View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

►

In This Issue:
T w o

D e c a d e s o f R e g io n a l P a r t ic ip a t io n
in

B o a rd

U . S . B a n k in g

A c t iv it y

o f D ir e c t o r s

D is t r ic t B u s in e s s L o a n

In f lo w s

D is t r ic t B u s in e s s C o n d it io n s

M ONTHLY R E V IE W

1976

Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta

March

F e d e ra l R e s e rv e B a n k O f A t la n t a
F e d e ra l R e s e rv e S t a tio n
A t la n t a , G e o rg ia 3 0 3 0 3
A d d re s s C o rre c tio n R e q u e s te d




BU LK RA TE
U .S . P O S T A G E

PA ID
A tla n ta , Georgia
P erm it N o . 2 9 2




Two Decades of Regional
Participation in U.S.
Banking Activity
b y

W illia m

N .

C o x ,

III

This article measures the participation of Sixth District banks in American
banking activity. Measurements span the 20 years from 1955 to 1975,
perm itting an examination of changes in Sixth District banks' participation in
American banking activity. The statistics presented here provide raw material
for raising and testing new questions about the Southeastern economy.
The use of semiannual call report data, the standard source encompassing
all banks in the Sixth District, limits the features of "banking activity"
examined to m ajor balance sheet items (see Appendix). For each of these
balance sheet items we have calculated a "participation index" (PI)
spanning 20 years of semiannual observations. For each call report date,
the index measures the regional share of national economic activity.1
O u r PI can also be interpreted as the volum e of regional business loans
per dollar of regional economic activity divided by the volum e of national
business loans per dollar of national economic activity. W e chose personal
income as an indicator of economic activity, converting state data into
a measure of the annual rate of income receipts w ithin Sixth District
boundaries on the 1955-1975 call report dates.
A PI of 1.0 for business loans w ould suggest that regional banks participate
in business loans to about the same extent as banks nationally; a PI of 0.7
w ould suggest banks participate at about seven-tenths of the national
rate. The index thus provides a comprehensive measure for looking at
regional banking in the context of both national banking activity and the
region's share of economic activity.
The indices merely describe District banks' participation; they do not
explain it. Underparticipation in business loans, for example, a fact defined
NOTE: Ruth Goeller, Statistical Analyst, contributed significantly to this article.
iC e n e r a lly ,

for each

balance sheet

item

i and each

RB ; » /NB ; f
"
R
N
B
E

-

W

7 R T T

call

report date

t, w e

define

RB: t /RE,
-

" n b7 J/ n e7

= regional
= national
= banking data
= eco n o m ic data

Vol. LXI, No. 2. Free subscription and additional copies available
upon request to the Research Department, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303. Material herein may be reprinted or abstracted provided
this R e v i e w , the Bank, and the author are credited. Please provide this Bank's
Research Department with a copy of any publication in which such material is
reprinted.
M o n t h l y R e v ie w ,

M A RC H 1976, M O N T H L Y R E V IE W

by a PI less than 1.0, might result from many
reasons. Reliance of regional business borrowers
on short-term credit could be less than is typical
nationally. Regional reliance on bank credit, as
distinct from other short-term sources of credit,
could be less than is typical, or the volum e of
regional business borrowing from outside banks
could more than outweigh the volum e of b orrow ­
ing by outside businesses from regional banks.
In developing the study, we hoped for direct
evidence on a research question. In the literature
of economic development, there is a proposition
that as economies become more sophisticated,
financial activity occupies an increasingly im ­
portant share of economic activity. (For instance,
the simplest kind of barter economy has no finan­
cial activity at all.) In terms of per capita
income, which is the most conventional and reason­
able measure of economic sophistication, the Sixth
District region has become increasingly sophisti­
cated relative to the nation; between 1955 and 1975
the region's per capita income grew from 72 percent
of the nation's to 83 percent. According to this
theory, then, many of the District's Pi's would
have increased over the period. To the extent
that per capita income does measure economic
sophistication, we would further expect to find
the District indices have increased at a level
ls than 1.0. The results generally display such
es
a pattern, suggesting that the proposition applies
to the Sixth District economy.
Let us begin by examining the District partic­
ipation indices for the broad categories of assets,
deposits, loans, investments, and capital accounts.
Loan, investment and deposit categories are de­
scribed in more detail later.
The Sixth District generally u d r a t c p t s
nepriiae
in the broadest measures of banking, total assets,
and total deposits. In mid-1975, the Sixth District
accounted for about 10 percent of the nation's
economic activity, but only about 9 percent of its
banking assets and deposits. Accordingly, the
Pi's for both these measures are 0.9, or ninetenths of parity w ith banks around the nation.
Alternatively, these indices show that nationally
banks held 75 cents in assets and 61 cents in
deposits for each dollar of national personal in­
come, whereas District banks held 65 cents and 54
cents for each dollar of District income.
Since 1955, the District indices for bank
assets and deposits have increased from about 0.8
to 0.9. Most of the increase has come since 1968
(see charts). As mentioned, this is broadly con­
sistent w ith the idea that as the region has
approached the nation in per capita income,
participation by District banks has increased.
Turning to bank loans, we find the current PI
is about 0.85, slightly below those for deposits
and assets. The region's aggregate loan/deposit
and loan/asset ratios, therefore, have been lower

FE D ER A L R ESER V E BANK O F A TLAN TA




The Sixth District generally underparticipates in
the broadest measures of banking activity.
Participation
Index

- 1.00

’56 ’58 ’60 ’62 ’64 ’66 ’68 ’70 ’72 ’74
Semiannual Call Report Date

than the nation's. Correspondingly, a greater
share of District banks' asset portfolios are held
in the form of investments. Since investments are
less likely to be locally generated than loans,
we have grounds for supposing that regional credit
demands are satisfied less by District banks than
is typical in other parts of the country. The loan
statistics resemble assets and deposit data in that
the PI has increased (from about 0.7 to 0.8) d ur­
ing the past 20 years and in that most of the in­
crease has come since 1968. The District loan/
deposit and loan/asset ratios have held steady
over the period.
In capital accounts, the regional PI is
slightly below 0.95, having climbed steadily from
about 0.7 in 1955. The region's bank capital per
dollar of personal income has increased, from about
4 cents to around 5 cents. Bank capital in the
United States (per dollar of income) has remained
constant at about 5 cents during the 20-year period.
Comparing these figures w ith the bank assets
indices mentioned earlier, the aggregate Sixth
District capital/asset ratio has been slightly
higher than the nation's since about 1961. From
available information, we do not know whether this
is because District banks tend to be smaller than
their national counterparts— smaller banks apparent­
ly tend to have higher capital/asset ratios— or
because District banks are, on average, more con­
servative in setting aside capital. In any case,
the average Sixth District bank was apparently
in slightly better shape, based on capital, at midyear
1975 than was its counterpart elsewhere in the
country.

