The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
E.15 (125) AGRICULTURAL FINANCE DATABOOK First Quarter 2002 Guide to internal tables o f contents and notes on sources Amount and characteristics o f farm loans made by commercial banks . . . . Page 3 Selected statistics from the quarterly reports o f condition o f commercial banks............................................................................................................... 22 Reserve bank surveys o f farm credit conditions and farm land values......... 33 Division of Research and Statistics Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System Washington, D.C. 20551 Nicholas A. Walraven 2 General Information The Agricultural Finance Databook is a compilation of various data on current developments in agricultural finance. Large portions of the data come from regular surveys conducted by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or Federal Reserve Banks. Other portions of the data come from the quarterly call report data of commercial banks or from the reports of other financial institutions involved in agricultural lending. When the current issue went to press, data from the survey of terms of bank lending were available for the fourth quarter of 2001; the other data generally were available through the third quarter of 2001. Parts or all of the Agricultural Finance Databook may be copied and distributed freely. Any redistribution of selected parts of the Databook should be accompanied by the "contents" pages at the beginning of the corresponding section, together with the front cover identifying the Databook and date of issue, and this page providing subscription information. Remaining questions may be addressed to Nicholas Walraven at the address shown on the cover. The Databook is furnished on a complimentary basis to college and university teachers, libraries of educational institutions, government departments and agencies, and public libraries. Others should enclose 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. A copy of the back cover showing the old address should be included. SECTION I: AMOUNT AND CHARACTERISTICS OF FARM LOANS MADE BY COMMERCIAL BANKS Estimates from the quarterly survey of non-real-estate farm loans Summary charts........................................................................................................................................................................................ Tables: I.A Number......................................................................................................................................................................................... I.B Average size............................................................................................................................................................................... I.C Amount........................................................................................................................................................................................ I.D Average maturity........................................................................................................................................................................ I.E Average effective interest rate........................................................................................................................................ I.F Percentage of loans with a floating interest rate.................................................................................................................. I.G Distribution of farm loans by effective interest rate............................................................................................................ I.H Detailed survey results.............................................................................................................................................................. I.I Regional disaggregation of survey results............................................................................................................................ Page 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 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. 3 4 SECTION I: (CONTINUED) The format and the information contained in the tables are likely to change over time as more of the new survey information is acquired. 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 USD A. 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. C hart 1 Results from the Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers M illio n s , A nnual rate 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 Thousands o f dollars 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 B illio n s o f d o lla rs, A nnual rate 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 vO C hart 2 Results from the Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers M onths 18 16 A verage m a tu rity o f non-real-estate farm loans 14 - F our quarter m o vin g average 12 10 8 6 4 Percent 20 18 Average e ffe c tiv e in te re st rate on non-real-estate fa rm loans 16 14 12 10 8 6 Share o f farm loans w ith a flo a tin g in te re st rate 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 - F our quarter m oving average 30 20 10 0 ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NON-REAL-ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS TABLE I.A N U M B E R OF LOANS M A D E (MILLIONS) BY SIZE OF L O A N ($1, 0008) BY P U RPOSE OF L O A N ALL LOANS FEEDER LIVE ST O C K OTHER L I V E STOCK OTH E R CURRENT OPERA T I N G EXPENSES F ARM MAC H I N E R Y AND E Q UIPMENT O THER BY SIZE OF B A N K 1 to 9 10 to 24 25 to 99 100 and over LARGE OTHER 1.70 1.66 1.67 1.65 1.55 1.45 1.33 1.32 1.20 1.09 1.09 0.97 0.49 0.51 0.54 0.56 0.51 0.57 0.48 0.50 0.45 0.44 0.44 0.40 0.35 0.32 0.37 0.37 0.35 0.36 0.31 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.28 0.28 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.44 0.50 0.51 0.55 0.54 0.66 0.53 0.46 0.39 0.40 0.57 0.61 2.20 2.10 2.18 2.15 1.98 1.83 1.69 1.82 1.71 1.56 1.34 1.14 A N N U A L N U M B E R OF LOANS M ADE 1 9 9 0 ...... 1 9 9 1 ...... 1 9 9 2 ...... 1 9 9 3 ...... 1 9 9 4 ...... 1 9 9 5 ...... 1 9 9 6 ...... 1 9 9 7 ...... 1 9 9 8 ...... 1 9 9 9 ...... 2 0 0 0 ...... 2 0 0 1 ...... | | | j | j j | j j j j 2.63 2.60 2.69 2.70 2.53 2.49 2.22 2.27 2.10 1.96 1.91 1.76 l 1 l l 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 l 0.32 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.28 0.26 0.18 0.19 0.15 0.14 0.11 0.13 0.24 0,23 0.25 0.27 0.23 0.19 0.17 0.20 0.18 0.16 0.17 0.16 1.69 1.64 1.67 1.62 1.56 1.48 1.38 1.40 1.39 1.32 1.30 1.08 0.19 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.14 0.15 0.17 0.16 0.13 0.13 0.19 0.21 0.24 0.27 0.27 0.39 0.36 0.33 0.22 0.18 0.19 0.26 N U M B E R OF LOANS M A D E DUR I N G FIRST FULL W E E K OF SECOND M O N T H OF QUARTER, A N N U A L RATE 1999 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q3. . . Q4... I l l I 1.93 2.37 2.05 1.49 1 1 1 l 0.20 0.12 0.07 0.15 0.18 0.18 0.13 0.15 1.17 1.77 1.47 0.88 0.17 0.17 0.19 0.13 0.20 0.14 0.19 0.17 ll l I i l 0.96 1.41 1.25 0.74 0.45 0.51 0.44 0.36 0.36 0.34 0.29 0.29 0.15 0.10 0.08 0.10 l l I l 0.39 0.45 0.44 0.33 1.54 1.93 1.61 1.16 2000 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q3 . . . Q4. . . l l l l 1.91 2.27 1.86 1.59 1 1 1 l 0.09 0.12 0.09 0.14 0.16 0.19 0.15 0.19 1.36 1.56 1.29 0.96 0.13 0.18 0.12 0.11 0.16 0.22 0.20 0.19 l l l l 1.07 1.28 1.10 0.90 0.43 0.54 0.43 0.35 0.27 0.33 0.26 0.26 0.14 0.11 0.08 0.08 l l l l 0.72 0.53 0.52 0.51 1.19 1.74 1.34 1.08 2001 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q3... Q4... l l 1 l 1.63 2.16 1.66 1.57 1 1 1 1 0.12 0.13 0.09 0.17 0.17 0.19 0.13 0.15 0.97 1.34 1.09 0.92 0.14 0.16 0.12 0.10 0.23 0.34 0.23 0.24 1 l 1 l 0.84 1.23 1.00 0.81 0.37 0.49 0.36 0.38 0.30 0.32 0.23 0.26 0.11 0.12 0.08 0.12 1 1 l l 0.52 0.79 0.59 0.56 1.11 1.37 1.07 1.01 2002 Q l . .. ! 1.78 1 0.14 0.16 1.11 0.13 0.24 1 0.91 0.39 0.34 0.14 l 0.51 1.27 7 8 ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NON-REAL-ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS TABLE I.B A V E R A G E SIZE OF LOANS MA D E (THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS) ALL LOA N S FEEDER LIVE STOCK OT H E R LIVESTOCK OTH E R C URRENT OPERATING EXPENSES BY SIZE OF B A N K BY SIZE OF LO A N ($1, 000s) B Y P U R POSE OF L OAN FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIP M E N T 1 to 9 OTHER 10 to 24 25 to 99 100 and over LARGE OTHER 320.4 272.1 487.7 539.9 468.2 490.3 480.7 451.3 545.9 385.3 357.0 322.1 258.4 269.6 70.0 53.7 100.7 107.0 97.0 106.0 101.3 84.0 115.0 92.0 95.0 76.2 44.1 49.2 16.3 14.4 13.9 13.9 15.8 15.8 15.4 15.7 15.4 16.3 18.1 19.3 18.7 18.8 A N N U A L A V E R A G E SIZE OF LOANS MA D E 1 9 8 8 ...... 1 9 8 9 ...... 1 9 9 0 ...... 1 9 9 1 ...... 1 9 9 2 ...... 1 9 9 3 ...... 1 9 9 4 ...... 1 9 9 5 ...... 1 9 9 6 ...... 1 9 9 7 ...... 1 9 9 8 ...... 1 9 9 9 ...... 2 0 0 0 ...... 2 0 0 1 ...... | 1 j | j | j j | j j | j j 21.8 19.9 28.4 31.9 31.2 34.3 33.9 33.8 39.2 31.4 32.4 30.9 26.3 29.4 l l l l l l l 1 l l l 1 l 1 34.1 42.7 69.7 61.0 68.2 79.7 60.3 49.7 59.0 42.3 41.5 35.6 43.3 39.7 40.6 29.5 22.7 25.2 26.9 23.1 27.6 26.7 24.2 26.0 24.3 26.4 26.0 29.8 16.7 14.1 15.7 15.6 14.7 15.2 16.3 18.5 26.0 16.8 18.2 21.4 21.3 20.0 13.9 12.1 11.9 15.1 15.9 13.9 17.5 15.6 17.2 17.8 28.1 31.8 29.3 31.8 34.7 32.2 94.3 129.3 108.7 112.0 123.6 93.6 95.2 97.2 127.9 101.1 48.5 62.2 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.9 14.8 14.7 14.8 14.9 14.8 14.9 14.6 14.7 15.0 14.9 14.8 14.8 14.9 14.8 A V E R A G E SIZ E OF LOANS M A D E D U R I N G FIRST FULL W E E K OF S E COND M O N T H OF Q U A R T E R 1999 Q 2 . .. Q3... Q4... I l l 26.1 21.4 31.5 2000 Q l . .. Q2... Q3... Q4... l l l l 31.1 25.4 22.9 25.9 2001 Q l . .. Q2... Q 3 ... Q 4 .. . l l l l 33.3 26.9 23.2 35.3 2002 Q l . .. l 33.2 45.2 45.9 46.1 46.6 45.9 46.1 47.0 44.9 45.2 45.8 45.4 46.8 45.3 45.4 , ANNUAL RATE 30.2 30.1 46.5 21.2 25.1 33.1 20.5 17.0 24.9 52.4 26.6 25.9 66.3 44.0 54.5 3.8 3.7 4.1 14.5 14.6 14.9 46.4 45.9 46.7 314.6 261.3 242.1 1 1 1 63.4 47.5 58.7 17.4 14.3 23.8 38.5 40.3 56.9 40.2 29.9 23.3 23.8 27.0 27.6 20.1 18.1 18.6 48.0 23.3 25.6 20.6 43.5 58.5 36.2 54.8 3.8 4.0 3.5 4.2 15.1 14.8 14.8 15.1 47.7 45.6 43.6 44.2 256.3 255.6 273.0 252.2 l 1 1 l 42.0 51.8 40.0 43.3 24.4 17.4 16.2 17.7 l l 1 l 1 l 30.1 31.4 43.6 51.0 25.3 29.5 27.2 37.5 24.3 19.3 16.2 21.1 34.6 41.2 23.4 22.9 78.4 47.1 46.1 83.1 3.9 3.9 3.7 4.0 15.2 14.5 14.7 14.7 46.6 44.1 44.0 47.1 274.0 263.7 255.6 280.2 l l 1 l 55.2 43.6 39.4 61.9 23.2 17.3 14.4 20.5 l 48.7 32.9 26.0 26.1 61.1 3.7 15.0 47.7 237.8 l 54.3 24.6 11 1l 1l l ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NON-REAL-ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS TABLE I.C A M O U N T OF LOANS M ADE (BILLIONS OF DOLLARS) BY SIZE OF LO A N ($l,000fl) BY PURPOSE OF LO A N ALL L OANS FEEDER LIVESTOCK OTHER LIVES T O C K OTHER C URRENT O P E R ATINQ EXPENSES FARM MACH I N E R Y AND EQUIPMENT 1 to 9 O THER 10 to 24 25 to 99 BY SIZE OF B A N K 100 and over L ARGE OTHER l l i i i l i i l l 44.2 53.7 49.4 58.8 55.1 55.3 61.2 41.9 37.0 30.6 25.1 30.2 30.5 29.1 34.3 33.8 30.6 28.8 26.1 29.6 31.1 30.1 25.0 21.4 A N N U A L A M O U N T OF LOANS M ADE 1 9 9 0 ...... 