Federal Reserve Statistical Release E.15 (125)

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

Agricultural Finance Databook

First Quarter 2010

Contents Page

A. Amount and Characteristics of Farm Loans Made by Commercial Banks . . . . . . . 2

Summary charts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Tables

A.1. Number of Non-real-estate Bank Loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

A.2. Average Size of Non-real-estate Bank Loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

A.3. Volume of Non-real-estate Bank Loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

A.4. Average Maturity of Non-real-estate Bank Loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

A.5. Average Effective Interest Rates on Non-real-estate Bank Loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

A.6. Share of Non-real-estate Bank Loans with a Floating Interest Rate . . . . . . . . . . . 10

A.7. Distribution of Dollar Amount of Non-real-estate Farm Loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

A.8–A.13. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

A.14. Regional Disaggregation of Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

B. Selected Statistics from the Quarterly Reports of Condition of Commercial Banks . 20

Tables

Commercial Banks

B.1. Farm Debt Outstanding at Commercial Banks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

B.2. Delinquent Non-real-estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks . . . . . 22

B.3. Net Charge-offs of Non-real-estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks 23

B.4. Delinquent Real Estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks . . . . . . . 24

B.5. Net Charge-offs of Real Estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks . . . 25

Agricultural banks

B.6. Distribution of Agricultural Banks by the Share of Their Total Loans that are

Nonperforming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

B.7. Selected Measures of Financial Performance of Agricultural and Other Small Banks 27

B.8. Average Loan-Deposit Ratios at Agricultural Banks in Selected Federal Reserve

Districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

B.9. Number of Agricultural Bank Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

C. Reserve Bank Surveys of Farm Credit Conditions and Farm Land Values . . . . . . . 30

Tables

C.1. Non-real-estate Farm Lending Compared with a Year Earlier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

C.2. Expected Farm Loan Volume for the Next Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

C.3. Indicators of Relative Credit Availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm Loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

C.5. Average Variable Interest Rates on Farm Loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

C.6. Trends in Farm Real Estate Values and Loan Volume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

C.7. Local Trends in Farm Income and Expenditures as Reported in Each Region . . . . . 41
The Agricultural Finance Databook is a compilation of various data on current developments in agricultural finance. Large portions of the data come from regular surveys conducted by the Board of Governors

of the Federal Reserve System or by Federal Reserve Banks. Other portions come from the quarterly Call

Report data of commercial banks or from the reports of other financial institutions involved in agricultural

lending. When the current issue went to press, data from the Survey of Terms of Bank Lending were

available for the first quarter of 2010; the other data generally were available through the fourth quarter of

2009.

Parts or all of the Agricultural Finance Databook may be copied and distributed freely. Any redistribution

of selected parts of the databook should be accompanied by the front cover identifying the databook and

date of issue. Remaining questions may be sent to:

Agricultural Finance Databook

Mail Stop 80

Division of Research and Statistics

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

20th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20551

The databook is available online at http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/e15.

1
Federal Reserve Statistical Release E.15 – Agricultural Finance Databook

Section A: Amount and Characteristics of Farm Loans Made by Commercial Banks

These data are for non-real-estate farm loans of $3,000 or more made by commercial banks.1 They are

derived from quarterly sample surveys conducted by the Federal Reserve System during the first full week

of the second month of each quarter. Data obtained from the sample are expanded into national estimates

for all commercial banks, which are shown in the following tables.

Since May 1997, the Federal Reserve has collected data on the assessment by the lender of the risk associated with each loan, the next date that the rate of interest could be adjusted, whether the loan was

callable by the bank, and whether the borrower could prepay the loan without penalty. Over time, the

data on the lender’s perception of the riskiness of farm loans should help provide a better picture of the

effect of fluctuations in the creditworthiness of farm borrowers as farm financial conditions or the broader

economic environment changes. The new data on loan repricing dates, the callability of the loan, and the

existence of prepayment penalties should help to refine estimates of the duration of farm loans made by

commercial banks.

Tables A.8 through A.13 contain most of the new data, whereas the other tables in this section show

estimates that are comparable to those that have been presented for a number of years. However, for several

quarters while the new survey was being designed, banks that left the survey panel were not replaced

immediately because new replacement banks would soon have been forced to revise their newly instituted

reporting procedures when the new survey form went into effect. As a result, the size of the survey panel

dwindled through early 1997, and an unusually large number of new reporters (about 25) were added with

the May 1997 survey. This change did not affect the validity of the May survey information, but it likely

introduced sampling error, especially when the May survey results are compared with those of previous

quarters.

The format and the information contained in the tables are likely to change as more of the new survey

information is acquired.

Since November 1991, several survey statistics have been estimated for each of ten farm production regions as defined by the United States Department of Agriculture. These statistics, which are presented in

table A.14, should be treated with some caution. Although an effort was made to choose a good regional

mix of banks for the panel, the panel never has been stratified by region. Consequently, the survey results

are less precise for each region than for the totals for the nation. More-detailed results from each quarterly

survey were previously published in Statistical Release E.2A, Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Since February 1992, these results have been included at the end of section A of the databook. The

E.2A was discontinued in February 1992.

1Before May 2006, loans of more than $1,000 were included in the survey.

2
Chart 1

Number, Size, and Volume of Non-real-estate Farm Loans, 1980-2010

 -- Four-quarter moving average.

 Source. Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers.

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

1

2

3

4

5

Number of non-real-estate farm loans Millions, annual rate

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Average size of non-real-estate farm loans

Thousands of dollars

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

25

50

75

100

125

Volume of non-real-estate farm loans

3

Billions of dollars, annual rate
Chart 2

Maturity and Interest Rate of Non-real-estate Farm Loans, 1980-2010

 Note. Effective (compounded) annual interest rates are calculated from the stated rate and other

 terms of the loans and weighted by loan size.

 -- Four-quarter moving average.

 Source. Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers.

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

4

8

12

16

Average maturity of non-real-estate farm loans 20

Months

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

4

8

12

16

Average effective interest rate on non-real-estate farm loans 20

Percent

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

0

25

50

75

100 Share of farm loans with a floating interest rate

4

Percent
5

A.1. Number of Non-real-estate Bank Loans Made to FarmersMillions

Size of loan Si

Purpose of loan (thousands of dollars) 

Other Farm 

current machinery 3 10 25 100

Feeder Other operating and to to to and Sm

Period Total livestock livestock expenses1 equipment Other2 9 24 99 over mid1998...... 2.10 .15 .18 1.39 .17 .22 1.20 .45 .33 .12 1999...... 1.96 .14 .16 1.32 .16 .18 1.09 .44 .32 .11 2000...... 1.91 .11 .17 1.30 .13 .19 1.09 .44 .28 .10 2001...... 1.76 .13 .16 1.08 .13 .26 .97 .40 .28 .11 2002...... 1.95 .11 .15 1.34 .12 .23 1.11 .42 .31 .12 2003...... 1.66 .12 .12 1.14 .13 .15 .91 .36 .29 .10 2004...... 1.64 .09 .13 1.15 .13 .14 .87 .36 .29 .12 2005...... 1.47 .10 .11 1.02 .11 .14 .76 .32 .27 .12 2006...... 1.37 .11 .11 .92 .11 .11 .57 .36 .30 .13 2007...... 1.34 .09 .11 .90 .12 .13 .51 .38 .32 .14 2008...... 1.32 .07 .10 .91 .08 .15 .46 .38 .32 .16 2009...... 1.27 .09 .08 .87 .09 .14 .46 .36 .31 .13 2006: Q3... 1.23 .11 .08 .82 .10 .12 .48 .37 .27 .11  Q4... 1.13 .12 .10 .73 .08 .09 .42 .31 .29 .12 2007: Q1... 1.19 .08 .10 .79 .11 .12 .42 .32 .29 .17  Q2... 1.56 .08 .12 1.09 .13 .14 .63 .45 .35 .13  Q3... 1.25 .08 .08 .84 .12 .13 .49 .36 .28 .11  Q4... 1.37 .11 .15 .86 .10 .14 .50 .38 .34 .15 2008: Q1... 1.25 .09 .10 .83 .09 .13 .41 .36 .30 .18  Q2... 1.45 .07 .11 1.01 .10 .16 .54 .38 .36 .17  Q3... 1.22 .03 .08 .87 .09 .14 .45 .37 .28 .13  Q4... 1.38 .10 .12 .93 .06 .17 .46 .40 .36 .17 2009: Q1... 1.31 .09 .09 .89 .10 .15 .43 .36 .33 .19  Q2... 1.31 .08 .09 .91 .09 .13 .49 .37 .32 .13  Q3... 1.27 .07 .06 .92 .07 .14 .52 .36 .29 .11  Q4... 1.21 .12 .09 .76 .11 .13 .40 .38 .31 .12 2010: Q1... 1.17 .09 .08 .79 .08 .13 .40 .31 .31 .16  Note. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Quarterly estimates aannual rate and are based on loans made during the first full week of the second month of the quarter. 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including p 2. Typically loans for which the lender does not know the purpose. 3. Portfolios with $25 million or less in farm loans. 4. Portfolios with more than $25 million in farm loans.
6

A.2. Average Size of Non-real-estate Bank Loans Made to FarmersThousands of dollars

Size of loan Si

Purpose of loan (thousands of dollars) 

Other Farm 

current machinery 3 10 25 100

All Feeder Other operating and to to to and Sm

Period loans livestock livestock expenses1 equipment Other2 9 24 99 over mid

1998...... 32.36 41.46 24.32 18.16 28.10 127.91 3.73 14.78 45.40 357.03 1999...... 30.92 35.63 26.42 21.43 31.82 101.12 3.82 14.83 46.80 322.06 2000...... 26.30 43.25 25.96 21.27 29.27 48.49 3.85 14.94 45.33 258.41 2001...... 29.40 39.71 29.75 20.03 31.76 62.16 3.87 14.76 45.45 269.62 2002...... 28.77 47.63 33.26 21.43 24.44 62.04 3.72 15.02 45.83 269.92 2003...... 30.74 67.77 36.98 21.44 33.40 64.60 3.75 14.81 47.26 276.39 2004...... 39.38 68.02 52.88 25.95 47.58 110.83 3.81 14.82 46.26 360.52 2005...... 40.42 69.13 47.05 26.41 63.49 99.94 3.83 14.62 47.14 333.02 2006...... 49.71 65.53 59.36 32.84 74.12 138.48 4.90 14.96 46.68 340.26 2007...... 48.27 64.93 50.33 36.27 47.41 117.22 5.35 15.11 46.62 302.38 2008...... 58.61 76.08 70.62 44.10 45.70 136.09 5.49 15.03 46.79 335.20 2009...... 55.71 68.17 58.34 46.97 47.09 107.13 5.37 14.90 47.16 358.13 2006: Q3... 51.48 81.93 89.64 26.57 50.49 172.18 5.41 15.01 45.16 377.96  Q4... 53.61 80.54 57.82 33.44 71.05 155.58 5.56 14.96 48.79 341.00 2007: Q1... 58.33 76.05 54.29 50.88 32.69 120.07 5.34 15.10 47.15 296.76  Q2... 39.55 48.25 33.93 32.08 41.55 95.17 5.40 15.11 45.96 276.68  Q3... 42.93 42.18 63.99 28.28 62.22 108.75 5.26 15.19 45.88 296.12  Q4... 54.29 84.90 53.85 36.07 53.00 145.08 5.39 15.03 47.47 335.44 2008: Q1... 66.99 70.42 57.84 57.17 37.17 152.28 5.63 15.42 46.38 339.22  Q2... 53.03 64.25 58.32 39.04 59.60 127.92 5.40 14.76 46.37 310.75  Q3... 56.57 97.26 91.69 40.35 42.95 136.38 5.42 14.53 46.29 368.80  Q4... 58.67 82.63 77.87 41.38 39.40 131.00 5.55 15.40 47.93 328.69 2009: Q1... 73.87 67.25 59.90 72.04 50.22 112.97 5.38 14.98 48.10 384.54  Q2... 47.33 47.69 45.07 41.40 33.44 98.43 5.38 15.17 46.75 308.72  Q3... 44.03 66.51 85.58 32.07 41.81 93.60 5.31 14.78 46.66 318.34  Q4... 57.43 82.88 51.12 42.60 59.12 124.83 5.40 14.68 47.03 405.48 2010: Q1... 56.18 62.45 47.53 50.74 49.97 95.23 5.38 15.13 49.02 279.63  Note. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Quarterly estimates aannual rate and are based on loans made during the first full week of the second month of the quarter. 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including p 2. Typically loans for which the lender does not know the purpose. 3. Portfolios with $25 million or less in farm loans. 4. Portfolios with more than $25 million in farm loans.
7

A.3. Volume of Non-real-estate Bank Loans Made to FarmersBillions of dollars

Size of loan Si

Purpose of loan (thousands of dollars) 

