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 1990
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
6
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
15
25
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 1990; the other data generally were available only through the third quarter of
1990.
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:
The sources of the data in this section are: 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.
The quarterly data shown here for commercial banks, life insurance companies, and the Farmers Home
Administration are virtually the same as those reported annually in the USDA accounts that include the debt of
farm households (as well as the debt of farm businesses). By contrast, the numbers shown here for the Farm
Credit System differ somewhat from those shown in the USDA accounts, owing to adjustments by the USDA to allow
for loans that are not for agricultural purposes.
Recent developments:
At the end of the third quarter of 1990, the volume of farm loans held by the major institutional lenders was
about 1/2 percent below the level of a year earlier; this year-to-year rate of decline was a little smaller
than the figure reported in the previous quarter. The reduction in outstanding loans, relative to a year
earlier, continued to be concentrated in the loans held by the Farmers Home Administration. Excluding the
FmHA, the loan volume of the institutional lenders was about 3-1/4 percent above the level of a year earlier.
The volume of loans held by life insurance companies rose almost 11-1/2 percent over the year. In addition,
the volume of farm loans held by commercial banks was up more than 5 percent from the level of a year earlier,
with roughly similar percentage gains in the real estate and nonreal estate categories. The Farm Credit
System saw its volume of real estate loans fall about 3-1/2 percent over the year; however, the system s
volume of nonreal estate farm loans increased more than 7 percent over the same period.
4
TABLE I.A
FARM DEBT OUTSTANDING:
DATA REPORTED BY THE MAJOR FARM LENDING INSTITUTIONS
(END OF QUARTER)
REAL ESTATE DEBT
TOTAL
TOTAL
I.A1
1987 Q4..
INSURED
COMMERCIAL
BANKS
FARM
CREDIT
SYSTEM
NONREAL ESTATE DEBT
LIFE
INSURANCE
COMPANIES
FARMERS
HOME
ADMINISTRATION
INSURED
COMMERCIAL
BANKS
FA&M
CREDIT
SYSTEM
FARMERS
HOME
ADMINISTRATION
55. 1
29.0
9.9
16.1
TOTAL
AMOUNT, END OF QUARTER, BILLIONS OF DOLLARS
1
123.8
I
68 8
14.5
34.3
9 .9
10.1
1988 Ql..
Q2. .
Q3. .
Q4. .
1
1
121.4
124.1
124.2
120.6
|
|
I
|
67 9
67 7
67. 8
66.9
14.7
15.2
15.3
15.4
33.6
33.0
33.0
32.2
9 .7
9 .6
9 .6
9 .7
10.0
9.9
9.8
9.6
53. 4
56. 4
56. 4
53. 8
28.1
30.3
30.8
29.8
9.5
10.1
9.8
9.3
15.9
16.0
15.8
14.7
1989 Ql..,
Q2. . .
Q3 . . .
Q4. . .
1
1
1
1
118.2
121.2
122.0
118.4
|
|
|
I
65.9
65.9
65.8
65.2
15.8
16.3
16.5
16.6
31.1
30.6
30.5
30.2
9 .5
9 .5
9 .5
9 .6
9.6
9.4
9.3
8.7
52. 3
55. 3
56. 2
53. 2
28.4
30.7
31.5
30.8
9.3
10.0
10.2
10.0
14.6
14.6
14.4
12.4
1990 Ql...
Q2. . .
Q3. . .
1
1
1
116.3
119.6
121.5
|
|
|
65.1
65.2
65.7
16.8
17.1
17.3
29.9
29.6
29.4
9 .8
10 .1
10 .6
8.6
8.5
8.3
51. 2
54. 4
55. 8
29.3
31.9
33.2
9.7
10.5
11.0
12.1
11.9
11.7
100 .0
52.7
18.0
29.2
I.A2
1
|
122.0
***
***
***
118.5
***
***
***
116.5
***
***
***
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL SPECIFIED DEBT, END OF QUARTER
1987 Q4...
1
|
100.0
21.0
49.9
14. 4
14.6
1988 Ql...
Q2. . .
Q3 . . .
Q4. . .
1
1
1
1
|
I
I
I
100.0
100 .0
100 .0
100 .0
21.7
22.4
22.6
23.1
49.4
48 .8
48.7
48.1
14 .2
14 .1
14 .1
14. 5
14.7
14.7
14 .5
14.4
100 .0
100 .0
100 .0
100 .0
52.6
53.6
54.6
55.4
17.7
17.9
17.4
17.2
29.7
28.4
28.0
27.3
1989 Ql...
02...
03...
04...
1
1
1
1
|
I
I
I
100. 0
100 .0
100 .0
100 .0
24.0
24.7
25.1
25.5
47.1
46.5
46.3
46.4
14. 4
14. 4
14. 5
14. 7
14.5
14.3
14.2
13.3
100 .0
100 .0
100 .0
100 .0
54.3
55.5
56.1
57.9
17.8
18.1
18.2
18.8
27.9
26.4
25.7
23.3
1990 Ql...
02...
03...
1
1
1
I
I
1
100 .0
100 .0
100 .0
25.8
26.3
26.4
46.0
45.4
44 .8
15. 0
15 .4
16. 1
13.2
13.0
12.7
100 .0
100 .0
100,.0
57.3
58.7
59.5
19.0
19.4
19.7
23.7
21.9
20.9
MEMO:
FARM DEBT
HELD BY MAJOR
FARM LENDING
INSTITUTIONS,
USDA BASIS
***
***
***
|I
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
TABLE I .B
FARM DEBT OUTSTANDING:
DATA REPORTED BY THE MAJOR FARM LENDING INSTITUTIONS
NONREAL ESTATE DEBT
REAL ESTATE DEBT
TOTAL
I.B1
TOTAL
INSURED
COMMERCIAL
BANKS
FARM
CREDIT
SYSTEM
LIFE
INSURANCE
COMPANIES
FARMERS
HOME
ADMINISTRATION
TOTAL
INSURED
COMMERCIAL
BANKS
FARM
CREDIT
SYSTEM
FARMERS
HOME
ADMINISTRATION
MEMO:
FARM DEBT
HELD BY MAJOR
FARM LENDING
INSTITUTIONS,
USDA BASIS
PERCENT CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS QUARTER
-0 . 9
1987 04
1988 Q1
1989 Q1
02
-0.0
14.4
1990 Q1
02
I.B2
PERCENTAGE CHANGE FROM SAME QUARTER OF PREVIOUS YEAR
-14.1
-2.1
1987 Q4.
-6.5
-6.2
13.9
-12.6
-9.9
-2.7
-7.0
-6.9
1988 Ql.
Q2.
03.
04.
-4.3
-3.1
-4.7
-3.8
-2.3
-10.4
-7.4
-7 . 4
-4.8
-2.3
-3
-3.8
-2.8
12.1
9.6
8.6
6.7
-2.3
-0.5
0.4
2.6
-9.1
-4.9
-6.7
-6.8
-3.1
—3 . 6
-2.9
-8.6
1989 Ql.
02.
Q3.
04.
-2 . 6
-2.9
-2.7
-2.9
-2.5
7.5
7.6
7.6
8.0
-7.5
-7.3
-7.8
— 1. 6
-8.0
—0 . 6
1.0
1.5
2.4
3.3
-2.0
-6.0
-4 .1
-4.9
-5.1
-9.3
-1.5
4.4
8.3
-9.0
-8.6
-15.9
1990 Ql.
02.
03.
-1.7
-1.3
-0 . 4
-1.3
5.9
5.1
5.0
-3.6
-3.4
-3 . 4
2.9
6.0
11. 4
-9.8
-10.5
-10.7
3.4
3.9
5.5
4.5
5.6
7.2
-16.9
-18.3
-19.3
-2.1
-2.6
-2.4
-1.8
-1.9
-1.0
-0.2
-8.2
-5.9
-6.3
-0.8
-0.7
-2
-2.2
-2
-4
-2.1
-1.6
-0.6
-6.4
***
* * *
*•* *
-2.8
-1.8
***
***
***
5
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
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
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 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 November 1990 survey,
about 210 banks reported at least one farm loan, and the number of sample loans totaled almost 5000, more than
twice the number typically reported in the quarterly surveys that were done before the sample was redesigned.
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
occasional appearance of large loans with either very long or very short maturities. 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.
SECTION II: (CONTINUED)
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:
Results from the two most recent quarterly surveys (conducted in August and November of 1990) were heavily
influenced by the terms of lending on some unusually large farm loans. The size of these loans has been in
the range of $10 to $20 million, and the loans have had maturities of one or two days. Although it probably
is still too early to read too much into the recurrence of such loans, they do seem to be cropping up more
frequently in the recent surveys, and may signal a shift in the type of credit demanded by agricultural
borrowers. Apart from these large loans (which, by purpose of loan, show up mainly in the "other" category),
the volume of new lending appeared to rise in the fourth quarter, paced by strong growth in the volume of
loans for feeder livestock.
The estimated number of loans made by all commercial banks was 2.77 million at an annual rate in the fourth
quarter, and 2.63 million for all of 1990; the figure for the year was about the same as the number for 1989.
The interest rates on nonreal estate farm loans (Table II.E) were down about 1 percentage point in 1990, to an
annual average of 11.4 percent; rates fell in 1990 for all categories of loans. Although the average rate was
pulled down by relatively low rates on the aforementioned large loans, rates for smaller loans fell as well.
As shown in the second-to-last column of Table II.G, almost three-fourths of the loans made in the midNovember survey week carried an effective interest rate between 11.0 percent and 12.9 percent; a similar
proportion of loans had fallen in this same range in the August 1990 survey. When weighted by the amount of
the loan, the distribution of loans skews towards lower interest rates. This reflects, in part, the large
loans mentioned earlier, but also it reflects the lower interest rates offered frequently for larger loans.
