The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
- F E D ik jrfR E SERVE BANK /^RICHM OND 7 August 1956 CHANGE IN PER ACRE VALUE OF FARM LAND, 1950 -1955 % Increase Maryland Virginia West Virginia North Carolina South Carolina 41 29 I3 30 28 Fifth District United States ♦ Independent cities. Seporote data not available. Source: Bureau of the Census. % Increase 75 and Over 50 - 74.9 25 - 49.9 10 - 24.9 Under 10 Decrease Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond F if t h D T is t r ic t r e n d s TOTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AWARDS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AWARDS 40 0 400 1 R ISIDENTUM. 300 300 A A A Aw v M f1U \ A V V i r\A\ i 200 100 200 ¥ 100 (Sea >onally Adju sted) (I9< 7-1949 = 1C>0) 1948 Sizable increases in contract awards for factory construction and for educational buildings were responsible for offsetting losses in other segments of the construction industry. Result: seasonally ad justed total awards in June were 1% higher than May and at the same level as a year ago. For the first half they were down 14%. 1949 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 Contract awards for residential buildings dropped 22% in June compared with May on a seasonally adjusted basis. Apartments and hotel awards were down 60% and one- and two-family houses awards 12% during the month. June awards were 8 % under a year ago and the first half-year was down 19% . DEPARTMENT STORE SALES BUSINESS FAILURES 1948 Business failures in the Fifth Federal Reserve District rose sub stantially in June on a seasonally adjusted basis— up 63% from May and 49% from a year ago. For the first half-year the increase was 17%. 1950 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 Department store sales (adjusted) slipped 1 % in June from May. This left the sales level on the plateau that has prevailed since September 1955. June sales were 9% higher than a year ago and the first half-year was up 5 % . BUILDING PERMITS RETAIL FURNITURE STORES NET SALES (V A L U E ) 150 150 125 i (A 125 i 100 7A A V k / r V u \ K V r f A \ A % i/v 100 u w r 75 75 (Sea sonolly Adjuste d ) (19 47-1949*1 1 36FifthDistrictdti*». Building permits in 36 Fifth District cities dropped 37% (after seasonal correction) in June compared with May. June permits were 35% smaller than a year ago, and the first half-year showed a decline of 12%. 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 Sales of retail furniture stores declined 2 % on a seasonally ad justed basis from May to June. June was, however, 9 % higher than a year ago, and the first half-year sales were up 10% . August 1956 /fonMA//fanac?- What Keeps Farm Land Values Up? and farm income is unusual and therefore surprising. What has happened to upset the usual and logical rela tionship? Several factors, the relative importance of which is difficult to evaluate, have been influencing the land market and thus offsetting the expected depressive effects of reduced income. of farm land have done it again— that is, step ped up in the face of declining farm income. W ith increases occurring in all Fifth District states, the March 1, 1956 index was 139 (1 9 47 -4 9= 10 0) or 5% above the year-ago level and at a new record high. The national index also set a record and at 138 was 4 % higher than in March 1955. This striking departure from the normal relationship between land values and farm income has been going on for more than two years— in fact, since the postKorean low in land prices in late 1953. W hat’s the explanation of this apparent paradox? Adequate answer to the query— if there is one— is of considerable significance, especially to those who re gard the price of farm land as a barometer of the economic health of agriculture. Actually, the book value of land and buildings accounts for over half the current market value of total farm assets. Changes in land prices, therefore, are watched closely by all who are interested in agriculture— particularly by farmmortgage lenders and by those planning to buy or sell farms. r ic e s P Perhaps the most significant factor has been the strong demand by farmers for land to enlarge existing farms. Census data show that Fifth District farms in 1955 averaged 3 acres larger than in 1950 and that the number of farms 500 acres and over has increased 5% . Caught in the cost-price squeeze, many farmers have found that more land will permit more efficient opera tions with a resulting improvement in profitability. In creased productivity per acre and delay of sales in order to qualify for Social Security benefits have also been price-sustaining factors. T o some extent, the old-fashioned but still widelyheld belief that farm land is a sound long-term invest ment has helped sustain demand. Widespread business prosperity has indubitably contributed to this confidence. Land is tangible, and many people— both farmers and nonfarmers— consider it an asset which offers security in case of cyclical change, of inflation or depression. Looking Backward T o gain perspective, let’s look at the record. It re veals that a hand-in-hand relationship between land values and farm income has existed for the 45 years of record. During this long and changeful period, there were only four times when this relationship did not prevail. Prior to the current divergence, the disparities lasting longer than one year occurred during some very unusual situation, such as the outbreak of W orld W ars I and II and the crash of 1920. There was no period similar in length to the present one in which land values increased as farm income declined. The beginning of W orld W ar II set off the longest upward movement in land values since records were started in 1912. Values of farm land, responding to an even faster climbing farm income, more than doubled by early 1949, then dipped slightly in response to the mild recession of that year. Then came K orea! Prices of farm real estate jump ed again, continuing to a new high 30% above preKorea and nearly 60% above the 1920 peak. Land values at that point again slipped but not nearly as much as farm income which had turned downward earlier. Then the unusual developed. Prices of farm land firmed and began to rise while farm commodities slip ped. This strengthening continued through early 1956, even though farm income was declining, and current values stand 9% above the 1953 low. In addition, more liberal lending policies were adopt ed by several of the