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 Fourth Quarter 1989 Guide to internal tables of contents and notes on sources Farm debt outstanding, major lending institutions Amount and characteristics of farm loans made by commercial banks. .. Page 3 7 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 Nicholas A. Walraven and John Rosine 16 26 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. In early December, when this publication went to press, data were available through either the second or third quarters of 1989. 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 substantive questions may be addressed to Nicholas Walraven or John Rosine 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. the old address should be included. A copy of the back cover showing SECTION I: FARM DEBT OUTSTANDING (including farm households) TABLES: Debt held by institutional lenders I.A Quarterly estimates Page 4 SOURCES OF DATA: Section I focuses on debt figures that are reported by the major farm lending institutions. These data provide much of the basis for the USDA's annual estimates of farm debt that are reported in Economic Indicators of the Farm Sector: National Financial Summary, available from the USDA's Economic Research Service. As is evident in the tables that follow—particularly Table A.6—annual changes in the lender data tend to approximate quite closely the changes in the official USDA data. Thus, the lender data, in an unadjusted form, seem to provide a reasonably good picture of current trends in agricultural debt outstanding. The sources of the data in this section are the quarterly reports of condition, all insured commercial banks; the quarterly information statements of the Farm Credit System; "Gross Flow of Mortgage Loans in the United States," American Council of Life Insurance; and "Report 616," Farmers Home Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture. The farm debt series on a USDA basis is from the Economic Research Service. The data are not seasonally adjusted. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: When this edition of the Databook went to press in early December, a full set of data on farm loans outstanding was available only through June 1989. As of that date, the overall volume of farm debt held by the institutional lenders was continuing to trend lower on a year-to-year basis, but at a much slower rate than through the mid-1980s. The trends in loans outstanding vary among the different lenders. At commercial banks, the rate of increase in the volume of farm loans secured by real estate picked up somewhat in the second quarter of 1989, and the volume of nonreal estate loans moved up to a level 1-1/2 percent above that of a year earlier. As of midyear, other lenders still were experiencing year-to-year declines in their volumes of both real estate and nonreal estate loans. However, third-quarter data that are available for the Farm Credit System (but are not included in the tables) show the System's volume of nonreal estate loans rising 2.6 percent from the second quarter, to a level about 4.4 percent above a year earlier; this is the first such year-to-year gain in many quarters. Ki '() KTABLE I.A FARM DEBT OUTSTANDING: REAL TOTAL END OF QUARTER I.A1 1 9 8 6 - Q 4 . . .I j 1987-Ql.. 1 -Q2. . I -Q3. . 1 -Q4. . I 126866. 128075. 126819. 123826. 1988-Ql.. -Q2. . -Q3. . -Q4. . 121359. 124144. 124173. 120611. 1 1 1 1 j 1989-Ql.. I -Q2. . 1 ! j 132498. INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS TOTAL AMOUNT, | j | | | | E N D OF DEBT FARM CREDIT SYSTEM OF FARMERS | HOME | ADMINIS-I TRATION 1 INSTITUTIONS NONREAL 1 LIFE INSURANCE COMPANIES MILLIONS FARM LENDING TOTAL ESTATE DEBT INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS FARM CREDIT SYSTEM FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION MEMO: FARM DEBT H E L D BY M A J O R FARM LENDING INSTITUTIONS, USDA BASISX DOLLARS 39286. 10983. 10355. 59184. 31180. 11563. 16441. 1130125. 71295. 70358. 69389. 68765. 13137. 13825. 14119. 14454. 37458. 35990. 35124. 34346. 10430, 10352. 10078. 9893. 10270. 10191. 10068. 10072. 55571. 57717 . 57430. 55061. 28775. 30425. 30641. 29041. 10423. 10649. 10518. 9927 . 16373. 16643. 16271. 16093. 14723. 15158. 15337. 15417. 33566. 33048. 33038. 32182. 9656. 9582. 9590. 9662. 9966. 9931 . 9835. 9594. 53448. 56425. 56373. 53756. 28109. 30258. 30762. 29799. 9479. 10127. 9812. 9256 . 15860. 16040. 15799. 14701. |XXXXXXX |XXXXXXX j XXXXXXX 1121930. 1 j XXXXXXX j XXXXXXX |XXXXXXX 1118521. 15827. 16303. 31051. 30624. 9405. 9318., ] . ^ 9559. 9446. 9 ^ - / 52271. 55279. 28389. 30707. 9286 . 9980. 14596. 14592. —i: i / — |XXXXXXX j XXXXXXX 1 xxxxxx 100 . 0 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 100 100 100 10 0 . . . , | j | j xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 100,. 100,, 100 . 100 . TOTAL SPECIFIED / / - /• DEBT, " E N D OF QUARTER ^ N '?< 17 .3 53 .6 15 .0 14 .1 100 . 0 52 .7 19 .5 27 .8 xxxxxxx 0 0 0 0 18 19 20 21 52 51 50 49 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 .4 .5 .5 .6 100 . 100 . 100,. 100 , . 0 0 0 0 51 , .8 52 .7 53,.4 52,J 18 18 18 18 .8 .5 .3 .0 29 28 28 29 .5 .8 .3 .2 XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX 0 0 0 0 21 , .7 22 .4 22,.6 23. 1 49 .4 48,.8 48 , .7 48 , 1 14 , .2 14 , .2 14,. .1 14 , .5 14,,7 14,,7 14,.5 14,.4 100,. 100., 100., 100 . , 0 0 0 0 52,,6 53.,6 54.,6 55. 4 17 17 17 17 , .7 , .9 , .4 , .2 29 .7 28 , .4 28,.0 27 , .3 XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX 24 ., 0 24. 8 .2 47 . 46 ..6 14,, 3 14 ,2 14.,5 14. 4 100 ., 0 100 ., 0 54. 3 55. 5 17 .,8 18.. 1 27 . ,9 26 .,4 XXXXXXX XXXXXXX 100 ., 0 100 .0 ,, u aE.!!SKcSEfJgLI!!.BSoiJsSo?S 7?r BY T H E M A J O R 12690. | 67911. | 67719. | 67500. | 66855. j 118113. | 65842. 120970. | 65691. ry?./ J / ' / I.A2 P E R C E N T A G E OF 1 9 8 9 - Q l . . ., 1 x x x x x x -Q2... j xxxxxx 1 ESTATE REPORTED '/^1 73314. 1 9 8 6 - Q 4 . . .j 1 1 1987-Ql.. | -Q2. . I -Q3. . I -Q4. . | 1988-Ql.. -Q2. . -Q3. . -Q4 . . QUARTER, DATA rvt .4 .6 . 3 . 0 . 5 .2 .6 . 9 , .6 .7 . 5 .4 or'&'iUjSrSMiictf S&}gW SI.JP&'Sauhce sheet.. # TABLE # I.A E N D OF QUARTER f (CONTINUED) 1 | I TOTAL I.A3 1 1 1 I 1 1 t # FARM # DEBT # OUTSTANDING: REAL TOTAL QUARTER, 1 | xxxxxxx 275. -5632. 1209. -1256. -2993. I I I I -2019. -937. -969. -624. 447. 688 . 294. 335. 1988-Ql... -Q2... -Q3... -Q4... -2467. 2786 . 29 . -3562. I I I I -854. -191. 81. -945. 269. 435. 179. 80. 1989-Ql... - Q 2 . .. -2498. I 2857 . I 1 -1013. -152. 410. 476 . 1986-Q4... xxxxxxx 1987-Ql... -Q2... -Q3... -Q4... I.A4 xxxxxx 1986-Q4... 1987-Ql.. . -Q2... -Q3. . . -Q4... -4.3 1.0 -1.0 -2.4 1988-Ql... -Q2... -Q3.. . -Q4... -2.0 2.3 .0 -2.9 1989-Ql... -Q2... -2.1 2.4 1 FARM CREDIT SYSTEM MILLIONS xxxxxxx -1828. -1468. -866 . -778. -780. -518. -10. -856 . -1131. -427. PERCENTAGE CHANGE DURING 1 j XXXXXX 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I | 1 DATA REPORTED # # BY T H E M A J O R FARM # LENDING LIFE INSURANCE COMPANIES FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION • # I # INSTITUTIONS NONREAL E S T A T E DEBT INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS CHANGE DURING # TOTAL INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS XXXXXXX -2440. ESTATE DEBT FARM CREDIT SYSTEM FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION MEMO: FARM DEBT H E L D BY M A J O R FARM LENDING INSTITUTIONS, USDA B A S I S X -1202. xxxxxxx -68. 270. -372. -178. xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxx*xxx OF D O L L A R S xxxxxxx -423. -200. -553. -78. -274. -185. -85. -79. -123. 4. -3613. 2146 . -287. -2369. -2405. 1650. 216 . -1600 . -1140. 226 . -131. -591. -237 . -73. 8. 72. -106 . -35. -96 . -241. -1613. 2977 . -52. -2617. -932. 2149 . 504. -963. -448. 648. -315. -556 . -233. 180 . -241 . -1098. xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx -257 . -88. -35. -113. -1485. 3008. -1410. 2318 . 30. 