7
ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NONREAL ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS
TABLE II.A
AMOUNT OF LOANS MADE (BILLIONS OF DOLLARS)
BY SIZE OF
LOAN ($l,OOOs)
BY PURPOSE OF LOAN
ALL
LOANS
FEEDER
LIVESTOCK
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
8.7
8.5
8.3
7.9
8.4
8.9
7.2
6.0
5.7
5.2
6.1
6.1
8.5
9.7
9.5
9.8
9.0
7.8
7.4
6.9
6.8
6.4
7.7
7.3
17.3
18.1
18.0
18.2
17.5
17.6
13.5
13.2
12.6
12.9
14.4
15.9
18.2
23.8
25.3
30.0
32.4
26.5
24.0
22.3
24.5
23.7
23.4
45.3
LARGE
OTHER
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
|
I
I
11.1
11.9
12.8
21.7
18.6
15.8
14.9
12.6
17.1
15.9
19.6
44.2
41.6
48.1
48.3
44.3
48.7
45.0
37.3
35.9
32.5
32.3
32.0
30.5
ANNUAL AMOUNT OF LOANS MADE
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
|
I
|
|
|
1
I
|
|
|
|
|
52.7
60.0
61.1
66.0
67.3
60.8
52.1
48.5
49.6
48.2
51.6
74.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I
|
|
I
|
16.8
16.1
12.7
13.6
12.1
10.7
8.6
10.4
13.2
10.0
12.9
22.0
4.9
4.6
4.3
4.5
5.9
6.5
5.2
4.5
3.4
4.6
6.0
5.5
18.7
24.1
27.3
28.1
31.1
26.5
22.6
23.2
22.5
24.3
24.3
26.6
4.2
4.8
4.7
5.4
6.1
4.4
4.4
2.4
2.3
1.9
2.0
2.3
8.0
10.1
11.4
13.4
11.9
12.2
11.3
8.0
8.3
7.4
6.4
18.3
AMOUNT OF LOANS MADE DURING FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF QUARTER, ANNUAL RATE
1988 Q4...
I
38.1
1
10.7
5.4
14.7
1.1
6.1
1989 Ql. . .
Q2. . .
Q3. . .
Q4. . .
|
|
|
|
41.2
62.7
47.7
54.8
|
I
I
I
11.7
11.8
11.4
16.8
3.1
5.2
5.7
10.0
19.1
35.8
22.3
20.0
1.8
1.8
2.5
1.7
1990 Ql. . .
Q2. . .
Q3. . .
Q4. . .
|
|
|
|
62.1
59.9
81.4
95.4
I
I
|
I
18.4
15.9
20.6
33.1
7.3
3.5
3.6
7.7
24.6
23.9
32.8
25.0
3.3
2.2
1.3
2.3
|
1
3.7
4.9
10.8
18.7
I
14.1
24.0
5.4
8.1
5.8
6.3
4.8
7.4
6.7
5.6
5.6
9.3
8.0
7.6
10.0
15.6
14.8
17.2
20.7
30.4
18.2
24.4
I
I
I
I
17.0
18.8
18.4
24.2
24.2
43.9
29.4
30.6
8.5
14.4
23.1
27.4
5.3
6.8
6.0
6.4
6.5
8.1
7.1
7.6
16.9
13.6
12.8
20.3
33.3
31.4
55.5
61.2
I
I
I
I
29.4
33.2
54.8
59.4
32.6
26.7
26.6
36.0
ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NONREAL ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS
TABLE II.B
NUMBER OF LOANS MADE (MILLIONS)
BY SIZE OF
LOAN ($1,0003)
BY PURPOSE OF LOAN
ALL
LOANS
FEEDER
LIVESTOCK
OTHER
LIVESTOCK
OTHER
CURRENT
OPERATING
EXPENSES
FARM
MACHINERY
AND
EQUIPMENT
OTHER
1
to
9
10
to
24
2.37
2.23
2.23
2.14
2.32
2.42
2.06
1.71
1.57
1.42
1.67
1.70
0.59
0.66
0.65
0.67
0.60
0.53
0.51
0.46
0.46
0.43
0.52
0.49
25
to
99
BY SIZE
OF BANK
100
and
over
LARGE
OTHER
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
|
0.18
0.18
0.17
0.22
0.20
0.18
0.18
0.20
0.20
0.23
0.36
0.44
3.24
3.22
3.21
3.08
3.21
3.26
2.78
2.34
2.18
1.99
2.23
2.20
ANNUAL NUMBER OF LOANS MADE
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
|
1
|
1
1
1
|
I
I
I
|
|
3.42
3 .40
3.39
3 .30
3 .41
3 .44
2.96
2 .55
2 .38
2 .21
,
.60
2.
2 .63
.
0.52
0.50
0.39
0.33
0.37
0.34
0.34
0.30
0.39
0.29
0.30
0.32
0.31
0.29
0.26
0.26
0.32
0.29
0.23
0.17
0.13
0.11
0.20
0.24
1.75
1.76
2.01
2.06
2.00
2.06
1.77
1.66
1.54
1.45
1.73
1.69
0.43
0.45
0.38
0.30
0.39
0.35
0.36
0.17
0.14
0.14
0.16
0.19
0.41
0.39
0.34
0.35
0.32
0.35
0.27
0.24
0.19
0.21
0.20
0.19
I
I
I
I
|
I
I
|
|
I
I
|
0.37 0.08
0.41 0.10
0 . 4 j. 0.10
0.40 0.09
0.38 0.11
0.40 0.09
0.30 0.09
0.29 0.08
0.27 0.08
0.28 0.07
0.31 0.09
0.35 0.09
NUMBER OF LOANS MADE DURING FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF QUARTER, ANNUAL RATE
1988 Q4...
I
1.64
1989 Ql...
Q2. . .
Q3. . .
Q4. . .
I
|
|
|
1990 Ql...
Q2. . .
Q3. . .
Q4 . . .
|
|
I
|
0.33
0.09
1.00
0.09
0.12
|
1.02
0.33
0.22
0.06
1
0.18
1.46
2.01
3.13
2.78
2.47
0.24
0.28
0.26
0.44
0.12
0.22
0.19
0.29
1.31
2.25
1.95
1.40
0.16
0.15
0.19
0.15
0.17
0.24
0.20
0.19
I
I
I
I
1.33
2.06
1.84
1.47
0.38
0.64
0.55
0.52
0.23
0.32
0.32
0.39
0.07
0.11
0.07
0.09
I
I
I
I
0.21
0.33
0.48
0.45
1.80
2.80
2.30
2.02
2.37
2.81
2.59
2.77
0.30
0.26
0.25
0.45
0.23
0.26
0.16
0.33
1.38
1.90
1.87
1.61
0.25
0.21
0.13
0.17
0.20
0.19
0.18
0.21
I
|
I
I
1.48
1.86
1.73
1.73
0.42
0.56
0.48
0.51
0.36
0.31
0.29
0.43
0.10
0.08
0.09
0.11
I
I
I
I
0.40
0.52
0.42
0.41
1.97
2.29
2.17
2.36
|
9
10
ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NONREAL ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS
TABLE II.C
AVERAGE SIZE OF LOANS MADE (THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)
BY SIZE OF
LOAN ($1# 000s)
BY PURPOSE OF LOAN
FEEDER
LIVESTOCK
ALL
LOANS
OTHER
LIVESTOCK
OTHER
CURRENT
OPERATING
EXPENSES
FARM
MACHINERY
AND
EQUIPMENT
1
to
9
OTHER
10
to
24
BY SIZE
OF BANK
25
to
99
100
and
over
46.7
43.9
43.5
46.1
46.3
43.8
45.5
44.9
46.5
45.2
45.9
46.1
220
239
255
326
294
291
255
280
320
320
272
488
LARGE
OTHER
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
t
61.5
66.3
73.0
97.8
92.0
88.1
82.0
62.0
85.5
70.0
53.7
100.7
12.8
14.9
15.0
14.4
15.2
13.8
13.4
15.3
14.9
16.3
14.4
13.9
ANNUAL AVERAGE SIZE OF LOANS MADE
|
1
|
|
|
1
1
I
I
I
|
1
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
15.4
17.7
18.0
20.0
19.7
17.7
17.6
19.0
20.8
21.8
19.9
28.4
I
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.4
32.3
32.6
41.5
32.5
31.8
25.7
35.0
33.8
34.1
42.7
69.7
15.9
15.8
16.6
17.5
18.2
21.9
22.5
25.8
26.3
40.6
29.5
22.7
10.7
13.7
13.6
13.6
15.5
12.9
12.8
14.0
14.6
16.7
14.1
15.7
9.8
10.7
12.3
17.6
15.6
12.5
12.4
13.6
16.1
13.9
12.1
11.9
19.4
25.8
33.8
38.9
37.1
34.8
42.1
32.9
44.6
34.7
32.2
94.3
I
I
I
1
|
|
I
|
I
I
I
|
3.7 14.4
3.8 14.7
3.7 14.7
3.7 14.6
3.6 14.8
3.7 14.7
3.5 14.4
3.5 14.9
3.6 14.7
3.7 14.8
3.6 . 14.7
3.6 14.8
AVERAGE SIZE OF LOANS MADE DURING FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF QUARTER, ANNUAL RATE
1988 04...
1
23.2
1
32.6
59.3
14.6
12.3
50.0
|
3.6
14.5
48.7
288
|
80.0
16.4
1989 Ql. . .
02...
03...
04...
|
|
|
|
20.5
20.1
17.2
22.2
|
|
|
|
49.1 *
42.7
44 .2
38.3
25.5
24.4
30.0
34.5
14.5
15.9
11.4
14.3
11.0
12.3
13.6
11.0
32.0
34.0
29.2
33.4
I
I
I
I
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.8
15.1
14.6
14.5
14.8
43.4
48.5
46.5
44.5
296
275
252
266
|
|
|
|
80.9
57.8
38.5
54.0
13.5
15.7
12.7
15.2
|
1
|
|
26.2
21.3
31.5
34.4
|
|
|
|
61.2
62.0
82.0
73.0
32.0
13.8
22.1
23.6
17.7
12.6
17.6
15.5
13.0
10.5
10.2
13.4
42.0
77.5
128.3
130.3
I
I
I
1
3.6
3.6
3.5
3.7
15.3
14.3
14.7
15.0
47.5
44.3
44.0
47.8
324
409
651
572
|
|
|
|
73.8
63.6
130.3
143.4
16.6
11.7
12.3
15.3
1990
oi...