Other Farm 

current machinery 3 10 25 100

Feeder Other operating and to to to and Sm

Period Total livestock livestock expenses1 equipment Other2 9 24 99 over mid1998...... 68.0 6.1 4.4 25.2 4.9 27.5 4.5 6.7 14.9 41.9 1999...... 60.6 4.9 4.2 28.4 5.2 18.0 4.2 6.6 15.1 34.9 2000...... 50.2 4.8 4.5 27.6 3.9 9.3 4.2 6.5 12.6 26.8 2001...... 51.6 5.1 4.7 21.7 4.1 16.1 3.7 5.9 12.6 29.3 2002...... 56.2 5.3 5.1 28.8 2.9 14.1 4.1 6.3 14.3 31.5 2003...... 51.1 7.9 4.5 24.5 4.3 10.0 3.4 5.3 13.5 28.8 2004...... 64.4 6.0 6.7 29.9 6.0 15.9 3.3 5.4 13.2 42.5 2005...... 59.3 6.6 5.1 26.9 6.7 14.0 2.9 4.7 12.5 39.2 2006...... 67.9 7.4 6.4 30.3 7.9 15.8 2.8 5.4 14.0 45.7 2007...... 64.8 5.6 5.6 32.5 5.5 15.6 2.7 5.7 14.8 41.6 2008...... 77.6 5.6 7.4 40.2 3.8 20.7 2.5 5.7 15.1 54.4 2009...... 70.9 6.1 5.0 40.9 4.3 14.7 2.5 5.4 14.8 48.2 2006: Q3... 63.5 9.2 7.3 21.8 5.2 20.0 2.6 5.6 12.2 43.2  Q4... 60.8 10.0 6.1 24.5 5.4 14.8 2.3 4.7 14.1 39.7 2007: Q1... 69.6 5.9 5.3 40.0 3.5 14.9 2.3 4.8 13.4 49.1  Q2... 61.7 3.7 4.1 35.0 5.4 13.5 3.4 6.8 16.2 35.3  Q3... 53.6 3.3 4.9 23.9 7.5 14.1 2.6 5.4 13.1 32.4  Q4... 74.4 9.3 8.3 31.2 5.5 20.1 2.7 5.7 16.3 49.7 2008: Q1... 83.7 6.6 5.9 47.7 3.2 20.3 2.3 5.6 14.0 61.9  Q2... 76.7 4.5 6.3 39.4 5.8 20.7 2.9 5.6 16.5 51.6  Q3... 69.1 3.3 7.6 35.3 3.9 19.0 2.4 5.3 12.8 48.5  Q4... 81.1 8.0 9.7 38.5 2.3 22.6 2.6 6.1 17.0 55.4 2009: Q1... 96.4 5.9 5.5 63.8 4.8 16.5 2.3 5.3 15.9 72.9  Q2... 61.9 3.8 4.2 37.9 2.9 13.2 2.7 5.6 14.9 38.7  Q3... 55.9 4.4 5.5 29.6 3.1 13.3 2.7 5.3 13.5 34.4  Q4... 69.4 10.2 4.7 32.3 6.3 15.8 2.2 5.6 14.6 47.0 2010: Q1... 65.7 5.6 4.0 39.9 4.1 12.1 2.1 4.7 15.0 43.9  Note. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Quarterly estimates aannual rate and are based on loans made during the first full week of the second month of the quarter. 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including p 2. Typically loans for which the lender does not know the purpose. 3. Portfolios with $25 million or less in farm loans. 4. Portfolios with more than $25 million in farm loans.
8

A.4. Average Maturity of Non-real-estate Bank Loans Made to FarmersMonths

Size of loan Si

Purpose of loan (thousands of dollars) 

Other Farm 

current machinery 3 10 25 100

All Feeder Other operating and to to to and Sma

Period loans livestock livestock expenses1 equipment Other2 9 24 99 over mid-

1998...... 9.8 8.0 10.3 9.9 27.5 6.8 8.8 11.3 12.5 8.7 1999...... 11.5 8.0 11.0 11.3 20.1 10.5 9.8 11.2 12.4 11.4 2000...... 11.2 8.0 10.8 9.5 22.4 13.2 9.7 11.5 11.1 11.4 2001...... 13.2 8.5 14.0 10.3 24.3 15.3 9.6 11.9 12.5 14.1 2002...... 11.2 8.6 11.5 10.2 23.3 11.7 9.4 10.9 12.5 10.8 2003...... 12.5 8.5 9.4 11.1 26.5 14.4 9.5 11.2 12.7 12.9 2004...... 11.9 9.2 11.9 10.0 23.3 12.0 9.6 11.8 12.9 11.7 2005...... 12.9 9.4 10.0 9.9 18.9 18.3 9.3 11.4 13.5 13.1 2006...... 12.7 8.7 12.9 10.0 15.9 18.3 9.6 11.7 12.6 13.1 2007...... 13.3 9.9 15.1 9.7 21.4 18.5 9.8 11.8 11.6 14.3 2008...... 13.8 9.5 12.3 9.1 30.6 21.7 9.2 11.1 12.6 14.6 2009...... 11.0 9.6 8.4 8.5 27.9 14.3 9.1 10.7 11.8 10.9 2006: Q3... 13.9 9.4 9.3 9.3 24.6 20.2 8.5 11.2 11.3 15.3  Q4... 12.5 9.0 11.4 9.0 14.3 20.6 7.9 9.9 11.4 13.4 2007: Q1... 13.5 10.3 16.5 10.8 33.0 16.3 9.6 14.2 12.5 13.8  Q2... 12.8 10.3 9.8 10.6 21.6 16.5 10.4 12.2 11.3 13.8  Q3... 13.9 6.8 23.9 8.1 20.5 18.3 10.5 10.7 10.1 16.2  Q4... 13.1 10.6 11.6 8.6 15.0 21.7 8.3 10.0 12.4 14.0 2008: Q1... 13.9 10.7 15.9 9.7 38.0 20.2 9.1 12.2 13.6 14.3  Q2... 14.8 8.2 8.9 9.7 24.4 25.7 10.7 11.7 11.9 16.3  Q3... 14.8 8.6 13.2 9.2 34.6 22.5 9.0 11.1 13.9 15.6  Q4... 12.0 9.7 11.7 7.6 29.2 18.7 7.9 9.5 11.5 12.5 2009: Q1... 10.8 9.7 9.6 8.3 36.8 14.0 9.6 12.5 14.6 9.9  Q2... 11.8 12.6 7.5 9.8 31.7 14.6 10.0 11.9 12.6 11.7  Q3... 11.7 7.0 7.7 8.8 35.0 15.8 8.7 9.7 10.8 12.5  Q4... 9.8 9.5 8.8 7.4 15.9 13.2 8.0 8.7 8.9 10.4 2010: Q1... 10.9 9.2 8.4 9.6 24.9 12.2 9.5 10.6 11.8 10.7  Note. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Quarterly estimates annual rate and are based on loans made during the first full week of the second month of the quarter. 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including p 2. Typically loans for which the lender does not know the purpose. 3. Portfolios with $25 million or less in farm loans. 4. Portfolios with more than $25 million in farm loans.
9

A.5. Average Effective Interest Rates on Non-real-estate Bank Loans Made to FarmersPercent

Size of loan Si

Purpose of loan (thousands of dollars) 

Other Farm 

current machinery 3 10 25 100

All Feeder Other operating and to to to and Sma

Period loans livestock livestock expenses1 equipment Other2 9 24 99 over mid-

1998...... 9.0 9.4 9.7 9.6 9.3 8.0 10.1 9.9 9.7 8.4 1999...... 8.7 9.1 9.1 9.2 8.8 7.6 9.7 9.5 9.3 8.1 2000...... 9.7 9.8 9.9 9.9 9.3 9.3 10.3 10.2 10.1 9.4 2001...... 7.8 7.6 8.0 8.4 8.3 7.0 9.1 8.7 8.3 7.3 2002...... 5.9 6.1 5.8 6.4 6.7 4.8 7.3 7.0 6.5 5.3 2003...... 5.4 5.1 5.4 5.7 6.0 4.6 6.7 6.4 5.9 4.8 2004...... 5.4 5.3 5.5 5.7 5.5 4.8 6.6 6.4 5.9 5.0 2005...... 6.7 6.9 6.9 7.0 7.0 6.0 7.7 7.5 7.1 6.5 2006...... 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 7.7 8.9 8.9 8.6 8.0 2007...... 8.3 8.6 8.3 8.5 8.5 7.6 9.0 9.0 8.7 8.0 2008...... 5.6 5.7 5.6 5.9 6.3 4.8 6.8 6.6 6.1 5.3 2009...... 4.8 5.0 4.2 5.2 5.2 3.6 5.8 5.6 5.4 4.5 2006: Q3... 8.6 8.4 8.8 8.8 9.0 8.3 9.3 9.2 8.7 8.4  Q4... 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 9.1 7.5 9.2 9.0 8.8 8.1 2007: Q1... 8.5 8.9 8.3 8.7 8.9 8.1 9.2 9.1 8.8 8.4  Q2... 8.6 9.0 8.5 8.9 8.7 7.9 9.2 9.1 8.9 8.4  Q3... 8.5 8.9 8.6 8.8 8.4 7.7 9.1 9.2 8.8 8.1  Q4... 7.7 8.2 8.1 7.8 8.1 6.9 8.6 8.5 8.3 7.4 2008: Q1... 6.5 6.7 6.7 6.8 7.1 5.8 7.6 7.4 6.9 6.3  Q2... 5.7 5.5 5.8 6.1 5.9 4.9 6.7 6.4 6.2 5.4  Q3... 5.3 5.6 5.4 5.5 6.3 4.7 6.6 6.6 6.1 4.9  Q4... 4.8 5.0 4.9 5.1 6.5 4.0 6.1 6.1 5.6 4.3 2009: Q1... 5.1 5.8 4.1 5.5 5.4 3.5 5.7 5.5 5.2 5.0  Q2... 4.7 5.3 4.4 5.0 6.0 3.6 5.9 5.6 5.3 4.3  Q3... 4.7 5.0 3.9 5.0 5.8 3.8 5.8 5.7 5.4 4.1  Q4... 4.5 4.4 4.7 5.0 4.4 3.4 5.9 5.7 5.5 4.0 2010: Q1... 5.0 4.9 5.3 5.4 5.6 3.7 5.9 5.9 5.4 4.8  Note. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Effective (compoundcalculated from the stated rate and other terms of the loans and weighted by loan size. Quarterly estimates are expressed as an annual loans made during the first full week of the second month of the quarter. 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including p 2. Typically loans for which the lender does not know the purpose. 3. Portfolios with $25 million or less in farm loans. 4. Portfolios with more than $25 million in farm loans.
10

A.6. Share of Non-real-estate Bank Loans with a Floating Interest Rate Made to FarmersPercent

Size of loan Si

Purpose of loan (thousands of dollars) 

Other Farm 

current machinery 3 10 25 100

All Feeder Other operating and to to to and Sma

Period loans livestock livestock expenses1 equipment Other2 9 24 99 over mid-

1998...... 54.4 55.0 59.4 68.5 46.7 42.0 57.6 54.8 62.7 51.1 1999...... 60.7 45.6 66.0 68.6 58.2 52.0 52.6 54.6 60.2 63.1 2000...... 66.9 57.3 60.7 67.0 62.2 76.7 53.4 54.6 61.8 74.5 2001...... 74.5 72.9 65.6 75.0 61.0 80.5 58.8 60.9 69.4 81.5 2002...... 75.1 64.6 65.4 75.8 60.9 84.1 67.8 64.5 68.4 81.2 2003...... 74.3 68.7 59.6 74.6 69.5 86.5 67.6 65.1 63.0 82.1 2004...... 74.3 67.2 47.5 73.4 71.2 91.3 65.8 63.7 63.1 79.9 2005...... 77.1 62.7 71.4 73.0 83.9 90.6 67.6 62.9 65.4 83.2 2006...... 75.3 56.9 68.0 70.4 84.1 91.8 68.7 66.1 65.5 79.8 2007...... 69.6 62.0 62.0 63.5 68.8 88.1 64.3 63.3 66.1 72.0 2008...... 75.9 69.0 71.2 72.1 59.2 90.2 66.2 63.3 68.7 79.7 2009...... 73.3 66.7 83.3 69.1 58.2 88.8 72.0 70.9 68.7 75.1 2006: Q3... 78.3 43.0 64.3 81.2 78.5 96.6 76.9 72.9 62.9 83.5  Q4... 76.6 62.7 67.4 74.9 91.4 87.1 65.4 62.3 65.3 82.9 2007: Q1... 64.6 71.8 68.1 55.8 50.0 87.4 62.6 64.9 70.9 62.9  Q2... 71.4 55.6 75.2 65.5 70.8 90.0 63.9 65.3 71.3 73.3  Q3... 74.8 41.5 75.5 71.7 70.2 89.8 66.2 64.0 61.1 82.8  Q4... 69.1 65.5 43.5 64.6 77.1 86.1 64.6 59.1 61.3 73.1 2008: Q1... 68.7 71.7 48.9 62.6 47.5 91.4 56.9 53.5 64.3 71.5  Q2... 74.7 70.5 56.6 72.5 69.0 86.7 65.2 68.7 71.2 76.9  Q3... 82.1 57.8 81.5 82.6 54.6 91.3 70.2 63.9 70.8 87.7  Q4... 79.4 70.4 86.3 73.8 58.9 91.2 71.7 66.9 68.4 84.5 2009: Q1... 61.1 63.8 83.6 52.8 45.6 89.4 71.9 69.4 64.7 59.4  Q2... 77.8 49.0 84.1 77.2 39.6 94.5 68.8 71.4 70.4 82.2  Q3... 76.6 67.1 87.2 76.2 52.6 81.7 77.0 73.3 70.9 79.3  Q4... 83.8 74.7 77.9 85.6 79.0 89.4 69.7 69.4 69.4 90.6 2010: Q1... 71.4 67.6 70.1 70.3 57.5 82.2 70.3 66.8 71.2 72.0  Note. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Quarterly estimates annual rate and are based on loans made during the first full week of the second month of the quarter. 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including p 2. Typically loans for which the lender does not know the purpose. 3. Portfolios with $25 million or less in farm loans. 4. Portfolios with more than $25 million in farm loans.
11

