Mercantile Bank - 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 o No þ

     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 o No þ

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

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

     Indicate by check mark 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 the 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. o

     Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

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

     The aggregate value of the common equity held by non-affiliates (persons other than directors and executive officers) of the registrant, computed by reference to the closing price of the common stock as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was approximately $43.0 million.

     As of February 1, 2011, there were issued and outstanding 8,597,993 shares of the registrant’s common stock.

Portions of the proxy statement for the 2011 annual meeting of shareholders (Portions of Part III).

     Mercantile Bank Corporation is a registered bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “Bank Holding Company Act”). Unless the text clearly suggests otherwise, references to “us,” “we,” “our,” or “the company” include Mercantile Bank Corporation and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. As a bank holding company, we are subject to regulation by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve Board”). We were organized on July 15, 1997, under the laws of the State of Michigan, primarily for the purpose of holding all of the stock of Mercantile Bank of Michigan (“our bank”), and of such other subsidiaries as we may acquire or establish. Our bank commenced business on December 15, 1997.

     Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company initiated business in October 2000 as a subsidiary of our bank, and was reorganized as Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company, LLC (“our mortgage company”), on January 1, 2004. Mercantile Insurance Center, Inc. (“our insurance company”), a subsidiary of our bank, commenced operations during 2002 to offer insurance products. Mercantile Bank Real Estate Co., L.L.C., (“our real estate company”), a subsidiary of our bank, was organized on July 21, 2003, principally to develop, construct and own our facility in downtown Grand Rapids which serves as our bank’s main office and Mercantile Bank Corporation’s headquarters. Mercantile Bank Capital Trust I (“our trust”), a business trust subsidiary, was formed in September 2004 to issue trust preferred securities.

     To date we have raised capital from our initial public offering of common stock in October 1997, a public offering of common stock in July 1998, three private placements of common stock during 2001, a public offering of common stock in August 2001 and a public offering of common stock in September 2003. In addition, we raised capital through a public offering of $16.0 million of trust preferred securities in 1999, which was refinanced as part of a $32.0 million private placement of trust preferred securities in 2004. In May 2009, we raised $21.0 million from the sale of preferred stock and a warrant for common stock to the United States Treasury Department under the Capital Purchase Program. Our expenses have generally been paid using the proceeds of the capital sales and dividends from our bank. Our principal source of future operating funds is expected to be dividends from our bank.

     We filed an election to become a financial holding company, which election became effective March 23, 2000. Effective June 1, 2009, we withdrew our election to be a financial holding company.

     Our bank is a state banking company that operates under the laws of the State of Michigan, pursuant to a charter issued by the Michigan Office of Financial and Insurance Regulation. Our bank’s deposits are insured to the maximum extent permitted by law by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). Our bank’s primary service area is the Kent and Ottawa County areas of West Michigan, which includes the City of Grand Rapids, the second largest city in the State of Michigan. In addition, our bank opened offices in the cities of East Lansing and Ann Arbor, Michigan, during 2005, and in Novi, Michigan, during 2007. The Ann Arbor and Novi offices were closed in mid-2009.

     Our bank, through its seven offices, provides commercial banking services primarily to small- to medium-sized businesses and retail banking services in and around the Grand Rapids, Holland and Lansing areas. These offices consist of a main office located at 310 Leonard Street NW, Grand Rapids, Michigan, a combination branch and retail loan center located at 4613 Alpine Avenue NW, Comstock Park, Michigan, a combination branch and operations center located at 5610 Byron Center Avenue SW, Wyoming, Michigan, and branches located at 4860 Broadmoor Avenue SE, Kentwood, Michigan, 3156 Knapp Street NE, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 880 East 16^th Street, Holland, Michigan, and 3737 Coolidge Road, East Lansing, Michigan.

     Our bank makes secured and unsecured commercial, construction, mortgage and consumer loans, and accepts checking, savings and time deposits. Our bank owns seven automated teller machines (“ATM”), located at each of our office locations, that participate in the MAC, NYCE and PLUS regional network systems, as well as other ATM networks throughout the country. Our bank also enables customers to conduct certain loan and deposit transactions by telephone and personal computer. Courier service is provided to certain commercial customers, and safe deposit facilities are available at each of our office locations. Our bank does not have trust powers.

     Our mortgage company’s predecessor, Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company, commenced operations on October 24, 2000, when our bank contributed most of its residential mortgage loan portfolio and participation interests in certain commercial mortgage loans to Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company. On the same date, our bank also transferred its residential mortgage origination function to Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company. On January 1, 2004, Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company was reorganized as Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company, LLC, a limited liability company, which is 99% owned by our bank and 1% owned by our insurance company. The reorganization had no impact on the company’s financial position or results of operations. Mortgage loans originated and held by our mortgage company are serviced by our bank pursuant to a servicing agreement.

     Our insurance company acquired an existing shelf insurance agency effective April 15, 2002. An Agency and Institution Agreement was entered into among our insurance company, our bank and Hub International for the purpose of providing programs of mass marketed personal lines of insurance. Insurance product offerings include private passenger automobile, homeowners, personal inland marine, boat owners, recreational vehicle, dwelling fire, umbrella policies, small business and life insurance products, all of which are provided by and written through companies that have appointed Hub International as their agent.

     Our real estate company was organized on July 21, 2003, principally to develop, construct and own our facility in downtown Grand Rapids that serves as our bank’s main office and Mercantile Bank Corporation’s headquarters. This facility was placed into service during the second quarter of 2005. Our real estate company is 99% owned by our bank and 1% owned by our insurance company.

     In 2004, we formed our trust, a Delaware business trust. Our trust’s business and affairs are conducted by its property trustee, a Delaware trust company, and three individual administrative trustees who are employees and officers of the company. Our trust was established for the purpose of issuing and selling its Series A and Series B trust preferred securities and common securities, and used the proceeds from the sales of those securities to acquire Series A and Series B Floating Rate Notes issued by the company. Substantially all of the net proceeds received by the company from the Series A transaction were used to redeem the trust preferred securities that had been issued by MBWM Capital Trust I in September 1999. We established MBWM Capital Trust I in 1999 to issue the trust preferred securities that were redeemed. Substantially all of the net proceeds received by the company from the Series B transaction were contributed to our bank as capital. The Series A and Series B Floating Rate Notes are categorized on our consolidated financial statements as subordinated debentures. Additional information regarding our trust is incorporated by reference to “Note 17 — Subordinated Debentures” and “Note 18 — Regulatory Matters” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Annual Report.

     Our earnings are affected by domestic economic conditions and the monetary and fiscal policies of the United States Government, its agencies, and the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board’s monetary policies have had, and will likely continue to have, an important impact on the operating results of commercial banks through its power to implement national monetary policy in order to, among other things, curb inflation, maintain employment, and mitigate economic recessions. The policies of the Federal Reserve Board have a major effect upon the levels of bank loans, investments and deposits through its open market operations in United States Government securities, and through its regulation of, among other things, the discount rate on borrowings of member banks and the reserve requirements against member bank deposits. Our bank maintains reserves directly with the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago to the extent required by law. It is not possible to predict the nature and impact of future changes in monetary and fiscal policies.

     As a bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act, we are required to file an annual report with the Federal Reserve Board and such additional information as the Federal Reserve Board may require. We are also subject to examination by the Federal Reserve Board.

     The Bank Holding Company Act limits the activities of bank holding companies that are not qualified as financial holding companies to banking and the management of banking organizations, and to certain non-banking activities. These non-banking activities include those activities that the Federal Reserve Board found, by order or regulation as of the day prior to enactment of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, to be so closely related to banking as to be a proper incident to banking. These non-banking activities include, among other things: operating a mortgage company, finance company, or factoring company; performing certain data processing operations; providing certain investment and financial advice; acting as an insurance agent for certain types of credit-related insurance; leasing property on a full-payout, nonoperating basis; and providing discount securities brokerage services for customers. With the exception of the activities of our mortgage company discussed above, neither we nor any of our subsidiaries engages in any of the non-banking activities listed above.

     Our bank is subject to restrictions imposed by federal law and regulation. Among other things, these restrictions apply to any extension of credit to us or to our other subsidiaries, to investments in stock or other securities that we issue, to the taking of such stock or securities as collateral for loans to any borrower, and to acquisitions of assets or services from, and sales of certain types of assets to, us or our other subsidiaries. Federal law restricts our ability to borrow from our bank by limiting the aggregate amount we may borrow and by requiring that all loans to us be secured in designated amounts by specified forms of collateral.

     With respect to the acquisition of banking organizations, we are generally required to obtain the prior approval of the Federal Reserve Board before we can acquire all or substantially all of the assets of any bank, or acquire ownership or control of any voting shares of any bank or bank holding company, if, after the acquisition, we would own or control more than 5% of the voting shares of the bank or bank holding company. Acquisitions of banking organizations across state lines are subject to restrictions imposed by Federal and state laws and regulations.

     The scope of existing regulation and supervision of various aspects of our business will be expanded as a result of the adoption in July, 2010 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”). For additional information on this legislation and its potential impact, refer to the Risk Factor entitled “The effect of financial services legislation and regulations remains uncertain” in Item 1A- Risk Factors in this Annual Report.

     As of December 31, 2010, we and our bank employed 219 full-time and 58 part-time persons. Management believes that relations with employees are good.

     As a routine part of our business, we make loans and leases to businesses and individuals located within our market areas. Our lending policy states that the function of the lending operation is twofold: to provide a means for the investment of funds at a profitable rate of return with an acceptable degree of risk, and to meet the credit needs of the creditworthy businesses and individuals who are our customers. We recognize that in the normal business of lending, some losses on loans and leases will be inevitable and should be considered a part of the normal cost of doing business.

     Our lending policy anticipates that priorities in extending loans and leases will be modified from time to time as interest rates, market conditions and competitive factors change. The policy sets forth guidelines on a nondiscriminatory basis for lending in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. The policy describes various criteria for granting loans and leases, including the ability to pay; the character of the customer; evidence of financial responsibility; purpose of the loan or lease; knowledge of collateral and its value; terms of repayment; source of repayment; payment history; and economic conditions.