694. -105. -4. xxxxxxx xxxxxxx QUARTER 1 I XXXXXX -7.3 XXXXXX -6.8 xxxxxxx -6 .1 3.9 -.5 -4.1 -7.7 5.7 .7 -5.2 -9.9 2.2 -1.2 -5.6 -.4 1.6 -2.2 -1.1 xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx -2.9 5.6 -.1 -4.6 -3.2 7.6 1.7 -3.1 -4.5 6.8 -3.1 -5.7 -1.4 1.1 -1.5 -6.9 xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx -2.8 5.8 -4.7 8.2 .3 7.5 -.7 -.0 xxxxxxx xxxxxxx 2.2 XXXXXX -3.7 -1.9 -2.8 -1.3 -1.4 -.9 3.5 5.2 2.1 2.4 -4.7 -3.9 -2.4 -2.2 -5.0 -.8 -2.6 -1.8 ::! -1.2 .0 ! I I | -1.2 -.3 .1 -1.4 1.9 3.0 1.2 .5 -2.3 -1.5 -.0 -2.6 -2.4 -.8 .1 .8 -!:i -1.0 -2.5 -1.5 -.2 2.7 3.0 -3.5 -1.4 -2.7 -.9 -.4 -1.2 i I 1 1 | 1 1 5 T A B L E I.A (CONTINUED) END OF QUARTER 1 | I 1 1 I 1 1 1986-Q4.. I 1 1987-Ql.. j -Q2. . | -Q3. . | -Q4. . I 1988-Ql . . -Q2. . -Q3. . -Q4. . I I I I TOTAL I.A5 1 1 1 I 1 1 FARM DEBT O U T S T A N D I N G : REAL TOTAL INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS R E P O R T E D BY DATA ESTATE DEBT FARM CREDIT SYSTEM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANIES THE MAJOR 1 1 FARMERS 1 HOME I ADMINIS- 1 TRATION 1 FARM LENDING INSTITUTIONS NONREAL TOTAL INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS E S T A T E DEBT FARM CREDIT SYSTEM FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION ! I MEMO: I FARM DEBT |HELD BY M A J O R |FARM L E N D I N G |INSTITUTIONS, 1 USDA B A S I S * C H A N G E FROM P R E V I O U S Y E A R , M I L L I O N S OF D O L L A R S -4307 . -3510. -328. -14903. -195. -393. -487 . -283. | ******* j ******* j ******* 1 -4123. -4989 . -3709. -2979. -2139. ******* ******* ******* -1636. -503. -1240. -1372. -348. ******* ******* ******* -8195. -77. ******* ******* ******* -4940. -1193. -961 . -1328. -1090. I -6843. 1356 . -7298. xxx**x* ******* ******* -8672. | ******* j ******* j ******* 1 -4549. 1442. 1732. 1704 . 1764. 1 I -8145. -824. -14988. -5508. I -3931. | -2646. I -3215. I -3385. -2639. -1589. -1910. 1586 . 1333. 1218 . 963. -3892. -2942. -2086. -2164. -775. -770. -488. -231 . -304. -260 . -233. -478 . 1 1 I I -2123. -1292. -1057. -1305. -66 6 . -167 . 121 . 758 . -944. -522. -706 . -671. -513. -603. -472. -1392. ******* ******* ******* -3409 . | 1 1 -2069. -2029. 1104. 1145. -2515. -2424. -251 . -265. -407 . -485. I I 1 -1177. -1146. 280 . 449. -193. -147 . -1264. -1448. ******* ******* 1989-Ql . . I -3246 . -Q2. . I -3175. 1 1 I I.A6 1 1 1986-Q4.. , .1 -10.2 i 1987-Ql. . i ****** -Q2. . i ****** -Q3. . j ****** -6.5 -Q4. . | P E R C E N T A G E C H A N G E FROM P R E V I O U S YEAR 1 I -8.5 1 j ****** j ****** | ****** I -6.2 12.0 -15.7 -7 .0 -.7 12.3 14.3 13.7 13.9 ****** ****** ****** -12.6 -10.3 -8.5 -11.6 -9.9 I I -12.1 -12.1 -23.3 -2.0 -10.3 -1.9 -3.7 -4.6 -2.7 | ****** | ****** j ****** 1 -7.0 -14.8 -10.9 -8.9 -6.9 ****** xxxxxx xxxxxx -14.1 -3.0 -6.9 -7.8 -2.1 ******* ******* ******* -6.3 I I 1 I i -4.3 -3.1 "2.1 -2.6 I I 1 1 -4.7 -3.8 -2.3 -2.8 12.1 9.6 8.6 6.7 -10.4 -8.2 -5.9 -6.3 -7.4 -7.4 -4.8 -2.3 -3.0 -2.6 -2.3 -4.7 I I | I -3.8 -2.2 -1.8 -2.4 -2.3 -. 5 .4 2.6 -9.1 -4.9 -6 .7 -6.8 -3.1 -3.6 -2.9 -8.6 ******* ******* ******* -2.8 1989-Ql. . 1 -Q2. . I 1 -2.7 -2.6 I I 1 -3.0 -3.0 7.5 7.6 -7.5 -7.3 -2.6 -2.8 -4.1 -4.9 I I 1 -2.2 -2.0 1.0 1.5 -2.0 -1.5 -8 . 0 -9.0 ******* ******* 1988-Ql.. -Q2. . -Q3. . -Q4 . . SECTION II: AMOUNT AND CHARACTERISTICS OF FARM LOANS MADE BY COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLES: Estimates from the quarterly survey of nonreal estate farm loans II.A II.B II.C II.D II.E II.F II.G Amount Number Average size Average maturity Average effective interest rate Percentage of loans with a floating interest rate.... Distribution of farm loans by effective interest rate Page 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 SOURCES OF DATA: These data on the farm loans 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 340 commercial banks. A subset of 250 banks was asked for information regarding agricultural lending, and about 150 typically reported at least one farm loan. Beginning in August of 1989, the data are being drawn from a new, redesigned sample of 250 banks that is no longer part of the broader survey. In choosing the new sample, banks are stratified according to their volume of farm lending; previously, they had been stratified according to the volume of total loans. As before, however, the sample data are being expanded into national estimates for all commercial banks. In the August 1989 survey, about 200 banks reported at least one farm loan, and the number of sample loans totaled about 4500, more than twice the number typically reported in the previous quarterly surveys. The new panel of farm banks also was chosen so that the regional mix of sample banks corresponds roughly to the geographic distribution of outstanding farm loans; over time, as more experience is gained with the new sample, it may become possible to examine regional differences in the terms of agricultural lending. In both the previous survey and the new one, the national estimates exhibit variability due to sampling error. This variability is particularly evident in data on average maturity, which are greatly affected by the SECTION II: (CONTINUED) occasional appearance of loans with a maturity of about 20 years. In addition, the breakdown of national estimates into those for large banks and small banks may be affected somewhat by the new sampling procedures that were implemented in August 1989; apparent shifts in the data as of that date therefore should be treated with caution. More detailed results from each quarterly survey are published in Table 5 of Statistical Release E.2, "Survey of Terms of Bank Lending," for which a mailing list is maintained by Publications Services, Mail Stop 138, Federal Reserve Board, Washington, D.C., 20551. Starting with the August 1986 survey, farm loans secured by real estate are included in the data shown in Statistical Release E.2, whereas such loans are excluded from the tabulations presented here. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: According to the survey taken in the second week of August 1989, the average effective rate of interest on commercial banks' nonreal estate loans to farmers (Table II.E) was 12.5 percent, down 40 basis points from the level reported in the May survey. Over the previous four quarters, the average interest rate on nonreal estate farm loans had risen about 220 basis points. In the third quarter, lower rates were reported for all types of farm loans and at both large banks and small banks. Other results from the quarterly surveys are presented in Tables II.A through II.D and in Table II.F. Because the quarterly data on these other loan characteristics (e.g., average loan maturity and the average size of loan) tend to be volatile, annual averages probably are a better indicator of the underlying trends. For 1989, the survey data for the first three quarters show the amount of nonreal estate farm loans made by commercial banks averaging a bit over $50 billion at an annual rate. The number of such loans made has averaged more than 2-1/2 million at an annual rate, and the size of these loans has averaged about $19,000. As in the past several years, the nonreal estate farm loans made by banks have average maturities of about 8 to 9 months. Nearly two-thirds of the loans are being made with a floating interest rate; among large banks, the proportion is much higher—between 8 0 and 90 percent of the amount of loans made. E S T I M A T E S FROM THE Q U A R T E R L Y S A M P L E S U R V E Y OF BANK NONREAL E S T A T E LOANS TO F A R M E R S T A B L E II.A A M O U N T OF LOANS M A D E (BILLIONS OF D O L L A R S ) * 1 PERIOD PURPOSE OF LOAN 1 ALL LOANS 1 II.A1 FEEDER LIVESTOCK ANNUAL OTHER LIVESTOCK 43. 47 . 53. 9. 13. 17. 5. 4. 5. 1980. 1981 . 1982. 1983. 1984. 1985. 1986 . 1987 . 1988. 60. 61 . 66 . 67. 61 . 52. 48. 50. 48. 16. 13. 14. 12. 11 . 9. 10. 13. 10. 5. 4. 4. 6 . 6 . 5. 5. 3. 5. A M O U N T OF LOANS M A D E DURING 1986-Q1. -Q2. -Q3. -Q4. 1987-Q1. -Q2. -Q3. -Q4. 10. 9. 11 . 11 . 8. 11 . 18. 15. 24. 27 . 28 . 31 . 27 . 23. 23. 22. 24. 5. 5. 5. 6. 4. 4. 2. 2. 2. OTHER 1 TO 9 10 TO 24 25 TO 99 8. 8 . 8. 9. 8 . 9. 9. 9. 8. 13. 14. 17 . 10. 11 . 13. 12. 12. 11 . 8. 8. 7 . 8. 8 . 8 . 8 . 9. 7 . 6 . 6 . 5. 10. 9. 10. 9. 8. 7. 7. 7 . 6 . 18. 18. 18. 18 . 18. 13. 13. 13. 13. FIRST FULL WEEK OF S E C O N D MONTH OF Q U A R T E R 3. 3. 3. 4. 3. 2. 4. 26. 19. 24. 21 . 2. 8. 8. 4. 3. 6 . 5. 1989-Q1. -Q2. -Q3. 14. 12. 13. 3. 5. 7 . 24. 21. 33. 18. 18. 30. 23. I N C L U D E D IN THE S U R V E Y . " L A R G E " B A N K S ARE T H O S E WITH A S S E T S 4. 