The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
E.15 (125) n AGRICULTURAL FINANCE DATABOOK First Quarter 1999 Guide to internal tables of contents and notes on sources Amount and characteristics of farm loans made by commercial banks Page 3 Selected statistics from the quarterly reports of condition of commercial banks Reserve bank surveys of farm credit conditions and farm land values Division of Research and Statistics Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System Washington, D.C. 20551 N i c h o l a s A. Walraven and M e l i s s a Post 22 33 2 General Information for the first quarter of 1999; the other data generally were available through December Parts or all of the Agricultural Finance Databook may be copied and distributed freely. Any redistribution of at the address shown on the cover. the annual subscription fee of $5.00. New subscriptions to the Databook (Statistical Release E.15) may be entered by sending a mailing address (including zip code) to: Publications Services, Mail Stop 138 Federal Reserve Board Washington, D.C. 20551 Notice of change of address also should be sent to Publications Services. the old address should be included. A copy of the back cover showing w SECTION I: * > w w v w w AMOUNT AND CHARACTERISTICS OF FARM LOANS MADE BY COMMERCIAL BANKS Estimates from the quarterly survey of non-real - estate farm loans Summary charts Zage ^ Tables: I. A I.B I.C I.D I.E I.F I!G I.H I.I Number Average size Amount Average maturity Average effective interest Percentage of loans with a Distribution of farm loans Detailed survey results Regional disaggregation of ^ rate . floating interest rate by effective interest rate survey results f* 13 ^ 21 SOURCES OF DATA: These data on the farm loans of $1000 or more made by commercial banks are derived from quarterly sample surveys conducted by the Federal Reserve System during the first full week of the second month of each quarter. Data obtained from the sample are expanded into national estimates for all commercial banks, which are shown in the following tables. Before August 1989, the farm loan survey was part of a broader survey of the terms of lending by a sample of 348 commercial banks. A subset of 250 banks was asked for information regarding agricultural lending, and about 150 typically reported at least one farm loan. Since August of 1989, the data have been drawn from a redesigned sample of 250 banks that is no longer part of the broader survey. In the redesigned sample, banks are stratified according to their volume of farm lending, previously, they had been stratified according to the volume of business loans. However, the sample data always have been expanded into national estimates for all commercial banks, and these estimates necessarily exhibit variability due to sampling error. The estimates are sensitive to the occasional appearance of very large loans in the sample. In addition, the breakdown of national estimates into those for large banks and small banks may have been affected somewhat by the new sampling procedures that were implemented in August 1989; apparent shifts in the data as of that date should be treated with caution. Beginning with the May 1997 survey, data on the assessment by the lender of the risk associated with each loan the next date that the rate of interest could be adjusted, whether the loan was callable by the bank, and whether the borrower could prepay the loan without penalty began to be collected. Over time, the data on the lender's perception of the riskiness of farm loans should help provide a better picture of the effect of fluctuations in the creditworthiness of farm borrowers as either farm financial conditions or the broader economic environment changes. The new data on loan repricing dates, callability of the loan, and the existence of prepayment penalties should help to refine estimates of the duration of farm loans made by commercial banks. Tables I H 1 through 1.H.6 contain most of the new data, while the other tables in section I attempt to show estimates that are comparable to those that have been presented for a number of years. However, for several quarters while the new survey was being designed, banks that left the survey panel were not replaced immediately, because new replacement banks would soon have been forced to revise their newly-instituted reporting procedures when the new survey form went into effect. As a result, the size of the survey panel dwindled through early 1997. and with the May 1997 survey, an unusually-large number of new reporters (about 25) were added. While this does not affect the validity of the May survey information, it likely introduced sampling error, especially when the May survey results are compared with those of previous quarters. The format and the information contained in the tables are likely to change over time as more of the new survey information is acquired. SECTION I (CONTINUED) More detailed results from each quarterly survey previously were published in Statistical Release E.2A, "Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers". Beginning in February, 1992, the more detailed results are included at the end of this section of the Databook. and the E2.A has been discontinued. Starting with the August 1986 survey, farm loans secured by real estate are included in the data shown in the table of detailed results, whereas such loans are excluded from the tabulations in Tables I.A through I.G and the summary charts. Beginning in November 1991, several survey statistics are estimated for each of ten farm production regions as defined by the USDA. These statistics, which are presented in table I.I, should be treated with some caution. Although an effort was made to choose a good regional mix of banks for the panel, the panel never has been stratified by region. Consequently, the survey results are less precise for each region than for the totals for the nation. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: In the February 1999 survey, the estimated number of non-real - estate farm loans made by banks rebounded only slightly from the November reading, leaving the level well below the four quarter moving average. As was the case with the previous survey, the average size of loans was quite large, leaving the dollar volume of farm loans at the upper end of the range seen since 1995. In the February survey, the average maturity of farm non-real-estate loans was about 10 months, towards the middle of the range seen for the past several years. The average effective rate of interest on non-realestate farm loans was 8.4 percent in the February survey, down 10 basis points from the previous quarter, and the lowest reading seen since mid 1996. The percentage of loans that were made with a rate of interest that floats was about 52 percent in February, continuing a trend towards fixed-rate arrangements that seemed to begin around 1995. The weighted average repricing interval (line 4 of Tables I.H.I through I.H.6) fell roughly 1/2 month to 6-1/2 months, while the average maturity (line 3) lengthened a bit. The weighted average risk rating moved up for all sizes of loans. Relative to surveys before last summer, the percentage of the volume of loans that were to purchase or improve farm real estate (line 23) remained quite low, perhaps reflecting heightened concerns in recent months about longer-run farm profitability. The percentage of loans that were callable by the bank (line 17) moved up to about 16 percent in the February survey. Bankers required collateral on almost 2/3 of farm loans (the total percentage of loans that are secured is obtained by summing lines 25 and 26). When broken out by the riskiness of the loan (Tables I.H.4 through I.H.6), a bit less than 60 percent of the estimated volume of loans was rated either "moderate" or "acceptable". Loans rated as "low" risk carried the lowest rate of interest; in past surveys, loans rated as "acceptable" or "moderate" have carried the lowest rates of interest. By farm production region, weighted average rates of interest fell in all regions except the Corn Belt and the Northern Plains, which edged up. Rates fell by a full percentage point in the Northeast, after falling almost as much in the previous survey. in Chart 1 Results from the Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers Millions, Annual rate 5.0 Number of non-real-estate farm loans 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 — Four quarter moving average 1.5 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Thousands of dollars 1.0 50 45 Average size of non-real-estate farm loans 40 35 30 - Four quarter moving average 25 20 r v - v 1978 1979 1980 1981 15 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Billions of dollars, Annual rate Amount of non-real-estate farm loans 10 130 120 110 100 90 80 Four quarter moving average 70 60 50 40 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 30 ID Chart 2 Results from the Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers Months Xverage maturity of non-real-estate farm loans - Four quarter moving average 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Percent 20 18 Average effective interest rate on non-real-estate farm loans 16 14 12 10 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Percent Share of farm loans with a floating interest rate 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 — Four quarter moving average 20 10 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 0 ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NON-REAL-ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS TABLE I.A NUMBER OF LOANS MADE (MILLIONS) FEEDER LIVESTOCK ALL LOANS OTHER LIVESTOCK OTHER CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES BY SIZE OF BANK BY SIZE OF LOAN ($1,000s) BY PURPOSE OF LOAN FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT OTHER 100 and over 1 to 9 10 to 24 25 to 99 1. 5 7 1. 4 2 1. 6 7 1. 7 0 1. 6 6 1. 6 7 1. 6 5 1. 5 5 1., 4 5 1.,33 1., 3 2 1.. 2 0 0. 46 0. 27 0. 08 1 0. 43 0. 28 0. 5 2 0. 4 9 0. 5 1 0. 5 4 0. 5 6 0. 5 1 0. 5 7 0. 4 8 0. 5 0 0. 4 5 0 0. 0 7 0. 0 9 0. 0 9 0. 1 0 0. 1 1 0. 1 2 0. 1 2 0. 1 2 0. 1 1 0. 1 1 0. 1 2 LARGE OTHER o. 2 0 0.2 3 2 .1 8 | | 0. 3 6 2 .2 3 1 | o. 44 2 .2 0 0. 5 0 2 .1 0 1 o. 51 0.5 5 2 .1 5 ANNUAL NUMBER OF LOANS MADE 1987 . 1988. 1989. 1990. 1991. 1992. 1993. 1994. 1995. 1996. 1997. 1998. 2 2 38 21 1 | o 39 0 29 30 2 60 1 o 2 63 1 o 32 35 60 1 o 2 .6 9 1 0. 3 5 2 .7 0 1 2. 5 3 1 o. 3 6 o ., 2 8 2 2 .4 9 1 , 22 2 . 1 , 27 2 . | | 2 .. 1 0 o ., 2 6 o .. 1 8 0,. 1 9 0,. 1 5 0. 13 0. 11 0. 2 0 0. 2 4 0. 2 3 0. 2 5 0. 2 7 0. 2 3 0. 1 9 0. 1 7 0. 2 0 0. 1 8 1. 5 4 1. 4 5 1. 7 3 1. 6 9 1. 6 4 1. 6 7 1. 6 2 1. 5 6 1. 4 8 1. 3 8 1., 4 0 1., 3 9 0. 14 0. 19 0. 14 0. 21 0. 1 6 0. 1 9 0. 1 7 0. 1 8 0. 1 8 0. 1 8 0. 1 7 0. 1 4 0. 1 5 0., 1 7 0. 2 0 0. 1 9 0. 2 1 0. 2 4 0. 2 7 0. 2 7 0., 3 9 0., 3 6 0., 3 3 0.. 2 2 .3 1 0. 3 5 0. 3 2 0. 3 7 0. 3 7 0. 3 5 0., 3 6 0., 3 1 0 ,, 3 4 0., 3 3 | | | | | | 0.5 4 0.6 6 0.5 3 0.4 6 0., 3 9 1. 