     The lending policy further limits the amount of funds that may be loaned or leased against specified types of real estate collateral. For certain loans secured by real estate, the policy requires an appraisal of the property offered as collateral by a state certified independent appraiser. The policy also provides general guidelines for loan to value and lease to value limits for other types of collateral, such as accounts receivable and machinery and equipment. In addition, the policy provides general guidelines as to environmental analysis, loans to employees, executive officers and directors, problem loan and lease identification, maintenance of an allowance for loan and lease losses, loan and lease review and grading, mortgage and consumer lending, and other matters relating to our lending practices.

     The Board of Directors has delegated significant lending authority to officers of our bank. The Board of Directors believes this empowerment, supported by our strong credit culture and the significant experience of our commercial lending staff, makes us responsive to our customers. The loan policy currently specifies lending authority for certain officers up to $5.0 million, and $10.0 million for our bank’s Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer; however, the $10.0 million lending authority is generally used only in rare circumstances where timing is of the essence. Generally, loan requests exceeding $2.5 million require approval by the Officers Loan Committee, and loan requests exceeding $4.0 million, up to the legal lending limit of approximately $38.4 million, require approval by the Board of Directors. In most circumstances, we apply an in-house lending limit that is significantly less than our bank’s legal lending limit.

     Provisions of recent legislation, including the Dodd-Frank Act, when fully implemented by regulations to be adopted by Federal agencies, may have a significant impact on our lending policy, especially in the areas of single-family residential real estate and other consumer lending. For additional information on this legislation and its potential impact, refer to the Risk Factor entitled “The effect of financial services legislation and regulations remains uncertain” in Item 1A- Risk Factors in this Annual Report.

     Commercial Loans. Our commercial lending group originates commercial loans and leases primarily in our market areas. Our commercial lenders have extensive commercial lending experience, with most having at least ten years’ experience. Loans and leases are originated for general business purposes, including working capital, accounts receivable financing, machinery and equipment acquisition, and commercial real estate financing, including new construction and land development.

     Working capital loans are often structured as a line of credit and are reviewed periodically in connection with the borrower’s year-end financial reporting. These loans are generally secured by substantially all of the assets of the borrower, and have an interest rate tied to the Mercantile Bank Prime Rate. Loans and leases for machinery and equipment purposes typically have a maturity of three to five years and are fully amortizing, while commercial real estate loans are usually written with a five-year maturity and amortize over a 15 to 20 year period. Commercial loans and leases typically have an interest rate that is fixed to maturity or is tied to the Mercantile Bank Prime Rate.

     We evaluate many aspects of a commercial loan or lease transaction in order to minimize credit and interest rate risk. Underwriting includes an assessment of the management, products, markets, cash flow, capital, income and collateral. This analysis includes a review of the borrower’s historical and projected financial results. Appraisals are generally required by certified independent appraisers where real estate is the primary collateral, and in some cases, where equipment is the primary collateral. In certain situations, for creditworthy customers, we may accept title reports instead of requiring lenders’ policies of title insurance.

     Commercial real estate lending involves more risk than residential lending because loan balances are greater and repayment is dependent upon the borrower’s business operations. We attempt to minimize the risks associated with these transactions by generally limiting our commercial real estate lending to owner-operated properties and to owners of non-owner occupied properties who have an established profitable history and satisfactory tenant structure. In many cases, risk is further reduced by requiring personal guarantees, limiting the amount of credit to any one borrower to an amount considerably less than our legal lending limit and avoiding certain types of commercial real estate financings.

     We have no material foreign loans, and only limited exposure to companies engaged in energy producing and agricultural-related activities.

     Single-Family Residential Real Estate Loans. Our mortgage company originates single-family residential real estate loans in our market areas, usually according to secondary market underwriting standards. Loans not conforming to those standards are made in limited circumstances. Single-family residential real estate loans provide borrowers with a fixed or adjustable interest rate with terms up to 30 years.

     Our bank has a home equity line of credit program. Home equity credit is generally secured by either a first or second mortgage on the borrower’s primary residence. The program provides revolving credit at a rate tied to the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate.

     Consumer Loans. We originate consumer loans for a variety of personal financial needs, including new and used automobiles, boats, credit cards and overdraft protection for our checking account customers. Consumer loans generally have shorter terms and higher interest rates and usually involve more credit risk than single-family residential real estate loans because of the type and nature of the collateral.

     We believe our consumer loans are underwritten carefully, with a strong emphasis on the amount of the down payment, credit quality, employment stability and monthly income of the borrower. These loans are generally repaid on a monthly repayment schedule with the source of repayment tied to the borrower’s periodic income. In addition, consumer lending collections are dependent on the borrower’s continuing financial stability, and are thus likely to be adversely affected by job loss, illness and personal bankruptcy. In many cases, repossessed collateral for a defaulted consumer loan will not provide an adequate source of repayment of the outstanding loan balance because of depreciation of the underlying collateral.

     We believe that the generally higher yields earned on consumer loans compensate for the increased credit risk associated with such loans, and that consumer loans are important to our efforts to serve the credit needs of the communities and customers that we serve.

     We utilize a comprehensive grading system for our commercial loans and leases as well as residential mortgage and consumer loans. All commercial loans and leases are graded on a ten grade rating system. The rating system utilizes standardized grade paradigms that analyze several critical factors such as cash flow, operating performance, financial condition, collateral, industry condition and management. All commercial loans and leases are graded at inception and reviewed at various intervals. Residential mortgage and consumer loans are graded on a random sampling basis after the loan has been made using a separate standardized grade paradigm that analyzes several critical factors such as debt-to-income and credit and employment histories.

     Our independent loan and lease review program is primarily responsible for the administration of the grading system and ensuring adherence to established lending policies and procedures. The loan and lease review program is an integral part of maintaining our strong asset quality culture. The loan and lease review function works closely with senior management, although it functionally reports to the Board of Directors. All commercial loan and lease relationships equal to or exceeding $1.8 million are formally reviewed every twelve months, with a random sampling performed on credits under $1.8 million. Our watch list credits are reviewed monthly by our Board of Directors and our Watch List Committee, the latter of which is comprised of personnel from the administration, lending and loan and lease review functions.

     Loans and leases are placed in a nonaccrual status when, in our opinion, uncertainty exists as to the ultimate collection of principal and interest. As of December 31, 2010, loans and leases placed in nonaccrual status totaled $63.9 million, or 5.1% of total loans and leases. As of the same date, loans and leases past due 90 days or more and still accruing interest totaled $0.8 million, or 0.06% of total loans and leases.

     Additional detail and information relative to the loan and lease portfolio is incorporated by reference to Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (“Management’s Discussion and Analysis”) and Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report.

     In each accounting period, we adjust the allowance for loan and lease losses (“allowance”) to the amount we believe is necessary to maintain the allowance at an adequate level. Through the loan and lease review and credit departments, we establish specific portions of the allowance based on specifically identifiable problem loans and leases. The evaluation of the allowance is further based on, but not limited to, consideration of the internally prepared Allowance Analysis, loan and lease loss migration analysis, composition of the loan and lease portfolio, third party analysis of the loan and lease administration processes and portfolio, and general economic conditions.

     The Allowance Analysis applies reserve allocation factors to non-impaired outstanding loan and lease balances, which is combined with specific reserves to calculate an overall allowance dollar amount. For non-impaired commercial loans and leases, which continue to comprise a vast majority of our total loans and leases, reserve allocation factors are based upon loan ratings as determined by our standardized grade paradigms and by loan purpose. We have divided our commercial loan and lease portfolio into five classes: 1) commercial and industrial loans and leases; 2) vacant land, land development and residential construction loans; 3) owner occupied real estate loans; 4) non-owner occupied real estate loans; and 5) multi-family and residential rental property loans. The reserve allocation factors are primarily based on the historical trends of net loan and lease charge-offs through a migration analysis whereby net loan and lease losses are tracked via assigned grades over various time periods, with adjustments made for environmental factors reflecting the current status of, or recent changes in, items such as: lending policies and procedures; economic conditions; nature and volume of the loan and lease portfolio; experience, ability and depth of management and lending staff; volume and severity of past due, nonaccrual and adversely classified loans and leases; effectiveness of the loan and lease review program; value of underlying collateral; lending concentrations; and other external factors, including competition and regulatory environment. Adjustments for specific lending relationships, particularly impaired loans and leases, are made on a case-by-case basis. Non-impaired retail loan reserve allocations are determined in a similar fashion as those for non-impaired commercial loans and leases, except that retail loans are segmented by type of credit and not a grading system. We regularly review the Allowance Analysis and make adjustments periodically based upon identifiable trends and experience.

     A migration analysis is completed quarterly to assist us in determining appropriate reserve allocation factors for non-impaired commercial loans and leases. Our migration analysis takes into account various time periods, and while we generally place most weight on the eight-quarter time frame as that period is close to the average duration of our loan and lease portfolio, consideration is given to the other time periods as part of our assessment. Although the migration analysis provides an accurate historical accounting of our loan and lease losses, it is not able to fully account for environmental factors that will also very likely impact the collectability of our commercial loans and leases as of any quarter-end date. Therefore, we incorporate the environmental factors as adjustments to the historical data.

     Environmental factors include both internal and external items. We believe the most significant internal environmental factor is our credit culture and relative aggressiveness in assigning and revising commercial loan and lease risk ratings. Although we have been consistent in our approach to commercial loan and lease ratings, ongoing stressed economic conditions have resulted in an even higher sense of aggressiveness with regards to the downgrading of lending relationships. In addition, we made revisions to our grading paradigms in early 2009 that mathematically resulted in commercial loan and lease relationships being more quickly downgraded when signs of stress are noted, such as slower sales activity for construction and land development commercial real estate relationships and reduced operating performance/cash flow coverage for commercial and industrial relationships. These changes, coupled with the stressed economic environment, have resulted in significant downgrades and the need for substantial provisions to the allowance. To more effectively manage our commercial loan and lease portfolio, we created two specific groups tasked with managing our higher exposure lending relationships. One team manages the most distressed credit relationships, while the other team manages larger weakened credit relationships.

     The most significant external environmental factor is the assessment of the current economic environment and the resulting implications on our commercial loan and lease portfolio. Currently, we believe conditions remain especially stressed for non-owner occupied commercial real estate; however, recent data and performance reflect a level of stability in the commercial and industrial class of our loan and lease portfolio.