major institutional lenders in 1954. Appraisal values for loan purposes were raised and dol lar loan limits were increased. These changes in loan policies doubtless contributed to the upward movement in land prices. The continued brisk demand by city people for parttime farms and rural residences has also contributed to the strength in the farm real estate market. This is evidenced by the nearly 10,000 increase between 1950 and 1955 in the number of District farms under 10 acres. O f this number, more than 5,000— a near 75% upturn — were farms of less than 3 acres. This influence is particularly exhibited in the Carolinas and Virginia. Urban and industrial expansion has also added strength to the asking prices for farm land. Farm real estate sold for such uses brings prices well above that sold for farming purposes and thus produces an indirect upward effect on land prices in surrounding communi ties. A prime example of this is evident in Barnwell and Aiken Counties, South Carolina— counties nearest the Savannah River Plant of the Atom ic Energy Com mission— where land values per acre more than doubled from 1950 to 1955. Another factor which has undoubtedly helped to prop up farm land prices is the theory that, with a growing population and a fixed supply of land, there will be an Factors Sustaining Land Values Historically, then, this disparity between land values (Continued on page 10) i 3 y Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond Treasury Financing-Fiscal ’56 Results and ’57 Prospects November offering of 2^6% Certificates of Indebted ness due December 1, 1956, and 2^$% Treasury Notes maturing June 15, 1958, in exchange for $12.2 billion of Notes and Certificates maturing on December 15, met a less favorable reception. Cash redemptions amounted to 13.1% of the maturing securities held outside of the Federal Reserve Banks. In the March refunding of $8.5 billion of 1-H$% Treasury Notes due March 15, 1956, and $1 billion of 1^2% Treasury Notes due April 1, 1956, total cash redemptions were only 3% of the amount held outside of the Federal Reserve Sys tem. Over-all cash redemptions in fiscal 1956 refund ings amounted to 3.8 % of total maturities compared to 4.5% in fiscal 1955. The Treasury issues which ma tured during fiscal 1956 TREASURY SECURITIES were refinanced at higher M ATURING OR C A L L A B L E interest rates than in 1955 so that interest payments in fiscal 1957 will increase some $200 million over fiscal 1956. fourth balanced budget in twenty-four years and the first under the present Administration produced a surplus of $1.75 billion for the 1956 fiscal year which ended June 30. This surplus in the administrative budget exceeded the mid-year estimate by roughtly $1.5 billion and was made possible by rising revenues derived from the increased level of business activity. Revenues were $68.14 billion and expenditures $63.39 billion. Existence of a surplus in the face of increased ex penditures by the armed services and for farm price supports continues the pattern of fiscal 1955 when the deficit was less than estimated because of the greater rise in revenue than in expenditures after initial projections had been made. T he In recent years the cash budget has run a greater surplus or a smaller deficit t h a n t h e administrative budget by about $2 or $3 billion, reflecting the great er excess of receipts over expenditures in government trust funds, which are not taken into account in the administrative budget. The cash surplus of $5.1 billion in fiscal 1956 permitted a reduction of the national debt by the end of June to • Excluding the weekly rollover of Treasury Bill $272.4 billion, bringing it under the permanent debt limit of $275 billion. Con gress has approved a temporary ceiling of $278 billion for fiscal year 1957 to permit the cash borrowing neces sary in the first half of fiscal 1957 before the concentrated flow of revenues begins in the January-June period. On June 30 the Treasury’s General Fund balance was $6.5 billion (compared with $6.2 billion a year earlier) which should provide a comfortable working margin for the immediate future. New money borrowing of approximately $6 billion, as compared with $13.6 billion in fiscal 1955, was concen trated in the first half of fiscal 1956. The principal source of funds was the sale of two issues of T ax Antici pation Certificates of In debtedness. In July $2.2 billion of 1 ^ % Certificates maturing March 22, 1956, were sold and in October $2.97 billion of 2^4% Certifi cates due June 22, 1956. The July sale of $821 million of 3 % , 40- year bonds, a reopening of the issue first offered in February 1955, modestly implemented the Treasury objective of broadening the distribution of the debt. Treasury officials regarded the successful flota tion of this security as evidence of a permanent market for long-term bonds among pension funds, trusts, col leges, and some corporations. Effect of this new money borrowing on the debt level was counteracted, of course by the use of the cash surplus to reduce the debt before June 30, 1956. Exclusive of the rollover of Treasury bills, which since July 1955 has proceeded at a weekly level of $1.6 billion, total refundings undertaken by the Treasury in fiscal 1956 amounted to a little over $30 billion as com pared to $43.7 billion for fiscal 1955 and a projected $44.1 billion for the current fiscal year. The very suc cessful refunding in July 1955, of $8.5 billion of 1^6% Certificates of Indebtedness through an optional ex change offering of 2% Tax Anticipation Certificates of Indebtedness maturing June 22, 1956, or 2% Treasury Notes due August 15, 1956, involved cash redemptions of only $150 million or about 5.4% of the amount held outside the Federal Reserve System. In contrast, the Treasury Needs in Fiscal 1957 January budget estimates for fiscal 1957, generally regarded as conservative, forecast a modest surplus in the administrative budget, with receipts of $66.3 bil lion and expenditures of $65.9 billion and a $2.4 billion cash surplus. W hile no official revision has been an nounced, it is quite possible that both receipts and ex i 4 y August 1956 penditures will be higher. Fiscal 1956 receipts of $68.1 billion and expenditures of $66.4 billion exceed official projections for fiscal 1957. Federal agencies began the current fiscal year with $519 million more appropria tions than the budget projected for those requests al ready acted upon by Congress. On the other