4. 4. 22. 25. 19. 26 . 12. 13. 16 , 17 , 19, 7. 5. 3. 3. 1988-Q1. -Q2. -Q3. -Q4. * LOANS UNDER $1,000 A R E NOT FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT SIZE OF LOAN ( T H O U S A N D S OF D O L L A R S ) A M O U N T OF LOANS M A D E 1977 . 1978. 1979. II.A2 OTHER CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES 1 1 1 j |1 1 1 OVER $500 MILLION, 1. 2. 1. 8. 11 . 6 . 5. 9. 6 . 9. 6 6 6 , 6, 6 . 6, 6 , S I Z E OF BANK 100 AND OVER LARGE „! 16. 18. | | 11 . 12. 11 . 32. 34. 42. 24. 25. 30. 32. 26. 24. 22. 24. 24. | | | | | | | | | 1 12. 13. 22. 19. 16 . 15. 13. 17 . 16 . 48. 48. 44. 49. 45. 37. 36. 32. 32. (SEASONALLY-ADJUSTED ANNUAL RATE) 12. 13. 14. 13. 25. 26 . 13. 23. 15. 12. 10. 13. 36 , 39. 33. 35. 11 . 25. 16 . 30. 29. 19. 11 . 21. 19. 32. 27 . 35. 38. 37. 27. 44. 24. 26 . 12. 13. 14. 4. 10. 2. 8. 7 . 9. 6 . 6. 6 . 5. 4. 12. 15. 10. 22. 31. 19. 15. 17 . 17 . 14. 5. 7 . 7 . 5. 6. 6 . 11. 14. 16 . 20. 27. 21 . 17 . 18. 19. 2. 2. 1. 2. 2. 2. 6 . OTHER 16 . 23. 36 . 35. E S T I M A T E S FROM THE Q U A R T E R L Y S A M P L E S U R V E Y OF BANK NONREAL T A B L E II.B NUMBER 1 | | ALL 1 1 PERIOD ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS OF LOANS M A D E ( T H O U S A N D S ) * SIZE OF LOAN ( T H O U S A N D S OF D O L L A R S ) P U R P O S E OF LOAN LOANS II. B1 FEEDER LIVESTOCK ANNUAL OTHER LIVESTOCK OTHER CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT 1 TO 9 OTHER 10 TO 24 25 TO 99 I 100 AND OVER S I Z E OF BANK I LARGE OTHER NUMBER OF LOANS M A D E 1977 1978 1979 I | I 3428. 3346. 3418. 435 . 602 . 520 . 397 . 316 . 308 . 1629. 1596 . 1745. 503. 430. 429 . 456 . 389. 412. I I 1 2522. 2357. 2372. 575. 598 . 591 . 286. 328. 371 . 45 64 83 188. 194. 181 . 3241 3152 3237 198 0 198 1 198 2 198 3 198 4 198 5 1986 1987 1988 I I I I I I I I I 3401. 3386. 3301. 3412. 3443. 2963. 2547. 2381. 2211. 499 . 389. 328. 373. 336. 335. 296. 391 . 293. 291 . 260 . 257 . 322. 295. 231 . 175. 128 . 112. 1756 . 2012. 2061 . 2003. 2060 . 1767 . 1657 . 1536 . 1454. 451. 381. 305. 390. 355. 358. 174. 141 . 139. 394. 337. 345. 319. 352. 267 . 244. 186 . 213. I I I I I I I I I 2227. 2228. 2140. 2319. 2417. 2060. 1708. 1572. 1422. 663. 645. 673. 604. 532. 513. 465. 462. 431 . 412. 413. 396 . 379. 403. 296 . 294. 271 . 285. 99 99 92 110 91 94 79 76 74 180. 175. 222. 203. 179. 181 . 202. 201. 226 . 3222 3211 3078 3210 3264 2781 2344 2181 1985 I II.B2 NUMBER OF L O A N S M A D E D U R I N G FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF Q U A R T E R (SEASONALLY-ADJUSTED ANNUAL RATE) 1986-Q1 -Q2 -Q3 -Q4, , 1 | | I I 2614. 2563. 2665. 2327. 1 | | | I 331 . 263. 293. 301 . 183. 190 . 163. 158 . 1708 1636 1730 1537 . . . . 156 . 187 . 222. 144. 229. 272. 220. 255. I | | I 1800. 1637 . 1830. 1562. 439. 491 . 503. 425. 284. 306 . 309. 279. 81 . 86 . 67 . 78. 191. 211 . 194. 212. 2416. 2355. 2481 . 2111 . 1987-Q1, -Q2 -Q3 -Q4. I | | 1 2415. 2301. 2309. 2526. | | | | 343. 412. 385. 412. 154. 100. 112. 142. 1544. 1481 . 1499 . 1665. 134. 138 . 121. 172. 218. 174. 170. 182. | | | | 1603. 1483. 1579 . 1656 . 484. 460. 418. 482. 236. 257 . 275. 314. 76 . 60. 81 . 91. 201 . 184. 205. 212. 2208. 2114. 2113. 2315. 1988-Q1 -Q2 -Q3 -Q4 , I I I I 2447. 2323. 2287 . 1767. | | | | 355. 283. 305. 252. 117 . 120. 124. 89. 1552. 1515. 1449 . 1261 . 152. 182. 137 . 87 . 236 . 209. 258. 142. | | | | 1542. 1561 . 1368 . 1183. 454. 401 . 564. 328. 338. 253. 359. 210. 82. 71 . 78. 63. 242. 234. 249. 179. 2197 2087 2048 1587 1989-Q1. -Q2. -Q3. , I I | 1 2254. 2730. 2674. | | | 1 275. 302. 281 . 116 . 207 . 216 . 1526 . 1817 . 1759. 157 . 154. 195. 158. 216 . 206 . | I | 1497 . 1768. 1684. 420. 540. 611 . 249. 282. 359. 64. 99. 93. 224. 315. 440. 2023. 2415. 2244. • x LOANS UNDER $1,000 A R E NOT # • # I N C L U D E D IN THE S U R V E Y . e # # # # # » i 10 # . . . . E S T I M A T E S FROM T H E Q U A R T E R L Y S A M P L E S U R V E Y OF BANK NONREAL E S T A T E L O A N S TO F A R M E R S T A B L E II.C A V E R A G E S I Z E OF L O A N S M A D E ( T H O U S A N D S OF D O L L A R S ) * P U R P O S E OF LOAN PERIOD ALL LOANS II,CI 1 FEEDER I LIVESTOCK ANNUAL OTHER LIVESTOCK OTHER CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT S I Z E OF LOAN ( T H O U S A N D S OF D O L L A R S ) 1 OTHER I 1 1 TO 9 10 TO 24 25 TO 99 100 AND OVER 1 1 S I Z E OF BANK | 1 LARGE OTHER I A V E R A G E SIZE OF LOANS M A D E 1977 1978 1979 13. 14. 15. 22. 22. 32. 13. 12. 16 . 10. 11. 11. 9. 10. 10. 18. 20. 19. 4. 4. 4. 15. 15. 14. 44. 41 . 47. 297. 246 . 220. 61. 63. 61 . 10 . 11 . 13. 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 18. 18. 20. 20. 18. 18. 19. 21 . 22. 32. 33. 41. 32. 32. 26 . 35. 34. 34. 16 . 17 . 17 . 18. 22. 23. 26 . 26 . 41 . 14. 14. 14. 16 . 13. 13. 14. 15. 17 . 11. 12. 18. 16 . 12. 12. 14. 16 . 14. 26 . 34. 39. 37. 35. 42. 33. 45. 35. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 15. 15. 15. 15. 15. 14. 15. 15. 15. 44. 44. 46 . 46. 44. 46 . 45. 47 . 45. 239. 255. 326. 294. 291. 255. 280. 320. 320. 66 . 73. 98 . 92. 88 . 82. 62. 85. 70. 15. 15. 14. 15. 14 . 13. 15. 15. 16 . 87 . 58. 47 . 59. 16 . 17 . 11 . 18. II.C2 1 A V E R A G E S I Z E OF LOANS M A D E DURING FIRST FULL W E E K OF S E C O N D M O N T H OF Q U A R T E R L986-Q1 -Q2 -Q3 -Q4 21 . 21 . 13. 21. 29. 36 . 34. 40. 37 . 25. 19 . 19. 16 . 15. 9 . 17 . 16 . 16 . 13. 9. 38. 45. 21 . 23. 4. 4. 3. 4. 15. 15. 15. 15. 42. 43. 48. 48 . 300. 296 . 218. 278. 987-Q1 -Q2 -Q3 -Q4 23. 17 . 20. 24. 24. 28. 43. 37 . 23. 32. 20 . 30. 20 . 12. 14. 13. 14. 13. 12. 23. 43. 34. 42. 62. 4. 4. 3. 4. 15. 14. 15. 15. 47 . 44. 49. 47 . 322. 257 . 411 . 305. 988-Q1 -Q2 -Q3 -Q4 23. 19. 23. 23. 33. 47. 26 . 33. 38. 26 . 44. 59. 19. 13. 20. 15. 16. 12. 14. 12. 31. 35. 31. 50. 4. 4. 4. 4. 15. 14. 15. 15. 46 . 45. 42. 49. 989-Q1 -Q2 -Q3 20 . 20. 17 . 49. 43. 44. 25. 24. 30. 15. 16 . 11. 11. 12. 14. 32. 34. 29. 4. 4. 4. 15. 15. 15. 43. 49. 47 . 1 x L O A N S UNDER 1 $ 1 , 0 0 0 A R E NOT I N C L U D E D IN T H E S U R V E Y . 102. 63. 90. 88. 15. 13. 14. 17 . 272. 301. 454. 288. 67 . 75. 61. 80. 18. 13. 18. 16 . 296 . 275. 252. 81. 58. 39. 13. 16 . 13. E S T I M A T E S FROM T H E Q U A R T E R L Y S A M P L E S U R V E Y OF BANK NONREAL E S T A T E LOANS TO F A R M E R S A V E R A G E M A T U R I T Y OF LOANS M A D E ( M O N T H S ) * 1 1 1 I 1 1 P U R P O S E OF LOAN PERIOD ALL LOANS FEEDER LIVESTOCK ANNUAL II. D1 OTHER LIVESTOCK OTHER CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES 9 . 8 . 7 . 6 . 6 . 6 . 10. 6 . 7 . 6 . 7 . 6 . 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 7 6 6 9 8 8 8 8 9 . . . . . . . . . 6 . 6 . 5. 5. 5. 6 . 6 . 5. 6 . 7 . 6 . 7 . 8. 7 . 8. 6 . 8 . 5. 7. 6 . 7 . 10. 8. 7 . 8. 8. 9. 1986-Q1 -Q2 -Q3 -Q4 AVEf?AGE M A T U R I T Y OF L O A N S M A D E D U R I N G 9. 9 . 7 . 6 . 10 TO 24 25 TO 99 100 AND OVER 8. 8. 8 . 9. 9 . 8 . 11. 9 . 8. 7. 8. 6 . 6 . 7. 5. 10. 9. 8. 7 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 7 8 8 8 8 8 9 7 . 6 . 7 . 8. 8 . 9 . 10 . 9 . 10 . 8. 6 . 6 . 10. 8 . 8. 7 . 8 . 8 . 7 . 5. 6 . 6 . 7 . 7 . 5. 6 . 8. 7 . 6 . 7 . 10. 8. 8. 9 . 9 . 9. 1 TO 9 I | LARGE I OTHER . . . . 1 1 j 1 1 J 13. 10. 9. 14. 18. 14. 14. 11. 8 . 11. 13. 14. 21 . 23. 20 . 7. c* 5. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8. 8. 9. 9. 11 . 11. . . . . . . . . . FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND M O N T H . . . . . . . . . OF Q U A R T E R 7 . 6 . 5. 6 . 5. 7 . 5. 9 . 10. 8. 6 . 6. 12. 43. 13. 10. 10. 10. 9. 5. 8. 8 . 6 . 6 . 8. 9 . 7 . 7 . 15. 11. 8 . 7 . 7 9 6 6 . . . . 4. 6 . 6 . 6 . 11 . 10. 7 . 6 . 6 . 6 . 4. 7 . 7 . 9. 9. 7. 8. 9. 8. 6. 19. 30. 15. 24. 14. 26 . 9. 3. 8. 8. 7 . 7 . 8 . 9. 7 . 8. 10 . 12. 9. 7 . 8. 14. 6 . 7 . 8. 7 . 5. 3. 8. 12. 8. 9. 13. 8. 6. 7. 20. 23. 9. 32. 16 . 9. 11. 7. 8. 8. 6 . 6 . 10 . 12. 6 . 8. 14. 10. 7 . 9. 12. 6. 7 . 6. 14. 6 . 7 . 5. 11. 9. 7 . 8. 21. 19. 18. 16 . 11. 13. 8. 8. 6 . 10. 9. 8. 12. 10. 8. 8. 6 . 8. 7 . 9. 8. 11. 8 . 8 . 1987-Q1 -Q2 -Q3 -Q4 8 11 7 7 1988-Q1 -Q2 -Q3 -Q4 12. 8 . 7 . 7 . 7 6 7 6 . . . . 5. 6 . 4. 4. 1989-Q1 -Q2 -Q3 10 . 8 . 8 . 7 . 6 . 7 . 7 . 7 . 