     The primary risk elements with respect to commercial loans and leases are the financial condition of the borrower, the sufficiency of collateral, and timeliness of scheduled payments. We have a policy of requesting and reviewing periodic financial statements from commercial loan and lease customers and employ a disciplined and formalized review of the existence of collateral and its value. The primary risk element with respect to each residential real estate loan and consumer loan is the timeliness of scheduled payments. We have a reporting system that monitors past due loans and leases and have adopted policies to pursue creditor’s rights in order to preserve our collateral position.

     Reflecting the stressed economic conditions and resulting negative impact on our loan and lease portfolio, we have substantially increased the allowance as a percent of the loan and lease portfolio over the past couple of years. The allowance equaled $45.4 million, or 3.59% of total loans and leases outstanding, as of December 31, 2010. As of December 31, 2009, the allowance balance was higher at $47.9 million, but a lower 3.11% of total loans and leases. The allowance as a percent of total loans and leases was 1.46%, 1.43% and 1.23% at year-end 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Although we believe the allowance is adequate to absorb losses as they arise, there can be no assurance that we will not sustain losses in any given period that could be substantial in relation to, or greater than, the size of the allowance.

     Additional detail regarding the allowance is incorporated by reference to Management’s Discussion and Analysis and Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Annual Report.

     Bank Holding Company Investments. The principal investments of our bank holding company are the investments in the common stock of our bank and the common securities of Mercantile trust. Other funds of our bank holding company may be invested from time to time in various debt instruments.

     As a bank holding company, we are also permitted to make portfolio investments in equity securities and to make equity investments in subsidiaries engaged in a variety of non-banking activities, which include real estate-related activities such as community development, real estate appraisals, arranging equity financing for commercial real estate, and owning and operating real estate used substantially by our bank or acquired for its future use. Our bank holding company has no plans at this time to make directly any of these equity investments at the bank holding company level. Our Board of Directors may, however, alter the investment policy at any time without shareholder approval.

     Our Bank’s Investments. Our bank may invest its funds in a wide variety of debt instruments and may participate in the federal funds market with other depository institutions. Subject to certain exceptions, our bank is prohibited from investing in equity securities. Among the equity investments permitted for our bank under various conditions and subject in some instances to amount limitations, are shares of a subsidiary insurance agency, mortgage company, real estate company, or Michigan business and industrial development company, such as our insurance company, our mortgage company, or our real estate company. Under another such exception, in certain circumstances and with prior notice to or approval of the FDIC, our bank could invest up to 10% of its total assets in the equity securities of a subsidiary corporation engaged in the acquisition and development of real property for sale, or the improvement of real property by construction or rehabilitation of residential or commercial units for sale or lease. Our bank has no present plans to make such an investment. Real estate acquired by our bank in satisfaction of or foreclosure upon loans may be held by our bank for specified periods. Our bank is also permitted to invest in such real estate as is necessary for the convenient transaction of its business. Our bank’s Board of Directors may alter the bank’s investment policy without shareholder approval at any time.

     Additional detail and information relative to the securities portfolio is incorporated by reference to Management’s Discussion and Analysis and Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Annual Report.

     Our primary markets for loans and core deposits are the Grand Rapids, Holland and Lansing metropolitan areas. We face substantial competition in all phases of our operations from a variety of different competitors. We compete for deposits, loans and other financial services with numerous Michigan-based and out-of-state banks, savings banks, thrifts, credit unions and other financial institutions as well as from other entities that provide financial services. Some of the financial institutions and financial service organizations with which we compete are not subject to the same degree of regulation as we are. Many of our primary competitors have been in business for many years, have established customer bases, are larger, have substantially higher lending limits than we do, and offer larger branch networks and other services which we do not. Most of these same entities have greater capital resources than we do, which, among other things, may allow them to price their services at levels more favorable to the customer and to provide larger credit facilities than we do. Under specified circumstances (that have been modified by the Dodd-Frank Act), securities firms and insurance companies that elect to become financial holding companies under the Bank Holding Company Act may acquire banks and other financial institutions. Federal banking law affects the competitive environment in which we conduct our business. The financial services industry is also likely to become more competitive as further technological advances enable more companies to provide financial services.

     Management’s Discussion and Analysis beginning on Page F-4 in this Annual Report includes selected statistical information.

     Return on Equity and Asset information is included in Management’s Discussion and Analysis beginning on Page F-4 in this Annual Report.

     We maintain an internet website at www.mercbank.com. We make available on or through our website, free of charge, our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as soon as reasonably practical after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission. We do not intend the address of our website to be an active link or to otherwise incorporate the contents of our website into this Annual Report.

     The following risk factors could affect our business, financial condition or results of operations. These risk factors should be considered in connection with evaluating the forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report because they could cause the actual results and conditions to differ materially from those projected in forward-looking statements. Before you buy our common stock, you should know that investing in our common stock involves risks, including the risks described below. The risks that are highlighted here are not the only ones we face. If the adverse matters referred to in any of the risks actually occur, our business, financial condition or operations could be adversely affected. In that case, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment.

     Dramatic declines in the housing market over the past several years, with falling home prices and increasing foreclosures, unemployment and under-employment, have negatively impacted the credit performance of real estate related loans and resulted in significant write-downs of asset values by financial institutions. These write-downs, initially of asset-backed securities but spreading to other securities and loans, have caused many financial institutions to seek additional capital, to reduce or eliminate dividends, to merge with larger and stronger institutions and, in some cases, to fail. Reflecting concern about the stability of the financial markets generally and the strength of counterparties, many lenders and institutional investors have reduced or ceased providing funding to borrowers, including to other financial institutions. This market turmoil and tightening of credit have led to an increased level of commercial and consumer delinquencies, lack of consumer confidence, increased market volatility and widespread reduction of business activity generally. The resulting economic pressure on consumers and lack of confidence in the financial markets have adversely affected our business, financial condition and results of operations. Market developments may affect consumer confidence levels and may cause adverse changes in payment patterns, causing increases in delinquencies and default rates, which may impact our charge-offs and provision for credit losses. A worsening of these conditions would likely exacerbate the adverse effects of these difficult market conditions on us and others in the financial institutions industry.

     Many of our loans relate to commercial real estate. Stressed economic conditions have significantly reduced the value of commercial real estate and have strained the financial condition of our commercial real estate borrowers, especially in the land development and non-owner occupied CRE segments of our loan and lease portfolio. Those difficulties have adversely affected us and could produce additional losses and other adverse effects on our business.

     The capital and credit markets have been experiencing volatility and disruption. In some cases, the markets have produced downward pressure on stock prices and credit availability for certain issuers without apparent regard to those issuers’ underlying financial strength. The current levels of market disruption and volatility have an adverse effect, which may be material, on our ability to access capital and on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

     The results of operations for financial institutions, including our bank, have been materially and adversely affected by changes in prevailing local and national economic conditions, including declines in real estate market values and the related declines in value of our real estate collateral, rapid increases or decreases in interest rates and changes in the monetary and fiscal policies of the federal government. Our profitability is heavily influenced by the spread between the interest rates we earn on loans and investments and the interest rates we pay on deposits and other interest-bearing liabilities, as well as provisions to the allowance for loan and lease losses. Substantially all of our loans are to businesses and individuals in the cities and surrounding areas of Grand Rapids, Holland and Lansing, Michigan, and the decline in the economy of these areas has adversely affected us. Continued stress on our financial condition is likely until economic conditions improve within our markets. Like most banking institutions, our net interest spread and margin will be affected by general economic conditions and other factors that influence market interest rates and our ability to respond to changes in these rates. At any given time, our assets and liabilities may be such that they will be affected differently by a given change in interest rates.

     Our ability to engage in routine funding transactions could be adversely affected by the actions and commercial soundness of other financial institutions. Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty or other relationships. We have exposure to many different industries and counterparties, and we routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial industry. As a result, defaults by, or even rumors or questions about, one or more financial services institutions, or the financial services industry generally, have led to market-wide liquidity problems and could lead to losses or defaults by us or by other institutions. Even routine funding transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of default of our counterparty or client. In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral held by us cannot be realized upon or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the financial instrument exposure due us. There is no assurance that any such losses would not materially and adversely affect our results of operations.

     In response to the turmoil in the financial services sector and the severe recession in the broader economy, the U.S. Government has taken legislative and other action intended to restore financial stability and economic growth. On October 3, 2008, then President Bush signed into law the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (the “EESA”). Among other things, the EESA established the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP. Under TARP, the United States Treasury Department (the “Treasury Department”) was given the authority, among other things, to purchase up to $700 billion of mortgages, mortgage-backed securities and certain other financial instruments from financial institutions and others for the purpose of stabilizing and providing liquidity to the U.S. financial markets. On October 14, 2008, the Treasury Department announced a program under EESA pursuant to which it would make senior preferred stock investments in qualifying financial institutions (the “TARP Capital Purchase Program”). On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the “ARRA”). The ARRA contained, among other things, a further package of economic stimulus measures and amendments to EESA’s restrictions on compensation of executives of financial institutions and others participating in the TARP. In addition to legislation, the Federal Reserve Board eased short-term interest rates and implemented a series of emergency programs to furnish liquidity to the financial markets and credit to various participants in those markets. The FDIC created a program to guarantee, on specified conditions, certain indebtedness and noninterest-bearing transaction accounts of participating insured depository institutions for limited periods. The Treasury Department also implemented further measures to address the crisis in the financial services sector. After permitting some of its emergency programs to lapse during the first half of the year, in November, 2010, the Federal Reserve Board implemented a further program of quantitative easing involving the purchase of an additional $600 billion of longer-term Treasury securities by the end of the second quarter of 2011. In addition, on December 17, 2010, President Obama signed the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 (the “2010 Tax Relief Act”) which is intended to stimulate the economy. Among other things, the 2010 Tax Relief Act contained two-year extensions of the Bush era tax cuts and of Alternative Minimum Tax relief, a two-percentage point reduction in employee-paid payroll taxes and self-employment tax for 2011, new incentives for investment in machinery and equipment, estate tax relief, and a significant number of tax breaks for individuals and businesses. There can be no assurance as to the actual impact of the EESA, the ARRA, the 2010 Tax Relief Act, and their respective implementing regulations, the programs of the government agencies, or any further legislation or regulations, on the financial markets or the broader economy. A failure to stabilize the financial markets, and a continuation or worsening of the current financial market conditions, could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, access to credit or the trading price of our common stock.