02...
03...
04...
ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NONREAL ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS
TABLE II.D
AVERAGE MATURITY OF LOANS MADE (MONTHS)
BY SIZE OF
LOAN ($1,0003)
BY PURPOSE OF LOAN
ALL
LOANS
FEEDER
LIVESTOCK
OTHER
LIVESTOCK
OTHER
CURRENT
OPERATING
EXPENSES
FARM
MACHINERY
AND
EQUIPMENT
OTHER
BY SIZE
OF BANK
1
to
9
10
to
24
25
to
99
100
and
over
LARGE
7.7
6.8
6.2
6.0
7.0
7.0
6.7
6.8
7.5
7.1
7.4
7.4
8.3
7.0
6.4
7.0
8.1
7.5
7.7
8.0
8.1
9.2
8.3
9.2
7.8
7.1
6.0
6.6
8.1
7.7
9.1
9.8
9.3
10.2
9.3
11.9
5.5
7.6
5.8
6.4
10.0
8.0
7.9
7.1
8.3
7.7
7.1
4.9
5 .3
6.6
5.4
6.0
6.1
7.0
6.9
5.5
5.9
8 .1
7.8
4.7
7.6
7.3
6.2
6.7
9.9
7.9
8.4
8.8
9.3
8.8
8.2
10.2
5.1
8.0
OTHER
ANNUAL AVERAGE MATURITY
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1
I
I
I
I
|
I
I
I
I
I
1
7.1
7.2
6.0
6.5
8.9
7.7
8.0
8.0
8.4
8.7
8.1
7.5
I
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
5.9
6.2
5.5
5.1
5.5
5.0
6.1
5.8
5.5
6.4
6.8
6.0
6.8
7.1
6.5
7.0
8.1
6.6
7.8
6.3
7.7
4.7
7.4
8.8
6 .0
6 .6
5 .6
7 .1
10 .4
7 .8
7 .3
7 .6
7 .6
8 .5
7 .2
7 .5
14 .2
13 .5
11 .1
8 .4
10 .6
12 . 6
13 .4
21 .0
22 .8
19 .8
18 .7
21,.9
8.7
6.7
5.2
5.4
7.8
8.1
8.8
8.8
12.1
10.9
11.8
6.4
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
1
MATURITY OF LOANS MADE DURING FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF QUARTER, ANNUAL RATE
1988 Q4...
I
7.2
I
6.2
3.9
7..0
32.,4
7.4
1
6.1
8.0
9.5
5.5
1989 Ql...
Q2...
Q3 • . .
Q4. . .
I
I
1
1
9.7
7.9
7.9
7.5
1
I
I
I
7.4
6.2
6.5
7.0
6.6
6.8
8.3
7.4
8.,7
,3
7.
6. 1
6. 8
21. 4
18. 5
17. 8
17. 4
15.7
11.2
13.3
8.1
I
I
I
I
8.4
8.0
6.5
6.8
10.4
8.8
7.7
6.8
12.3
9.5
8.1
8.5
7.0
6.3
8.5
7.1
6.8
8.8
8 .3
7.2
10.7
7.7
7.7
7.6
1990 Ql...
Q2...
Q3. . .
Q4. . .
|
I
I
|
10.8
10.0
5.4
5.5
I
1
I
I
6.3
6.2
5.0
6.4
8.5
10.6
9.2
8.2
11. 6
9. 7
4 .5
5 .3
23. 7
19. 2
25. 1
20. 3
11.9
11.8
4.7
3.4
1
1
I
1
8.3
8.7
6.6
6.2
10.2
10.7
7.5
8.2
16.3
12.6
9.2
9.4
7.6
8.3
3.0
3.3
6.8
8 .2
2.9
3 .3
13.0
11.3
8.3
8.2
|
1
11
12
ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NONREAL ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS
TABLE II.E
AVERAGE EFFECTIVE INTEREST RATE ON LOANS MADE
BY SIZE OF
LOAN ($lvOOOs)
BY PURPOSE OF LOAN
ALL
LOANS
FEEDER
LIVESTOCK
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
11.1
14.7
18.0
17.0
14.2
14.6
13.7
12.4
11.6
11.7
12.8
12.5
11.4
14.7
18.2
16.8
14.1
14.3
13.2
12.0
11.3
11.6
12.7
12.4
11.5
14.9
18.2
17.0
14.0
14 .3
13.2
11.8
11.1
11.4
12.7
12.1
12.8
15.9
18.9
16.4
13.0
13.7
12.1
10.8
9.9
10.8
12.2
10.9
LARGE
OTHER
13.6
16.2
19.8
16.1
12.1
13.1
11.2
9.6
9.2
10.2
12.1
10.9
11.4
15 .0
18.1
17.0
14.1
14.4
13.4
12.1
11.3
11.6
12.7
12.3
ANNUAL AVERAGE INTEREST RATE
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
|
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
11.9
15.2
18.5
16.7
13.5
14.1
12.8
11.5
10.6
11.2
12.5
11.4
12 .1
15 .6
18 .6
15 .9
13 .6
13 .7
12 .5
11 .1
10 .7
10 .9
12 .3
11 .5
11.7
14.6
18.4
16.3
13.8
14.3
12.7
11.9
10.2
11.9
12.4
12.0
11 .8
15,.3
18 .4
16,.9
13,.5
14 ,
.2
13,.0
11,.5
10..8
11,.2
12..6
11..7
11.2
14.4
17.9
17.1
14.3
14.6
13.7
12.2
11.5
11.7
12.8
12.3
12.1
15.3
18.6
16.9
12.8
14.0
12.1
11.2
9.5
10.7
12.3
10.7
I
|
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
|
I
I
I
|
AVERAGE RATE ON LOANS MADE DURING FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF QUARTER, ANNUAL RATE
1988 Q4.
11.6
11.6
11.7
11 .6
1989 Ql.
Q2.
03.
Q4.
12.3
12.9
12.5
12.1
12.2
12.9
12 .0
12.2
12.2
12.8
12.
12.
12.4
12.9
12.7
12 .0
1990 Ql.
11.8
11.8
10.9
11.5
11.4
11.6
11.5
11 .6
11.7
12.2
12.4
12.2
12.1
12.0
11.1
11.7
02.
03.
04.
12.1
11.3
12.1
11.9
12.0
11.1
11.1
11.8
12.
12.
12.
12.1
12.8
12.2
12.1
12.5
13.1
13.0
12.7
12.3
12.9
12.9
12.5
12.6
13.2
12.6
12.3
12,
12.
12.
12.4
13.0
11.8
12.1
12.8
12.0
11.6
12.5
12.
12.
12.
12.
11.5
11.5
9.8
10.9
12.6
12.5
12.6
12.5
12.4
12.3
12.4
12.3
12.2
12.1
12.1
12.0
11.3
11.4
10.3
11.1
11.2
11.4
10.2
11.0
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.2
13.
12.8
ESTIMATES FROM THE QUARTERLY SAMPLE SURVEY OF BANK NONREAL ESTATE LOANS TO FARMERS
TABLE II.F
PERCENTAGE OF LOANS MADE WITH A FLOATING INTEREST RATE
BY SIZE OF
LOAN ($1,000s)
BY PURPOSE OF LOAN
FEEDER
LIVESTOCK
ALL
LOANS
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
3.1
6.9
15.5
24 .3
25.6
23 .8
27.6
40.6
48 .5
49.3
50 .4
53 .6
6.2
12.1
17.7
25.6
29.1
31.3
31.5
41.8
45.6
51.5
49.6
59.2
9.7
12.9
21.7
29.7
34.9
29.0
42.0
48.2
54 .4
60.8
58.5
66.0
34.7
37.2
42.9
53.4
55.9
52.7
56.6
63.7
68.5
67.0
69.1
67.5
LARGE
OTHER
|
j
|
|
|
|
j
|
I
|
|
|
66.4
74 .6
80.0
65.6
77.7
71.1
77.1
71.9
77.6
79.1
83.6
69.4
3.4
8.4
15.5
26.3
29.9
27.6
32.6
47.0
49.9
52.6
47.2
59.3
ANNUAL PERCENTAGE OF LOANS MADE
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1
1
|
|
|
I
|
I
!
!
I
|
16 7
21 .5
29 0
39..2
43.. 1
38.. 9
45..3
53..4
59..5
61 .4
61.• 0
65..2
|
I
i
16.5
19.8
33.3
47.8
47.8
41.2
!
61.4
|
60.5
51 .6
65.3
71.4
76.8
|
1
!
|
I
|
|
17.1
17.7
21.6
30,2
28.7
32.3
44 . 9
34.8
69.6
39.5
40.0
61.6
15 .8
21 .0
31 .5
43 .0
48 .1
41 .7
43 .0
57 .2
62 . 1
63 .8
59 .7
68 .3
7.3
11.2
14.9
15.5
17.6
24.3
19.6
30.9
55.5
54.9
32.9
40.0
23.8
32.7
28.5
31.4
44.3
39.5
47.3
50.6
62.1
63.2
73.6
51.2
|
|
I
I
I
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AVERAGE PERCENTAGE DURING FIRST FULL WEEK OF SECOND MONTH OF QUARTER
1988 04...
|
62.• 9
i
61.8
17.4
78 .4
68.1
66.8
1
51.3
53.2
60.5
69.1
|
74.8
55.9
1989 Ql. . .
02...
03...
04...
(
|
68..6
51 .. 6
|
6 5 .,7
i
|
|
|
61 .8
.
i
82.9
66.0
69.5
68.5
30.0
18.2
46.2
51.0
67 .4
49 .7
69 .5
59 .1
40.1
26.9
30.7
35.1
75.6
66.0
78.3
77.2
I
{
|
|
45.8
56.3
51.9
44.5
52.4
45.9
58.2
42.9
69.4
50.6
63 .9
54 .6
78.3
52.7
75.6
76.8
|
|
|
(
88.6
80.3
87.1
80.1
55.0
39.3
52.3
47.4
01...
1
71.• 6
02...
03...