9 9 2 .1 8 1. 9 8 1. 8 3 1. 6 9 1. 8 2 1., 7 1 NUMBER OF LOANS MADE DURING FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF QUARTER, ANNUAL RATE 2 . 14 | 0 .43 1 1 o .38 1 . 66 I 0 .38 1 .70 j 0 .47 2 . 04 1 0 .38 1 .74 0 .30 0 .16 0 .12 0 .09 0 . 11 1 0 .33 1 .37 0 . 36 0 . 15 1 0 .39 1 .54 1 .07 0 ,, 4 7 0 .38 0 .24 1 .44 0 .37 0 .46 0 .40 2 . 21 1 0 . 15 0 .14 1 .53 0 .23 1 .18 1 .62 1 .34 1 o .23 0 .21 1 .23 0 . 14 0 . 14 0 .15 0 .22 2 . 08 1 0 .20 1 .29 02. 2 . 51 1 o .19 o .12 0 .22 1 .72 03. 04. 2 . 12 1 0 .16 1 .50 1 .70 | o . 10 0. 1 7 0 .14 1 .05 0 . 18 0 .22 0 .15 0 . 14 1999 Ql. 1 .93 1 o .20 0 .18 1 .17 0 .17 0 .20 1,. 7 0 0. 5 1 0 .22 0 . 18 1 .72 1998 Ql. 0 .49 | 1 .15 1 .13 2 . 65 0,. 2 4 0,. 2 2 2 .05 | 0 .37 o .20 0 . 17 2 . 19 0,. 1 5 0,. 0 9 0,. 0 9 0 .12 0. 4 9 0. 5 7 0. 4 7 0. 4 5 1 | 1997 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. 0 .20 1 .36 0 .20 0 .94 0., 5 8 0., 4 1 0.. 3 6 o .96 0.. 4 5 1 0 .37 0 .31 0 .33 0 .26 .77 7 ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NON-REAL-ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS TABLE & AVERAGE SIZE OF LOANS MADE (THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS) ALL LOANS FEEDER LIVESTOCK OTHER LIVESTOCK OTHER CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES BY SIZE OF BANK BY SIZE OF LOAN ($1,000s) BY PURPOSE OF LOAN FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT OTHER 1 to 9 10 to 24 25 to 99 44. 6 34. 7 32 .2 94 , .3 129.,3 108.,7 112 ,0 , .6 123 , 93 . 6 95 . 2 97 . 2 127 .9 3., 6 3.,7 3..6 3,.6 3 .6 , 3 .7 , , 3 .7 3 .7 3 .7 3 .7 3 .8 3 .7 14.,7 14..8 14..7 14,.8 14 .9 , 14 .8 . 14 .9 14 . 6 14 .7 15 .0 14 .9 14 .8 46. 5 45. 2 45. 9 46., 1 46..6 45.,9 46., 1 47 .0 , 44 ,9 , 45 .2 45 . ,8 45 .4 100 and over LARGE OTHER 85. 5 70.,0 53 .7 . 100..7 107,.0 97,.0 106 .0 101 . 3 84 .0 115 .0 92 .0 95 .0 14 ,9 . 16.,3 14 ,4 . 13.. 9 13 .9 . 15..8 15,.8 15,.4 15 .7 15 .4 16 . 3 18 . 1 ANNUAL AVERAGE SIZE OF LOANS MADE 1 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 | | 20. 8 21. 8 19.9 28.,4 31..9 31..2 34.. 3 .9 33 . 33 .. 8 39 .2 31 .4 32.4 AVERAGE 1997 Ql. 02. 03. 04. 1998 Q l . 02. 03. 04. 1999 Ql. 33. 8 34.,1 42 ,7 . 69,,7 61,.0 68,.2 79 .7 60 .3 49 .7 59 .0 42 . 3 41 .5 S I Z E 26. 3 40.,6 29.,5 22 ,7 , 25,.2 26,.9 23 , .1 27,.6 26 .7 24 .2 26 .0 24 . 3 14. 6 16. 7 14. 1 15.,7 15..6 14 .7 . 15,,2 16..3 18,. 5 26 .0 16 .8 18 .2 16.. 1 13..9 12., 1 11.,9 15.. 1 15..9 13 .9 17 .5 15 . 6 17 .2 17 . 8 28 . 1 320. 4 320. 4 272 .1 487. 7 539. 9 468.,2 490.,3 480.,7 451,.3 545,.9 385 . 3 357 .0 OF LOANS MADE DURING FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF QUARTER, ANNUAL RATE 38.7 24.3 28.3 36.1 50., 7 27 ,6 . 51., 9 39..5 28. 1 22 .2 23.,0 29..6 24., 3 13.,6 15..5 16..1 18. 5 17. 6 17.,0 17.,8 82., 1 73.,2 106.,6 160..5 3.,7 3.,7 3,.7 3,.9 14. 7 14. 9 14 ,4 . 15.,4 48. 0 45.,6 45., 1 44..2 371. 9 357.,7 419,.3 398,.5 95. 0 67. 9 91.,7 120..5 22 .4 13 .9 12 .9 16.,5 37.9 25.6 40.4 37,.7 43 .4 , 30 . 4 50 .7 29..6 21,.0 17 .9 , 29,.3 .3 23 , 17,.2 14 .4 18 .9 39,.6 24,.5 20,.9 26,.9 130,.7 107 .4 , 115 .8 161 .7 3 .8 , 3,.7 3 .5 3 .9 15.,1 14..4 14..6 15,.3 45,.8 46,.6 44,.0 44 .6 320,.2 335 .7 366 .8 424 .7 100.. 3 80,.3 85 .7 120 .7 .2 24 , 16 .0 12 .5 21 .0 46.6 32 .7 26,.9 25 .6 21 .9 219 .2 3 .7 15,.5 47 .9 412 .6 137.6 23 .4 28.0 1 | ESTIMATES FROM T H E QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NON-REAL-ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS TABLE I.C A M O U N T OF LOANS M A D E (BILLIONS OF DOLLARS) FEEDER LIVESTOCK ALL LOANS OTHER LIVESTOCK OTHER CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES BY S I Z E OF BANK B Y S I Z E OF L O A N ($1,000s) BY PURPOSE OF LOAN FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT 10 to 24 1 to 9 OTHER 25 to 99 100 and over LARGE OTHER •1 15. 9 32. 5 A N N U A L AMOUNT OF LOANS M A D E | 1987 49 6 | 13 2 3 4 22 5 2 .3 8 .,3 24. 5 6 24 3 1 .9 7 .,4 5. 7 5. 2 1 2 .6 4 1 j 6. 8 0 6. 4 12. 9 23. 7 1 1 9 6 0 24 3 2 .0 6 ..4 j 6 .,1 7 .,7 14. 4 2 3 .4 j 19. 6 3 2 .0 1 1 - ,1 6 ..1 6 ..2 .3 7 . 15. 9 45. 3 j 44. 2 30. 5 7 . .6 1 5 .,1 54. 0 1 5 3 .7 29. 1 8 ..0 1 6 .,8 5 2 .8 j 49. 4 34. 3 6 .,1 8 .,3 17. 1 61. 0 j 58. 8 3 3 .8 1988 1 48 2 | 10 1989 1 51 6 | 12 1990 | 74 7 1 22 0 5 5 26 6 2 .3 1 8 ..3 1991 | 82 8 | 21 4 5 8 25 5 2 .5 2 7 ..6 2 .9 2 6 ..0 2 .5 3 0 ..6 1 j 6 1 7 32. 3 1992 | 8 3 .,7 1 2 3 .,6 6 .,7 24, 6 1993 j 9 2 ..6 j 2 8 .,7 6 .,2 2 4 ..7 8 5 ..7 j 1 6 ..8 6 .,4 2 5 ,.4 3 .2 3 3 ..9 j 5 ..8 7 . .4 1 6 .,5 56. 0 1 55. 1 30. 6 1 2 ..7 5 ..2 .3 27 , 2 .7 3 6 ..1 1 6 ..0 54. 4 7 . 1 1 3 ..9 6 1 .,3 1 j 5 5 .,3 6 1 .,2 2 8 .8 3 4 ..5 5 .,4 5 ..0 8 ,.3 2 .4 1 j 1 j 5 ..0 4 ..5 .4 7 , 15 , .8 4 3 ..3 j 4 1 .,9 2 9 ..6 6 ..7 1 4 ..9 4 1 .,9 j 3 7 .,0 3 1 .. 1 3 8 ,.2 1994 | 1995 8 4 .. 1 j 1996 87 , .3 | 1 0 ..6 4 ..0 3 5 ,.9 1997 7 1 ..4 6 8 ..0 j 8,.0 5 ..3 23 , .6 2 .7 3 1 ..9 4 ..4 2 5 .2 4 .9 27 , .5 1 j 1998 AMOUNT 1997 1998 OF LOANS MADE DURING FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF QUARTER, ANNUAL RATE Q1 . . . | 8 4 ,. 9 2 | 1 0 ,.1 6,.7 2 7 .4 3 .2 3 7 .5 1 4 .4 7 .3 1 7 .8 5 5 .5 | 4 6 .8 Q2 . . . j 6 4 .44 j 4,.6 5,.0 2 3 .3 2 .4 2 9 .0 1 6 .1 8 .5 1 6 .9 .0 33 , j 3 4 .7 2 9 .7 Q3 . . . j 6 2 .49 8 .0 3,.3 2 3 .8 2 .4 2 4 .9 5 .0 6 .8 1 3 .9 3 6 .8 j 3 9 .6 2 2 .9 Q4 . . . | 7 3 ,. 8 3 | 9 .2 6 ..3 1 9 .7 2 .7 3 6 .0 1 j 4 .4 7 .0 1 4 .5 4 7 ,.9 | 4 6 .4 2 7 .5 Q1 . . . 1 7 8 .80 | 7 .1 5,.9 3 0 .0 7 .1 2 8 .6 1 4 7 0 .30 j 5 .3 4,.6 2 9 .5 5 .4 2 5 .6 Q2 . . . 1999 6,.1 j 2 6 .,1 .1 7 .0 1 7 .6 5 0 .1 | 3 7 .7 4 1 .2 5 .4 8 .4 1 7 .4 3 9 .2 | 3 7 .7 3 2 .6 Q3 . . . j 5 4 .29 3 .1 2,.9 2 1 .6 3 .2 2 3 .5 | 4 .8 6 .0 1 1 .5 3 2 .0 | 3 2 .5 2 1 .8 Q4... j 6 8 ,. 7 3 | 8 .8 4,.1 1 9 .7 3 .8 3 2 ,.3 | 3 .6 5 .5 1 3 .2 4 6 ,.4 j 4 0 .0 2 8 .7 Ql. . . | 8 9 ,. 8 6 | 6 .7 4,.8 3 0 .1 3 .7 4 4 .6 1 3,.6 7 .0 1 7 ,.4 6 1 ,.9 1 5 3 .9 3 6 .0 9 ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NON-REAL-ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS TABLE D AVERAGE MATURITY OF LOANS MADE (MONTHS) BY PURPOSE OF LOAN ALL LOANS FEEDER LIVESTOCK OTHER LIVESTOCK OTHER CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES BY SIZE OF BANK BY SIZE OF LOAN ($1,000s) FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT 1 to 9 OTHER 10 to 24 25 to 99 100 and over LARGE OTHER 1 . 5E5 1 . 8E5 1 . 6E5 1 . 8E5 1 . 6E5 1 . 9E5 1 . 9E5 2 . 2E5 2 . 1E5 2E5 2 . 2E5 2 . 2E5 1.8E5 2E5 1.8E5 2.3E5 2E5 2.1E5 2.1E5 2.6E5 2.3E5 2.3E5 2.4E5 2.4E5 1.6E5 1.5E5 1.4E5 93222 1.1E5 1.4E5 1.4E5 1.4E5 1.6E5 1.4E5 1.7E5 1.7E5 1.1E5 1.6E5 1.5E5 89783 1E5 1.2E5 1.2E5 1.1E5 1.4E5 1.2E5 1.5E5 1.3E5 1.8E5 1.7E5 1.6E5 2E5 1.8E5 1.9E5 2E5 2.4E5 2.2E5 2 . 3E5 2.5E5 2.5E5 ANNUAL AVERAGE MATURITY 105249.0 122747.4 130622.7 114905.8 127991.4 117565 140068 145725 166923 149489 174775 153180 1987. 1988. 1989. 1990. 1991. 1992. 1993. 1994. 1995. 1996. 1997. 1998. 147105.6 89370.9 140943.6 169165.5 163615.5 182263.4 184134.8 187200.5 190567.3 216044.9 211732.4 196624.7 146309. 0 163073. 6 137350. 5 143354. 8 138014. 3 164054.,1 159272,,1 165363,,4 163436.,3 145199,.5 205246 .9 189093 .8 436126.,4 379006.,5 358571.,2 420521.,4 471693,.6 384896,.0 581886 .7 701106 .6 508471 .3 564019 .8 586652 .9 527858 .8 232304. 6 208599. 5 226823. 8 123327.,3 102146.,0 180716.,6 180099..0 181095..8 191376,.9 175498 .2 141319 .4 130839 .2 1 | | | 1 1 | | | | | 1 - 4E5 , 4E5 1. , 4E5 1. ,4E5 1. 1-, 5E5 1 , 6E5 . 6E5 1. . 7E5 1, . 7E5 1, 1. 6E5 1. 7E5 1 . 7E5 1 MATURITY OF LOANS MADE DURING FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF QUARTER, ANNUAL RATE 1997 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 11.7 1998 Q1 02 03 04 10 10 1999 Ql. 11.0 8.8 7.9 9 9.2 14.6 7.2 5.3 7.4 10. 0 ,5 13 . 9, .4 11 , 1 12 .2 13 , 6 9,, 5 6,, 7 34., 1 32 , .1 23.,2 31,,8 8. 5 6. 8 7 .8 6. 3 | 1 I | 9.5 9.5 8-4 ,5 7. 11. 8 12. 6 10. 7 11. 0 13 .4 14 , .1 10.,9 10,. 6 11 .3 9., 1 7 ,8 , 6,. 6 9. 1 6. 6 7, .6 6,,8 14 .2 15. 5 10., 8 9., 6 8.1 7.8 7.2 8.3 12 . ,1 7. ,5 .1 13 , 8 .6 9,.9 10,.4 9 .9 8 .9 23 .9 , 33,.1 21 .7 31 .5 8. 2 6., 6 7, 6 5,,2 1 1 1 9,.1 9,.8 8 .3 7 .6 13., 1 11,,3 11,.5 8,.9 13,.2 13 .8 , 11 .0 11 .4 9 .5 8 .8 9 .0 7 .5 7 .4 , 6,.8 7 .2 5 .9 13 .4 , 14 . ,5 13 .2 11 . 7 8.3 12 .8 11 .2 28 .0 6,. 1 1 io .1 11 .9 10 .9 8 .4 7 .0 12 . 6 1 ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NON-REAL-ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS TABLE I.E AVERAGE EFFECTIVE INTEREST RATE ON LOANS MADE FEEDER LIVESTOCK ALL LOANS OTHER LIVESTOCK OTHER CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES BY SIZE OF BANK BY SIZE OF LOAN ($1,000s) BY PURPOSE OF LOAN FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT 1 to 9 OTHER 10 to 24 25 to 99 100 and over LARGE OTHER ANNUAL AVERAGE INTEREST RATE 1 0 ,. 6 1 0 ,. 7 1 0 ,. 2 1 0 ,. 8 1 1 ,. 5 9 .5 | 1 1 ,. 6 1 1 .. 3 11 . 1 9 ,. 9 | 9 ,, 2 1 1 ,. 3 1988 1 1 ,. 2 1 0 .. 9 1 1 ,. 9 1 1 ,, 2 1 1 ,. 7 1 0 ,. 7 j 1 1 ,. 7 1 1 ,. 6 1 1 .4 1 0 ,. 8 j 1 0 ,, 2 1 1 ,. 6 1989 1 2 ,, 5 .3 12 , 1 2 ,, 4 1 2 ,. 6 . 8 12 , 12 . 3 j 1 2 ,. 8 1 2 ., 7 .7 12 , 1 2 ,, 2 j 12 , . 1 1 2 .. 7 1990 1 1 ,. 4 1 1 ,. 5 .0 12 , 1 1 ,. 7 12 , . 3 1 0 ,. 7 j 1 2 ,. 5 1 2 .. 4 12 , . 1 1 0 ,. 9 j 1 0 ,, 9 12 , . 3 1991 9 ., 8 1 0 .. 2 1 1 ,. 0 1 0 ,, 4 1 1 ,. 3 8 .6 j 1 1 ,. 5 1 1 ., 2 1 0 .7 9 ,. 2 j 9 ,. 0 1 1 .. 3 1992 7 ,, 8 8 ,. 2 8 .. 6 8 ,. 8 9 ,. 3 6 ,. 3 j 9 ,. 7 9 ,. 3 8 .8 7 . , 1 j 6 .. 8 9 . ,4 1993 7 , .5 8 .. 0 8 ,, 1 8 ,, 1 8 ,. 7 6 ,. 2 j 9 ,. 0 8 ,. 7 8 ,. 3 6 ,. 9 j 6 ,. 7 8 ,. 7 1994 7 ., 8 8 ,, 3 8 ,. 6 ,0 7 . j 8 ,. 6 1995 9 ,, 5 1 0 ., 1 8 ., 8 j 1 0 .. 6 1 0 ., 5 1996 8 ,. 4 1997 9 .. 2 1998 9 .. 0 1 1987 9 ,. 1 8 ,. 0 8 ,, 4 1 0 ., 2 1 0 .. 0 1 0 ,. 3 8 ,. 8 9 ., 5 8 ., 6 9 ,. 7 8 ,. 0 j 1 0 .. 2 9 ,. 6 9 ., 8 9 ,, 9 9 ,. 8 8 ,, 5 j 1 0 .. 2 9 ., 4 9 ., 7 9 ,. 6 9 ., 3 8 ,. 0 j 1 0 .. 1 7 ,3 j 7. 2 8 ,, 8 1 0 ,. 3 9 ., 0 j 9 ., 0 1 0 ,. 4 1 0 ., 1 9 ,. 8 7 .. 8 j 7 ., 8 1 0 .. 0 1 0 .. 0 9 .. 9 8 .. 8 1 8 ., 7 1 0 .. 0 9 ., 9 9 ,. 7 8 ,, 4 j 8 .. 3 9 .. 8 8 .. 8 AVERAGE RATE ON LOANS MADE DURING FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF QUARTER, ANNUAL RATE 1997 1998 Ql. . . 1 | 9 .. 3 Q3 . . . 9 ., 4 Q4 . . . 1 9 ., 2 0 1 . . . 1 9 ,. 1 0 2 . . . 1 9 ,. 2 j 9 .0 | 0 3 . . . 04.. 1999 9 ., 1 Q2 . . . Q l . . . . j 8 . 5 1 8•2 j j j | j | 9 ,. 2 9 ., 6 9 ., 8 9 .. 7 8 ,. 5 | 1 0 ., 1 9 ., 8 9 .. 7 8 .. 8 8 ., 6 9 .. 8 9 ,. 7 10. 0 1 0 .. 0 9 .. 9 8 ,. 5 j 10. 2 1 0 ., 1 1 0 .. 0 8 .. 6 8 .. 6 1 0 .. 1 9 ,. 7 1 0 ., 0 1 0 ., 0 9 .. 8 8 ,. 5 j 10. 2 1 0 ., 1 1 0 .. 0 8 ,. 9 8 .. 9 1 0 .. 1 9 ,. 7 9 ., 6 9 ., 9 9 .. 9 8 ,. 5 j 1 0 .. 2 1 0 .. 0 9 ,. 8 8 .. 7 8 ,, 6 1 0 ,. 1 9 .6 9 ., 9 9 ,. 8 9 . ,3 8 .0 | 10. 2 1 0 ,. 0 9 .8 8 ,. 6 8 ,. 2 9 .9 9 . 6 9 ,, 9 9 ,. 7 9 ,. 5 8 .3 j 1 0 ., 1 9 ,. 9 9 . 8 8 . 6 8 ,. 5 9 .9 9 .7 9 ., 7 9 ,. 6 9 ,. 7 8 . 3 j 1 0 ., 1 1 0 ,. 1 9 .7 8 .4 8 .5 9 .9 9 . 1 9 ,. 0 9 ,. 3 ,0 9 . 7 . , 7 1 9 .. 9 9 ,. 7 9 .3 8 . 1 7 . , 9 9 .4 9 . 1 9 ,. 1 9 ,. 2 9 ,, 2 7 .2 1 9 ,, 7 9 ,. 4 9 .2 7 .7 7 ,. 