19

sponding national increase (from 33 to 39 cents
per dollar of income) has not been as great in
percentage terms, but banks throughout the country
nevertheless ended the period at a much higher
activity level than those in the District.
W e have also calculated indices for three selected
loan categories— consumer loans, commercial
and industrial (business) loans, and loans
"to other financial institutions." The patterns for
these three categories are quite disparate. In
mid-1975, the consumer loan PI was extremely
high, whereas the indices were low on both business
loans and loans to other financial institutions.
O ver the past 20 years, the consumer loan PI has
increased sharply, the business loan PI has held
steady, and the PI for loans to other financial
institutions has dropped sharply. Since these
are major bank loan categories, the im plica­
tion, quite correctly, is that the increase in
the District's overall loan PI has come largely
from the strength in its consumer loan component.
Looking at consumer loans in more detail, we
found that in 1955 District banks and their
national counterparts were operating at about
the same levels of activity, each then showing
about 5 cents in consumer loans for each dollar
in personal income. In other words, the regional
PI for consumer loans was about 1.0. Since then,
District banks' consumer loans have more than
doubled to 11 cents per dollar of income, whereas
national portfolios have risen only to about 8
cents per dollar of income. This has raised the
District's PI to about 1.3, the highest index in
the study. The big increase came largely in the
last ten years.

M ajor Loan Categories
The participation index for total loans, as noted
earlier, rose in the past 20 years from about 0.7
to about 0.85. Both regionally and nationally,
there has been a strong expansion in bank loans
per dollar of income over that time, but rising
indices show that the District's increase has been
greater than the nation's. Since 1955 District
banks have doubled their loan portfolios in re­
lation to income, from 18 to 33 cents. The corre­

20




Sixth District banks, then, deal much more
heavily in consumer loans than do their national
counterparts. Assuming that markets for consumer
loans are prim arily local, we do not know w hether
District consumers borrow more per dollar of in ­
come than consumers nationally or District
borrowers have (or think they have) fewer nonbank
credit sources from which to borrow or District
banks are somehow more effective in competing
for consumer loan business than is generally true
in the U. S. banking system. The data at hand
do not discriminate among these explanations.
This District emphasis on consumer loans does
not, however, seem to be a business cycle
phenomenon; it has frequently been the case over
several cycles.
W hen we turn to business loans, the picture
is strikingly different. District banks have
increased their portfolios of business loans over
the 20 years (from 7 cents per dollar of income
to 9V 2 cents). But this increase has brought
District banks only to where banks in the nation
were 20 years ago; nationally, banks increased
their business loan portfolios from about 10 cents

M A RC H 1976, M O N T H L Y R E V IE W

per dollar of income in 1955 to 14 cents in 1975.
The District PI on business loans, therefore, has
held steady at 0.65, significantly below 1.O.2
This is not surprising, since bank borrowing
by large firms is w idely thought to be concentrated
in such national credit centers as New York and
Chicago. It is interesting, however, that alof
l
the District's strong 20-year increase in business
loans per dollar of income has been matched
nationwide.
O ther financial institutions are savings and
loan associations, insurance companies, and securi­
ties dealers, "o th e r" referring to "o the r than
banks." Here the pattern of loans has been dow n­
ward. This is the only item examined in which
District activity per dollar of income has dropped
(from about 1V 2 cents in 1955 to about 1 cent
in 1975). National activity, on the other hand,
has increased from 2 cents to 3 cents.
O ver the 20-year span, therefore, this PI has been
halved from about.0.7 to about 0.35, the only in­
dex to show a decline.

Semiannual Call Report Date
‘ Includes agency issues.

M ajo r Investment Categories
In the investment sector, District banks have come
roughly into line w ith their national counterparts.
This index has increased steadily during the
last 20 years, from about 0.85 in 1955 to about
1.05 in mid-1975.
The two specific investment categories show
very different behavior, even more so than loans.
Both in the nation and the District, banks sharply
decreased their holdings (per income dollar) of
Federal government securities during the 20-year
period. In 1955, banks in the nation held about
19 cents worth of government securities; by mid1975 holdings had plummeted to about 5 cents.
The drop in the District was not quite so sharp,
from 16 cents in 1955 to 5 cents in 1975. The
participation coefficient for government securi­
ties, accordingly, has risen from 0.8 to about 1.0.
Bank activity in state and local obligations,
on the other hand, has increased sharply, both in
the District and the nation. Nationally, holdings
per income dollar increased gradually from 4 to
about 8 cents over the 20 years. In the District,
activity rose from about 4 cents in 1955 to about
9 cents in mid-1975. The indices, accordingly,
have drifted up from about 0.9 at the beginning
of the period to about 1.10 most recently. By
mid-1975, therefore, District banks held a dis­
proportionately high level of municipal obliga­
tions in their portfolios.
M ajor Deposit Categories
As mentioned, the participation index for total
2See this Review, "D istric t Business Loan In flo w s," Joseph E.
Rossm an, Jr.

FE D ER L R ES ER V
Digitized forAFRASERE BANK O F ATLA N TA


deposits rose from about 0.8 to about 0.9 over the
period. This increase reflects growth relative
to income in both the District and the nation,
w ith the District slightly ahead. In 1955,
District banks reported 49 cents in deposits
per dollar of income; the national figure was
56 cents per dollar. By mid-1975, District
banking activity had almost reached the national
level of activity of two decades earlier (54
cents) but by this time that had risen to 61
cents.
Just as in the case of loans and investments,
the picture becomes more diverse when we dis­
aggregate the deposit figures into their major
components, private demand deposits, private time
deposits, and deposits of the U. S. government.
Private demand deposits have fallen steadily in
relation to income throughout the period. Both
District and national banks in mid-1975 reported
about 18 cents in private demand deposits for each
dollar of personal income, so that the PI has come
very close to 1.0. In terms of cents per dollar
in income, however, District banks began the 20year period at a low er level than their national
counterparts. The 1955 District figure was about
28 cents and the national figure about 34 cents,
so that the PI then was about 0.8. In other words,
the sharper national drop in activity has brought
the District's participation coefficient up around
1 .0 .

The decrease in private demand deposits per
dollar of income is generally thought to reflect
the gradual and continuing economization of de­
mand deposit balances since W o rld W a r II.

21

D e p o s it c o m p o n e n t s v a r ie d w id e ly .

Participation
Index

’56 ’58 ’60 ’62 '64 ’66 ’68 ’70 ’72 ’74
Semiannual Call Report Date

Economization is probably a response to secularly
higher interest rates, accentuated and accelerated
by new applications of technology to the financial
area. Credit cards and computers have enabled
both businesses and households to operate with a
lower level of money balances relative to income.
In technical terms, we may summarize this tendency
by saying the income velocity of money (of
which private demand deposits are the main
component) has increased.
O ur interpretation of the PI pattern cited
above combines two opposing tendencies. As the
region's economy has become more sophisticated
relative to the nation, demand deposits per income
dollar have tended to increase. At the same time,
however, both the nation and the District have