A.7. Distribution of Dollar Amount of Non-real-estate Farm Loans, by Effective Interest RatePercent

Effective interest rate (percent)

Zero 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 

All to to to to to to to to to to to to to to 

Quarter rates 4.9 5.9 6.9 7.9 8.9 9.9 10.9 11.9 12.9 13.9 14.9 15.9 16.9 17.9 1998: Q1... 100 * .01 13.00 4.00 23.00 32.00 22.00 5.00 1.00 .01 .01 .01 * * 1999: Q1... 100 .01 4.00 17.00 17.00 29.00 23.00 9.00 2.00 1.00 .01 .01 .01 .01 * 2000: Q1... 100 * .01 5.00 4.00 30.00 36.00 18.00 6.00 1.00 .01 .01 * * * 2001: Q1... 100 .01 * 8.00 7.00 28.00 33.00 17.00 5.00 2.00 .01 .01 * .01 .01 2002: Q1... 100 23.76 17.31 19.76 23.14 10.76 4.30 .80 .00 .00 * .00 .00 * .00 2003: Q1... 100 37.28 22.16 18.64 14.73 4.88 1.72 .47 .02 .02 * * * * * 2004: Q1... 100 43.84 22.35 17.33 11.30 3.56 1.16 .27 .05 .05 * .07 .02 * * 2005: Q1... 100 11.07 19.85 27.21 29.30 11.22 1.06 .17 .13 * * * * .00 .00 2006: Q1... 100 * 2.78 14.02 34.59 34.39 12.26 1.44 * * * * * * * 2007: Q1... 100 * * 7.64 19.40 38.92 28.70 3.97 1.02 * * * * * * 2008: Q1... 100 9.82 19.42 36.70 20.50 9.19 4.03 * * * * * * * * 2009: Q1... 100 39.51 21.84 28.68 5.44 3.88 * * * * * * * * * 2006: Q3... 100 * * 5.27 21.96 34.82 30.67 5.70 1.12 * * * * * *  Q4... 100 * 3.32 10.48 17.65 39.46 21.03 7.27 .65 * * * * * * 2007: Q1... 100 * * 7.64 19.40 38.92 28.70 3.97 1.02 * * * * * *  Q2... 100 * 1.43 5.99 17.56 39.08 27.15 7.64 1.10 * * * * * *  Q3... 100 * .71 5.44 30.65 35.13 19.80 6.25 1.48 * * * * * *  Q4... 100 * 7.53 22.95 27.42 25.90 14.22 1.65 * * * * * * * 2008: Q1... 100 9.82 19.42 36.70 20.50 9.19 4.03 * * * * * * * *  Q2... 100 25.50 26.97 29.46 12.17 4.47 .87 .56 * * * * * * *  Q3... 100 42.96 22.94 21.11 8.58 2.62 1.52 * * * * * * * *  Q4... 100 52.53 18.20 16.11 8.68 3.71 .65 * * * * * * * * 2009: Q1... 100 39.51 21.84 28.68 5.44 3.88 * * * * * * * * *  Q2... 100 47.26 23.81 20.08 5.22 2.50 .67 * * * * * * * *  Q3... 100 47.01 22.06 20.03 8.04 1.70 .56 .58 * * * * * * *  Q4... 100 52.92 18.49 20.52 6.08 1.47 * * * * * * * * * 2010: Q1... 100 37.01 30.51 19.83 9.88 2.15 * * * * * * * * *  Note. Non-real-estate farm loans of $1,000 or more made by insured commercial banks. Effective (compounded) annual interest from the stated rate and other terms of the loans and weighted by loan size. Percentages may not sum to 100 because of rounding. * Indicates value of zero. Source. Federal Reserve Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers, conducted during the first full business week of the squarter.
12

A.8. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- All Banks, by Size of Loan, February 1-5, 2010Percent except as noted

$1,000 to $10,000 to $25,000 to $50,000 to $100,000 

Loan characteristic All sizes $9,999 $24,999 $49,999 $99,999 $249,999 Volume of loans (thousands of dollars) 1,507,746 43,776 97,708 125,016 199,412 360,34Number of loans 24,971 8,151 6,467 3,660 2,986 2,3Weighted average maturity (months)1 18.92 9.53 10.86 12.31 16.82 15.

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 6.48 4.03 5.10 5.46 6.71 7.

Weighted average risk rating3 3.09 3.01 2.94 3.03 3.02 3.0

Weighted average interest rate4 5.21 5.88 5.87 5.57 5.42 5. Standard error5 .18 .24 .13 .15 .20 .

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 6.24 6.75 6.92 6.45 6.35 6. 25th percentile 4.25 5.06 5.09 5.00 4.54 4. Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 4.91 5.45 6.02 5.28 5.06 5. Other livestock 5.27 7.19 6.49 5.70 4.57 5.0 Other current operating expenses7 5.50 5.84 5.85 5.74 5.52 5.

 Farm machinery and equipment 5.45 7.19 6.61 6.28 6.54 5. Farm real estate 6.32 3.86 6.38 5.66 6.34 6.4 Other8 3.73 4.27 4.59 4.04 4.39 4.0

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rate 69.14 69.15 66.78 70.24 68.46 65. Under commitment 60.12 78.81 73.54 66.77 67.25 60. Callable 17.24 23.47 21.01 19.12 20.97 20.4 Subject to prepayment penalty 15.67 5.61 6.93 5.55 11.98 14.0 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 7.21 4.60 6.96 8.39 11.87 9. Other livestock 5.24 7.91 11.44 4.56 3.41 4. Other current operating expenses7 57.66 72.24 62.74 67.37 54.61 58. Farm machinery and equipment 5.72 6.78 6.15 6.20 10.39 4. Farm real estate 7.67 .46 2.79 3.79 5.52 7. Other8 16.51 8.01 9.92 9.69 14.19 15.

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 16.47 6.13 8.49 10.82 11.84 15. Other 81.26 89.50 88.58 85.00 86.83 80. Note. Data in tables A.8 through A.13 are from the the Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers, which collects data oextensions made during the first full business week in the mid-month of each quarter by a sample of 250 banks of all sizes. Tdata are used to infer an estimate of the lending terms at all insured agricultural banks during that week. The estimated terms lending are not intended for use in collecting the terms of loans extended over the entire quarter or those residing in the portfbanks. Loans of less than $1,000 are excluded from the survey. (notes continued on next page)
13

 A.8. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- All Banks, by Size of Loan, February 1-5, 2010 (cont.) 1. Average maturities are weighted by loan size and exclude loans with no stated maturity. 2. The repricing interval measures the period from the date the loan is made until it first may be repriced. For floating-rate loans that ar at any time--such as many prime-based loans--the repricing interval is zero. For floating rate loans that have a scheduled repricing interv the number of days between the date the loan is made and the date on which it is next scheduled to reprice. For loans having rates that re matures (fixed-rate loans), the interval measures the number of days between the date the loan is made and the date on which it matures.  are assumed to reprice on the business day after they are made. 3. A complete description of these risk rating categories is available from the Banking Analysis Section, mail stop 81, the Federal Rese DC 20551. The category ’Moderate Risk’ includes the average loan, under average economic conditions, at the typical lender. The weig are alculated by assigning a value of ’1’ to minimal risk loans; ’2’ to low risk loans; ’3’ to moderate risk loans; ’4’ to acceptable risk loa mention and classified loans. In calculating the average risk rating, these values are weighted by loan amount and exclude loans with no  loans are not rated for risk. 4. Effective (compounded) annual interest rates are calculated from the stated rate and other terms of the loans and weighted by loan si 5. The chances are about two out of three that the average rate shown would differ by less than this amount from the average rate that w complete survey of lending at all banks. 6. The interquartile range shows the interest rate range that encompasses the middle 50 percent of the total dollar amount of loans mad 7. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including pou 8. Typically loans for which the lender does not know the purpose.
14

A.9. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Large Farm Lenders, by Size of Loan, February 1-5, Percent except as noted

$1,000 to $10,000 to $25,000 to $50,000 to $100,000 

Loan characteristic All sizes $9,999 $24,999 $49,999 $99,999 $249,999 Volume of loans (thousands of dollars) 1,044,105 29,301 62,965 86,379 131,154 252,9Number of loans 16,485 5,383 4,174 2,531 1,895 1,6Weighted average maturity (months)1 14.74 8.18 10.15 11.80 13.21 14.4

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 4.80 2.38 3.42 4.35 4.72 5.

Weighted average risk rating3 3.25 3.13 3.18 3.26 3.24 3.

Weighted average interest rate4 4.78 5.34 5.34 5.13 4.95 4. Standard error5 .28 .22 .13 .14 .25 .

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 5.75 6.06 6.18 6.16 5.90 5. 25th percentile 3.79 4.85 4.75 4.30 4.07 4.0 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 4.54 5.21 5.56 4.98 4.58 5.0 Other livestock 4.71 5.51 4.95 5.00 4.57 4.0 Other current operating expenses7 5.22 5.47 5.49 5.29 5.15 5.

 Farm machinery and equipment 4.88 6.57 6.00 6.24 5.60 5. Farm real estate 6.11 3.86 5.79 5.43 6.34 5. Other8 3.42 4.17 4.29 3.89 3.97 3.

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 77.90 85.35 82.64 79.88 81.51 81. Under commitment 70.51 90.29 82.73 75.28 79.80 70.0 Callable 15.03 26.07 23.00 17.46 16.80 23.0 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 6.64 5.83 6.39 7.43 7.58 7.7 Other livestock 5.78 6.32 4.30 4.23 5.19 4. Other current operating expenses7 54.98 73.20 68.16 64.94 56.01 58. Farm machinery and equipment 6.02 3.25 4.35 6.23 6.73 4.4 Farm real estate 5.00 .69 2.86 3.69 5.59 6. Other8 21.59 10.72 13.93 13.48 18.90 18.7

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 11.61 7.56 7.76 12.22 7.36 12. Other 85.73 89.36 89.67 83.91 90.61 82. Note. Most large farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had more than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8.
15

A.10. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Small and Mid-sized Farm Lenders, by Size of LoaPercent except as noted

$1,000 to $10,000 to $25,000 to $50,000 to $100,000 t

Loan characteristic All sizes $9,999 $24,999 $49,999 $99,999 $249,999 Volume of loans (thousands of dollars) 463,641 14,476 34,744 38,637 68,258 107,36Number of loans 8,486 2,767 2,292 1,129 1,091 71Weighted average maturity (months)1 28.22 12.14 12.08 13.42 23.71 18.0

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 10.27 7.39 8.14 7.94 10.58 14.4

Weighted average risk rating3 2.66 2.75 2.46 2.36 2.42 2.3

Weighted average interest rate4 6.19 6.98 6.85 6.54 6.33 6.0

 Standard error5 .09 .36 .10 .21 .12 .3

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 7.13 7.64 7.50 7.04 7.25 6.7 25th percentile 5.26 6.36 6.18 6.09 5.63 5.5 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 5.57 6.80 6.69 5.76 5.41 5.6 Other livestock 7.09 9.12 6.98 6.94 n.a. 6.7 Other current operating expenses7 6.05 6.61 6.70 6.64 6.27 5.7

 Farm machinery and equipment 6.98 7.48 7.12 6.38 7.24 6.1 Farm real estate 6.49 n.a. 7.54 6.14 6.35 7.1 Other8 6.67 5.18 7.43 7.76 7.41 6.8

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 49.42 36.36 38.05 48.68 43.38 29.9 Under commitment 36.70 55.57 56.88 47.73 43.13 38.4 Callable 22.24 18.23 17.40 22.84 28.98 14.2 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 8.48 2.10 7.98 10.53 20.13 12.2 Other livestock 4.02 11.15 24.38 5.29 n.a. 6.0 Other current operating expenses7 63.69 70.30 52.92 72.81 51.91 60.4

 Farm machinery and equipment 5.05 13.91 9.40 6.13 17.44 3.5 Farm real estate 13.68 n.a. 2.66 4.01 5.38 10.4 Other8 5.08 2.54 2.65 1.22 5.14 7.2

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 27.42 3.22 9.82 7.70 20.43 23.8 Other 71.20 89.80 86.60 87.44 79.57 74.0 Note. Most small and mid-sized farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had less than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
16

A.11. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- All Banks, by Risk Rating, February 1-5, 2010Percent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not ratVolume of loans (thousands of dollars) 1,507,746 107,906 193,686 508,914 325,659 98,145 33,40Number of loans 24,971 1,685 3,269 10,295 4,397 1,051 25Weighted average maturity (months)1 18.92 12.69 16.44 26.43 18.65 6.08 13.9

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 6.48 6.97 8.25 6.27 5.65 .78 10.9

Weighted average risk rating3 3.09 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 n

Weighted average interest rate4 5.21 6.03 5.30 5.37 4.38 4.41 6.2 Standard error5 .18 .28 .22 .26 .47 .59 .4

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 6.24 6.25 6.00 6.54 5.13 4.85 8.0 25th percentile 4.25 5.26 4.86 4.30 3.28 3.56 6.0 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 4.91 5.89 4.29 4.94 4.88 4.18 4.9 Other livestock 10.37 7.09 6.04 4.22 4.22 n.a. 7.0 Other current operating expenses7 5.67 5.28 5.61 4.80 4.76 6.32 5.9

 Farm machinery and equipment 7.49 6.26 4.99 4.68 8.06 n.a. 6. Farm real estate 6.56 6.44 6.88 5.03 n.a. 8.38 6.4 Other8 5.81 3.44 3.43 3.72 3.91 2.38 4.