04...
|
7 4 .6
|
61.•
78.3
77.5
72.4
78.3
47.5
50.4
76.3
73.3
73 .0
73 .0
60 .3
69 .6
41.7
47.1
46.3
27.4
85.3
84.2
52.0
22.5
|
I
|
I
50.2
55.7
53.9
53.9
57.8
63.2
66.2
49.7
69.6
65.2
73 .9
58.5
78.8
85.7
58.9
59.9
|
|
|
|
85.0
88.0
60.6
59.3
59.5
58.0
63.4
56.9
1990
I
5
5 8 .• 4
|
|
|
|
13
Table II.G
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF NONREAL ESTATE FARM LOANS MADE BY BANKS, 1
BY EFFECTIVE INTEREST RATE
Effective
interest
rate
(percent)
All
I
I Memo:
|
November
| Percentage
I
I Distribution
| 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 | of Number of
|
I Loans, 1990
J_
1 November August
1 nans
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
|
100
100
1
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..
-
-
1
7
10
15 ' 3
35
10
13 ! 21
4 1 28
27
6
7
5
3
3
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
—
—
-
-
-
—
—
-
-
-
—
—
-
-
—
—
-
-
2
5
20
31
23
13
5
1
-
-
-
-
3
6
6
15
17
37
13
3
1
8
5
17
20
36
13
1
1
3
12
24
32
22
5
1
-
1
t
/ f
1
11
15
17
25
27
4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
5
25
41
20
7
2
1
10
29
41
17
2
-
3
36
24
30
5
1
I
!
|
I
1
|
1
10
35
37
14
3
1
9
33
39
15
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
~
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
y\-
1
16
7
13
21
33
7
1
-
1
6
12
11
13
29
25
2
1
i
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.
Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.
SECTION III:
SELECTED STATISTICS FROM THE QUARTERLY REPORTS OF CONDITION OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
TABLES:
Commercial banks:
TIT.A
III•B
Estimated delinquent nonreai estate farm loans at insured commercial banks
Estimated net charge-offs of nonreai estate farm loans at insured commercial banks.....
17
18
Agricultural banks:
HI •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-offs 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
19
20
21
22
23
24
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 nonreai 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 nonreai 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 nonreai estate) to total loans that is greater
than the unweighted average at all banks. The estimate of this average was 16.25 percent in September of
1990.
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.
15
SECTION 111:
(conr i.nued)
Recent Devs1 opiawif J.
The volume of ae.i j nquen; i :^ ,n nonreal estate loan:; (table III.A) ed jed down further in the third quarter of
1990. The^e delinquencies amounted to 3.2 percent of n on real estate farm loans, well below the rate of
delinquency for air Joaru- at banks. Total net charge-offs of farm loans (table III .B) were very small for the
nation through September as substantial net recoveries in California largely offset sizeable net charge-offs
in Texas ana smalJ net cimrge-cffs in most other states. fewer than one in twelve agricultural banks had
nonperforming loans that amounted to more than 5 percent of total loans (table III.C), and the proportion of
banks that had 2 a.r ge amounts of net charge-of fs fell compared to a year earlier (table III .D) .
Data t ii±.'t'ij 1 j Seprember suggest that agricultural banks have been earning profits at about the same
rate as in the !ast three or four years, a rate that has been higher than that earned by nonagricultural banks
(table ill.F) . Tte ratio ot loans to deposits at agricultural banks in the third quarter of 1990 (table
III.G) was abc>.n ! !i<.
as it was a year earlier, and this ratio remained quite low by historical standards.
The ratios at n o n e u.lrirai btnks in 'r.he Kansas City and Dallas Federal Reseive Districts remained well below
the rat ros i n oth^.: di sr. i ,'" L^ „ Failure; of cy = r tn] tnrnl banks were rare in 1990 (table III. H) , and the data
in tables i n . C ond 111.D suggest that the episode of widespread failures of these banks seen in 1984 through
1988 has run it, L,jrse.
TABLE III.A
ESTIMATED DELINQUENT FARM NONREAL ESTATE LOANS
INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS
SEPTEMBER 30
AS PERCENTAGE OF OUTSTANDING FARM PRODUCTION LOANS
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS
NONPERFORMING
NONPERFORMING
TOTAL
PAST DUE
30 TO 89
DAYS
ACCRUING
TOTAL
PAST DUE
90 DAYS
ACCRUING
NONACCRUAL
MEMO:
RESTRUCTURED
LOANS IN
COMPLIANCE
6 .7
4 .9
3
3.2
1.,2
1..5
1..4
0.. 9
0.. 6
0..5
0,.4
3 .8
.
5..6
6..2
4..8
3..4
2..2
1,.6
NA
NA
1.2
1.6
1.6
1.4
1.1
0. 5
0. 5
6..7
6..5
1. 0
1. 7
5. 7
4. 8
0. 9
0. 7
4. 8
4. 2
1. 6
1. 7
1..2
1..1
1..0
0 .9
.
0. 5
0..5
0.,5
0., 5
7.,1
5.,5
4..9
4 .5
.
2.,0
1.,0
0.,9
1..2
5.,2
4.. 5
4..0
3..3
1. 0
0.,7
0.,6
0..5
4. 2
3. 7
3. 4
2 .9
1. 7
1. 7
1. 6
1.,6
0..2
0..2
0..2
0,.1
0..8
0..8
0,.7
0,.6
0..5
0,.5
0,,4
0,.4
5..5
4,.4
3,.8
3 .7
1..9
1..3
1..1
1..3
3.. 5
3,.2
2,.7
2 .3
0..6
0..6
0..5
0..5
,9
2.
,5
2.
.
2 .2
1..9
1..6
1..5
1..4
1.. 4
0,.2
0 .2
0 .1
0,.6
0 .6
0 .5
0,.4
0 .4
0 .4
4 .8
3 .5
3 .2
2,.1
1 .2
1 .1
2 .7
2 .4
2 .0
0,.7
0,.5
0 .4
.
2 .0
1..8
.6
1.
1,.3
1,.2
1,.1
2,
.1
2,
.9
2.6
1.. 8
1..2
0.. 9
0.. 7
0., 5
0.. 6
0.,5
0.. 3
0..2
0..2
0.. 1
1.,6
2 ,2
.
2.1
1 .5
'
.0
.7
0,.5
NA
NA
^'
0.5
1987 Q3.
04.
2,
.1
1..9
0. 3
0. 5
1. 8
1. 4
0.,3
0.,2
1. 5
1.,2
1988 Ql.
2..0
1..7
1..5
1..4
0. 5
0., 3
0. 3
0.,4
1., 5
1., 3
1..2
1., 0
0. 3
0..2
0..2
0.. 1
1.. 6
1,.4
1.e 2
1,.1
0..5
0.. 4
0..3
0..4
1..0
1.. 0
0,. 9
0.. 7
1 .4
1 .1
1 .0
0.. 6
0. 4
0. 4
0..8
0 .8
0. 7
03.
04.
1989 Ql.
02.
03.
04.
1990 Ql.
02.
NONACCRUAL
MEMO:
RESTRUCTURED
LOANS IN
COMPLIANCE
5..0
7,
.1
7.7
5..7
4..0
2 .7
.
2.. 0
0..6
0 .7
.
0.5
0,.3
0 .3
,
0 .3
,
0 .4
02.
TOTAL
PAST DUE
90 DAYS
ACCRUING
1.. 4
1., 7
1., 6
1.. 0
0,9
1,, 1
1..1
2 .7
.
3..5
3 .1
,
2 .1
,
.5
1•
.2
1.
1 .0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
198 9
199 0
TOTAL
PAST DUE
30 TO 89
DAYS
ACCRUING
0*4
0.4
1
|
1
|
|
6..4
.8
g'
-i'EfEr = = — = =
1
I
1
1
1
I
1
more than 90
; for other banks,
estimates of delinquent farm loans are based on a study of delinquent total loans at these banks.
17
18
TABLE III.B
ESTIMATED NET CHARGE-OFF S OF NONREAL ESTATE FARM LOANS
INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS*
ESTIMATED AMOUNT
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
198 5
198 6
198 7
198 8
198 9
199 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
CHARGE-OFFS AS A PERCENTAGE
OF SUCH LOANS OUTSTANDING
ANNUAL
TOTAL
Q1
02
Q3
Q4
1300.00
1195.00
503.00
128.00
91.00
**
200
235
173
28
10
-5
320
360
133
39
26
19
255
230
57
24
15
10
525
370
140
37
40
**
ANNUAL
TOTAL
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.28
3.38
1.61
0.44
0.29
**
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
0.51
0.66
0.55
0.10
0.03
-0.02
0.84
1.07
0.46
0.14
0.09
0.06
0.64
0.67
0.19
0.10
0.05
0.03
1.34
1.10
0.46
0.12
0.13
**
*Data are estimates of the 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.
TABLE III.C
DISTRIBUTION OF AGRICULTURAL BANKS BY RELATIVE NONPERFORMING LOANS*
NONPERFORMING LOANS AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL LOANS
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION, SEPTEMBER 30
198 4
198 5
198 6
198 7
198 8
198 9
199 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
46.2
36.7
33.9
43.0
54.0
61.7
66.6
33.0
34.6
32.8
33.3
31.3
27.6
24.8
15.8
20.6
23.2
17.0
12.0
8.5
7.3
3.7
5.2
6.6
4.9
2.1
1.6
1.0
0.8
1.9
2.2
1.3
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.9
1.4
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.0
1987 Q3. . .
Q4. . .
|
|
100.0
100.0
43.0
50.3
33.0
30.6
17.0
14.4
4.9
3.3
1.3
0.9
0.5
0.3
1988 Ql.. .
02...
Q3. . .
Q4. . .
|
|
|
|
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
49.1
51.7
54 .0
59.0
30.8
31.9
31.3
28.9
15.7
13.1
12.0
9.7
3.2
2.4
2.1
1.9
0.9
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
1989 Ql...
Q2...
Q3...
04...
|
|
|
|
100 .0
100 .0
100.0
100 .0
57.6
60.2
61.7
65.8
29.3
29.3
27.6
25.1
10.6
8.3
8.5
7.6
1.9
1.5
1.6
1.2
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
1990 Ql...
Q2...