hand, the failure of the President’s program for school construc tion and the prospective cut in foreign aid may offset this factor. Neither the new superhighway system nor the increased excises to finance it were included in the original budget. diminish the risk of substantial attrition resulting from anticipation of superior terms in the future. On July 16 subscription books were opened for 2 % % Notes due August 1, 1957. These notes were offered in exchange for the 2% Treasury Notes maturing August 15 and the 1^ % Treasury Notes due October 1, which to gether totaled $12.9 billion. The September redemption of the 2^4% , partially tax-exempt Treasury Bonds of 1956-59 is in line with the Treasury’s practice of calling securities with taxexempt features. The bonds will be redeemed for cash. The projected surplus obviously anticipates continued high level tax receipts derived from high and moderate ly rising income levels, which more than counteract ris ing expenditures. The actual increase in fiscal 1956 expenditures and the projected increases in expendi tures for fiscal 1957 over the original fiscal 1956 budg et reverse the pattern of decrease over the past three years. Slightly over half of the increase in expendi tures over the fiscal 1956 budget is allocated to national defense and related items, reflecting, in the President’s words, “ in large part, the cost of keeping our forces modern.” The remainder is scheduled for a wide range of nondefense programs. The largest single proposed increase in nondefense programs is $400 million for the new soil bank program, but this is offset by a roughly comparable decrease in other farm price and income stabilization programs. Other increases, e.g., for pub lic health and community development, are substantial if viewed in the aggregate. Revenue estimates assume continuation of existing tax rates, enactment of higher postal rates, a slight in crease in personal income, and a slight decline in the rate of corporate profits. Outside of the weekly rollover of bills, the Treasury faces the task of refunding $36.9 billion of maturing se curities and $7.2 billion of callable bonds. O f the total $6.3 billion of securities callable in September, $982 million of 2^4% Bonds maturing September 15, 1959, have been called, the remainder being callable again on the next succeeding interest payment date, March 15. In the first half of fiscal 1957, three maturing issues and one callable bond issue, totaling $23.0 billion, are scheduled for disposition. Approximately $9 billion of these securities are held by the public, of which nonfinancial corporations hold roughly $4 billion of the 2% Notes due in August, $400 million of the 2 ^ % Bonds callable in September, and $2 billion of 2 £^% Certifi cates of Indebtedness maturing in December. In recent years the Treasury has frequently combined several refundings into a single operation in part to O f the major issues maturing during the JanuaryJune period of fiscal 1957, only the May 1 ^ % Treas ury Notes come due during the period of large cash surplus from the latter half of March to the end of June. O f the total $21.1 billion of maturing or callable debt in the January-June period, $14.9 billion is held outside of the U. S. Government investment accounts and the Federal Reserve Banks. Although the total refinanc ing in the January-June period is smaller than that scheduled for the preceding six months, the proportion of maturing securities held by the public is much greater. Virtually all of the May 1^6% Treasury Notes are held by the public. The smaller increase in the temporary debt ceiling for the current fiscal year indicates that new money bor rowing will be under the approximate $6 billion bor rowed last year. New money needs, following the pat tern of recent years, will be concentrated in the JulyDecember period. Fiscal 1955 marked the end of the acceleration of corporate income tax payments under the Mills Plan. The final result placed corporate income tax liability on a calender year basis payable in the January-June period following the close of the taxable year. Begin ning in fiscal 1956 a five-year plan to even out corporate tax payments in excess of $100,000 went into effect. Although only 5% of the taxable corporations are sub ject to this plan, an estimated 85% of the total cor porate tax liability is affected. In the fiscal year just ended corporations filed estimates of taxes due on 1955 income and paid an estimated 5% in September, 5% in December, and approximately 45% in both March and June. Each year the tax liability due in September and in December will increase by 5% of the total liability in excess of $100,000, the increases being shifted back from March and June. By 1959 payments due in each quar ter will be approximately 25% of the total. Once the evening-out process is complete, the Treasury’s season al borrowing problem will be reduced. 1 5 Y Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond Loan Survey Results . . . Business Loan Maturities A t Fifth District Member Banks ties, because of heavy capital investment and stable T T ow are business loan maturities related to type of revenues, were able to borrow over 55% of their funds l l borrower, form of business organization, interest through long-term notes. Service firms were also rates, and size of lending bank ? Answers to these ques strongly dependent upon long-term loans, particularly tions are important to both commercial bankers and those with maturities of over four years. economic analysts. T o the commercial banker their im portance lies in the provision of a yardstick against Maturities by Form of Business Organization which to measure his own banking practices. For the A s indicated in Table 2, unincorporated businesses economic analyst such information means a better basis depended slightly more upon term loans as a credit for monetary policy by adding to his knowledge con medium than did incorporated businesses, probably be cerning the operation of the banking system. cause of the greater access of the latter to other supplies In order to obtain this and related information the of long-term funds. In the Federal Reserve System, in case of incorporated busi cooperation with member nesses, only 21% of the dol banks, undertook a sample ' "i A V E R A G IE IN T E R E S T R A T E S O N B U S IN E S S L O A N S lar amount of loans and survey of business loans FIFTH DISTRICT MEMBER BANKS 23% of the number of loans outstanding on October 5, (October 5, 1955) were long-term as compared 1955. Part of the Fifth Dis Motuntv 4 34% Demand [_ with corresponding percent trict results already have 1month or Jess | 4 7 1% 13 ages of 27% and 25% for been released in April, June, 4 18% 1-3 month* | 3 - 6 months | 4 12% unincorporated firms. A s and July Monthly Review 6 - 9 month* [ 4 27% 9 months* lye or | might be expected with such 5 46% articles reporting loan char ......... i 1 - 2 years £ 6 08% i s li g h t differences, there acteristics according to size 2 - 3 yeors 1 5 6 7% ................. “ i 3 ~ 4 yeor* | 5 69% were s e v e r a l variations of bank and borrower, busi ......... ................ l 4 31% 4 ~ 5 **o r« [ within maturity categories. ness of borrower, and simi 5 -10 iva rt [ 4 32* .......... J Over 10 year* [_ 4 49% For example, among the i larity to 1946 loan patterns. Averoqe £ 4 4 8% .' ■ i short-term loan maturities, This article concentrates on unincorporated b u s in e s s e s another aspect of the survey acquired larger percentages — the relationship of loan of both the dollar amount of demand loans and the num maturities to business of borrower, form of business ber of three- to six-month loans than did incorporated organization, average interest rate, and size of bank. firms. There were also exceptions among long-term Maturities by Business of Borrower maturities where incorporated businesses had heavier percentage concentrations of four- to five-year loans. Table 1, a breakdown of loan maturities by business of borrower, demonstrates the banks’ continuing roles Average Interest Rates for Different Maturities as short-term lenders. Around two-thirds of the loans, The above chart, which shows weighted average inter both in dollar amount and in number of loans, had ma est rates for each maturity, reveals some interesting re turities of less than six months, and less than onelationships between the pattern of loan maturities and in fourth had maturities of more than one year. Even in terest rates. Average rates for short-term loans amount the long-term category only a few loans had maturities ed to 4.34% as compared with an average of 4.2% as great as ten years. reported for all districts in the April issue of the Federal Am ong different classes of borrowers there were sub Reserve Bulletin. Fifth District average long-term rates stantial variations in maturity, suggesting that banks were also higher than the national average— 4.87% as tailor their loans to fit individual needs. For example, against 4.2% . There were probably several reasons for commodity dealers and sales finance companies, both these differentials. Possibly the most important was the traditionally heavy short-term borrowers, obtained over high percentage of Fifth District loans made by small 95% of their bank funds with short-term loans (one banks, banks that were shown in the April 1956 issue of year or less). Food, liquor, and tobacco manufacturers, the Monthly R eview to charge somewhat higher rates wholesalers, and construction firms also were relatively than did larger banks. Another important reason was heavy short-term borrowers. A t the other extreme, the high percentage of the dollar total of Fifth District transportation, communication, and other public utili loans made to small businesses. The fact that alterna -{ 6 August 1956 Table 1 M A T U R IT Y OF B U SIN E SS L O A N S BY T Y P E OF B U SIN E S S Fifth Federal Reserve District Estimated— October 5 1955 Maturity of Loans Business of Borrower Demand Manufacturing and mining Food, liquor, and tobacco ______ Textiles, apparel, and leather __ Metal and metal products - - Petroleum, coal, chemicals, and rubber . _ _ _ __ .............. All other manufacturing and mining _ _______ ___ _ Trade Wholesale ...................... ..................... Retail . _ ........................... Other Commodity dealers .................... Sales finance companies .......... Transportation, communication, and other public u tilitie s____ _ Construction _______ ____________ Real estate .................. ......... Service firms _____ _ ...................... All other nonfinancial ___________ All Borrowers _ .... _........... 1 mo. or less 1-3 mos. 3-6 mos. 18,807 37,512 19,349 18,619 15,083 1,307 6-9 mos. 9 mos.1 yr. 1-2 yrs. 2-3 yrs. 3-4 yrs. 4-5 yrs. 5-10 yrs. Over 10 yrs. 414 4,750 3,752 2,430 5,684 1,714 88 966 399 Total Amount Outstanding— Thousands of Dollars 9,702 5,459 4,007 5,028 7,824 3,678 522 2,021 1,844 288 417 137 3,853 1,238 856 181 218 677 560 1,371 577 60,492 82,543 38,297 6,282 1,111 5,205 2,741 311 1,099 737 118 333 1,057 607 249 19,850 9,473 8,482 24,792 10,599 1,112 1,512 2,484 3,252 1,521 5,102 8,149 557 77,035 13,114 32,937 20,930 27,336 27,042 65,366 18,462 29,759 1,394 5,669 6,020 8,882 1,371 10,201 1,581 7,563 990 4,096 900 7,593 8,161 22,075 997 2,994 100,962 224,471 33,897 24,927 1,724 5,324 4,973 37,827 3,388 33,637 0 1,224 281 372 0 400 83 413 78 1,000 946 0 41 0 0 0 45,411 105,124 12,457 21,626 36,350 11,785 9,387 2,278 6,659 7,796 6,051 3,905 3,371 21,907 27,501 18,563 9,873 2,715 20,703 10,973 8,827 7,596 6,570 3,234 3,437 1,733 1,766 4,407 2,348 8,661 2,703 2,523 7,253 6,660 8,970 4,668 916 7,803 830 3,957 3,295 1,663 2,303 2,461 435 1,403 748 14,476 282 9,248 5,235 5,522 6,642 1,582 19,478 15,378 7,391 1,388 842 2,565 1,508 608 71,663 89,134 139,371 81,149 51,898 231,403 108,126 322,088 184,409 30,837 39,650 49,607 31,634 17,876 59,277 99,332 13,161 1,187,400 32 44 64 19 45 85 23 71 115 136 64 83 26 5 3 1,991 1,384 1,918 Number of Loans Manufacturing and mining Food, liquor, and tobacco ______ Textiles, apparel, and le a th e r__ Metal and metal products ____ . Petroleum, coal, chemicals, and rubber __________ _ -------- -------All other manufacturing and ................................ mining Trade Wholesale _________ „ ________ Retail .................................................... Other Commodity dealers _________ ___ Sales finance companies ___ _ _ Transportation, communication, and other public utilities _ Construction ____________________ Real estate ________-______________ Service firms _ ... ............... All other nonfinancial ... 108 70 326 501 484 1,504 714 2,882 903 3,329 1,664 9,616 344 102 7 35 214 824 882 1,128 583 All Borrowers ............................... 