1 9 9 1 ...... 1 9 9 2 ...... 1 9 9 3 ...... 1 9 9 4 ...... 1 9 9 5 ...... 1 9 9 6 ...... 1 9 9 7 ...... 1 9 9 8 ...... 1 9 9 9 ...... 2 0 0 0 ...... 2 0 0 1 ...... | | | | | | | j | j | | 74.7 82.8 83.7 92.6 85.7 84.1 87.3 71.4 68.0 60.6 50.2 51.6 l I 1 l l l l l l l 1 l 22.0 21.4 23.6 28.7 16.8 12.7 10.6 8.0 6.1 4.9 4.8 5.1 5.5 5.8 6.7 6.2 6.4 5.2 4.0 5.3 4.4 4.2 4.5 4.7 26.6 25.5 24.6 24.7 25.4 27.3 35.9 23.6 25.2 28.4 27.6 21.7 2.3 2.5 2.9 2.5 3.2 2.7 2.4 2.7 4.9 5.2 3.9 4.1 18.3 27.6 26.0 30.6 33.9 36.1 34.5 31.9 27.5 18.0 9.3 16.1 1 j 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6.1 6.1 6.2 6.1 5.8 5.4 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.2 4.2 3.7 A M O U N T OF LOANS M A D E DURI N G FIRST FULL W E E K or S ECOND M O N T H OF QUARTER, 7.3 7.6 8.0 8.3 7.4 8.3 7.1 7.4 6.7 6.6 6.5 5.9 15.9 15.1 16.8 17.1 16.5 16.0 13.9 15.8 14.9 15.1 12.6 12.6 45.3 54.0 52.8 61.0 56.0 54.4 61.3 43.3 41.9 34.9 26.8 29.3 l I A N N U A L RATE 1999 Q2. Q3. Q4. 1 l l 61.85 43.91 46.96 1 1 1 3.5 2.2 7.1 3.8 3.2 5.0 36.4 25.0 22.0 8.7 5.1 3.4 9.5 8.4 9.4 1 1 1 5.4 4.6 3.0 7.4 6.4 5.3 16.0 13.2 13.7 33.0 19.7 24.9 1 1 1 28.3 20.8 19.3 33.5 23.1 27.7 2000 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. I l I I 59.42 57.44 42.60 41.24 1 1 1 1 3.6 4.8 5.1 5.8 4.8 4.4 3.7 5.1 37.6 31.5 23.4 17.8 6.3 4.1 3.0 2.3 7.1 12.7 7.4 10.2 l 1 1 1 4.1 5.1 3.8 3.7 6.6 7.9 6.3 5.3 12.7 15.1 11.3 11.4 36.0 29.3 21.2 20.8 l 1 1 1 30.4 27.2 20.9 22.0 29.0 30.2 21.7 19.3 2001 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. I i I i 54.27 58.02 38.64 55.60 1 1 1 1 3.6 4.1 4.1 8.4 4.3 5.5 3.5 5.6 23.7 25.9 17.7 19.4 4.7 6.7 2.8 2.4 18.0 15.9 10.5 19.8 1 1 1 1 3.3 4.8 3.7 3.2 5.7 7.1 5.3 5.6 13.9 14.1 10.2 12.5 31.4 32.1 19.5 34.3 1 l 1 1 28.4 34.4 23.2 34.8 25.8 23.6 15.5 20.8 I 58.98 1 6.6 5.4 28.8 3.3 14.9 l 3.3 5.9 16.3 33.5 1 27.8 31.2 2002 Ql. ,. 9 ESTIMATES PROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OP BANK NON-REAL-ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS TABLE I.D A V E R A G E M A T U R I T Y OP LOANS MA D E (MONTHS) B Y SIZE OP L O A N ($1, 000s) BY P URPOSE OF LO A N ALL LOANS PEEDER LIVE STOCK O TH E R LIVESTOCK OTH E R CURR E N T OPERATING EXPENSES FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIP M E N T 1 to 9 O THER 10 to 24 25 to 99 9.2 8.3 9.7 10.0 11.6 10.8 10.5 11.6 11.3 11.2 11.5 11.9 11.9 10.6 11.1 11.1 13.5 12.1 12.1 12.4 12.5 12.4 11.1 12.5 B Y SIZE OP B A N K 100 and over LAR G E OT H E R 4.7 5.2 6.4 6.4 5.8 7.3 6.4 7.6 6.8 9.2 10.0 11.4 10.2 9.6 10.1 10.4 12.6 11.4 12.3 12.8 13.2 13.8 12.3 15.5 A N N U A L AV E R A G E M A T U R I T Y | | j j j | | | j j | 7.5 7.3 8.9 9.2 10.3 9.9 8.5 9.9 9.8 11.5 11.2 13.2 1 1 1 1 l l l l l l l l 6.0 6.7 6.1 7.3 7.6 8.7 7.8 9.1 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.5 8.8 8.5 9.5 9.6 9.8 9.9 11.3 11.0 10.3 11.0 10.8 14.0 7.5 7.2 8.6 8.3 8.6 8.5 7.6 10.7 9.9 11.3 9.5 10.3 21.9 24.6 20.1 30.4 36.6 26.5 29.4 30.6 27.5 20.1 22.4 24.3 6.4 5.3 9.4 9.4 9.4 o o H 1 9 9 0 ...... 1 9 9 1 ...... 1 9 9 2 ...... 1 9 9 3 ...... 1 9 9 4 ...... 1 9 9 5 ...... 1 9 9 6 ...... 1 9 9 7 ...... 1 9 9 8 ...... 1 9 9 9 ...... 2 0 0 0 ...... 2 0 0 1 ...... 9.2 7.4 6.8 10.5 13.2 15.3 l l 1 l l l l l l l l I 7.4 7.7 8.3 8.5 8.6 9.0 8.6 8.8 8.8 9.8 9.7 9.6 M A T U R I T Y OP L O A N S MA D E D U R I N G FIRST P ULL WE E K OP SECO N D M O N T H OP QUARTER, 4.9 5.8 7.2 7.4 7.2 8.2 7.3 8.8 8.7 11.4 11.4 14.1 A N N U A L R ATE 1999 Q 2 . .. Q3... Q4. . . 1 l l 14.4 12.0 11.5 1 1 1 8.8 6.9 7.7 12.0 7.3 10.9 14.2 9.3 8.7 13.9 22.3 24.1 18.8 17.1 16.9 l l l 9.9 9.4 9.7 11.3 10.4 11.1 14.7 11.1 12.9 15.7 13.8 11.1 9.9 12.3 10.8 18.0 11.8 11.9 2000 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q3... Q4... l l 1 l 11.2 11.6 11.1 10.6 1 1 1 1 9.0 9.7 6.7 7.2 10.4 9.3 14.8 9.7 10.0 10.1 9.1 7.9 17.4 22.3 30.7 25.8 14.1 13.4 10.2 14.5 l l l l 9.8 10.8 9.0 8.9 12.0 11.9 11.2 10.5 10.9 11.7 10.2 11.5 11.4 11.6 11.9 10.5 8.2 11.2 10.3 10.9 14.3 11.9 11.8 10.4 2001 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q3... Q4... 1 1 1 1 18.7 11.8 11.0 10.6 1 1 1 1 8.7 8.1 6.8 9.5 18.6 16.9 10.7 9.8 12.4 10.2 8.6 9.6 30.6 14.0 32.3 31.4 25.9 12.8 11.3 9.9 l l l l 9.9 11.1 9.1 7.6 13.3 11.9 11.2 11.1 13.5 12.5 11.8 12.1 23.0 11.6 10.9 10.3 19.6 8.9 9.9 8.3 17.8 15.9 12.6 14.4 2002 Q l . .. l 11.6 1 9.0 9.6 10.9 30.1 10.8 l 10.0 12.3 14.5 10.2 8.6 14.2 l ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NON-REAL-ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS TABLE I.E A V E RAGE E F F E CTIVE INTEREST RATE ON LOANS M ADE BY SIZE OF L O A N ($1, 0008) B Y PURPOSE OF ]LOAN ALL L OANS FEE D E R LIVE ST O C K OTHER L I V E STOCK OTH E R CURRENT O P E R ATING EXPENSES FARM MACH I N E R Y AND EQUIPMENT 10 to 24 1 to 9 O THER 25 to 99 B Y SIZE OF BA N K 100 and over L ARGE OTHER A N N U A L AVER A G E INTEREST R ATE 1 9 9 0 ...... 1 9 9 1 ...... 1 9 9 2 ...... 1 9 9 3 ...... 1 9 9 4 ...... 1 9 9 5 ...... 1 9 9 6 ...... 1 9 9 7 ...... 1 9 9 8 ...... 1 9 9 9 ...... 2 0 0 0 ...... 2 0 0 1 ...... | | j | j | j j j j j | 11.4 9.8 7.8 7.5 7.8 9.5 8.4 9.2 9.0 8.7 9.7 7.8 l l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l l l 11.5 10.2 8.2 8.0 8.3 10.1 8.8 9.6 9.4 9.1 9.8 7.6 12.0 11.0 8.6 8.1 8.0 10.2 9.5 9.8 9.7 9.1 9.9 8.0 11.7 10.4 8.8 8.1 8.4 10.0 8.6 9.9 9.6 9.2 9.9 8.4 12.3 11.3 9.3 8.7 8.6 10.3 9.7 9.8 9.3 8.8 9.3 8.3 10.7 8.6 6.3 6.2 7.0 8.8 8.0 8.5 8.0 7.6 9.3 7.0 | j | | j | | | j | j 12.5 11.5 9.7 9.0 9.1 10.6 10.2 10.2 10.1 9.7 10.3 1 9.1 12.4 11.2 9.3 8.7 8.8 10.5 10.1 10.0 9.9 9.5 10.2 8.7 A V E R A G E RAT E O N LOANS MA D E DURI N G FIRST FULL W E E K OF S ECOND M O N T H OF QUARTER, 12.1 10.7 8.8 8.3 8.6 10.3 9.8 9.9 9.7 9.3 10.1 8.3 10.9 9.2 7.1 6.9 7.3 9.0 7.8 8.8 8.4 8.1 9.4 7.3 I l l l l l l l l l l l 10.9 9.0 6.8 6.7 7.2 9.0 7.8 8.7 8.3 7.9 9.3 7.1 12.3 11.3 9.4 8.7 8.8 10.4 10.0 10.0 9.8 9.4 10.2 8.9 A N N U A L RATE 1999 Q 2 ... Q 3 .. . Q4... I l 1 8.8 9.0 9.2 1 1 1 9.0 9.0 9.3 9.1 9.1 9.2 9.1 9.2 9.4 8.2 9.0 9.4 7.9 8.5 8.6 l l l 9.5 9.7 9.9 9.4 9.6 9.7 9.2 9.4 9.4 8.3 8.4 8.8 l 1 l 8.1 8.4 8.7 9.3 9.6 9.5 2000 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q3... Q4. . . l l l l 9.2 9.7 10.2 10.0 1 1 1 1 9.2 9.6 10.4 10.0 9.3 9.9 10.2 10.3 9.5 9.9 10.3 10.3 8.0 10.1 10.1 10.3 9.2 9.2 9.6 9.4 l l l l 9.8 10.3 10.7 10.6 9.7 10.1 10.7 10.5 9.5 10.0 10.4 10.3 9.0 9.4 9.8 9.7 l l l l 8.7 9.4 9.7 9.7 9.8 10.1 10.6 10.5 2001 Q l . .. Q2... Q3. . . Q4. . . l l l l 9.1 8.3 7.7 6.2 1 1 1 1 9.6 8.3 7.8 6.2 9.6 8.6 7.5 6.3 9.6 8.6 8.1 6.8 9.2 8.1 8.2 7.4 8.3 7.8 6.9 5.3 l l l l 10.1 9.2 8.9 7.9 9.8 8.9 8.5 7.4 9.6 8.6 8.0 6.8 8.7 7.9 7.1 5.5 l 1 l l 8.5 7.8 7.1 5.3 9.8 9.0 8.7 7.7 2002 Q l . .. l 6.3 1 6.5 5.6 6.8 6.7 5.2 l 7.6 7.2 6.7 5.7 l 5.1 7.3 11 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 BY SIZE OF LOAN ($1, 000s) BY PURPOSE OF LOAN ALL LOANS FEEDER LIVE STOCK OTHER LIVESTOCK OTHER CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT OTHER BY SIZE OF BANK 1 to 9 10 to 24 25 to 99 100 and over LARGE OTHER 53.6 52.0 57.3 60.1 58.6 61.7 60.6 60.1 57.6 52.6 53.4 58.8 59.2 59.0 59.1 61.0 59.8 63.9 61.5 58.0 54.8 54.6 54.6 60.9 66.0 64.0 61.2 64.5 70.4 73.6 69.1 68.0 62.7 60.2 61.8 69.4 67.5 67.8 78.6 83.9 80.2 76.7 62.2 67.0 51.1 63.1 74.5 81.5 69.4 70.0 82.9 86.9 83.7 79.9 65.4 71.4 57.1 70.8 82.5 89.1 59.3 56.1 55.5 58.9 59.7 62.3 57.9 57.9 51.3 50.5 51.4 54.0 51.8 53.0 57.3 51.6 52.4 54.7 57.9 53.2 53.0 61.8 67.8 65.7 69.7 78.0 79.2 73.1 65.2 88.4 89.9 91.9 60.7 50.2 52.9 37.6 60.0 57.3 58.0 60.5 60.4 57.4 63.5 63.3 66.4 69.0 70.7 72.2 70.4 86.2 86.6 84.4 76.2 91.9 95.0 92.9 58.4 53.2 48.9 53.4 63.8 57.2 64.3 79.6 89.6 56.8 ANNUAL PERCENTAGE OF LOANS MADE 65.2 65.1 71.7 76.7 75.1 73.8 63.1 65.8 54.4 60.7 66.9 74.5 1990. 1991. 1992. 1993. 1994. 1995, 1996. 1997. 1998, 1999. 2000. 2001, 76.8 81.5 78.5 84.6 82.9 83.9 58.1 66.4 55.0 45.6 57.3 72.9 61.6 69.3 63.5 70.0 74.3 75.9 71.2 73.2 59.4 66.0 60.7 65.6 68.3 68.8 66.3 70.3 72.3 73.0 67.3 67.8 68.5 68.6 67.0 75.0 40.0 40.6 47.8 48.2 51.6 53.1 32.9 49.9 46.7 58.2 62.2 61.0 51.2 50.3 75.3 78.1 75.7 72.2 61.4 64.3 42.0 52.0 76.7 80.5 AVERAGE PERCENTAGE DURING FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF QUARTER 2000 Ql... Q2... Q3.•* Q4... | | | | ; 2001 Ql... Q2.•. Q3. .. Q4 ••• 2002 Ql. .. | 63.0 68.3 71.0 66.5 46.4 51.0 60.0 66.8 69.2 57.8 59.5 56.2 59.4 69.7 78.9 62.8 80.6 57.6 38.6 51.0 70.8 78.4 72.9 81.6 67.7 76.1 76.5 78.1 64.7 77.5 72.5 74.2 73.7 56.8 72.6 63.6 73.4 73.8 75.5 78.3 50.8 79.0 54.9 38.0 63.9 85.1 86.9 88.5 61.9 63.9 69.5 58.8 88.1 72.2 1 | | | | | | TABLE 1.0 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BY EFFECTIVE INTEREST RATE OF NON-REAL ESTATE FARM LOANS MADE BY BANKS* EFFECTIVE INTEREST RATE (percent) ZERO ALL TO R A T E S 5.0 1 9 9 7 ____ 1 9 9 8 ---1 9 9 9 ____ 2 0 0 0 ____ 2 0 0 1 ____ 2 0 0 2 ____ 100 ** ** 0 ** 100 0 24 5.0 TO 5.9 6.0 TO 6.9 7.0 TO 7.9 8.0 TO 8.9 0 0 4 0 5 13 17 5 8 20 10 4 17 4 7 23 31 23 29 30 28 11 ** 17 9.0 TO 9.9 10.0 TO 10.9 11.0 TO 11.9 £roiu previous i 33 17 32 22 23 9 36 18 33 17 4 1 12.0 TO 12.9 13.0 TO 13.9 years for the mo D 4 5 2 6 5 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** 14.0 TO 14.9 a LUV a 0 0 0 0 0 0 15.0 TO 15.9 a m ^ 16.0 TO 16.9 17.0 TO 17.9 1 8.0 TO 18.9 19.0 TO 19.9 20.0 TO 20 . 