4 9 .4 1 12 ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NON-REAL-ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS TABLE I.F PERCENTAGE OF LOANS MADE WITH A FLOATING INTEREST RATE FEEDER LIVESTOCK ALL LOANS OTHER LIVESTOCK OTHER CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES BY SIZE OF BANK BY SIZE OF LOAN ($1,000s) BY PURPOSE OF LOAN FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT OTHER 1 to 9 10 to 24 25 to 99 100 and over LARGE OTHER ANNUAL PERCENTAGE OF LOANS MADE 1 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1 51.,6 65.,3 71.,4 76,,8 81,.5 .5 78 , .6 84 , 82 .9 83 , .9 58 . 1 66 .4 55 .0 59,.5 61..4 61..0 65 .2 65 .1 71..7 76 .7 75 . 1 73 .8 63 . 1 65 .8 54 .4 69.,6 39.,5 40.,0 61..6 69,.3 ,5 63 , 70 , .0 74 . 3 75 , .9 71,.2 73 , .2 59 .4 62.,1 63 . ,8 59..7 68.,3 68..8 66.,3 70..3 .3 72 . .0 73 . .3 67 , 67 .8 68 .5 4 9 ..9 5 5 .,5 6 2 .,1 48. 5 45. 6 5 4 .,4 68. 5 | 77. 6 5 4 .,9 6 3 ..2 4 9 .,3 5 1 ..5 6 0 ..8 6 7 .,0 j 7 9 .,1 5 2 ..6 3 2 ..9 .6 73 , 5 0 .A 4 9 ..6 5 8 .,5 6 9 .,1 j 8 3 ..6 4 7 ..2 4 0 ..0 5 1 ,.2 5 3 ..6 5 9 ..2 6 6 ..0 6 7 ..5 | 6 9 ..4 59. 3 4 0 ..6 5 0 ,.3 5 2 ..0 5 9 ..0 6 4 .,0 6 7 .,8 j 7 0 ..0 5 6 ..1 4 7 ..8 7 5 ..3 5 7 5 9 .. 1 6 1 ,.2 7 8 ..6 j 8 2 ..9 5 5 ..5 4 8 ,.2 78 . 1 •.3 6 0 .. 1 6 1 ..0 6 4 ,,5 83 . .9 j 8 6 .. 9 5 8 ,.9 5 1 ,.6 7 5 .7 5 8 ,.6 . 8 59 , 7 0 ,.4 8 0 ..2 j 8 3 .7 , 5 9 ,.7 53 , . 1 7 2 .2 j 6 1 ,.7 6 3 .9 .6 73 , .7 76 . j 7 9 ,.9 .3 62 , 32 , .9 6 1 .4 j 6 0 ,.6 6 1 .5 69 . 1 .2 62 , j 6 5 ,.4 5 7 .9 4 9 .9 6 4 .3 6 0 ,.1 5 8 .0 6 8 .0 .0 67 , j 7 1 ,.4 5 7 .9 4 6 .7 4 2 .0 57 5 4 .8 6 2 ,.7 5 1 ,.1 j 5 7 ,.1 5 1 ,.3 | 1 1 .6 AVERAGE PERCENTAGE DURING FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF QUARTER Ql. . . | 7 1 .,2 7 2 ,.6 7 5 ,.0 6 7 ,.3 5 2 ,.0 7 4 ,.7 1 59. 8 5 6 .,3 6 9 .,2 .7 74 , | 8 1 ..3 58. 9 Q2 . . . | 7 5 ..6 6 4 ,.6 6 7 ,.1 6 1 ,.9 4 5 ,.1 9 2 ,.4 j 6 0 .,1 5 6 ..3 6 7 ..7 87 , .4 j 8 9 .,9 58. 8 3 9 ,.8 j 5 9 .,2 6 2 ,.3 6 2 ,.4 5 4 ,.0 j 6 0 .,3 5 1 .,9 6 1 .,6 5 7 ,.7 7 2 ,.2 5 4 ,.2 j 5 7 ..2 6 0 ,. 6 5 9 ,.1 Q3 . . . 1 5 7 ,.2 7 2 ,.2 6 9 ,.9 6 9 ,.7 4 6 ..9 Q4. . . j 5 8 ,.5 5 5 .4 7 8 ,.0 7 3 ,.4 5 4 ,.5 4 8 ,.0 | Ql... | 5 6 .6 5 9 .4 5 6 ,.6 7 0 ,.2 5 8 ,.1 4 1 ,.2 | 6 0 ..5 5 6 ,.7 6 7 ,.0 5 2 .6 | 5 3 ,.9 Q2 . . . j 5 4 ,.6 7 6 .2 6 0 ,.1 6 8 ,.1 4 8 ,.2 3 4 ,.9 j 5 8 .,0 5 0 ,.5 6 1 ,.9 5 1 .7 1 5 7 ,.6 5 1 ,.1 5 4 ,.2 6 7 ,.1 2 8 ,.3 4 7 .4 1 5 5 ..7 5 7 .7 5 9 .3 5 2 .4 j 6 1 ,.9 4 4 ,. 1 Q3... j 5 4 ,.7 5 1 .6 Q4... | 5 1 ,.6 3 9 .9 6 6 .2 6 8 .0 3 8 .9 4 4 .4 j 5 6 ,.4 5 5 ,.9 6 0 ,.8 4 8 .1 j 5 5 ,.8 4 5 ,,1 Ql... | 4 6 ,•4 5 0 .2 6 5 .2 6 3 ,.6 3 3 ,.9 3 3 ,.2 1 4 7 ..0 5 0 ,.4 5 5 ,.0 4 3 .5 1 4 3 ..4 5 0 ..8 | 1 Table I.G Effective interest rate (percent) All Loans PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF NON-REAL-ESTATE FARM LOANS M A D E BY BANKS. 1 BY EFFECTIVE INTEREST RATE Memo: Perecentage Distribution of Number of Loans, February 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Nov 98 Feb 99 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 * * Under 5 percent - - - - - - 8 - - - — 5.0 to 5.9 - - - - 2 4 4 2 4 * * 4 * 1 6.0 to 6.9 - - - 3 16 11 30 1 23 5 13 17 1 2 7.0 to 7.9 - - - 4 10 20 18 1 5 10 4 17 6 9 8.0 to 8.9 3 - - 3 17 17 22 9 19 31 23 29 29 33 9.0 to 9.9 18 1 1 31 18 26 15 7 26 33 32 23 36 35 10.0 to 10.9 . . . 34 4 8 19 22 15 2 27 18 17 22 9 21 16 11.0 to 11.9 . . . 30 30 34 22 10 7 1 27 4 4 5 2 5 3 1 * 1 * 12.0 to 12.9 . . . 10 46 38 13.0 to 13.9. . . 3 15 14 14.0 to 14.9 . . . 1 3 3 1 1 14 5 1 - 15 1 1 1 - * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 - - - 11 * - - - - - - - - - - - - - 15.0to 1 5 . 9 . . . - 16.0 to 16.9 . . . - - - - - - - - - - - 17.0 to 1 7 . 9 . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 18.0 to 18.9 . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * - * * 19.0 to 19.9 . . . — - - - - - - - - - 20.0 to 20.9 . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 21.0 to 2 1 . 9 . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 22.0 to 22.9 . . . - - - - — - - - - - - - - - 23.0 to 23.9 . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 24.0 to 24.9 . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 25.0 and o v e r . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1. Percentage distribution of the estimated total dollar amount of non-real-estate farm loans of $1,000 or more made by insured commercial banks during the week covered by the survey, which is the first full business week of the month specified. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve survey of terms of bank lending to farmers. Percentages may not add to 100 percent because of rounding. * Indicates less than .5 percent. 14 SURVEY I 0F TERMS OF BANK LENDING: FEBRUARY 1-5, 1999 Loans to farmers Size class of loans (thousands) all sizes $1-9 ALL BANKS $10-24 $25-49 $50-99 $100-249 ! i l l l l i S E B F - " i l l i 11 II 111 5 8 " " ' T i F E E E ' 6 pll?-™" fggiE::: S .llif™"' 26 By Q?E/^1 eState Footnotes are at the end of table I.H »s i:i? «:=° S: it. i n *> $250 and over !:H l:ii !:s g II II I 11 II II n « i u i II I i:i i i ill i i i i a a 54:28 8 till 86:61 8): 04 8l:?2 72:87 2^52 TABLE I.H.2 SURVEY OF TERMS OF BANK LENDING: FEBRUARY 1-5, 1999 Loans to farmers Size class of loans (thousands) all sizes $1-9 $10-24 $25-49 $50-99 $100-249 1,276,520 14.634 11. 01 3. 67 ,28 3. 24,146 6.486 9 .22 2 .51 3 .00 47,065 3,102 11 .43 5 .00 3 .08 59,210 1,732 12 .17 4 . 82 3 .18 94,113 1,401 14 .20 5 .62 3 .05 161,577 1,082 25.15 12.40 3.12 7..73 0.,27 9 .34 0 .09 2 .22 o:90 .13 i3 9 .05 0 . 14 O:?4 .18 l08i.86 t 8.57 0.14 l:ll 8,.57 6,.40 10 .03 8 .77 9 .93 8 .55 VM 9 .77 8 .33 ?:H 9 .54 8 .06 MS 9.11 8.03 9 .45 9 . 11 9 .33 9 . 11 8 .76 8 .88 8 .73 9 . 18 9 .22 9 .46 8 .91 8 .56 8 .73 8 .48 9 . 15 9 .08 8 .60 8 .41 8.43 8.74 8. 67 8.25 8.52 8.45 $250 and over LARGE FARM LENDERS 7 ri?SravS5interest 8 rate lpercent)4 " T l — i i r | p g w r I 18 f 1 l:lo 8,.61 8 .68 8,.85 8 .74 8 .54 7 .16 ? . 32 ' H ' " 1 0 " " " " 1 '!:!? 9 .47 9 .29 9 .40 9 . 14 9 .73 9 .05 !:S j| |1 i:| |1 |1 |1 46.,51 • Subject to prepayment penalty « " M m 124 other ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 74.,23 ,02 1. 1.02 69. 89 68. 70 19. 21 ,72 3. 3.72 8,.21 6,. 12 57,.58 7 .80 , 1 .47 .46 10 10.46 ,11 :« 8.,00 9..68 54,.83 5,.75 1..94 . 66 10, 10.66 a fia 12,.69 8 .04 48 .74 4 .95 3 .53 14 .20 14.20 H sis 5., 61 8.,82 47,,49 5., 66 3,.87 . 10 19 , 19.10 J:1 i* il sis 77.26 7 .96 , 6 .59 81 .67 .86 ,76li:8i 11 .43 13,.73 74,.51 »i:8J 4,.40 6 .42 69 .53 6 .93 0 .70 7.71 .71 7 J* ili :s 1:?l 6 .03 41 .59 4 .18 86 .40 .1:5S 82 .55 -S:JS |1 73.,88 79,,48 26..52 1..72 1.72 3..38 3,.65 23 .71 2,.42 1,.74 46.35 .35 46 .?-8 8:81 ?77. j,20 | 25.,71 72., 13 85.,72 ItM 23.,73 ,26 0. 0.26 I'M 82. |28. | :,42 || , 67 89.,31 SI:?! 10.,48 3. ,14 3.14 "1 ,55 0. 0.55 72. 32 .5:1? HIS Si:IS 3I| 3.55 Footnotes are at the end of table I.H 15 16 TABLE I.H.3 SURVEY OF TERMS OF BANK LENDING: FEBRUARY 1-5, 1999 Loans to farmers Size class of loans (thousands) all sizes $1-9 $10-24 $25-49 $50-99 $100-249 $250 and over 636,747 25,117 20.88 12.09 2.47 48,513 12,636 11.15 7.79 2.41 96,604 6,238 12.53 8.76 2.52 97,606 2,875 12.95 7.55 2.42 122,926 1,797 13.54 9.65 2.34 188,466 1,342 33.89 13.91 2.47 82,631 229 26.92 23.28 2.83 9.35 0.14 9.88 0.08 9.46 0.11 9.46 0.12 9.37 0.20 9.12 0.22 9.25 0.30 9. 90 8. 77 10. 26 9,,25 9. 99 8. 88 9.,95 8.,98 10. 06 8.,75 9.,76 8.,51 9.75 8.89 9. 26 9. 43 9. 53 9. 34 8. 97 8. 52 9,,96 9.,98 9,,86 9. 89 8,.99 10.,04 9. 23 10. 21 9. 41 9. 47 8..72 9. 65 9..20 9.,96 9.,50 9.,27 9.,47 8.,92 9.,42 9..46 9.,45 8. 98 9.,27 8. 92 9., 12 7.,92 9.,51 9., 14 8.,82 8.,00 9.01 47.,51 48.,29 27.,11 0 . ,20 33..30 53..95 24..21 1..15 38.,73 52., 12 25.,28 0 . ,76 37.,78 44.,64 23..70 42.,50 52.,05 24.,67 57.,15 49.,71 24..77 63.08 36.01 43.94 18,.55 11,.81 50,.98 3,.64 6 .83 14 .20 6,.90 5 .18 55 .81 9 .62 11 .50 19 .10 18.74 6.89 77.26 13 .66 85 .43 28 .53 71 .47 30.79 69.21 OTHER BANKS 7 1 2 3 4 5 Amount of loans Number of loans Weighted average Weighted average Weighted average (thousands) maturity (months) 1 repricing interval (months) 1 risk rating 3 6 Weighted average interest rate (percent) 4 7 Standard error 5 8 Interquartile Range 6 a.75th Percentile b.25th Percentile By purpose of loan 9 Feeder livestock 10 Other livestock 11 Other current operating expenses 12 Farm machinery and equipment 13 Farm real estate 14 Other Percentage of the amount of loans With floating rates Made under commitment Callable Subject to prepayment penalty By purpose of the loan 19 Feeder livestock 20 Other livestock 21 Other current operating expenses 22 Farm machinery and equipment 23 Farm real estate 24 Other By type of collateral 25 Farm real estate 26 Other 15 16 17 18 Footnotes are at the end of table I.H 9. 66 8.87 7.96 - 13..83 7,.47 55,.87 7 .56 6 .51 46 .35 10.36 10 .72 57 .45 13 .31 2 .59 7 .71 16..27 8 .76 52 ,93 14 .45 1 .20 10 .46 16 .40 9 .86 60 .03 5 .24 3 .36 10 .66 17 .93 79 .74 4 .79 89 .46 6 .28 88 .59 10 .03 83 .87 60.85 TABLE I.H.4 SURVEY OF TERMS OF BANK LENDING: FEBRUARY 1-5, 1999 Loans to farmers Risk Rating All ALL BANKS 1 lilSElmF™ r,te 5 8 ' T i r S S i r r I llliiF— " 14 Other Percentage of the amount of loans With floating rates Made under commitment Callable Subject to prepayment penalty By purpose of the loan 19 Feeder livestock 20 Other livestock 21 Other current operating expenses 22 Farm machinery and equipment 23 Farm real estate 24 Other By type of collateral 25 Farm real estate 26 Other 15 16 17 18 Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not Rated Not Reported l I I l ! II 11 11 11 ™. ' "o 5:51 l.tl S:" !:B 1:^ lit ?:!! ?:5S S:" 1:11 oil !:Si i:S! S:J5 II II II II i 1:1 1:1 !:1 8.98 46.,85 75.,66 16..02 2., 17 62 ,84 , 57.,34 25..37 2., 18 27 .11 81. 32 13 , . 56 0 . ,43 57. 29 71. 47 20.. 69 4.,61 43 ., 66 92 . 94 6. 38 0.,86 ,74 43 . 93., 37 8., 53 0., 10 76.,32 84. 03 0.,31 8..80 45. 70 31., 11 33 . ,36 6,.86 4..93 34 .41 4 .13 3 .33 . 46 .35 12 . , 85 1 . . 32 57 . 11 11 .04 4. , 77 12 .91 6.,27 4,,28 31..21 3,.40 2 .73 , 52 . , 11 6.,05 4..96 43..71 6..19 5..37 33..72 2.,49 1..93 17.. 12 0..88 0.. 52 77 .05 , 1.,71 2,.54 21,. 13 0,.47 2 .59 , 71,. 56 2 .31 . 32 .07 , 34,.26 1,.59 0,.08 29 .69 23 . , 17 9,.31 47,.98 5,.83 5,. 13 8 . 59 9 .99 54 .28 7 .29 89 .70 6 .64 44 . 30 12,.58 64,.68 2 .05 40 . 14 5 .41 29 .22 9 . 19 75 . 67 32 .95 64 . 