22



been economizing on demand deposits. The net of
these two effects, apparently, is that District
private demand deposit balances per dollar of
income have dropped less than in the nation,
which started at a higher level. Each is now at
about the same level, so that the current District
PI is close to 1.0.
W h ile private demand deposit balances per
income dollar have been running down, private
time deposit balances have been piling up. Call
report data on time balances, however, include
time deposits of two markedly different types,
consumer savings instruments and money market
certificates of deposit. Combining these two
types, we find that District banks' time deposits
per dollar of income have roughly tripled over the
past 21 years, from about 9 cents in 1955 to about
26 cents in 1975. Nationally, banks started at a
higher 14-cent level in 1955 and have moved up to
about 30 cents. Accordingly, the District's partic­
ipation coefficient has risen, from about 0.65
to 0.85. Most of the District's underparticipation
in time deposits is probably concentrated in money
market CD's rather than consumer savings
instruments.
The final major deposit item we examined is
deposits of the U. S. government. The indices
here are by far the most erratic. However, there
does seem to be a general increase in the index,
from about 0.635 to 0.69 in mid-1975. Most of
the increase appears to have come in the last six
or seven years.
Four especially interesting facts emerge from
the study: (1) Sixth District banks have increased
their overall banking activity from 80 percent to
90 percent of national participation levels, an
increase consistent with the theory that increased
economic sophistication brings a more-thanproportional increase in financial activity; (2) by
1975, District banks were participating in invest­
ment and demand deposit activity at about the
national rate but were below parity in loan and
time deposit activity; (3) District banks partic­
ipate unusually and more and more heavily in
consumer loans; and (4) District participation
in loans to other financial institutions has declined
significantly. ■

M A RCH 1976, M O N T H L Y R EV IEW

APPENDIX
M ethodology and Data Sources

To measure the importance of District banking
activity, we began w ith major balance sheet
items aggregated over all commercial banks,
member and nonmember, w ithin the boundaries
of the Sixth Federal Reserve District. The
semiannual call report series began w ith the
12/31/55 call and ended w ith the 6/30/75 call,
the latest for which tabulations were available.
(One item, loans to other financial institutions,
was not available until the 12/31/59 call.)
W e attempted to adjust the levels given by
the District balance sheet totals to take account
of both contemporaneous changes in national
balance sheet totals and changes in the economic
bases underlying regional and national banking
markets. To do this, we chose to express our
measurements in a “ participation index” defined
as the regional share of U. S. banking activity
divided by the regional share of U. S. economic
activity, or, equivalently, as regional banking
activity per dollar of regional income divided by

FE D ER A L R ESER V E BANK O F A TLAN TA




U. S. banking activity per dollar of U. S. income.
W e calculated these participation indices for 13
selected balance sheet items.
W e chose personal income as the best available
measure of state and national economic activity.
Since three of the six District states (Louisiana,
Mississippi, and Tennessee) lie only partly w ithin
the Sixth Federal Reserve District, we interpolated
between census data on county personal income in
the census years 1950, 1959, 1967, 1972, and 1973
to derive estimates of personal income w ithin the
District portion of these states on dates corre­
sponding to the semiannual banking data. The
results are described in "The Sixth District Share
of Personal Income in Mississippi, Louisiana, and
Tennessee," M o n th ly Review, August 1975.
In analyzing the participation indices, we
focused on broad trends rather than narrow
fluctuations. As the charts show, the trends were
definite and sustained for all items except U. S.
government deposits.

23

B o a rd o f D ire c to rs
F e d

e r a l

R

e s e r v e

B

F e b ru a ry

a n
1 ,

k

o

f

A

t l a

n

t a

a

n

1 9 7 6

ATLA N TA

Class A 1

Class B2

John T. O liv e r, Jr.— 1976

Rob ert D . H o rn b e c k — 1976
Manager, Tennessee Operations, Aluminum
Com pany of America
Alcoa, Tennessee
U lysses V . G o o d w y n — 1977
Executive Vice President, Southern Natural
Resources, Inc.
Birmingham, Alabama
* G e o rg e W . Jen k in s — 1978
Chairman, Publix Super Markets, Inc.
Lakeland, Florida

President, First National Bank
Jasper, Alabama
Jack P. Keith— 1977
President, First National Bank
West Point, Georgia
*Sam I. Y a rn e ll— 1978
Chairman, American National Bank & Trust
Company
Chattanooga, Tennessee

Class C 3
C liffo rd M . K irtland , Jr. (Deputy Chairman)—

1976
President, Cox Broadcasting Corporation
Atlanta, Georgia
H. G . Pattillo (Chairman)— 1977
Chairman, Pattillo Construction Company, Inc.
Decatur, Georgia
Fred A d am s, Jr.— 1978
President, Cal-Maine Foods, Inc.
Jackson, Mississippi
M EM B ER , F ED ER A L A D V IS O R Y C O U N C IL 4
La w ren ce A . M errig an — 1976

President, The Bank of New Orleans and
Trust Company
New Orleans, Louisiana
A p p o in te d by Board of G o ve rn o rs

A p p o in te d by Federal R eserve Bank
B IR M IN G H A M B R A N C H

W illia m H. M artin, III — 1976
Executive Vice President, Martin Industries
Sheffield, Alabama
H aro ld B. B lach, Jr. (Chairman)— 1977
President, J. Blach & Sons, Inc.
Birmingham, Alabama
* Frank P. Sam ford, Jr.— 1978
Chairman of the Board, Liberty National Life
Insurance Company
Birmingham, Alabama

JM ember bank representatives elected by member
banks
2Nonbankers elected by member banks
3Nonbankers appointed by Board of Governors,
Federal Reserve System

24




C la re n ce L. T u rn ip se e d — 1976

President, First National Bank
Brewton, Alabama
John M ap les, Jr.— 1976
Executive Vice President, Union Bank &
Trust Company
Montgomery, Alabama
D . C . W a d sw o rth , Jr.— 1977
President, American National Bank of Gadsden
Gadsden, Alabama
Robert H. W o o d ro w , Jr.— 1978
Chairman of the Board and Chief
Executive Officer, First National
Bank of Birmingham
Birmingham, Alabama
4Not a member of the Board of Directors
Note: Expiration dates of terms occur on D ecember 31
of the year beside each name.
^Reappointed or reelected for three year term

M A RC H 1976, M O N T H L Y R E V IE W

d

J A C K S O N V IL L E B R A N C H

Egbert R. B eall, (Chairman)— 1976

M a c D o n e ll Tyre— 1976

President, Beall's Department Stores
Bradenton, Florida

Chairman, Sun First National Bank of Orlando
Orlando, Florida

G e rt H . W . S ch m id t — 1977

R ichard A . C o o p e r — 1976

Chairman, First National Bank of New Port Richey
New Port Richey, Florida
C h a u n ce y W . Lever — 1977
Chairman, Florida First National Bank
Jacksonville, Florida

President, TeLeVision 12 of Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Florida
*Jam es E. Lyons — 1978

President, Lyons Industrial Corporation
Winter Haven, Florida

"John T. C a n n o n , III — 1978

President, Barnett Bank of Cocoa, N. A.
Cocoa, Florida
M IA M I B R A N C H
C astle W . Jordan (Chairman)- -1976
President, Aegis Corporation
Coral Gables, Florida

M ich a el J. Franco — 1976
Chairman of the Board, City National
Bank of Miami
Miami, Florida

D avid G . R o b in so n — 1977
President, Edison Community College
Fort Myers, Florida
A lv aro Luis Carta — 1978
President, Gulf + Western Americas Corporation
Vero Beach, Florida

H arry H oo d Bassett— 1977
Chairman of the Board, Southeast First
National Bank of Miami
Miami, Florida
Tho m as F. Flem in g, Jr.— 1978
Chairman of the Board, First Bank and Trust
Company
Boca Raton, Florida
Jean M cA rth u r D a vis — 1978
President, McArthur Dairy, Inc.
Miami, Florida