9,042 476 116 168 152 108 279 528 625 590 316 126 96 36 31 65 100 57 61 147 92 309 412 54 297 244 68 19 18 45 1 1,662 596 84 240 255 170 75 104 243 22 4,278 698 3,415 63 1,074 376 2,212 458 2,518 136 1,081 54 615 70 481 248 1,245 64 243 5,448 28,711 78 309 37 224 0 17 12 30 0 3 6 6 15 1 6 0 6 0 0 0 511 727 183 597 459 1,047 466 282 1,668 1,473 2,860 1,630 181 694 527 1,342 1,338 98 150 177 305 300 191 312 281 1,145 783 727 704 195 1,835 378 449 60 113 726 190 77 36 61 184 80 82 47 252 391 193 85 137 818 614 369 19 69 86 110 61 2,588 5,298 5,324 11,687 6,371 8,119 23,153 10,002 2,454 6,097 7,865 3,145 1,366 1,853 4,093 709 77,898 tive sources of funds may not have been as readily avail able in this District may have contributed also to the higher rates. The most reasonable explanation for the greater differential between short- and long-term rates seems to be that long-term borrowing here was not as heavily confined to industries that paid low interest rates as was the case for the country as a whole. The most interesting relationships, however, can be found by comparing Fifth District interest rates and loan maturities since these figures appear on superficial examination to be somewhat unreasonable. For ex ample, rates on demand and very short-term loans were higher than rates on four- to ten-year loans, and rates on one- to two-year loans wTere the highest of all. What is the explanation? Shouldn’t long-term bank rates be higher than short-term rates because of the greater risk Table 2 M A T U R IT Y OF B U SIN E SS L O A N S B Y FORM OF B U S IN E SS O R G A N IZ A T IO N Fifth Federal Reserve District Estimated— October 5, 1955 Maturity of Loans Type of Business Organization Demand 1 mo. or less 1-3 mos. 3-6 mos. 6-9 mos. 9 mos.1 yr. 1-2 yrs. 2-3 yrs. 3-4 yrs. 4-5 yrs. 5-10 yrs. Over 10 yrs. 11,879 5,997 41,488 17,789 57,140 42,192 5,823 7,338 827,815 359,585 402 964 728 1,125 1,243 2,850 166 543 24,885 53,013 Total Amount Outstanding— Thousands of Dollars Incorp orated__________ __ ________ Unincorporated ..................... ............. 153,698 77,705 72,604 35,522 239,355 82,733 139,998 44,411 24,245 6,592 24,270 15,380 Incorporated ______________ ________ Unincorporated ____________________ 3,092 5,950 2,809 5,310 8,419 14,734 2,617 7,385 697 1,757 1,573 4,524 35,453 14,154 21,862 9,772 Number of Loans i 7 y 2,109 5,756 1,030 2,115 Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond Business Loans by Bank Size involved in long-term lending ? Partial explanation can be found in the changing interest rate levels that ob scured normal relationships between short- and long term rates. For example, it seems clear that the rela tively high rates on demand and very short loans can be attributed to the comparatively high rates of the period during which the loans were negotiated. Some of the one- to three-month notes probably also bore these higher rates, but since part of these loans were dated before the rise in interest rates occurred, the average rate for the group was somewhat lower despite the longer maturities. Average rates for loans between three months and two years varied directly with maturities, probably be cause many of these loans were extended between O cto ber 1953 and July 1955, when loan rates were fairly stable. Rates on maturities ranging from two to four years seem to have borne a reasonable relationship to most short-term rates, considering the differences in maturities. It appears that the relatively low interest rates reported for maturities exceeding four years were strongly influenced by the low interest rates before 1950 when a number of these loans probably were negotiated. In addition, the tendency of industries capable of commanding a low term rate to resort to long-term borrowing may have lowered the long-term average. In summary, the figures do not seem to damage seriously the concept that interest rates vary directly with maturities. Table 3 shows that banks of different sizes varied widely in their policies concerning business loan ma turities. A s might be expected, the smallest banks— those with deposits of less than $2 million— had pro portionately less of their loans, both in amount and in number, in long maturities than did any of the other groups. They also concentrated most of their short term loans in maturities of less than three months. Strangely enough, however, such term loans as they had were grouped most heavily in maturities running from four to ten years. A t the other extreme, the pic ture differs from the expected— the largest size banks did not extend the highest percentage of term loans by either number or by dollar amount. They were, however, relatively the heaviest lenders in maturity ranges of over four years. The strongest concen tration of term loans is found in the medium-size banks — those with deposits from $10 million to $50 million. Within this group the $10 million to $20 million banks had the highest percentages, by dollar amount, of both total term loans and those with maturities of five years or more. They were surpassed in the percentage of term loans by number, however, by the $20 million to $50 million banks, which had 30% of their loans in long-term maturities. Table 3 M A T U R IT Y O F B U SIN E S S L O A N S B Y S IZ E O F B A N K Fifth Federal Reserve District Estimated— October 5, 1955 Maturity of Loans Bank Size (Total deposits in millions of dollars) Demand 1 mo. or less 1-3 mos. 3-6 mos. 6-9 mos. 9 mos.1 yr. 1-2 yrs. 2-3 yrs. 3-4 yrs. 4-5 yrs. 5-10 yrs. Over 10 yrs. Total Amount Outstanding— Thousands oi Dollars 250-500 _____________________________ 100-250 .......... .................................... 50-100 ______ _____ _________ ________ 20-50 ......................... ............................... 10-20 _______________________________ 2-10 ............... ........................................... Less than 2 ............. - ----------Total ------------------------------------------- 44,611 82,561 30,829 35,783 16,668 17,496 3,455 8,345 33,214 18,118 19,435 12,918 15,717 377 62,540 95,348 51,554 56,814 25,963 28,517 1,351 46,611 58,194 21,521 23,083 11,920 22,106 974 3,536 11,768 4,786 3,441 3,194 4,050 61 4,808 11,176 4,056 4,933 7,354 6,684 638 6,143 20,436 4,771 7,504 4,265 6,156 332 2,632 9,574 4,775 5,649 5,378 3,506 123 5,111 3,535 2,113 1,078 1,851 4,111 75 17,515 25,820 6,902 4,362 900 3,446 334 26,026 21,376 13,266 17,740 14,354 6,202 369 2,993 1,265 2,301 3,407 1,978 1,065 153 230,871 374,267 164,992 183,229 106,743 119,056 8,242 231,403 108,124 322,087 184,409 30,836 39,649 49,607 31,637 17,874 59,279 99,333 13,162 1,187,400 Number of Loans 250-500 ____________________________ 100-250 __________________ _________ 50-100 ______________________________ 20-50 _______________ ______ ______ __ 10-20 ____________________________ __ 2-10 ____________ ___________________ Less than 2 ................ - .................. Total ................. .................. ............. 498 1,345 1,151 1,678 1,113 2,647 610 404 1,195 1,069 2,218 845 2,291 98 3,353 3,518 2,709 5,181 2,350 5,443 598 635 1,220 803 1,263 1,431 4,060 590 92 332 267 273 523 895 73 469 763 451 1,242 1,363 1,662 149 349 954 633 2,530 1,001 2,286 112 151 438 293 1,013 481 745 24 74 198 109 262 148 566 9 252 462 318 279 59 451 31 524 583 546 802 750 796 90 132 78 94 199 112 88 6 6,933 11,086 8,443 16,940 10,176 21,930 2,390 9,042 8,120 23,152 10,002 2,455 6,099 7,865 3,145 1,366 1,852 4,091 709 77,898 ^ 8 y August 1956 Business Conditions and Prospects higher than a year ago, and first half sales were up 10%. Furniture store sales are at a high level, but no further forward progress has been shown since March. Credit sales have accounted for practically all of the increase for the past year and a half. W ith the normal lag in collections, their rise has been at the same rate as re ceivables. N o inventory problem appears in this group — the June level was 1% higher than in May (after seasonal correction) and 1% above a year ago. The 1% increase over last year compares with a 9 % increase in sales. New passenger automobile registrations in three states of the District and the District of Columbia during June were 4% lower than in May, 17% under June 1955, and the first half-year was down 5% . W est V ir ginia was the only state to show an increase during the month, year, and the first half. Registrations in the first half-year (dow n 5% from a year ago) compare with a drop of 11% for 24 states reported thus far. New commercial car registrations, which had shown considerable strength earlier in the year, dropped 20% from May to June to a level 17% under June 1955. For the first half, however, they were up 7 % . was a “ down month” in District trade, mining, and most construction areas. Several large manu facturing and educational construction projects in V ir ginia and Maryland were, however, sufficient to raise total construction volume (after seasonal adjustment) 1% from May to June. Total nonagricultural employment rose fractionally, with increases being shown in both manufacturing and nonmanufacturing areas. Man-hours in all manufac turing industries of the District, excluding Maryland, edged up 0.1% from May to June, due to gains in the Carolinas. Sentiment in the textile industry remains hopeful of an expansion in business following a long period of working down backlogs. Textile prices are being firmly held at reduced levels, an optimistic indicator for the period immediately ahead. New savings improved substantially in the savings and loan associations in June compared with May and other forms of savings improved with the exception of purchases of U. S. Savings Bonds which declined $800,000 from May to June. Deposits of mutual sav ings banks in Maryland rose $3 million during the month, savings and loan associations in all states ex cluding W est Virginia were up $23.3 million, and time deposits were up $16.8 million in all member banks of the District. Total deposits of member banks rose 2% from May to June, reserves with the Federal Reserve Bank were 5% higher, and both loans and investments continued to expand during the month. Bank debits, however, declined 5% from May to June (after seasonal correc tion), which meant the June level was back near the March low though 6% above June 1955. / une Construction A s a result of a sharp rise in contract awards for new manufacturing and educational buildings, total construc tion contract awards in June seasonally adjusted were 1% higher than in May, at the same level as June 1955, and 14% under a year ago during the first half-year. Other types of construction dropped from May to June, after seasonal correction, with apartments and hotels down 60% , one- and two-family houses down 12% , to tal residential construction down 22% , commercial awards down 28% , public works and utilities down 13%. Relative to a year ago, apartments and hotels were 17% higher but still at a relatively low level. On the other hand, public works and utilities were up 85% and at a very high level. Commercial awards were down 53% , manufacturing building awards down 56% , one- and two-family houses down 2 0% , total residential down 8 % . In the first half-year, awards for public works and utilities were the only category to show an increase from last year—-up 11%. All other types were down from 9% to 31% . Federal aid for highway construction under the new law will give Fifth District states and the District of Columbia $3,157,000,000 during the 13-year program. An estimated $649,000,000 will be available in the next three years. Trade The trade level in the District during June was mod erately under May, taking seasonal factors into account. Sales of department stores slipped 1%, furniture stores were off 2 % , and new passenger automobile registra tions were down 4% without seasonal correction. Department store sales (adjusted) were, however, 9% higher than June last year, and for the first six months were up 5% . On the basis of weekly returns for the first three weeks in July, the July (seasonally adjusted) index will set a new all-time high. Depart ment store inventories rose 4 % on a seasonally adjusted basis to a level 13% ahead of a year ago. Outstanding orders in June were 26% higher than in May and 11% higher than a year ago. Instalment receivables showed no increase from May to June but were 19% ahead of a year ago, and collections were not running far behind. Retail furniture store sales were off 2% (after sea sonal correction) from May to June, but June was 9% Manufacturing Cotton consumption in Fifth District mills during June was 7% smaller than in May on an average daily O f Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond seasonally adjusted basis. June was also 3% lower than a year ago, but the first half-year was up 4 % . Cigarette production in the District during May was 2% higher than April (on a seasonally adjusted basis), 1% higher than a year ago, and the first five months were up 6 % . June output in Virginia declined 5% from May and 7.2% from a