69 Footnotes are at the end of table I.H 17 TABLE I.H.5 SURVEY OF TERMS OF BANK LENDING: FEBRUARY 1-5, 1999 Loans to farmers Risk Rating All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not Rated Not Reported 380,789 6,014 17.77 4.75 3.00 429,078 3,209 7.06 2.54 4.00 6,831 811 4.24 1.07 5.00 40,887 329 16.08 2.36 34,793 1,112 16.89 5.28 LARGE FARM LENDERS 7 1 Amount of loans (thousands) 2 Number of loans , . (months)1 3 Weighted average maturity 4 Weighted average repricing interval (months) 5 Weighted average risk rating3 6 Weighted average interest rate (percent)1 7 Standard error 5 8 Interquartile Range 6 a.75th Percentile b.25th Percentile By purpose of loan 9 Feeder livestock 10 Other livestock 11 Other current operating expenses 12 Farm machinery and equipment 13 Farm real estate 14 Other Percentage of the amount of loans 15 With floating rates i .u Made under commitment 16 17 Callable 18 Subject to prepayment penalty By purpose of the loan 19 Feeder livestock 20 Other livestock 21 Other current operating expenses 22 Farm machinery and equipment 23 Farm real estate 24 Other By type of collateral 26 Other' 6 3 Footnotes are at the end of table I.H 3 6/ -3-28 12.bb i.uu 259,654 2,279 7.70 4.18 2.00 7.73 0.27 8.69 U.2U 6.83 0.40 7.96 0.29 7.75 0.15 8.43 0.31 7.42 0.38 9.11 0.18 8.57 6.40 b.yy 7.9b 7.76 6.05 9.03 6.70 8.03 7.23 9.11 7.50 7.98 6.40 9.58 8.82 8.61 8.68 ° bb ° /4 b. bU b.b2 ° /b b.yu 8.85 9.72 8.94 8.39 8.85 6.21 8.77 8.85 8.86 8.92 8.31 7.04 8.24 8.24 8.71 8.15 8.63 7.55 7.88 10.14 9.48 9.30 9.29 8.08 9.11 8.10 6.96 8.17 8.95 6.86 8.68 9.35 9.25 8.10 10.12 9.18 46.51 73.16 °9.jl S-i'ri 1 0-48 23.51 *• o . o j 22.14 92.55 2.57 0.37 58.59 83.37 18.56 7.60 42.85 93.85 3.71 0.90 43.27 95.03 7.29 4.02 97.12 97.87 0.12 73.05 66.96 77.43 1'it ii 2J.zi 2.42 \ •'* 46.35 i it 6 n 4? ou.qj io'qi 12.91 3.67 1.72 15.75 0.56 0.86 52.11 3.36 2.47 37.02 5.16 3.27 33.72 2.46 2.03 13.57 0.79 0.52 77.05 1.73 2.64 18.64 0.48 2.68 71.56 0.57 40.50 21.72 1.78 0.10 29.69 16.35 12.51 54.57 5.72 1.47 8.59 4^:^ 90 '.ll 3.00 24.98 11.33 51.81 2.15 37.38 4.68 27.58 2.29 78.22 26.30 70.95 1,216.520 ii ni i*?i 7 -16 24 <488 ?? 66 8 -JJ TABLE I.H.6 SURVEY OF TERMS OF BANK LENDING: FEBRUARY 1-5, 1999 Loans to farmers Risk Rating All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not Rated 246,!581 8,390 22 .23 9 .87 3 .00 22,535 1,071 6 .53 3 .68 4 .00 3, 883 395 6 .73 2 .77 5 .00 11, 747 697 22 . 57 21 .40 Not Reported OTHER BANKS 7 1 2 3 4 5 Amount of loans Number of loans Weighted average Weighted average Weighted average (thousands) 1 maturity (months) repricing interval (months)2 risk rating 3 6 Weighted average interest rate (percent)4 7 Standard error 5 8 Interquartile Range 6 a.75th Percentile b.25th Percentile By purpose of loan Feeder livestock 9 10 Other livestock 11 Other current operating expenses 12 Farm machinery and equipment 13 Farm real estate 14 Other Percentage of the amount of loans With floating rates Made under commitment Callable Subject to prepayment penalty By purpose of the loan 19 Feeder livestock 20 Other livestock 21 Other current operating expenses 22 Farm machinery and equipment 23 Farm real estate 24 Other By type of collateral 25 Farm real estate 26 Other 15 16 17 18 Footnotes are at the end of table I.H 636,747 25, 117 20 .88 12 .09 2 .47 76, 391 132,006 5,713 3, 722 25 .59 26 .07 6 . 68 21 . 50 1 .00 2 .00 9 .35 0 . 14 8 .80 0 . 14 9 . 31 0 . 19 9 .90 8 .77 9 .20 8 .40 9 .95 8 .87 10 .06 8 .75 9 .26 9 .43 9 .53 9 .34 8 .97 8 .52 9 .08 7 .60 8 .90 9 .43 7 .75 8 .09 9 .04 9 .40 9 .27 8 .86 8 .60 47 .51 48 .29 27 .11 0 .20 59 .53 56 .41 25 .96 0 . 15 13 .83 7 .47 55 .87 7 .56 6 .51 46 .35 17,.93 79 . .74 9 .73 0 . 13 - - 9 .31 0 . 33 9 .82 0 .40 9.45 0.12 10 .04 9 .52 9 .68 9 .00 10 .52 9 . 69 9.76 9.01 9 .15 9 .34 9 .78 9 .31 8 .95 8 .36 9 .19 12 .75 9 .76 9 .86 9 .91 9 .54 9 . 38 10 . 10 9 .87 9 .80 10 .00 36 .89 59 .22 35 . 17 0 .55 55 .26 53 .10 23 .98 0 .05 13 .70 1 .32 56 .05 10 .45 3 .83 12 .91 11 .38 9 .32 61,.62 8,.96 6,.42 52 .11 7 .41 89 .44 13..80 82 .28 . - 9 .42 0 .21 143,603 5,129 13.94 10.92 9 .93 9 .68 9.46 9.60 9.52 9.36 9.55 8.93 59 .13 75 .64 57 .24 1 .49 56 . 61 47 . 67 42 .71 3 .90 35 . 87 0 .95 39.07 22.42 22 . 68 10 .21 8 .79 54 .03 7 .79 8 .63 33 .72 3 .13 0 .10 84 .70 2 .65 0 .69 77 .05 0 .97 8 .24 89 .83 2 .79 222 . 37 71 .56 8 .36 104 .32 77 .93 71 . 52 14 .51 . 84 .56 4,.38 92 .50 , 100 .48 74 . 55 422 .53 66 .79 - 9 .24 - - - - - 29 . 69 - 24.82 46.38 - 8.59 63 . 17 CM NOTES TO TABLE I.H The Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers collects data on gross loan extensions made during the first full business week in the mid-month of each quarter by a sample of 250 banks of all sizes. The sample data are blown up to estimate the lending terms at all insured agricultural banks during that week. The estimated terms of bank lending are not intended for use in collecting the terms of loans extended over the entire quarter or those residing in the portfolios of banks. Loans of less than $1,000 are excluded from the survey. 1. Average maturities are weighted by loan size and exclude loans with no stated maturity. 2. The repricing interval measures the period from the date the loan is made until it first may be repriced. For floating-rate loans that are subject to repricing at any time-such as many prime-based loans-the repricing interval is zero. For floating rate loans that have a scheduled repricing interval, the interval measures the number of days between the date the loan is made and the date on which it is next scheduled to reprice. For loans having rates that remain fixed until the loan matures (fixed-rate loans), the interval measures the number of days between the date the loan is made and the date on which it matures. Loans that reprice daily are assumed to reprice on the business day after they are made. 3. A complete description of these risk rating categories is available from the Banking and Money Market Statistics Section, mail stop 81, the Federal Reserve Board, Washington, DC 20551. The category "Moderate Risk" includes the average loan, under average economic conditions, at the typical lender. The weighted-average risk ratings are calculated by assigning a value of "1" to minimal risk loans; "2" to low risk loans; "3" to moderate risk loans; "4" to acceptable risk loans; and "5" to special mention and classified loans. These values are weighted by loan amount and exclude loans with no risk rating. Some of the loans are not rated for risk. 4. Effective (compounded) annual interest rates are calculated from the stated rate and other terms of the loans and weighted by loan size. 5. The chances are about two out of three that the average rate shown would differ by less than this amount from the average rate that would be found by a complete survey of lending at all banks. 6. The interquartile range shows the interest rate range that encompasses the middle 50 percent of the total dollar amount of loans made. 7. Among banks reporting loans to farmers, most "large banks" (survey strata 1 and 2) had over $25 million in farm loans, most "other banks" (survey strata 3 to 5) had farm loans below $25 million. Table I.I Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers, (selected quarters) Proportion of farm loans outstanding. Dec. 1998 USDA Farm Production Region _NZ AL. _L£ 2 .2 26. 3 12. 1 17 .7 MN 8. 7 4. 4 5. 0 8. 5 6. 0 9. 2 3 .0 6. 2 24. 2 72. 1 16. 0 39. 2 53 .5 217. 1 Sample Coverage. Feb. 1999 survey (%) 18. 3 3 .6 10. 7 12 .6 17 .8 21 .7 Avg. Loan Size. Feb. 1999 survev ($1000) Survev date: 69. 8 27 .0 25. 8 27 .6 47 .3 64. 7 Nov. 1992 _£JL Weighted Average Interest Ratei During Samole Week 7 .9 9. 2 8. 3 7 .9 5 .5 7 .3 8. 4 8. 2 7 .6 6. 9 7 .5 6. 5 Feb. 1993 7 .8 9. 0 8. 0 8. 0 5. 6 8. 3 7 .8 7 .8 1993 8. 1 8. 7 8. 1 7 .9 5. 2 8. 4 7 .8 8. 3 7 .7 6. 8 Aug. 1993 8. 2 7 5 8. 2 8. 0 5. 7 7 .3 7 .0 7 .7 7 .1 7 .2 Nov. 1993 8. 3 8. 1 7 8 7 .4 5. 3 6. 3 8. 2 7 .8 7 .1 6. 7 Feb. 1994 7 7 8. 6 7 9 7. 5 5. 2 7 .3 7 .7 7 .6 7 .3 6. 9 1994 8. 7 9. 0 8. 0 8. 1 6. 1 8. 2 7 .8 8. 4 7 .5 7. 2 Aug. 1994 9. 1 8. 6 8. 3 8. 6 6. 5 8. 6 7 .6 8. 6 7 .6 7. 5 Nov. 1994 10. 2 9. 7 8. 9 8. 5 7 .1 8. 5 8. 8 9. 0 8. 0 8. 5 Feb. 1995 11 7 10 7 10. 0 9. 9 8. 6 7. 2 10. 4 10.,4 9.,4 9. 4 1995 9. 0 10 4 9 3 9. 4 8. 5 10. 2 10.,7 10.. 1 9..3 9. 3 Aug. 1995 9. 6 10 3 9 3 9.,8 8.. 1 9. 6 10.,4 10.. 1 9..4 9.,5 Nov. 1995 10..8 10..3 8..3 9..6 7.,9 10.. 1 10.,3 9..8 9..3 8..9 May May May Feb. 1996 8. 8 (..32) 9..9 (..25) 8..0 (1..10) 9..4 (..22) 7..3 (..99) 9.,4 (. 31) 10..9 (..22) 9..9 (..24) 8..9 (•.85) 8..1 (..65) 10 .2 . (.. 13) 7 .3 . (..93) 9..0 (..38) 8.. 1 (..86) 9..6 (..68) 10..4 (..36) 9,.8 (,.25) 8..7 (..78) 8..3 (..65) 1996 10..3 (..25) Aug. 1996 8..3 (..87) 9..9 (..18) 8..9 (..49) 9..4 (,.25) 7..6 (..82) 9..4 (..59) 10 .0 . (..37) 9 .4 ( .18) 8..9 (..58) 8..1 (..56) Nov. 1996 10..1 (,.21) 9 .9 ( .14) 9 .3 (.11) 9..0 ( .55) 7 .5 , (,.82) 9..3 (..57) 9,.9 (..40) 9. 1 ( .25) 9,.0 ( .75) 8..6 (•.48) Feb.. 1997 8,.8 ( .11) 9 .5 (.26) 9 .5 ( .12) 9 .3 (.22) 8 .0 ( .51) 9..9 (..32) 9 .5 ( .35) 9 .5 ( .24) 10 . 1 ( .27) 8..7 ( .35) May 1997 9 .4 (.43) 10 . 1 ( .17) 9 .2 ( .22) 9 .5 ( .27) 8 .3 ( .62) 10 .2 9,.9 ( .29) (.. 66) 9 .7 ( .23) 10 .0 ( .29) 8 .7 (.51) Aug.. 1997 9 .3 (.47) 9 .8 ( . 18) 9 .6 ( .14) 9 .9 ( .08) 8 .5 ( .26) 10 .1 (.24) 9 .9 (.12) 9 .7 ( .27) 10 .5 ( .23) 8 .7 ( .34) Nov,. 1997 9 .2 ( .41) 9 .5 ( .17) 9 .3 ( .10) 9 .8 ( .08) 7 .5 (.60) 9 .8 ( .11) 9 .4 ( .05) 9 .4 ( .38) 10 .1 ( .57) 8 .8 ( .31) Feb . 1998 9 .3 (.51) 9 .0 ( .27) 9 .4 ( .17) 9 .8 ( .09) 7 .3 (.77) 10 .0 ( .48) 10 .3 ( . 13) 9 .8 ( .30) 9 .6 ( .43) 8 .5 ( . 19) May 1998 9 .2 (.49) 9 .4 (.24) 9 .2 ( .15) 9 .7 ( .10) 7 .6 ( .54) 10 .2 ( .12) 10 .3 ( .34) 9 .6 ( .30) 9 .8 ( .42) 8 .4 (.39) Aug . 1998 10 .2 (.19) 9 .5 (.21) 9 .5 ( .12) 9 .5 ( .17) 8 .8 ( .17) 9 .5 ( .29) 9 .7 ( .29) 9 .5 ( .28) 9 .6 (.47) 8 .5 (.33) Nov . 1998 9 .4 (.01) 9 .2 ( .28) 8 .7 ( .20) 9 .0 ( .12) 8 .3 (.38) 9 .4 ( .31) 9 .7 ( .20) 9 .2 ( .32) 9 .1 ( .59) 8 .0 (.38) May 8 .2 9 .6 7 .5 9. 1 9 .0 9 .1 8 .9 9 .0 8 .4 8 .9 ( .23) (, 1 2 ) (, 5 2 ) (, 5 1 ) (, 1 2 ) (, 4 1 ) (, 2 0 ) (, 2 0 ) (, 1 5 ) (, 4 0 ) * NE is Northeast. LS is Lake States. CB is Cornbelt. NP is Northern Plains, AP is Appalachia, SE is Southeast, DL is Delta States. SP is Southern Plains, MN is Mountain States. and PA is Pacific. Feb . 1999 Standard errors are in parentheses below the more recent estimates. Standard errors are calculated from 100 replications of a bootstrap procedure (resampling of banks) in each region. 22 SECTION II: SELECTED S T A T I S T I C S FROM T H E Q U A R T E R L Y R E P O R T S OF C O N D I T I O N OF C O M M E R C I A L B A N K S TABLES: Commercial banks: II.A II.B II.C II.D II.E E s t i m a t e d v o l u m e of farm loans at i n s u r e d c o m m e r c i a l b a n k s E s t i m a t e d d e l i n q u e n t non- real - e s t a t e farm loans at insured c o m m e r c i a l b a n k s . . . . . . E s t i m a t e d net c h a r g e - o f f s of n o n - r e a l - e s t a t e farm loans at insured c o m m e r c i a l b a n k s E s t i m a t e d d e l i n q u e n t real e s t a t e farm loans at insured c o m m e r c i a l b a n k s . . . . . . E s t i m a t e d net c h a r g e - offs of real e s t a t e farm loans at insured c o m m e r c i a l b a n k s 24 Agricultural banks: II.F II.G II in II.I D i s t r i b u t i o n of a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k s by ratio of n o n p e r f o r m i n g loans to t o t a l D i s t r i b u t i o n of a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k s by rate of return to equity L o a n - d e p o s i t r a t i o s at a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k s F a i l u r e s of a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k s loans 29 5L S O U R C E S OF DATA: ass which may include 5 p e r c e n t of t o t a l q u e n c i e s or chargeb a n k s that are not required _rpa_ c o n c e r n i n g c h a r g e - offs in t a b l e s II.C and II.E an a l t e r n a t i v e previous paragraph. SECTION Recent II: (continued) Developments: O v e r the four q u a r t e r s of 1998, g r o w t h in t h e v o l u m e of f a r m l o a n s , b o t h t h o s e s e c u r e d by Loans outstanding: farm real e s t a t e and o t h e r farm l o a n s , s l o w e d c o n s i d e r a b l y . T h e d e c e l e r a t i o n w a s m o r e p r o n o u n c e d for n o n r e a l e s t a t e f a r m l o a n s , w h i c h fell to a 3 p e r c e n t y e a r - o n - y e a r g a i n , c o m p a r e d w i t h m o r e t h a n 10 p e r c e n t in e a r l y 1998. At the end of 1998, the y e a r l y c h a n g e in t o t a l f a r m l o a n s w a s 4 . 