N A S H V ILLE B R A N C H
Jam es W . Long (Chairman;- -1976

Farmer
Springfield, Tennessee
Jam es R. Law so n — 1977

Fisk University
Nashville, Tennessee

T. Scott F ille b ro w n , Jr.— 1976
Vice Chairman, First American National Bank
Nashville, Tennessee
Fred R. Law so n — 1976

President, Blount National Bank
Maryville, Tennessee
W . M . Joh nso n — 1977

John C . Bo ling er, Jr.— 1978

Management Consultant
Knoxville, Tennessee

President, First National Bank
Sparta, Tennessee
John W . A n d ersen — 1978
President and Chief Executive Officer, First
National Bank of Sullivan County
Kingsport, Tennessee
N EW O R L E A N S B R A N C H

G e o rg e C . Co rtright

C h a rles W . M c C o y — 1976

Planter
Rolling Fork, Mississippi

Chairman of the Board and President, Louisiana
National Bank of Baton Rouge
Baton Rouge, Louisiana

*Ed w in J. C a p la n (Chairman)— 1978

President, Caplan's Men's Shops, Inc.
Alexandria, Louisiana
Vacancy

M artin C . M ile r — 1976
Chairman of the Board and President, The
Hibernia National Bank
New Orleans, Louisiana
R. B. Lam pton — 1977

President, First National Bank
Jackson, Mississippi
W ilm o re W . W h itm o re — 1978
President and Chief Executive Officer, First
National Bank of Houma
Houma, Louisiana

F E D E R A L R ESER V E BANK O F ATLA N TA




25




District Business
Loan Inflows
b y

Jo se p h

E.

R o s s m a n , Jr.

Banks are an im portant source of funds for business firms. W h ile Sixth District
firms borrow mostly from local banks, some also borrow from banks located
outside the District. On the other hand, District banks lend to both local firms
and those outside the District. On balance, we w ould expect to find that the
Sixth District, as is typical of a growth region, w ould have a net inflow of
business loans. However, the volum e of this net inflow is unknown. In this
paper we present estimates of net inflows for the years 1972 and 1974. In
addition, we estimate the proportions of total bank funds that different types
of District business obtained, net, from banks outside the District.
In developing net loan inflow estimates, we had to estimate total bank
borrowings by businesses located in the District states.1 This was necessary
because business loans are reported according to the location of the bank
originating the loan and not by the location of the borrower. So, we first assumed
that businesses borrow from banks in proportion to their respective levels of
economic activity. If Sixth District business firms accounted for 10 percent of
all business activity in the nation, we w ould use 10 percent of the nation's
total business loans as an estimate of total borrowings by District business firms.
Since there is no single best measure of business activity for our purposes, we
used all available indicators— business em ploym ent, business payrolls, number
of business firms, and personal income.
Second, we estimated net business loan inflow by subtracting the actual loans
made by banks in District states from the estimates of total borrowings of
District business firms. Since we do have four estimates of the total borrowings
of District business firms, we choose to present our inflow findings in the form
of a range including them all.
'T h ese estim ates include business in the parts ot Louisiana, M ississippi and Ten nessee lying outside
the Sixth Federal Reserve D istrict.

M A R C H 1976, M O N T H L Y R E V IE W

TA BLE 1

“ P A R T IC IP A T I O N R A T IO S ”
A C T U A L T O P R O P O R T IO N A T E S H A R E O F
C O M M E R C IA L A N D I N D U S T R I A L L O A N S
B Y IN D U S T R IA L C A T E G O R Y
Based on 1972
Em ploym ent Ratios

Payroll Ratios

No. of Reporting Unit!

1972

1974

1972

1974

1972

1974

All M anufacturing

.56

.48

.72

.59

.40

.39

M ining

.24

.27

.26

.30

.30

.35

Trade

.86

.80

.96

.89

.92

.78

W holesale

.84

.81

.96

.91

.80

.81

Retail

.90

.78

.96

.83

1.04

.76

.52

.48

.60

.54

.48

.41

Transportation

.67

.68

.74

.78

.72

.74

Com m unication

.32

.30

.38

.35

.26

.24

Other P u b lic U tilitie s

.38

.31

.42

.35

.28

.24

Construction

.66

.65

.80

.83

.74

.78

Services

.98

.89

1.10

.91

.88

.87

.66

.63

.88

.72

.66

.65

Category

Transp ortation, Com m unication and
Other Pub lic U tilitie s

TOTAL

O u r findings indicate that in 1972 and 1974,
business loans at banks in District states accounted
for two-thirds to three-fourths of estimated total
bank borrowings by firms headquartered in Sixth
District states. Using the remaining one-fourth to
one-third as a net inflow estimate, we obtained a
range of $4.1 billion to $7.1 billion for 1974 and
$2.8 billion to $5.5 billion for 1972.
Looking at individual District states, each differed
in the relative size of its net business loan inflow,
but each had a positive net inflow of business
loans during 1972 and 1974. Ranking the District
states by size of net inflow shows Mississippi and
Alabama w ith the largest proportionate net inflows;
Louisiana and Tennessee had the smallest.
In order to determine what proportion of total
bank borrowings different types of businesses
obtain from banks outside the District, we used the
reports from 17 large District banks, along with
their U. S. counterparts, that report weekly loan
information by borrowers' type of business for six
major categories— manufacturing, mining, trade,
F E D ER A R ESER V E
Digitized forL FRASER BANK O F A TLAN TA


communication and other public utilities,
construction, and services.
In addition, loans in nine manufacturing sub­
categories were estimated in the same way we
developed net loan inflows. Using the District
states' share of total U. S. employment, payrolls,
and number of reporting units for each category,
we calculated equivalent loan shares for each
category from the corresponding total loans of the
reporting U. S. banks." W e then computed ratios
of actual loans made by Sixth District banks to the
District's proportionate share (based upon each of
three economic indicators) of the U. S. total for
each category. The smaller the ratio, the greater
the indication that type of business is obtaining
funds from banks outside the District. Recognizing

-Loan data and business activity data used here reflect slightly
different industrial classification s. These differences are not
significant enough to affect the results.