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 69.14 46.04 53.96 74.50 85.45 89.47 13.7 Under commitment 60.12 38.47 48.21 73.24 69.59 92.41 11. Callable 17.24 10.10 20.81 24.76 12.07 .77 60.2 Subject to prepayment penalty 15.67 4.02 7.86 15.43 24.08 60.64 n Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 7.21 12.49 10.62 5.03 2.92 1.98 n Other livestock 5.24 4.66 2.83 3.31 3.72 38.28 n Other current operating expenses7 57.66 69.05 75.65 60.61 38.92 34.42 93.5 Farm machinery and equipment 5.72 4.68 2.47 6.69 8.05 2.02 n Farm real estate 7.67 2.20 6.87 10.05 8.51 n.a. 3. Other8 16.51 6.94 1.56 14.31 37.88 23.31 3.

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 16.47 7.21 11.17 21.18 12.87 1.50 51.5 Other 81.26 89.77 84.55 75.33 86.71 98.50 46. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
17

A.12. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Large Farm Lenders, by Risk Rating, February 1-5, 20Percent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not ratVolume of loans (thousands of dollars) 1,044,105 38,819 138,127 373,297 251,386 95,992 4,6Number of loans 16,485 580 1,785 7,212 3,770 949 Weighted average maturity (months)1 14.74 11.76 14.06 17.95 15.71 5.99 3.

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 4.80 6.49 7.77 4.68 4.56 .63 1.4

Weighted average risk rating3 3.25 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 n

Weighted average interest rate 4 4.78 5.94 4.96 4.83 4.21 4.34 4.

 Standard error5 .28 .32 .24 .30 .50 .59 1.0

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 5.75 6.18 5.32 5.75 5.13 4.85 3.5 25th percentile 3.79 5.11 4.50 3.82 3.04 3.56 3.5 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 5.70 2.93 4.85 4.88 4.18 n.a. 4.5 Other livestock 10.44 4.46 5.09 3.94 4.22 n.a. 8. Other current operating expenses7 5.43 5.03 5.22 4.88 4.73 3.58 5.9

 Farm machinery and equipment 5.71 6.15 4.74 4.56 10.24 n.a. 6.4 Farm real estate 6.35 6.14 6.26 5.63 n.a. 10.20 5.9 Other8 3.41 3.44 3.11 3.46 3.92 2.38 3.

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 77.90 34.63 56.85 82.01 86.38 91.22 87. Under commitment 70.51 36.05 42.74 77.92 89.18 94.03 74.0 Callable 15.03 14.12 19.14 19.37 14.70 .79 7.7 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 6.64 7.76 6.17 6.61 3.75 2.02 n Other livestock 5.78 10.49 .13 2.02 4.29 39.09 n Other current operating expenses7 54.98 70.34 82.60 59.30 32.74 34.83 64. Farm machinery and equipment 6.02 1.97 2.51 7.92 9.99 .32 n Farm real estate 5.00 5.07 6.40 6.01 4.55 n.a. 12.2 Other8 21.59 4.36 2.19 18.13 44.69 23.74 23.

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 11.61 11.96 9.72 12.34 9.34 1.54 n Other 85.73 80.46 87.44 83.15 90.16 98.46 86.7 Note. Most large farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had more than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
18

A.13. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Small and Mid-sized Farm Lenders, by Risk Rating, Percent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not rated Volume of loans (thousands of dollars) 463,641 69,088 55,559 135,617 74,273 2,154 28,713 Number of loans 8,486 1,105 1,484 3,083 627 103 187 Weighted average maturity (months)1 28.22 13.22 22.34 49.39 28.64 9.65 15.51 

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 7.24 9.43 10.66 9.41 7.06 12.55 12.39 

Weighted average risk rating3 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 n.a. n.a

Weighted average interest rate4 6.19 6.08 6.14 6.83 4.97 7.31 6.60 

 Standard error5 .09 .21 .28 .27 .32 1.81 .30 

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 7.13 6.25 6.72 7.59 5.12 7.67 8.00  25th percentile 5.26 5.26 5.65 6.45 4.25 7.67 6.00  Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 5.95 5.26 7.29 5.07 n.a. n.a. 5.47  Other livestock 10.06 7.17 n.a. 6.52 11.07 n.a. 6.94  Other current operating expenses7 5.81 6.17 6.62 4.66 6.94 6.61 6.11 

 Farm machinery and equipment 7.81 6.55 6.59 7.51 7.67 n.a. 6.70  Farm real estate 7.59 7.04 7.36 4.60 n.a. 6.17 6.73  Other8 6.51 n.a. 7.68 6.31 .00 n.a. 6.88 

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 52.45 46.77 53.84 82.28 11.28 1.64 32.63  Under commitment 39.84 61.81 60.35 3.30 20.24 .90 23.74  Callable 7.84 24.95 39.62 3.16 n.a. 68.86 8.13  Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 15.14 21.70 .67 .12 n.a. n.a. 16.06  Other livestock 1.38 9.53 6.83 1.78 2.14 n.a. 1.80  Other current operating expenses7 68.32 58.35 64.23 59.86 16.15 98.36 56.52 

 Farm machinery and equipment 6.20 2.37 3.31 1.50 77.62 n.a. 10.73  Farm real estate .58 8.06 21.16 21.92 n.a. 1.64 13.35  Other8 8.39 n.a. 3.80 14.82 4.09 n.a. 1.55 

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 4.54 14.79 45.51 24.84 n.a. 59.92 18.73  Other 95.01 77.38 53.79 75.06 n.a. n.a. n.a Note. Most small and mid-sized farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had less than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
20

Federal Reserve Statistical Release E.15 – Agricultural Finance Databook 

Section B: Selected Statistics from the Quarterly Reports of Condition of Commercial Banks 

The data in tables B.1 through B.8 are prepared using data from the quarterly reports of condition and income for 

commercial banks. These reports changed substantially beginning in March 2001, and the information on the 

delinquencies and charge-offs of non-real-estate farm loans after that date is not directly comparable to that shown in 

earlier editions of the databook. Under the new system, banks with more than $300 million in assets or banks with 

foreign offices report the same information as before. However, smaller banks at which farm production loans account 

for more than 5 percent of total loans now report the same information on delinquencies and charge-offs of farm 

production loans that larger bank do. In the new reporting system, small banks at which farm production loans account 

for less than 5 percent of total loans are excused from reporting delinquencies or charge-offs of farm production loans. 

Before March 2001, these small banks had reported delinquencies and charge-offs of "agricultural loans" according to 

each bank’s own definition, and we used these responses to help estimate total delinquencies of farm production loans. 

Under the new reporting system, the totals for the nation as a whole include estimates of delinquencies and charge-offs 

of non-real-estate farm loans for small banks that hold about 35 percent of the volume of such loans that is outstanding. 

 All banks continue to report delinquencies and charge-offs of loans that are secured by farm real estate, which are 

shown in tables B.4 and B.5. 

Examination of total lending at banks that have a high exposure to agricultural loans provides an alternative perspective 

on the agricultural lending situation. Agricultural banks in table B.4 through table B.9 are those that have a proportion 

of farm loans (real-estate plus non-real-estate) to total loans that is greater than the unweighted average at all banks. 

The current estimate of this average can be found in the far right column of table B.8. 

Information about failed banks (table B.9) is obtained from news releases of the Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation, with agricultural banks in our tabulation defined as in the previous paragraph. 
B.1. Farm Debt Outstanding at Commercial Banks

Loan volume Percent change from Percent change from

(billions of dollars) previous quarter previous year

Real Non-real- Real Non-real- Real Non-realTotal estate estate Total estate estate Total estate estate

Quarter loans loans loans loans loans loans loans loans loans

1997: Q3... 71.1 27.0 44.2 3.0 2.9 3.1 6.8 8.1 6.0

 Q4... 71.3 27.1 44.2 .3 .7 .0 8.9 8.5 9.1

1998: Q1... 70.1 27.6 42.4 -1.7 1.8 -3.9 9.8 9.0 10.4

 Q2... 75.0 28.5 46.5 7.1 3.2 9.6 8.6 8.8 8.5

 Q3... 76.3 28.9 47.4 1.7 1.3 1.9 7.2 7.2 7.3

 Q4... 74.7 29.3 45.5 -2.0 1.3 -4.0 4.8 7.8 3.0

1999: Q1... 72.7 29.7 42.9 -2.8 1.7 -5.6 3.7 7.6 1.1

 Q2... 75.8 30.8 45.1 4.4 3.5 5.0 1.1 8.0 -3.1

 Q3... 76.8 31.4 45.5 1.3 1.9 .9 .7 8.6 -4.1

 Q4... 76.0 31.8 44.2 -1.0 1.5 -2.8 1.7 8.8 -2.8

2000: Q1... 71.5 31.4 40.1 -5.9 -1.4 -9.2 -1.6 5.5 -6.5

 Q2... 79.7 33.7 45.9 11.4 7.5 14.4 5.0 9.6 1.9

 Q3... 80.1 33.9 46.2 .6 .5 .6 4.3 8.1 1.6

 Q4... 80.9 34.0 46.9 1.0 .3 1.5 6.4 6.8 6.1

2001: Q1... 79.4 34.3 45.1 -1.9 .8 -3.9 11.0 9.2 12.4

 Q2... 82.9 35.1 47.7 4.4 2.5 5.8 4.0 4.2 3.9

 Q3... 82.5 35.4 47.1 -.4 .8 -1.3 3.0 4.5 2.0

 Q4... 82.2 35.6 46.7 -.3 .4 -.9 1.6 4.6 -.5

2002: Q1... 80.1 36.0 44.1 -2.6 1.2 -5.5 .9 4.9 -2.2

 Q2... 83.7 37.0 46.7 4.4 2.7 5.9 1.0 5.1 -2.1

 Q3... 84.4 37.7 46.7 .9 2.1 -.1 2.3 6.5 -.9

 Q4... 83.9 38.0 45.9 -.6 .6 -1.6 2.0 6.8 -1.7

2003: Q1... 82.0 38.7 43.3 -2.3 1.9 -5.7 2.4 7.5 -1.9

 Q2... 84.5 39.6 44.9 3.1 2.5 3.7 1.1 7.3 -3.9

 Q3... 85.5 40.2 45.4 1.2 1.4 1.0 1.4 6.5 -2.8

 Q4... 86.1 40.6 45.5 .6 1.1 .2 2.7 7.0 -.9

2004: Q1... 84.3 41.4 42.9 -2.1 1.9 -5.7 2.8 7.0 -.9

 Q2... 88.9 42.9 46.0 5.4 3.6 7.2 5.2 8.3 2.4

 Q3... 91.5 43.9 47.6 2.9 2.3 3.5 6.9 9.2 4.9

 Q4... 92.3 44.5 47.7 .8 1.5 .2 7.1 9.6 4.9

2005: Q1... 89.3 45.0 44.3 -3.2 1.1 -7.2 5.9 8.7 3.3

 Q2... 93.5 46.2 47.3 4.7 2.7 6.6 5.1 7.7 2.7

 Q3... 96.7 47.1 49.5 3.4 2.0 4.8 5.7 7.4 4.0

 Q4... 97.5 47.6 49.9 .9 1.0 .8 5.7 6.9 4.6

2006: Q1... 96.2 48.4 47.7 -1.4 1.8 -4.4 7.7 7.6 7.7

 Q2... 101.0 49.8 51.2 5.1 2.9 7.2 8.1 7.8 8.3

 Q3... 104.2 51.1 53.0 3.1 2.5 3.6 7.8 8.4 7.1

 Q4... 105.4 52.2 53.2 1.2 2.1 .3 8.1 9.7 6.5

2007: Q1... 105.0 53.4 51.6 -.4 2.3 -3.0 9.2 10.2 8.1

 Q2... 109.3 54.8 54.5 4.1 2.7 5.6 8.2 9.9 6.5

 Q3... 110.8 56.0 54.9 1.4 2.2 .6 6.4 9.5 3.4

 Q4... 112.3 56.8 55.5 1.3 1.5 1.2 6.6 8.9 4.3

2008: Q1... 110.4 57.9 52.5 -1.7 1.9 -5.3 5.2 8.5 1.8

 Q2... 117.4 60.4 57.0 6.3 4.4 8.5 7.4 10.3 4.5

 Q3... 119.9 61.6 58.3 2.1 1.9 2.4 8.2 10.0 6.3

 Q4... 121.6 63.0 58.6 1.4 2.3 .4 8.3 10.9 5.6

2009: Q1... 118.8 63.9 54.9 -2.3 1.3 -6.2 7.6 10.3 4.6

 Q2... 122.0 64.9 57.2 2.7 1.6 4.0 3.9 7.3 .3

 Q3... 124.7 65.8 58.9 2.2 1.5 3.0 4.0 6.9 .9

 Q4... 124.5 66.0 58.5 -.2 .3 -.7 2.4 4.8 -.2

 Note. Data are as of end of quarter.