9 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 0 0 0 ** ** ** ** 0 ** ** ** ★* ** ** ** ★★ ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ★* ** ** ** *★ k k ■ k it k k 0 k k an* 0 0 0 0 ** 0 ** ** ★★ 0 ** 0 0 ** ** ** ** ** ** 0 0 quarterly 1999 Q2... Q3. . . Q4. . . 100 100 100 0 ** 2000 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q 3 ... Q 4 ... 100 100 100 100 ** Ql. .. Q 2 ... Q3. . . Q4 . . • 100 100 100 100 0 0 1 21 Ql. .. 100 24 2001 2002 0 0 0 *★ 4 2 0 4 4 3 12 10 9 37 35 30 30 32 36 11 12 17 2 4 5 0 1 1 0 0 0 ** 0 0 0 5 0 1 36 36 30 30 18 27 28 34 6 11 19 13 1 2 5 4 0 0 ** * it itit 0 it k it k 0 30 19 16 15 0 0 1 0 4 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 ** 7 29 25 16 28 31 25 11 33 22 12 4 17 5 3 1 5 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ★* 3 9 33 8 8 23 14 0 ** *★ ** ** ★* ** ★* ** ** ** * it 17 20 23 11 4 1 0 0 *★ 0 0 ** 0 it it 0 0 0 0 it it 0 it it 0 k k k k k k * Percentage distribution of the estimated dollar amount of nonreal-estate farm loans of $1,000 or more made by insured commercial banks during the survey week. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers, which is conducted during the first full business week of the second month of each quarter. Percentages may not add to 100 percent because of rounding. A value of 0 indicates less than .5 percent, while ** indicates no observation. 13 14 TABLE I.H.l SURVEY OF TERMS OF BANK LENDING MADE DURING February 4-8, 2002 Loans to farmers Size class of loans (thousands) all sizes $1-9 1,384,796 37,092 20.06 7.98 2.90 $10-24 $25-49 $50-99 $100-249 $250 and over 66,345 18,160 10.25 4.15 2.71 118,468 7,963 12.68 6.94 2.85 148,288 4,429 17.15 7.77 2.74 202,073 3,028 17.60 6.28 2.78 408,910 2,669 30.70 9.73 2.80 440,712 844 15.78 8.07 3.14 6.39 0.11 7.59 0.05 7.20 0.05 7.10 0.12 6.59 0.12 6.45 0.16 5.60 0.28 7.64 5.05 8.50 6.75 8.03 6.14 8.00 5.92 7.68 5.64 7.52 5.64 6.96 4.33 6.54 5.77 6.86 6.68 6.40 5.53 7.45 7.81 7.69 8.24 6.10 6.38 7.64 7.30 7.24 7.53 6.58 6.42 7.29 6.80 7.20 7.13 6.59 6.97 7.02 5.94 6.77 7.01 6.79 6.07 6.21 5.73 6.91 6.60 6.97 5.71 5.74 4.39 6.40 4.40 5.70 4.77 66.42 69.15 23.46 7.60 63.22 72.42 23.90 1.07 57.99 68.48 21.69 2.24 58.66 64.91 24.38 5.04 66.26 67.50 30.55 7.64 71.34 63.72 34.41 9.48 67.29 76.07 10.16 9.13 9.17 8.20 46.13 5.31 7.79 23.40 4.63 9.18 66.84 8.60 1.13 9.61 9.64 9.64 57.44 9.06 2.10 12.13 11.98 8.10 48.75 9.48 4.18 17.52 13.23 9.21 45.90 7.15 2.45 22.06 6.86 8.12 43.26 4.07 12.00 25.69 9.05 7.32 41.85 2.71 10.09 28.98 18.37 73.76 4.45 89.18 5.32 87.24 13.03 81.29 8.90 83.61 23.12 71.65 25.70 62.74 ALL BANKS 1 2 3 4 5 Amount of loans (thousands) Number of loans Weighted average maturity (months)1 Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 Weighted average risk rating3 6 Weighted average interest rate (percent)4 7 Standard error5 8 Interquartile Range6 a.75th Percentile b.25th Percentile By purpose of loan 9 Feeder livestock Other livestock 10 11 Other current operating expenses 12 Farm machinery and equipment Farm real estate 13 14 Other Percentage of the amount of loans With floating rates Made under commitment Callable Subject to prepayment penalty By purpose of the loan Feeder livestock 19 Other livestock 20 Other current operating expenses 21 Farm machinery and equipment 22 Farm real estate 23 Other 24 By type of collateral Farm real estate 25 Other 26 15 16 17 18 Footnotes are at the end o£ table I.H TABLE I.H.2 SURVEY OF TERMS OF BANK LENDING MADE DURING February 4-8, 2002 Loans to fanners Size class of loans (thousands) all sizes $1-9 $10-24 $25-49 $50-99 $100-249 $250 and over 771,674 18,036 16.36 5.68 3.21 32,896 9,073 9.46 2.20 3.06 56,135 3,742 10.81 3.11 3.21 66,659 1,950 14.35 4.76 3.14 86,010 1,297 17.98 5.00 3.16 204,885 1,413 19.36 5.79 3.07 325,088 561 16.15 6.77 3.33 5.84 0.19 6.88 0.19 6.62 0.23 6.42 0.15 6.09 0.17 6.06 0.21 5.27 0.40 7.25 4.55 7.77 5.90 7.73 5.38 7.59 5.12 7.23 4.85 7.45 4.84 6.50 3.92 5.61 4.84 6.42 5.79 7.03 6.54 6.15 7.16 6.99 5.50 6.60 5.61 6.84 6.82 7.24 6.31 5.82 6.78 6.86 6.00 6.21 4.99 6.52 6.04 6.10 6.45 5.05 6.44 6.49 7.13 4.71 4.39 5.99 4.40 7.27 76.27 83.99 19.66 84.41 87.78 22.03 81.43 85.96 21.39 80.04 83.18 24.46 79.25 87.26 21.41 76.96 79.41 29.70 72.56 85.45 11.34 7.63 9.33 46.05 4.31 4.56 23.40 4.82 3.57 70.86 3.74 0.96 9.61 5.43 4.17 62.35 5.39 1.34 12.13 8.32 7.38 52.22 6.66 2.75 17.52 10.81 8.42 51.93 4.16 3.66 22.06 6.12 11.73 48.92 4.39 6.64 25.69 8.25 9.92 36.09 3.68 4.77 28.98 16.82 74.95 5.74 86.47 7.18 83.83 8.94 80.70 11.21 82.24 14.85 74.71 23.94 69.30 LARGE FARM LENDERS7 1 2 3 4 5 Amount of loans (thousands) Number of loans Weighted average maturity (months)1 Weighted average repricing Interval (months)2 Weighted average risk rating3 6 Weighted average Interest rate (percent)4 Standard error5 7 8 Interquartile Range6 a.75th Percentile b.25th Percentile By purpose of loan Feeder livestock 9 Other livestock 10 Other current operating expenses 11 Farm machinery and equipment 12 Farm real estate 13 Percentage of the amount of loans With floating rates Made under commitment Callable By purpose of the loan Feeder livestock 19 Other livestock 20 Other current operating expenses 21 Farm machinery and equipment 22 Farm real estate 23 Other 24 By type of collateral Farm real estate 25 Other 26 15 16 17 Footnotes are at the end of table I.H 15 16 TABLE I.H.3 SURVEY OF TERMS OF BANK LENDING MADE DURING February 4-8, 2002 Loans to farmers Size class o£ loans (thousands) all sizes $1-9 $10-24 $25-49 $50-99 613,123 19,056 24.60 10.81 2.41 33,449 9,088 11.01 6.02 2.24 62,333 4,221 14.32 10.31 2.42 81,628 2,478 19.57 10.36 2.35 7.08 0.18 8.29 0.12 7.72 0.19 7.90 6.00 9.11 7.41 7.35 7.37 7.41 7.42 6.10 6.44 $100-249 $250 and over 116,064 1,731 17.33 7.21 2.39 204,024 1,256 41.43 13.48 2.51 115,624 282 14.78 11.66 2.33 7.66 0.21 6.95 0.26 6.84 0.16 6.52 0.49 8.30 7.00 8.68 6.75 7.90 5.75 7.75 5.75 7.00 4.86 8.41 8.21 8.27 8.59 6.54 8.12 8.03 7.74 7.65 7.81 6.28 8.15 7.73 7.47 7.59 7.25 6.84 8.63 7.45 6.55 6.99 7.32 8.00 6.51 6.02 7.50 7.51 6.72 6.91 6.06 7.87 7.12 4.86 5.09 54.02 50.48 28.26 42.37 57.32 25.74 36.88 52.74 21.96 41.21 49.99 24.31 56.63 52.85 37.32 65.69 47.98 39.14 52.47 49.68 6.86 11.10 6.79 46.22 6.58 11.87 23.40 4.45 14.70 62.89 13.38 1.30 9.61 13.43 14.57 53.01 12.37 2.78 12.13 14.96 8.70 45.91 11.78 5.34 17.52 15.03 9.80 41.43 9.38 1.55 22.06 7.61 4.48 37.57 3.75 17.38 25.69 11.28 58.05 25.07 28.98 20.32 72.27 3.17 91.85 3.64 90.31 16.37 81.78 7.18 84.63 31.43 68.57 30.65 44.28 OTHER BANKS7 1 2 3 4 5 Amount of loans (thousands) Number of loans Weighted average maturity (months)1 Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 Weighted average risk rating3 6 Weighted average interest rate (percent)4 7 Standard error5 8 Interquartile Range6 a.75th Percentile b.25th Percentile By purpose of loan Feeder livestock 9 Other livestock 10 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 By purpose of the loan Feeder livestock 19 20 Other livestock Other current operating expenses 21 Farm machinery and equipment 22 23 Farm real estate 24 Other By type of collateral Farm real estate 25 26 Other 15 16 17 Footnotes are at the end of table I.H TABLE I.H.4 SURVEY OF TERMS OF BANK LENDING MADE DURING February 4-8, 2002 Loans to fanners Risk Rating All Minimal Low 1,384,796 37,092 20.06 7.98 2 .90 134,708 3,900 45.35 11. 9 7 1.00 6.39 0.11 Moderate Acceptable Special Not Rated 251,768 7,615 22.54 12. 0 4 2 .00 453,092 11,809 17.41 6 .46 3. 0 0 258,202 5,7 4 7 11.99 3 .54 4. 0 0 74,333 1,218 14.63 0.63 5.00 81,330 1,808 10.53 4.82 - 131,363 4,995 21.50 15.54 - 6 .60 0.24 6 .88 0.20 6.36 0. 2 5 5.79 0.23 6.56 0 .43 5.59 0 .87 6. 8 9 0. 2 9 7.64 5.05 7.75 5 .81 7.68 6.18 7.79 4.85 6.40 4.85 7.74 5.65 7.50 4.85 7.52 6.17 6 .54 5.77 6.86 6.68 6.40 5.53 7.22 5.09 6 .81 6.94 6 .55 6 .59 6.52 6.22 7.02 7.35 7.06 6.54 6.01 5.44 6.87 6.46 7.35 5.53 5.70 5.25 6 .50 7. 7 7 7.01 5.29 5. 4 9 6.49 7.09 4.58 7.53 6. 4 3 9. 0 6 7.81 7.51 6.33 5. 2 5 4. 2 4 7.21 7.37 6 .66 7.21 6.94 6.62 66. 4 2 69.15 23.46 7.60 56.58 53.65 18. 2 3 0. 2 1 51.37 60.16 28.96 0 .21 67.85 66.43 18.61 9.18 87.49 93.61 29.99 23.88 85.16 84.48 11.17 0.30 89.29 84.37 18.92 1.17 34.27 45.52 31.98 - 9.17 8 .20 46.13 5.31 7. 7 9 23.40 21.01 1 3.87 39.19 3.24 1 7.73 4.95 10.96 7.20 65.25 3.13 4. 7 6 8.70 6.53 9 .29 50. 8 3 5 .39 3.96 24.00 7.24 6.74 32.10 1 .54 2 .82 49.57 6.02 3.49 46.43 11.01 7.32 25.73 3 .77 4.87 15.62 1.23 44.77 29.74 11.59 8. 1 8 46.64 18.06 3.80 11. 7 3 1 8.37 73.76 28.36 68.65 18. 1 3 74.70 17.67 75.00 11 . 1 2 84.23 22.12 73.63 12.06 47.13 27.03 68.96 Not Reported ALL BANKS 1 2 3 4 5 A m o u n t of l oans (thousands) N u m b e r of loans Weighted average maturity (months)1 Weighted average repricing Interval Weighted average risk rating3 (months)2 6 Weighted average Interest rate (percent)4 7 Standard error5 8 Interquartile R a nge6 a.7 5th Percentile b.25th Percentile B y p u r p o s e of loan Feeder livestock 9 Other livestock 10 Other current operating expenses 11 12 Farm machinery and equipment F a r m real estate 13 14 Other P e r c e n t a g e of t h e a m o u n t o f l o a n s W i t h floating rates Made under commitment Callable Subject to prepayment penalty By pur p o s e of the loan Feeder livestock 19 Other livestock 20 21 Other current operating expenses Farm machinery and equipment 22 F a r m real estate 23 Other 24 By type of col l a t e r a l F a r m real estate 25 26 Other 15 16 17 18 Footnotes a r e at t h e e n d of t a b l e I.H 17 TABLE I.H.5 SURVEY OF TERMS OF BANK LENDING MADE Loans to farmers D U R I N G F e b r u a r y 4-8, 20 0 2 Risk Rating All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not R a ted Not Reported LARGE FARM LENDERS7 1 2 3 4 5 A m o u n t of loans N u m b e r of loans Weighted average Weighted average Weighted average (thousands) maturity (months)1 repricing interval risk rating3 (months)2 6 Weighted average interest rate (percent)4 7 Standard error5 8 Interquartile Range6 a.7 5th Percentile b.25th Percentile B y p u r p o s e of loan 9 Feeder livestock 10 Other livestock 11 Other current operating expenses 12 Farm machinery and equipment 13 F a r m real estate 14 Other P e r c e n t a g e of the am o u n t of loans With floating rates Made under commitment Callable Subject to prepayment penalty By purpose of the loan Feeder livestock 19 20 Other livestock 21 Other current operating expenses 22 Farm machinery and equipment 23 F a r m real estate 24 Other B y type of collat e r a l F a r m real estate 25 Other 26 15 16 17 18 Footnotes a r e at the e n d of t a ble I.H 771,674 18,036 16.36 5. 