8 p e r c e n t , l e s s t h a n h a l f the rate s e e n at t h e b e g i n n i n g of the y e a r . Problem loans: C o m p a r e d w i t h one y e a r e a r l i e r , the r a t e of d e l i n q u e n c i e s on f a r m n o n - r e a l - e s t a t e l o a n s b e g a n to e d g e up in mid 1 9 9 8 . H o w e v e r , t h e rate of net c h a r g e - o f f s of t h e s e l o a n s r e m a i n e d a b i t b e l o w t h e p a c e s e e n the past c o u p l e of y e a r s . F e w e r t h a n 1 in 5 a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k s r e p o r t e d a l e v e l of n o n p e r f o r m i n g l o a n s that w a s m o r e t h a n 2 p e r c e n t of t o t a l l o a n s , and h a r d l y a n y b a n k s r e p o r t e d p r o b l e m l o a n s in e x c e s s of 15 p e r c e n t of t o t a l l o a n s . N e v e r t h e l e s s , the p r o p o r t i o n of a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k s r e p o r t i n g a m o d e r a t e d e g r e e o f r e p a y m e n t p r o b l e m s ( n o n p e r f o r m i n g s of 2 to 15 p e r c e n t of t o t a l l o a n s ) b e g a n to p i c k up in 1998. P e r f o r m a n c e of a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k s : T h e a v e r a g e r a t e of r e t u r n on a s s e t s at a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k s for 1 9 9 8 w a s 1.2 p e r c e n t , the s a m e a n n u a l r e a d i n g as t h e past 6 y e a r s . The capital ratio for a g r i c u l t u r a l banks fell s l i g h t l y by y e a r e n d to 10.9 p e r c e n t , still r o u g h l y in l i n e w i t h the a v e r a g e o v e r t h e p a s t 3 or 4 y e a r s . The r a t i o of l o a n s to d e p o s i t s at a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k s f e l l to 6 8 . 2 p e r c e n t at t h e end o f 1 9 9 8 , e n d i n g a l o n g s t r i n g of s u b s t a n t i a l y e a r - o n - y e a r i n c r e a s e s for t h i s s e r i e s . F a i l u r e s of a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k s : One a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k f a i l e d in 1998. G i v e n t h e s t r o n g c a p i t a l p o s i t i o n s of m o s t a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k s and t h e i r low l e v e l s of p r o b l e m l o a n s , the n u m b e r of f a i l u r e s s e e m s l i k e l y to r e m a i n f a i r l y s m a l l in c o m i n g q u a r t e r s . H o w e v e r , if r e c e n t f i n a n c i a l p r o b l e m s in t h e f a r m s e c t o r p e r s i s t , s t r e s s a m o n g a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k s l i k e l y w o u l d rise f u r t h e r as w e l l . 23 24 TABLE II.A FARM DEBT OUTSTANDING AT COMMERCIAL BANKS, END OF QUARTER LOAN VOLUME, BILLIONS OF DOLLARS PERCENT CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS QUARTER PERCENT CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS YEAR REAL ESTATE LOANS NONREAL ESTATE LOANS TOTAL LOANS REAL ESTATE LOANS NONRBAL ESTATE LOANS TOTAL LOANS REAL ESTATE LOANS NONREAL ESTATE LOANS TOTAL LOANS 1990 Q2. Q3. Q4. 49.0 50.5 50.1 17.1 17.3 17.2 31.9 33.2 32.9 6.4 3.1 -0.8 2.2 1.1 -0.6 8.7 4.1 -0.9 4.3 5.3 5.7 5.1 5.0 3.5 3.9 5.5 6.9 1991 Ql. Q2 • Q3. Q4. 49.5 52.6 53.9 53.0 17.5 18.1 18.3 18.4 32.0 34.5 35.6 34.6 -1.3 6.2 2.5 -1.6 1.5 3.4 1.4 0.6 -2.8 7.7 3.1 -2.7 7.4 7.2 4.3 5.5 5.8 7.0 9.1 7.1 5.1 1992 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. 51.9 55.1 56.2 54.5 18.9 19.5 19.9 19.9 33.0 35.6 36.2 34.7 -2.1 2.7 3.3 1.9 -0.2 -4.6 7.8 1.9 -4.4 4.9 4.9 4.2 2.9 8.2 8.1 8.6 3.1 3.2 1.9 1993 Ql. 20.0 20.6 20.8 20.9 32.8 35.4 37.1 36.8 -3.2 0.5 3.1 3.5 -0.5 1.2 0.1 -5.3 7.8 4.9 -0.8 1.7 Q3. Q4. 52.8 56.0 58.0 57.7 3.2 5.8 1994 Ql. 02. 03. 04. 56.8 61.1 63.0 61.3 21.2 21.9 22.4 22.6 35.5 39.2 40.6 38.7 -1.5 7.6 3.1 -2.7 3.2 2.2 0.7 -3.4 10.2 3.6 -4.6 7.6 9.1 8.7 6.2 1995 Ql. 59.9 63.5 65.3 63.7 22.9 23.6 23.8 23.9 36.9 40.0 41.5 39.8 1.6 2.7 1.1 0.4 -4.6 8.0 3.9 -4.1 5.4 4.0 3.7 3.9 61.7 65.7 66.6 65.5 24.0 24.7 24.9 25.0 37.7 41.0 41.6 40.5 -3.1 6.5 1.3 -1.6 0.5 2.7 1.1 0.3 -5.3 8.9 1.5 -2.8 3.1 3.4 1.9 2.8 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 2.0 63.8 69.0 71.1 71.3 25.4 26.2 27.0 27.1 38.4 42.8 44.2 44.2 -2.6 -5.1 11.5 3.1 3.4 5.1 5.5 2.0 3.0 0.3 1.4 3.3 2.9 0.7 0.0 8.9 8.5 9.1 70.1 75.0 76.3 74.7 27.6 28.5 28.9 29.3 42.4 46.5 47.4 45.5 -1.7 7.1 1.7 -2.0 1.8 -3.9 9.6 1.9 -4.0 9.8 9.0 3.2 1.3 1.3 7.2 4.8 7.2 7.8 10.4 8.5 7.3 3.0 Q2. 02. 03. 04. 1996 Ql. 02. 03. 04. 1997 Ql. 02. 03. 04. 1998 Ql. 02. 03. 04. 6.2 1.9 -2.9 6.0 8.2 1.8 8.2 6.6 5.7 7.8 8.6 0.2 -0.5 -0.6 2.4 1.6 6.8 8.1 6.2 8.2 8.3 10.7 9.3 5.2 3.9 2.0 2.3 2.8 6.2 8.1 8.8 2.7 0.3 1.8 4.4 6.0 TABLE II.B ESTIMATED DELINQUENT FARM NON-REAL-ESTATE LOANS INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS AS PERCENTAGE OF OUTSTANDING FARM PRODUCTION BILLIONS OF DOLLARS NONPERFORMING NONPERFORMING TOTAL PAST DUE 30 TO 89 DAYS ACCRUING TOTAL PAST DUE 90 DAYS ACCRUING NONACCRUAL TOTAL PAST DUE 30 TO 89 DAYS ACCRUING TOTAL PAST DUE 90 DAYS ACCRUING NONACCRUAL December 31 of year indicated 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1 | | 1 1 .0 1,.1 1,.0 o .8 0. 8 0 .8 1,.0 o .9 1,.0 0,,4 0,.4 0,.3 0,.3 0..3 0..4 0,.5 0..4 0,.5 0,.6 0,.7 0..6 0,.5 0,.4 0,.4 0,. 5 0..5 0,.5 0. 1 0..1 0.,1 0..1 0..1 0.,1 0..1 0.,1 0..1 0,.5 0..5 0..5 0,.4 0..3 0,. 3 0,.4 0,.4 0..4 1 | 1 | | | 1 1 | 3. 1 3 .2 . 2 .8 2.2 2.0 2. 1 2 .4 2 .0 2 .2 1..3 1,.3 1,.0 0 .8 0 .9 0 .9 1 .2 0,.9 1..0 1..9 1.,9 1..8 1..4 1..1 1,.1 1,.3 1,. 1 1..2 0. 3 0.,3 0. 3 0,,2 0..2 0.,3 0..3 0.,2 0.,3 1 .6 , 1..6 1 .5 , 1,.2 0,.9 0 .9 1,.0 0,.9 0.. 9 2.1 0.9 1.1 0.3 0.9 -End of quarter- 0.1 0.3 1995 Q4. 0.8 0.4 0.4 1996 Ql. Q2. Q3 . Q4. 1.3 1.2 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.3 1997 Ql. 02. Q3. 04. 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.1 1998 Ql. 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.5 02. 03. 04. 1.0 1.0 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 3.2 2.4 2 .1 2.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1. 0 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.9 Data are estimates of the national totals for farm non-real-estate loans. After 1984, estimates are based on reports from banks that hold more than 90 percent of such loans. Earlier, only large banks that held about one-fourth of such loans reported nonaccrua1 and renegotiated farm loans; for other banks,estimates of delinquent farm loans are based on a study of delinquent total loans at these banks. 25 26 T A B L E I I . C ESTIMATED NET CHARGE-OFFS OF NON-REAL-ESTATE FARM LOANS INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS* CHARGE-OFFS AS A PERCENTAGE OF SUCH LOANS OUTSTANDING ESTIMATED AMOUNT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 1991. 1992 . 1993 . 1994. 1995. 1996. 1997 . 1998. ANNUAL TOTAL Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 ANNUAL TOTAL 105 82 54 69 51 95 93 87 12 14 7 10 -2 16 6 4 25 20 16 11 14 27 19 15 36 29 5 15 13 24 19 24 32 18 26 33 25 30 50 45 0.,32 0.,24 0,,15 0..19 0..13 0 .24 0 .23 0 .20 these data on the March 1984 Report of Income. Q1 Q2 Q3 0. 04 0.,04 0..02 0..03 -0,.00 0 .04 0 .01 0 .01 0..08 0.,06 0.,05 0.,03 0..04 0,.07 0 .05 0 .04 0. 10 0.,08 0.,01 0..04 0..03 0 .06 0 .05 0 .05 Q4 0. 09 0.,05 0.,07 0..08 0,.06 0 .07 0 . 11 0 .09 # TABLE II.D DELINQUENT FARM REAL ESTATE LOANS INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AS PERCENTAGE OF OUTSTANDING FARM REAL ESTATE LOANS NONPERFORMING NONPERFORMING TOTAL PAST DUE 30 TO 89 DAYS ACCRUING TOTAL PAST DUE 90 DAYS ACCRUING NONACCRUAL TOTAL PAST DUE 30 TO 89 DAYS ACCRUING TOTAL PAST DUE 90 DAYS ACCRUING NONACCRUAL December 31 of year indicated 1993 , | 0. 4 0. 1 0. 2 0. 0 0. 2 I l. 8 0. 7 1. 1 0. 2 0. 8 1994, 1 o. 3 0. 1 0. 2 0. 0 0. 1 1 l. 5 0. 7 0. 8 0. 2 0. 6 | 1995, | 0. 5 0. 2 0. 2 0. 1 0. 1 1 2. 1 1. 0 1. 0 0. 4 0. 6 j 1996, | 0. 4 0. 2 0. 2 0. 1 0. 1 1 1. 5 0. 7 0. 8 0. 3 0. 6 j 0. 1 0. 1 1 1. 3 0. 6 0. 7 0. 2 0. 5 j 0. 1 0. 1 1 1. 3 0. 5 0. 8 0. 3 0. 5 j 0 ., 5 0. 9 0 ., 3 0 ., 6 | 0 ., 7 0 ., 8 0. 2 0 ., 6 1997, 1 o. 4 0. 2 0. 2 1998 1 o. 4 0. 2 0. 2 | CJUal lei 1995 1996 1997 1998 0 3 . . . 1 o ,, 3 0 ,, 1 0 ,, 2 0 ., 1 0. I | 1,, 4 Q4. 1 o ,, 4 0 ,, 2 0 .. 2 0 ., 1 0. I | 1. 0 ., 1 . . ,5 0. I | 2 ., 1 1 ,, 0 1 ,, 0 0 ,, 4 0 ., 6 1 0. I j 1 ,, 7 0 ,. 7 1 ,, 0 0 ,, 4 0 ,, 6 1 0. i j 1, 1 ,. 0 0 ,, 4 0 ,. 6 0 ,, 1 0. l j .5 1 ,.5 0 ,. 7 0 ,. 8 0 ,. 3 0 ,• 6 0 ,, 2 0 ,, 1 0. l | 1 . ,9 1 ,. 0 0 ,. 9 0 ,. 4 0, 0 ,, 2 0 ., 1 0. l | 1 ,. 4 0 .. 6 0 ,. 9 0 ,, 3 0 ,. 5 0 ,. 1 0 ,. 2 0, 0 .. 2 0 ,. 2 0 ,. 1 0. l 0. i j 1,. 3 1,. 3 0,. 5 0,. 6 0,. 8 0,. 7 0,. 3 0,. 2 0,.5 0,. 5 0,. 3 0,. 2 0,, 2 0,. 2 0 ,. 2 0.. 1 0,. 1 0,. 1 0,, 1 0. l 0. l 0. l 0. l | 1 .9 1,. 1 0,. 6 0,. 5 0,. 5 0,. 8 0,. 8 0,. 8 0,. 8 0,, 3 0,, 4 0.. 3 0..3 0,.5 0,.5 0,. 5 0 ,.5 0 1 . . . 1 o, 0 ., 2 0 ,, 2 02... 1 o ., 4 0 .. 2 0, 0 3 . . . 1 o ,. 4 0 ,. 1 0 ,. 2 , 0 ., 0 4 . . . 1 o ,, 4 0 ,. 2 0 ,. 2 o i . . . 1 o ,. 5 0 ,. 3 0 2 . . . | 0 ,. 4 0 , .2 0 3 . . . i 0 ,. 3 0 4 . . . | 0, .4 o i . . . 1 o ,. 5 0 2 . . . 1 o ,. 4 0 3 . . . 1 0 4 . . . 1 o,.4 0,.4 .3 0,. 2 0.. 2 0 ,. 2 0. , 1 All commercial banks began to report these data in 1991. ,5 j | j j 1,. 4 1,.3 1,.3 0, .5 ,5 j | j j | | j j j | j | | 28 TABLE II .E NET CHARGE-OFFS OF REAL ESTATE FARM LOANS INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS* CHARGE-OFFS AS A PERCENTAGE OF SUCH LOANS OUTSTANDING ESTIMATED AMOUNT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ANNUAL TOTAL Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1993. 1994. 1995. 1996. 1997. 1998. * All commercial banks began to report these data in 1991. ANNUAL TOTAL 0.,03 -0.,00 0,,01 0..01 0,.01 0..01 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 0..002 -0,.004 -0,.001 -0 .004 -0 .004 -0 .006 0..003 -0..004 -0..001 -0,.003 -0,.001 -0 .002 0.,008 0.,002 0..006 0..003 0..005 0,.001 0.,015 0..003 0,.007 0,.009 0 .013 0,.012 TABLE II.F DISTRIBUTION OF AGRICULTURAL BANKS BY THE SHARE OF THEIR LOANS THAT ARE NONPERFORMING* NONPERFORMING LOANS AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL LOANS TOTAL UNDER 2.0 2. 