21
B.2. Delinquent Non-real-estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks

Share of outstanding farm production

Estimated volume (billions of dollars) loans (percent)

Nonperforming Nonperforming 

Past due Past due

30 to 89 Past due 30 to 89 Past due

days, 90 days, Non- days, 90 days, NonPeriod Total accruing Total accruing accruing Total accuring Total accruing accruing

1999...... .9 .3 .6 .1 .5 2.1 .8 1.3 .2 1.1

2000...... 1.0 .4 .6 .1 .5 2.1 .9 1.2 .2 1.0

2001...... 1.3 .5 .7 .1 .6 2.7 1.2 1.5 .2 1.3

2002...... 1.2 .5 .7 .1 .6 2.6 1.0 1.6 .3 1.3

2003...... 1.0 .4 .7 .1 .5 2.3 .8 1.5 .3 1.2

2004...... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.6 .5 1.0 .2 .9

2005...... .6 .3 .3 .1 .3 1.3 .6 .7 .2 .5

2006...... .7 .4 .3 .1 .3 1.3 .7 .6 .1 .5

2007...... .7 .4 .4 .1 .3 1.3 .7 .6 .1 .5

2008...... .9 .5 .4 .1 .3 1.5 .8 .6 .1 .5

2009...... 1.8 .8 1.1 .1 1.0 3.1 1.3 1.8 .2 1.6

2002: Q3... 1.3 .4 .8 .2 .6 2.7 .9 1.8 .4 1.4

 Q4... 1.2 .5 .7 .1 .6 2.6 1.0 1.6 .3 1.3

2003: Q1... 1.7 .9 .8 .2 .6 4.0 2.1 1.9 .4 1.5

 Q2... 1.4 .5 .9 .2 .7 3.1 1.1 2.0 .5 1.5

 Q3... 1.2 .4 .8 .2 .6 2.7 .9 1.8 .4 1.4

 Q4... 1.0 .4 .7 .1 .5 2.3 .8 1.5 .3 1.2

2004: Q1... 1.3 .6 .7 .2 .5 3.0 1.3 1.6 .4 1.2

 Q2... .9 .3 .6 .1 .5 2.1 .7 1.3 .3 1.0

 Q3... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.7 .6 1.1 .2 .9

 Q4... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.6 .5 1.0 .2 .9

2005: Q1... 1.0 .5 .5 .1 .4 2.3 1.2 1.1 .3 .9

 Q2... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.6 .6 1.0 .3 .8

 Q3... .7 .3 .4 .1 .3 1.3 .5 .8 .2 .6

 Q4... .6 .3 .3 .1 .3 1.3 .6 .7 .2 .5

2006: Q1... .9 .5 .4 .1 .3 1.8 1.1 .8 .2 .5

 Q2... .7 .3 .4 .1 .2 1.3 .6 .7 .2 .5

 Q3... .6 .3 .4 .1 .3 1.2 .5 .7 .2 .5

 Q4... .7 .4 .3 .1 .3 1.3 .7 .6 .1 .5

2007: Q1... 1.0 .6 .4 .1 .3 1.9 1.1 .8 .3 .5

 Q2... .9 .4 .5 .1 .4 1.6 .7 .9 .2 .7

 Q3... .7 .3 .4 .1 .3 1.2 .5 .7 .2 .6

 Q4... .7 .4 .4 .1 .3 1.3 .7 .6 .1 .5

2008: Q1... .9 .5 .4 .1 .3 1.7 1.0 .7 .2 .5

 Q2... .8 .4 .4 .1 .3 1.4 .7 .7 .2 .5

 Q3... .8 .4 .4 .1 .3 1.3 .6 .7 .2 .5

 Q4... .9 .5 .4 .1 .3 1.5 .8 .6 .1 .5

2009: Q1... 1.4 .7 .6 .2 .5 2.5 1.4 1.2 .3 .9

 Q2... 1.4 .5 .8 .2 .7 2.4 .9 1.5 .3 1.2

 Q3... 1.4 .6 .8 .1 .7 2.4 1.0 1.4 .3 1.1

 Q4... 1.8 .8 1.1 .1 1.0 3.1 1.3 1.8 .2 1.6

 Note. Data are estimates of the national totals for non-real-estate farm loans. Reported amounts are adjusted to exclude foreign

results for large banks that report farm delinquencies on a consolidated basis and for small banks that are allowed to report

delinquencies according to their internal definition of agricultural loans. Yearly data are as of December 31. Quarterly data

are as of end of quarter.

22
23

B.3. Net Charge-offs of Non-real-estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks

Estimated volume Share of total non-real-estate farm loans

(millions of dollars) (percent)

Year Total Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

1998...... 87 4 15 24 45 .198 .008 .036 .051 .095

1999...... 126 18 37 35 36 .280 .040 .086 .078 .080

2000...... 108 11 17 34 45 .259 .027 .041 .075 .098

2001...... 308 67 53 140 48 .656 .142 .118 .294 .101

2002...... 221 40 50 58 73 .471 .085 .114 .124 .157

2003...... 175 34 35 48 58 .382 .074 .080 .108 .128

2004...... 129 28 17 46 38 .284 .062 .039 .099 .081

2005...... 59 8 16 12 24 .124 .017 .035 .026 .048

2006...... 73 9 7 23 34 .146 .018 .015 .045 .064

2007...... 90 8 13 23 47 .170 .014 .025 .042 .085

2008...... 150 12 20 42 75 .269 .022 .037 .074 .129

2009...... 435 65 59 151 159 .743 .111 .108 .265 .271

 Note. Components might not sum to totals because of rounding. Reported amounts are adjusted to exclude

foreign results for large banks that report farm net charge-offs on a consolidated basis and for small banks that

are allowed to report net charge-offs according to their internal definition of agricultural loans. Quarterly data

are as of end of quarter.

 n.a. Not available.
B.4. Delinquent Real Estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks

Share of outstanding farm real estate

Volume (billions of dollars) loans (percent)

Nonperforming Nonperforming 

Past due Past due

30 to 89 Past due 30 to 89 Past due

days, 90 days, Non- days, 90 days, NonPeriod Total accruing Total accruing accruing Total accuring Total accruing accruing

1999...... .6 .2 .4 .2 .2 2.0 .8 1.3 .5 .7

2000...... .8 .3 .5 .2 .3 2.3 .9 1.4 .6 .8

2001...... .9 .4 .5 .1 .4 2.6 1.1 1.5 .3 1.2

2002...... .9 .4 .6 .1 .5 2.5 1.0 1.5 .3 1.2

2003...... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 2.1 .7 1.3 .2 1.1

2004...... .7 .3 .4 .1 .4 1.6 .6 1.0 .2 .8

2005...... .6 .3 .4 .1 .3 1.3 .6 .7 .1 .6

2006...... .7 .3 .3 .1 .3 1.3 .6 .7 .1 .5

2007...... .8 .4 .4 .1 .3 1.4 .7 .7 .1 .5

2008...... 1.3 .6 .7 .1 .6 2.1 1.0 1.2 .2 1.0

2009...... 2.1 .6 1.5 .2 1.4 3.2 .9 2.3 .3 2.0

2000: Q4... .8 .3 .5 .2 .3 2.3 .9 1.4 .6 .8

2001: Q1... 1.1 .6 .5 .1 .4 3.2 1.7 1.4 .4 1.1

 Q2... .9 .4 .6 .1 .4 2.7 1.0 1.7 .4 1.2

 Q3... .9 .3 .6 .1 .4 2.5 .9 1.7 .4 1.3

 Q4... .9 .4 .5 .1 .4 2.6 1.1 1.5 .3 1.2

2002: Q1... 1.2 .6 .6 .2 .4 3.3 1.6 1.7 .5 1.2

 Q2... 1.0 .4 .6 .2 .4 2.6 1.0 1.6 .4 1.1

 Q3... .9 .3 .6 .1 .5 2.4 .9 1.6 .4 1.2

 Q4... .9 .4 .6 .1 .5 2.5 1.0 1.5 .3 1.2

2003: Q1... 1.2 .6 .6 .1 .5 3.2 1.6 1.6 .4 1.2

 Q2... 1.0 .4 .7 .2 .5 2.6 .9 1.6 .4 1.2

 Q3... .9 .3 .6 .1 .5 2.3 .7 1.5 .3 1.2

 Q4... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 2.1 .7 1.3 .2 1.1

2004: Q1... 1.0 .4 .6 .1 .4 2.5 1.1 1.4 .3 1.1

 Q2... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.9 .7 1.2 .3 .9

 Q3... .7 .2 .5 .1 .4 1.7 .6 1.1 .2 .9

 Q4... .7 .3 .4 .1 .4 1.6 .6 1.0 .2 .8

2005: Q1... .9 .4 .5 .1 .4 2.0 1.0 1.0 .2 .8

 Q2... .7 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.6 .6 1.0 .2 .8

 Q3... .7 .3 .4 .1 .3 1.4 .5 .9 .2 .7

 Q4... .6 .3 .4 .1 .3 1.3 .6 .7 .1 .6

2006: Q1... .9 .5 .4 .1 .3 1.8 .9 .9 .2 .6

 Q2... .7 .3 .4 .1 .3 1.4 .6 .8 .2 .6

 Q3... .7 .3 .4 .1 .3 1.3 .6 .8 .2 .6

 Q4... .7 .3 .3 .1 .3 1.3 .6 .7 .1 .5

2007: Q1... .9 .5 .4 .1 .3 1.6 .9 .7 .2 .5

 Q2... .8 .4 .4 .1 .3 1.5 .7 .8 .2 .6

 Q3... .7 .3 .4 .1 .3 1.3 .6 .7 .2 .5

 Q4... .8 .4 .4 .1 .3 1.4 .7 .7 .1 .5

2008: Q1... 1.0 .5 .5 .1 .3 1.7 .9 .8 .2 .6

 Q2... 1.0 .5 .5 .1 .4 1.6 .8 .9 .2 .7

 Q3... 1.0 .4 .6 .1 .5 1.6 .6 1.0 .1 .8

 Q4... 1.3 .6 .7 .1 .6 2.1 1.0 1.2 .2 1.0

2009: Q1... 1.8 .8 1.0 .1 .8 2.8 1.3 1.5 .2 1.3

 Q2... 1.7 .5 1.2 .2 1.0 2.7 .8 1.8 .3 1.5

 Q3... 1.9 .5 1.3 .2 1.1 2.8 .8 2.0 .3 1.7

 Q4... 2.1 .6 1.5 .2 1.4 3.2 .9 2.3 .3 2.0

 Note. Yearly data are as of December 31. Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.

24
25

B.5. Net Charge-offs of Real Estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks

Estimated volume Share of outstanding real estate farm loans

(millions of dollars) (percent)

Year Total Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

1998...... 6 -1 3 0 5 .022 -.004 .009 .000 .016

1999...... 15 0 3 5 7 .051 -.001 .011 .015 .022

2000...... 12 -12 3 8 14 .037 -.037 .009 .022 .040

2001...... 42 10 9 5 17 .123 .030 .027 .014 .049

2002...... 35 8 6 5 16 .097 .022 .017 .014 .041

2003...... 32 4 6 8 14 .082 .010 .015 .021 .034

2004...... 18 1 5 2 10 .044 .003 .012 .005 .021

2005...... 17 2 11 4 0 .039 .005 .024 .009 .000

2006...... 20 2 6 1 12 .042 .003 .012 .002 .023

2007...... 8 -3 0 5 6 .015 -.006 .000 .009 .011

2008...... 54 5 8 12 29 .093 .008 .013 .020 .046

2009...... 184 33 41 34 77 .289 .051 .064 .051 .116

 Note. Components might not sum to totals because of rounding. Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.

 n.a. Not available.
B.6. Distribution of Agricultural Banks by the Share of Their Total Loans that are Nonperforming

Percent

Less than 20.0 percent

2.0 2.0-4.9 5.0-9.9 10.0-14.9 15.0-19.9 and

Period Total percent percent percent percent percent over

1998...... 100.0 81.7 15.1 2.8 .3 ... .1

1999...... 100.0 84.8 12.6 2.4 .3 .0 ...