6 8 3.21 25,758 863 12. 5 3 6 .20 1.00 115,284 2,676 16. 9 6 8. 2 1 2. 0 0 331,053 7,970 18.32 6.06 3.00 183,737 4,320 12.84 4. 7 3 4.00 66,314 984 14.99 0.11 5. 0 0 33,187 544 19.74 14.09 - 16,340 679 19.43 2. 4 2 - 5 .84 0 .19 5 .36 0 .43 6 .36 0.23 5. 8 0 0.24 5 .54 0.28 6. 4 0 0. 5 4 4.85 0.91 6.83 0.24 7.25 4.55 6 .75 4. 3 4 7. 3 3 5.13 7.52 4. 3 3 6.40 4.60 7.50 5.35 5.38 3. 3 9 7.45 6.17 5.61 4.84 6.42 5 .79 7. 0 3 5 .09 5 .78 4. 3 5 5.99 7. 1 2 4.39 5 .37 5. 7 5 6. 5 8 7.04 6.25 6.44 5. 3 0 4.51 6. 4 3 5 .93 7.31 5 .02 5. 7 0 5 .13 6.02 6.84 7.01 4.90 5 .49 5. 1 0 7.01 4.58 6.36 6. 3 9 9.39 4.47 5 .24 5 .03 7.28 3.97 6. 8 9 6.29 6. 9 8 7.07 6 .00 6 .30 76.27 83.99 19.66 6.22 48.07 93 . 1 2 51.08 1 .11 65.71 73.87 34.73 0.45 75.04 80.72 19.42 10.75 83.74 93.27 8.16 6. 1 8 86.49 84.85 2.66 0 .33 81.65 88.43 3. 2 7 83.79 90.41 100.00 - 7.63 9 .33 46.05 4.31 4.56 23.40 4.07 37.88 48.22 5.75 21.22 4. 9 5 10.44 8 .63 63.82 0.71 14.92 8. 7 0 6.17 9.83 45.51 5. 3 9 2. 1 3 24.00 10.17 9.08 38.74 1. 2 5 0. 5 4 49.57 6 .74 1.66 49.81 12.35 5.49 25.73 6.28 2 .23 10.96 1.96 2.45 29.74 0. 5 8 7.11 66.18 11.82 16.82 74.95 70.73 92.39 52.47 68.95 8.30 73.89 8.95 79.19 9. 5 0 70.44 2.53 68.76 - - 11.73 - 94.60 TABLE I.H.6 SURVEY OF TERMS OF BANK LENDING MADE DURING February 4-8, 2002 Loans to fanners Risk Rating All Minimal Low 613,123 19,056 24.60 10.81 2.41 108,950 3,037 53.11 13.34 1.00 7.08 0. 1 8 Moderate Acceptable Special Not Rated Not Reported 136,484 4,939 27.24 15. 2 7 2. 0 0 122,039 3,839 14.89 7.56 3.00 74,465 1,426 9. 9 5 0. 6 5 4.00 8,019 234 11.86 4.91 5. 0 0 48,143 1,264 6.39 0.66 - 115,023 4,316 21.79 17.41 - 6.90 0.28 7. 3 2 0 .24 7.89 0. 2 6 6. 4 1 0. 82 7.90 0 .38 6.10 1.07 6.89 0.34 7.90 6.00 7.75 6.00 7.85 6 .86 9. 0 0 6. 6 1 5.64 5.64 7.79 7.52 8.23 4.86 7. 6 4 6.17 7.35 7. 3 7 7.41 7.42 6 .10 6.44 7. 2 7 5.90 7 .07 6.84 6 .55 7.00 7.41 7.37 7.39 7.74 6. 6 8 7.59 8. 6 4 7.72 7.92 8 .13 8. 4 0 8. 1 1 9.41 9 .06 7.27 5.73 7.52 8.77 7.79 7.52 8 .37 8. 5 8 8.42 8 .74 5 .03 7.69 7.21 7.51 6 .59 7.22 7.12 6. 6 5 54.02 50.48 28.26 9.34 58.60 44.32 1 0.47 5.51 39.25 48.57 24.08 36.86 48.33 27.66 16.40 0.78 96.74 94. 4 7 83. 8 7 ~ 74.13 81.41 81.54 - 94.55 81.57 29.71 - 27.23 39.15 22.32 - 11.10 6.79 46.22 6. 5 8 11.87 23.40 25.02 8.19 37.06 2 .64 21. 9 2 4. 9 5 11.39 5 .98 66.47 5. 1 8 4.77 8. 7 0 7.51 7.80 65.25 5. 3 8 0 .62 24.00 1 .31 0. 9 5 15.70 2.25 0 .29 49.57 188.69 18.59 18.46 4.38 55.54 25.73 6 .69 18.83 45.27 68.06 29.74 20.32 72.27 35.06 6 3.04 20.09 79.55 1 6.03 78.01 1 .66 96.65 43.76 100.00 72.01 32.21 OTHER BANKS7 1 2 3 4 5 A m o u n t of loans (thousands) N u m b e r of loans Weighted average maturity (months)1 Weighted average repricing interval Weighted average risk rating3 (months)2 6 Weighted average interest rate (percent)4 Standard error5 7 8 Interquartile Range6 a.75th Percentile b.25th Percentile By purpose of loan Feeder livestock 9 Other livestock 10 Other current operating expenses 11 12 Farm machinery and equipment 13 F a r m real estate 14 Other P e r c e n t a g e of t h e a m o u n t of loans W i t h floating rates Made under commitment Callable Subject to prepayment p enalty By purpose of the loan Feeder livestock 19 Other livestock 20 21 Other current operating expenses Farm machinery and equipment 22 F a r m real estate 23 24 Other By type of coll a t e r a l F a r m real estate 25 Other 26 15 16 17 18 Footnotes ar e at t h e e n d of t a b l e - - - - - - 8.33 43.87 - 3 .63 11 . 7 3 - 65.32 I.H 19 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, D C 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, Sept. 2002 Sample Coverage, Feb. 2002 survey (%) Avg. Loan Size, Feb. 2002 survey ($1000) Survey date: Nov. 1992 Feb. 1993 May 1993 Aug. 1993 Nov. 1993 Feb. 1994 1994 May Aug. 1994 Nov. 1994 1995 Feb. May 1995 Aug. 1995 Nov. 1995 1996 Feb. May 1996 Aug. 1996 Nov. 1996 1997 Feb. 1997 May Aug. 1997 Nov. 1997 Feb. 1998 May 1998 Aug. 1998 Nov. 1998 Feb. 1999 1999 May Aug. 1999 Nov. 1999 2000 Feb. May 2000 Aug. 2000 NE LS CB USDA Farm Production Region NP SE DL AP 2.5 16.3 9.5 4.1 27.2 15.8 17.2 11.5 10.5 16.3 5.0 14.2 5.0 6.0 40.0 46.9 38.7 25.6 60.2 82.9 42.7 7.9 7.8 8.1 8.2 8.3 7.7 8.7 9.1 10.2 11.7 9.0 9.6 10.8 8.8 10.3 8.3 10.1 8.8 9.4 9.3 9.2 9.3 9.2 10.2 9.4 8.4 9.6 10.2 9.1 9.4 10.7 10.5 (.96) Weighted Average Interest Rate During Sample Week 9.2 8.4 7.3 8.3 7.9 5.5 9.0 8.0 8.0 8.3 7.8 5.6 8.4 8.7 7.8 8.1 7.9 5.2 7.5 8.2 7.3 7.0 8.0 5.7 8.1 7.4 6.3 8.2 7.8 5.3 7.7 8.6 7.9 7.5 7.3 5.2 8.2 9.0 7.8 8.0 8.1 6.1 8.6 8.3 8.6 8.6 7.6 6.5 9.7 8.5 8.8 8.9 7.1 8.5 10.4 10.7 9.9 7.2 10.0 8.6 9.4 8.5 10.2 10.7 10.4 9.3 10.4 10.3 9.8 9.3 9.6 8.1 10.1 10.3 9.6 7.9 10.3 8.3 9.4 9.9 9.4 7.3 10.9 8.0 9.6 10.2 9.0 10.4 7.3 8.1 9.4 9.4 9.9 8.9 7.6 10.0 9.3 9.9 9.0 9.3 7.5 9.9 9.3 9.9 9.5 9.5 8.0 9.5 9.9 10.2 10.1 9.2 9.5 8.3 9.9 10.1 9.8 9.6 8.5 9.9 9.4 9.5 9.8 9.8 9.3 7.5 9.4 9.0 9.8 7.3 10.0 10.3 9.4 9.7 10.2 9.2 7.6 10.3 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 8.8 9.7 9.4 9.2 9.0 8.7 8.3 9.7 8.2 9.0 8.9 8.9 9.1 9.6 9.0 9.0 9.1 8.8 8.0 9.8 8.9 8.7 9.3 8.2 8.9 10.0 9.2 9.4 8.3 8.8 8.8 9.8 8.4 9.2 9.2 9.6 9.8 9.3 9.7 9.5 9.7 9.1 9.1 10.5 10.3 9.7 9.2 10.30 10.0 10.5 (.23) (.20) (.09) (.35) (U 0 ) (.01) SP MN PA 8.5 5.1 5.9 12.6 8.7 62.2 31.5 43.4 61.2 8.2 7.8 8.3 7.7 7.8 7.6 8.4 8.6 9.0 10.4 10.1 10.1 9.8 9.9 9.8 9.4 9.1 9.5 9.7 9.7 9.4 9.8 9.6 9.5 9.2 9.1 9.0 8.8 9.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 (.31) 7.6 7.5 7.7 7.1 7.1 7.3 7.5 7.6 8.0 9.4 9.3 9.4 9.3 8.9 8.7 8.9 9.0 10.1 10.0 10.5 10.1 9.6 9.8 9.6 9.1 9.0 8.7 9.0 9.5 9.8 10.1 10.6 (.29) 6.9 6.5 6.8 7.2 6.7 6.9 7.2 7.5 8.5 9.4 9.3 9.5 8.9 8.1 8.3 8.1 8.6 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.8 8.5 8.4 8.5 8.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 8.8 8.4 9.5 9.7 (.27) Nov. 2000 10.7 (.75) 9.3 (.25) 9.9 (.13) 10.1 (.11) 9.2 (.12) 9.4 (.97) 9.2 (1.24) 10.3 (.33) 10.3 (.19) 9.8 (.20) Feb. 2001 9.3 (.11) 9.1 (.22) 9.4 (.16) 9.7 (.13) 8.4 (.19) 7.8 (1.20) 9.5 (.25) 9.0 (.95) 9.8 (.37) 8.8 (.12) May 2001 8.2 (0.5) 8.7 (.58) 8.3 (.12) 8.8 (.09) 7.4 (.22) 8.1 (.67) 8.3 (.51) 9.2 (.29) 8.6 (.41) 7.9 (.09) Aug. 2001 8.3 (.36) 9.8 (.07) 7.9 (.16) 8.2 (.12) 6.3 (.22) 7.6 (1.17) 8.7 (.25) 8.8 (.42) 7.8 (.37) 7.2 (.36) Nov. 2001 6.9 (.23) 7.9 (.78) 6.3 (.38) 7.0 (.29) 5.2 (.36) 6.3 (1.71) 8.7 (.42) 7.6 (.79) 6.1 (.33) 5.2 (.35) Feb. 2002 6.9 (.12) 7.8 (.37) 6.7 (.26) 7.2 (.22) 5.2 (.63) 5.5 (1.14) 7.3 (.39) 7.4 (.45) 6.8 (.26) 4.9 (.25) * NE is Northeast, LS is Lake States, CB is Combelt, 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. 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 H: SELECTED STATISTICS FROM THE QUARTERLY REPORTS OF CONDITION OF COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLES: Page Commercial banks: II.A Estimated volume of farm loans at insured commercial banks........................................................................... II.B Estimated delinquent non-real-estate farm loans at insured commercial banks.............................................. H.C Estimated net charge-offs of non-real-estate farm loans at insured commercial banks................................. n.D Estimated delinquent real estate farm loans at insured commercial banks...................................................... II.E Estimated net charge-offs of real estate farm loans at insured commercial banks.......................................... 24 25 26 27 28 Agricultural banks: ILF Distribution of agricultural banks by ratio of nonperforming loans to total loans.......................................... n.G Distribution of agricultural banks by rate of return to equity............................................................................. II.H Loan-deposit ratios at agricultural banks................................................................................................................ II.I Failures of agricultural banks.................................................................................................................................... 29 30 31 32 SOURCES OF DATA: The data in tables R A through II.H are prepared using data from the quarterly reports of condition and income for commercial banks. These reports changed substantially beginning in March 2001, and the information on the delinquencies and charge-offs of farm nonreal estate loans after that date is not directly comparable to that shown in earlier editions of the Databook. Under the new system, banks with more than $300 million in assets or any bank with a foreign office continue to report the same information as before. However, smaller banks where farm production loans account for more than 5 percent of total loans now report the same information on delinquencies and charge-offs of farm production loans as larger banks. In the new reporting system, small banks where farm production loans account for less than 5 percent of total loans are excused from reporting delinquencies or charge-offs of farm production loans. Before March 2001, these small banks had reported delinquencies and charge-offs of "agricultural loans" according to the particular bank’s own definition, and we used these responses to help estimate total delinquencies of farm production loans. Under the new reporting system, the totals for the nation as a whole include estimates of delinquencies and charge-offs of non-real-estate farm loans for small banks that hold about 35 percent of the volume of such loans that is outstanding. All banks continue to report delinquencies and charge-offs of loans that are secured by farm real estate, which are shown in tables U.D and II.E. SECTION II: (continued) Examination of total lending at banks that have a high exposure to agricultural loans provides an alternative perspective on the agricultural lending situation. Agricultural banks in table ILF through table II.I are those that have a proportion of farm loans (real estate plus nonreal estate) to total loans that is greater than the unweighted average at all banks. The estimate of this average was 14.9 percent in December of 2001. Information on failed banks (table II.I) is obtained from news releases of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, with agricultural banks broken out in our tabulation according to the definition stated in the previous paragraph. 