0 TO 4.9 5.0 TO 9.9 10.0 TO 14.9 15.0 TO 19.9 20.0 AND OVER -Percentage distribution, December 31 of year indicated1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996, 1997 , 1998, • • I 1 | 1 1 | 1 1 1 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100.,0 100.,0 100..0 69. 6 70. 8 76. 2 80. 6 85. 5 83 .,7 81.,8 84.,4 81..9 22 .7 22. 3 18. 9 15. 9 12 .3 13. 8 15.,5 13.,0 14.,9 6. 4 5. 8 ,9 3. 2. 8 1.,9 .1 2. 2,.3 2,.4 2 .8 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.6 distribution,, end 78,.4 78 .5 79,.3 81 .8 17 . .2 16,.9 17,.0 15,.5 3 .5 3 .9 3 .1 2 .3 0. 5 0. 6 0. 5 0. 2 0. 1 0. 1 0. 1 0. 1 0. 1 0. 1 0. 1 0. 1 .0 .0 .0 .0 79 .0 80 . 6 81 .7 84 .4 16 15 15 13 .8 .8 .2 .0 3 .7 3 .2 2 .7 2 .4 0.,4 0,.4 0,.2 0 .1 0.,1 0..1 0,.1 0,. 1 0., 1 0.,0 0.. 1 0,.0 .0 .0 .0 .0 80 .6 81 .0 80 .3 81 .9 16 .4 15 .7 16 .2 14 .9 2 .8 2 .9 3 .0 2 .8 0. 1 0 .3 0 .3 0 .3 0 .1 0 .1 0 .1 0 .1 0,. 1 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 1996 Ql... 02... Q3. . . Q4. . . | | j | 100,.0 100,.0 100,.0 100,.0 1997 Ql... Q2 . . . Q3. . . 04... | 100 100 100 100 1998 Ql... Q2 . . . 03... 04... | 100 100 100 100 | j | | | | * Nonperforming loans are loans in nonaccrual status or past aue uay* vj. muxc. " in compliance with the modified terms are not included. Agricultural banks are defined in the introduction to section II. 29 TABLE II.G 30 SELECTED MEASURES OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE OF AGRICULTURAL AND OTHER BANKS* AVERAGE RATE OF RETURN TO EQUITY NET INCOME AS A PERCENTAGE OF AVERAGE EQUITY AT AGRICULTURAL BANKS ALL BANKS NEGATIVE 0 TO 4 5 TO 9 15 TO 19 20 TO 24 25 AND OVER 12.,9 13..4 19..8 18..5 17..1 13.,3 14..3 14 .3 13 .4 2..6 2..5 5..1 4..6 3.»3 2 .4 2 .6 3 .2 3 .5 1..1 0..9 1.,7 1..3 0..9 0..6 0..5 1..2 1 .3 10 TO 14 AVERAGE CAPITAL RATIO (PERCENT) NET CHARGE-OFFS AS PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL LOANS RATE OF RETURN TO ASSETS AGRICULTURAL BANKS OTHER SMALL BANKS AGRICULTURAL BANKS OTHER SMALL BANKS AGRICULTURAL BANKS OTHER SMALL BANKS AGRICULTURAL BANKS OTHER SMALL BANKS 10..8 10..9 12.,6 12..4 11..9 11..3 11..5 11..6 11,.4 8..5 8.,9 11..5 12..4 12.,4 11..6 11..6 11..8 11..4 1..0 1..0 1..2 1.,2 1.,2 1..2 1..2 1..2 1..2 0..7 0..7 1.,0 1..1 1..1 1..1 1,.1 1 .2 1 .1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 9.9 10.1 10.4 10.8 10.7 11.1 10.9 10.9 9.0 9.2 9.5 10.0 9.9 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.7 -percentage distribution1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 | | | | | j | | | 100.,0 100.,0 100.,0 100.,0 100..0 100.,0 100..0 100..0 100..0 4.,9 4..1 1..9 1..5 1..5 1. 4 2..0 1..6 2,.0 7.,5 7..7 5..0 5..7 5.,7 5.,6 5 .5 5 .9 8 .7 33.,4 32..2 25..5 27..8 31.,3 36..8 33..5 34..3 35..5 37.,6 39..2 41..1 40..6 40..2 39..9 41..5 39 .5 35 .7 | | j j | | j j | 0.2 0.3 0.8 11.0 QUARTERLY YEAR 1996 Ql.. Q2. . Q3. . Q4. . 3..1 6..2 9..2 11..5 3..1 6.,1 9..0 11..6 0..3 0.,6 0..9 1..2 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.1 0..0 0.,1 0. 2 0.,3 0..1 0..1 0.,2 0..3 11..0 11,.0 11..0 10,.9 10. 6 10..5 10..5 10.,6 1997 Ql.. Q2. . Q3. . Q4. . 3..0 6..2 9..0 11..6 3..1 6.,1 9..3 11..8 0..3 0..7 1..0 1..2 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 0..0 0..1 0..2 0.2 0.,1 0..1 0..2 0..3 11..0 11,.1 11.. 3 11,,0 10..6 10..7 10..9 10..7 1998 Ql.. Q2.. Q3.. Q4. . 3..0 6 .1 8 .9 11 .4 3..2 6..1 8 ,7 11,.4 0..3 0.,6 0..9 1..2 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.1 0..0 0..1 0..1 0..2 0..1 0..1 0,.2 0,.3 11,.1 11,.1 11 .3 10 .9 10,.7 10 .9 11,.0 10,.7 * Agricultural and other banks ar defined in the introduction to section II; small banks have less than 500 million dollars in assets. Total primary and secondary capita (items that are available at the end of the period specified) are measured as a percentage of total assets. Quarterly data in the lower panel are cumulative through the end of the quarter indicated and, for periods of less than a year, are not comparable to the annual data in the upper panel. TABLE II.H AVERAGE LOAN-DEPOSIT RATIOS AT AGRICULTURAL BANKS IN SELECTED FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICTS* DECEMBER 31 U. S. ST. LOUIS CHICAGO ATLANTA CLEVELAND MINNEAPOLIS KANSAS CITY DALLAS SAN FRANCISCO MINIMUM FARM LOAN RATIO LOANS LOANS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER NUMBER OF TO OF TO OF TO OF TO TO OF OF TO OF TO OF TO TO OF BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS . The 0.442 0.474 0.499 0.492 0.528 0.525 58 53 55 55 53 50 0.733 0.747 0.741 0.734 0.660 0 . 664 17.04 16.99 15.79 15.41 15.40 15.32 0,.690 0 .681 394 402 406 384 0. 650 0. 692 0 ,699 0.,666 632 630 623 619 0.682 0.712 0.716 0.698 978 964 952 944 0.629 0.651 0.662 0.649 357 349 331 331 0.489 0.515 0.510 0.492 57 54 54 55 0.737 0.778 0.757 0.734 15.46 15.94 15.84 15.41 0 .685 0 .712 0 .730 0 .721 382 383 384 360 0,, 662 0 .703 , 0,,722 0 .699 , 611 0 732 0 ,706 806 799 795 784 604 591 584 0.701 0.763 0.749 0.727 941 922 913 904 0.644 0.677 0.686 0.679 339 338 325 325 0.499 0.536 0.543 0.528 54 54 52 53 0.722 0.704 0 . 679 0 . 660 15.02 15 . 57 15.64 15.40 0 .719 0 .731 0 .742 0.703 762 757 752 744 0 .726 0 .746 0.757 0 .711 355 360 358 339 0 .691 0 .726 0 .733 0 .693 583 579 578 568 0.731 0.769 0.769 0.715 906 904 892 884 0.681 0.699 0.720 0.680 325 322 305 306 0.527 0.536 0.549 0.525 53 53 54 50 0.667 0.701 0.693 0.664 15.28 15.76 15.75 15.32 0,706 0 714 0 . 808 0 .770 128 144 139 122 0 .782 0 .792 0 .806 0 .772 118 118 119 106 52 55 54 54 0.,780 0.. 809 3176 3164 3127 3056 0 .689 0 .713 0 .725 0 .682 53 50 52 46 1998 Q1. . . Q2... 03... 04... 378 366 359 331 325 306 0,,657 0.,671 0..660 0 ., 696 0 .703 0 . 687 1997 Q1. . . Q2 . . . Q3 . . . Q4. . . 0.566 0.618 0.634 0.649 0.679 0.680 828 829 814 814 3336 3323 3274 3207 0. 639 0. 665 1063 1014 981 944 904 884 0, 664 0.,690 0,,708 0..682 0.,674 0,.658 3471 3461 3400 3347 0.615 0.674 0.681 0.698 0.727 0.715 143 151 140 126 0..721 1996 Q1 . . . Q2 . . . Q3... 04... 0. 625 0.641 0. 658 0. 687 0. 682 669 658 637 619 584 568 0. 682 0.706 0.703 58 57 58 55 0.582 0. 590 0.629 0. 654 0. 666 0. 699 0. 693 0.600 0.643 0. 658 0. 660 0.707 0.717 3723 3550 3482 3347 3207 3056 432 402 393 384 360 339 912 860 841 814 784 744 67 56 60 55 54 46 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 0.775 0.770 0.772 0.743 0.,780 0,.775 130 125 135 126 122 106 0.618 0.646 0.647 0. 681 0. 721 0.711 loan-deposit ratio is defined as total loans divided by total deposits. Agricultural banks are defined as banks with a farm loan ratio at least as great as that shown in the last column, as described in the introduction to section II. 31 TABLE II.I F A I L U R E S OF A G R I C U L T U R A L B A N K S * N U M B E R OF F A I L U R E S 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 , , . . 1993 1994 1995. . . , 1996 1997 1998 Q1 02 Q3 Q4 ANNUAL TOTAL 22 11 5 3 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 19 6 7 5 2 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 12 12 5 6 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 16 7 5 3 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 69 36 22 17 8 7 5 0 0 2 1 1 * D a t a e x c l u d e b a n k s a s s i s t e d to p r e v e n t f a i l u r e . Industrial banks and mutual savings banks also are excluded. Agricultural b a n k s a r e d e f i n e d in t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n to s e c t i o n II. SECTION III: F E D E R A L R E S E R V E B A N K Q U A R T E R L Y S U R V E Y S OF F A R M C R E D I T C O N D I T I O N S A N D FARM LAND VALUES TABLES: III.A III.B III.C III.D III.E Nonreal estate lending experience E x p e c t e d c h a n g e in non - real - e s t a t e l o a n v o l u m e and r e p a y m e n t c o n d i t i o n s A v e r a g e l o a n / d e p o s i t r a t i o , and o t h e r i n d i c a t o r s of r e l a t i v e c r e d i t a v a i l a b i l i t y Interest rates T r e n d s in real e s t a t e v a l u e s and loan v o l u m e 35 37 39 41 43 S O U R C E S OF D A T A : T h e s e surveys are Data are from q u a r t e r l y s u r v e y s of a g r i c u l t u r a l c r e d i t c o n d i t i o n s at c o m m e r c i a l b a n k s . c o n d u c t e d at t h e end of e a c h q u a r t e r by f i v e F e d e r a l R e s e r v e B a n k s . T h e s i z e of t h e s u r v e y s d i f f e r s c o n s i d e r a b l y , as is n o t e d in the i n f o r m a t i o n b e l o w . In a d d i t i o n , t h e f i v e s u r v e y s d i f f e r i n s u b j e c t m a t t e r c o v e r e d (as is e v i d e n t in t h e t a b l e s ) , w o r d i n g of b a s i c a l l y s i m i l a r q u e s t i o n s , and t y p e o f b a n k s c o v e r e d . Most of the d i f f e r e n c e s in w o r d i n g a r e r e f l e c t e d in the u s e of d i f f e r e n t c o l u m n h e a d i n g s on t h e two p a g e s of each table. T h e s t a t e s i n c l u d e d in e a c h d i s t r i c t are i n d i c a t e d in t h e t a b l e h e a d i n g s ; s t a t e s t h a t f a l l o n l y p a r t l y w i t h i n a g i v e n d i s t r i c t are m a r k e d w i t h a s t e r i s k s . B e g i n n i n g in 1994. t h e M i n n e a p o l i s F e d e r a l R e s e r v e B a n k r e v i s e d i t s s u r v e y c o n s i d e r a b l y . Many questions were c h a n g e d and it w a s n o t a l w a y s p o s s i b l e to m a t c h the d a t a to t h e c a t e g o r i e s that w e h a v e s h o w n in p r e v i o u s e d i t i o n s of the D a t a b o o k . W h e n e v e r p o s s i b l e , w e h a v e tried to fit t h e d a t a f r o m t h e r e v i s e d s u r v e y i n t o t h e older format. S e r i e s that w e r e d i s c o n t i n u e d s h o w no d a t a for t h e f i r s t q u a r t e r , w h i l e t h o s e t h a t w e r e a d d e d suddenly appear. W h e n a s i g n i f i c a n t b r e a k in t h e d a t a o c c u r r e d , w e i n c l u d e d t h e n e w d a t a and a d d e d a f o o t n o t e to h i g h l i g h t t h e c h a n g e s . Research results: d e p a r t m e n t s at e a c h of the f i v e R e s e r v e B a n k s i s s u e m o r e d e t a i l e d t h e s e r e p o r t s are a v a i l a b l e at the a d d r e s s e s g i v e n b e l o w . quarterly reports on their survey F e d e r a l R e s e r v e B a n k of C h i c a g o . B o x 834, C h i c a g o , I l l i n o i s , 6 0 6 9 0 T h e s a m p l e i n c l u d e s m e m b e r b a n k s at w h i c h farm l o a n s r e p r e s e n t e d 25 p e r c e n t or m o r e of t o t a l l o a n s as of J u n e 1972 (a 10 p e r c e n t s t a n d a r d is used for b a n k s in the s t a t e of M i c h i g a n ) . The sample has undergone periodic review. T h e l a t e s t s u r v e y r e s u l t s w e r e b a s e d on the r e s p o n s e s of a b o u t 4 5 0 b a n k s . F e d e r a l R e s e r v e B a n k of K a n s a s C i t v . F e d e r a l R e s e r v e P.O. S t a t i o n , K a n s a s C i t y M i s s o u r i 6 4 1 9 8 T h e s a m p l e c h o s e n o r i g i n a l l y in 1976 c o n s i s t e d of 181 b a n k s s e l e c t e d f r o m b a n k s at w h i c h f a r m l o a n s c o n s t i t u t e d 50 p e r c e n t or m o r e of t o t a l l o a n s , w i t h a p p r o p r i a t e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of all f a r m a r e a s . The w a s r e d r a w n and s i g n i f i c a n t l y e x p a n d e d in 1987; r o u g h l y 300 b a n k s r e s p o n d e d to t h e l a t e s t s u r v e y . sample Federal R e s e r v e B a n k o f M i n n e a p o l i s . M i n n e a p o l i s , M i n n e s o t a 55480 . . B e f o r e 1987, t h e s a m p l e p r o v i d e d a c r o s s - s e c t i o n of b a n k s of a l l s i z e s t h a t w e r e e n g a g e d in f a r m l e n d i n g . M e m b e r s of t h e U p p e r M i d w e s t A g r i c u l t u r a l C r e d i t C o u n c i l f o r m e d t h e c o r e o f t h e s u r v e y p a n e l . B e g i n n i n g in 1987, the s a m p l e w a s r e d r a w n to i n c l u d e o n l y b a n k s at w h i c h f a r m l o a n s r e p r e s e n t e d 25 p e r c e n t or m o r e of t o t a l loans. A s o u t l i n e d a b o v e , t h e M i n n e a p o l i s s u r v e y w a s c h a n g e d c o n s i d e r a b l y b e g i n n i n g in t h e f i r s t q u a r t e r of 1994. In r e c e n t s u r v e y s , a b o u t 130 b a n k s r e s p o n d e d . 