8. x A V E R A G E M A T U R I T Y OF N O N D E M A N D L O A N S , W I T H http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ # e Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis OTHER S I Z E OF BANK A V E R A G E M A T U R I T Y OF LOANS M A D E 1977 1978 1979 II. D2 FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT S I Z E OF LOAN ( T H O U S A N D S OF D O L L A R S ) 9. 7 . 6. EACH LOAN W E I G H T E D BY ITS DOLLAR A M O U N T . 12 * # e # * * " e # # # # * # # # # # # # # E S T I M A T E S FROM T H E Q U A R T E R L Y S A M P L E S U R V E Y OF BANK NONREAL ESTATE L O A N S TO F A R M E R S T A B L E II.E A V E R A G E E F F E C T I V E I N T E R E S T R A T E ON LOANS M A D E ( P E R C E N T ) * PERIOD 1 1 I ALL 1 1 LOANS I II.El 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1 1 1 | 1 S I Z E OF LOAN ( T H O U S A N D S OF D O L L A R S ) P U R P O S E OF LOAN 8 .8 9 .6 .9 11 15 .2 18 .5 16 .7 13 .5 14 .1 12 .8 11 .5 10 .6 11 .2 II.E2 1986-Q1 -Q2 -Q3 -Q4 12,.0 ,5 11 . 11 . .4 10..8 1987-Ql -Q2 -Q3 -Q4 10.,1 10. 7 10. 4 11. 0 1988-Q1 -Q2 -Q3 , , , -Q4 11. 0 10 .7 11. 5 11. 6 1989-Q1, -Q2 -Q3 12. 3 12. 9 12. 5 FEEDER LIVESTOCK OTHER LIVESTOCK OTHER CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT OTHER I S I Z E OF BANK 1 1 OTHER I LARGE 1 TO 9 10 TO 24 25 TO 99 100 AND OVER 9 .1 9 .4 11 .1 8 .9 9 .4 11 .4 8 .8 9 .5 11 .5 8 .6 9 .9 12 .8 8 .5 10 .2 13 .6 9 .0 9 .4 11 .4 14 18 16 14 14 13 12 11 11 14 18 17 14 14 13 11 11 11 15 18 16 13 13 12 10 9 10 .9 .9 .4 .0 .7 .1 .8 .9 .8 16 .2 19 .8 16 , .1 12 ,1 13,.1 11 , .2 9 ,6 , 9 .2 , 10 , .2 15 .0 18 .1 17 . 0 14 .1 14 .4 13 .4 12 .1 11,.3 11,.6 I A N N U A L A V E R A G E E F F E C T I V E INTEREST R A T E ON L O A N S M A D E 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 .6 9 .7 12 .1 8 .7 9 .8 11 .7 15 .6 18 .6 15 .9 13 . 6 13 .7 12 .5 11 .1 10 .7 10 .9 14 18 16 13 14 12 11 10 11 .6 .4 .3 .8 .3 .7 .9 .2 .9 8 .9 9 .5 11 .8 9 .2 9 .6 11 .2 8 .9 9 .7 12 .1 .3 .4 .9 .5 .2 .0 .5 .8 .2 14 .4 17 .9 17 .1 14 .3 14 .6 13 .7 12 .2 11,.5 11,.7 15 .3 18 .6 16 .9 12 .8 14 .0 12 .1 11 .2 9 .5 10 .7 15 18 16 13 14 13 11 10 11 A V E R A G E E F F E C T I V E INTEREST R A T E ON LOANS M A D E D U R I N G 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 18 17 14 14 13 12 11 11 .7 .0 . 0 .2 .6 .7 .4 .6 , .7 . .7 .2 .8 .1 .3 .2 .0 .3 .6 .9 .2 . 0 .0 .3 .2 .8 .1 .4 FIRST FULL WEEK OF S E C O N D MONTH OF Q U A R T E R 1 11,,9 11. 3 10.,9 10.,8 12..6 .7 11 . ,5 11 . 10 . .5 11 11 11 11 ,8 . ,6 . .6 . . .1 12.,7 12.,5 11 .,6 11 .9 11 .9 11 .3 11 .2 9 .9 10. 6 10. 7 9. 9 11. 4 9 ,9 . 9.,6 11 ..1 10 .,6 10 . ,4 10 .,9 10.,9 11 .3 11 .2 11 .3 10. 8 12. 1 9. 1 10 .3 9 .8 9 .2 10. 3 10. 5 11. 2 11. 6 12. 5 10 .6 12. 3 11 .7 11 .1 10. 9 11 .5 11 .6 12. 1 11 .3 11. 6 12. 1 10 10 11 11 12. 2 12. 9 iz 0 12. 2 12. 8 12. 6 12. 4 12. 9 12. 7 12. 5 13. 2 12. 9 12 .1 12 .8 12 .2 - 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 1 .6 .2 .0 .3 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 12.,9 12.,4 12..2 ,9 11 . 12,.8 12,. 1 11 , .9 .3 11 . 12 11 11 11 .6 , .9 .8 .0 11 . .4 10,,9 10,.1 10,.3 10..3 9 ,7 , 9,.3 8 .9 , 12,.8 12,.0 12,.1 .5 11 , ,6 11 . ,4 11 . ,5 11 . 12.,0 11 11 11 11 . .2 , .2 . ,2 . ,6 10 .9 10,.9 .0 11 , 11 , .4 9,.3 10,.1 9.,7 10,.4 8,.4 9.,4 9..3 9..6 11 , .2 11 , .2 11,,1 11,.6 11.,6 ,5 11 . 11. 8 12. 1 11 11 11 11 .,6 ,4 . .6 . ,9 . 11 , .1 .0 11 , .6 11 , 12,.0 10 10 11 11 , ,7 , .1 .3 , . ,1 9.,7 9..7 10.,7 11 , .1 .6 11 , ,3 11 , .8 11 , 11,.8 12. 5 13. 1 13. 0 12.,3 12.,9 12.,9 12,.6 13,.2 12,.6 12..1 12.,7 12.,0 12,.1 12,,8 11 , ,9 12,.4 13,, 0 12,.8 x THE A P P R O X I M A T E C O M P O U N D E D ANNUAL I N T E R E S T R A T E ON EACH LOAN IS C A L C U L A T E D FROM S U R V E Y DATA ON T H E S T A T E D R A T E A N D O T H E R T E R M S OF T H E LOAN. IN C O M P U T I N G THE A V E R A G E OF T H E S E E S T I M A T E D E F F E C T I V E R A T E S , EACH LOAN IS W E I G H T E D BY ITS DOLLAR A M O U N T . 13 E S T I M A T E S FROM T H E Q U A R T E R L Y S A M P L E S U R V E Y OF BANK NONREAL ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS T A B L E II.F P E R C E N T A G E OF LOANS M A D E WITH A FLOATING INTEREST R A T E * P U R P O S E OF LOAN ALL LOANS II.F1 17 . 17 . 17 . 22. 29 . 39 . 43. 39. 45. 53. 59 . 61 . II.F2 * 1 1 FEEDER 1 LIVESTOCK 1 ANNUAL 1 I 1 1 | 1 I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 OTHER LIVESTOCK OTHER CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES SIZE OF LOAN FARM MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT P E R C E N T A G E OF L O A N S M A D E WITH A FLOATING 1 | 1 1 1 TO 9 10 TO 24 25 TO 99 100 AND OVER I LARGE OTHEF INTEREST R A T E 28. 19. 17. 14. 20 . 17 . 12. 14. 16 . 6 . 2. 7 . 23. 28. 24. 20. 33. 48. 48. 41. 61. 60. 52. 65. 18. 22. 30 . 29. 32. 45. 35. 70 . 39 . 21 . 31 . 43. 48. 42. 43. 57 . 62. 64. 11. 15. 15. 18. 24. 20. 31 . 56 . 55. 33. 28. 31 . 44. 39. 47 . 51 . 62. 63. 1 | | | | | | | | | 1 | | 1 P E R C E N T A G E OF L O A N S M A D E WITH A F L O A T I N G INTEREST R A T E DURING S l l " E R " ; H E F B « " N o S f l ? H E .SRROSER'KHOHS'THIMact OTHER S I Z E OF BANK 2. 2. 3. 4. 3. 6 . 7 . 8 . 10. 45. 42. 35. I 1 1 60. 62. 66 . 2. 1. 3. 7 . 15. 24. 26 . 24. 28 . 41 . 49. 49. 12. 18. 26 . 29. 31 . 32. 42. 46 . 52. 13. 22. 30. 35. 29 . 42. 48 . 54. 61 . 37 . 43. 53. 56 . 53. 57 . 64. 68 . 67 . 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 75. 80. 66 . 78. 71 . 77 . 72. 78. 79. 8 . 16 . 26 . 30 . 28 . 33 . 47 . 50 . 53. FIRST FULL WEEK OF S E C O N D MONTH OF Q U A R T E R 26. 44. 49. 44. 37 . 42. 47 . 40 . 52. 49. 50. 43. 43. 75. 67 . 74. 57 . 72. 82. 83. 36 . 57 . 45. 47 . 43. 50. 51. 50. 44. 45. 56 . 41 . 54. 57 . 58. 49 . 81 . 72. 58 . 63. 94. 95. 61 . 67 . 49. 46 . 55. 50. 45. 57 . 43. 51 . 56 . 52. 47 . 53. 71 . 61 . 49 . 60. 57 . 65. 77 . 69. 85. 76 . 81 . 75. 49. 52. 54. 56 . 46 . 56. 52. 52. 46 . 58. 69. 51 . 64. 78 . 53. 76 . 89. 80. 87 . 55. 39. 53. RAT1°SI INTERESl'fo' BE^CHARGED^OVER^THE^LIFE^OF 14 Table II.G PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF NONREAL ESTATE FARM LOANS MADE BY BANKS,' BY EFFECTIVE INTEREST RATE Effective interest rate (percent) All loans.. Under 6. 0. . 6.0 to 6 .9. 7.0 to 7 .9. 8.0 to 8 .9. . . . . 9.0 to 9 .9. . . . . 10.0 to 10. 9. . . 11.0 to 11. 9. . . 12.0 to 12. 9. . . 13.0 to 13. 9. . . 14.0 to 14. 9. . . 15.0 to 15. 9. . . 16.0 to 16. 9. . . 17.0 to 17. 9. . . 18.0 to 18. 9. . . 19.0 to 19. 9. . . 20.0 to 20. 9. . . 21.0 to 21. 9. . . 22.0 to 22. 9. . . 23.0 to 23. 9. . . 24.0 to 24. 9. . . 25.0 and; over.. August 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 100 100 1 1 11 48 34 4 - 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 - - - - - - - - — — - - - - - - - — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 17 14 34 18 12 2 - - 1 11 15 12 16 25 16 3 1 20 50 22 6 1 2 11 29 33 14 7 5 1 1 10 17 43 19 9 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 - 1 2 5 14 16 28 11 7 6 3 3 3 1 7 1 2 11 23 30 21 2 1 4 8 22 20 35 8 1 — - 4 16 32 42 5 3 9 12 13 18 36 6 1 1 2 7 21 39 22 8 - - - - - - - - 1 6 27 36 21 8 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1. Percentage distribution of the total dollar amount of nonreal 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. - - SECTION III: SELECTED STATISTICS FROM THE QUARTERLY REPORTS OF CONDITION OF COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLES: Page Commercial banks: III.A III.B Estimated delinquent nonreal estate farm loans at insured commercial banks Estimated net charge-offs of nonreal estate farm loans at insured commercial banks 18 19 Agricultural banks: III.C III .D III.E III .F III.G III .H Distribution of agricultural banks by ratio of nonperforming loans to total loans Distribution of agricultural banks by ratio of net charge-of fs to total loans Distribution of agricultural banks by ratio of nonperforming loans to total capital Distribution of agricultural banks by rate of return to equity Loan-deposit ratios at agricultural banks Failures of agricultural banks 20 21 22 23 24 25 SOURCES OF DATA: The data in tables III.A through III.G are prepared using data from the quarterly reports of condition and income for commercial banks. Delinquencies and charge-offs of nonreal estate farm loans for the nation as a whole (table III.A and table III.B) are estimated from reports of banks that hold more than 90 percent of total nonreal estate farm loans. Banks that do not report delinquencies of agricultural loans are assumed to have the same delinquency rates as those that report. 