Q3. ..
|
|
|
100 .0
100.0
100.0
61.9
65.4
66.6
26.8
25.0
24.8
9.2
8.0
7.3
1.5
1.3
1.0
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
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 III.
TABLE III.D
DISTRIBUTION OF AGRICULTURAL BANKS BY RELATIVE NET CHARGE-OFFS*
NET CHARGE-OFFS AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL LOANS
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION
1984
198 5
198 6
198 7
198 8
198 9
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
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
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
18.5
10.6
9.7
19.4
31.8
36.0
23.6
14.5
13.4
20.6
25.7
28.1
20.0
18.0
15.5
18.5
17.2
16.5
23.9
30.2
30.7
25.4
17.3
14.1
9.2
16.1
18.0
11.0
5.8
3.9
4.8
10.5
12.6
5.1
2.2
1.4
YEAR-TO-DATE PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION
1988 03...
04...
|
|
100.0
100.0
46.0
31.8
25..3
25..7
13.3
17.2
10.7
17.3
3.6
5.8
1.3
2.2
1989 oi...
02...
03...
04...
1
|
|
|
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
75.6
59.9
50.6
36.0
17..3
24..7
26..0
28..1
3.7
8.0
12.0
16.5
2.9
5.6
8.7
14.1
0.4
1.5
2.1
3.9
0.2
0.4
0.7
1.4
1990 oi...
02...
03...
1
1
|
100.0
100.0
100.0
77.2
61.8
53.2
16..3
24..2
26..7
3.8
7.9
10.5
2.2
4.9
7.4
0.4
1.0
1.7
0.1
0.3
0.3
* 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.
TABLE III.E
DISTRIBUTION OF AGRICULTURAL BANKS BY RATIO OF NONPERFORMING LOANS TO TOTAL CAPITAL*
NONPERFORMING LOANS AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL CAPITAL
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION, SEPTEMBER 30
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1988 Q3. . .
Q4 . . .
1
1
1
1
1
|
I
25
TO
49
50
TO
74
75
TO
99
100
TO
124
125
TO
149
150
TO
174
175
TO
199
200
AND
OVER***
ALL BANKS
UNDER
25
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
67 .5
76 .9
85 .4
89 .2
90 .9
19.6
14.8
10.0
7.6
6.9
6.0
4.2
2.4
1.6
1.5
3.2
1.9
1.0
0.6
0.3
1.1
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.1
0.8
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
1.0
0.7
0.3
0.3
**
|
|
|
|
|
100.0
100 .0
85 .4
87 .5
10.0
8.4
2.4
2.1
1.0
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.3
|
|
1989 Ql...
Q2 ...
03...
04...
1
|
|
|
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
87 .0
88 .6
89 .2
90 .1
8.5
7.9
7.6
7.6
2.2
1.7
1.6
1.1
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.3
|
|
|
|
1990 Ql...
02...
03...
1
|
1
100.0
100.0
100.0
89 .0
90 .1
90 .9
8.1
7.4
6.9
1.6
1.5
1.5
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.1
**
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.1
**
|
|
|
* Total primary and secondary capital items that are available at the end of the period specified.
are defined in the introduction to section III.
** Less than 0.05 percent.
*** Includes banks with negative capital.
Agricultural banks
21
TABLE III.F
SELECTED MEASURES OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE OF AGRICULTURAL AND OTHER BANKS*
NET INCOME AS A PERCENTAGE
OF AVERAGE EQUITY AT
AGRICULTURAL BANKS
(PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION)
0
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
|
|
|
|
|
|
I
|
|
|
I
ALL BANKS
NEGATIVE
TO
4
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
1
1
2
4
7
13
18
19
13
9
5
2
2
3
5
7
9
11
14
13
9
7
5
TO
9
10
TO
14
15
TO
19
20
TO
24
8
9
12
15
18
23
22
27
31
30
29
36
33
33
33
36
36
33
28
31
36
38
38
35
32
28
24
15
13
9
9
12
14
12
14
13
11
7
3
3
2
2
3
4
25
AND
OVER
3
5
6
4
2
1
1
1
1
2
3
|
|
|
|
I
I
|
I
|
I
|
NET CHARGE-OFFS
AS PERCENTAGE
OF TOTAL LOANS
RATE
OF RETURN
TO ASSETS
AVERAGE RATE
OF RETURN
TO EQUITY
AGRICULTURAL
BANKS
OTHER
SMALL
BANKS
15
16
15
14
11
8
6
5
8
10
11
14
14
13
12
12
12
11
8
8
9
10
AGRICULTURAL
BANKS
1,.2
1..3
1..2
1..1
1..0
0,.7
0 .5
0 .4
0 .7
0 .9
1 .0
OTHER
SMALL
BANKS
1.,0
1.,0
0..9
0..9
0..9
0..8
0,.8
0,.6
0,.6
0 .7
0 .8
AGRICULTURAL
BANKS
OTHER
SMALL
BANKS
AVERAGE
CAPITAL RATIO
(PERCENT)
AGRICULTURAL
BANKS
OTHER
SMALL
BANKS
0. 2
0. 3
0.,4
0.,7
0..9
1..2
2..1
2..3
1,.3
0..7
0..6
0. 3
0., 4
0..4
0..6
0.,7
0..6
0,.8
1..1
0,.9
0,.7
0,.7
9..0
9..2
9..2
9..3
9,.4
9 .5
,
9,.6
9 .5
9 .8
9 .9
10 .1
8..5
8,.6
8..6
8..5
8..4
8..5
8,.5
8 .4
8 .8
8 .8
9 .0
QUARTERLY
-YEAR TO DATE1988 03...
04...
1
1
100
100
1989 01...
02...
03...
04...
1
1
1
1
1990 01...
02...
03...
1
1
I
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
100
100
100
100
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
100
100
100
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
8
10
7
9
0..8
0.,9
0.,6
0,,7
0.5
0.7
0.5
0.7
10.3
9.9
8.9
3
6
9
11
3
6
8
10
0..3
0,.6
0,.9
1 .0
0..3
0..4
0..7
0,.8
0.1
0.1
10.2
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.7
10.4
10.4
10.1
8.9
9.1
9.1
9.0
3
6
9
3
5
7
0 .3
0 .5
0 .8
0 .2
,
0,.4
0 .6
0.1
0.2
0.1
10.2
10.2
10.3
9.0
9.0
9.1
0.2
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.5
•Agricultural and other banks are defined in the Introduction to section III; small banks have less than 500 million dollars in assets.
Total primary and secondary capital (items that are available at the end of the period specified) are measured as a percentage of total assets.
Quarterly data in the lower panel are cumulative through the end of the quarter indicated and, for periods of less than a year, are not comparable to
the annual data in the upper panel.
TABLE III.G
AVERAGE LOAN-DEPOSIT RATIOS AT AGRICULTURAL BANKS IN SELECTED FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICTS*
SEPTEMBER 30
AVERAGE
CLEVELAND
NUMBER
OF
BANKS
LOANS
NUMBER
TO
OF
DEPOSITS
BANKS
ST. LOUIS
LOANS
NUMBER
TO
OF
DEPOSITS
BANKS
LOANS
TO
DEPOSITS
NUMBER
OF
BANKS
LOANS
NUMBER
TO
OF
DEPOSITS
BANKS
LOANS
MINNE-
KANSAS
APOLIS
CITY
NUMBER
TO
OF
DEPOSITS
BANKS
LOANS
TO
DEPOSITS
NUMBER
OF
BANKS
SAN
FARM I/" -
FRANCISCO
LOANS
TO
DEPOSITS
NUMBER
OF
BANKS
LOANS
NUMBER
TO
OF
DEPOSITS
BANKS
RATIO
LOANS
TO
DEPOSITS
1985
4937
0 .593
|
13
0 .677
31
0 .750
207
1986
0 .588
1285
0 .575
|
4801
608
0 .550
|
0 .567
883
11
0 .709
0,.628
1370
29
0 .744
0 .582
|
186
333
1249
0 .522
0 .600
1
16.89
1987
0 .602
|
4594
591
0 .54 3
|
0 .538
115
860
0 .632
0,. 566
1330
172
0 .619
,52 3
|
1189
|
569
0 .541
0 .572
|
16.25
1988
0 .523
350
4403
0 .555
822
|
0 .544
97
0 . 660
1281
0..507
350
159
0 .614
0 .550
|
1131
0 .539
62
530
0 .677
|
0 .571
16.02
|
787
0 .557
1233
0..519
381
0 .535
|
61
0 .657
|
16.12
1989
4266
0 .565
|
85
0 . 666
150
0 .599
1075
1990
0 .566
504
0 .577
|
4149
772
0 .563
0,.583
|
81
0 .681
1211
0..520
153
387
0 . 612
0 .509
|
1023
59
0 .563
511
0 .594
.
0 .675
|
|
16.17
749
0 .587
,
1164
0..516
389
0 .477
|
60
0,.714
|
16.25
1988 03...
4403
0,.555
|
97
0..660
|
159
0..614
1131
0..539
|
530
0..571
|
04...
787
4344
0,.538
0..557
|
1233
96
0..637
0..519
|
381
0..585
0..535
|
144
0 .529
.
61
1111
0,.657
|
|
500
16.12
0,.549
|
778
0..532
1239
0.,512
392
0..506
|
62
0..637
|
15.72
15.47
1989 01...
4317
0,.537
|
92
0.
,648
|
149
0.,600
1100
0..535
|
773
0.,548
|
773
02...
0.,540
4321
0..557
|
1229
0. 508
94
0..665
|
396
0. 604
0..479
|
161
62
1085
0. 555
0..624
|
|
499
0. 569
|
03.. .
778
0.,575
4266
0. 565
|
1223
85
0. 666
0. 514
|
391
0..495
|
150
0. 599
1075
62
0.,566
|
0..682
|
16.00
504
0. 577
|
04...
772
4181
0. 583
0. 544
|
1211
84
0. 520
0 .641
|
387
0..509
|
138
0. 588
59
1055
0. 54 8
|
0..675
|
16.17
477
0. 558
|
758
0. 552
1196
0. 511
393
0..481
|
57
0..637
|
15.87
1990 01...