23 24 TABLE II.A FARM DEBT OUTSTANDING AT COMMERCIAL BANKS, END OF QUARTER LOAN VOLUME, BILLIONS OF DOLLARS TOTAL LOANS REAL ESTATE LOANS NONREAL ESTATE LOANS PERCENT CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS QUARTER TOTAL LOANS PERCENT CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS YEAR REAL ESTATE LOANS NONREAL ESTATE LOANS TOTAL LOANS REAL ESTATE LOANS NONREAL ESTATE LOANS 1992 Q l . .. Q 2 ... 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 6.2 1.9 -2.9 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 7.8 3.1 3.2 1.9 0.2 1993 Ql... Q 2 .. . Q 3 .. . Q4. . . 52.8 56.0 58.0 57.7 20.0 20.6 20.8 20.9 32.8 35.4 37.1 36.8 -3.2 6.0 3.5 -0.5 0.5 3.1 1.2 0.1 -5.3 7.8 4.9 -0.8 1.7 1.6 3.2 5.8 5.6 5.4 4.7 5.0 -0.5 -0.6 2.4 6.2 1994 Q l . .. Q 2 .. . Q 3 ... Q4... 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 1.8 3.2 2.2 0.7 -3.4 10.2 3.6 -4.6 7.6 9.1 8.7 6.2 6.4 6.4 7.5 8.2 8.3 10.7 9.3 5.2 1995 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q3... Q4... 59.9 63.5 65.3 63.7 22.9 23.6 23.8 23.9 36.9 40.0 41.5 39.8 -2.3 6.1 2.9 -2.5 1.6 2.7 1.1 0.4 -4.6 8.2 3.9 -4.1 5.4 4.0 3.7 3.9 8.0 7.5 6.3 5.9 3.9 2.0 2.3 2.8 1996 Q l . .. Q2... Q 3 ... Q4... 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 2.7 0.3 1.8 1997 Q l . .. Q2... Q 3 ... Q4... 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 8.2 3.0 0.3 1.4 3.3 2.9 0.7 -5.1 11.5 3.1 0.0 3.4 5.1 6.8 8.9 5.5 6.2 8.1 8.5 2.0 4.4 6.0 9.1 1998 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q 3 .. . Q4... 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 3.2 1.3 1.3 -3.9 9.6 1.9 -4.0 9.8 8.6 7.2 4.8 9.0 8.8 7.2 7.8 10.4 8.5 7.3 3.0 1999 Q l . .. Q2... Q3... Q4... 72.7 75.8 76.8 76.0 29.7 30.8 31.4 31.8 42.9 45.1 45.5 44.2 -2.8 4.4 1.3 -1.0 1.7 3.5 1.9 1.5 -5.6 5.0 0.9 -2.8 3.7 1.1 0.7 1.7 7.6 8.0 8.6 8.8 1.1 -3.1 -4.1 -2.8 2000 Q l . .. Q2... Q3... Q 4 .. . 71.5 79.7 80.1 80.9 31.4 33.7 33.9 34.0 40.1 45.9 46.2 46.9 -5.9 11.4 0.6 1.0 -1.4 7.5 0.5 0.3 -9.2 14.4 0.6 1.5 -1.6 5.0 4.3 6.4 5.5 9.6 8.1 6.8 -6.5 1.9 1.6 6.1 2001 Q l . .. Q2... Q3. . . Q4... 79.4 82.9 82.5 82.2 34.3 35.1 35.4 35.6 45.1 47.7 47.1 46.7 -1.9 4.4 -0.4 -0.3 0.8 2.5 0.8 0.4 -3.9 5.8 -1.3 -0.9 11.0 4.0 3.0 1.6 9.2 4.2 4.5 4.6 12.4 3.9 2.0 -0.5 TABLE II.B ESTIMATED DELINQUENT FARM NON-REAL-ESTATE LOANS INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AS PERCENTAGE OF OUTSTANDING FARM PRODUCTION NONPERFORMING NONPERFORMING P A S T D UE P A S T D UE TOTAL 30 TO 89 DAYS ACCRUING TOTAL 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.7 PAST DUE 90 DAYS ACCRUING NON ACCRUAL 30 TO 89 DAYS ACCRUING TOTAL 2.2 2.0 2.1 2.4 2.0 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.7 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.2 0.9 1.0 0.8 0.9 1.2 1.4 1.1 1.1 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.5 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.2 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.1 1.0 1.3 2.2 1.0 1.2 0.3 0.9 TOTAL PAST DUB 90 DAYS ACCRUING NO N ACCRUAL 31 of year indicated---1993..... 1994..... 1995..... 1996..... 1997..... 1998..... 1999..... 2000..... 2001..... 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 End of quarter- 1 i-o 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.4 1999 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4... 1.6 1.3 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 3.7 2.8 2.2 2.1 2.1 1.2 0.8 0.8 1.5 1.6 1.4 1.3 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.2 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.1 2000 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4... 1.2 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 3.0 2.2 1.9 2.1 1.5 0.9 0.7 0.9 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.2 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 2001 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q 3 ... Q4... 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.6 3.9 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.2 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.3 1998 Q 4 . .. | | | 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 nonaccrual 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 TABLE II.C ESTIMATED NET CHARGE-OFFS OF NON-REAL-ESTATE FARM LOANS INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS* ESTIMATED AMOUNT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 1994..... 1995..... 1996..... 1997..... 1998..... 1999..... 2000..... 2001..... CHARGE-OFFS AS A PERCENTAGE OF SUCH LOANS OUTSTANDING ANNUAL TOTAL Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 ANNUAL TOTAL 69 51 95 93 87 126 108 308 10 -2 16 6 4 18 -35 67 11 14 27 19 15 37 64 53 15 13 24 19 24 35 34 140 33 25 30 50 45 36 45 48 0.19 0.13 0.24 0.23 0.20 0.28 0.24 0.68 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 0.03 -0.00 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.04 -0.08 0.15 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.09 0.16 0.12 0.04 0.03 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.07 0.29 0.08 0.06 0.07 0.11 0.09 0.08 0.10 0.10 * Data are estimates of the national charge-offs of farm non-real-estate loans based on reports from banks that hold more than 90 percent of the outstanding national volume of such loans. Additional uncertainty of the estimates arises because small banks report only charge-offs of 'agricultural' loans as defined by each bank for its internal purposes. Banks first reported these data on the March 1984 Report of Income. TABLE II.D D E L I N Q U E N T FARM REAL E S TATE LOANS I N S URED COMM E R C I A L BANKS B I L L I O N S OF D O LLARS AS PERCE N T A G E OF OUT S T A N D I N G F A R M R E A L E S T A T E LOANS NONPERFORMING TOTAL PA S T DUE 30 T O 89 DAYS ACCRUING TOTAL 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.5 P AST DUE 90 DAYS ACCRUING NONPERFORMING NON AC C R U A L PAST DUE 30 TO 89 DAYS AC C R U I N G TOTAL 2.8 2.6 2.9 2.0 2.3 2.6 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.7 1.5 1.7 1.3 1.4 1.5 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.3 2.5 2.9 0.9 1.2 1.6 1.7 0.7 0.8 2.0 1.7 1.5 1.3 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.5 1.9 1.7 1.4 1.4 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.6 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.2 T OTAL PAST DUE 90 DAYS ACCRUING NON AC C R U A L ■December 31 of y e a r Indicated* 1 9 9 6 ___ _ . 1 9 9 7 ...... 1 9 9 8 ...... 1 9 9 9 ...... 2 0 0 0 ...... 2 0 0 1 ...... 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.1 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.7 0.8 1.2 E nd of quarter* 0.7 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 1999 Q l . .. Q2... Q3. . . Q4... 1.1 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 3.6 2.7 2.3 2.0 1.6 2000 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q 3 . .. Q4. . . 1.0 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 3.2 2.7 2.1 2.3 1.3 0.9 0.7 0.8 2001 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q3. . . Q4. . . 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 3.2 2.7 2.5 2.6 1998 Q 3 . .. Q4... 1 | 11 || 1.0 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.7 0.9 1.7 1.0 0.9 1.1 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.8 All co m m e r c i a l ba n k s b e g a n to repo r t these da t a in 1991. 27 28 TABLE II.E NET CHARGE-OFFS OF REAL ESTATE FARM LOANS INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS* ESTIMATED AMOUNT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ANNUAL TOTAL 1994..... 1995..... 1996..... 1997..... 1998..... 1999..... 2000..... 2001..... 10 12 7 16 6 15 12 42 CHARGE-OFFS AS A PERCENTAGE OF SUCH LOANS OUTSTANDING Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 ANNUAL TOTAL 1 -0 1 3 1 -0 3 3 3 9 3 6 2 3 -0 5 8 5 6 4 4 14 5 7 14 17 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.06 0.02 0.05 0.04 0.12 0 -1 -1 -0 -12 10 * All commercial banks began to report these data in 1991. Q1 - Q2 Q3 Q4 0.003 0.003 0.001 0.000 0.011 0.013 0.027 0.009 0.010 -0.000 0.015 0.022 0.014 0.026 0.016 0.017 0.054 0.016 0.022 0.040 0.049 -0.003 -0.004 0.003 - 0.001 0.009 0.001 0.011 -0.037 0.030 0.009 0.027 - 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 Ai ^. joajL A x 4ti 4 w 1993. 1994. 1995. 1996. 1997. 1998. 1999. 2000. 2001. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 80.7 85.5 83.4 81.9 84.5 81.7 84.8 85.0 80.0 15.8 12.3 14.0 15.4 12.9 15.1 12.6 12.8 17.3 2.8 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.8 2.4 1.8 2.5 Km *•4 aih/4 a # 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 15.0 TO 19.9 20.0 AND OVER 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 ^ mm*!* AV _ _ quaxwox 1999 Ql. .. Q2 •.. Q3. .. Q4. .. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 77.2 78.7 80.4 84.8 17.8 16.9 15.9 12.6 4.5 3.8 3.4 2.4 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2000 Ql ••• Q2... Q3. .. Q4. .. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 81.8 82.2 83.0 85.0 14.8 15.1 14.9 12.8 2.9 2.4 1.7 1.8 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2001 Ql. .. Q2... Q3.•• Q4. .. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 80.3 80.2 78.7 80.0 16.9 16.6 17.8 17.3 2.6 3.0 3.2 2.5 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nonperforming loans are loans in nonaccrual status or past due 90 days or more. Renegotiated or restructured loans in compliance with the modified terms are not included. Agricultural banks are defined in the introduction to section II. 29 TABLE II.O SELECTED MEASURES OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE OF AGRICULTURAL AND OTHER BANKS* NET INCOME AS A PERCENTAGE OF AVERAGE EQUITY AT AGRICULTURAL BANKS ALL BANKS NEGATIVE 0 TO 4 ------------p e r c e n t a g e 1 9 9 3 .............. 1 9 9 4 .............. 1 9 9 5 .............. 1 9 9 6 .............. 1997. . . . . . 1 9 9 8 .............. 1 9 9 9 .............. 2 0 0 0 .............. 2 0 0 1 .............. 