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 III.C through table III.H 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. This average was 16.00 percent in June of 1989. Failures of banks (table III.H) are obtained from news releases of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, with agricultural banks defined, as above, by the amount of farm loans relative to total loans that they hold. SECTION III: (continued) Recent Developments: Through June 1989, the condition of agricultural lenders and borrowers continued the steady improvement seen since mid-1986. At commercial banks overall, the amount of nonreal estate farm loans that are delinquent fell $0.3 billion from mid-1988 to mid-1989, reflecting a decline in nonaccrual loans to the lowest level in several years (table III.A). Net charge-offs, shown in table III.B, have slowed further during the past four quarters, and with problem loans at the lowest levels in a number of years, charge-offs should remain low in the near future. Improvement also continues to be evident in the condition of agricultural banks. The proportion of agricultural banks with large amounts of nonperforming loans relative to total loans (table III.C) declined further over the past year, as did the proportion of banks with a high rate of net charge-offs (table III .D) . In addition, banks with large levels of problem loans relative to capital became less numerous—fewer than 12 percent of agricultural banks had amounts of nonperforming loans that were more than 1/4 of total capital (table III.E). In 1988 and the first half of 1989, agricultural banks have been at least as profitable as small banks that do not concentrate as heavily on farm lending, and this relative profitability of agricultural banks roughly parallels the patterns seen before the farm financial difficulties of the mid-1980s (table III.F). Through mid-1989, the average ratio of loans to deposits at agricultural banks (table III.G) remained low by historical standards. The rate of failure of agricultural banks remained low compared to that of recent years (table III.H). TABLE III.A ESTIMATED DELINQUENT FARM NONREAL ESTATE LOANS INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS Memo: March 31 June 30 Class of delinquent loans 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1988 1989 Billions of dollars Total Past due 30 to 89 days and still accruing Nonperforming Past due 90 days or more and still accruing Nonaccrual Addendum: Restructured loans in compliance with modified terms 1.9 2.6 3.4 3.5 2.5 1.7 1.4 2.0 1.6 .5 .6 .7 .6 .4 .3 .4 .5 .6 1.4 2.0 2.7 2.9 2.0 1.3 1.0 1.5 1.0 .6 1•4 .7 2.1 .6 .4 1.6 .2 .2 .3 2.3 1.1 .8 1.2 .2 .8 n.a. .4 .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 .8 n.a. n.a. As percentage of outstanding farm production loans Total 4.7 6.5 8.6 10.3 8.1 5.5 4.4 7.1 5.5 Past due 30 to 89 days and still accruing 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.7 1.3 1.0 1.3 2.0 1.9 Nonperforming 3.4 5.0 7.0 8.6 6.7 4.5 3.2 5.2 3.5 1.3 2.1 1.5 3.5 1.7 5.3 1.8 6.8 1.3 5.4 .7 3.7 .6 2.5 1.0 4.2 .6 2.9 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.1 1.6 1.7 1.5 1.7 1.6 Past due 90 days or more and still accruing Nonaccrual Addendum: Restructured loans in compliance with modified terms Data are estimates of national totals for farm nonreal 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. • # # # e e # # # # TABLE III.B ESTIMATED NET CHARGE-OFFS OF NONREAL ESTATE FARM LOANS INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS Estimated amount, millions of dollars: 198 4 198 5 198 6 198 7 198 8 198 9 gi Q2 Q3 2i Annual Total 120 200 235 173 28 10 160 320 360 133 39 26 195 255 230 57 24 425 525 370 140 37 900 1300 1200 502 129 gi Q2 Q3 £4 Charge-offs as a percentage of such loans outstanding: 198 4 198 5 198 6 198 7 198 8 198 9 .31 .51 .66 .55 .10 .03 .41 .84 1.07 .46 .14 .09 .47 .64 .67 .19 .10 1.02 1.34 1.10 .46 .12 Annual 2.30 3.28 3.38 1.61 .44 Data are estimates of national charge-offs of farm nonreal 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. 19 # III.C DISTRIBUTION OF AGRICULTURAL BANKS BY RELATIVE NONPERFORMING LOANS* 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, June 30 Memo: March 31 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1988 1989 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 56.0 30.9 10.9 1.7 .4 .2 47.4 33.2 15.4 2.8 .7 .5 38.8 33.4 20.0 5.5 1.4 .9 32.4 33.5 23.3 6.6 2.6 1.6 39.6 33.5 19.3 5.1 1.7 .8 51.7 31.9 13.1 2.4 .6 .3 60.2 29.3 8.3 1.5 .6 .2 49.1 30.8 15.7 3.2 .9 .4 57.6 29.3 10.6 1.9 .4 .2 * 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 III. # # # # # # # # # # # III.D DISTRIBUTION OF AGRICULTURAL BANKS BY RELATIVE NET CHARGE-OFFS* Memo: First Net charge-offs as a percentage of total loans Percentage distribution Total .., . ** 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1988 1989 .0 100 .0 100.0 100 .0 100 .0 100,.0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 .7 32,,0 19.,9 15.,8 3.,5 25 .2 28 .2 20 .5 18 .6 5 .5 2 .1 18.5 23.6 20.0 23.9 9.2 4.8 10,.6 14,.5 18,.0 ,2 16.,1 10.,5 9,.7 13,,4 15.,5 30.,7 18.,0 12. 6 19,.4 20,,6 18.,5 25.,4 11..0 5. 1 31,.8 25,.7 17,.2 17,,3 5,,8 2.,2 55,.2 23,,6 10..7 7.,8 2.,1 .7 59,.9 24.,7 8.,0 5.,6 1.,5 ,4 1. 0 o CO Under 0.10 0.10 to 0.49 0.50 to 0.99 1.00 to 2.49 2.50 to 4.99 5.00 and over half * Net charge-offs are charge-offs less recoveries for all loans (both agricultural and nonagricultural) in the year indicated. Agricultural banks are defined in the introduction to section III. ** Data are through the first half, not at an annual rate; therefore, they are not comparable to data for the full year. 21 III.E DISTRIBUTION OF AGRICULTURAL BANKS BY RATIO OF NONPERFORMING LOANS TO TOTAL CAPITAL Nonperforming loans as a percentage of total capital All banks 25 25 to 49 50 to 7 4 :::::: 75 to 99 Under 100 125 150 175 200 to 124 to 149 to 174 to 199 and over*** .... Memo: March 31 Percentage distribution, June 30 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1988 1989 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 83.6 12.5 2.3 .9 .3 .1 ** .1 .2 76.3 16.3 4.4 1.6 69.0 19.6 6.1 2.3 66.6 19.4 6.8 3.0 74.2 16.1 4.8 2.1 84.4 10.5 2.8 1.0 88.6 7.9 1.7 .6 81.2 12.3 3.3 1.3 .6 -3 -2 -1 .2 1.3 -8 -4 -2 .4 1.4 -8 .6 -3 1.0 1.1 "5 .3 "2 .7 .2 -2 .3 "2 .4 .3 -2 .2 •] .4 .7 87.0 8.5 2.2 .7 .2 * Total primary and secondary capital items that are available at the end of the period specified. Agricultural banks are defined in the introduction to section III. ** Less than 0.05 percent. *** includes banks with negative capital. .4 * .1 TABLE III.F DISTRIBUTION OF AGRICULTURAL BANKS BY RATE OF RETURN TO EQUITY* Net income as percentage of average equity at bank 1977 1978 1979 100. 100. 100. 1. 4. 16. 45. 28. 5. 1. 1. 3. 14. 46. 28. 6. 1. 1. 2. 8. 36. 38. 12. 3. Average rate of return to equity: Agricultural banks.. 14. Other small banks... 12. 14. 13. Rate of return to assets: Agricultural banks. Other small banks.. 1.1 .9 1.0 All banks. Negative 0 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 and over Percentage distribution 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 100. 1985 1986 1987 1988 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 1. 2. 9. 33. 35. 14. 5. 2. 3. 12. 33. 32. 13. 6. 4. 5. 15. 33. 28. 11. 4. 7. 7. 18. 36. 24. 7. 2. 13. 9. 23. 36. 15. 3. 1. 18. 11. 22. 33. 13. 3. 1. 19. 14. 27. 28. 9. 2. 1. 13. 13. 31. 31. 9. 2. 1. 15. 14. 16. 14. 15. 13. 14. 12. 11. 12. 8. 6. 12. 11. 1.2 1.3 1.0 1.2 .9 1.1 .9 1.0 .9 .7 .8 .5 .4 .4 .6 9.2 8.6 9.3 8.5 Memo: ** first half 1988 1989 100. 100. 9. 9. 30. 36. 12. 3. 2. 8. 33. 53. 5. 1. 0. 0. 5. 28. 58. 7. 1. 0. 0. 8. 8. 10. 9. 5. 5. 6. 6. .7 .9 .7 .5 .4 Addenda: 1.0 .8 Net charge-offs as percentage of total loans: Agricultural banks.. Other small banks... Average capital ratio (percent)*** Agricultural banks. 8.7 Other small banks.. 