2000...... 100.0 85.0 12.8 1.8 .3 ... ...

2001...... 100.0 80.0 17.3 2.5 .1 .0 ...

2002...... 100.0 79.7 17.1 2.8 .2 .1 ...

2003...... 100.0 81.2 15.0 3.3 .4 .1 .0

2004...... 100.0 85.3 12.7 1.7 .2 .1 ...

2005...... 100.0 87.2 10.7 1.9 .2 ... ...

2006...... 100.0 86.8 11.5 1.6 .0 .0 ...

2007...... 100.0 84.0 13.3 2.4 .2 .0 ...

2008...... 100.0 76.1 18.3 4.7 .8 .0 .0

2009...... 100.0 68.4 24.8 5.8 .8 .2 .0

 Q4... 100.0 85.0 12.8 1.8 .3 ... ...

2001: Q1... 100.0 80.3 16.9 2.6 .2 .1 ...

 Q2... 100.0 80.2 16.6 3.0 .2 .1 ...

 Q3... 100.0 78.7 17.8 3.2 .3 ... ...

 Q4... 100.0 80.0 17.3 2.5 .1 .0 ...

2002: Q1... 100.0 76.8 19.3 3.7 .2 .0 ...

 Q2... 100.0 76.8 19.6 3.1 .4 .0 ...

 Q3... 100.0 77.8 18.8 3.2 .2 .0 ...

 Q4... 100.0 79.7 17.1 2.8 .2 .1 ...

2003: Q1... 100.0 75.4 19.9 4.1 .3 .2 .0

 Q2... 100.0 76.2 19.2 4.0 .4 .1 .1

 Q3... 100.0 77.7 18.3 3.6 .3 .1 .0

 Q4... 100.0 81.2 15.0 3.3 .4 .1 .0

2004: Q1... 100.0 79.2 17.2 3.2 .2 .1 .0

 Q2... 100.0 81.3 15.1 3.2 .3 .0 .1

 Q3... 100.0 82.1 15.1 2.4 .2 .1 .0

 Q4... 100.0 85.3 12.7 1.7 .2 .1 ...

2005: Q1... 100.0 84.4 13.3 2.0 .2 .0 ...

 Q2... 100.0 85.7 12.0 2.0 .3 .0 ...

 Q3... 100.0 85.7 12.4 1.8 .1 ... ...

 Q4... 100.0 87.2 10.7 1.9 .2 ... ...

2006: Q1... 100.0 85.6 12.6 1.7 .1 ... ...

 Q2... 100.0 85.8 12.5 1.5 .1 .0 ...

 Q3... 100.0 85.9 12.5 1.5 .0 ... ...

 Q4... 100.0 86.8 11.5 1.6 .0 .0 ...

2007: Q1... 100.0 84.9 12.9 2.0 .1 ... ...

 Q2... 100.0 85.2 12.2 2.5 .1 ... ...

 Q3... 100.0 83.6 14.1 2.1 .0 .0 .0

 Q4... 100.0 84.0 13.3 2.4 .2 .0 ...

2008: Q1... 100.0 81.0 15.5 2.9 .5 .0 .0

 Q2... 100.0 79.2 17.1 3.1 .4 .1 .1

 Q3... 100.0 78.2 17.5 3.5 .6 .1 .1

 Q4... 100.0 76.1 18.3 4.7 .8 .0 .0

2009: Q1... 100.0 69.9 23.6 5.6 .7 .2 .1

 Q2... 100.0 67.9 25.0 5.9 1.0 .1 .0

 Q3... 100.0 67.1 25.5 6.3 1.1 .0 .0

 Q4... 100.0 68.4 24.8 5.8 .8 .2 .0

 Note. Nonperforming loans are loans in nonaccruing status or past due 90 days or more. Renegotiated or restructured

loans in compliance with the modified terms are not included. Agricultural banks are defined in the introduction to section B.

Yearly data are as of December 31. Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.

 ... Not applicable.

26
B.7. Selected Measures of Financial Performance of Agricultural and Other Small Banks

Percent

Distribution of net income as a Average rate Rate N

share of average equity at of return of return 

agricultural banks on equity to assets 

25 percent Agri- Other Agri- Other A

Negative 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 and cultural Small cultural small cu

Period All banks income percent percent percent percent percent over banks Banks banks banks ba1999...... 100.0 2.9 7.9 34.8 33.3 14.2 4.9 1.9 11.8 11.9 1.2 1.1 2000...... 100.0 2.4 8.9 35.3 33.5 13.8 4.2 1.8 11.7 11.4 1.2 1.1 2001...... 100.0 3.1 12.6 37.6 28.6 13.1 3.7 1.3 10.8 10.4 1.1 1.0 2002...... 100.0 3.0 10.7 35.1 31.4 13.5 4.6 1.7 11.5 10.6 1.2 1.1 2003...... 100.0 2.7 12.2 36.6 29.3 12.9 4.4 1.8 11.2 10.7 1.2 1.1 2004...... 100.0 2.1 10.0 34.9 31.4 13.8 5.8 2.0 11.5 10.5 1.2 1.1 2005...... 100.0 1.7 10.1 34.5 29.9 14.6 6.4 2.8 11.8 10.7 1.2 1.1 2006...... 100.0 2.7 10.9 35.7 30.1 13.1 4.6 2.8 11.4 10.1 1.2 1.1 2007...... 100.0 3.2 12.3 36.6 29.4 11.8 4.5 2.2 10.6 7.7 1.1 .9 2008...... 100.0 7.4 15.2 35.0 27.0 9.9 3.8 1.6 9.0 1.5 1.0 .2 2009...... 100.0 12.2 19.7 34.8 22.4 7.9 2.0 1.1 7.0 -2.0 .7 -.2 2005: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.0 2.9 .3 .3  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5.9 5.6 .6 .6  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 9.0 8.3 .9 .8  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 11.8 10.7 1.2 1.1 2006: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.0 2.7 .3 .3  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 6.1 5.7 .6 .6  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 9.0 8.0 .9 .9  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 11.4 10.1 1.2 1.1 2007: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.8 2.3 .3 .3  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5.7 4.6 .6 .5  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 8.4 6.6 .9 .7  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 10.6 7.7 1.1 .9 2008: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.0 1.5 .3 .2  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5.6 2.5 .6 .3  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 7.6 2.4 .8 .3  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 9.0 1.5 1.0 .2 2009: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.8 .5 .2 .0  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.7 -.3 .4 .0  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5.5 -.5 .6 -.1  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 7.0 -2.0 .7 -.2  Note. Agricultural and other banks are defined in the introduction to section B; small banks have less than $500 million in assets. Total primary anavailable at the end of the period specified) are measured as a percentage of total assets. Quarterly data are cumulative through the end of the quarte n.a. Not available.27
B.8. Average Loan-Deposit Ratios at Agricultural Banks in Selected Federal Reserve Districts

Total Kansas 

(entire U.S.) Cleveland Atlanta Chicago St. Louis Minneapolis City D

Number Loans to Number Loans to Number Loans to Number Loans to Number Loans to Number Loans to Number Loans to Numbe

Period of banks deposits of banks deposits of banks deposits of banks deposits of banks deposits of banks deposits of banks deposits of bank1999...... 2,866 .72 41 .85 93 .74 715 .75 300 .72 538 .74 838 .71 22000...... 2,767 .75 39 .86 92 .77 693 .78 293 .75 519 .76 796 .76 22001...... 2,683 .74 40 .79 83 .75 675 .75 283 .73 497 .76 776 .76 22002...... 2,591 .76 43 .80 84 .77 646 .76 281 .75 489 .78 746 .79 22003...... 2,549 .75 38 .76 76 .75 640 .75 286 .73 478 .77 736 .76 22004...... 2,470 .78 39 .81 75 .77 611 .78 278 .73 457 .82 726 .79 22005...... 2,429 .79 40 .81 78 .76 612 .81 271 .77 437 .84 722 .80 22006...... 2,366 .81 48 .85 72 .77 603 .82 254 .78 425 .84 702 .80 22007...... 2,312 .81 45 .85 74 .78 582 .83 255 .80 414 .84 683 .81 22008...... 2,258 .83 45 .85 78 .81 568 .84 258 .81 405 .87 653 .82 22009...... 2,228 .79 43 .79 84 .79 561 .79 250 .78 404 .83 643 .76 22003: Q2... 2,595 .76 40 .80 88 .77 640 .76 281 .75 490 .81 742 .77 2 Q3... 2,579 .76 44 .79 87 .79 644 .77 287 .75 485 .81 735 .78 2 Q4... 2,549 .75 38 .76 76 .75 640 .75 286 .73 478 .77 736 .76 22004: Q1... 2,512 .75 42 .77 76 .75 626 .76 267 .71 469 .80 732 .76 2 Q2... 2,528 .78 43 .80 77 .76 623 .78 287 .75 468 .84 730 .78 2 Q3... 2,510 .79 42 .83 79 .78 618 .79 291 .76 462 .86 724 .80 2 Q4... 2,470 .78 39 .81 75 .77 611 .78 278 .73 457 .82 726 .79 22005: Q1... 2,457 .78 42 .80 79 .76 603 .79 269 .73 451 .83 728 .78 2 Q2... 2,466 .80 42 .82 78 .80 606 .81 281 .78 446 .87 724 .80 2 Q3... 2,450 .81 42 .83 82 .79 610 .82 284 .79 443 .88 711 .81 2 Q4... 2,429 .79 40 .81 78 .76 612 .81 271 .77 437 .84 722 .80 22006: Q1... 2,412 .79 43 .84 80 .76 606 .82 268 .75 437 .86 716 .79 2 Q2... 2,409 .82 42 .87 77 .79 608 .84 269 .79 429 .89 716 .81 2 Q3... 2,383 .83 43 .86 80 .78 604 .85 268 .80 423 .89 701 .82 2 Q4... 2,366 .81 48 .85 72 .77 603 .82 254 .78 425 .84 702 .80 22007: Q1... 2,371 .81 48 .85 75 .77 599 .83 262 .76 427 .85 695 .80 2 Q2... 2,361 .83 46 .86 82 .78 587 .84 265 .80 425 .88 688 .82 2 Q3... 2,348 .83 47 .87 83 .80 590 .84 265 .81 421 .88 677 .82 2 Q4... 2,312 .81 45 .85 74 .78 582 .83 255 .80 414 .84 683 .81 22008: Q1... 2,311 .81 46 .83 81 .81 576 .81 256 .77 412 .85 675 .80 2 Q2... 2,312 .83 47 .85 87 .82 569 .83 261 .81 412 .89 669 .82 2 Q3... 2,288 .84 44 .86 85 .84 575 .84 261 .85 406 .90 662 .82 2 Q4... 2,258 .83 45 .85 78 .81 568 .84 258 .81 405 .87 653 .82 22009: Q1... 2,263 .81 46 .82 87 .80 567 .81 253 .78 405 .86 655 .79 2 Q2... 2,273 .81 45 .82 91 .82 564 .80 256 .81 407 .87 656 .79 2 Q3... 2,258 .82 43 .82 92 .83 563 .80 261 .83 404 .87 648 .80 2 Q4... 2,228 .79 43 .79 84 .79 561 .79 250 .78 404 .83 643 .76 2 Note. The loan-deposit ratio is defined as total loans divided by total deposits. Agricultural banks are defined as banks with a farm loan ratio at least as described in the introduction to section B. Yearly data are as of December 31. Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.28
29

B.9. Number of Agricultural Bank Failures

Year Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total

1988...... 11 6 12 7 36

1989...... 5 7 5 5 22

1990...... 3 5 6 3 17

1991...... 2 2 3 1 8

1992...... 1 1 1 4 7

1993...... 1 2 2 0 5

1994...... 0 0 0 0 0

1995...... 0 0 0 0 0

1996...... 0 2 0 0 2

1997...... 0 0 0 1 1

1998...... 0 0 1 0 1

1999...... 0 1 0 0 1

2000...... 0 0 0 0 0

2001...... 0 0 0 0 0

2002...... 1 0 0 1 2

2003...... 0 1 0 0 1

2004...... 0 1 0 0 1

2005...... 0 0 0 0 0

2006...... 0 0 0 0 0

2007...... 0 0 0 0 0

2008...... 1 0 0 2 3

2009...... 2 3 2 2 9

 Note. Data exclude banks assisted to prevent failure. Industrial banks and

mutual savings banks also are excluded. Agricultural banks are defined in

the introduction to section B.

 n.a. Not available.
30

Federal Reserve Statistical Release E.15 – Agricultural Finance Databook

Section C: Reserve Bank Surveys of Farm Credit Conditions and Farm Land Values 

Data are from quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks. Currently, these surveys are 

conducted during each quarter in six Federal Reserve districts. The surveys differ considerably in size, as is noted in 

the information below. They also differ in subject matter covered (as is evident in the tables), wording of basically 

similar questions, and type of banks covered. Most of the differences in wording are reflected in the use of different 

column headings on the two pages of each table. The states included in each District are indicated in the table 

headings; states that fall only partly within a given District are marked with asterisks. 