27

TA BLE 2
M A N U F A C T U R IN G L O A N S B Y I N D U S T R Y

Based on 1972
Em ploym ent Ratios

Payroll Ratios

Value-Added Ratios

Capital
Expenditure Ratios

1972

1974

1972

1974

.48

.72

.59

.64

.54

.48

.39

.56

.41

.60

.46

.60

.39

.46

.37

T e x tile s, Apparel, and
Leather

.54

.56

.60

.61

.60

.61

.58

.57

C h em ic als and Rubber

.50

.26

.40

.24

.38

.24

.28

.19

Petroleum R efining

.96

.59

.75

.61

.80

.61

.44

.33

Other Fabricated M etals

.98

.72

1.30

.83

1.28

.83

1.06

.68

M achinery, E le ctrical
and Nonelectrical

.62

.43

.79

.44

.66

.44

.58

.39

Transportation
Equipm ent

.70

.61

.80

.76

.82

.76

.76

.70

P rim ary M etals

.46

.44

.48

.50

.48

.50

.32

.33

Other Durable and
Nondurable Goods

.46

.39

.66

.57

.62

.54

.48

.43

1972

1974

.56

Food Processing

Category
All M anufacturing

that possible distortions may have been introduced
because the 17 District banks exclude those in areas
of Sixth District states lying outside Sixth District
boundary lines and because the reported loan
figures may not accurately reflect the Sixth District's
proportion of business loans on an “ all commercial
bank basis," we applied an adjustment factor to
each of the loan ratios.3

:lThe correction factor is the product of two com ponents. The first
is the volum e of business loans made by all co m m ercial banks
in the six-stale region, divided by the volum e of business loans
made by those banks lying w ithin Sixth Federal Reserve District
boundaries. The second com ponent has as its num erator the
proportion of business loans made by U. S. banks included in the
industrial breakdow ns; the denom inator is the same proportion
for the D istrict. N um erically, the correction factors w ere 2.0 for
1972 and 1.78 for 1974.

Digitized 2 8 FRASER
for


1972

1974

Looking at the m ajor business loan categories,
we found that the more concentrated an industry's
market structure, the low er the ratio of its actual
loan volum e to its proportionate share of total U. S.
loans was likely to be. Thus, firms classified under
mining (including oil and gas exploration and
drilling) seemed most likely to seek loans outside
the District. On the other hand, service firms w ith
ratios close to 1 seemed to obtain most of their
funds from local banks.
Loan ratios were also calculated for individual
manufacturing industries. Value added figures and
capital expenditure, available only for manufactur­
ing industries, were used as additional indicators in
estimating ratios. As w ith the m ajor classifications,
concentrated manufacturing industries (such as
chemicals and rubber), had relatively low ratios.
Petroleum refining, w ith a higher ratio, was an
exception. Unconcentrated manufacturing industries

M A R C H 1976, M O N T H L Y R E V IE W

L O A N S H A R E P A R T IC IP A T IO N

1972

All Com m ercial
B an ks Actual
B u sin e ss Loans
(M illion s $)

State

Share
of U. S.
Industry
Em ploym ent

1972

Share
of U. S.
Ind ustry
Payroll

Percent
A ctual Loans to
Em ploym ent
Share Estim ate

Percent
Actual Loans to
Taxable Payroll
Share Estim ate

1972

1974

(Percent)

1972

1974

(Percent)

1972

1974

Alabam a

1,046

1,431

1.42

59.82

56.86

1.19

71.39

67.85

Florida

2,651

3,908

3.44

62.56

65.12

2.99

71.98

73.77

Georgia

1,851

2,639

2.31

65.06

64.48

2.03

74.04

73.37

Louisiana

1,443

1,949

1.47

79.71

74.81

1.31

89.48

83.94

M ississipp i

580

770

.83

56.77

52.39

.61

77.24

71.28

Tennessee

1,781

2,629

1.99

72.68

74.57

1.69

85.58

87.80

9,352

13,325

11.46

65.62

9.82

123,162

177,184

—

All D istrict
States
U. S.

66.26
100.0

1972

Share
of U. S.
Num ber of
Reporting Units

State

100.0

1972

Percent
Actual Loans to
Reporting
Unit Estim ate

77.33
100.0

Share of
IndustryRelated
Personal Incom e

76.58
100.0

P ercent
A ctual Loans to
Personal
Income
Estim ate

(P ercent)

1972

1974

1972

1974

1.45

Alabam a

58.59

55.68

1.25

67.96

64.59

Florida

3.92

54.90

56.27

3.06

70.33

72.08

Georgia

2.27

66.20

65.61

2.05

73.31

72.65

Lou isian a

79.11

1.61

72.79

68.30

1.39

84.30

M ississipp i

.97

48.57

44.82

.69

68.29

63.01

Tennessee

1.85

78.17

80.20

1.73

83.60

85.71

All D istrict
States

12.07

62.31

10.17

62.91
100.0

U. S.

showed a mixture of high and low ratios. Several
industries im portant to the Southeast's manufactur­
ing structure, food processing and textiles, apparel
and leather goods, had smaller ratios than expected.
Conclusion
W e recognize that our approach may tend to over­
estimate total business loans of Sixth District firms
since the ratios do not take into account the struc­
ture and composition of Southeastern industries.
There are a high number of industrial firms head­
quartered outside the District operating plants here.
These firms would be expected to borrow from
banks in their own areas, since these banks w ould

FE D ER A L R ESER V E BANK O F A TLAN TA




100.0

74.45
100.0

73.73
100.0

tend to be more fam iliar w ith the company's
operations.
Sixth District industrial firms, typically smaller in
size than their national counterparts, may also be
obtaining more loans from nonbank sources than
their national counterparts. Small firms also rely on
their equity and credit extended by their suppliers
of materials as additional sources of funds.
In conclusion, although estimates of net business
loan inflows may have been overstated, our
expectations that the District has net business loan
inflows was supported by every category of busi­
ness loan examined. In every instance, net positive
inflows were indicated. ■

29

Sixth District Statistics
S e a s o n a lly A d ju s t e d

(A ll d a t a a r e in d e x e s , u n l e s s i n d ic a t e d o t h e r w i s e . )
Latest Month
1975

One
Month
Ago

Two
Months
Ago

One
Year
Ago

SIXTH DISTRICT

Unemployment Rate
(Percent of Work Force)*** . . . Dec.
Avg. Weekly Hrs. in Mfg. (Hrs.) . . . Dec.

INCOME AND SPENDING
Manufacturing In c o m e........................
Farm Cash Receipts ............................
Crops ................................................
Livestock............................................
Instalment Credit at Banks*/' (Mil. $).
New Loans ........................................
Repayments ....................................

Dec.
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.

133.8
186.9
212.6
124.4

132.6
223.9
202.9
205.6

130.7
136.5
144.8
178.5

118.2
247.3
328.1
128.4

FINANCE AND BANKING
Member Bank L o a n s ........................Dec.
Member Bank D eposits........................Dec.
Bank Debits**.......................................Dec.

Nov.
Nov.

124.1
129.4

150.7
N.A.

N.A.
N.A.

113.7
N.A.

130.9
112.5
113.1
103.9
106.5
114.8
108.3
125.5
109.6
111.8
100.6
114.9
lt)1.3
123.6
147.1
105.9
137.4
123,5
121.4
133.6
150.8
157.7
107.3
144.7
96.7

130.7
111.9
112.5
103.6
106.4
113.9
108.0
124.2
108.9
111.1
99 8
115 7
101.7
121.1
146.5
105.2
137.4
122.2
121.2
134 0
150.5
157.3
107.6
144.3
78.8

130.6
111.7
112.4
103.3
106.7
113.6
107.7
123.7
108.9
110.7
99.5
116.3
101.1
120.6
145.9
104.1
137.3
122.6
120.8
134.4
150.2
156.7
107.6
144.1
60.1

132.6
112.3
111.0
106.4
100.6
111.1
111.0
128.3
110.4
117.8
100.5
124.5
112.2
128.2
158.0
93.7
138.9
144.9
127.7
135.4
153.4
156.2
105.1
140.0
67.2

9.5

9.5

9.6

8.1

4.5
40.6
143.4
124.5
161.8
73.1
88.7
147.3
149.0
133.8
144.7
133.0
144.4
130.1
160.7
144.6
146.2
139.5
145.6
101.8
114.5
146.4
233.0
141.1

4.9
40.4
159.8
134.7
184.5
74.2
88.6
146 6
148.1
131.4
142.5
130.8
144.2
129.6
161.4
144.1
151.2
139.6
144.3
101.6
114.2
143.8
231.7
139.4

4.8
40.6
193.0
145.4
239.7
73.4
90.7
145.9
147.0
128.2
145.5
130.4
140.7
128.4
161.7
144.3
150.0
137.5
146.3
102.6
113.5
145.7
231.3
139.8

5.0
39.0
375.6
128.1
618.2
64.2
97.9
148.4
149.1
132.8
136.5
130.8
137.6
131.2
170.1
147.3
131.9
135.9
150.7
108.2
118.2
156.8
250.0
137.5

. Dec.
. Dec.