year ago. Man-hours in all manufacturing industries of the Dis trict, excluding Maryland, were up 0.1% in June over May but down 0.8% from a year ago. Gains were shown in the Carolinas and losses in the Virginias. Durable goods industries man-hours during June were down 0.2% from May and 0.3% from a year ago. Gains were shown in the Carolinas and losses in the Virginias. Man-hours in the nondurable goods industries of these states rose 0.2% in June over May but declined 1.1% from a year ago. Virginia and South Carolina had small increases, North Carolina a loss, and W est Virginia held even. Increases in man-hours from May to June occurred in the lumber, primary metals, fabricated metals, food, tobacco, and apparel industries. Broadwoven fabrics mills showed a decline of 1.9% ; yarn and thread mills, 0.4% ; but knitting mills rose 1.9%, with most of the gain in the seamless hosiery industry. Banking Total assets of all member banks in the Fifth District rose $125 million during June. Loans and investments were up $58 million; reserves, cash, and bank balances up $69 m illion; and other assets off $2 million. Loans and discounts were up $42 million during the month, U. S. Government obligations up $15 million, and other security holdings up $1 million. Total deposits of member banks increased $138 mil lion during the m onth; borrowings were down $11 mil lion, other liabilities were unchanged, and capital ac counts were down $2 million. Time deposits rose $17 million, other demand deposits were up $113 million, and deposits of banks were up $8 million. Commercial and industrial loans of the weekly re porting banks declined moderately during July, possibly a belated seasonal movement. Other loans, largely consumer loans, are at their all-time peak; while real estate loans, which had been inching upward, seem to have leveled off. Agriculture Cash income from farm marketings during May rose 20% over April in Fifth District states. The May level, however, was 3% under May 1955, and the first five months were off 3 % . Income from crops in May was up 38% from April and due to recent price strength, was 1% above a year ago. Livestock and products income rose 13% during the month. Despite an increase of 16% in slaughter of meat animals, it was down 5% from a year ago. Farm prices in June were higher in all states of the District than in May except Maryland. A ll states ex cept North Carolina showed prices higher than a year ago. As a consequence of the miners’ holiday and pre liminary efforts to meet the impending steel strike, bituminous coal output in the District during June was down 8% from May on an average daily basis. June output, however, was 16% higher than a year ago, and the first half-year was up 18% . Export demand for coal continues strong and the outlook is favorable. What Keeps Farm Land Values Up? (Continued from page 3) increasing demand for land to feed our people. This idea has been reflected in the limited supply of land on the market— voluntary sales and trades have been at or near their lowest point in history— and has played a dominant role in setting asking and offering prices. A final word of caution : The potential capacity of our farm plant and contributions that technology is likely to make in the future toward meeting increased food and fiber needs should not be overlooked. Failure to do so can result in expectations of future earnings from land which may not be realized. The real basis for farm land values in the long-term future, as in the past, must be the level that can be supported by long-term earnings from the land. i 10 1* ffw izu jL August 1956 F if t h STATES Maryland Dist. of Columbia Virginia West Virginia North Carolina South Carolina _ District _____ D is t r ic t S t a t i s t i c a l D a t a F U R N IT U R E SAL ES* (Based on Dollar Value) Percentage change with correspond ing period a year ago June 1956 6 Mos. 1956 ---------------_____ _. - . +10 0 B U IL D IN G P E R M IT F IG U R E S June 1956 + 2 +2 + 4 ---------------------______________ ---------------------- +14 — 4 + 9 ---------------- ----- +12 + ---------------- + 6 + 5 +14 +10 5 IN D IV ID U AL CITIES Baltimore, M d .___________ +10 Washington, D. C. _____ 0 Richmond, Va. + 16 Charleston, W . Va. + 9 +10 Greenville, S. C. __ * Data from furniture departments of department stores as well as furniture stores. W H O L E SA L E TRADE LINE Auto supplies _ _ . Electrical, electronic and appliance goods . . _ Hardware, plumbing, and heating goods ____________ Machinery equipment sup ....................... ........ plies Drugs, chemicals, allied products__________________ Dry goods _______ _ _ ____ ____ Grocery, confectionery, meats ____________________ Paper and its products ........ Tobacco products _. _ ____ Miscellaneous _______ .. ... District total . .... Sales in June 1956 compared with June May 1955 1956 — 2 + 1 Stocks on June 30,, 1956 compared with June 30, May 31, 1955 1956 — 7 + 7 +29 + 6 NA NA — 1 + 7 NA NA +21 + 4 +41 + + 8 NA + 1 NA + 8 NA — 1 NA — + + + + — — + — + 1 NA + 2 +23 + 17 — 2 NA — 7 — 3 — 1 4 9 7 7 8 3 6 2 2 0 2 South Carolina Charleston ___ Columbia ____ Greenville ____ Spartanburg _ Sales, June ’56 vs June ’55 _ Sales, 6 Mos. ending June 30, ’56 vs 6 Mos. ending June 30, ’55 ......................... Stocks, June 30, ’56 vs ’55 Outstanding orders June 30, ’56 vs ’5 5 -------- +12 + 13 +11 + 6 + 3 + 3 + 6 + 8 +12 + + +17 +11 + 11 +10 +53 +18 7 Open account receivables, June 1, collected in June ’56 _ 30.5 50.7 44.2 38.3 42.0 Instalment receivables June 1, collected in June ’56 _ 13.9 13.5 15.6 13.4 Md,. Sales, June ’56 vs June ’55 ______ ____________ + 8 D.C. Va. W .V a. +12 +13 +18 N.C. S.C. + +13 7 $11,014,340$ 27,113,583 $ 54,610,222 101,600 928,505 903,291 375,000 3,351,910 1,543,175 113,375 744,825 1,444,260 213,677 1,213,518 1,246,276 1,045,348 789,287 515,100 602,100 117,594 780,399 180,000 1,740,190 1,660,440 1,005,560 182,673 1,009,238 468,263 1,370,821 398,929 2,106,720 411,475 1,284,093 179,000 244,900 3,282,184 1,422,771 296,950 1,193,220 4,708,591 4,547,731 1,369,658 5,875,935 1,207,266 14,685,700 1,440,050 3,191,929 15,563,553 12,724,815 1,456,589 4,127,360 3,810,284 8,525,903 2,009,636 6,202,518 1,261,501 7,349,452 1,746,400 1,794,715 12,727,949 6,510,124 1,666,305 6,484,785 1,883,654 487,260 450,681 513,266 205,000 1,652,842 4,408,371 1,190,692 2,555,775 3,403,415 1,063,464 3,674,068 437,075 2,515,177 806,589 476,950 1,490,014 326,705 726,783 322,852 89,825 193,378 1,627,523 333,003 1,604,583 806,268 565,750 1,205,523 424,845 2,031,469 236,541 293,215 180,500 722,186 3,357,821 17,410,539 4,525,860 3,372,900 8,844,025 3,112,609 6,453,168 1,946,414 1,344,950 2,793,453 8,412,991 1,657,080 15,175,558 6,958,257 4,187,700 5,832,947 4,211,864 11,375,348 1,889,186 799,378 1,851,275 7,311,203 1,152,053 908,860 355,735 534,202 393,152 631,177 817,266 265,990 2,085,224 6,051,580 3,736,961 3,020,188 1,675,777 4,420,117 4,194,012 1,136,690 15,650,780 26,801,657 44,098,400 $53,010,674$215,676,696 $244,752,535 May 1956 June 1955 % Chg.