8.2 .2 .3 8.9 8.3 9.0 8.5 9.2 8.6 .7 .4 .6 .6 1.2 2.1 .8 2.3 1.1 1.3 .9 .7 .7 9.5 8.5 9.6 8.5 9.5 8.4 9.8 8.8 8.8 .6 9.4 8.4 .8 9.9 .3 .5 10.1 8.8 10.4 9.1 * Agricultural banks are defined in the introduction to section III. ** Income data are through the first half, not at an annual rate, and equity is measured at the end of the period specified; therefore, the data are not directly comparable to data for the entire year. *** Total primary and secondary capital (items available in bank reports at the end of the period specified) as a percentage of total assets. 23 TABLE III.G AVERAGE LOAN-DEPOSIT RATIOS AT AGRICULTURAL BANKS IN SELECTED FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICTS District 1 984 Number Loans to of Banks Deposits 1985 Number Loans to of Banks Deposits 1986 Number Loans to of Loans Deposits 1987 Number Loans to of Banks Deposits 1988 Number Loans to of Banks Deposits 1989 Number Loans to of Banks Deposits Memo: March 31 1988 Number Loans to of Banks Deposits 1989 Number Loans to of Banks Deposits Cleveland 142. .601 140. . 604 125. .589 121. 620 101. .651 94. .665 103. .626 92. .648 Atlanta 276. .560 217. .593 200. .597 174. 598 162. .607 161. .604 155. .599 149. .600 Chicago 1277. .580 1278. .579 1231. .519 1191. .511 1147. .526 1085. .555 1152. .504 1100. .535 St. Louis 642. .558 608. .562 592. .538 564. .530 533. .546 499. .569 520. .527 488. .548 Minneapolis 908. .644 888. . 639 863. .591 837. 548 801. .552 778. .575 803. .521 773. .540 Kansas City 1411. .607 1376. .591 1351. .533 1299. .500 1257. .503 1223. .514 1271. .503 1229. .508 370. .591 341. .591 359. .567 366. .536 380. .519 391. .495 381. .518 396. .479 61. .737 60. .726 63. .709 57. .694 61. 62. .682 59. 62. .624 5155. .599 4963. .597 4835. .556 4647. .534 4474. 4321. .557 4478. 4317. .537 Dallas San Francisco Addendum: U.S. Average Farm Loan Ratio 17 . 63 16 .93 16 .21 16 .00 * The loan-deposit ratio is defined as total loans divided by total deposits 16 .04 . 669 .541 16 .00 15 .51 . 643 .526 15 .47 Agricultural banks are defined in the introduction to section III. TABLE III.H FAILURES OF AGRICULTURAL BANKS* Number of failures: 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Annual Total 01 02 03 04 2 1 3 0 3 1 7 0 3 2 10 0 3 3 12 1 11 7 32 22 11 5 21 14 19 6 7 17 21 12 12 5/ 18 16 16 7 68 65 69 36 T *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 III. SECTION IV: FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF FARM CREDIT CONDITIONS AND FARM LAND VALUES Page TABLES: IV.A IV.B IV.C IV.D IV.E Nonreal estate lending experience ••• Expected change in non-real-estate loan volume and repayment conditions Average loan/deposit ratio, and other indicators of relative credit availability Interest rates Trends in real estate values and loan volume 29 31 33 ^5 37 SOURCES OF DATA: Data are from quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks conducted at the end of each quarter by five Federal Reserve Banks. Each of these banks issues a more detailed quarterly report on its survey results, available from its Research Department at the address given below. 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. Important differences in the type of banks surveyed are noted 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 and has included roughly 900 banks in recent quarters. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Federal Reserve P.O. Station, Kansas City Missouri 64198 The sample chosen originally in 1976 consisted of 188 banks selected from among banks at which farm loans constituted 50 percent or more of total loans, with appropriate representation of all farm areas. In recent quarters, the sample has included about 150 banks. Section IV: (continued) 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. Currently the sample includes 325 banks and in recent quarters the rate of responses has averaged roughly 50 percent. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Station K, Dallas, Texas 75222 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. About 300 banks have been responding to the survey in recent quarters. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, Richmond, Virginia 23261 The sample selected in 1975 consisted of 43 banks of all sizes. loans were sampled more heavily. Banks with the larger amounts of farm RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: The Reserve Banks' surveys of agricultural credit conditions suggest that the demand for farm loans (Tables IV.A and IV.B) is holding steady or rising across the various agricultural regions. Indications of rising loan demand is most evident in the midwestern districts—Chicago, Kansas City, and Minneapolis—where the number of respondents citing higher loan demand has been running well above those who say that demand has decreased. The rise in loan demand appears to be associated mainly with increased operating expenses, purchases of farm machinery, and storage of farm crops, although, in some areas hurt by drought, there also are scattered reports of farmers borrowing to cover unexpected shortfalls in cash receipts. In general, banks continue to have ample funds available to accommodate the demand for farm loans. Although loan-to-deposit ratios have moved up for banks in the Chicago District (Table IV.C), they still are well below the peaks reached in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and a majority of the bankers surveyed continue to characterize the ratios as being lower than desired. Loan-to-deposit ratios remain low, on balance, in the 27 Section IV: (continued) Kansas City, Minneapolis and Dallas districts. In the Richmond district, by contrast, a significant proportion of the respondents continue to view the current loan-to-deposit ratios as being at higher-thandesired levels. Indicators of loan quality continue to look relatively favorable. Although loan repayment rates (Table IV.A) may have slipped a little in regions affected by the droughts of the last two years, the overall picture remains one in which repayment problems are relatively limited. All of the Reserve Bank surveys show the interest rates on farm loans (Table IV.D) turning down after the first quarter of 1989 and reversing some of the increases that had occurred over the previous few quarters. The Reserve Bank surveys continue to show year-to-year increases in land prices (Table IV.E), but, in most regions, prices are rising at a somewhat slower rate than in previous quarters. In the Chicago District, land prices rose 2 percent in the third quarter of 1989 to a level 8 percent above a year earlier. The thirdquarter Kansas City survey showed prices of various types of farm land up 8 to 11 percent from a year earlier, but with a slowing evident over the past two quarters. The Minneapolis survey for the third quarter indicated a 6 percent rise for dryland relative to a year earlier and slightly smaller gains for other types of land. In the Richmond district, land prices at the end of the third quarter were reported to be 20 percent above those of a year earlier; the quarterly pattern of change in this land price measure has been quite volatile of late, perhaps reflecting the relatively small number of banks included in the Richmond survey. FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE IV.A FARM NONREAL ESTATE LENDING EXPERIENCE COMPARED WITH A YEAR EARLIER (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) DEMAND FOR LOANS LOWER IV.A1 SAME SEVENTH FUND AVAILABILITY HIGHER LOWER SAME LOAN REPAYMENT RATE HIGHER (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT LOWER SAME RENEWALS OR EXTENSIONS HIGHER LOWER SAME COLLATERAL REQUIRED HIGHER LOWER SAME HIGHER ( IL*, IN*, 10, MI*, WI* ) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1987 Q3. . . 04... | | 40 39 44 44 16 17 1 1 7 4 50 50 43 46 1 1 5 6 56 42 39 52 | | 33 45 62 50 5 6 1 | o 1 61 70 39 29 1988 Ql. . . Q2. . . Q3. . . 04... | 1 1 | 26 21 18 15 46 45 45 43 28 34 37 42 1 1 1 I 5 7 9 5 53 60 66 67 42 34 24 28 1 1 | | 2 11 22 29 52 64 68 54 46 25 10 17 | I | I 43 25 14 14 53 64 63 57 4 11 23 28 1 1 1 I o o 0 1 73 74 77 78 27 25 22 22 1989 oi... 02... 03... 1 | 1 11 11 13 39 41 50 50 49 37 | | | 11 15 13 63 63 65 26 22 22 | 1 | 27 18 12 62 72 70 11 10 18 I 1 | 11 11 15 61 68 70 28 21 15 1 | | o 1 0 73 79 81 26 20 18 IV.A2 TENTH (KANSAS CITY) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1987 03... 