272
247

266
244

263
240

280
265

. Dec.
. Dec.
Dec.

229
202
324

226
198
310

223
191
313

214
191
295r

ALABAMA
INCOME
Manufacturing In c o m e.................... . Dec.
Farm Cash R eceip ts........................ . Nov.

136.5
162.9

135.2
203.6

133.3
186.6

121.4
334.1

EMPLOYMENT
Nonfarm Em ploym ent....................
Manufacturing ............................
Nonmanufacturing
....................
C onstruction............................
Farm Employment............................

122.8
112.3
127.5
140.0
63.6

122.4
111.6
127.2
139.6
61.8

122.0
111.1
126.9
138.5
58.7

120.9
112.8
124.6
138.7
61.0

30




.
.
.
.
.

8.8
40.4

One
Year
Ago
7.5
39.2

FLORIDA

EMPLOYMENT AND PRODUCTION
Nonfarm Em ployment........................ Dec.
Manufacturing ................................ Dec.
Nondurable G oods........................ Dec.
Food............................................ Dec.
Textiles .................................... Dec,
Apparel .................................... Dec.
Paper ....................................... Dec.
Printing and Publishing . . . Dec.
Chemicals................................... Dec.
Durable G o o d s ............................ Dec.
Lbr., Wood Prods., Furn. & Fix. . Dec.
Stone, Clay, and Glass . . . . Dec.
Primary M e ta ls ........................ Dec.
Fabricated Metals . . . . • Dec.
M achinery............................ • Dec.
Transportation Equipment
• Dec.
Nonmanufacturing........................ • Dec.
C onstruction........................ • Dec.
Transportation .................... • Dec.
T r a d e .................................... . Dec.
Fin., ins., and real est. . . . • Dec.
S e r v ic e s ................................ • Dec.
Federal Government . . . . • Dec.
State and Local Government • Dec.
Farm Employment............................ • Dec.
Unemployment Rate
(Percent of Work Force) . . . . • Dec.
Insured Unemployment
(Percent of Cov. Em p.)................ • Dec.
Avg. Weekly Hrs. in Mfg. (Hrs.) . . • Dec.
Construction C ontracts*................ • Dec.
Residential.................................... ■ Dec.
All o t h e r ........................................ • Dec.
Cotton Consumption**.................... • Nov.
Petroleum Production */** . . . . • Dec.
Manufacturing Production . . . . • Nov.
Nondurable G o o d s .................... • Nov.
Food
.................................... • Nov.
T e x t i le s ................................ • Nov.
Apparel ................................ • Nov.
Paper .................................... • Nov.
Printing and Publishing . . • Nov.
C h e m ic a ls............................ ■ Nov.
Durable G o o d s ............................ . Nov.
Lumber and W ood................ • Nov.
Furniture and Fixtures . . . . Nov.
Stone, Clay, and Glass . . . . Nov.
Primary M e ta ls.................... . Nov.
Fabricated M e ta ls................ . Nov.
Nonelectrical Machinery . . . Nov.
Electrical Machinery . . . . . Nov.
Transportation Equipment
. Nov.
FINANCE AND BANKING
Loans*
All Member B a n k s ....................
Large Banks ................................
Deposits*
All Member B anks........................
Large Banks ................................
Bank Debits*/**................................

One
Two
Latest Month Month Months
1975
Ago
Ago

Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Nov.

INCOME
Manufacturing In co m e........................Dec.
Farm Cash R eceip ts............................Nov.
EMPLOYMENT
Nonfarm Employment........................Dec.
Manufacturing ................................Dec.
Nonmanufacturing............................Dec.
C onstruction................................Dec.
Farm Employment................................Dec.
Unemployment Rate
(Percent of Work Force)***
Dec.
Avg. Weekly Hrs. in Mfg. (Hrs.) . . . Dec.
FINANCE AND BANKING
Member Bank L o a n s............................Dec.
Member Bank D eposits........................Dec.
Bank Debits** ....................................Dec.

275
235
304

271
230
288

269
226
295

130.7
228.5

130.3
310.1

130.1
106.1

221.9

146.6
119.3
151.8
131.0
85.8

146.3
118.5
151.6
129.4
80.2

146.8
119.1
152.2
131.8
87.0

153.2
123.5
158.9
181.7
76.1

12.6
40.4

12.3
40.4

40.3

11.8

9.7
39.4

288
252
345

285
250
325

285
247
324

127.9
288.7

128.9
329.1

126.7
237.4

108.4
355.1

126.5
105.4
136.2
117.8
65.2

126.9
105.6
136.6
118.1
62.7

126.6
104.8
136.6
117.6
57.4

127.5
103.6
138.4
138.7
70.3

9.3
40.8

8.9

8.9

7.8
38.7

250
196
383

244
194
376

240
193
364

145.8
217.6

142.8
196.6

138.1
128.4

131.2
260.6

119.7
104.4
122.9
102.3
124.5

119.8
104.4
123.0
100.7
52.5

119.6
104.5

119.0
105.8
121.7
103.2
69.2

8.2
40.3

8.7

265
208
271r

122.1

311
238
310r

GEORGIA
INCOME
Manufacturing In c o m e........................Dec.
Farm Cash R eceipts............................Nov.
EMPLOYMENT
Nonfarm Employment........................Dec.
Manufacturing ................................Dec.
Nonmanufacturing............................Dec.
C onstruction................................Dec.
Farm Employment................................Dec.
Unemployment Rate
(Percent of Work F o r c e )................Dec.
Avg. Weekly Hrs. in Mfg. (Hrs.) . . . Dec.
FINANCE AND BANKING
Member Bank L o a n s............................Dec.
Member Bank D eposits........................ Dec.
Bank D e b its* * .................................... Dec.

265
189
339r

LOUISIANA
INCOME
Manufacturing In c o m e........................Dec.
Farm Cash R eceip ts............................Nov.
EMPLOYMENT
Nonfarm Employment........................Dec.
Manufacturing ................................Dec.
Nonmanufacturing
........................ Dec.
Construction................................Dec.
Farm Employment................................Dec.
Unemployment Rate
(Percent of Work Force)*** . . . . Dec.
Avg. Weekly Hrs. in Mfg. (Hrs.) . . . Dec.
FINANCE AND BANKING
Member Bank L o a n s* ........................Dec.
Member Bank D ep osits*....................Dec.
Bank Debits*/** ................................ Dec.