— Latest Mo. Prev. Yr. Mo. Ago 171 190 110 228 172 107 125 135 111 129 228 202 170 87r 229 188 101 121 123 109r 116 204 — 2 — 5 — 8 + 1 + 63 + 2 — 5 — 1 0 — 2 0 Dist. Totals 7 10.7 6 Months 1955 F IF T H D IS T R IC T IN D E X E S + +28 6 Months 1956 Seasonally Adjusted: 1947-1949 = 100 + 10 8 4,389,697 73,450 2,127,660 84,084 114,633 Dist. of Columbia Washington 3,364,539 District Totals ..$34,567,308 N A Not available. Source: Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce. D E P A R T M E N T STORE; O P E R A T IO N S (Figures show percentage changes) Other Rich. Balt. Wash. Cities Maryland B a ltim ore ____ $ Cumberland _ _ F re d e ric k ____ H agerstow n__ Salisbury ____ Virginia Danville ______ H am pton_____ Hopewell ____ Lynchburg ___ Newport News N o r fo lk ______ Petersburg___ Portsmouth___ Richmond ____ Roanoke _____ Staunton _____ Warwick ____ West Virginia Ch arleston___ Clarksburg___ Huntington _ _ North Carolina A sheville_____ Charlotte_____ Durham _____ Gastonia _____ Greensboro ___ High Point Raleigh ______ Rocky Mount _ Salisbury ____ W ils o n _______ : Winston-Salem June 1955 June 1956 New passenger car registra tion* ___________ ____________ Bank debits ------------------------------ 180 Bituminous coal production* _ 101 Construction con tracts________ 230 280 Business failures— number Cigarette production ------119 Cotton spindle hours ------ Department store sales ____ —— 134 Manufacturing employment * _ 126 Furniture store sales __ Life insurance sa le s----------------- 228 _ * Not seasonally adjusted, r Revised. Back figures available on request -i i i v — 13 + 6 + 16 0 +49 + 1 — 2 + 9 + 3 + 9 + 12 Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond F if t h d is t r ic t B D E B IT S TO D E M A N D D E P O SIT A C C O U N T S* (000 omitted) 1956 1955 1955 1956 6 Months June 6 Months June )ist. of Columbia Washington ______ $1,498,503 $1,429,062 $ 8,989,244 $ 7,996,299 Maryland 9,380,646 Baltimore ________ 1,863,437 1,707,905 10,427,806 162,014 30,090 150,807 Cumberland ______ 29,497 140,557 Frederick ................ 27,659 26,319 156,222 256,228 50,047 44,376 285,245 Hagerstown ___ _ 37,258 215,744 201,000 Salisbury** ______ 39,288 9,928,238 Total 4 Cities ___. 1,970,640 1,808,690 11,031,287 North Carolina 435,230 A sheville______ 75,720 66,956 394,519 2,426,250 432,009 420,786 2,662,778 Charlotte ____ 483,111 87,144 Durham _______ 92,557 515,007 868,757 152,461 962,909 160,478 Greensboro ___ 298,755 57,102 52,701 334,132 High Point** . 133,515 22,458 133,352 K i n s t o n ______ 22,876 1,287,248 230,010 1,406,325 233,937 Raleigh __ _ 313,522 54,910 320,045 56,409 W ilm in g to n __ 118,763 17,413 126,312 21,943 Wilson ________ 1,019,969 184,941 1,152,123 200,606 W inston-Salem 7,045,654 1,237,079 7,714,081 1,296,035 Total 9 Cities South Carolina 553,268 497,580 Charleston ______ 92,613 83,675 185,941 197,370 1,179,765 1,063,816 Columbia 146,094 136,029 765,359 865,585 G reenville_______ _ 420,684 Spartanburg — 69,875 64,319 390,518 469,964 Total 4 Cities___ 505,952 3,019,302 2,717,273 Virginia 39,684 Charlottesville 42,756 231,287 219,462 42,281 40,626 232,513 Danville__________ 256,235 61,211 Lynchburg __ 62,942 370,589 323,000 66,107 59,265 329,812 Newport News __ 377,376 313,499 Norfolk _ 315,846 1,856,325 1,717,263 NA 27,525 32,985 NA Petersburg**____ 37,545 38,509 226,491 Portsmouth ____ 216,972 701,534 715,005 4,143,871 3,895,603 R ichm ond_______ _ 162,746 138,854 920,142 Roanoke _ _____ 767,095 1,406,653 8,382,316 7,701,720 Total 8 Cities ___ 1,431,757 W est Virginia 50,230 Bluefield ................ 59,791 342,055 265,224 181,882 168,053 1,092,396 1,012,124 C h arleston ______ _ Clarksburg ______ 43,384 38,681 244,595 214,195 79,767r H u n tin g to n _____ 89,218 515,802 475,651r 37,697 33,814 220,468 189,870 Parkersburg_____ 370,545r 2,415,316 2,157,064r Total 5 C ities_._ 411,972 District Totals ____ —$7,114,859 $6,721,993r $41,551,546 $37,546,248r * Interbank and U . S. Government accounts excluded. ** Not included in District Totals, r Revised. N A Not Available. a n k in g s t a t is t ic s W E E K L Y R E P O R T IN G M E M B E R B A N K S (000 omitted) Change in Amount from Items Total Loans _________ __ July 18, 1956 $1,831,681** Bus. & Agric.................... Real Estate Loans . All Other Loans ............ Total Security Holdings 832,323 335,061 690,615 1,596,502 U. S. Treasury Bills U. S. Treasury Certificates __ U. S. Treasury Notes _ ____ ____ U. S. Treasury Bonds _ Other Bonds, Stocks & Secur. Cash Items in Process of Col. _ Due from Banks _________ Currency and Coin _____ Reserve with F. R. Banks .................. Other Assets ____ _____ Total Assets Total Demand Deposits__ Deposits Deposits Deposits Deposits Certified ____ ____ 46,759 10,570 293,127 979,290 266,756 348,802 168,635* 79,042 551,646 71,030 $4,647,338 ____ $3,484,139 ___ of Individuals . 2,628,400 of U. S. Government 104,790 of State & Local Gov. 202,418 of Banks __ 491,311* & Officers’ Checks__ 57,220 Total Time Deposits ____ Deposits of Individuals Other Time Deposits _---------- 767,353 690,142 77,211 Liabilities for Borrowed Money 14,550 46,157 All Other Liabilities ........ 335,139 Capital Accounts _________ Total L iabilities______ ---------- $4,647,338 — 7--------' ' \ June 13, 1956 + 19,387 July 13, 1955 +181,094 1,074 784 18,110 42,205 + 101,553 5,013 + + 78,714 42,367 — 7,548 — 2,459 + 11,440 3,162 + — 7,480 — 57,655 — 42,215 1,791 + 591 + — 20,971 — 3,364 + + + — — 1,271 — 20,550 — 13,250 — 480 + 30,634 — 3,243 — 102,397 29,707 + + + 5,423 2,340 62,716 — 44,366 + 45,678 — 41,665 1,719 + — 27,629 + 27,489 — 4,280 + 42,070 110 + — 16,154 + 22,592 — 2,940 - + + + 12,521 10,254 2,267 + + + _ 4,050 + — 673 + — 1,239 + — 29,707 V. + * Net figures, reciprocal balances being eliminated. ** Less losses for bad debts. 12,557 8,647 3,910 26,400 5,496 25,385 62,716