04... | | 38 32 51 54 11 15 1 1 9 8 47 49 44 43 1 1 5 6 60 49 35 45 I | 22 30 72 66 5 5 I | 1 0 53 56 46 44 1988 01... 02... 03... 04... | | | | 31 22 22 22 48 61 60 52 21 17 18 26 | 1 1 1 10 7 9 5 50 57 59 60 40 36 32 36 | | | 1 7 5 5 4 58 64 63 60 36 30 32 36 | | | | 29 29 26 27 64 67 66 67 7 4 7 6 | | | I 1 0 1 1 57 66 69 75 42 34 29 25 1989 oi... 02... 03... | | | 17 15 11 56 56 53 27 29 36 1 1 1 4 10 10 63 63 64 33 27 26 1 | | 3 10 14 67 71 70 29 20 16 I | | 25 13 11 71 71 78 4 20 11 | | | 1 0 0 72 75 80 27 25 20 IV.A3 ELEVENTH (DALLAS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( LA*, NM*, TX ) 1987 03... 04... 1 1 34 32 46 48 21 21 | | 12 9 46 46 41 45 | 1 24 16 57 54 19 30 I I 18 33 57 47 25 20 1 1 o o 31 40 69 60 1)88 oi... 02... 03... 04... I I 1 1 30 27 21 21 44 50 46 49 26 23 32 30 | 1 1 1 8 6 12 8 48 55 55 50 44 39 33 42 1 | | | 13 10 13 11 56 62 61 60 31 28 26 30 | | | | 32 30 27 31 52 55 58 56 16 15 15 13 1 1 1 1 o o o o 44 43 46 51 56 57 54 49 1389 01.. . 02... 03 .. . 1 | | 25 28 20 47 47 52 27 25 28 1 1 1 5 8 10 51 55 57 44 37 33 | 1 1 10 15 15 68 68 71 22 17 14 | | | 27 18 17 64 66 65 9 16 18 1 1 1 o o o 54 56 61 46 44 39 29 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS FARM NONREAL ESTATE LENDING EXPERIENCE COMPARED WITH NORMAL CONDITIONS (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) LOWER IV. A4 NINTH SAME LOWER HIGHER SAME (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT 1987 Q3 . . Q4. . 27 25 67 65 6 10 | | *** *** *** *** 1988 Ql. . Q2. . Q3 . . Q4. . 20 16 12 18 66 66 67 69 14 18 21 12 | | | | *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 1989 Ql. . Q2 . . Q3. . 14 4 6 64 70 75 22 26 20 | | *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** IV . A5 FIFTH LOWER HIGHER (RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT SAME COLLATERAL REQUIRED RENEWALS OR EXTENSIONS LOAN REPAYMENT RATE FUND AVAILABILITY DEMAND FOR LOANS LOWER HIGHER SAME HIGHER LOWER SAME *** *** *** *** HIGHER ( MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI* ) | | *** *** 6 9 78 57 16 34 | 1 19 24 73 67 8 9 | | | | 5 5 29 19 68 81 61 65 28 14 10 16 1 | I | 19 10 8 13 70 83 81 77 12 8 11 10 | | *** *** *** *** *** *** | | | 13 17 16 75 82 80 12 1 5 | | | 16 20 12 71 71 81 13 9 7 | | | *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 0 10 1 1 o o 54 52 46 48 ( MD, NC, SC, VA, WV* ) 1987 Q3 . . 04. . 23 29 69 67 8 5 1 1 o 5 85 81 15 14 | | 0 5 85 86 15 10 I 1 o o 100 91 1988 Ql. Q2. Q3. 04. . . . . 19 18 18 21 73 71 64 68 8 11 18 11 | | | 1 12 4 0 4 65 75 77 82 23 21 23 14 | | | | 4 0 5 4 89 93 82 71 8 7 14 25 | 1 1 I 8 11 18 21 92 89 77 75 0 0 5 4 | | | 1 4 0 5 o 64 62 68 75 32 39 27 25 1989 Ql. . 02. . 03. . 21 14 19 66 69 67 14 17 15 1 1 | 14 10 12 72 76 65 14 14 23 | | | 3 0 4 83 89 82 14 11 15 | 1 | 28 14 19 69 82 78 3 4 4 1 1 I 0 o 4 69 71 85 31 29 12 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE IV.B FARM NONREAL ESTATE LOAN VOLUME EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT QUARTER, COMPARED WITH VOLUME OF LOANS MADE A YEAR EARLIER (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) FEEDER CATTLE DAIRY LOWER SAME HIGHER LOWER SAME HIGHER LOWER SAME HIGHER ZV.B1 SEVENTH (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT FARM MACHINERY OPERATING CROP STORAGE TOTAL LOWER SAME HIGHER LOWER SAME HIGHER LOWER SAME HIGHER (IL*, IN*, 10, MI*, WI*) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1987 Q3 . . . 04... | | 35 29 53 54 11 17 | | 29 27 53 60 18 13 | 1 26 21 69 75 4 4 | | 31 34 57 61 11 5 | | 35 27 58 52 7 21 | | 25 22 43 41 32 37 1988 01... 02... 03... 04... | | | 1 19 28 18 8 52 48 48 45 29 24 34 47 | | | 1 28 46 30 16 58 46 56 70 14 8 14 13 1 | | | 18 30 18 14 76 64 76 77 6 6 6 9 | 1 1 | 27 51 42 33 68 41 43 57 4 8 15 10 | | 1 1 21 20 13 5 50 47 42 31 30 33 44 64 1 1 | 1 11 52 37 17 36 39 45 50 53 9 18 33 1989 Ql... Q2. . . 03... | | 1 9 10 16 40 53 57 51 37 27 | | 1 25 22 21 62 69 67 13 9 12 1 1 1 15 13 14 78 80 78 7 7 8 | | 1 33 28 19 59 65 62 8 6 20 1 1 | 6 9 20 28 46 57 66 45 24 1 1 1 14 15 9 49 58 45 37 27 46 IV.B2 ELEVENTH (DALLAS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (LA*, NM*, TX*) 1987 03... 04... | | 23 19 64 63 13 18 | | 20 20 53 61 27 19 | | 23 25 73 71 4 4 I I 16 17 75 75 9 8 1 | 17 18 59 58 24 23 | | 35 26 45 49 20 25 1988 Ql... Q2 . . . Q3 . . . 04... | | | | 23 20 20 15 57 62 61 66 20 18 19 20 | | | | 28 26 24 23 53 58 54 57 19 16 22 20 | | | | 22 22 21 16 71 72 72 79 7 7 6 5 I I I | 20 31 18 15 74 60 71 76 6 9 11 9 1 1 | | 15 16 20 14 58 56 50 52 27 28 30 33 | | | | 27 25 28 19 49 52 51 58 24 23 22 23 1989 Ql... Q2 . . . 03... | 1 1 22 24 18 55 52 66 23 24 16 | | | 29 31 23 53 55 59 17 14 18 | 1 | 16 18 20 80 76 75 4 5 5 I | | 19 24 21 76 71 70 5 5 9 | 1 1 16 16 15 54 54 63 31 30 22 | | | 19 25 22 61 58 64 20 17 14 IV.B3 FIFTH (RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 1987 Q3. Q4. 16 18 80 73 4 9 | 1 23 16 68 79 9 5 | 1 21 24 79 71 0 5 | 1 25 19 67 76 8 5 19 14 69 71 12 14 1 | 19 27 69 55 12 18 1988 Ql. Q3. Q4 . 12 22 15 10 85 74 70 80 4 4 15 10 1 1 1 1 13 15 6 9 83 81 89 87 4 4 6 4 | | 1 | 36 30 21 32 64 67 68 68 0 4 11 0 | | | 1 30 30 25 24 65 59 60 68 4 11 15 8 12 11 10 11 76 75 67 71 12 14 24 18 | | | 1 20 21 18 14 56 64 55 68 24 14 27 18 1989 Ql. Q2. Q3. 8 17 24 77 62 64 15 21 12 1 | 1 21 12 17 79 85 83 0 4 0 1 1 | 26 24 44 74 76 57 0 0 0 | 1 | 23 24 20 77 76 64 0 0 16 10 3 11 69 72 70 21 24 19 | 1 | 10 10 20 66 69 63 24 21 11 02. 31 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE IV.B (CONTINUED) EXPECTED DEMAND FOR FARM LOANS DURING NEXT QUARTER, COMPARED WITH NORMAL DEMAND (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) IV.B4 SHORT-TERM NONREAL ESTATE LOANS IN TERMED IATE - TERM NONREAL ESTATE LOANS LOWER LOWER NINTH SAME HIGHER SAME HIGHER (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT DEBT EXTENSION OR REFINANCING LOWER SAME HIGHER ( MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*) 1986 Q3. Q4. 25 29 65 62 10 9 29 32 57 55 14 14 6 7 50 68 44 26 1987 Ql. Q2. Q3. Q4. 19 23 23 19 65 72 71 70 16 5 6 10 21 25 20 17 63 71 72 74 16 3 8 9 4 13 14 18 71 78 80 73 25 9 6 9 1988 Ql. Q2. Q3 . Q4. 13 11 13 11 74 65 69 56 13 24 18 32 14 21 24 12 75 65 69 80 12 14 7 8 15 12 7 7 80 61 68 82 6 26 25 11 1989 Ql. Q2. Q3. 6 3 7 64 82 81 30 16 13 5 11 10 80 82 80 14 7 10 10 11 7 82 83 81 9 6 12 • # e • • # e e # # e FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE IV.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 IV CI 1988 01.. 02. . 03. . 04. . 1989 01.. 02.. 03... REFUSED OR REDUCED A FARM LOAN BECAUSE OF A SHORTAGE OF LOANABLE FUNDS LOAN/DEPOSIT RATIO IS LOWER AT THAN DESIRED DESIRED LEVEL SEVENTH HIGHER THAN DESIRED (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT 1 1 I I 1 I 77 72 67 72 19 22 25 20 4 6 8 8 I I | | *** *** *** *** 1 1 1 54 56 57 I I I 68 66 62 22 22 28 11 12 10 | | | *** TENTH CORRESPONDENT BANKS NONE NONBANK AGENCIES COMPARED WITH A YEAR EARLIER LOWER SAME HIGHER NONE COMPARED WITH A YEAR EARLIER LOWER SAME HIGHER ( IL*, IN* , io, MI*, WI*) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 50 52 54 53 IV. C2 NUMBER OF FARM LOAN REFERRALS TO ACTIVELY SEEKING NEW FARM LOAN ACCOUNTS (KANSAS CITY) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT *** *** *** *** | | | *** *** *** | | | *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** | | | *** *** j | *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ** * *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ( CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1988 01... 02... 03... 04... 1 1 1 1 49 50 50 49 1 1 1 1 76 75 77 79 7 10 9 10 17 15 14 10 | | | | 3 4 5 3 60 58 59 67 | 1 1 | 73 74 76 72 27 22 26 20 68 75 70 72 5 3 5 7 | | | | 61 68 66 66 28 23 25 17 63 69 69 75 9 8 6 8 1989 01... 02... 03... 1 1 1 49 51 51 1 1 1 81 81 79 12 7 7 8 12 14 | | | 3 2 4 71 69 70 1 | | 75 78 78 23 25 21 70 75 75 7 1 4 | | | 65 65 74 21 21 21 67 75 73 11 4 7 IV. C3 ELEVENTH 1988 01... 02... 03... 04... 1 1 1 1 50 50 52 49 1989 01... 02... 03... 1 1 1 46 48 49 (DALLAS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT | | | *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ( LA, NM*, TX) *** *** *** *** | j | j 5 6 5 4 *** *** 18 19 20 21 77 74 70 71 5 7 10 8 | | | | *** *** *** 19 17 17 25 71 75 72 68 10 8 11 8 *** *** *** | | | 1 3 4 *** *** *** 12 18 16 79 75 72 8 7 12 | I | *** *** *** 15 18 11 75 75 80 9 6 9 11 V F E D E R A L R E S E R V E B A N K QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE IV.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 IV.C4 NINTH REFUSED OR REDUCED A F A R M LOAN BECAUSE OF A SHORTAGE OF LOANABLE FUNDS LOAN/DEPOSIT R A T I O IS LOWER AT THAN DESIRED DESIRED LEVEL HIGHER THAN DESIRED (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL R E S E R V E DISTRICT NUMBER OF F A R M LOAN REFERRALS TO ACTIVELY SEEKING NEW FARM LOAN ACCOUNTS NONBANK AGENCIES CORRESPONDENT BANKS NONE COMPARED WITH N O R M A L NUMBER LOWER SAME HIGHER NONE COMPARED WITH N O R M A L NUMBER LOWER SAME HIGHER ( MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*) 1988 01... Q2 . . . *3... 04... 50 53 53 51 1 1 1 1 64 59 58 57 34 40 39 39 1 1 3 4 | | | 1 3 2 3 3 1 | | | 31 33 34 33 15 11 8 6 53 55 57 61 0 0 1 0 | | | 1 29 31 30 34 13 12 9 5 57 58 60 57 1 0 1 3 1989 01... 02... 03... 50 53 55 1 1 1 56 54 43 41 45 52 3 1 5 | | | 6 3 3 | | | 34 35 34 10 5 5 55 59 59 1 0 2 1 | | 34 31 32 8 6 6 56 61 57 2 2 5 IV.C5 FIFTH (RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 1938 Ql... 02... Q3. . . 04... 74 78 79 78 1 1 1 | 8 8 5 11 76 68 67 61 16 24 29 29 | | | | 4 0 0 4 69 57 59 67 | | 1 | 72 68 91 78 4 0 0 0 24 28 10 22 0 4 0 0 | | | | 65 48 70 60 4 0 0 0 30 52 30 40 0 0 0 0 1989 01... 02... 03... 80 79 80 1 1 | 14 10 22 50 62 56 36 28 22 | | | 7 3 4 55 66 63 | | | 77 82 84 4 4 4 19 15 12 0 0 0 | | 1 60 64 71 0 4 8 36 32 21 4 0 0 34 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE IV. D INTEREST RATES ON FARM LOANS MOST COMMON INTEREST RATE ON FARM LOANS (AVERAGE, PERCENT) FEEDER CATTLE LOANS rV.Dl OTHER OPERATING LOANS SEVENTH | 1 1 | 11..0 11..2 11..6 11..9 11..1 11,.2 11..7 12..0 1989 01... 02... 03... | | | 12..5 12 .4 . 12..1 .5 12 . 12..4 12 . .2 TENTH INTERMEDIATE NONREAL ESTATE LONG-TERM REAL ESTATE LOANS *** INTERMEDIATE-TERM NONREAL ESTATE LOANS LOWER LOWER *** *** 10 .5 10 .6 11,.0 11..3 SAME HIGHER SAME LONG-TERM REAL ESTATE LOANS HIGHER LOWER *** *** 11..7 11..5 11..3 SAME HIGHER *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** (KANSAS CITY) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1988 Ql... 02... 03... 04... | | | | 11.5 11.6 11.9 12.2 11.4 11.5 11.8 12.1 *** *** *** *** 11.5 11.6 11.9 12.2 10.9 11.0 11.4 11.6 | | | | 1989 Ql... 02... 03... | | | 12.6 12.5 12.4 12.6 12.4 12.3 *** *** *** 12.6 12.5 12.4 12.0 11.9 11.7 | | | SHORT-TERM NONREAL ESTATE LOANS (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (IL*, IN*, 10, MI*, WI*) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 1988 01... 02... 03... 04... IV. D2 SHORTTERM NONREAL ESTATE AVERAGE INTEREST RATE EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT QUARTER COMPARED WITH AVERAGE RATES IN THE CURRENT QUARTER (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) *** *** *** | *** *** *** | *** *** *** *** *** | *** *** *** | *** *** *** *** *** *** | *** *** *** | *** *** *** *** *** *** | *** *** *** | *** *** *** *** *** *** | *** *** *** | *** *** *** *** *** *** | *** *** *** | *** *** *** *** *** *** | *** *** *** | *** *** *** 35 *** FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE IV.D INTEREST RATES ON FARM LOANS MOST COMMON INTEREST RATE ON FARM LOANS (AVERAGE, PERCENT) FEEDER CATTLE LOANS IV.D3 NINTH OTHER OPERATING LOANS SHORTTERM NONREAL ESTATE INTERMEDIATE NONREAL ESTATE AVERAGE INTEREST RATE EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT QUARTER COMPARED WITH AVERAGE RATES IN THE CURRENT QUARTER (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING) LONG-TERM REAL ESTATE LOANS (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT SHORT-TERM NONREAL ESTATE LOANS INTERMEDIATE - TERM NONREAL ESTATE LOANS LOWER LOWER SAME HIGHER SAME LONG-TERM REAL ESTATE LOANS HIGHER LOWER SAME HIGHER (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*) 1988 Ql... Q2. . . Q3. . . 04... 1 1 1 1 11,.6 11,.6 11..9 12..2 11.7 11.7 12.1 12.4 11..0 11..1 11..6 11..7 1 1 1 1 14 0 1 1 83 61 54 34 3 39 44 66 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 86 61 55 33 3 37 43 66 1 | I I 13 1 1 1 84 65 58 37 3 35 41 62 1989 01... 02... 03... 1 1 1 .8 12 . 12 . ,7 .5 12 . 12.9 12.9 12.5 12..2 12..1 11. 9 1 1 1 7 43 30 29 55 68 63 2 2 1 1 1 7 42 28 31 54 70 62 3 2 | 1 | 8 42 29 36 56 69 56 1 2 IV.D4 ELEVENTH (DALLAS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT 1988 Ql... Q2 . . . Q3 . . . Q4 . . . 11.8 11.9 12.4 12.6 11.9 12.0 12.6 12.8 12.1 12.2 12.6 12.8 12.0 11.9 12.4 12.5 *** 1989 Ql.., Q2. . . Q3 . . . 13 .3 13.2 13.0 13.5 13.3 13.0 13.6 13.3 13.1 13.2 12.9 12.7 *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** IV. D5 FIFTH (RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT 1988 Ql... Q2 . . . Q3. . . Q4 . . . 10 . 8 11.2 11.5 12.1 10 . 6 11.1 11.4 12.0 1989 Ql.. Q2. . 03. . 12.8 12.6 11 . 9 12.7 12 .5 12 .3 *** *** *** • ** *** (LA*, NM*, TX) *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 10.9 11.3 11.8 12.3 10.8 11.3 11.6 *** *** *** *** 12.1 *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 12.9 12.6 12.4 12.7 12.5 12.3 *** *** *** *** *** *** 36 FEDERALRESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TRENDS IN FARM REAL ESTATE VALUES AND LOAN VOLUME MARKET VALUE OF GOOD FARMLAND PERCENTAGE CHANGE DURING QUARTER ALL O£I VJSWTrl 1987 Q3.. Q4. . tUii-LUAtiO) TREND EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT QUARTER (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS) PERCENTAGE CHANGE FROM A YEAR EARLIER DRY- IRRI- RANCHLAND GATED LAND ALL EXPECTED TREND IN FARM REAL ESTATE LOAN VOLUME DURING THE NEXT QUARTER, COMPARED TO YEAR EARLIER (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS) DRY- IRRI- RANCHLAND GATED LAND DOWN STABLE UP LOWER SAME HIGHER FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICTC (IL*Z IN*, io, MI*, WI*) AGRICULTURAL BANKS 3 3 1 1 3 8 2 2 74 70 24 28 19 17 52 55 29 29 1988 Ql.. Q2. . Q3. . , Q4 . . . 1 I I 4 1 3 3 1 1 1 i 12 12 12 12 2 31 9 2 59 60 71 69 39 9 20 29 10 37 22 14 1989 Ql... Q2. . . Q3. . . 56 50 56 60 34 13 21 25 1 1 1 3 1 2 i 1 ! 10 9 8 4 3 1 73 77 67 24 20 32 15 17 11 56 63 65 30 19 24 FIFTH (K1CHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 1987 Q3... Q4 . . . 1 1 10 6 10 13 1 1 0 0 92 82 8 18 | | 20 32 68 64 1988 Ql... Q2 . . . Q3. . . Q4. . . 12 5 1 1 1 1 -4 4 2 3 14 15 7 5 1 1 1 1 0 4 0 0 58 57 67 75 42 39 33 25 | | | | 16 29 14 19 72 64 73 78 1989 Ql... Q2. . . Q3. . . 16 7 14 4 1 I 1 6 -0 11 16 11 21 1 1 1 0 0 0 69 69 93 31 31 7 | | | 22 21 28 70 72 64 7 7 8 37 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS TABLE IV.E TRENDS IN FARM REAL ESTATE VALUES AND LOAN VOLUME MARKET VALUE OF GOOD FARMLAND PERCENTAGE CHANGE DURING QUARTER ALL IV.E3 DRYLAND TENTH IRRIGATED TREND EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT QUARTER (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS) PERCENTAGE CHANGE FROM A YEAR EARLIER RANCHLAND ALL DRYLAND IRRIGATED (KANSAS CITY) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT RANCHLAND DOWN 2 2 -0 2 2 2 | | 1 6 -5 3 -6 4 1 1 1988 Ql. . . Q2. . . Q3 . . . Q4 . . . 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 3 5 2 1 2 | | | | 9 9 9 10 4 7 9 11 10 12 12 11 1 1 1 1 1989 Ql... Q2. . . Q3. . . 4 1 0 5 1 2 4 2 -0 | | | 11 10 8 14 11 11 10 10 8 1 1 1 NINTH (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT STABLE UP *** *** *** SAME *** *** *** *** *** *** *** | | | *** *** *** *** *** *** | | | *** *** HIGHER *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 19 11 62 71 19 18 13 20 18 13 68 71 77 70 18 9 5 18 10 9 4 74 85 75 15 6 21 *** (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SC, WI*) -3 2 -2 *** *** -4 *** *** 1 8 3 -3 -5 *** *** *** *** 5 -7 5 *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 2 5 10 2 -1 LOWER (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY) 1987 Q3. . Q4. . IV.E4 EXPECTED DEMAND FOR FARM REAL ESTATE LOANS DURING THE NEXT QUARTER, COMPARED WITH NORMAL (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS) *** *** *** *** *** ***
@FedFRASER