In the second quarter of 2002, the Kansas City and Minneapolis Federal Reserve Banks revised their surveys. 

Questions were changed, and it was not always possible to match the data to the categories that were shown in 

previous editions of the databook. Whenever possible, the data from the revised survey were fit into the older 

format. Series that were discontinued show no data for the second quarter, whereas new series show no data for the 

previous quarters. When a significant break in the data occurred, the new data were included and a footnote was 

added to highlight the changes. 

Due the sample size and the nature of the San Francisco District land values, the sampling error is particularly large 

in that district. In coming quarters, surveys from the Cleveland and Philadelphia Federal Reserve Banks are expected 

to be included in the databook. 

Research departments at five Reserve Banks issue more-detailed quarterly reports on their survey results; these 

reports are available at the addresses given below.

Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Box 834, Chicago, Illinois 60690 

The sample includes member banks at which farm loans represented 25 percent or more of total loans as of June 

1972 (a 10 percent standard is used for banks in the state of Michigan). The sample has undergone periodic review. 

The latest survey results were based on the responses of about 450 banks. 

Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Federal Reserve P.O. Station, Kansas City, Missouri 64198 

The original sample chosen in 1976 had 181 banks selected from banks at which farm loans constituted 50 percent 

or more of total loans, with appropriate representation of all farm areas. The sample was redrawn and significantly 

expanded in 1987; roughly 280 banks responded to the latest survey. 

Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480 

Before 1987, the sample provided a cross-section of banks of all sizes that were engaged in farm lending. Members 

of the Upper Midwest Agricultural Credit Council formed the core of the survey panel. In 1987, the sample was 

redrawn to include only banks at which farm loans represented 25 percent or more of total loans. As outlined above, 

the Minneapolis survey changed considerably beginning in the first quarter of 1994. In recent surveys, about 120 

banks responded. 

Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, P.O. Box 655906, Dallas, Texas 75265-5906 

The sample is stratified regionally and includes banks at which farm loans are relatively important or that hold a 

major portion of bank loans in their region. The sample was enlarged in the first quarter of 1985 and was redrawn in 

the second quarter of 1989. The results for the most-recent quarter were based on the responses from about 200 

respondents. 

Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, Richmond, Virginia 23261 

The number of agricultural banks in this District is much smaller than that in the other Districts. When the survey 

was initiated in 1975, the sample consisted of forty-three banks of all sizes; banks with larger amounts of farm loans 

were sampled more heavily. More recently, the sample has consisted of about thirty banks, roughly three-fourths of 

which typically respond to the quarterly surveys. 
31

C.1. Non-real-estate Farm Lending Compared with a Year EarlierPercent

Demand for loans Funds availability Loan repayment rate Renewals or extensions Coll

Quarter Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower 

Seventh (Chicago) Federal Reserve District (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*)

2007: Q4... 22 46 32 5 65 30 4 44 52 37 57 6 0 

2008: Q1... 26 38 36 4 63 33 4 45 51 38 56 6 2  Q2... 30 40 30 8 59 32 4 54 41 33 61 6 1  Q3... 19 44 36 13 71 16 9 67 24 22 71 8 0  Q4... 18 49 33 14 62 24 12 63 25 15 74 11 1 2009: Q1... 21 42 37 9 70 21 17 61 22 17 65 18 0  Q2... 33 45 21 6 70 24 22 64 15 10 69 21 0  Q3... 30 44 25 6 68 27 21 68 10 8 68 24 0  Q4... 26 46 28 5 65 30 21 66 13 9 69 22 0 

Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2007: Q4... 19 59 22 6 79 16 5 63 32 15 78 7 1 

2008: Q1... 21 52 26 7 70 23 5 58 37 16 74 10 0  Q2... 16 55 29 9 75 17 9 70 21 11 77 12 0  Q3... 18 52 30 11 78 12 8 71 22 10 79 11 0  Q4... 21 56 23 14 69 16 18 65 17 7 73 19 0 2009: Q1... 29 53 18 6 72 22 18 70 12 5 75 21 0  Q2... 23 57 20 8 73 19 17 74 9 4 79 16 0  Q3... 20 59 21 8 77 15 23 73 5 3 72 25 0  Q4... 24 59 17 6 70 24 20 65 15 8 68 24 0 

Eleventh (Dallas) Federal Reserve District (LA*, NM*, TX)

2007: Q4... 23 60 17 4 77 19 8 72 20 14 76 10 1 

2008: Q1... 28 51 21 3 67 31 6 72 22 24 71 5 1  Q2... 20 54 26 3 72 25 7 78 15 14 78 8 0  Q3... 21 61 19 6 75 19 11 83 6 9 77 14 0  Q4... 39 44 17 5 74 20 29 68 3 7 70 24 0 2009: Q1... 33 52 15 5 74 21 24 72 4 4 70 25 0  Q2... 33 52 15 3 81 16 21 77 2 5 76 19 0  Q3... 38 48 14 5 71 24 26 72 2 5 77 18 0  Q4... 34 57 9 3 72 25 22 73 5 9 74 17 0 
32

C.1. Non-real-estate Farm Lending Compared with a Year Earlier (continued)Percent

Demand for loans Funds availability Loan repayment rate Renewals or extensions Coll

Quarter Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower 

Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2007: Q4... 21 54 25 4 72 24 2 44 54 22 73 5 1 

2008: Q1... 24 45 31 2 63 35 2 37 60 29 65 6 0  Q2... 23 40 38 11 71 19 3 60 36 17 78 5 0  Q3... 16 45 39 7 81 11 5 65 30 18 76 6 1  Q4... 26 55 18 10 72 17 21 56 23 10 77 13 2 2009: Q1... 26 49 25 8 74 19 24 58 19 8 68 25 1  Q2... 24 52 24 4 76 20 21 71 8 8 70 22 0  Q3... 26 52 23 7 76 17 26 68 6 3 73 24 0  Q4... 24 54 23 5 73 22 24 63 13 7 69 24 0 

Fifth (Richmond) Federal Reserve District (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 

2007: Q4... 42 42 16 n.a. 58 11 n.a. n.a. n.a. 5 74 21 11 

2008: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... 29 53 18 n.a. 82 6 n.a. n.a. n.a. 12 82 6 0  Q3... 53 47 0 n.a. 80 13 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 93 7 0  Q4... 56 38 6 n.a. 81 6 n.a. n.a. n.a. 13 63 25 0 2009: Q1... 48 48 5 n.a. 76 10 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 62 38 0  Q2... 53 35 12 n.a. 67 11 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 72 28 0  Q3... 63 31 6 n.a. 75 13 n.a. n.a. n.a. 13 44 44 0  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 

Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA) 

2007: Q4... 5 63 32 0 100 0 5 47 47 5 89 5 0 

2008: Q1... 23 50 27 0 86 14 5 52 43 5 86 9 5  Q2... 19 48 33 5 90 5 19 62 19 0 86 14 0  Q3... 15 65 20 10 85 5 30 55 15 10 85 5 5  Q4... 33 56 11 6 89 6 33 44 22 11 72 17 6 2009: Q1... 12 41 47 6 94 0 47 41 12 0 76 24 0  Q2... 15 50 35 40 60 0 40 60 0 0 70 30 0  Q3... 26 42 32 37 63 0 37 58 5 0 63 37 0  Q4... 26 53 21 25 60 15 50 45 5 0 60 40 0  * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District. n.a. Not available. Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
33

C.2. Expected Farm Loan Volume for the Next Quarter, Compared with a Year EarlierPercent

Purpose of loan

Total Feeder cattle Dairy Crop storage Operating 

Quarter Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same Hig

Seventh (Chicago) Federal Reserve District (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*)

2007: Q4... 16 42 41 27 67 6 9 80 11 5 62 33 18 32 

2008: Q1... 20 46 34 41 55 4 17 77 6 8 59 33 19 35  Q2... 26 49 25 45 52 3 22 72 6 10 56 34 26 36  Q3... 18 37 45 31 64 4 19 76 5 13 67 20 8 35  Q4... 16 41 43 28 72 1 13 77 10 19 67 14 7 30 2009: Q1... 15 54 32 34 63 3 21 69 10 21 68 11 9 41  Q2... 30 49 21 42 56 2 32 57 11 26 62 12 21 47  Q3... 24 54 22 38 58 5 33 61 6 21 59 19 17 43  Q4... 20 58 21 30 65 4 26 67 7 20 63 17 20 47 

Eleventh (Dallas) Federal Reserve District (LA*, NM*, TX)

2007: Q4... 11 63 26 16 71 13 7 90 3 8 76 16 8 64 

2008: Q1... 22 57 21 29 65 6 11 86 4 17 76 7 19 55  Q2... 21 56 23 40 53 8 13 85 2 8 78 14 15 51  Q3... 15 71 15 31 65 4 11 89 0 13 74 13 11 58  Q4... 38 52 10 47 48 5 19 69 6 23 71 6 22 52 2009: Q1... 30 59 11 41 56 3 17 74 4 15 77 8 16 65  Q2... 33 58 9 33 64 3 22 67 6 10 87 3 22 61  Q3... 36 56 8 38 60 2 26 67 2 21 70 4 27 61  Q4... 33 58 10 27 67 5 25 68 2 16 77 2 24 63 

Fifth (Richmond) Federal Reserve District (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*)

2007: Q4... 39 56 6 33 67 0 31 69 0 24 76 0 17 61 

2008: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... 25 56 19 20 73 7 21 71 7 19 56 25 13 75  Q3... 60 33 7 36 64 0 46 54 0 29 64 7 40 47  Q4... 56 38 6 43 57 0 50 50 0 36 50 14 50 38 2009: Q1... 41 53 6 33 67 0 47 53 0 35 59 6 35 55  Q2... 67 33 0 53 40 7 53 40 7 35 59 6 44 44  Q3... 75 13 13 57 36 7 50 36 14 38 44 19 31 44  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.  * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District. Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
C.3. Indicators of Relative Credit Availability

Percent

Number of farm loan referrals to

Refused or Correspondent banks 

Average Loan-to-deposit ratio reduced a Actively

loan-to- farm loan seeking Compared with 

deposit because of new year earlier 

ratio, Lower At Higher a shortage farm

end of than desired than of loanable loan

Quarter quarter desired level desired funds accounts None Lower Same Higher None 

Seventh (Chicago) Federal Reserve District (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*)

2007: Q4... 77 59 25 16 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 

2008: Q1... 76 65 24 11 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... 75 60 23 17 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q3... 79 43 35 22 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q4... 76 49 29 22 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2009: Q1... 76 53 30 17 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... 77 54 30 16 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q3... 75 54 29 17 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q4... 75 52 33 16 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 

Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2007: Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3 n.a. n.a. 3 95 2 n.a. 

2008: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 n.a. n.a. 2 94 4 n.a.  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 n.a. n.a. 3 92 5 n.a.  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 n.a. n.a. 3 93 4 n.a.  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 4 n.a. n.a. 5 93 2 n.a. 2009: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 4 n.a. n.a. 4 93 3 n.a.  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 1 n.a. n.a. 4 93 3 n.a.  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 1 n.a. n.a. 3 94 3 n.a.  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 n.a. n.a. 5 90 4 n.a. 

Eleventh (Dallas) Federal Reserve District (LA*, NM*, TX)

2007: Q4... 61 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1 n.a. n.a. 12 84 4 n.a. 