1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0 ** ** 1 .6 1 .5 1 .4 2 .1 1 .6 2 .0 2 .9 2 .4 3 .1 5 .9 5 .9 5 .7 5 .6 5 .9 8 .7 7 .9 8 .9 1 2 .6 5 TO 9 10 TO 14 AVERAGE RATE OF RETURN TO EQUITY < 15 TO 19 20 TO 24 25 AND OVER A G R I CULTURAL BANKS OTHER SMALL BANKS RATE O r RETURN TO ASSETS A G R I CULTURAL BANKS NET CHARGE-ORES AS PERCENTAGE OR TOTAL LOANS OTHER SMALL BANKS AVERAGE CAPITAL RATIO (PERCENT) OTHER SMALL BANKS A G R I CULTURAL BANKS 0 .2 0 .2 0 .2 0 .2 0 .2 0 .2 0 .3 0 .3 0 .3 0 .4 0 .3 0 .3 0 .3 0 .3 0 .3 0 .3 0 .3 0 .3 1 0 .8 1 0 .7 1 1 .2 1 0 .9 1 1 .0 1 0 .9 1 0 .5 1 0 .7 1 0 .7 9 .9 9 .9 1 0 .4 1 0 .4 1 0 .5 1 0 .5 1 0 .3 1 0 .4 1 0 .4 A G R I CULTURAL BANKS OTHER SMALL BANKS d i s t r i b u t i o n -----------2 7 .8 3 1 .4 3 7 .1 3 3 .4 3 4 .5 3 5 .6 3 4 .8 3 5 .3 3 7 .6 4 0 .4 4 0 .1 3 9 .6 4 1 .6 3 9 .7 3 5 .5 3 3 .3 3 3 .5 2 8 .6 1 8 .4 1 6 .9 1 3 .4 1 4 .2 1 4 .2 1 3 .4 1 4 .2 1 3 .8 1 3 .1 4 .6 3 .3 2 .3 2 .6 3 .1 3 .5 4 .9 4 .2 3 .7 1 .3 0 .9 0 .6 0 .5 1 .1 1 .3 1 .9 1 .8 1 .3 1 2 .3 1 1 .8 1 1 .2 1 1 .4 1 1 .4 1 1 .3 1 1 .8 1 1 .7 1 0 .8 1 2 .3 1 2 .5 1 2 .1 1 2 .3 1 2 .3 1 1 .7 1 1 .9 1 1 .4 1 0 .4 1 .2 1 .2 1 .2 1 .2 1 .2 1 .2 1 .2 1 .2 1 .1 1 .1 1 .1 1 .2 1 .2 1 .2 1 .2 1 .1 1 .1 1 .0 2 .9 6 .0 9 .1 1 1 .8 3 .0 6 .1 8 .9 1 1 .9 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 1 1 .0 1 0 .8 1 0 .8 1 0 .5 1 0 .5 1 0 .4 1 0 .4 1 0 .3 3 .2 6 .5 9 .3 1 1 .7 3 .1 6 .1 8 .9 1 1 .4 0 .3 0 .6 0 .9 1 .2 0 .3 0 .6 0 .9 1 .1 0 .0 0 .1 0 .1 0 .3 0 .1 0 .1 0 .2 0 .3 1 0 .5 1 0 .6 1 0 .7 1 0 .7 1 0 .2 1 0 .3 1 0 .4 1 0 .4 2 .8 5 .6 8 .2 1 0 .8 2 .8 5 .4 7 .9 1 0 .4 0 .3 0 .6 0 .9 1 .1 0 .3 0 .5 0 .8 1 .0 0 .0 0 .1 0 .2 0 .3 0 .1 0 .1 0 .2 0 .3 1 1 .0 1 1 .0 1 1 .2 1 0 .7 1 0 .5 1 0 .5 1 0 .6 1 0 .4 QUARTERLY •YEAR TO DATE 1999 Q Q Q Q l... 2 ... 3 ... 4 ... ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 2000 Q Q Q Q l... 2 ... 3 ... 4 ... ** ** •* ** ** ** ** 2001 Q Q Q Q l... 2 ... 3 ... 4 ... ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** * A g r i c u l t u r a l an d o t h e r b a n k s a r e d e f i n e d i n t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n t o s e c t i o n I I ; s m a ll b a n k s h a v e l e s s th a n 500 m i l l i o n d o l l a r s i n a s s e t s . T o t a l p r im a ry and s e c o n d a r y c a p i t a l (it e m s t h a t a r t a v a i l a b l e a t t h e en d o f th e p e r i o d s p e c i f i e d ) a r e m ea su red a s a p e r c e n t a g e o f t o t a l a s s e t s . Q u a r t e r ly d a t a i n t h e lo w e r p a n e l a r e c u m u la t iv e th r o u g h t h e en d o f t h e q u a r t e r i n d i c a t e d a n d , f o r p e r i o d s o f l e s s th a n a y e a r , a r e n o t c o m p a r a b le th e ann ual d a ta in th e u p p er p a n e l. to TABLE II.H AVERAGE LOAN-DEPOSIT RATIOS AT AGRICULTURAL BANKS IN SELECTED FEDERAL RESERVE D IS T R IC T S * DECEMBER 31 u.s. CLEVELAND ATLANTA CHICAGO ST. KANSAS C IT Y MINNE APOLIS LOUIS MINIMUM FARM LOAN RATIO SAN FRANCISCO DALLAS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER LOAMS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER LOANS NUMBER LOANS OF TO OF TO OF TO OF TO OF TO OF TO OF TO OF TO OF TO BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS BANKS DEPOSITS 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 3239 3101 2968 2866 2767 2683 0 .6 5 6 0 .6 8 5 0 .6 8 3 0 .7 1 8 0 .7 5 1 0 .7 4 2 49 45 40 41 39 40 0 .7 7 1 0 .7 4 7 0 .7 6 3 0 .8 4 9 0 .8 5 9 0 .7 9 1 11 3 113 99 93 92 83 0 .6 8 4 0 .7 0 4 0 .7 0 9 0 .7 3 8 0 .7 6 6 0 .7 5 1 795 759 733 715 693 675 1999 Q l . . . Q 2. . . Q 3 ... Q 4 ... 2957 2872 2918 2866 0 .6 8 9 0 .7 1 8 0 .7 3 5 0 .7 1 8 42 41 44 41 0 .7 9 3 0 .8 4 9 0 .8 4 4 0 .8 4 9 100 93 106 93 0 .7 1 9 0 .7 3 8 0 .7 4 6 0 .7 3 8 720 716 716 715 2000 Q Q Q Q l... 2 ... 3 ... 4 ... 2842 2834 2790 2767 0 .7 2 6 0 .7 6 4 0 .7 6 6 0 .7 5 1 41 43 42 39 0 .8 6 5 0 .8 8 6 0 .8 8 0 0 .8 5 9 97 96 93 92 0 .7 4 8 0 .7 8 4 0 .7 9 7 0 .7 6 6 2001 Q Q Q Q l... 2 ... 3 ... 4 ... 2755 2736 2725 2683 0 .7 4 9 0 .7 6 6 0 .7 6 5 0 .7 4 2 40 41 43 40 0 .8 4 0 0 .8 3 5 0 .8 1 7 0 .7 9 1 95 95 100 83 0 .7 5 4 0 .7 6 5 0 .7 7 1 0 .7 5 1 0 .6 8 0 0 .7 1 9 0 .7 1 1 0 .7 5 0 0 .7 7 6 0 .7 5 5 363 346 321 300 293 283 0 .6 6 3 0 .6 9 8 0 .6 9 3 0 .7 1 8 0 .7 4 8 0 .7 3 3 60 9 57 4 558 538 519 497 0 .6 9 9 0 .7 2 5 0 .7 1 5 0 .7 3 8 0 .7 6 0 0 .7 5 9 928 890 868 838 796 776 0 .7 1 9 0 .7 5 0 0 .7 6 5 0 .7 5 0 31 7 302 319 300 0 .6 8 8 0 .7 1 9 0 .7 4 5 0 .7 1 8 55 0 539 547 53 8 0 .7 2 3 0 .7 3 8 0 .7 7 5 0 .7 3 8 868 838 846 838 0 .6 8 4 0 .7 1 5 0 .7 2 1 0 .7 1 5 297 279 275 277 0 .5 3 2 0 .5 6 6 0 .5 6 7 0 .5 6 4 705 707 698 693 0 .7 5 7 0 .7 9 0 0 .7 9 6 0 .7 7 6 288 30 6 306 293 0 .7 1 4 0 .7 5 7 0 .7 6 8 0 .7 4 8 53 6 529 52 3 51 9 0 .7 5 7 0 .7 9 9 0 .7 9 1 0 .7 6 0 831 814 796 796 0 .7 1 9 0 .7 5 5 0 .7 6 1 0 .7 6 0 278 268 261 269 69 6 682 683 675 0 .7 8 1 0 .7 8 3 0 .7 8 0 0 .7 5 5 282 291 296 283 0 .7 3 1 0 .7 5 9 0 .7 6 3 0 .7 3 3 514 508 506 497 0 .7 6 4 0 .8 0 1 0 .7 9 5 0 .7 5 9 798 791 778 776 0 .7 5 5 0 .7 7 1 0 .7 7 4 0 .7 6 4 * Tha l o a n - d e p o s i t r a t i o i s d e f i n e d a s t o t a l l o a n * d i v i d e d b y t o t a l d a p o s i t s . t h a t s h ow n i n t h a l a s t c o l u n n , a s d a s c r i b a d i n t h a i n t r o d u c t i o n t o s a c t i o n I I . A g r ic u ltu r a l banks a re d e fin e d 0 .6 4 3 0 .6 8 0 0 .6 8 1 0 .7 1 5 0 .7 6 0 0 .7 6 4 a * b a n k s w it h 313 312 289 277 269 267 0 .4 9 1 0 .5 2 3 0 .5 2 9 0 .5 6 4 0 .6 1 9 0 .6 0 8 52 49 48 48 50 45 0 .7 3 5 0 .6 6 1 0 .6 6 0 0 .7 2 4 0 .7 4 1 0 .7 5 1 1 6 .4 5 1 6 .4 4 1 6 .3 4 1 5 .6 7 1 5 .0 8 1 4 .8 8 48 48 51 48 0 .6 9 2 0 .7 2 4 0 .7 3 7 0 .7 2 4 1 6 .0 4 1 6 .2 6 1 6 .2 3 1 5 .6 7 0 .5 7 1 0 .6 1 4 0 .6 1 3 0 .6 1 9 50 54 54 50 0 .7 4 3 0 .7 7 8 0 .7 6 4 0 .7 4 1 1 5 .2 8 1 5 .3 6 1 5 .3 6 1 5 .0 8 266 265 256 267 0 .6 1 1 0 .6 2 2 0 .6 2 7 0 .6 0 8 46 44 45 45 0 .7 6 4 0 .8 0 4 0 .7 8 8 0 .7 5 1 1 4 .9 5 1 5 .2 1 1 5 .1 0 1 4 .8 8 a fa r m lo a n r a t io at le a s t as great as 31 32 TABLE II.I FAILURES OF AGRICULTURAL BANKS* NUMBER OF FAILURES Q1 1 9 9 1 --1 9 9 2 ___ 1 9 9 3 ___ 1 9 9 4 ___ 1 9 9 5 --1 9 9 6 ___ 1 9 9 7 ___ 1 9 9 8 ___ 1 9 9 9 --2 0 0 0 ___ 2 0 0 1 ___ 2 0 0 2 ___ 0 Q2 Q3 Q4 ANNUAL TOTAL 2 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 ** 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 ** 8 7 5 0 0 2 1 1 1 0 0 ** * Data exclude banks assisted to prevent failure. Industrial banks and mutual savings banks also are excluded. Agricultural banks are defined in the introduction to section II. SECTION DI: FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF FARM CREDIT CONDITIONS AND FARM LAND VALUES TABLES: Page III.A Nonreal estate lending experience............................................................................................................................................. III.B Expected change in non-real-estate loan volume and repayment conditions.................................................................... III.C Average loan/deposit ratio, and other indicators of relative credit availability............................................................... III.D Interest rates.................................................................................................................................................................................. III.E Trends in real estate values and loan volume......................................................................................................................... 35 37 39 41 43 SOURCES OF DATA: Data are from quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks. These surveys are conducted at the end of each quarter by five Federal Reserve Banks. The size of the surveys differs considerably, as is noted in the information below. In addition, the five surveys differ in subject matter covered (as is evident in the tables), wording of basically similar questions, and type of banks covered. Most of the differences in wording are reflected in the use of different column headings on the two pages of each table. The states included in each district are indicated in the table headings; states that fall only partly within a given district are marked with asterisks. Beginning in 1994, the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank revised its survey considerably. Many questions were changed and it was not always possible to match the data to the categories that we have shown in previous editions of the Databook. Whenever possible, we have tried to fit the data from the revised survey into the older format. Series that were discontinued show no data for the first quarter, while those that were added suddenly appear. When a significant break in the data occurred, we included the new data and added a footnote to highlight the changes. Research departments at each of the five Reserve Banks issue more detailed quarterly reports on their survey results; these reports are available at the addresses given below. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. Box 834, Chicago, Illinois, 60690 The sample includes member banks at which farm loans represented 25 percent or more of total loans as of June 1972 (a 10 percent standard is used for banks in the state of Michigan). The sample has undergone periodic review. The latest survey results were based on the responses of about 450 banks. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas Citv. Federal Reserve P.O. Station, Kansas City Missouri 64198 The original sample chosen in 1976 had 181 banks selected from banks at which farm loans constituted 50 percent or more of total loans, with appropriate representation of all farm areas. The sample was redrawn and significantly expanded in 1987; roughly 300 banks responded to the latest survey. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480 Before 1987, the sample provided a cross-section of banks of all sizes that were engaged in farm lending. Members of the Upper Midwest Agricultural Credit Council formed the core of the survey panel. Beginning in 1987, the sample was redrawn to include only banks at which farm loans represented 25 percent or more of total loans. As outlined above, the Minneapolis survey was changed considerably beginning in the first quarter of 1994. In recent surveys, about 130 banks responded. 33 34 Section III: (continued! Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. P.O. Box 655906, Dallas, Texas 75265-5906 The sample is stratified regionally and includes banks at which farm loans are relatively important or which hold a major portion of bank loans in their region. The sample was enlarged in the first quarter of 1985 and was redrawn in the second quarter of 1989. The results for the most recent quarter were based on the responses from about 200 respondents. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. Richmond, Virginia 23261 The number of agricultural banks in this district is much smaller than those of the other districts. When the survey was initiated in 1975, the sample consisted of 43 banks of all sizes; banks with larger amounts of farm loans were sampled more heavily. More recently, the sample has consisted of about 30 banks, roughly three-fourths of which typically respond to the quarterly surveys. FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.A FARM NONREAL ESTATE LENDINQ EXPERIENCE COMPARED WITH A YEAR EARLIER (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) FUND AVAILABILITY DEMAND FOR LOANS LOWER I I I .A l SAME SEVENTH LOWER HIGHER (CHICAGO) SAME LOAN REPAYMENT RATE HIGHER FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT SAME LOWER ( IL*, I N * , IA, MI*, RENEWALS OR EXTENSIONS HIGHER WI* LOWER SAME COLLATERAL REQUIRED HIGHER | 22 50 28 |1 12 71 17 1 39 51 10 1 7 54 39 1 2000 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4. . . 1 14 23 || |1 | |1 1 | j 31 26 27 57 66 70 65 10 3 3 8 1 1 1 1 8 5 4 7 57 60 69 68 34 35 27 25 1 21 14 11 10 13 33 35 28 66 54 61 66 1 19 20 34 32 25 26 20 1 j 52 45 56 54 2 001 Ql... Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4... 1 j j | 17 23 28 23 48 48 54 52 35 29 18 24 18 13 8 6 64 65 57 60 18 22 35 34 | 37 31 21 33 58 65 72 59 5 4 7 8 1 1 1 1 4 4 8 7 61 60 70 59 III.A2 TENTH ( K A N S A S CITY) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( CO, KS, MO*, NE, SAME HIGHER o 75 25 0 22 21 20 21 ) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1999 Q 4 ... j LOWER NM*, OK, WY) 1 1 0 1 78 79 80 78 35 36 22 34 1 1 j 0 0 1 0 74 77 77 76 26 23 22 24 0 AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1999 Q 4 ... 1 17 67 17 | 1 16 69 15 1 24 66 10 1 8 70 22 1 1 84 15 2000 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4. . . 1 1 12 11 16 20 30 25 1 I6 19 20 25 75 75 76 68 8 6 4 7 1 1 1 1 9 6 4 4 75 80 79 73 16 14 17 24 0 1 1 21 15 8 10 11 1 j 1 65 62 65 68 1 j 16 19 23 20 22 | | 1 | 1 69 66 64 61 1 0 87 84 86 85 13 15 13 15 1 1 j 13 14 20 12 18 11 9 70 65 61 63 18 18 28 27 1 | 1 | 25 26 21 24 72 72 76 70 3 2 4 6 1 1 1 1 3 3 4 6 71 75 77 73 26 22 19 21 0 1 21 24 25 18 19 1 1 63 61 63 61 1 j 0 1 82 81 83 80 18 18 17 19 | 22 52 26 1 o 75 25 19 13 12 13 64 73 64 59 18 13 24 28 1 j 1 2 1 2 75 79 82 73 24 19 17 25 7 8 8 7 62 62 75 68 31 31 17 25 1 1 o 1 j 8 1 72 73 77 77 27 27 23 22 2 001 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4. . . III.A3 ELEVENTH (DALLAS) 1999 Q 4 . .. I 27 55 18 2000 Q l . .. Q2... Q3... Q4. . . l 1 l 1 20 18 23 21 59 63 51 49 21 19 26 30 2 001 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q3... Q4. . . l l l l 17 22 27 24 54 55 55 58 29 23 18 18 FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT |1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 ( LA*, NM*, TX ) 4 75 21 1 24 52 24 7 14 17 13 73 72 71 72 20 14 13 15 1 j j j 15 12 22 27 67 71 65 64 18 17 13 10 8 io io 8 74 69 68 69 17 21 22 23 | j 30 26 1 | 18 28 61 66 77 61 9 7 5 11 1 1 | 1 1 j 35 36 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 III.A4 1999 Q 4 . . . 1 | | 1 | III.A5 1999 Q 4 . . . | 1 2000 Q l . . . Q2. . . Q3. . . Q 4 ... 2001 Q l . . . Q 2 ... Q 3 ... Q4. . . | 1 1 | | (MINNEAPOLIS) **★ *** *** *** *♦* *** *** *** *** *** *** ★ ** *** *** ★★* *** *** *** *★★ *** ★★★ ... * ★ 1 FIFTH LOWER HIGHER *** | 1 2000 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q 3 .*. Q 4 ... 2 001 Q l . .. Q2... Q 3 ... Q4... NINTH SAME FUND AVAILABILITY (RIC H M O N D ) SAME HIGHER FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT |1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 RENEWALS OR EXTENSIONS LOAN REPAYMENT RATE LOWER ( M I * , MN, MT, SAME ND, HIGHER SD, W I * LOWER SAME 8 70 22 COLLATERAL REQUIRED HIGHER LOWER SAME HIGHER |1 o 80 20 o i o i 82 76 82 87 18 23 17 12 0 1 0 0 83 86 84 83 17 13 16 17 o 69 31 8 73 78 74 67 27 22 26 33 62 74 71 75 38 26 25 25 ) io 67 23 | 26 62 12 8 27 39 16 69 61 56 68 23 13 5 15 1 24 1 18 20 17 14 5 11 63 67 69 78 1 |! |1 9 30 19 8 22 20 19 25 1 46 62 72 69 11 11 11 12 11 2 70 66 61 52 20 22 27 46 1 23 17 15 1 16 61 72 78 74 16 11 7 9 7 6 12 5 77 70 78 76 16 24 10 19 FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( MD, NC, SC, VA, WV* | 1 ) 25 61 14 1 19 69 11 1 31 67 3 1 8 58 33 1 30 22 34 21 57 68 60 75 14 11 6 4 1 1 1 1 1« 19 9 4 76 69 80 92 8 11 11 4 | 27 22 1* 1 1 H 9 57 78 80 87 30 22 9 4 1 13 3 5 11 8 1 1 70 73 83 79 I9 24 40 29 58 70 56 61 23 6 4 11 1 1 1 1 o 3 o 4 85 76 56 64 15 21 44 32 1 15 15 4 11 81 85 92 86 4 0 4 4 1 0 6 92 82 84 79 8 12 8 14 6 1 8 8 1 7 8 8 1 8 1 8 8 4 1 8 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS 07 AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.B F A R M N O N R E A L E S T A T E L O A N V O L U M E E X P E C T E D D U R I N G T H E N E X T QUARTER, C O M P A R E D W I T H V O L U M E O F L O A N S M A D E A Y E A R E A R L I E R ( P E R C E N T A G E O F B A N K S RE P O R T I N G ) TOTAL LOWER SAME III.B1 FEED ER LOWER SAME HIGHER SEVENTH CA TTLE (CHICAGO) D A IR Y HIGHER LOWER SAME FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (I L * , IN*, CROP HIGHER IA, MI*, STO RAG E LOWER SAME WI*) O P E R A T IN G HIGHER LOWER SAME |[ 15 55 31 | 18 58 24 1 21 68 11 l 29 62 8 1 2000 Ql... Q 2 ... Q 3 ... |1 |1 I * 16 16 31 23 24 1 | | 31 1 19 26 23 18 60 63 66 67 21 11 11 15 1 1 20 27 26 28 69 64 66 66 11 9 8 7 1 1 j1 j1 55 54 60 53 1 24 25 21 17 25 58 49 57 66 17 30 26 9 13 20 23 19 54 57 59 53 33 23 18 28 | | | 14 22 24 24 70 65 67 68 16 13 9 8 1 1 1 1 25 22 22 16 68 71 72 77 7 7 6 6 1 1 1 29 29 27 28 61 61 66 67 Q 4 . •. 20 0 1 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q 3 ..♦ Q4... III.B2 ELEVENTH | FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (DALLAS) 1999 Q 4 . .. l 25 58 17 1 2000 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q3. . . Q4. . . l l l i 23 18 24 20 57 60 60 57 20 22 16 23 2001 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q 3 ... Q4... i l l l 20 25 22 24 58 55 60 63 22 21 18 13 1 1 1 1 I I I , .B3 1999 Q4... | 1 2000 Q l . .. Q2... Q 3 ... Q4... 2001 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q3... Q 4 .. . | 1 | | j 1 F IF T H (R IC H M O N D ) 23 61 16 34 24 40 19 53 68 57 71 13 9 3 10 17 27 40 25 70 70 55 67 13 3 5 8 (LA*. NM*, l 1 l HIGHER LOWER SAME HIGHER AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1999 Q4. . . I FA R M M A C H IN E R Y 8 46 46 1 53 39 9 1 8 1 1 1 11 11 7 47 52 54 42 45 37 35 51 1 1 1 j 46 46 43 39 46 47 49 52 8 7 8 9 10 9 7 5 1 1 1 1 8 12 13 12 43 53 60 47 49 35 27 40 1 1 1 1 42 42 42 43 45 50 47 45 13 8 11 12 TX) 24 56 21 1 13 82 5 1 15 72 13 | 19 63 17 | 30 60 10 | 26 22 19 16 20 1 1 1 l 17 21 18 15 79 77 80 78 4 2 2 2 16 19 16 16 81 71 74 78 3 25 32 15 53 56 52 65 1 1 1 1 11 10 |1 11 |1 11 23 18 17 14 53 58 61 55 24 25 22 31 | | 26 26 31 29 59 57 60 55 16 17 10 16 I7 1« 19 18 65 64 63 67 17 19 19 16 1 1 1 1 17 17 18 16 78 78 77 78 5 5 1 j j 14 14 15 12 83 77 80 81 3 9 5 8 17 18 18 19 57 61 63 64 26 21 19 18 29 31 31 35 60 56 58 58 11 13 11 7 FED ERA L | | 1 | 1 | I 1 RESERVE D IS T R IC T (M D , NC, SC, | 5 6 VA, « 1| W V*) 22 74 4 1 42 58 0 1 34 66 0 l 23 57 20 1 40 57 3 25 13 35 13 58 88 65 80 17 0 0 7 1 1 I 1 38 30 29 25 62 70 71 75 0 0 0 0 l 1 l l 31 19 11 13 69 67 59 69 0 15 30 19 l l l l 17 19 26 14 61 76 65 77 22 5 9 9 1 1 1 1 50 43 38 30 42 51 53 70 8 5 9 0 12 17 28 30 88 83 72 70 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 18 26 27 18 82 74 73 76 0 0 0 6 l l l l 10 19 6 29 81 73 76 57 10 8 18 14 l l l l 8 13 8 19 72 88 88 74 20 0 4 7 1 1 l 1 24 26 25 41 68 74 71 56 8 0 4 4 37 38 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.B (CONTINUED) EXPEC TED FEEDER LIVESTOCK LOWER SAME III.B4 NINTH 18 72 10 200 0 Ql... Q 2 ... | 1 j 1 18 11 I* 15 61 73 71 69 14 17 17 17 76 75 77 77 20 0 1 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. .. .. .. .. | 1 | 1 LOWER SAME (MINNEAPOLIS) | 1 Q3 • • • Q4 . . . OTHER INTERMEDIATE HIGHER 1999 Q 4 . . . DEMAND F O R FA R M L O A N S D U R IN G N E X T C O M PA R ED W IT H NORM AL DEMAND (P E R C E N T A G E O F B A N K S R E P O R T IN G ) | FARM REAL ESTATE HIGHER LOWER SAME FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( MI*, MN, MT, 41 3 14 13 12 6 5 7 6 9 82 62 68 78 13 31 26 13 1 42 42 39 1 43 56 49 54 53 1 9 7 4 11 8 12 17 7 6 10 6 69 67 68 75 23 27 22 19 1 | j | 34 35 28 44 61 60 67 47 5 5 4 9 6 6 6 11 28 28 26 29 62 64 62 55 10 8 6 6 18 19 16 25 76 76 78 64 SD, WI*) 56 44 52 53 55 68 68 65 74 HIGHER 1 42 35 35 39 27 22 27 23 LOWER SAME 22 5 9 8 3 21 16 15 16 1 | HIGHER 67 11 5 ND, LOWER SAME 12 57 65 FARM MACHINERY OTHER OPERATING HIGHER 33 30 Q UARTER, 1| FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AORICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.C AVERAGE LOAN-TO-DEPOSIT RATIO A ND OTHER INDICATORS OF RELATIVE CREDIT AVAILABILITY AVERAGE LOAN-TODEPOSIT R A TIO, END OF QUARTER PERCENT III.Cl l 1 1 l 73 75 77 75 2001 Q l . .. Q2... Q3. . * Q4. . . 1 75 75 75 73 1 1 1 III.C 2 LOWER AT THAN DESIRED DESIRED LEVEL SEVENTH 2000 Q l . .. Q2... Q 3 ..* Q4... TEN TH (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT 35 36 32 36 1 41 46 48 j1 52 35 34 33 34 (K A N S A S C IT Y ) 63 51 54 50 6 8 9 8 29 41 37 41 1 11 7 9 8 40 33 34 32 1 | 1 !1 67 70 71 71 1 2001 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4. . . 70 70 71 69 1 j 49 58 56 1 59 ELEVENTH (DALLAS) 2000 Q l . . . Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4... 51 55 58 55 1 | | 2001 Q l . . . Q2... Q3. . . Q4... 