     In response to the financial crisis, on July 21, 2010, President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Act, the most comprehensive reform of the regulation of the financial services industry since the Great Depression of the 1930’s. Among many other things, the Dodd-Frank Act provides for increased supervision of financial institutions by regulatory agencies, more stringent capital requirements for financial institutions, major changes to deposit insurance assessments by the FDIC, heightened regulation of hedging and derivatives activities, a greater focus on consumer protection issues, in part through the formation of a new Consumer Finance Protection Bureau having powers formerly split among different regulatory agencies, extensive changes to the regulation of mortgage lending, imposition of limits on interchange transaction and network fees for electronic debit transactions, repeal of the existing prohibition on payment of interest on demand deposits, the effective winding up of additional expenditures of funds under the TARP, and the imposition of a “sunset date” of December 31, 2012 on expenditures under the ARRA. Many of the Dodd-Frank Act provisions have delayed effective dates that have not yet occurred, while others require implementing regulations of Federal agencies that have not yet been adopted. There can be no assurance that the Dodd-Frank Act and its implementing regulations will not limit our ability to pursue business opportunities, impose additional costs on us, impact our revenues and/or the value of assets, or otherwise adversely affect our business.

     The programs established or to be established under the EESA, TARP, the ARRA, the Dodd-Frank Act or other legislation or regulations may have adverse effects upon us. We may face increased regulation in our industry. Compliance with such regulations may increase our costs and limit our ability to pursue business opportunities. Also, our participation in specific programs may subject us to additional restrictions. For example, we participated in the TARP Capital Purchase Program by selling preferred stock and a warrant for common stock to the Treasury Department for $21.0 million in May of 2009. That participation limits our ability, without the consent of the Treasury Department, to increase the cash dividend on, or to repurchase, our common stock. It also subjects us to restrictions on the compensation we may pay to our executives. The restrictions may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock or our ability to recruit and retain executives.

     The risk of nonpayment of loans is inherent in all lending activities, and nonpayment, when it occurs, may have a materially adverse effect on our earnings and overall financial condition as well as the value of our common stock. Our focus on commercial lending may result in a larger concentration of loans to small businesses. As a result, we may assume different or greater lending risks than other banks. We make various assumptions and judgments about the collectability of our loan portfolio and provide an allowance for losses based on several factors. If our assumptions are wrong, our allowance may not be sufficient to cover our losses, which would have an adverse effect on our operating results. The actual amounts of future provisions for loan and lease losses cannot be determined at this time and may exceed the amounts of past provisions. Additions to our allowance decrease our net income.

     We are and will continue to be dependent upon the services of our management team, including Michael H. Price, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer, and our other senior managers. The loss of Mr. Price, or any of our other senior managers, could have an adverse effect on our growth and performance. We have entered into employment contracts with Mr. Price and two other executive officers. The contracts provide for a three year employment period that is extended for an additional year each year unless a notice is given indicating that the contract will not be extended.

     In addition, we continue to depend on our key commercial loan officers. Several of our commercial loan officers are responsible, or share responsibility, for generating and managing a significant portion of our commercial loan and lease portfolio. Our success can be attributed in large part to the relationships these officers as well as members of our management team have developed and are able to maintain with our customers as we continue to implement our community banking philosophy. The loss of any of these commercial loan officers could adversely affect our loan and lease portfolio and performance, and our ability to generate new loans and leases. Many of our key employees have signed agreements with us agreeing not to compete with us in one or more of our markets for specified time periods if they leave employment with us.

     Some of the other financial institutions in our markets also require their key employees to sign agreements that preclude or limit their ability to leave their employment and compete with them or solicit their customers. These agreements make it more difficult for us to hire loan officers with experience in our markets who can immediately solicit their former or new customers on our behalf.

     We have utilized, and expect to continue to utilize, out-of-area or wholesale deposits to support our assets. These deposits are generally a lower cost source of funds when compared to the interest rates that we would have to offer in our local markets to generate a commensurate level of funds. In addition, the overhead costs associated with wholesale deposits are considerably less than the overhead costs we would incur to obtain and administer a similar level of local deposits. A decline in the availability of these wholesale deposits would require us to fund our growth with more costly funding sources, which could reduce our net interest margin, limit our growth, reduce our asset size, or increase our overhead costs. Wholesale deposits include deposits obtained through brokers. If a bank is not well capitalized, regulatory approval is required to accept brokered deposits.

     In many situations, our Board of Directors has the authority, without any vote of our shareholders, to issue shares of our authorized but unissued preferred or common stock, including shares authorized and unissued under our Stock Incentive Plan of 2006. In the future, we may issue additional securities, through public or private offerings, in order to raise additional capital. Any such issuance would dilute the percentage of ownership interest of existing shareholders and may dilute the per share book value of the common stock. In addition, option holders under our stock-based incentive plans may exercise their options at a time when we would otherwise be able to obtain additional equity capital on more favorable terms.

     We face substantial competition in all phases of our operations from a variety of different competitors. Our future growth and success will depend on our ability to compete effectively in this highly competitive environment. We compete for deposits, loans and other financial services with numerous Michigan-based and out-of-state banks, thrifts, credit unions and other financial institutions as well as other entities that provide financial services, including securities firms and mutual funds. Some of the financial institutions and financial service organizations with which we compete are not subject to the same degree of regulation as we are. Most of our competitors have been in business for many years, have established customer bases, are larger, have substantially higher lending limits than we do and offer branch networks and other services which we do not, including trust and international banking services. Most of these entities have greater capital and other resources than we do, which, among other things, may allow them to price their services at levels more favorable to the customer and to provide larger credit facilities than we do. This competition may limit our growth or earnings. Under specified circumstances (that have been modified by the Dodd-Frank Act), securities firms and insurance companies that elect to become financial holding companies under the Bank Holding Company Act may acquire banks and other financial institutions. Federal banking law affects the competitive environment in which we conduct our business. The financial services industry is also likely to become more competitive as further technological advances enable more companies to provide financial services. These technological advances may diminish the importance of depository institutions and other financial intermediaries in the transfer of funds between parties.

     The banking industry is heavily regulated under both federal and state law. These regulations are primarily intended to protect customers, not our creditors or shareholders. Existing state and federal banking laws subject us to substantial limitations with respect to the making of loans, the purchase of securities, the payment of dividends and many other aspects of our business. Some of these laws may benefit us, others may increase our costs of doing business, or otherwise adversely affect us and create competitive advantages for others. Regulations affecting banks and financial services companies undergo continuous change, and we cannot predict the ultimate effect of these changes, which could have a material adverse effect on our profitability or financial condition. Federal economic and monetary policy may also affect our ability to attract deposits, make loans and achieve satisfactory interest spreads.

     All federal law prohibitions on the ability of depository institutions to pay interest on demand deposit accounts will be repealed as part of the Dodd-Frank Act, effective on July 21, 2011. As a result, depository institutions could commence offering interest on demand deposits to compete for customers. We do not yet know what interest rates we or other depository institutions may offer on demand deposit accounts. Our interest expense could increase and our net interest margin could decrease if we were to begin offering interest on demand deposits to attract additional customers or maintain current customers. Some customers, however, may choose to use noninterest-bearing checking accounts because the Dodd-Frank Act provides that those accounts are fully insured by the FDIC until December 31, 2012.

     We may need or want to raise additional capital in the future to provide us with sufficient capital resources and liquidity to meet our commitments and business needs, particularly if our asset quality or earnings were to deteriorate significantly. Our ability to raise additional capital will depend on, among other things, conditions in the capital markets at that time, which are outside of our control, and our financial performance. Economic conditions and any loss of confidence in financial institutions generally may increase our cost of funding and limit access to certain customary sources of capital.

     There can be no assurance that capital will be available on acceptable terms or at all. Any occurrence that may limit our access to the capital markets, such as a decline in the confidence of equity or debt purchasers, or counterparties participating in the capital markets, may adversely affect our capital costs and our ability to raise capital and, potentially, our liquidity. Also, if we need to raise capital in the future, we may have to do so when many other financial institutions are also seeking to raise capital and would have to compete with those institutions for investors. An inability to raise additional capital on acceptable terms when needed could have a materially adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

     The banking industry is undergoing technological changes with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. In addition to better serving customers, the effective use of technology increases efficiency and enables financial institutions to reduce costs. Our future success will depend, in part, on our ability to address the needs of our customers by using technology to provide products and services that will satisfy customer demands for convenience as well as create additional efficiencies in our operations. Many of our competitors have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements. There can be no assurance that we will be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services or be successful in marketing these products and services to our customers.

     Our Articles of Incorporation and By-laws, and the corporate laws of the State of Michigan, include provisions which are designed to provide our Board of Directors with time to consider whether a hostile takeover offer is in our and our shareholders’ best interest. These provisions, however, could discourage potential acquisition proposals and could delay or prevent a change in control. The provisions also could diminish the opportunities for a holder of our common stock to participate in tender offers, including tender offers at a price above the then-current market price for our common stock. These provisions could also prevent transactions in which our shareholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares over then-current market prices, and may limit the ability of our shareholders to approve transactions that they may deem to be in their best interests.

     The Michigan Business Corporation Act contains provisions intended to protect shareholders and prohibit or discourage various types of hostile takeover activities. In addition to these provisions and the provisions of our Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws, federal law requires the Federal Reserve Board’s approval prior to acquiring “control” of a bank holding company. All of these provisions may delay or prevent a change in control without action by our shareholders and could adversely affect the price of our common stock.

     The price of our common stock has been, and will likely continue to be, subject to fluctuations based on, among other things, economic and market conditions for bank holding companies and the stock market in general, as well as changes in investor perceptions of our company. The issuance of new shares of our common stock also may affect the market for our common stock.

     Our common stock is traded on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “MBWM”. The development and maintenance of an active public trading market depends upon the existence of willing buyers and sellers, the presence of which is beyond our control. While we are a publicly-traded company, the volume of trading activity in our stock is still relatively limited. Even if a more active market develops, there can be no assurance that such a market will continue, or that our shareholders will be able to sell their shares at or above the offering price.