2008: Q1... 59 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 19 80 1 n.a.  Q2... 59 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 15 80 5 n.a.  Q3... 62 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 12 86 2 n.a.  Q4... 59 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 8 80 7 n.a. 2009: Q1... 57 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 15 79 6 n.a.  Q2... 61 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 9 84 2 n.a.  Q3... 60 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 10 82 3 n.a.  Q4... 58 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 n.a. n.a. 9 84 2 n.a. 
35

C.3. Indicators of Relative Credit Availability (continued)Percent

Number of farm loan referrals to:

Refused or Correspondent banks Nonbank ag

Average Loan-to-deposit ratio reduced a Actively

loan-to- farm loan seeking Compared with Comp

deposit because of new year earlier year 

ratio, Lower At Higher a shortage farm

end of than desired than of loanable loan

Quarter quarter desired level desired funds accounts None Lower Same Higher None Lower S

Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2007: Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 10 88 2 n.a. 9 

2008: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 1 n.a. n.a. 11 87 3 n.a. 8  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 1 n.a. n.a. 6 93 2 n.a. 6  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 4 n.a. n.a. 5 91 4 n.a. 4  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5 n.a. n.a. 5 92 3 n.a. 4 2009: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 4 n.a. n.a. 4 91 4 n.a. 2  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 n.a. n.a. 5 92 3 n.a. 5  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 1 n.a. n.a. 3 88 8 n.a. 3  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 3 87 10 n.a. 4 

Fifth (Richmond) Federal Reserve District (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 

2007: Q4... 90 37 37 26 5 79 78 0 17 6 76 0 

2008: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... 89 31 56 13 0 71 86 0 14 0 86 0  Q3... 75 36 50 14 0 73 100 0 0 0 100 0  Q4... 86 36 50 14 0 75 86 0 14 0 86 0 2009: Q1... 88 16 68 16 0 67 84 0 16 0 83 6  Q2... 84 47 47 7 6 76 100 0 0 0 94 0  Q3... 79 36 43 21 6 75 93 0 7 0 93 0  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 

Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA) 

2007: Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 0 89 11 n.a. 0 

2008: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 0 90 10 n.a. 0  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 5 81 14 n.a. 5  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 15 85 0 n.a. 10  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 6 94 0 n.a. 6 2009: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0 n.a. n.a. 6 82 12 n.a. 7  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 17 n.a. n.a. 5 75 20 n.a. 5  Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 31 n.a. n.a. 0 81 19 n.a. 0  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 33 n.a. n.a. 10 80 10 n.a. 0  * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District. n.a. Not available. Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
36

C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm Loans

Percent

Feeder cattle Other operating Intermediate non-real- Long-term real

Quarter loans loans1estate loans estate loans

Seventh (Chicago) Federal Reserve District (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*)

2007: Q4... 7.9 7.8 n.a. 7.1

2008: Q1... 6.9 6.7 n.a. 6.4

 Q2... 6.8 7.1 n.a. 6.5

 Q3... 6.8 6.7 n.a. 6.6

 Q4... 6.3 6.2 n.a. 6.2

2009: Q1... 6.3 6.2 n.a. 6.1

 Q2... 6.4 6.2 n.a. 6.2

 Q3... 6.4 6.2 n.a. 6.1

 Q4... 6.4 6.2 n.a. 6.1

Eleventh (Dallas) Federal Reserve District (LA*, NM*, TX)

2007: Q4... 8.9 9.1 8.7 7.9

2008: Q1... 7.8 8.0 7.7 7.2

 Q2... 7.5 7.8 7.6 7.2

 Q3... 7.4 7.6 7.5 6.9

 Q4... 6.9 6.9 7.2 6.8

2009: Q1... 6.9 7.2 7.2 6.8

 Q2... 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.7

 Q3... 6.9 7.2 7.2 6.9

 Q4... 6.9 7.0 7.0 6.8

Fifth (Richmond) Federal Reserve District (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 

2007: Q4... 8.2 7.9 7.6 7.5

2008: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

 Q2... 7.2 7.1 7.2 7.2

 Q3... 6.9 6.7 6.9 7.1

 Q4... 6.8 6.5 6.6 6.9

2009: Q1... 6.9 6.7 6.9 7.1

 Q2... 6.9 6.6 6.6 6.9

 Q3... 6.7 6.4 6.7 7.1

 Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
37

C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm Loans (continued)

Percent

Feeder cattle Other operating Intermediate non-real Long-term real

Quarter loans loans1-estate loans estate loans

 Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2007: Q4... n.a. 8.6 8.4 7.9

2008: Q1... n.a. 7.5 7.4 7.0

 Q2... n.a. 7.4 7.3 7.0

 Q3... n.a. 7.4 7.3 7.0

 Q4... n.a. 7.0 7.1 6.8

2009: Q1... n.a. 6.9 7.0 6.6

 Q2... n.a. 6.9 7.0 6.6

 Q3... n.a. 7.0 7.0 6.7

 Q4... n.a. 6.9 7.0 6.7

Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2007: Q4... n.a. 8.3 8.2 7.7

2008: Q1... n.a. 7.2 7.1 6.8

 Q2... n.a. 6.9 7.0 6.8

 Q3... n.a. 7.0 7.1 6.8

 Q4... n.a. 6.7 6.8 6.6

2009: Q1... n.a. 6.4 6.6 6.5

 Q2... n.a. 6.4 6.6 6.5

 Q3... n.a. 6.4 6.6 6.5

 Q4... n.a. 6.4 6.6 6.5

Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA) 

2007: Q4... n.a. 8.0 8.2 7.8

2008: Q1... n.a. 7.2 7.4 7.2

 Q2... n.a. 7.3 7.4 7.2

 Q3... n.a. 7.1 7.6 7.4

 Q4... n.a. 6.7 7.0 6.8

2009: Q1... n.a. 6.4 6.8 6.9

 Q2... n.a. 6.5 7.2 7.2

 Q3... n.a. 6.7 7.2 7.1

 Q4... n.a. 6.9 7.2 7.0

 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of

livestock (including poultry).

 * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District.

 n.a. Not available.

 Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
38

C.5. Average Variable Interest Rates on Farm Loans

Percent

Other operating Intermediate non-real- Long-term real

Quarter loans1estate loans estate loans

 Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2007: Q4... 8.2 8.1 7.6

2008: Q1... 6.9 7.0 6.6

 Q2... 6.6 6.7 6.4

 Q3... 6.7 6.8 6.5

 Q4... 6.2 6.4 6.1

2009: Q1... 6.0 6.1 5.9

 Q2... 6.0 6.2 5.9

 Q3... 6.1 6.2 5.9

 Q4... 5.9 6.1 5.9

 Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2007: Q4... 8.5 8.2 7.7

2008: Q1... 7.4 7.2 6.7

 Q2... 7.1 6.9 6.6

 Q3... 7.0 6.9 6.5

 Q4... 6.7 6.7 6.4

2009: Q1... 6.5 6.5 6.2

 Q2... 6.6 6.5 6.2

 Q3... 6.6 6.6 6.2

 Q4... 6.5 6.5 6.2

 Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA)

2007: Q4... 8.3 8.4 8.4

2008: Q1... 7.5 7.6 7.7

 Q2... 6.6 6.8 6.8

 Q3... 6.8 7.3 7.1

 Q4... 5.5 5.9 5.8

2009: Q1... 5.7 6.1 6.0

 Q2... 5.9 6.5 6.5

 Q3... 5.9 6.5 6.6

 Q4... 5.9 6.3 6.2

 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and

feeding of livestock (including poultry).

 * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District.

 n.a. Not available.

 Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
39

C.6. Trends in Farm Real Estate Values and Loan Volume

Market value of good farmland

Trend expected during 

Percentage change Percentage change from the next quarter 

during quarter a year earlier (percentage of banks) 

Dry- Irri- Ranch- Dry- Irri- RanchQuarter All land gated land All land gated land Down Stable Up 

Seventh (Chicago) Federal Reserve District (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*)

2007: Q4... 6 n.a. n.a. n.a. 16 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 42 56 

2008: Q1... 2 n.a. n.a. n.a. 14 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 49 49  Q2... 3 n.a. n.a. n.a. 15 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 61 37  Q3... 2 n.a. n.a. n.a. 14 n.a. n.a. n.a. 17 67 16  Q4... -4 n.a. n.a. n.a. 5 n.a. n.a. n.a. 35 61 4 2009: Q1... -1 n.a. n.a. n.a. -2 n.a. n.a. n.a. 30 66 4  Q2... 0 n.a. n.a. n.a. -3 n.a. n.a. n.a. 28 71 1  Q3... 2 n.a. n.a. n.a. -4 n.a. n.a. n.a. 27 69 4  Q4... 2 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2 n.a. n.a. n.a. 10 84 6 

Fifth (Richmond) Federal Reserve District (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 

2007: Q4... 7 n.a. n.a. n.a. 10 n.a. n.a. n.a. 16 63 21 

2008: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. -3 n.a. n.a. n.a. 18 65 18  Q3... -6 n.a. n.a. n.a. -2 n.a. n.a. n.a. 20 80 0  Q4... -1 n.a. n.a. n.a. -8 n.a. n.a. n.a. 25 69 6 2009: Q1... -1 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 20 80 0  Q2... 9 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1 n.a. n.a. n.a. 33 67 0  Q3... -6 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1 n.a. n.a. n.a. 25 75 0  Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 

Eleventh (Dallas) Federal Reserve District (LA*, NM*, TX)

2007: Q4... n.a. 5 2 1 n.a. 22 15 13 n.a. n.a. n.a. 

2008: Q1... n.a. 3 4 4 n.a. 23 15 13 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... n.a. 2 -0 -2 n.a. 18 13 9 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q3... n.a. 2 3 -1 n.a. 12 9 3 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q4... n.a. 2 1 -2 n.a. 9 8 -1 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2009: Q1... n.a. 0 0 2 n.a. 5 4 -3 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... n.a. -0 -1 0 n.a. 3 4 -1 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q3... n.a. -3 -2 0 n.a. -2 -1 -0 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q4... n.a. -2 -1 -1 n.a. -5 -4 1 n.a. n.a. n.a. 
40

C.6. Trends in Farm Real Estate Values and Loan Volume (continued)

Market value of good farmland

Trend expected during 

Percentage change Percentage change from the next quarter 

during quarter a year earlier (percentage of banks) 

Dry- Irri- Ranch- Dry- Irri- RanchQuarter All land gated land All land gated land Down Stable Up 

Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2007: Q4... n.a. 7 5 6 n.a. 24 26 28 n.a. n.a. n.a. 

2008: Q1... n.a. 4 1 -6 n.a. 23 14 14 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... n.a. 6 9 12 n.a. 24 21 23 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q3... n.a. 5 -2 -2 n.a. 24 13 9 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q4... n.a. -4 3 -5 n.a. 12 11 -2 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2009: Q1... n.a. -3 -7 -1 n.a. 3 2 4 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... n.a. 2 -1 2 n.a. 0 -7 -5 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q3... n.a. -4 1 -7 n.a. -9 -3 -10 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q4... n.a. 7 9 6 n.a. 2 3 0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 

Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2007: Q4... n.a. 15 14 11 n.a. 23 24 22 n.a. n.a. n.a. 

2008: Q1... n.a. 3 8 -1 n.a. 16 22 13 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... n.a. -3 -2 -2 n.a. 13 17 9 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q3... n.a. 7 5 6 n.a. 23 26 15 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q4... n.a. -1 -1 -0 n.a. 6 10 3 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2009: Q1... n.a. -1 -1 -4 n.a. 2 2 -1 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... n.a. -1 -4 1 n.a. 4 -0 3 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q3... n.a. 0 2 0 n.a. -2 -3 -3 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q4... n.a. 1 -2 -0 n.a. -0 -4 -3 n.a. n.a. n.a. 

Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA)

2007: Q4... n.a. 10 -2 9 n.a. -33 -5 -4 n.a. n.a. n.a. 

2008: Q1... n.a. -4 -2 8 n.a. -34 -24 -10 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... n.a. 4 12 0 n.a. -30 -15 -6 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q3... n.a. -17 -0 -4 n.a. -9 8 13 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q4... n.a. 23 11 2 n.a. 2 23 5 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2009: Q1... n.a. -5 -10 -3 n.a. 1 12 -5 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... n.a. 3 8 -0 n.a. -1 7 -6 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q3... n.a. 6 -4 5 n.a. 27 3 3 n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q4... n.a. -8 -1 -16 n.a. -5 -9 -15 n.a. n.a. n.a.  * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District. n.a. Not available. Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
41

C.7. Local Trends in Farm Income and Expenditures as Reported by Banks in Each RegionPercent

Farm income Farm household spending Farm capital sp

Quarter Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same 

Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2007: Q4... 2 12 86 2 28 71 2 2

2008: Q1... 0 10 90 0 32 68 1 1 Q2... 6 17 77 6 27 67 6 2 Q3... 10 30 60 7 37 57 11 3 Q4... 46 23 31 26 46 27 35 32009: Q1... 58 27 15 37 42 21 54 2 Q2... 41 42 17 29 57 15 43 4 Q3... 58 34 8 38 53 9 54 3 Q4... 46 33 21 29 54 17 42 4

Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2007: Q4... 7 25 68 5 47 48 7 3

2008: Q1... 7 25 68 5 36 59 7 3 Q2... 8 35 57 8 40 51 12 4 Q3... 10 35 55 6 42 52 13 4 Q4... 36 36 29 31 45 24 42 32009: Q1... 48 38 14 46 42 13 57 3 Q2... 41 47 12 32 58 11 47 4 Q3... 56 38 5 45 45 10 57 3 Q4... 36 42 22 26 57 17 41 4

Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA)

2007: Q4... 5 0 95 11 42 47 11 2

2008: Q1... 5 29 67 10 43 48 14 2 Q2... 10 19 71 19 29 52 14 3 Q3... 16 37 47 22 39 39 16 4 Q4... 50 17 33 61 22 17 72 22009: Q1... 71 29 0 59 35 6 75 1 Q2... 65 35 0 70 30 0 70 2 Q3... 84 16 0 68 32 0 68 3 Q4... 68 16 16 63 26 11 68 1 * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District. n.a. Not available. Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.