4177
0. 536
|
81
0 .648
|
151
0. 592
1037
0. 541
|
487
0. 549
|
02...
756
0. 557
4196
1191
0. 553
0. 497
|
85
0. 672
398
|
0..468
|
0. 612
54
161
1033
0.,622
|
15.63
0. 554
|
495
0. 569
|
0 3...
755
0. 583
4149
1183
0. 563
0. 506
|
81
0. 681
401
|
0.,468
|
60
153
0. 612
0. 563
|
16.08
1023
0..714
|
511
0. 594
|
749
0. 587
1164
0. 516
389
0.,477
|
60
0.,714
|
16.25
•The loan-deposit ratio is defined as total loans divided by total deposits.
Agricultural banks are defined in the introduction to section III.
23
TABLE III.H
F A I L U R E S OF AGRICULTURAL BANKS*
SEPTEMBER 30
NUMBER OF FAILURES
1982
1983
1984. . . .
1985
1986....
1987
1988....
1989
1990....
Q1
02
03
04**
2
1
3
12
14
22
11
5
3
3
1
7
21
14
19
6
7
5
3
2
10
17
21
12
12
5
6
3
3
12
18
16
16
7
5
3
ANNUAL
TOTAL
11
7
32
68
65
69
36
22
17
*Data exclude b a n k s assisted to prevent failure.
Industrial
banks and m u t u a l savings banks also are excluded. Agricultural
banks are defined in the introduction to section III.
**Data for the fourth quarter and year end 1990 are preliminary.
SECTION IV:
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF FARM CREDIT CONDITIONS AND FARM LAND VALUES
TABLES:
IV. A
IV.B
iV\C
IV.D
IV.&
Page
Nonieal estate lending experience
Expected change in non-real-estate loan volume and repayment conditions
Average 1 can/deposit ratio, and other indicators of relative credit availability
Interest rates....
Trends in real estate values and loan volume...
28
30
32
34
36
SOURCES OF DATA.
Data are from quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks conducted at the end of
each quarter by f ive 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 Ba nk o f Ch i c a go, 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 ^ ^
of Kansas City, Federal Reserve P.O. Station, Kansas City Missouri 64198
The sample 1 , ,en originally in l!>7 6 consisted of 188 banks selected from among banks at which farm loans
constituted 5v percent or more of total loans, with appropriate representation of all farm areas. In recent
quarters, the samp:!e nas 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 sampleselected'in 1975 consisted of 43 Danks of all sizes.
loans were sampled more heavily.
Banks with the larger amounts of farm
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS:
The Reserve Bank surveys that were completed around the end of the third quarter of 1990 showed continued
stability in agricultural credit conditions.
Loan demand was reported to be still on a moderate uptrend. More specifically, in all of the districts, the
number of banks reporting an increase in the demand for farm loans outnumbered those reporting decreases
(Table IV.A), and further moderate gains in loan demand were anticipated in most districts in the fourth
quarter (Table IV,B).
Agricultural banks appear to have ample funds available for farm lending. Loan-to-deposit ratios in the third
quarter were little changed from those of the previous quarter; these ratios also were little changed from
those of a year earlier. The number of respondents who characterized their ratios as being lower than desired
continued to greatly outnumber those who viewed their loan-to-deposit ratios as being too high. A large
majority of the respondents say that they are actively seeking new farm accounts. Only a very small fraction
of the respondents report naving refused or reduced a farm loan because of a shortage of loanable funds.
Section IV: (continued)
In some of the districts, repayment rates on farm loans were not quite as rapid as in previous quarters;
nonetheless, the percentages of banks reporting that repayment rates were slow generally remains quite low by
historical standards.
The Reserve Bank surveys indicate that the interest rates on farm loans (Table IV.D) changed little in the
third quarter of 1990. In most districts, the rates on farm loans were about 1/4 percentage point below the
levels of a year earlier.
Land prices, on average, still appeared to be trending up at the end of the third quarter, but at a slower
rate than in previous quarters. In most districts, the year-to-year gains were in a range of 4 to 5 percent.
Slightly stronger year-to-year gains were reported in the Kansas City district. In the Dallas district,
however, land prices in the third quarter are reported to have been moderately below the levels of a year
earlier.
27
28
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)
LOWER
IV. A1
SAME
LOWER
HIGHER
SAME
LOWER
HIGHER
SAME
COLLATERAL REQUIRED
RENEWALS OR EXTENSIONS
LOAN REPAYMENT RATE
FUND AVAILABILITY
DEMAND FOR LOANS
HIGHER
LOWER
SAME
HIGHER
LOWER
5AM#
HIGHER
SEVENTH (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( IL*, IN*, IO, MI*, WI* ) AGRICULTURAL BANKS
1988 Q3.
04.
18
15
45
43
37
42
I
1
9
5
66
67
24
28
1
|
22
29
68
54
10
17
|
|
14
14
63
57
23
28
0
1
77
78
22
22
1989 Ql.
02.
03.
04.
11
11
13
17
39
41
50
48
50
49
37
35
1
I
I
|
11
15
13
6
63
63
65
64
26
22
22
30
|
1
|
I
27
18
12
11
62
72
70
54
11
10
18
34
|
|
|
|
11
11
15
28
61
68
70
59
28
21
15
12
0
1
0
1
73
79
81
83
26
20
18
16
1990 Ql.
02.
03.
15
18
16
45
46
40
36
32
1
1
i
6
5
6
63
65
66
31
30
28
1
1
1
10
5
5
59
71
76
31
24
19
1
|
1
29
22
22
61
72
74
11
6
4
1
0
0
81
87
84
18
12
16
IV.A2
52
TENTH (KANSAS CITY) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY) AGRICULTURAL BANKS
1988 Q3 . .
04. .
|
|
22
22
60
52
18
26
i
j
9
5
59
60
32
36
5
4
63
60
32
36
|
|
26
27
66
67
7
6
1
1
1
1
69
75
29
25
1989 Ql. .
Q2 . .
Q3 . .
04. .
1
|
I
1
17
15
11
11
56
56
53
53
27
28
36
36
1
1
|
f
4
10
10
9
63
63
64
63
33
27
26
28
3
9
14
21
67
71
70
63
29
20
16
16
|
|
|
|
25
13
11
11
71
78
78
65
4
9
11
24
1
1
1
I
1
o
o
1
72
75
80
82
27
25
20
16
1990 Ql. .
02 . .
03. .
|
1
1
13
17
11
55
53
59
32
31
31
|
i
1
7
8
8
66
59
68
27
34
24
14
5
12
67
75
72
19
20
16
(
|
1
13
17
14
72
78
74
15
5
13
i
i
i
1
2
o
80
82
85
19
17
15
IV.A3
ELEVENTH (DALLAS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( LA*, NM*, TX )
1988 Q3 . .
04. .
|
|
21
21
46
49
32
30
1
|
12
8
55
50
33
42
|
|
13
11
61
60
26
30
|
I
27
31
58
56
15
13
1
1
o
o
46
51
54
49
1989 Ql . .
Q2. .
Q3 . .
04. .
|
|
|
|
25
28
20
20
47
47
52
54
27
26
28
26
1
j
|
I
5
8
10
5
51
55
57
61
44
37
33
|
1
|
|
10
15
15
23
68
68
71
61
22
17
14
16
|
|
1
I
27
18
17
16
64
66
65
61
9
16
18
23
1
1
1
I
o
o
o
o
54
56
61
57
46
44
39
43
1990 Ql. .
Q2 . .
03. .
|
1
1
16
18
17
54
56
53
30
!
1
7
25
30
|
13
60
61
58
33
31
29
|
|
|
22
17
23
68
73
67
10
10
9
|
1
I
13
13
13
65
73
64
22
14
24
I
1
|
o
1
4
59
62
52
41
37
44
8
33
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS
TABLE IV.A
FARM NONREAL ESTATE LENDING EXPERIENCE COMPARED WITH NORMAL CONDITIONS
(PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING)
DEMAND FOR LOANS
LOWER
IV.A4
SAME
FUND AVAILABILITY
HIGHER
LOWER
SAME
LOAN REPAYMENT RATE
HIGHER
LOWER
SAME
RENEWALS OR EXTENSIONS
HIGHER
LOWER
SAME
COLLATERAL REQUIRED
HIGHER
LOWER
SAME
HIGHER
NINTH (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( Ml*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI* )
03...
04...
|
|
12
18
67
69
21
12
***
***
|
1
29
19
61
65
10
16
8
13
81
77
11
10
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
oi...
02...
03...
04...
1
1
1
I
14
4
6
5
64
70
75
85
22
26
20
10
***
***
***
1
I
1
|
13
17
16
22
75
82
80
70
12
1
5
8
16
20
12
9
71
71
81
80
13
9
7
11
|
|
|
j
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
oi...
02...
03...
1
I
|
4
7
10
78
78
76
18
15
14
***
***
***
|
1
1
25
10
19
70
82
78
5
8
3
12
16
16
68
70
78
20
14
6
|
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
IV.A5
|
|
***
***
|
*•*
***
***
FIFTH (RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( MD, NC, SC, VA, WV* )
1988 Q3.
04.
21
64
68
18
11
|
1
0
4
77
82
23
14
1
|
5
4
82
71
14
25
I
I
18
21
77
75
5
4
5
0
68
75
27
25
1989 Ql.
02.
03.
04.
21
14
19
19
66
69
67
69
14
17
15
12
1
1
1
1
14
10
12
4
72
76
65
64
14
14
23
32
|
1
1
1
3
o
4
4
83
89
82
77
14
11
15
19
1
1
1
I
28
14
19
15
69
82
78
81
3
4
4
4
0
0
4
4
69
71
85
84
31
29
12
12
1990 Ql.
02.
03.
21
25
12
68
68
11
7
16
1
1
1
11
7
12
68
82
72
21
11
16
1
1
1
11
7
8
79
93
76
11
0
16
I
I
I
18
7
21
79
86
71
4
7
8
4
1
4
74
62
60
22
37
36
18
72
29
30
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS
TABLE IV.B
F & R M
"
E S T A T E
L 0 M T
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
1988 Q3.
04.
