, there are piles of grain on the ground in many areas of the state, market prices for grain below the cost of
production, uncertainty in the tax laws as we plan for the end of the year, reduced working capital and eroding debt
repayment capacity for many farms... all part of the current agriculture management environment. These are also
reminders to each of us of the importance of careful planning and consideration as management decisions are made.
Those of us working within the KFMA program and in the Agricultural Economics Department greatly appreciate the
efforts of those working on the farms and ranches of Kansas. We are thankful for the opportunity to provide farm
management information to farm decision makers through this newsletter and through delivery of the KFMA Program.
The KFMA motto is “Building Strong Relationships…Producing Excellence” and we desire to use this newsletter as a way
of building our relationship with you and to provide you with information that helps you achieve excellence. The KFMA
E‐Newsletter is sent quarterly throughout the year. This issue provides information on farm profitability, measuring
financial health, and the importance of understanding your farm’s current financial position and debt repayment ability.
Finally, we provide you with some guidance toward year‐end tax planning and management.
Further information can be found on the extension agricultural economics website at www.agmanager.info and the
KFMA website at www.agmanager.info/kfma. I would welcome any comments that you feel will be helpful for the KFMA
program to excel in our work with the farm families of Kansas as we seek to help you know your numbers, use your
numbers, and reach your goals. Till next time…
Kevin
…
September 15, 2021
Fed Cattle Pricing
DISCOVERY, DIVERGENT INCENTIVES, RISK MANAGEMENT,
AND FUTURE … well-informed trade; better manage
risk; and inform policy and regulatory … Marketing Cost, Flexibility, & Risk Management; 3)
Market Information …
November 1, 2009
Pork Quality Grading System and Wholesale Pork Price Reporting
100 articles in journals,
proceedings, symposia, or
chapters … research in
livestock market risk
management, beef demand … handling, food safety,
price risk management and
analysis …
November 1, 2009
100 articles in journals,
proceedings, symposia, or
chapters … research in
livestock market risk
management, beef demand … handling, food safety,
price risk management and
analysis …
January 1, 2009
Animal ID & Traceability
The first set of scenarios compare doing nothing (status quo) to adopting
full animal tracing for just the bovine sector. The bovine sector is the
focus here because it is it the sector among bovine, porcine, ovine, and
poultry that would incur the largest adoption cost of NAIS practices.
Under the status quo scenarios, we further explore what the impacts are
if by doing nothing we also lose export market access. We are likely to
lose export market access over time if we do not adopt NAIS practices,
even without any major market or major animal disease event, because
the international marketplace is making animal identification and tracing
systems the norm and any country that does not conform will have less
market access.
Table 2 summarizes the total loss per head to producers in the beef
sector, after all markets adjust as a result of not adopting NAIS practices
(i.e., status quo) under 0%, 10%, 25%, and 50% permanent export
market losses for beef. If we do nothing to adopt NAIS, and nothing
happens to export markets, the result is no cost, no market loss. If we do
nothing and we lose market access, which we believe is likely, the beef
industry will suffer losses. The losses would amount to $18.25 per head if
we do not adopt NAIS and we lose 25% of export market share. To put
this into perspective, this would be about like losing access to the South
Korean export market at 2003 export market shares.
Table 2. Net Annual Loss in Beef Producer Surplus from Status Quo
with Varying Export Market Losses
Export Market Loss Incurred
0% …
that is contingent on future events• A formal claim follows … 10/31
•Election period 60 days proceeding – 1/1 •11/2 – 12/31 … corporation?
Material participation?
At-risk limitations?
AMT adjustments?
Shareholder …
September 30, 2016
Wind Energy Leases
by a grant from the USDA Risk Management Agency through … Agency through the
Southern Risk Management Education Center … Councils. These are
non-profit organizations that operate …
September 26, 2022
Industry Economics & Trade
April 1, 2005
Industry Economics & Trade
of Feed-Ban and Specified Risk Material Policy Options .........................43
5.1 … Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Events … months of age) as specified
risk materials (SRM) not allowed …