33 34 Section III: (continued) F e d e r a l R e s e r v e B a n k of D a l l a s . P . O . B o x 6 5 5 9 0 6 . D a l l a s . T e x a s 7 5 2 6 5 - 5 9 0 6 . n <• T h e s a m p l e is s t r a t i f i e d r e g i o n a l l y and i n c l u d e s b a n k s at w h i c h f a r m l o a n s are r e l a t i v e l y i m p o r t a n t or w h i c h h o l d a m a j o r p o r t i o n of b a n k l o a n s in t h e i r r e g i o n . T h e s a m p l e w a s e n l a r g e d in t h e f i r s t q u a r t e r of 1985 and w a s r e d r a w n in t h e s e c o n d q u a r t e r of 1989. T h e r e s u l t s for the m o s t r e c e n t q u a r t e r w e r e b a s e d on the responses from a b o u t 200 respondents. F e d e r a l R e s e r v e B a n k of R i c h m o n d . R i c h m o n d , V i r g i n i a 23261 T h e n u m b e r of a g r i c u l t u r a l b a n k s in t h i s d i s t r i c t is m u c h s m a l l e r t h a n t h o s e of the o t h e r d i s t r i c t s . when the s u r v e y w a s i n i t i a t e d in 1975, the s a m p l e c o n s i s t e d of 43 b a n k s of all s i z e s ; b a n k s w i t h l a r g e r a m o u n t s of farm l o a n s w e r e s a m p l e d m o r e h e a v i l y . M o r e r e c e n t l y , the s a m p l e h a s c o n s i s t e d of a b o u t 30 b a n k s , r o u g h l y t h r e e - f o u r t h s of w h i c h t y p i c a l l y r e s p o n d to t h e q u a r t e r l y s u r v e y s . RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: B a n k e r s r e s p o n d i n g to the s u r v e y s i n d i c a t e d t h a t the d e m a n d for f a r m l o a n s m a y h a v e e a s e d in t h e f a l l of 1998 a bit m o r e t h a n u s u a l s e a s o n a l p a t t e r n s w o u l d i n d i c a t e . C o n s i s t e n t w i t h the p i c k u p in d e l i n q u e n c i e s that w a s s h o w n in s e c t i o n II of the D a t a b o o k , b a n k e r s in m o s t d i s t r i c t s that r e p o r t i n d i c a t e d t h a t r a t e s of l o a n r e p a y m e n t had d e t e r i o r i a t e d s u b s t a n t i a l l y s i n c e the s p r i n g of 1998. A s m i g h t b e e x p e c t e d , g i v e n t h e f a l l in loan r e p a y m e n t s , t h e r e h a s b e e n a p r o n o u n c e d p i c k u p in the i n c i d e n c e of r e n e w a l s and e x t e n s i o n s of l o a n s in all the d i s t r i c t s t h a t r e p o r t . F i n a l l y , a s u b s t a n t i a l p o r t i o n of b a n k s in the s u r v e y r e p o r t e d h i g h e r c o l l a t e r a l r e q u i r e m e n t s t h a n had b e e n the n o r m in r e c e n t y e a r s , s u g g e s t i n g s o m e m o u n t i n g c o n c e r n s a b o u t repayment prospects. In the C h i c a g o and M i n n e a p o l i s F e d e r a l R e s e r v e d i s t r i c t s , the r a t i o of l o a n s to d e p o s i t s s l i p p e d for t h e f i r s t time in s e v e r a l y e a r s . t h o u g h s t i l l t h e r a t i o s r e m a i n f a i r l y h i g h by h i s t o r i c a l s t a n d a r d s . Nevertheless, most b a n k e r s r e p o r t e d that the r a t i o w a s l o w e r t h a n d e s i r e d . s u g g e s t i n g t h a t t h e g e n e r a l u p w a r d t r e n d of t h e last several Reported in t h e s e years might resume soon. r a t e s of i n t e r e s t on f a r m l o a n s f e l l in the f o u r t h q u a r t e r of 1998. s u r v e y s n o w h a v e f a l l e n a b o u t 50 b a s i s p o i n t s s i n c e e a r l y 1996. and the rates that are reported ar rm mland were P e r h a p s r e f l e c t i n g the g e n e r a l low p r i c e s and r e t u r n s of most of 1998, the n o m i n a l p r i c e s of f fa about e v e n w i t h y e a r - e a r l i e r l e v e l s in all of t h e d i s t r i c t s that r e p o r t . T h e s e flat p r i c e s s t a n d .in c o n t r a s t to the f a i r l y rapid y e a r l y r a t e of i n c r e a s e s e e n at the b e g i n n i n g of 1998. w h i c h r e a c h e d d o u b l e - d i g i t increase in the C h i c a g o and Richmond districts. FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.A FARM NONREAL ESTATE LENDING EXPERIENCE COMPARED WITH A YEAR EARLIER (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) DEMAND FOR LOANS LOWER III.A1 SAME FUND AVAILABILITY HIGHER LOWER SAME LOAN REPAYMENT RATE HIGHER LOWER SAME RENEWALS OR EXTENSIONS HIGHER LOWER SAME COLLATERAL REQUIRED HIGHER LOWER SAME HIGHER SEVENTH (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI* ) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1 I* 50 36 9 71 19 1 24 58 18 1 19 61 21 1 o 90 10 1997 Ql. . . Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4... 1 1 1 1 io 8 11 14 46 50 47 52 44 42 42 34 14 17 17 11 62 68 69 69 24 14 14 20 1 1 15 I*7 15 19 66 72 77 68 19 11 8 14 1 14 13 10 14 69 69 77 72 17 18 13 14 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 92 89 92 90 8 10 8 9 1998 Ql... Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4. . . 1 8 49 44 46 47 42 42 35 34 12 13 10 6 64 71 75 66 24 16 14 28 1 27 31 43 51 64 65 53 42 9 4 3 7 8 64 64 56 45 29 33 41 48 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 89 86 80 75 11 14 19 25 in H 1996 04... 19 (O o 1 III.A2 |1 11 64 26 |1 12 71 17 1997 Ql... Q2. . . Q3... 04... | | | | 1 8 9 6 6 64 57 61 60 28 34 33 34 |1 | 1 | 1 | 1 9 19 21 16 72 67 67 72 19 14 12 13 5 7 14 13 69 63 59 66 25 30 26 20 12 16 16 9 68 69 69 73 20 15 15 18 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 1 16 1 1 87 13 21 14 18 12 16 13 15 9 74 78 79 79 10 9 7 12 | j 0 1 0 88 89 91 92 12 10 8 8 76 72 55 51 9 3 2 2 6 4 2 3 79 74 60 56 15 22 38 41 1 0 91 1 I 1 1 79 80 20 19 io 51 40 1 o 73 27 14 16 14 15 59 66 71 64 27 17 15 21 1 I I I 0 1 0 0 74 79 88 82 26 20 12 18 14 9 3 3 69 64 51 43 16 26 46 53 1 j | 1 86 82 73 68 13 18 26 31 20 10 10 7 13 69 76 75 76 15 25 44 47 21 50 28 1 7 74 19 1 31 53 17 1997 Ql... Q2... Q3... Q4... 1 17 18 15 16 55 54 57 58 28 29 28 26 1 j 1 j 4 4 3 3 76 69 80 74 21 27 17 24 1 1 1 29 13 16 56 71 67 60 16 16 17 19 14 24 28 17 62 49 50 53 24 27 22 30 1 j j 1 3 4 5 2 76 70 71 76 21 26 24 23 1 | 1 1 16 29 52 52 71 64 45 42 13 8 3 6 1 j j |1 I j 1 9 *** ELEVENTH (DALLAS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( LA*, NM*, TX ) 1 1998 Ql... Q2... Q3... Q4... 1 3 3 7 70 66 1996 Q4. . . j 1 14 15 to H III.A3 | j 1 TENTH (KANSAS CITY) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1996 Q4... 1998 Ql... Q2 . . . Q3 . . . 04... 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 35 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.A (CONTINUED) FARM NONREAL ESTATE LENDING EXPERIENCE COMPARED WITH NORMAL CONDITIONS (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) DEMAND FOR LOANS LOWER Ill .A4 1996 Q4. . SAME FUND AVAILABILITY HIGHER LOWER HIGHER LOWER SAME RENEWALS OR EXTENSIONS HIGHER LOWER SAME 17 64 19 1997 Ql. . Q2. . 03.. Q4. . *** *** *** *** 1998 Ql. . . 02... Q3. . . 04... HIGHER 1 1 || 1| 13 67 20 1 34 45 21 10 23 23 15 67 57 65 58 23 20 12 27 1 1 1 1 46 33 31 24 47 59 61 58 7 8 8 18 10 5 1 12 57 63 72 70 33 32 18 18 13 15 27 12 59 66 56 63 28 19 17 24 1 1 1 1 35 44 52 45 54 52 42 46 11 4 6 8 4 3 5 2 64 61 57 59 32 36 38 39 1 1 10 76 14 | 1 3 85 12 1 5 78 17 1 32 56 12 1997 Ql... Q2. . . 03... Q4... 1 1 1 1 9 11 15 13 77 77 73 70 15 11 12 18 |1 11 |! | 4 9 2 5 77 68 76 60 19 23 22 35 1 1 1 1 0 2 7 18 88 93 88 78 13 5 5 5 I 1 | 1 | 1 1 I 13 16 io 13 81 80 85 70 6 5 5 18 8 13 29 19 73 73 64 68 20 13 7 13 0 6 0 3 73 71 75 65 28 23 25 32 1 1 1 1 10 16 21 35 88 77 71 55 3 6 7 10 8 6 7 10 80 74 75 55 13 19 18 35 LOWER SAME HIGHER 1 o 85 15 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 75 80 81 82 25 20 18 18 0 2 0 0 77 70 73 75 23 28 27 25 2 93 5 0 2 0 0 94 91 83 85 6 7 17 15 3 0 0 0 85 81 71 71 13 19 29 29 FIFTH[ (RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( MD, NC, SC, VA, WV* ) 1996 04... 1998 Ql. . . 02... 03... 04... COLLATERAL REQUIRED NINTH (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI* ) 1 III.,A5 SAME LOAN REPAYMENT RATE 3 g 1 |! |1 |1 |1 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.B pARM NONREAL ESTATE LOAN VOLUME EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT QUARTER, COMPARED WITH VOLUME OF LOANS MADE A YEAR EARLIER (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) LOWER SAME LOWER SAME HIGHER LOWER SAME HIGHER LOWER SAME HIGHER FARM MACHINERY OPERATING CROP STORAGE DAIRY FEEDER CATTLE TOTAL LOWER SAME HIGHER LOWER SAME HIGHER HIGHER AGRICULTURAL BANKS SEVENTH (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*) III.B1 1996 Q4. 12 48 40 27 59 15 22 69 1997 Ql. Q2. 03. 04. 8 12 10 9 52 55 61 54 40 33 28 37 28 .22 23 24 63 64 65 69 9 13 12 20 22 24 24 69 69 69 69 1998 Ql. 02. 03. 04. 11 14 21 12 51 59 39 48 38 26 40 40 33 38 38 31 61 59 52 65 6 3 10 4 22 24 20 14 67 68 71 76 58 27 8 39 53 1 12 42 46 10 9 7 7 19 17 10 12 69 65 59 62 13 18 31 26 8 7 9 5 42 52 59 49 50 41 32 46 1 | 9 22 1 1 12 47 53 52 53 45 25 36 36 11 8 9 10 13 12 12 32 64 64 33 59 23 24 55 9 7 7 9 9 43 51 39 34 50 42 52 57 1 | j j 17 33 68 55 56 56 27 36 27 11 5 9 15 11 ELEVENTH (DALLAS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (LA*, NM*, TX) 1996 Q4. 18 54 27 1 24 56 20 1 22 73 5 20 76 5 1 16 55 30 to to III.B2 I 15 63 1997 Ql. Q2. 03. Q4. 16 15 14 14 58 62 68 62 26 22 18 25 1 I 1 1 15 I* 15 14 57 63 62 69 28 23 24 17 1 1 1 1 23 19 17 24 71 76 81 72 6 5 2 4 19 9 13 18 74 74 67 68 7 17 21 14 1 |I |I | I 17 15 12 11 54 59 66 57 29 25 22 32 1 j j | 16 12 16 17 63 63 63 67 21 26 21 16 1998 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. 