SEVENTH
(CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT
FARM MACHINERY
OPERATING
CROP STORAGE
TOTAL
IV. B1
01.. .
02.. .
Q3...
04...
N 0 N R E A L
(IL*, IN*, IO, ML*, WI*) AGRICULTURAL BANKS
18
8
48
45
34
47
30
16
56
70
14
13
1
|
18
14
76
77
6
9
42
33
43
57
15
10
13
5
42
31
44
64
9
40
53
57
51
51
37
27
37
25
22
21
13
62
69
67
70
13
9
12
17
1
1
1
1
15
13
14
11
78
80
78
77
7
7
8
11
33
28
19
25
59
65
62
63
8
6
20
11
6
9
20
13
28
46
57
45
66
45
24
43
50
58
58
38
27
28
20
20
20
60
70
66
20
10
14
1
|
|
13
12
16
77
81
78
11
7
6
23
21
12
71
72
58
6
7
30
13
17
15
46
56
62
41
27
23
18
71
76
11
20
15
9
14
50
52
30
33
1
1
1
1
10
16
12
12
1990 Ql.
02.
03.
15
14
IV.B2
ELEVENTH
(DALLAS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT
LOWER SAME HIGHER
LOWER SAME HIGHER
LOWER SAME HIGHER
37
17
45
50
18
1
|
|
|
14
15
9
8
49
58
45
38
37
27
46
54
I
1
1
6
8
8
41
51
47
53
40
45
28
51
58
22
19
33
(LA*, NM*, TX)
1988 Q3.
04.
20
15
61
66
19
20
1
|
24
23
54
57
22
20
21
16
72
79
1989 Ql.
02.
03.
04.
22
24
18
15
55
52
66
59
23
24
16
25
|
|
|
|
29
31
23
23
53
55
59
65
17
14
18
12
16
18
20
12
80
76
75
82
4
5
5
6
19
24
21
17
76
71
70
76
5
5
9
7
16
16
15
12
54
54
63
54
31
30
22
34
|
|
|
|
19
25
22
24
61
58
64
63
20
17
14
13
1990 Ql.
17
18
21
59
61
55
25
22
23
|
1
1
22
25
26
62
64
58
16
12
16
19
15
15
76
79
79
5
6
7
17
22
18
80
70
74
3
8
8
11
15
16
58
61
54
31
24
30
|
|
|
20
27
22
62
63
64
17
10
14
02.
03.
IV.B3
FIFTH
(RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT
23
(MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*)
1988 Q3.
04.
15
10
70
80
15
10
|
|
6
9
89
87
6
4
|
|
21
32
68
68
11
0
25
24
60
68
15
8
|
1
10
11
67
71
24
18
1
1
18
14
55
68
27
18
1989 Ql.
8
17
24
12
77
62
64
64
15
21
12
24
|
1
|
|
21
12
17
9
79
85
83
87
0
4
0
4
|
|
|
|
26
24
44
21
74
76
57
79
0
0
0
0
23
24
20
17
77
76
64
83
0
0
16
0
1
1
1
1
10
3
11
8
69
72
70
65
21
24
19
27
1
|
1
1
io
10
26
15
66
69
63
62
24
21
11
23
23
11
17
65
85
78
12
4
4
|
|
1
20
12
9
80
85
87
0
4
4
|
|
I
28
26
18
72
70
82
0
24
27
5
72
65
81
4
8
14
1
|
1
15
7
4
67
82
83
19
11
13
|
1
1
19
11
17
67
71
67
15
18
17
02.
03.
04.
1990 Ql.
02.
03.
4
0
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)
SHORT-TERM
NONREAL ESTATE LOANS
INTERMEDIATE-TERM
NONREAL ESTATE LOANS
LOWER
LOWER
IV.B4
SAME
HIGHER
SAME
DEBT EXTENSION
OR REFINANCING
HIGHER
LOWER
SAME
HIGHER
NINTH (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( MI*, MM, MT, ND, SD, WI*)
1987 Q3...
Q4. . .
|
1
23
19
71
70
6
10
I
1
20
17
72
74
8
9
1
1
14
18
80
73
6
9
|
|
1988 Ql...
Q2. . .
Q3. . .
Q4. . .
1
I
1
1
13
11
13
11
74
65
69
56
13
24
18
32
1
1
1
1
14
21
24
12
75
65
69
80
12
14
7
8
1
1
1
1
15
12
7
7
80
61
68
82
6
26
25
11
|
|
|
|
1989 Ql...
Q2. . .
Q3. . .
Q4. . .
1
1
1
1
6
3
7
3
64
82
81
82
30
16
13
16
1
1
|
1
5
11
10
7
80
82
80
78
14
7
10
16
1
1
|
I
10
11
7
2
82
83
81
88
9
6
12
10
|
|
|
|
1990 Ql...
Q2. . .
Q3. . .
1
1
1
0
4
8
80
86
76
19
10
16
1
1
1
4
4
9
86
83
81
10
12
11
|
I
1
5
12
9
81
80
78
13
8
13
.
|
|
|
r y
0
•
,
4
f '
'
' ' i'
31
32
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS
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
REFUSED OR
REDUCED A
FARM LOAN
BECAUSE OF
A SHORTAGE
OF LOANABLE
FUNDS
LOAN/DEPOSIT RATIO IS
LOWER
AT
THAN
DESIRED
DESIRED LEVEL
HIGHER
THAN
DESIRED
NUMBER OF FARM LOAN REFERRALS TO
ACTIVELY
SEEKING
NEW
FARM
LOAN
ACCOUNTS
NONBANK AGENCIES
CORRESPONDENT BANKS
NONE
COMPARED WITH
A YEAR EARLIER
LOWER SAME HIGHER
NONE
COMPARED WITH
A YEAR EARLIER
LOWER SAME HIGHER
SEVENTH (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( IL*Z IN*, 10, MI*, WI*) AGRICULTURAL BANKS
1989 Ql...
Q2. . .
Q3. . .
Q4 . . .
54
56
57
56
|
|
|
;
68
66
62
65
22
22
28
26
11
12
10
9
1
I
|
|
* * *
* * *
|
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
|
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
|
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
;
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
1990 Ql...
Q2...
Q3. . .
55
56
57
1
|
|
67
68
65
25
25
27
7
7
8
|
I
I
* * *
* * *
|
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
|
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
|
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
IV.C2
but n**nr<
TENTH (KANSAS CITY) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY) AGRICULTURAL
BANKS
82
79
79
7
7
7
8
11
14
14
3
2
4
5
71
69
70
67
|
|
|
1
75
78
78
76
23
25
21
18
70
75
75
76
7
1
4
6
1
|
1
1
65
65
74
72
21
21
21
19
67
75
73
75
11
4
6
6
81
82
82
9
7
4
10
11
14
4
2
1
71
68
69
|
|
|
74
77
77
15
13
16
78
83
81
7
4
3
1
|
1
67
68
71
15
12
14
74
79
78
11
9
8
1989 Ql...
Q2. . .
Q3. . .
Q4. . .
49
51
51
51
81
1990 Ql...
Q2. . .
Q3 . . .
50
51
52
IV.C3
12
I
ELEVENTH (DALLAS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( LA, NM*, TX)
1989 Ql...
Q2...
Q3...
Q4...
I
I
|
|
46
48
49
47
|
I
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
I
I
I
I
1
3
4
2
***
***
***
***
|
|
;
|
***
***
***
***
12
18
16
16
79
75
72
74
8
7
12
10
|
|
|
|
***
***
***
***
15
18
11
17
75
75
80
68
9
6
9
15
1990 Ql...
Q2...
q3
I
|
|
45
45
47
|
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
I
I
I
2
3
4
***
***
***
|
|
|
***
***
***
19
21
17
76
72
74
5
8
9
|
|
***
***
***
15
19
11
75
75
76
10
6
13
|
BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS
AVERAGE LOAN-TO-DEPOSIT RATIO AND OTHER INDICATORS OF RELATIVE CREDIT AVAILABILITY (PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING)
AVERAGE
LOAN-TODEPOSIT
RATIO,
END OF
QUARTER
PERCENT
iv7c4
REFUSED OR
REDUCED A
FARM LOAN
BECAUSE OF
A SHORTAGE
OF LOANABLE
FUNDS
LOAN/DEPOSIT RATIO IS
LOWER
AT
THAN
DESIRED
DESIRED LEVEL
HIGHER
THAN
DESIRED
CORRESPONDENT BANKS
NONE
NONBANK AGENCIES
COMPARED WITH
NORMAL NUMBER
LOWER SAME HIGHER
NONE
COMPARED WITH
NORMAL NUMBER
LOWER SAME HIGHER
NINTH (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)
1989 Ql...
02...
Q3. . .
Q4. . .
50
53
55
55
I
1
1
1
56
54
43
43
41
45
52
48
3
1
5
9
|
|
|
|
6
3
3
3
1990 Ql...
02.. .
03.. .
52
55
55
1
1
I
49
43
40
47
51
55
4
6
5
|
|
|
3
6
2
IV-C5
NUMBER OF FARM LOAN REFERRALS TO
ACTIVELY
SEEKING
NEW
FARM
LOAN
ACCOUNTS
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
34
35
34
34
10
5
5
4
55
59
59
60
1
0
2
3
34
31
32
29
8
6
6
3
56
61
57
63
2
2
5
5
32
34
30
3
7
7
63
56
62
2
3
1
30
35
31
2
8
7
63
52
58
4
4
4
FIFTH (RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT ( MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*)
1989 Q l . . .
02...
03...
04..
I
|
1
|
I
|
1
80
79
80
76
1
1
1
1
14
10
22
32
50
62
56
56
36
28
22
12
7
3
4
0
55
66
63
69
I
1
1
|
77
82
84
73
4
4
4
4
19
15
12
23
0
0
0
0
I
1
1
1
60
64
71
62
0
4
8
12
36
32
21
27
4
0
0
0
1990 Q l . . .
02...