     At present we are not paying any dividends on our common stock. For more information on the suspension of our cash dividend, see Item 5 of this Annual Report. Our ability to pay cash and stock dividends is subject to limitations under various laws and regulations, to prudent and sound banking practices, and to contractual provisions relating to our subordinated debentures and participation in the Capital Purchase Program.

     We, like most financial institutions, are exposed to many types of operational risks, including the risk of fraud by employees or outsiders, unauthorized transactions by employees or operational errors. Operational errors may include clerical or record keeping errors or those resulting from faulty or disabled computer or telecommunications systems. Given our volume of transactions, certain errors may be repeated or compounded before they are discovered and successfully corrected. Our necessary dependence upon automated systems to record and process our transaction volume may further increase the risk that technical system flaws or employee tampering or manipulation of those systems will result in losses that are difficult to detect.

     We may also be subject to disruptions of our operating systems arising from events that are wholly or partially beyond our control, including, for example, computer viruses or electrical or telecommunications outages, which may give rise to losses in service to customers and to loss or liability to us. We are further exposed to the risk that our external vendors may be unable to fulfill their contractual obligations to us, or will be subject to the same risk of fraud or operational errors by their respective employees as are we, and to the risk that our or our vendors’ business continuity and data security systems prove not to be sufficiently adequate. We also face the risk that the design of our controls and procedures prove inadequate or are circumvented, causing delays in detection or errors in information. Although we maintain a system of controls designed to keep operational risk at appropriate levels, there can be no assurance that we will not suffer losses from operational risks in the future that may be material in amount.

     We have received no written comments regarding our periodic or current reports from the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission that were issued 180 days or more before the end of our 2010 fiscal year and that remain unresolved.

     During 2005, our bank placed into service a new four-story facility located approximately two miles north from the center of downtown Grand Rapids. This facility serves as our headquarters and our bank’s main office, and houses the administration function, our bank’s commercial lending and review function, our bank’s loan operations function, a full service branch, and portions of our bank’s retail lending and business development function. The facility consists of approximately 55,000 square feet of usable space and contains multiple drive-through lanes with ample parking. The land and building are owned by our real estate company. The address of this facility is 310 Leonard Street NW, Grand Rapids, Michigan.

     Our bank designed and constructed a full service branch and retail loan facility which opened in July of 1999 in Alpine Township, a northwest suburb of Grand Rapids. The facility is one story and has approximately 8,000 square feet of usable space. The land and building are owned by our bank. The facility has multiple drive-through lanes and ample parking space. The address of this facility is 4613 Alpine Avenue NW, Comstock Park, Michigan.

     During 2001, our bank designed and constructed two facilities on a 4-acre parcel of land located in the City of Wyoming, a southwest suburb of Grand Rapids. The land had been purchased by our bank in 2000. The larger of the two buildings is a full service branch and deposit operations facility which opened in September of 2001. The facility is two-stories and has approximately 25,000 square feet of usable space. The facility has multiple drive-through lanes and ample parking space. The address of this facility is 5610 Byron Center Avenue SW, Wyoming, Michigan. The other building is a single-story facility with approximately 11,000 square feet of usable space. Our bank’s accounting, audit, loss prevention and wire transfer functions are housed in this building, which underwent a renovation in 2005 that almost doubled its size. The address of this facility is 5650 Byron Center Avenue SW, Wyoming, Michigan.

     During 2002, our bank designed and constructed a full service branch which opened in December of 2002 in the City of Kentwood, a southeast suburb of Grand Rapids. The land had been purchased by our bank in 2001. The facility is one story and has approximately 10,000 square feet of usable space. The facility has multiple drive-through lanes and ample parking space. The address of this facility is 4860 Broadmoor Avenue SW, Kentwood, Michigan.

     During 2003, our bank designed and constructed a full service branch in the northeast quadrant of the City of Grand Rapids. The land had been purchased by our bank in 2002. The facility is one story and has approximately 3,500 square feet of usable space. The facility has multiple drive-through lanes and ample parking space. The address of this facility is 3156 Knapp Street NE, Grand Rapids, Michigan.

     During 2003, our bank designed and started construction of a new two-story facility located in Holland, Michigan. This facility, which was completed during the fourth quarter of 2004, serves as a full service banking center for the Holland area, including commercial lending, retail lending and a full service branch. The facility, which is owned by our bank, consists of approximately 30,000 square feet of usable space and contains multiple drive-through lanes with ample parking. The address of this facility is 880 East 16^th Street, Holland, Michigan.

     During 2006, our bank purchased approximately 3 acres of vacant land and designed and initiated construction of a new three-story facility in East Lansing, Michigan. This facility was completed during the second quarter of 2007, and serves as a full service banking center for the greater Lansing area, including commercial lending, retail lending, and a full service branch. The facility consists of approximately 27,000 square feet of usable space and contains multiple drive-through lanes with ample parking. The address of this facility is 3737 Coolidge Road, East Lansing, Michigan.

     From time to time, we may be involved in various legal proceedings that are incidental to our business. In the opinion of management, we are not a party to any legal proceedings that are material to our financial condition, either individually or in the aggregate.

     Our common stock is traded on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “MBWM”. At February 1, 2011, there were 366 record holders of our common stock. In addition, we estimate that there were approximately 4,000 beneficial owners of our common stock who own their shares through brokers or banks.

     The following table shows the high and low sales prices for our common stock as reported by the Nasdaq Global Select Market for the periods indicated and the quarterly cash dividends paid by us during those periods.

     Holders of our common stock are entitled to receive dividends that the Board of Directors may declare from time to time. We may only pay dividends out of funds that are legally available for that purpose. We are a holding company and substantially all of our assets are held by our subsidiaries. Our ability to pay dividends to our shareholders depends primarily on our bank’s ability to pay dividends to us. Dividend payments and extensions of credit to us from our bank are subject to legal and regulatory limitations, generally based on capital levels and current and retained earnings, imposed by law and regulatory agencies with authority over our bank. The ability of our bank to pay dividends is also subject to its profitability, financial condition, capital expenditures and other cash flow requirements. In addition, under the terms of our subordinated debentures, we would be precluded from paying dividends on our common stock if an event of default has occurred and is continuing under the subordinated debentures, or if we exercised our right to defer payments of interest on the subordinated debentures, until the deferral ended. Also, in connection with our participation in the Treasury Department’s Capital Purchase Program, we agreed that we would not, without the Treasury Department’s consent, increase our cash dividend rate on our common stock, or with certain exceptions, repurchase any shares of our common stock. These restrictions relating to the Capital Purchase Program remain in effect until the earlier of (i) May 15, 2012, or (ii) when all of the preferred stock that we sold to the Treasury Department has been redeemed by us or transferred by the Treasury Department to third parties.

     On July 9, 2010, we announced via a Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission that we were deferring regularly scheduled quarterly interest payments on our subordinated debentures beginning with the quarterly interest payment scheduled to have been paid on July 18, 2010. The deferral of interest payments on the subordinated debentures results in the deferral of distributions on our trust preferred securities. We also announced that we were deferring regularly scheduled quarterly dividend payments on our preferred stock beginning with the quarterly dividend payment scheduled to have been paid on August 15, 2010. We have not determined the duration of the deferral period.

     We and our bank are subject to regulatory capital requirements administered by state and federal banking agencies. Failure to meet the various capital requirements can initiate regulatory action that could have a direct material effect on the financial statements. Our bank’s ability to pay cash and stock dividends is subject to limitations under various laws and regulations, to prudent and sound banking practices, and to contractual provisions relating to our subordinated debentures and participation in the Capital Purchase Program. During 2009, we paid a cash dividend on our common stock each calendar quarter. However, reflecting our financial results and the poor and weakening economy, we lowered the dollar amount of the cash dividends paid during the year. During the first quarter of 2009, our cash dividend was $0.04 per share, but was lowered to $0.01 per share for the second, third and fourth quarters. Our cash dividend on our common stock was also $0.01 per common share during the first quarter of 2010. In April 2010, we suspended future payments of cash dividends on our common stock until economic conditions and our financial condition improve. In addition, we are precluded from paying cash dividends on our common stock and preferred stock because, under the terms of our subordinated debentures, we cannot pay cash dividends during periods when we have deferred the payment of interest on our subordinated debentures, and, we are now deferring such interest payments. Also, pursuant to our Articles of Incorporation, we are precluded from paying dividends on our common stock while any dividends accrued on our preferred stock have not been declared and paid. Because we have suspended the payment of cash dividends on our preferred stock, we are precluded from paying cash dividends on our common stock.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

     We did not purchase any shares of our common stock during the fourth quarter of 2010.

Shareholder Return Performance Graph

     Set forth below is a line graph comparing the yearly percentage change in the cumulative total shareholder return on our common stock (based on the last reported sales price of the respective year) with the cumulative total return of the Nasdaq Composite Index and the SNL Bank Nasdaq Index from December 31, 2005 through December 31, 2010. The following is based on an investment of $100 on December 31, 2005 in our common stock, the Nasdaq Composite Index and the SNL Bank Nasdaq Index, with dividends reinvested where applicable.

     The Selected Financial Data on page F-3 in this Annual Report is incorporated here by reference.

     Management’s Discussion and Analysis included in this Annual Report is incorporated here by reference.

     The information under the heading “Market Risk Analysis” included in this Annual Report is incorporated here by reference.

     The Consolidated Financial Statements, Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and the Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm included in this Annual Report are incorporated here by reference.

     None

     As of December 31, 2010, an evaluation was performed under the supervision of and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures. Based on that evaluation, our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of December 31, 2010.

     There have been no significant changes in our internal controls over financial reporting during the quarter ended December 31, 2010, that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

     Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f). There are inherent limitations in the effectiveness of any system of internal control. Accordingly, even an effective system of internal control can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation.

     Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010. This evaluation was based on criteria for effective internal control over financial reporting described in Internal Control — Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on our evaluation under the framework in Internal Control — Integrated Framework, our management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2010. Refer to page F-37 for management’s report.