122.8
100.2
48.6

7.5
39.7
256
196
247r

265
215
266

258

241
207
279

INCOME
Manufacturing In co m e........................Dec.
Farm Cash R eceip ts............................Nov.

139.4
73.3

136.8
138.8

135.9
70.4

109.2
179.0

EMPLOYMENT
Nonfarm Employment........................ Dec.
Manufacturing ................................Dec.
Nonmanufacturing............................ Dec.
C onstruction ................................ Dec.
Farm Employment................................ Dec.

130.7
128.2
131.8
124.3
131.0

129.8
127.2
131.0
118.4
54.3

129.0
126.2
130.2
116.2
55.2

127.4
118.1
131.7
134.6
57.4

253

211

MISSISSIPPI

M A R C H 1976, M O N T H LY R E V IE W

Latest Month
1975

One
Two
Month Months
Ago
Ago

One
Year
Ago

Unemployment Rate
6.0
40.7
FINANCE AND BANKING
Member Bank L o a n s* ......................... Dec.
Member Bank D eposits*..................... Dec.
Bank Debits*/**................................... . Dec.

6.3
39.9

6.9
40.0

5.6
37.9

270
235
270

259
228
267

257
225
267

263
217
262

132.6
153.2

130.1
137.7

127.8
115.2

119.9
194.8

Latest Month
1975

One
Two
Month Months
Ago
Ago

Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.

128.4
112.6
137.2
130.7
111.0

127.9
111.0
137.3
130.1
124.5

127.6
111.2
136.8
131.2
60.6

127.9
113.7
135.8
146.0
65.7

. . . Dec.
. . . Dec.

7.7
40.6

8.2
40.6

8.9
40.3

7.6
38.9

FINANCE AND BANKING
Member Bank Loans* . . . . . . . Dec.
Member Bank Deposits* . . . . . . Dec.
Bank Debits*/**........................ . . . Dec.

276
228
271

272
224
254

271
218
273

281
212
277

EMPLOYMENT
Nonfarm Employment . . . .
Manufacturing ....................
Nonmanufacturing
. . . .
Construction....................
Farm Employment....................
Unemployment Rate
(Percent of Work Force) . .
Avg. Weekly Hrs. in Mfg. (Hrs.)

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

One
Year
Ago

TENNESSEE
Manufacturing In c o m e.................... . Dec.
Nov.
Farm Cash R eceip ts........................

**Daily average basis

*For Sixth District area only; other totals for entire six states
***Seasonally adjusted data supplied by state agencies.

fPreliminary data

r-Revised

N.A. Not available

All in d exes: 1967 = 100, except mfg. incom e, 1972= 100.
Sources: Manufacturing production estimated by this Bank; nonfarm, mfg. and non mfg. emp., mfg. income and hours, and unemp., U.S. Dept, of Labor and cooperating
state agencies; cotton consumption, U.S. Bureau of Census; construction contracts, F. W Dodge Div., McGraw-Hill Information Systems Co.; pet. prod., U.S. Bureau of
.
Mines; farm cash receipts and farm emp., U.S.D.A. Other indexes based on data collected by this Bank. All indexes calculated by this Bank.
iData benchmarked to June 1971 Report of Condition.
NOTE: All employment data have been revised to reflect updated seasonal factors. The manufacturing payrolls series previously calculated and reported by this Bank was
based upon the state personal income estimates compiled by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Because of changes in that series, the manufacturing income estimate
currently reported includes proprietor’s income as well as labor income.

Debits to Demand Deposit Accounts
In s u re d

C o m m e r c i a l B a n k s in t h e S i x t h

D is t r ic t

(In T h o u s a n d s o f D o lla r s )

Nov.
1975

Dec.
1975

Dec.
1974

Bartow-LakelandWinter Haven
Daytona Beach . .
Ft. LauderdaleHollywood . . .
Ft. Myers . . . .
Gainesville
. . .
Jacksonville . . .
MelbourneTitusville-Cocoa
Miami ................
O rlando................
Pensacola . . . .
Sarasota . . . .
Tallahassee . . .
Tampa-St. Pete
W Palm Beach
.
A lb a n y ................
A tla n ta ................
A ugusta................
Columbus . . . .
Macon....................
Savannah . . . .

4,483,725
109,854
397,253
1,281,929
828,627
255,377

4,851,497r
110,416
447,417
1,395,695
802,317
253,101

+ 27 + 17 + 11
+ 15 + 15 + 4
+ 19 + 6 + 8
+21 + 11 + 14
+22 +26 +22
+ 14 + 15 + 13

. 1,013,432
511,906

772,218
393,294

909,201
440,892

+31
+30

+ 11
+ 16

+ 6
+ 6

. 2,471,944
410,262
284,158
. 5,851,607

1,994,372
347,040
226,050
5,275,290

2,085,361
384,107
281,356
5,238,135

+24
+ 18
+26
+ 11

+ 19
+ 7
+ 1
+ 12

+
+

707,964
9,365,594
2,070,209
800,688
685,291
998,707
. 4,967,292
. 1,268,165

428,942
6,828,452
1,424,363
670,509
538,011
797,086
3,966,144
1,015,465

454,616
8,542,448
1,646,524
575,730
554,141
699,673
4,376,017
1,237,014

+65 + 56 + 4
+37 + 10 - 1
+45 +26 + 6
+ 19 +39 + 17
+27 + 24 - 0
+25 +43 + 16
+25 + 14 + 5
+25 + 3 - 8

190,342
213,404
229,296
23,685,771 20,085,021 19,698,113
663,499
591,866
654,963
454,894
478,037
529,256
900,468r
916,070
756,840
1,037,448
861,070
1,292,972

+20
+ 18
+ 11
+ 16
+21
+25

+ 7
+ 20
- 1
+ 11
+ 2
+ 50

2
8
4
2

- 2
+ 12
- 3
+ 9
+ 5
+ 59

301,027
1,833,112
386,347
262,126
5,087,184

318,791
2,038,430
379,506
301,240
5,634,077r

+ 15 + 8 + 11
+ 11 - 0 + 14
+ 19 +21 +27
+21 + 6 + 9
+25 + 13 + 12

344,569
2,020,269

298,702
1,751,968

291,479
1,998,206

+ 15
+ 15

+ 18 + 13
+ 1 + 1

Chattanooga . . . . 1,338,255
1,702,443
Knoxville . . . .
Nashville . . . . . 4,973,005

1,110,331
1,352,365
4,155,581

1,435,724
2,124,632
4,529,023

+21
+ 26
+20

- 7 - 7
-2 0 -1 8
+ 10 + 9

122,005

122,706

+ 17

+ 16

Alexandria
. .
Baton Rouge .
Lafayette . . . .
Lake Charles . .
New Orleans . .

345,818
.
. . 2,035,494
458,869
.
318,366
. . 6,356,194

Biloxi-Gulfport . .
Jackson ................

OTHER CENTERS
Anniston . . . .