03...
|!
|
|
76
77
77
1
1
1
32
19
26
57
74
61
11
7
13
0
4
0
68
75
80
1
1
I
84
84
87
4
0
0
12
16
13
0
0
0
I
1
I
65
67
77
8
4
5
27
29
18
0
0
0
33
34
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS
TABLE IV.D
INTEREST RATES ON FARM LOANS
AVERAGE INTEREST RATE EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT QUARTER
COMPARED WITH AVERAGE RATES IN THE CURRENT QUARTER
(PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING)
MOST COMMON INTEREST RATE ON FARM LOANS
(AVERAGE, PERCENT)
FEEDER
CATTLE
LOANS
IV.D1
OTHER
OPERATING
LOANS
|
|
|
1
.5
12.
,4
12.
.1
12.
12..0
12 .5
.
12 ,4
.
12..2
12..0
1990 Ql.
02.
03.
|
|
I
11.9
11. 9
11 .9
11 .9
11 .9
11 .9
LONG-TERM
REAL
ESTATE
LOANS
SHORT-TERM
NONREAL ESTATE LOANS
INTERMEDIATE-TERM
NONREAL ESTATE LOANS
LOWER
LOWER
SAME
HIGHER
SAME
HIGHER
LONG-TERM
REAL ESTATE LOAMS
LOWER
SAME
HIGHER
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
11. 7
11. 5
11. 3
11. 1
|
|
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
** *
11..1
11..1
11 1
|
1
1
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
|
|
j
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
|
j
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
TENTH (KANSAS CITY) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (CO, KS, MO*, HE, NM*, OK) AGRICULTURAL BANKS
1989 Ql
02
03
04
I
|
|
1
12 . 6
12.5
12. 4
12 .3
12 .6
,
12 .4
,
12 .3
12 .1
1990 Ql
02
03
;
I
1
12.2
12 . 1
12 .1
12 .1
12 .0
12 .0
INTERMEDIATE
NONREAL
ESTATE
SEVENTH (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (IL*, IN*, 10, MI*, WI*) AGRICULTURAL BANKS
1989 Ql.
02.
03.
04.
IV. D2
SHORTTERM
NONREAL
ESTATE
***
***
12..6
12 .5
12..4
12..2
12 .0
11..9
11 .7
11..6
|
|
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
|
|
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
12 .1
12..1
12..1
11 .5
11 .4
11 .4
|
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
;
|
j
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS
TABLE XV. D
INTEREST RATES ON FARM LOANS
MOST COMMON INTEREST RATE ON FARM LOANS
(AVERAGE, PERCENT)
FEEDER
CATTLE
LOANS
IV
'
D3
OTHER
OPERATING
LOANS
|
|
j
IV.D 4
1989 01...
02...
Q3. . .
Q4. . .
1990 01...
02. . .
Q3...
INTERMEDIATE
NONREAL
ESTATE
LONG-TERM
REAL
ESTATE
LOANS
SHORT-TERM
NONREAL ESTATE LOANS
IN TERMED IATE - TERM
NONREAL ESTATE LOANS
LOWER
LOWER
SAME
HIGHER
LOWER
SAME
HIGHER
***
***
***
ELEVENTH
***
12.9
12.9
12.5
12.3
12.2
12.1
11.9
11.7
|
|
|
|
7
43
30
49
29
55
68
50
63
2
2
1
1
1
I
I
7
42
28
44
31
54
70
56
62
3
2
1
1
1
I
1
8
42
29
46
36
56
69
54
56
1
2
0
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.3
11.5
11.6
11.7
|
|
|
8
18
11
83
79
77
9
3
12
I
I
I
8
17
11
80
81
77
12
3
12
1
1
1
8
17
8
80
80
82
11
4
10
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
1
1
1
1
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
1
1
j
1
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
mar.T.Afit WntZD AT. CC C17DT7T?
13 .3
13 .2
13 .0
12 .9
13 .5
13 .3
13 .0
12 .9
13 .6
13 .3
13 .1
12 .9
13 -2
12 .9
12 •7
12 •7
|
1
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
1
I
I
12 .7
12 .7
12 .6
12 . 8
12 .8
12 .7
12 .9
12 .8
12 .7
12 .6
12 •4
12 .5
|
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
FIFTH (RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*)
1989 01...
02...
03...
04...
1
1
1
1
12.8
12. 6
11- 9
12.2
1990 01...
02...
03...
1
1
1
12.0
12.2
12.0
SAME
12.8
12.7
12.5
12.4
I
1
I
1
IV. D5
HIGHER
LONG-TERM
REAL ESTATE LOANS
NINTH (MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)
1989 Ql...
Q2. . .
Q3...
04...
1990 Ql...
02...
03...
SHORTTERM
NONREAL
ESTATE
AVERAGE INTEREST RATE EXPECTED DURING THE NEXT QUARTER
COMPARED WITH AVERAGE RATES IN THE CURRENT QUARTER
(PERCENTAGE OF BANKS REPORTING)
12. 7
12.5
12.3
12. 1
12. 0
12. 0
12 .0
***
***
***
***
***
12. 9
12. 6
12. 4
12.2
12. 1
12. 0
12. 1
12. 7
12.5
12.3
11.8
12.0
11. 9
11. 9
|
|
|
|
***
***
***
***
|
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
35
36
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK QUARTERLY SURVEYS OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS
TABLE IV.E
TRENDS IN FARM REAL ESTATE VALUES AND LOAN VOLUME
EXPECTED TREND IN FARM
REAL ESTATE LOAN VOLUME
DURING THE NEXT QUARTER,
COMPARED TO YEAR EARLIER
(PERCENTAGE OF BANKS)
MARKET VALUE OF GOOD FARMLAND
ALL
IV.El
1
1
1
1
3
1
2
1
1990 Ql...
Q2 . . .
Q3 . . .
1
1
1
3
1
1
[
1990 Ql. .
02 - .
03. .
1
1
1
14
-11
6
DOWN
***
***
**•
***
***
***
***
***
1
1
1
1
10
9
8
6
***
***
***
***
1
1
1
5
6
4
***
***
***
***
***
STABLE
LOWER
UP
SAME
HIGHER
4
3
1
2
73
77
67
70
24
20
32
29
1
1
|
|
15
17
11
11
56
63
65
60
30
19
24
29
2
0
3
71
75
73
28
25
24
1
1
|
6
12
12
66
66
68
28
22
20
** *
***
***
6
-0
11
-4
1990 Ql. .
02. .
Q3. .
DRY- IRRI- RANCHLAND GATED LAND
(RICHMOND) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (MD, NC, SC, VAi, WV*)
1
1
1
1989 Ql. .
02. .
Q3. .
Q4. .
ALL
FIFTH
1989 Ql...
02..
Q3 . . .
04..
IV. E3
DRY- IRRI- RANCHLAND GATED LAND
SEVENTH (CHICAGO) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (IL*, IN*, 10, MI*, WI*) AGRICULTURAL BANKS
1989 Ql. . .
Q2. . .
Q3. . .
Q4 . . .
IV.E2
TREND EXPECTED DURING
THE NEXT QUARTER
(PERCENTAGE OF BANKS)
PERCENTAGE CHANGE FROM
A YEAR EARLIER
PERCENTAGE CHANGE
DURING QUARTER
***
***
***
1
1
|
|
16
11
21
13
|
|
1
21
8
4
***
***
***
1
|
|
|
o
0
0
0
69
69
93
73
31
31
7
27
|
|
|
1
22
21
28
16
70
72
64
76
7
7
8
8
|
|
|
4
7
4
68
86
80
29
7
16
|
|
|
23
22
22
69
70
65
8
7
13
-9
-8
-7
-4
|
|
|
***
***
***
I
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
***
|
|
|
1
25
32
28
26
65
61
61
65
10
7
10
9
-5
—6
-5
|
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
1
1
|
25
34
29
64
56
64
11
10
6
* **
***
***
ELEVENTH (DALLAS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (LA* , NM*, TX)
* **
***
***
***
***
-1
0
-0
0
-0
0
-1
2
2
4
-3
-2
-0
1
-2
-1
-0
-1
-3
-2
1
1
I
I
|
j
-2
-3
it-kit -3
***
-1
***
***
***
0
-0
-1
5
3
5
5
2
-0
-4
***
Q U A R T E R L Y
SURVEYS
° F AGRICOLTDRAX, CREDIT CONDITIONS AT COMMERCIAL BANKS
MARKET VALUE OF GOOD FARMLAND
PERCENTAGE CHANGE
DURING QUARTER
ALL
IV.E4
1989 QL.
Q2.
Q3.
Q4.
DRYLAND
TENTH
IRRIGATED
***
4
2
-0
5
***
***
1990 Q l .
Q2.
Q3.
-0
4
-2
1989 Q l . ,
Q2. .
Q3. .
Q4. .
Ql...
Q2. . .
Q3. . .
RANCHLAND
NINTH
***
***
***
|
***
j
***
|
***
ALL
DRYLAND
IRRIGATED
RANCHLAND
DOWN
LOWER
SAME
HIGHER
(KANSAS CITY) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (CO, KS, MO*, HE, NM*, OK, WY)
***
IV. E5
TREND EXPECTED DURING
THE NEXT QUARTER
(PERCENTAGE OF BANKS]
PERCENTAGE CHANGE FROM
A YEAR EARLIER
EXPECTED DEMAND FOR
FARM REAL ESTATE LOANS
DURING THE NEXT QUARTER,
COMPARED WITH NORMAL
(PERCENTAGE OF BANKS)
|
;
|
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
11
10
8
8
14
11
11
9
10
10
8
11
5
7
7
5
6
5
7
8
6
|
|
***
***
J
***
***
***
***
j
***
***
J
***
|
|
***
***
***
***
***
***
* **
***
***
***
***
***
***
(MINNEAPOLIS) FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT (MI*, MN, MT, ND
8
4
-4
-2
7
5
-5
2
5
-8
8
10
2
-1
-5
1
8
2
-2
5
-9
***
***
***
***
7
6
6
6
5
4
3
6
10
9
4
12
74
85
75
75
15
6
21
13
3
10
7
84
83
84
13
7
9
37
@FedFRASER