     Our independent registered public accounting firm has issued an audit report on our internal control over financial reporting which is included in this Annual Report.

     None

     The information presented under the captions “Election of Directors,” “Executive Officers,” “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance” and “Corporate Governance — Code of Ethics” in the definitive Proxy Statement of Mercantile for our April 28, 2011 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (the “Proxy Statement”), a copy of which will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission before the meeting date, is incorporated here by reference.

     We have a separately-designated standing audit committee established in accordance with Section 3(a)(58)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The members of the Audit Committee consist of David M. Cassard, Calvin D. Murdock, Merle J. Prins and Timothy O. Schad. The Board of Directors has determined that Messrs. Cassard, Murdock and Schad, members of the Audit Committee, are qualified as audit committee financial experts, as that term is defined in the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Messrs. Cassard, Murdock, Prins and Schad are independent, as independence for audit committee members is defined in the Nasdaq listing standards and the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

     The information presented under the captions “Executive Compensation,” “Corporate Governance — Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation” and “Compensation Committee Report” in the Proxy Statement is incorporated here by reference.

     The information presented under the caption “Stock Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” in the Proxy Statement is incorporated here by reference.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

     The following table summarizes information, as of December 31, 2010, relating to compensation plans under which equity securities are authorized for issuance.

     The information presented under the captions “Transactions with Related Persons” and “Corporate Governance — Director Independence” in the Proxy Statement is incorporated here by reference.

     The information presented under the caption “Principal Accountant Fees and Services” in the Proxy Statement is incorporated here by reference.

(a) (1) Financial Statements. The following financial statements and reports of the independent registered public accounting firm of Mercantile Bank Corporation and its subsidiaries are filed as part of this report:

FINANCIAL INFORMATION
December 31, 2010 and 2009

FINANCIAL INFORMATION
December 31, 2010 and 2009

CONTENTS

The following discussion and other portions of this Annual Report contain forward-looking statements that are based on management’s beliefs, assumptions, current expectations, estimates and projections about the financial services industry, the economy, and about our company. Words such as “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “expects,” “forecasts,” “intends,” “is likely,” “plans,” “projects,” and variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions (“Future Factors”) that are difficult to predict with regard to timing, extent, likelihood and degree of occurrence. Therefore, actual results and outcomes may materially differ from what may be expressed or forecasted in such forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to update, amend, or clarify forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events (whether anticipated or unanticipated), or otherwise.

Future Factors include, among others, changes in interest rates and interest rate relationships; demand for products and services; the degree of competition by traditional and non-traditional competitors; changes in banking regulation or actions by bank regulators; changes in tax laws; changes in prices, levies, and assessments; impact of technological advances; governmental and regulatory policy changes; outcomes of contingencies; trends in customer behavior as well as their ability to repay loans; changes in local real estate values; changes in the national and local economies; and other risk factors described in Item 1A of this Annual Report. These are representative of the Future Factors that could cause a difference between an ultimate actual outcome and a forward-looking statement.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (“Management’s Discussion and Analysis”) is based on Mercantile Bank Corporation’s consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses. Material estimates that are particularly susceptible to significant change in the near term relate to the determination of the allowance for loan and lease losses and income tax accounting, and actual results could differ from those estimates. Management has reviewed the analyses with the Audit Committee of our Board of Directors.

Allowance For Loan and Lease Losses: The allowance for loan and lease losses (“allowance”) is maintained at a level we believe is adequate to absorb probable incurred losses identified and inherent in the loan and lease portfolio. Our evaluation of the adequacy of the allowance is an estimate based on past loan loss experience, the nature and volume of the loan and lease portfolio, information about specific borrower situations and estimated collateral values, guidance from bank regulatory agencies, and assessments of the impact of current and anticipated economic conditions on the loan and lease portfolio. Allocations of the allowance may be made for specific loans or leases, but the entire allowance is available for any loan or lease that, in our judgment, should be charged-off. Loan and lease losses are charged against the allowance when we believe the uncollectability of a loan or lease is likely. The balance of the allowance represents our best estimate, but significant downturns in circumstances relating to loan and lease quality or economic conditions could result in a requirement for an increased allowance in the future. Likewise, an upturn in loan and lease quality or improved economic conditions may result in a decline in the required allowance in the future. In either instance, unanticipated changes could have a significant impact on operating earnings.

The allowance is increased through a provision charged to operating expense. Uncollectable loans and leases are charged-off through the allowance. Recoveries of loans and leases previously charged-off are added to the allowance. A loan or lease is considered impaired when it is probable that contractual interest and principal payments will not be collected either for the amounts or by the dates as scheduled in the loan or lease agreement. Impairment is evaluated in aggregate for smaller-balance loans of similar nature such as residential mortgage, consumer and credit card loans, and on an individual loan or lease basis for other loans. If a loan or lease is impaired, a portion of the allowance is allocated so that the loan or lease is reported, net, at the present value of estimated future cash flows using the loan’s or lease’s existing interest rate or at the fair value of collateral if repayment is expected solely from the collateral. The timing of obtaining outside appraisals varies, generally depending on the nature and complexity of the property being evaluated, general breadth of activity within the marketplace and the age of the most recent appraisal. For collateral dependent impaired loans and leases, in most cases we obtain and use the “as is” value as indicated in the appraisal report, adjusting for any expected selling costs. In certain circumstances, we may internally update outside appraisals based on recent information impacting a particular or similar property, or due to identifiable trends (e.g., recent sales of similar properties) within our markets. The expected future cash flows exclude potential cash flows from certain guarantors. To the extent these guarantors are able to provide repayments, a recovery would be recorded upon receipt. Loans and leases are evaluated for impairment when payments are delayed, typically 30 days or more, or when serious deficiencies are identified within the credit relationship. Our policy for recognizing income on impaired loans is to accrue interest unless a loan is placed on nonaccrual status. We put loans into nonaccrual status when the full collection of principal and interest is not expected.

Income Tax Accounting: Current income tax liabilities or assets are established for the amount of taxes payable or refundable for the current year. In the preparation of income tax returns, tax positions are taken based on interpretation of federal and state income tax laws for which the outcome may be uncertain. We periodically review and evaluate the status of our tax positions and make adjustments as necessary. Deferred income tax liabilities and assets are also established for the future tax consequences of events that have been recognized in our financial statements or tax returns. A deferred income tax liability or asset is recognized for the estimated future tax effects attributable to temporary differences that can be carried forward (used) in future years. The valuation of our net deferred income tax asset is considered critical as it requires us to make estimates based on provisions of the enacted tax laws. The assessment of the realizability of the net deferred income tax asset involves the use of estimates, assumptions, interpretations and judgments concerning accounting pronouncements, federal and state tax codes and the extent of future taxable income. There can be no assurance that future events, such as court decisions, positions of federal and state taxing authorities, and the extent of future taxable income will not differ from our current assessment, the impact of which could be significant to the consolidated results of operations and reported earnings.

Accounting guidance requires us to assess whether a valuation allowance should be established against our deferred tax assets based on the consideration of all available evidence using a “more likely than not” standard. In making such judgments, we consider both positive and negative evidence and analyze changes in near-term market conditions as well as other factors which may impact future operating results. Significant weight is given to evidence that can be objectively verified. Despite improvements in key areas such as an expanded net interest margin, increased regulatory capital levels, a continued shift to local funding sources and reduced controllable overhead costs, the loan and lease loss provision expense and problem asset administration costs remain sizable. The continuing recent losses resulting from the distressed operating environment have significantly restricted our ability to rely on projections of future taxable income to support the recovery of our deferred tax assets. Consequently, we determined it necessary to carry a valuation allowance against our entire net deferred tax asset as of December 31, 2010 and 2009. We will continue to monitor our net deferred tax asset quarterly for changes affecting its realizability.

This Management’s Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements contained in this Annual Report. This discussion provides information about the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of Mercantile Bank Corporation and its consolidated subsidiary, Mercantile Bank of Michigan (“our bank”), and of Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company, LLC (“our mortgage company”), Mercantile Bank Real Estate Co., L.L.C. (“our real estate company”) and Mercantile Insurance Center, Inc. (“our insurance company”), which are subsidiaries of our bank. Unless the text clearly suggests otherwise, references to “us,” “we,” “our,” or “the company” include Mercantile Bank Corporation and its wholly-owned subsidiaries referred to above.

We were incorporated on July 15, 1997 as a bank holding company to establish and own our bank. Our bank, after receiving all necessary regulatory approvals, began operations on December 15, 1997. Our bank has a strong commitment to community banking and offers a wide range of financial products and services, primarily to small- to medium-sized businesses, as well as individuals. Our bank’s lending strategy focuses on commercial lending, and, to a lesser extent, residential mortgage and consumer lending. Our bank also offers a broad array of deposit products, including checking, savings, money market, and certificates of deposit, as well as security repurchase agreements. Our primary markets are the Grand Rapids, Holland and Lansing areas. Our bank utilizes deposits from customers located outside of our primary market areas to assist in funding assets.

We formed a business trust, Mercantile Bank Capital Trust I (“our trust”), in 2004 to issue trust preferred securities. We issued subordinated debentures to our trust in return for the proceeds raised from the issuance of the trust preferred securities. In accordance with accounting guidelines, our trust is not consolidated, but instead we report the subordinated debentures issued to our trust as a liability.

Our mortgage company’s predecessor, Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company, was formed to increase the profitability and efficiency of our mortgage loan operations. Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company initiated business on October 24, 2000 from our bank’s contribution of most of its residential mortgage loan portfolio and participation interests in certain commercial mortgage loans. On the same date, our bank had also transferred its residential mortgage origination function to Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company. On January 1, 2004, Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company was reorganized as Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company, LLC, a limited liability company. Mortgage loans originated and held by our mortgage company are serviced by our bank pursuant to a servicing agreement.

Our insurance company acquired, at nominal cost, an existing shelf insurance agency effective April 15, 2002. An Agency and Institution Agreement was entered into among our insurance company, our bank and Hub International for the purpose of providing programs of mass marketed personal lines of insurance. Insurance product offerings include private passenger automobile, homeowners, personal inland marine, boat owners, recreational vehicle, dwelling fire, umbrella policies, small business and life insurance products, all of which are provided by and written through companies that have appointed Hub International as their agent.