56 58 60 56 HIGHER THAN DESIRED 44 34 35 39 2000 Q l . .. Q2... Q3. . . Q4. . . III.C3 REFUSED OR REDUCED A FARM LOAN BECAUSE OF A SHORTAGE OF LOANABLE FUNDS L O A N / D E P O S I T R A T I O IS j *** *** **★ | 1 *** **# *** *** FED ERA L 21 29 33 25 1 1 1 1 23 1 20 1 19 14 1 RESERVE ( IL», 1 D IS T R IC T ( *** *** *** *** | j ** * *** *** *** *** *** *** | j IA, MI*, ** * ★** *** *** *** *** * * * * * * NONBANK AGENCIES CORRESPONDENT BANKS COMPARED WITH A YEAR EARLIER LOWER SAME HIGHER NONE NONE COMPARED WITH A YEAR EARLIER LOWER SAME HIGHER AGRICULTURAL BANKS WI*) | j| j j ... *** I 1 *** * ** * ** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ** * ★** *** *** *** *** *** *** | ★*★ * * * *** *** *** *** ★*★ *** *** ** * *** *** ★ ** *** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1 | * ★ * * * ★ * * * * * * ★ ★ * * * * ★ * * * * * ★ * * * * * * * * * * * | * * * ★ ★ * ★ * * * ★ * CO, | ★ ** *** ★ ** *** NUMBER OF FARM LOAN REFERRALS TO ACTIVELY SEEKING NEW FARM LOAN ACCOUNTS ★** *** *** *** | FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT IN*, (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) ( LA*, KS, M O *, N E, ★ ★ * N M *, OK, * * * W Y) * * * * * * A G R IC U L T U R A L BANKS 75 9 9 7 4 82 85 85 87 9 6 8 9 | j | j 74 77 78 77 5 9 6 8 85 83 86 86 10 8 8 6 5 5 8 8 I j j j *** *** *★ ★ *** 15 5 13 13 80 82 75 73 12 14 82 10 I 79 9 *★ * *** 6 6 ★ ** 8 10 11 8 75 72 78 81 17 18 11 11 86 85 88 90 6 6 5 4 1 77 1 75 77 81 9 9 6 6 1 1 1 | 1 84 85 83 85 5 7 7 6 90 88 89 90 4 4 4 4 *** *★ * *** *** | j *** ★★* | *** 15 10 15 12 81 84 77 80 **★ *** *** *** | *** *** *** * ** 8 12 11 83 85 1 3 3 1 73 73 71 73 0 1 1 0 1 82 I 81 82 1 71 72 71 74 1 1 1 5 2 2 1 N M * , TX) 3 1 j j j 9 9 9 39 40 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS T A B L E I I I . C (CONTI N U E D ) AVERAGE LOAN-TO-DEPOSIT RATIO AN D OTHER INDICATORS OF RELATIVE CREDIT AVAILABILITY AVERAGE LOAN-TODEPOSIT R A TIO, END OF QUARTER PERCENT III.C4 2000 Q l . . . Q 2 ... Q3... Q4 . . . | 1 1 | 1 | 1 2001 Q l . .. Q2... Q3. . . Q4... (MINNEAPOLIS) | 1 | | 1 | 1 FIFTH 70 62 HIGHER THAN DESIRED FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT 45 62 5 8 11 8 25 30 44 30 68 64 55 70 11 12 11 8 21 23 35 23 (RIC H M O N D ) ( MI*, MN, NUMBER OF FARM LOAN REFERRALS TO ACTIVELY SEEKING NEW FARM LOAN ACCOUNTS MT, 1 5 10 5 | 1 1 1 1 FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( MD, NC, SC, VA, SD, NONE ★** *** *** *** *** *** *** 10 10 4 13 87 81 87 84 4 8 9 3 *** *** *** *** 9 10 2 10 82 80 87 85 10 9 11 4 ** * *** *** *** *** *** ★** *** 9 7 10 9 86 88 86 88 5 5 3 4 *** *** *** *** 8 11 6 9 85 82 88 83 7 7 6 9 o 3 WV*) | 42 44 14 0 68 94 39 47 14 3 66 77 0 6 6 j Q3... |1 | 75 | 38 44 18 3 60 88 0 12 77 | 39 43 17 4 67 75 5 20 73 72 Q l . .. Q2. . . 84 1 46 46 8 1 0 1 j 61 68 32 6 4 1 0 Q3. . . 78 74 0 72 Q4... 74 1 56 7 | 0 71 28 37 NONE 1 | | 1 1 13 80 0 20 83 78 3 0 13 22 93 0 7 o o 0 0 0 0 | 1 |1 1 1 | 1 80 0 9 11 69 3 16 13 67 80 0 30 3 0 20 0 80 0 20 77 3 0 3 74 0 17 22 93 0 7 + B e g i n n i n g i n 1994, M i n n e a p o l i s o m i t t e d t h e r e s p o n s e 'none' f o r t h e n u m b e r of r e f e r r a l s t o e i t h e r c o r r e s p o n d e n t b a n k s o r n o n b a n k a g e n cies . T h e c o l u m n t h a t h a s b e e n a d d e d c o m b i n e s r e s p o n s e s t h a t f o r m e r l y w o u l d h a v e b e e n r e p o r t e d as e i t h e r 'none' o r 'low'. COMPARED WITH NORMAL NUMBER LOWER SAME HIGHER WI*) 74 75 j NONBANK AGENCIES COMPARED WITH NORMAL NUMBER LOWER SAME HIGHER |1 |1 1 1 2 2 « 1 ND, CORRESPONDENT BANKS Q l . .. Q2... Q4... 2001 70 73 77 73 AT LOWER DESIRED THAN DESIRED LEVEL 84 71 76 73 III.C5 2000 NINTH REFUSED OR REDUCED A FARM LOAN BECAUSE OF A SHORTAGE OF LOANABLE FUNDS L O A N / D E P O S I T R A T I O IS (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) 4 0 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, 200 0 Ql. . . Q 2 ... Q3. . . Q4. . . SEVENTH 9.2 8.6 8.1 7.5 III.D2 2 0 0 1 Q l . .. Q2 . . . Q3 . . . Q4... FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT 9.7 10.1 10.1 9.9 1l 1l 1l 1l 2 0 0 1 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4... 2 0 0 0 Q l . .. Q2 . . . Q 3 ... Q4... (CHICAGO) I 1 j | | | | | TENTH ( K A N S A S CITY) 10.0 10.4 10.4 10.3 9.6 9.0 8.4 7.8 INTER MEDIATE NONREAL ESTATE OTHER OPERATING LOANS FEEDER CATTLE LOANS XIX.Dl PERCENT) (IL*, IN*, LONG-TERM REAL ESTATE LOANS IA, MI*, W I * ) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 9.8 10.4 10.2 9.9 ★** *** *** *** 8.9 9.2 9.4 8.9 9.2 8.6 8.0 7.4 *#* *** ★ ** *** 8.2 7.9 7.5 7.2 FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, 10.2 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.0 10.3 10.3 10.2 9.5 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.8 9.1 8.6 8.1 9.5 9.0 8.5 8.2 8.9 8.5 8.0 7.6 OK) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 41 42 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/ FEEDER CATTLE LOANS III.D3 2 0 0 0 Ql... Q 2 ... Q3. . . Q4. . . NINTH *** h It* *** *** *** 2 0 0 1 Ql. * • Q 2 ... Q 3 ... Q4. . . *** *** III.D4 2 0 0 0 Q l . .. Q2 . . . Q3 . . . Q 4... ELEVENTH || [ | | 2 0 0 1 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q 3 ... Q4. . . III.D5 2 0 0 0 Q l . .. Q2. . . Q 3 ... Q4. . . 2 0 0 1 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q3. . . Q4. . . | 1 | | j FIFTH (DALLAS) INTER MEDIATE NONREAL ESTATE OTHER OPERATING LOANS ( M I N N EAPOLIS) 1 1l 1 1l PERCENT) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT LONG-TERM REAL ESTATE LOANS ( M I * , MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*) 9.9 10.1 10.5 10.4 9.9 10.2 10.4 10.3 9.2 9.4 9.7 9.6 9.8 9.3 8.9 8.2 9.8 9.3 8.9 8.1 9.1 8.6 8.5 7.6 FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (LA*, NM*, TX) 10.6 11.0 11.0 11.0 10.6 10.8 11.0 11.1 10.5 10.7 10.8 10.8 9.9 10.2 10.1 10.2 10.3 9.7 9.2 8.3 10.4 9.7 9.2 8.4 10.1 9.5 9.2 8.5 9.5 9.0 8.5 8.0 (RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 10.0 10.4 10.6 10.5 10.2 10.6 10.6 10.4 10.0 10.4 10.4 10.1 9.6 1 0.1 9.9 9.8 9-* 8.6 8.2 9.9 9.4 11.0 7.9 7.2 9.2 8.5 8.0 7.2 8.9 8.3 7.6 7.0 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.E TRENDS IN FARM REAL ESTATE VALUES A N D LOAN VOLUME MARKET VALUE OF GOOD FARMLAND PERCENTAGE CHANGE DURING QUARTER ALL III.El DRYLAND SEVENTH IRRIGATED ALL ★** l 2 *** 2000 Q l . .. Q 2 . .. Q3. . . Q4... 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 *** *** *★★ *** ★*★ *** *** *** *** 2001 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q3... Q 4 ... 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 * ** ★★* *** ★*★ *** ★** * ** *** *** *** *** *** 1999 2000 2001 Q 4 . .. I 2000 2001 (RICHMOND) *** *** * ** ** * ** * *★* ##* * ** ★** ★*★ *** *** 1 1 1 1 4 5 6 6 *** *** ★*★ *** * ** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 1 1 1 I 4 5 5 5 ★★* *** *** **★ ★*★ * *★ * ** *** ★** ★★* ★** *** | 1 Q3 . . . Q 4 ... |j j| **★ 3 -1 -0 0 Q l . .. *** 3 7 Q2... * * * Q3... Q4... ★ * * 1 -2 1 -1 -7 3 * * * 1 0 2 -3 5 - 1 -3 -2 12 11 12 11 1 1 1 1 26 27 22 22 61 67 66 63 14 6 12 15 1 1 1 1 15 10 13 7 74 79 79 78 11 11 7 14 1 1 l 1 25 25 22 19 61 65 65 63 14 10 13 18 9 74 17 1 33 58 9 l 1 60 68 53 11 8 13 77 9 (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) h 1t + *** *** * *★ 16 25 24 26 l 29 24 34 14 9 *★★ ★★* *** *** **★ *** *** ★** ★** *** *** *** 0 0 12 65 73 68 75 1 1 1 l 29 23 23 19 54 73 64 74 17 4 35 27 20 21 l 27 62 11 l l l 20 19 29 27 62 62 61 63 17 19 10 10 20 30 29 32 68 59 59 58 12 11 12 10 D IS T R IC T (L A * , N M *, |I | I 4 -8 -0 | ★ ★★ ** ★ *** *** *** *** 6 5 3 2 -5 -2 1 -1 -1 | j *★* *** -1 -2 j *** *** ★** *** ★** *** *** *** *** | *** | 1 j | j | ★ * * ★ ★ ★ * * * 2 4 2 3 6 4 -4 2 l 3 14 7 TX) *** *** 1 75 78 80 77 84 75 76 74 FED ERA L R ESER V E -5 -2 4 2 13 11 8 12 o 13 11 13 *** *** 1 1 1 1 o o 0 *★* ★ ** *** *★* Ql... Q2 . . . 13 I **★ *** *** ★** |1 || 59 I I *** **★ *★* *** | 28 ... ★** 5 1 l | l l 1 l 8 8 *★* Q l . .. Q2 . . . Q3... Q4... -1 71 *** * ** *** 2 22 ★★★ * ** *** *** *** l | **★ || HIGHER **★ 5 Q 4 . .. SAME ★** l (D A L L A S ) LOWER *** -17 -21 2 0 ELEVEN TH UP ’ 12 -3 -0 -1 6 STABLE IA, MI*, WI*) AGRICULTURAL BANKS *** l l l -3 IN*, DOWN *** Q l . .. Q2... Q3... Q4 . . . 4 (IL*, RANC H LAND 1 FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT 7 IRRI GATED 1 *** *★★ *** III.E 3 1999 FIFTH D RYLAND (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT 1999 Q 4 .. . III.E2 TREND EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT QUARTER ( P E R C E N T A G E O F BANKS) PERCENTAGE CHANGE FROM A YEAR EARLIER RANCHLAND E X P ECTED T R END IN FARM REAL ESTATE LOAN VOLUME D U R I N G T H E N E X T Q U ARTER, COMPARED TO YEAR EARLIER ( P E R C E N T A G E O F BANKS) ^ 1 ★ ★ ★ * * * * * * 10 j * * * ★ ★ ★ * * * 3 -2 j j * * * * ★ * * * * * * * * * * ★ * * l l l i l 43 44 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE III.E (CONTINUED) TRENDS IN F A R M R E A L E S T A T E V A L U E S A N D L O A N V O L U M E EXPECTED DEMAND FOR FARM REAL ESTATE LOANS D U R I N G T H E N E X T QU A R T E R , COMPARED WITH NORMAL ( P E R C E N T A G E O F BANKS) MARKET VALUE OF GOOD FARMLAND ALL III.E4 1999 Q4... 200 0 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. .. 3 1 I *** *** *** *** 1 -1 2 -0 3 -1 2 2 1 | 1 1 | 1 | 1 j I 1 *** *** *** 1 -1 j *** ■2 | | | | | | l | j 3 NINTH 1 2 -1 2 -0 (MINNEAPOLIS) 2 2 ★★* *** *** *** *** 3 *** *** *** -1 *** 0 -0 IRRI GATED ★** **★ *★★ *** *** *** *** *** **★ *** ★ ** *** *** *** *** ★ ** *** *** *** *** ★ ** *** *** ★ ** **# *** *** ★** ★*★ ... *** *** | | j j j RAN C H LAND (CO, KS, DOWN MO*, 1 2 4 2 3 2 3 7 3 6 3 2 4 3 4 5 3 2 1 3 4 3 3 4 0 FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT *★★ *** DRYLAND FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT 1 200 0 Q l . .. Q 2 ... Q3... Q4. . . 2 0 0 1 Q l . .. Q2... Q3... Q4... ( K A N S A S CITY) ALL 1 III.E5 1999 Q4... RANCH LAND *★ ★ .. 2 0 0 1 Ql. . . Q2. . . Q3. . . Q4... TENTH IRRIGATED | .. .. DRYLAND TREND EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT QUARTER ( P E R C E N T A G E O F BANKS) PERCENTAGE CHANGE FROM A YEAR EARLIER PERCENTAGE CHANGE DURING QUARTER NE, OK, UP LOWER SAME HIGHER WY) ★ ** **★ *** | *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** I ★ ** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ★★★ *** | | j 1 j | **★ *** *** *** *** *** *** 1 *** *★ * *★ ★ **★ *** ★ *★ | 1 *★★ *★* ★★* *** *** j j *** ★** *** ★*★ ★★* *#* *★* *** **★ 1 33 57 11 ★*★ ** * *** *** ★** **★ *** *** *** *** *** *** 1 j 42 35 1 j 35 39 44 52 53 55 14 13 12 6 *★* ★** *** *** *★* *** *** *** *** *** *** *** | | | j 28 28 26 29 62 64 62 11 8 12 17 | | 6 7 (MI* , MN, NM*, STABLE MT,- ND, ★** 5 2 2 l *** ★*★ ★** *** 4 11 11 10 3 8 7 6 4 5 10 2 1 l l l ★** *** *** *** 8 10 6 6 2 10 6 1 7 5 7 6 5 l l l SD, j j WI*) 55
@FedFRASER