16 30 32 26 63 51 48 50 20 19 20 24 1 1 1 1 25 34 37 34 68 58 56 53 7 8 7 13 1 j 1 I 17 20 19 15 71 79 78 78 7 0 3 7 17 10 21 18 78 76 58 68 6 15 21 14 15 23 24 23 64 53 46 49 21 23 30 29 1 j j j 21 32 41 40 59 58 54 50 20 10 5 10 IXI.B3 FIFTH (RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 1996 04... |1 7 81 12 1 I 23 75 3 19 75 6 1 18 67 14 | 1 8 70 22 1 7 65 28 1997 01... 02... 03... 04... I | | 1 | 1 16 8 I4 7 58 80 74 77 26 13 11 17 |1 |1 1 |1 17 16 21 13 73 81 79 83 10 3 0 4 21 17 19 20 79 80 81 70 0 3 0 10 1 j j j 13 15 20 17 82 76 60 79 5 9 20 3 | 1 1 1 1 6 5 20 8 63 80 61 66 31 16 20 26 I j j | io 5 29 18 65 75 54 66 25 20 17 16 8 18 15 27 75 79 69 65 17 4 15 8 20 27 0 18 76 68 95 82 4 5 5 0 9 15 21 5 87 80 79 95 4 5 0 0 1 j | j 13 17 19 19 81 70 62 65 6 13 19 15 8 10 11 13 74 77 71 80 18 13 18 7 1 j j j I8 29 43 40 70 58 46 60 13 13 11 0 1998 Ql... Q2... 03... 04... 37 38 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.B (CONTINUED) EXPECTED DEMAND FOR FARM LOANS DURING NEXT QUARTER, COMPARED WITH NORMAL DEMAND (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) FEEDER LIVESTOCK LOWER SAME III.B4 HIGHER LOWER SAME OTHER OPERATING FARM REAL ESTATE OTHER INTERMEDIATE LOWER SAME HIGHER LOWER SAME HIGHER HIGHER FARM MACHINERY LOWER SAME HIGHER NINTH (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*) 1996 Q4. . . | 28 58 15 19 74 7 1 30 60 10 1 1* 72 14 26 57 17 1997 Ql. . . 02... Q3. . . Q4. . . | 29 32 28 31 56 52 62 63 15 17 10 7 12 12 18 18 77 79 73 75 11 9 10 7 1 21 28 28 24 21 11 14 16 1 j | j 4 1 58 61 58 60 57 64 67 74 39 30 27 19 22 18 25 24 68 75 58 63 10 7 17 14 1998 Ql. . . Q2. . . Q3... Q4. . . | 38 32 38 28 58 67 50 66 4 1 13 7 18 13 37 28 72 80 55 64 9 7 9 9 1 26 25 33 27 56 58 52 57 18 17 15 16 1 j j j 8 65 65 58 70 27 27 34 24 22 36 59 46 63 58 37 52 15 7 4 2 | 1 1 j j 6 7 7 8 9 6 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.C AVERAGE LOAN-TO-DEPOSIT RATIO AND OTHER INDICATORS OF RELATIVE CREDIT AVAILABILITY (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) AVERAGE LOAN-TODEPOSIT RATIO, END OF QUARTER PERCENT III.CI 1996 Q4. . . 1997 Ql. . , 02... Q3. . . Q4. . . 1998 Ql... Q2. . . Q3... Q4. . . | 1 j I | III.C2 1996 Q4... I 1 1997 Ql... 02... 03... 04... 1998 Ql... 02... 03... 04... LOWER AT THAN DESIRED DESIRED LEVEL III.C3 1996 Q4... HIGHER THAN DESIRED 68 68 70 70 71 69 73 72 70 | 1 | 1 j 48 35 NONBANK AGENCIES CORRESPONDENT BANKS NONE COMPARED WITH A YEAR EARLIER LOWER SAME HIGHER NONE COMPARED WITH A YEAR EARLIER LOWER SAME HIGHER 17 51 47 43 44 32 32 34 36 17 21 23 21 43 43 39 50 39 34 38 34 18 22 22 16 1 *•* *** j | 1 1 1 | 1 | 1 j *** *** *** *** www I | | | www www www www J j j I www www www www TENTH (KANSAS CITY) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM* , OK, WY) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 63 1 | 66 68 68 67 1 | 1 | 1 | | 1 74 10 30 78 72 55 51 8 9 8 7 30 34 33 31 54 54 52 55 8 8 8 11 27 31 32 26 | 1 |1 |1 |1 |1 10 83 8 69 . 73 75 73 8 9 6 9 83 82 87 83 9 9 7 8 70 73 74 72 8 82 10 6 6 80 80 13 14 10 10 75 14 83 85 78 84 4 3 8 7 12 12 21 12 74 81 72 80 14 7 6 8 75 85 86 80 8 6 4 8 17 8 6 8 69 81 81 74 14 11 13 18 2 89 | 82 10 86 4 1 71 1 2 1 1 89 89 72 69 | | | | 1 82 82 82 78 11 8 6 7 86 87 87 88 4 5 7 6 | 1 | 1 1 I 1 I 1 2 3 2 70 66 62 64 78 78 79 79 7 89 4 7 7 88 89 5 5 12 78 1 2 1 1 13 12 14 9 0 4 1 1 18 8 9 11 ELEVENTH (DALLAS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( LA*, NM*, TX) 49 1997 01... 02... 03... 04... | j | | 49 52 54 50 1998 01... 02... 03... 04.. . | | j j 49 53 53 52 NUMBER OF FARM LOAN REFERRALS TO ACTIVELY SEEKING NEW FARM LOAN ACCOUNTS SEVENTH (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 62 65 66 66 | 1 | 1 j1 |1 REFUSED OR REDUCED A FARM LOAN BECAUSE OF A SHORTAGE OF LOANABLE FUNDS LOAN/DEPOSIT RATIO IS | | | | www www www www www www www www |1 |1 |1 j 39 40 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.C ( C O N T I N U E D ^ L O A N - T O - D E P O S I T AVERAGE LOAN-TODEPOSIT RATIO, END OF QUARTER PERCENT RATIO AND OTHER INDICATORS OF RELATIVE CREDIT AVAILABILITY <PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) REFUSED OR REDUCED A FARM LOAN BECAUSE OF A SHORTAGE OF LOANABLE FUNDS LOAN/DEPOSIT RATIO IS LOWER AT THAN DESIRED DESIRED LEVEL HIGHER THAN DESIRED NUMBER OF FARM LOAN REFERRALS TO ACTIVELY SEEKING NEW FARM LOAN ACCOUNTS NONBANK AGENCIES CORRESPONDENT BANKS NONE COMPARED WITH NORMAL NUMBER LOWER SAME HIGHER NONE COMPARED WITH NORMAL NUMBER LOWER SAME HIGHER (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*) 69 j *** . . . . 73 74 72 72 1 1 1 1 *** 1998 Ql... Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4... 73 74 74 71 1996 04... 1997 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. . . . . | III.C5 *** j 1 | 56 15 29 | 38+ 56 6 1 40 54 6 10 11 12 13 35 31 36 35 63 60 59 61 2 9 6 4 | j j j 30 32 32 36 52 55 58 52 18 13 10 12 7 12 10 9 34 29 27 8 62 66 67 85 4 5 6 7 | j j j 28 27 24 8 58 62 64 81 14 11 12 11 7 *** | FIFTH (RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 71 39 50 11 1 o 82 | 91 0 7 2 79 0 21 0 1997 Ql... Q2. . . 03... 04... 72 74 72 73 36 39 45 41 50 49 53 51 14 12 3 8 |1 |1 | 1 1 0 2 2 o 77 82 80 73 j1 |1 |1 | 1 85 91 85 87 5 0 0 0 10 9 15 13 0 0 0 0 83 86 78 74 3 0 0 0 10 14 23 15 5 0 0 10 1998 Ql... 02... 03... Q4. . . 72 73 72 73 46 48 62 63 41 48 35 30 14 3 4 7 0 0 0 0 78 81 70 71 92 93 96 93 0 0 0 0 8 7 4 7 0 0 0 0 83 100 85 83 3 0 0 0 8 0 11 13 6 0 4 3 1996 04... |1 •Beginning in 1994, Minneapolis omitted the response "none" for the number of referrals to either correspondent banks or nonbank agencies. The column that has been added combines responses that formerly would have been reported as either "none" or "low". FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.D INTEREST RATES ON FARM LOANS MOST COMMON INTEREST RATE ON FARM LOANS (AVERAGE, PERCENT) FEEDER CATTLE LOANS OTHER OPERATING LOANS INTERMEDIATE NONREAL ESTATE LONG-TERM REAL ESTATE LOANS Ill . Dl SEVENTH (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1996 Q4. . . 1997 Ql. . . Q2 . . . Q3. . . Q4. . . 1998 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. . . . . . . . . 1 9 6 9.6 8.7 1 9 6 9 7 9,,7 9.6 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.6 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.7 9,,5 9., 5 9,.4 9..1 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.1 8.4 8.5 8.3 8.1 | 1 | | | 1 III . D2 TENTH (KANSAS CITY) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (CO, KS, MO* , NE, NM*, OK) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1996 Q4. . . 1 9,.8 10.0 9.9 9.3 1997 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. . . . . 1 | | 1 9,.9 9,.9 9 .9 9 .8 10.0 10.1 10.1 9.9 9.9 9.9 9.9 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.4 9.3 1998 Ql... Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4... I I I 1 9 .8 9 .8 9 .7 9 .4 9.9 9.9 9.8 9.6 9.8 9.8 9.7 9.4 9.2 9.2 9.1 8.8 . . . . 41 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.D (CONTINUED) INTEREST RATES ON FARM LOANS MOST COMMON INTEREST RATE ON FARM LOANS (AVERAGE, PERCENT) FEEDER CATTLE LOANS INTERMEDIATE NONRBAL ESTATE LONG-TERM REAL ESTATE LOANS NINTH (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*) H O O III.D3 OTHER OPERATING LOANS 10.0 9.4 Q3. 04. 10.0 10.0 9.8 10.0 10.0 10.1 9.7 10.0 9.3 9.6 9.3 9.4 1998 Ql. Q2. Q3. 04. 9.9 9.9 9.8 9.6 9.8 9.8 9.7 9.5 9.4 9.7 9.6 8.8 1996 Q4. 1997 Ql. Q2. III.D4 ELEVENTH (DALLAS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (LA*, NM*, TX) 10.5 10.6 10.4 9.9 1997 Ql... Q2... 03... 04... 10.5 10.6 10.5 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.6 10.6 10.4 10.5 10.4 10.4 10.1 10.0 9.7 9.7 1998 Ql... Q2... 03... Q4. . . 10.5 10.4 10.3 10.0 10.5 10.5 10.4 10.1 10.4 10.2 10.2 9.9 9.7 9.6 9.6 9.2 1996 Q4... || III.D5 1996 Q4... 1 | 1997 Ql... Q2 .. Q3... Q4... 1998 Ql... 02... 03... 04... 1 | | 1 1 FIFTH (RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 10.0 9.8 10.0 9.5 9.9 9.8 10.0 9.8 9.9 9.8 9.8 9.7 9.9 9.8 9.9 9.6 9.5 9.6 9.5 9.2 9.9 9.8 9.5 9.3 9.7 9.6 9.2 9.0 9.4 9.3 9.1 8.9 9.2 9.2 9.0 8.7 42 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III .E TRENDS IN FARM REAL ESTATE VALUES AND LOAN VOLUME EXPECTED TREND IN FARM REAL ESTATE LOAN VOLUME DURING THE NEXT QUARTER, COMPARED TO YEAR EARLIER (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS) MARKET VALUE OF GOOD FARMLAND ALL Ill El 1 1997 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. . . . . 2 1 2 2 1998 Ql... -Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4. . . 2 0 -1 0 III,,E2 1996 Q4... 1997 Ql... Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4... 1998 Ql... Q2 . . . Q3 . . . Q4. . . 1 1 | | | | | | 11 | | j | 1 1 1 III .E3 IRRIGATED RANCHLAND ALL 16 3 12 5 *** w** www www HIGHER | 1 | 1 16 59 25 34 27 38 36 11 20 12 11 61 63 62 62 29 17 26 27 10 8 4 1 10 17 51 43 76 67 40 50 15 16 9 8 17 25 45 31 57 61 47 53 26 14 8 16 o 83 17 5 90 5 2 5 5 5 81 77 80 88 17 18 15 8 11 9 13 18 80 80 79 77 9 11 8 5 j 1 | 1 1 1 3 io 7 13 74 81 89 81 23 10 4 6 16 20 29 34 70 67 61 66 14 13 11 0 | www 17 69 14 1 1| |1 | 1 4 4 13 41 | www www www www www | 1 I 1 ELEVENTH (DALLAS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (LA*, NM*, TX) | | www 1 1 -2 2 -2 2 -3 4 3 3 1 2 3 3 5 5 1 4 1 1 15 12 10 15 65 72 77 69 19 17 13 16 -1 7 2 1 -0 2 0 -1 1 2 -1 -2 2 7 12 9 12 23 27 27 73 67 66 60 15 10 7 13 3 0 0 1 -1 1 -2 1 -1 2 -4 1 www 19 20 -4 -3 1 -1 -0 2 j SAME 64 64 60 62 -13 -1 3 -10 6 | I 1 1 LOWER 2 8 2 2 1 | -15 1997 Ql. . . Q2. . . Q3... 04... j UP FIFTH (RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 4 | STABLE 9 8 7 10 www www w*w www 1 | DOWN 33 www www www www 1 1998 Ql. . . Q2 . . . Q3... 04... RANCHLAND 61 10 1 1 j | 1 1 IRRIGATED 6 *** 1996 Q4. . . | DRYLAND SEVENTH (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*,, WI*) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1996 Q4. . . . . . . DRYLAND TREND EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT QUARTER (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS) PERCENTAGE CHANGE FROM A YEAR EARLIER PERCENTAGE CHANGE DURING QUARTER 43 44 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III .E (CONTINUED) TRENDS IN FARM REAL ESTATE VALUES AND LOAN VOLUME MARKET VALUE OF GOOD FARMLAND PERCENTAGE CHANGE FROM A YEAR EARLIER PERCENTAGE CHANGE DURING QUARTER ALL III.E4 DRYLAND IRRIGATED RANCHLAND ALL DRYLAND IRRIGATED RANCHLAND TREND EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT QUARTER (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS) DOWN STABLE TENTH (KANSAS CITY) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY) 1996 Q4. 1997 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. 2 1 1 1 4 1 3 0 1998 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. 3 0 -1 -1 3 3 III.E5 1996 Q4. 1997 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. 1998 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. -2 0 * ** www WW* www www www www NINTH (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*) UP EXPECTED DEMAND FOR FARM REAL ESTATE LOANS DURING THE NEXT QUARTER, COMPARED WITH NORMAL (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS) LOWER SAME HIGHER
@FedFRASER