Our real estate company was organized on July 21, 2003, principally to develop, construct and own our facility in downtown Grand Rapids which serves as our bank’s main office and Mercantile Bank Corporation’s headquarters. Construction was completed during the second quarter of 2005.

Our earnings performance has been negatively impacted by substantial provisions to the allowance and problem asset administration costs. Ongoing state, regional and national economic struggles have negatively impacted some of our borrowers’ cash flows and underlying collateral values, leading to increased nonperforming assets, higher loan and lease charge-offs and increased overall credit risk within our loan portfolio when compared to historical levels. We continue to work with our borrowers to develop constructive dialogue to strengthen our relationships and enhance our ability to resolve complex issues; however, with the environment for the banking industry likely to remain stressed until economic conditions improve, credit quality will continue to be our major concern. We will remain vigilant in the identification and administration of problem assets, but provisions to the allowance and problem asset administration costs will likely remain above historical levels, dampening future earnings performance.

Our earnings performance also reflects positive steps we have taken to not only partially mitigate the impact of deteriorating asset quality in the near term, but to benefit us on a longer-term basis as well. First, our net interest margin has been expanding as we have replaced maturing high-rate deposits and borrowed funds with lower-cost funds, while at the same time our commercial loan pricing initiatives significantly offset the negative impact of a relatively high level of nonaccrual loans. Next, our regulatory risk-based capital ratios are increasing, as the 2009 sale of preferred stock under the Treasury’s Capital Purchase Program and the reduction of loans and leases outstanding have more than offset the impact of our net losses. In addition, we are increasing our local deposit balances, reflecting the successful implementation of various initiatives, campaigns and product enhancements. The local deposit growth, combined with the reduction of loans and leases outstanding, are providing for a substantial reduction of, and reliance on, wholesale funds. Lastly, we continue to see the positive effect of our branch consolidation and other overhead cost reduction initiatives, as we continue to make strides to reduce controllable noninterest expense.

Reflecting strategies employed in regards to our financial condition and the continued weak and poor economic environments within our markets, our balance sheet has shrunk during the past two years. Total assets declined from $1.91 billion on December 31, 2009 to $1.63 billion on December 31, 2010, representing a decrease in total assets of $273.8 million, or 14.4%. During 2009, we had shrunk our balance sheet by $301.8 million, or 13.7%. The decline in total assets during 2010 was primarily comprised of a $277.2 million decrease in total loans and leases, following a decline of $317.1 million during 2009. Our total deposits decreased $127.8 million and Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances declined $140.0 million during 2010, compared to declines of $197.9 million and $65.0 million, respectively, during 2009.

Average earning assets equaled 94.8% of average total assets during 2010, a level very similar to the 95.1% during 2009. The loan and lease portfolio continued to comprise a majority of earning assets, followed by securities, federal funds sold and interest-bearing deposits; however, during 2010, securities, federal funds sold and interest-bearing deposits comprised a larger percentage of earning assets primarily reflecting our decision to operate with a larger volume of on-balance sheet liquidity given market conditions. Average total loans and leases equaled 81.8% of average total assets during 2010, a decline from 85.1% in 2009. Meanwhile, average securities, federal funds sold and interest-bearing deposits equaled a combined 18.2% of average total assets during 2010, an increase from 14.9% during 2009.

Our loan and lease portfolio is primarily comprised of commercial loans and leases. Commercial loans and leases declined by $266.7 million during 2010, and at December 31, 2010, totaled $1.18 billion, or 93.1% of the total loan and lease portfolio. The decline in outstanding balances reflects the slowdown in business activity in our markets and the impact of a concerted effort on our part to reduce exposure to certain non-owner occupied commercial real estate (“CRE”) lending. Our commercial and industrial (“C&I”) loan portfolio declined $119.7 million during 2010, as usage of commercial lines of credit was reduced, in large part reflecting the slowdown in business activity and a corresponding reduction in accounts receivable and inventory financings, along with only nominal equipment financing requests. We would expect to see higher commercial line of credit usage, along with increased equipment financing requests, when economic conditions improve. Commercial loans collateralized by non-owner occupied CRE declined $95.2 million during 2010. Our systematic approach to reducing our exposure to certain non-owner occupied CRE lending will be prolonged, given the nature of CRE lending and depressed economic conditions; however, we believe that such a reduction is in our best interest when taking into account the increased inherent credit risk and nominal deposit balances associated with targeted borrowing relationships. Also during 2010, commercial loans collateralized by owner-occupied real estate declined $42.8 million and commercial loans related to residential land development and construction decreased by $9.7 million.

The commercial loan and lease portfolio represents loans to businesses generally located within our market areas. Approximately 77% of the commercial loan and lease portfolio is primarily secured by real estate properties, with the remaining generally secured by other business assets such as accounts receivable, inventory, and equipment. The continued concentration of the loan and lease portfolio in commercial loans and leases is consistent with our strategy of focusing a substantial amount of our efforts on commercial banking. Corporate and business lending is an area of expertise for our senior management team, and our commercial lenders have extensive commercial lending experience, with most having at least ten years’ experience. Of each of the loan categories that we originate, commercial loans and leases are most efficiently originated and managed, thus limiting overhead costs by necessitating the attention of fewer employees. Our commercial lending business generates the largest portion of local deposits and is our primary source of demand deposits.

The following table summarizes our loans secured by real estate, excluding residential mortgage loans representing permanent financing of owner occupied dwellings and home equity lines of credit:

Residential mortgage loans and consumer loans declined in aggregate $10.4 million during 2010, and at December 31, 2010, totaled $86.7 million, or 6.9% of the total loan and lease portfolio. Although residential mortgage loan and consumer loan portfolios may increase in future periods, we expect the commercial sector of the lending efforts and resultant assets to remain the dominant loan portfolio category.

The following table presents total loans outstanding as of December 31, 2010, according to scheduled repayments of principal on fixed rate loans and repricing frequency on variable rate loans. Floating rate loans that are currently at interest rate floors are treated as fixed rate loans and are reflected using maturity date and not repricing frequency.

Our credit policies establish guidelines to manage credit risk and asset quality. These guidelines include loan review and early identification of problem loans and leases to provide effective loan and lease portfolio administration. The credit policies and procedures are meant to minimize the risk and uncertainties inherent in lending. In following these policies and procedures, we must rely on estimates, appraisals and evaluations of loans and leases and the possibility that changes in these could occur quickly because of changing economic conditions. Identified problem loans and leases, which exhibit characteristics (financial or otherwise) that could cause the loans and leases to become nonperforming or require restructuring in the future, are included on the internal “watch list.” Senior management and the Board of Directors review this list regularly. Market value estimates of collateral on impaired loans, as well as on foreclosed and repossessed assets, are reviewed periodically; however, we have a process in place to monitor whether value estimates at each quarter-end are reflective of current market conditions. Our credit policies establish criteria for obtaining appraisals and determining internal value estimates. We may also adjust outside and internal valuations based on identifiable trends within our markets, such as recent sales of similar properties or assets, listing prices and offers received. In addition, we may discount certain appraised and internal value estimates to address distressed market conditions.

The levels of net loan and lease charge-offs and nonperforming assets have been elevated since early 2007. Although we were never directly involved in the underwriting of or the investing in subprime residential real estate loans, the apparent substantial and rapid collapse of this line of business during 2007 and 2008 throughout the United States had a significant negative impact on the residential real estate development lending portion of our business. The resulting decline in real estate prices and slowdown in sales has stretched the cash flow of our local developers and eroded the value of our underlying collateral, which caused elevated levels of nonperforming assets and net loan and lease charge-offs. Since that time, we have witnessed and been impacted by poor economic conditions in Michigan and throughout the country. The resulting decline in business revenue has negatively impacted the cash flows of many of our borrowers, some to the point where loan payments have become past due or may likely become delinquent in future periods. In addition, real estate and equipment prices are significantly depressed, thereby exposing us to larger-than-typical losses in those instances where the sale of collateral is the primary source of repayment. Also during this time, we have seen deterioration in guarantors’ financial capacities to fund deficient cash flows and reduce or eliminate collateral deficiencies. It is likely that net loan and lease charge-offs and nonperforming assets will remain elevated in comparison to our historical levels until economic conditions improve.

As of December 31, 2007, nonperforming assets totaled $35.7 million, or 1.68% of total assets, an increase from the $9.6 million, or 0.46% of total assets, as of December 31, 2006. Nonperforming loans and leases totaled $29.8 million and foreclosed properties/repossessed assets equaled $5.9 million at year-end 2007, compared to $8.6 million and $1.0 million, respectively, at year-end 2006. As of December 31, 2007, nonperforming loans secured by real estate, combined with all foreclosed properties, totaled $28.6 million, or about 80% of total nonperforming assets. Nonperforming loans and foreclosed properties associated with the development of residential real estate totaled $11.1 million, with another $3.2 million in nonperforming loans secured by, and foreclosed properties consisting of, residential properties. Net loan and lease charge-offs during 2007 totaled $6.7 million, or 0.38% of average total loans and leases. During 2006, net loan and lease charge-offs totaled $4.9 million, or 0.29% of average total loans and leases.

Throughout most of 2008, we experienced a sudden and rapid deterioration in a number of commercial loan relationships which previously had been performing satisfactorily. Analyses of certain commercial borrowers revealed a reduced capability on the part of these borrowers to make required payments as indicated by factors such as delinquent loan payments, diminished cash flow, deteriorating financial performance, or past due property taxes, and in the case of commercial and residential development projects slow absorption or sales trends. In addition, commercial real estate is the primary source of collateral for many of these borrowing relationships and updated evaluations and appraisals in many cases reflected significant declines from the original estimated values.

As of December 31, 2008, nonperforming assets totaled $57.4 million, or 2.60% of total assets. Nonperforming loans and leases totaled $49.3 million and foreclosed properties/repossessed assets equaled $8.1 million at year-end 2008, compared to $29.8 million and $5.9 million, respectively, at year-end 2007. As of December 31, 2008, nonperforming loans secured by real estate, combined with all foreclosed properties, totaled $52.3 million, or about 91% of total nonperforming assets. Nonperforming loans and foreclosed properties associated with the development of residential real estate totaled $25.3 million, with another $4.2 million in nonperforming loans secured by, and foreclosed properties consisting of, residential properties. Net loan and lease charge-offs during 2008 totaled $19.9 million, or 1.09% of average total loans and leases. The increase in net loan and lease charge-offs during 2008 over prior periods primarily reflected a higher level of nonperforming assets and significant declines in property values.