Dec.
1975

142,697

+ 9

Nov.
1975

Dec.
1974

Dec.
1975
from
Nov. Dec.
1975 1974

Year
to
date
mos.
1975
From
1974

12

237,989
126,529

213,683
87,596

199,850
91,896

+ 11
+44

+19
+38

Bradenton . . .
Monroe County .
O c a la ...............
St. Augustine
St. Petersburg .
Tampa . . . .

184,049
99,269
240,567
50,702
. 1,126,511
. 2,637,691

165,354
98,300
203,679
37,957
945,593
2,154,610

221,643
142,663
193,201
42,633
995,423
2,239,918

+ 11
+ 1
+ 18
+34
+ 19
+22

-1 7 - 5
-3 0 + 1
+25 + 10
+ 19 -1 5
+ 13 + 0
+ 18 + 12

Athens . . . .
Brunswick . . .
Dalton . . . .
Elberton . . .
Gainesville . .
Griffin . . . .
LaGrange . . .
Newnan . . . .
R o m e ................
Valdosta
. . .

195,852
135,800
204,612
39,837
195,302
81,675
42,908
68,776
280,258
118,780

166,358
112,473
163,036
29,468
169,781
68,351
42,943
46,229
247,684
102,818

Abbeville .
Bunkie . .
Hammond .
New Iberia
Plaquemine
Thibodaux .

19,452
18,009
97,395
109,923
20,594
70,079

Dothan
Selma

STANDARD METROPOLITAN
STATISTICAL AREAS'
Birmingham . ,
. 5,676,415
126,604
Gadsden . . . .
473.154
Huntsville . . . .
1,552,640
Mobile ................
Montgomery . . . . 1,009,018
291,516
Tuscaloosa . . .

Percent Change

Percent Change
Year
to
Dec.
date
1975 12 mos.
from
1975
Nov. Dec. From
1975 1974 1974
. . . .
. . . .

+ 3
+ 2

169,010 + 18
119,634 +21
170,217 +26
27,659 +35
170,444 + 15
75,201 + 19
40,188 - 0
52,041 +49
150,522 + 13
121,697 +16

+ 16
+ 14
+20
+44
+ 15
+ 9
+ 7
+32
+86
- 2

+ 4
+ 19
- 5
+24
+ 10
- 5
-1 0
- 9
+26
+ 2

17,767
18,655
86,721
87,005
21,015
58,564

23,680
16,891
106,149
98,642
29,400
66,750

+ 9
- 3
+ 12
+26
- 2
+20

-1 8
+ 7
- 8
+ 11
-3 0
+ 5

+ 8
+ 13
+ 13
+23
+ 1
+50

173,481
92,259
144,711
72,156

156,133
79,036
129,230
61,739

141,083
79,785
137,611
70,106

+ 11
+ 17
+ 12
+ 17

+23 + 15
+ 16 + 2
+ 5 + 3
+ 3 + 3

.
.

175,709
100,178
59,556

164,446
92,786
39,353

156,048
79,348
55,189

+ 7 + 13 + 5
+ 8 +26 - 8
+51 + 8 + 4

Bristol . . . .
Johnson City
Kingsport . . .

162,396
188,652
406,064

127,869
164,758
328,015

146,893
159,114
309,715

+27
+ 15
+24

+ 11
+ 19
+31

- 1
+ 14
+ 11

87,403,053r 95,848,458r +24

+ 12

+ 6

+21
+32
+20
+20
+ 15
+22

+ 12
+ 16
+ 16
+ 10
+ 7
- 1

+ 13r
+ 1
+10
+ 13
+ 4
- 1

.
. .
.
.
.
.

Hattiesburg .
Laurel
. . . .
Meridian . .
Natchez . . . .
PascagoulaMoss Point
Vicksburg . .
Yazoo City . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

DISTRICT TOTAL . . 108,026,715
Alabama
. . .
Florida . . . .
Georgia . . . .
Louisiana2 . . .
Mississippi- . .
Tennessee2 . .

. 12,798,074 10,539,330
35,211,792 26,773,786
32,633,604 27,266,102
9,465,968r
. 11,355,351
. 4,135,277
3,605,268
. 11,892,617
9,752,599

ll,062,521r
30,460,765
28,142,550r
10,311,731
3,870,559
12,000,332

■Conforms to SMSA definitions as of December 31, 1972.
2District portion only,
r-revised
Figures for some areas differ slightly from preliminary figures published in "Bank Debits and Deposit Turnover" by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

F E D ER A L R ESER V E BAN K O F A TLA N TA




31

District Business Conditions

— 10
1
— 250

— 150
A/
— 350

- 6
/v
— 42

— 150

— 38

1 111111 r

n r

1976

*Se as. adj. fig ure; not an index
Late st plotting: Decem ber, except mfg. production and farm cash receipts, Nov.

Favorable signs dominate the news from the region's economy. Employment and m anufacturing incomes
increased. Both loan demand and savings deposits rose as banks' reserve positions eased. Departm ent store
sales increased. The good news is tempered by faltering new car registrations and construction contracts
and the farm sector's higher prices and low er incomes.
Nonfarm em ploym ent rose moderately in Decem­
ber for the fourth straight m onth; the unem ploy­
m ent rate was unchanged. M ajor job increases were
in manufacturing, where strong gains in fabricated
metals and printing and publishing more than offset
losses in prim ary metals and stone, clay, and glass.
Led by Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi, construct­
io n job gains were the strongest since an upward
trend began in September. Nonmanufacturing em ­
ploym ent was unchanged. The factory w orkw eek
moved back up to its October level after dropping
in November.
The value of construction contracts retreated
further in December, w ith both residential and
nonresidential sectors losing ground. The losses
were w idely distributed. December completed a
year of almost uninterrupted large inflows at sav­
ings and loan associations. Interest rates on resi­
dential mortgages continued their slow decline.
Manufacturing incomes increased substantially in
November, but tw o m ajor components of consump­
tion spending showed divergent movements. D e­
partment store sales posted a very large gain.
However, new auto registrations and auto credit
extended by banks slipped. Bank purchases of
dealer autom obile paper declined further. Home
improvem ent loans continued to rebuild, w hile
m obile home and personal loan extensions fell.

32




Most large Atlanta banks w ere posting a 63
/4percent prime lending rate in late January; however,
banks in the District's other large cities were gen­
erally at 7 percent or higher. Loan demand strength­
ened during December and was concentrated at
the larger banks in both business and securities
loans. Continuing rapid savings deposit growth was
paced by a gain of nearly $100 m illio n in business
savings accounts during the first two months they
were offered. District member banks' reserve posi­
tions eased some more, causing a further reduction
in both discount activity and net Federal funds
purchases.
Prices received by farmers rose in December, as
increases in citrus and vegetable prices m ore than
offset declines for most other crops. Prelim inary
data for January indicate that sharp increases in
prices of eggs, fats, and oils have interrupted the
downward trend in spot market prices of foodstuffs.
Cum ulative farm cash receipts through November
of 1975 were sharply low er than the comparable
1974 level in Mississippi and Tennessee; reduced
crop income slowed growth of cash receipts in
other states. Farmers plan to increase acreage of
cotton and corn but to reduce soybean plantings
in 1976. W heat acreage is down slightly, but im ­
proved yields are expected to increase total produc­
tion.

M A RC H 1976, M O N T H L Y R E V IE W