How do financially vulnerable farms finance debt in periods of falling prices?

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of falling commodity prices on farm debt usage of corn and soybean farms, and how this debt usage differs based on the financial leverage of the farm. Design/methodology/approach Using panel data on farms surveyed at least twice in the Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS) from 1996 to 2015, this paper uses a difference-in-differences approach to measure the effect of low commodity price shocks on financially vulnerable farms. To account for the correlation in the error structure between the three dependent variables (real estate debt, non-real estate debt, and interest payments) we use a seemingly unrelated regression approach. Findings Following a commodity price shock, financially vulnerable farms (debt-to-asset ratio greater than 40 percent) were found to increase their non-real estate debt when compared with non-financially vulnerable farms. Off-farm business income was found to help farms reduce real estate debt and interest payments in the face of these shocks. Research limitations/implications Data consist of corn and soybean farms surveyed more than once in the ARMS from 1996 to 2015 and are not representative of all US farms, but have similar characteristics to US commercial farms. Social implications The results indicate that financially vulnerable commercial crop farms respond to lower prices by taking on non-real estate debt, increasing financial stress. Well-targeted federal programs could prevent further financial stress for this group. Originality/value This is the first paper to use unbalanced panel data from ARMS to examine how farm debt use responds to commodity prices. This paper can inform policymakers about the financial risks to farms resulting from the current low-price environment.

The Supply and Demand of Agricultural Loans

“…The counterfactual analysis suggests particularly high demand for loans when aggregate farm income declines, which suggests the demand for debt capital is counter-cyclical to farm income. The counter-cyclical relationship between farm income and loan demand is consistent with prior findings of income and investment smoothing in the agricultural sector (Whitaker, 2009) and the inverse relationship between income and credit use (Prager, Burns, and Miller, Prager et al;Fiechter and Ifft, 2022).…”

Drivers of farm business capital structure and its speed of adjustment: evidence from Western Australia’s Wheatbelt

“…In an analysis of loan data from a major German development bank, Fecke et al (2016) found that loan demand was significantly influenced by the choice of different types of capital investment, loan structures and business climate expectations. In an examination of the effect of declining commodity prices on the use of debt by soybean and corn farmers in the United States, Prager et al (2018) found that, following commodity price shocks, farm businesses with higher debt-to-asset ratios increased their non-real estate debt relative to those with less debt intensive capital structures, while off-farm income reduced reliance on external debt. Aderajew et al (2018) found that earnings volatility, profitability, asset tangibility and growth opportunities were important determinants of farm-level capital structure.…”

“…In an examination of the effect of declining commodity prices on the use of debt by soybean and corn farmers in the United States, Prager et al . (2018) found that, following commodity price shocks, farm businesses with higher debt‐to‐asset ratios increased their non‐real estate debt relative to those with less debt intensive capital structures, while off‐farm income reduced reliance on external debt. Aderajew et al .…”

Financial immunity of companies from Indonesian and Shanghai stock exchange during the US-China trade war

“…A declining stock market condition (bearish market) caused by the trade war can be overcome with a healthy balance sheet and financial position (An et al, 2020;Prager, Burns, & Miller, 2018;Takahashi & Yamada, 2021). Policies taken under these conditions play a significant role in companies' survival goals.…”