As of December 31, 2009, nonperforming assets totaled $111.7 million, or 5.86% of total assets. Nonperforming loans and leases totaled $85.1 million and foreclosed properties/repossessed assets equaled $26.6 million at year-end 2009. As of December 31, 2009, nonperforming loans secured by, and foreclosed properties consisting of, non-owner occupied CRE properties totaled $62.6 million. Nonperforming loans and foreclosed properties associated with the development of residential-related real estate totaled $31.8 million, with another $7.5 million in nonperforming loans secured by, and foreclosed properties consisting of, residential properties. Nonperforming C&I loans and repossessed assets totaled $9.8 million. Net loan and lease charge-offs during 2009 totaled $38.2 million, or 2.24% of average total loans and leases. The increase in net loan and lease charge-offs during 2009 over prior periods primarily reflected a higher level of nonperforming assets and depressed property values.

As of December 31, 2010, nonperforming assets totaled $86.1 million, or 5.28% of total assets. Nonperforming loans and leases totaled $69.4 million and foreclosed properties/repossessed assets equaled $16.7 million at year-end 2010. As of December 31, 2010, nonperforming loans secured by, and foreclosed properties consisting of, non-owner occupied CRE properties totaled $51.4 million. Nonperforming loans and foreclosed properties associated with the development of residential-related real estate totaled $16.9 million, with another $9.5 million in nonperforming loans secured by, and foreclosed properties consisting of, residential properties. Nonperforming C&I loans and repossessed assets totaled $8.4 million. Net loan and lease charge-offs during 2010 totaled $34.3 million, or 2.43% of average total loans and leases. The elevated level of net loan and lease charge-offs during 2010, like those during 2008 and 2009, were significantly higher than historical averages due to a higher level of nonperforming loans and depressed property values.

During the latter part of 2008 and throughout 2009 and 2010, we saw a continuation of the stresses caused by the poor economic conditions, especially in the non-owner occupied CRE markets. High vacancy rates or slow absorption has resulted in inadequate cash flow generated from some real estate projects we have financed, and have required guarantors to provide personal funds to make full contractual loan payments and pay other operating costs. In some cases, the guarantors’ cash and other liquid reserves have become seriously diminished. In other cases, sale of the collateral, either by the borrower or us, is our primary source of repayment.

We are, however, encouraged by the apparent credit quality stabilization within our loan and lease portfolio during the past several quarters. After a period of significant and ongoing increases from 2007 through September 30, 2009, the level of nonperforming assets remained relatively unchanged through June 30, 2010 and then declined during the third and fourth quarters of 2010. Of particular note are the reduced level of additions to the nonperforming asset category and an increased level of nonaccrual loans returning to performing status. We also saw an improved level of interest in, and sales of, foreclosed properties and assets securing nonaccrual loans during the latter half of 2010.

The following table provides a breakdown of nonperforming assets by property type:

The following table provides a breakdown of net loan and lease charge-offs by collateral type:

The following table summarizes nonperforming loans and leases, including troubled debt restructurings:

The following table summarizes changes in the allowance for loan and lease losses for the past five years:

The following table illustrates the breakdown of the allowance balance by loan type (dollars in thousands) and of the total loan and lease portfolio (in percentages):

In each accounting period, we adjust the allowance to the amount we believe is necessary to maintain the allowance at an adequate level. Through the loan and lease review and credit departments, we establish specific portions of the allowance based on specifically identifiable problem loans and leases. The evaluation of the allowance is further based on, but not limited to, consideration of the internally prepared Allowance Analysis, loan and lease loss migration analysis, composition of the loan and lease portfolio, third party analysis of the loan and lease administration processes and portfolio, and general economic conditions.

The Allowance Analysis applies reserve allocation factors to non-impaired outstanding loan and lease balances, which is combined with specific reserves to calculate an overall allowance dollar amount. For non-impaired commercial loans and leases, which continue to comprise a vast majority of our total loans and leases, reserve allocation factors are based upon loan ratings as determined by our standardized grade paradigms and by loan purpose. We have divided our commercial loan and lease portfolio into five classes: 1) commercial and industrial loans and leases; 2) vacant land, land development and residential construction loans; 3) owner occupied real estate loans; 4) non-owner occupied real estate loans; and 5) multi-family and residential rental property loans. The reserve allocation factors are primarily based on the historical trends of net loan and lease charge-offs through a migration analysis whereby net loan and lease losses are tracked via assigned grades over various time periods, with adjustments made for environmental factors reflecting the current status of, or recent changes in, items such as: lending policies and procedures; economic conditions; nature and volume of the loan and lease portfolio; experience, ability and depth of management and lending staff; volume and severity of past due, nonaccrual and adversely classified loans and leases; effectiveness of the loan and lease review program; value of underlying collateral; lending concentrations; and other external factors, including competition and regulatory environment. Adjustments for specific lending relationships, particularly impaired loans and leases, are made on a case-by-case basis. Non-impaired retail loan reserve allocations are determined in a similar fashion as those for non-impaired commercial loans and leases, except that retail loans are segmented by type of credit and not a grading system. We regularly review the Allowance Analysis and make adjustments periodically based upon identifiable trends and experience.

A migration analysis is completed quarterly to assist us in determining appropriate reserve allocation factors for non-impaired commercial loans and leases. Our migration takes into account various time periods, and while we generally place most weight on the eight-quarter time frame as that period is close to the average duration of our loan and lease portfolio, consideration is given to the other time periods as part of our assessment. Although the migration analysis provides an accurate historical accounting of our loan and lease losses, it is not able to fully account for environmental factors that will also very likely impact the collectability of our commercial loans and leases as of any quarter-end date. Therefore, we incorporate the environmental factors as adjustments to the historical data.

Environmental factors include both internal and external items. We believe the most significant internal environmental factor is our credit culture and the relative aggressiveness in assigning and revising commercial loan and lease risk ratings. Although we have been consistent in our approach to commercial loan and lease ratings, ongoing stressed economic conditions have resulted in an even higher sense of aggressiveness with regards to the downgrading of lending relationships. In addition, we made revisions to our grading paradigms in early 2009 that mathematically resulted in commercial loan and lease relationships being more quickly downgraded when signs of stress are noted, such as slower sales activity for construction and land development CRE relationships and reduced operating performance/cash flow coverage for C&I relationships. These changes, coupled with the stressed economic environment, have resulted in significant downgrades and the need for substantial provisions to the allowance. To more effectively manage our commercial loan and lease portfolio, we created two specific groups tasked with managing our higher exposure lending relationships. One team manages the most distressed credit relationships, while the other team manages larger weakened credit relationships.

The most significant external environmental factor is the assessment of the current economic environment and the resulting implications on our commercial loan and lease portfolio. Currently, we believe conditions remain especially stressed for non-owner occupied CRE; however, recent data and performance reflect a level of stability in the C&I class of our loan and lease portfolio.

The primary risk elements with respect to commercial loans and leases are the financial condition of the borrower, the sufficiency of collateral, and timeliness of scheduled payments. We have a policy of requesting and reviewing periodic financial statements from commercial loan and lease customers and employ a disciplined and formalized review of the existence of collateral and its value. The primary risk element with respect to each residential real estate loan and consumer loan is the timeliness of scheduled payments. We have a reporting system that monitors past due loans and leases and have adopted policies to pursue creditor’s rights in order to preserve our collateral position.

Reflecting the stressed economic conditions and resulting negative impact on our loan and lease portfolio, we have substantially increased the allowance as a percent of the loan and lease portfolio over the past couple of years. The allowance equaled $45.4 million, or 3.59% of total loans and leases outstanding, as of December 31, 2010. As of December 31, 2009, the allowance balance was higher at $47.9 million, but a lower 3.11% of total loans and leases. The allowance as a percent of total loans and leases was 1.46%, 1.43% and 1.23% at year-end 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively.

As of December 31, 2010, the allowance was comprised of $35.7 million in general reserves relating to non-impaired loans and leases and $9.7 million in specific reserve allocations relating to impaired loans and leases. At year-end 2010, impaired loans and leases with an aggregate carrying value of $27.7 million had been subject to previous partial charge-offs aggregating $26.1 million. Those partial charge-offs were recorded as follows: $21.7 million in 2010, $3.4 million in 2009 and $1.0 million in 2008. As of December 31, 2010, specific reserves allocated to impaired loans that had been subject to a previous partial charge-off totaled $1.0 million.

Although we believe the allowance is adequate to absorb losses as they arise, there can be no assurance that we will not sustain losses in any given period that could be substantial in relation to, or greater than, the size of the allowance.

Securities decreased $22.2 million during 2010, totaling $235.2 million as of December 31, 2010. During 2010, the securities portfolio equaled 13.7% of average earning assets. The decline in the securities portfolio primarily reflects the sale of certain tax-exempt municipal general obligation and revenue bonds with an aggregate book value of $20.0 million, which were sold during the first quarter of 2010 after analyzing our current and forecasted federal income tax position. Proceeds from matured and called U.S. Government agency bonds totaled $81.2 during 2010, with another $17.9 million received from principal paydowns on mortgage-backed securities, $5.8 million from matured and called tax-exempt municipal securities, $2.4 million from matured Michigan Strategic Fund bonds and $1.3 million from redeemed FHLB stock. Purchases during 2010, consisting almost exclusively of U.S. Government agency bonds, totaled $106.3 million. We maintain the securities portfolio at levels to provide for required pledging purposes and secondary liquidity for our daily operations. In addition, the portfolio serves a primary interest rate risk management function. At December 31, 2010, the portfolio was comprised of U.S. Government agency issued bonds (51%), U.S. Government agency issued or guaranteed mortgage-backed securities (20%), tax-exempt municipal general obligation and revenue bonds (14%), Michigan Strategic Fund bonds (8%), FHLB stock (6%) and mutual funds (1%).

The following table reflects the composition of the securities portfolio, excluding FHLB stock: