Posts

Showing posts with the label Gary Schnitkey

A Discussion on Crop Insurance & ARC/PLC with Gary Schnitkey

This is a lengthy discussion with ILLINOIS ag economist Gary Schnitkey detailing the ARC/PLC and Crop Insurance decisions farmers throughout the nation will need to make by March 16, 2020.

Soybeans More Profitable than Corn

read blog post

Soybeans have been more profitable than corn over the last three years, and an ILLINOIS agricultural economist expects that to continue to be the case this year and next.



Gary Schnitkey has updated crop budgets for highly productive central Illinois farmland. It shows, as was the case in 2013, 2014, 2015, & 2016, that planting soybeans will make farmers more money than planting corn this year and in 2018. The cash price of corn will need to exceed $4.00 a bushel if that is to change, at least with soybeans in the high $9.00 a bushel range. Schnitkey in his farmdocDaily article, you can find that online, says there are four points to be aware of as it relates to the 2017 and 18 crop budgets.
  1. first, these can change as expected yields and price evolve
  2. second, repeating this, corn needs to be above four bucks if it is to really compete
  3. third, total returns from highly productive central Illinois soils won’t be as much this year as in 2014, 15, or 16.
  4. fourth and finally - cash flows are likely to be very tight this year and next.

New FarmDoc Tool Assesses Performance of Crop Insurance



by Gary Schnitkey
original source FarmDocDaily

A new “Product Performance” section has been added to the 2017 Crop Insurance Decision Tool. By using this section, users can examine per acre premiums and payments from alternative crop insurance products from 1995 to 2015, thereby allowing users to gain a feel for the historical performance of crop insurance products. For corn, users will notice that the 2012 drought had large impacts on crop insurance performance.

User Selections

From the 2017 Crop Insurance Decision Tool, users will select “product performance” from the menu and make the following selections (see Figure 1):
  1. State. Any state in the nation can be selected.
  2. County. Any county can be selected.
  3. Crop. Information is available for corn, soybeans, and wheat.
  4. Product. Data are available for Revenue Protection (RP), Yield Protection (YP), RP with the harvest price exclusion (RPwHPE), Area Revenue Protection (ARP), Area Yield Protection (AYP), and ARP with harvest price exclusion (ARPwHPE).
  5. Coverage level. Choices are each available coverage level (50 to 85% for RP) and an “all” selection.
Figure 1 shows a Logan County, Illinois example where corn is selected. RP performance will be given for all coverage levels, meaning that data over the 50% to 85% coverage levels are averaged and reported.




Product Performance Output

Figure 2 shows output from selections in Figure 1. All data comes from Summary of Business, which is maintained by the Risk Management Agency (RMA). The 2017 Crop Insurance Decision Tool provides results from 1995 to 2015. Yearly performance rows will be blank if no use of the chosen product occurred during the year.




RP along with YP and RPwHPE came into existence in 2011. As a result, RP performance is reported from 2011 onward. Before 2011, Crop Revenue Coverage (CRC) and Revenue Assurance (RA) plans where in use. RP, CRC, and RA all are revenue insurances that allow guarantees to increase if harvest price is higher than projected price (RA had an option that excluded the guarantee increase, but this option was used rarely). Therefore, CRC and RA performance are reported for years prior to 2011.

The “product performance” section first reports acres insured using the selected combination. RP type products were first introduced in 1997 and 7,916 acres were insured in Logan County (see Figure 2). Use grew to 125,359 acres in 2014, decreasing slightly to 121,619 acres in 2015. RP is now the most used crop insurance product, having over 90% use in many counties (see farmdoc daily, January 4, 2017).

Next, the section reports premiums in three columns: total, subsidy, and farmer-paid premium. The subsidy represents the premium paid by the Federal government as specified by subsidy schedules written into statute. As its name implies, “farmer-paid premium” is paid by the farmer. Farmer-paid premium plus subsidy equals total premium. In Logan County, total premium was $40.56 per acre in 2015 (see Figure 2). Of the total premium, $19.79 per acre was subsidy and $20.77 per acre was farmer-paid premium.

Also given are per acre insurance payments. These are payments to farmers resulting from claims to crop insurance products. In 2015, insurance payments on RP products averaged $32.95 per acre.
The final two columns provide an evaluation of the crop insurance products. Insurance payments minus farmer-paid premium show insurance payments received from the products relative to farmer-paid premium. Positive values mean that insurance payments were larger than farmer-paid premium.

In high payment years, payments minus farmer-paid premium will be positive. For example, insurance payments were high in the 2012 drought year, resulting in payments minus farmer-paid premium of $302.26. In low loss years, payments minus farmer-paid premium will be negative. From 1997 to 2015, negative values occurred 13 out of 19 years. From 1995 to 2015, farmers received an average of $10.38 more in premium than in payments (see Figure 2). From 2006 to 2015, farmers received $22.55 per acre more in payments than they paid in premium (see Figure 2).

The loss ratio equals insurance payments divided by total premiums. In 2015, the loss ratio was .81. Loss ratios less than 1.0 mean that insurance payments were less than total premium. Conversely, loss ratios higher than 1.0 indicate that payments were greater than premium. Over time, RMA’s goal is to maintain a loss ratio near but below 1.0.

Interpretation

Past performance will not be entirely reflective of how the products will perform in the future. RMA makes adjustments to premiums over time. For example, continuing high payments on products will result in increasing premiums and vice versa. Moreover, RMA continually conducts studies of its rating procedures, which can cause premium changes. As a result, current premiums will vary from historical premiums even given identical conditions. As a result, future performance will not match historical performance.

Moreover, values are averages across many farms in a county. In 2015, average RP premium in Logan County were $20.77 per acre. Some farmers paid higher premiums depending on crop insurance choices and historical yields, and vice versa. The average RP payment in 2015 was $32.95 per acre. Again, payments vary across farms in the county. Some farmers did not receive payments in 2015 while other farms received payments much larger than $32.95 per acre.

Importance of 2012 in Illinois

The drought year of 2012 has a large impact on crop insurance performance. In 2012, the loss ratio for RP in Logan County was 5.84, much higher than the .89 average from 2006–2015 (see Figure 2). If 2012, had not occurred, the .89 average loss ratio for the 2006–2015 would have decreased to .46.

Payments minus farmer-paid premium averaged $22.55 per acre from 2006 to 2015. Without 2012 included, payments minus premium averaged -$8.53 per acre.

The drought has similar impacts on many Illinois counties. To illustrate, Panel A of Figure 3 shows average RP loss ratios for corn in each Illinois county for 2006 to 2015. The 2012 drought particularly impacted farms in southern and eastern Illinois, causing many counties to have loss ratios above 1.0. Panel B shows loss ratios for 2006–2015 with 2012 excluded. Without 2012, most counties had loss ratios well below 1.0.




These comparisons point out the importance of “extreme” years on overall crop insurance performance. Severe droughts like 2012 occur in the Midwest occasionally, with much debate concerning their frequency of droughts. The last drought of comparable magnitude to 2012 happened in 1988, 25 years previous to 2012, suggesting infrequent droughts. However, two additional, large yield shortfalls occurred in the 1980s: 1980 and 1983. Three severe events in a decade give a very different perspective on the frequency of droughts than the more recent history of the passing of 25 years. Which represents the future the best is an open question, with a blend of the 1980s experience and the recent more moderate losses likely to be the most appropriate answer.

Summary

The Product Performance section allows users to examine historical performance of crop insurance plans, thereby providing intuitions on the frequency of payments, the size of payments, and the net costs of the plans. While evaluating past performance is useful, future performance will not necessarily match historical performance as RMA is adjusting premiums over time. Moreover, the frequency of large-scale droughts has a large impact on insurance performance. Whether there are 0, 1, or 2 drought years in the next ten will dramatically influence crop insurance performance.

Revenue Protection (RP) Use on Corn in the Midwest



by Gary Schnitkey

Revenue Protection (RP) is the most used crop insurance plan for corn. Over time, RP use has grown to over 90% of corn acres insured in many counties in the corn belt (farmdoc daily, December 13, 2016). As illustrated by maps in this article, farmers in the corn belt typically select 80 and 85% coverage levels when using RP. Detailed statistics on a county basis are available from the “product use” section of the 2017 Crop Insurance Decision Tool). Overall, use suggests farmers prefer revenue insurances that allow guarantees to increase if harvest prices are above projected prices. Use of high coverage levels suggests farmers value protection offered by crop insurance.

RP Use

According to 2016 Summary of Business statistics from the Risk Management Agency (RMA), RP use on corn acres is over 95% in most counties around the western corn-belt. For example, over 95% use predominates in North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, Kansas, Iowa, and Missouri (see Figure 1).




Many counties in Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio have lower RP use than in the western corn-belt (see Figure 1). In these eastern corn-belt counties, higher use of Area Risk Protection (ARP) occurs. RP and ARP are similar in that both are revenue insurances whose guarantees increase if harvest prices are above the projected prices. ARP uses county yields in determining payments while RP uses farm yields. In eastern corn-belt counties, the sum of RP and ARP use often is above 90%.

Two counties illustrate RP and ARP use in the eastern corn-belt. Sangamon County is in west-central Illinois and has 66% of its corn acres insured using RP, 32% using ARP, with the sum of RP and ARP use being 98%. Noble County is in the northeast Indiana. In Noble County, RP use is 43%, ARP use is 51%, and the sum of RP and ARP use is 94%.

Some counties outside the corn belt have more use of Yield Protection (YP) insurance, a yield insurance. For example, higher YP use occurs along the Mississippi River in Mississippi, Arkansas, and Louisiana (see Figure 1). Take Bolivar County, Mississippi as an example. RP is used to insure 71% while YP is used on 29% of the acres. Besides the Mississippi Delta, more use of YP also occurs in:

Counties in the middle part of Michigan, Western New York counties, Texas panhandle counties (see Figure 1). By far, RP is the plan most used to insure corn. In some areas, predominately in the eastern corn belt, ARP has significant use, with RP and ARP being used on over 90% of corn acres. In areas outside the corn belt, RP use often is above 50% of acres, but YP has a higher percentage of acres than in the corn belt.

RP Coverage Levels

In most counties, RP’s coverage levels range from 50% to 85% coverage levels in 5% increment. Figure 2 shows a weighted average coverage level for RP products in 2016. To illustrate weighted average coverage level calculations, suppose a county has 60% RP acres insured using an 80% coverage level and 40% using an 85% coverage level. The weighted average coverage level for this county is 82% (.6 use x .80 coverage level + .4 use x .85 coverage level).




Average coverage levels for RP in corn is over 80% in southern Minnesota, the northern two-thirds of Iowa, Illinois, and Indiana, and western Ohio (see Figure 2). Counties around this core of the corn belt typically have average coverage levels between 75% and 80%. Average coverage levels then decrease to between 70% and 75% the further away from the central core of the corn belt.

County Level Detail

More detail on crop insurance use is available from the 2017 Crop Insurance Decision Tool, a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet available for download from farmdoc. In the “product use” section, users make a state, county, and crop selection. Then, product use details are given.

Figure 3 shows an example of output for corn in Sangamon County, Illinois. In 2016, 197,535 acres of corn were insured. Of the acres insured, 66.3% of acres insured using RP, 32.0% used ARP, and 1.0% used YP. RP with the harvest price exclusion (RPwHPE) and Area Yield Protection (AYP) had much smaller percentages of acres. Within RP use, 47.9% of acres were insured using an 85% coverage level, 14.7% at an 80% coverage level, and 3.7% at lower coverage levels.




Figure 3 shows these use statistics for 2016. Users can change the year to any year from 1995 onward. The product use section of the 2017 Crop Insurance Decision Tool also includes graphs detailing crop insurance use over time.

Commentary

RMA offers different types of insurances including yield insurances, revenue insurances with harvest price exclusion, and revenue insurances with guarantee increase provisions. RP and ARP are both revenue insurances with guarantee increase provisions. High use of RP and ARP suggest that farmers prefer revenue insurances over yield insurances. Moreover, high use suggests that farmers value the guarantee increase associated with RP and ARP.

In the heart of the corn-belt, farmers typically purchase RP at high coverage levels. Weighted average coverage levels are above 80% in the center of the corn-belt, indicating that most acres are insured using either the 80% and 85% coverage levels. High coverage levels suggest that farmers desire risk protection offered by crop insurance.

Grain Farm Working Capital Nearly Exhausted

Four consecutive years of lower commodity prices has nearly exhausted the financial resources of U.S. grain farmers. Todd Gleason looks into the problem with an agricultural economist from the University of Illinois.

Grain Farm Income & Cash Rent Outlook

by Todd E. Gleason



Urbana, Illinois - Wednesday morning September 7, 2016 University of Illinois Extension Agricultural Economist Gary Schnitkey presented a webinar looking forward into 2017. The discussion centered on farm profitability, projected income, and cash rents. You may the watch the webinar. What follows is a summary of the hour long content.





The USDA WASDE monthly average corn price is $4.67 from 2006 to 2016. The price of corn has been below this average since the fall of 2013 & Gary Schnitkey believes it is likely to continue to stay below this average through the 2017/18 crop year.

Each year USDA tracks the average marketing year cash price. This price is updated monthly in the World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates report. The average cash price for corn from 1975 to 2005 is $2.33, $5.95 for soybeans. This is a long term national average cash price. The USDA projected estimates for this marketing year (2016/17) are currently $3.15 and $9.10. The USDA estimate for the 2015 crops is $3.60 and $9.05. This last set can be used to compute expected ARC County payments to be delivered this fall.







Here is a [link](http://farmdoc.illinois.edu/fasttools/index.asp) to the FarmDoc Fast Tools web page from which you may download an Excel spreadsheet to project ARC & PLC payments.

The following tables detail gross revenue per acre for highly productive central Illinois farmland. These are actual, as derived from the Illinois Farm Business Farm Management records, and projected revenues.







op

Operator and land returns have been declining for both corn and soybeans for several years. However, returns from soybeans have been out performing corn since 2013. Schnitkey predicts this will continue through 2017. It would be the fifth year of higher returns for soybeans than corn. Raising corn on cash rented farmland has been a loser since 2014.

Total income on all Illinois corn and soybean farm (all types of owned & cash rented combined) for 2016 projects a breakeven income year.




Schnitkey says farmers will face three key decision making factors as they consider cash renting farmland for 2017, and that it might be better to give up some of the land based on these considerations.




Across the board the University of Illinois agricultural economist says farmers might need to rethink crop rotations. Soybeans have proved better for several years, and it may be time to adjust to this reality. This or it needs to get cheaper to plant corn. Back in 2000 it costs $63 less to sow and harvest an acre of soybeans. This year the difference was more than $200 an acre of non-land costs in favor of soybeans over corn.



Last week the professional farm managers in Illinois suggested they'd be lowering cash rents by about $20 next year (ISPFMRA Survey). Gary Schnitkey's number is a more conservative $17 an acre based on the fact not all land is professionally managed. Neither of these would be enough to make a cash rented farm break even given $3.50 corn and $9.00 soybeans (2017 | by expected corn yield across Illinois).



So what's the impact on the price of farmland? Well, says Schnitkey, if interest rates stay low the price of farmland will drop by approximately the same percentage change as the cash rent drops. Because cash rent changes very slowly, this is good news for farmland owners, bankers, and producer owners.





Each Tuesday Gary Schnitkey posts a new article to the FarmDocDaily website. Periodically he and the other agricultural economist at the University of Illinois hosts webinars. You may register for upcoming webinars and watch those that have already concluded on this page.


Don't Bet the Cash Rented Farm on a Loss

It is very difficult to give up a farm, even one that is losing money because the cash rent is too high. Todd Gleason has a few simple guidelines one might follow to help them make that decision.

Projected 2015 Net Incomes on Grain Farms

by Gary Schnitkey, Extension Agricultural Economist - University of Illinois

Average 2015 net income for grain farms in Illinois is projected at around $15,000 per farm, down considerably from the 2014 average of slightly above $100,000 per farm (see Figure 1). Furthermore, the 2015 net income will be below incomes in 2010 through 2012 which were above $200,000 per farm. This decline in incomes raises questions.

title

What do incomes in Figure 1 represent?

Historical values in Figure 1 are average net farm incomes of grain farms enrolled in Illinois Farm Business Farm Management (FBFM). These farms are located throughout Illinois and represent a variety of farm sizes, tenure relationships, and debt positions. Farms have increased in size over time. In 2014, average farm size was close to 1,500 acres, but the sample included many smaller farms and may larger farms. There were a relatively large number of farms of over 5,000 acres.

How was the 2015 net farm income projected?

Commodity prices, yields, input costs, and cash rents were projected for 2015. More detail on these projections are contained in the 2015 budgets which are summarized in the July 7th FarmDoc daily article. Key items impacting projections are:
  • Commodity prices are $4.20 per bushel for corn and $10.00 per bushel for soybeans.
  • Yields are presumed to be near trend line levels.
  • Non-land costs are projected to declines slightly from 2014 levels.
  • Cash rents are projected to decrease slightly from 2014 levels.
Can 2015 net incomes vary from projections?

Of course. Differences in prices and yields from those used in projections will change incomes. For example, corn price could easily be $.50 per bushel different from the $4.20 price used in projections. With higher prices or higher yields, 2015 net incomes could be above $50,000. However, it is difficult to build a case where 2015 incomes are not considerably lower than 2014 incomes.

Why are 2015 net incomes projected so much lower than 2014 net incomes?

The projected 2015 commodity prices ($4.20 for corn and $10.05 for soybean) are above commodity prices received for 2014 crop (likely $3.70 for corn and $9.75 for soybeans). Given higher prices, why then are projected 2015 incomes lower than 2014 net incomes? Two reasons:
  • Trend line yields are used in 2015 projections. Much of Illinois had above average yields in 2014, contributing to higher net incomes.
  • Marketing gains contributed a large amount to 2014 incomes. Grain produced in 2013 was valued at a lower price on the end-of-year 2013 income than it was sold in 2014. More detail is provided in the May 27th FarmDoc daily article.
Why is projected 2015 net income lower than averages between 2000 through 2005?

From 2000 to 2005, net incomes on Illinois grain farms averaged $57,500, higher than incomes projected in 2015. When making 2015 projections, a $4.20 corn price and $10.00 soybean price are used. These 2015 projected prices are significantly above prices from 2000 to 2005 when prices received by Illinois farmers averaged $2.18 for corn and $5.69 for soybeans. Given higher prices, revenue is projected higher in 2015 than from 2000–2015. However, costs are projected much higher as well. For example, non-land costs for corn have increased 224% from $256 per acre average from 2000–05 to $578 per acre in 2015. Cash rents have increased 205% from $139 per acre to a projected $286 per acre. These cost increases are the primary factor offsetting higher commodity prices, leading to lower projected incomes in 2015.

Will lower incomes signal financial stress?

These lower incomes suggest the need for continuing financial adjustments. More on the financial strength and need for adjustments will be covered in the July 28th FarmDocDaily article.

2014 Loss Experience for Revenue Protection Products

by Gary Schnitkey

Most of the 2014 insurance payments on COMBO products have been entered into Risk Management Agency’s Summary of Business, allowing us to calculate loss performance for individual products accurately. This article describes loss performance for Revenue Protection (RP), a revenue insurance plan used to insure most acres in the United States.



Corn, soybeans, and wheat had loss ratios of 1.04, .54, and 1.12, respectively. Loss ratios were above 1.0 in many counties of Iowa and Minnesota for corn and soybeans. Counties in the southern Great Plains had loss ratios above 1.0 for wheat. In Illinois, RP loss ratios were .40 for corn and .24 for soybeans.

Corn

In 2014, RP was used to insure 69.9 million acres of corn in the United States, representing 88% of total acres insured with crop insurance. Total premium on RP products was $3,350 million and total crop insurance payments were $3,484 million, giving a loss ratio of 1.04 ($3,484 in losses divided by $3,350 in total premium). A loss ratio above 1.0 means that insurance payments exceeded premiums. Over time, average loss ratios should equal near 1.0. On a per insured acre, insurance payments equaled $49.86 per acre (see Table 1).



Loss experience varied tremendously across states. For the eleven states with the most insured acres, RP’s loss rate was the highest for Minnesota at 3.01 and the lowest for Missouri at .11 (see Table 1). Iowa had a loss ratio of 2.21 while Illinois had a .40 loss ratio.

For Midwest states, the 2014 projected price was $4.62 per bushel while the harvest price was $3.49 per bushel. The harvest price was 75% of the projected price, meaning that coverage levels of 80% and 85% would have crop insurance prices if the actual yield did not exceed the guarantee yield. While much of the country had above average corn yields, there were areas of the country where yields were at or below guarantee yields. These areas included northern and central Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. As a result, RP products had high loss ratios in these areas, as illustrated in Figure 1 which shows RP loss ratio by county (see Figure 1). In most other areas of the country, loss ratios were well below 1.0. As one would expect, loss ratios were higher in areas with lower relative yields.



Soybeans

In 2014, RP was used to insure 65.2 million acres of soybeans in the United States, representing 88% of total acres insured with crop insurance. Total premiums were $2,092 million and total payments were $1,126 million (see Table 2). Total payments were far less than total premiums resulting in a loss ratio of .54. Since 2008, loss ratios for soybeans across all policies have not exceeded 1.00. On a per insured acre basis, insurance payments equaled $17.27 per acre.



Loss experience for soybeans had less range than those for corn. For the eleven states with the most insured acres, RP’s loss ratio was the highest for Minnesota at 1.25 and the lowest for South Dakota at .18. Iowa had a loss ratio of 1.07 while Illinois has a .24 loss ratio.

For Midwest states, the 2014 projected price was $11.36 per bushel while the harvest price was $9.65 per bushel. The harvest price was 85% of the projected price. Even at an 85% coverage level, farmers had to have actual yields below guarantee yields before insurance payments were made.
Most counties across the United States had loss ratios well below 1 (see Figure 2). Areas with loss ratios above 1.00 included counties in northern and central Iowa, Minnesota, northern Wisconsin, and some counties in Michigan, and New York.



Wheat

In 2014, RP was used to insured 40.8 million acres of wheat, representing 85% of total acres insured with crop insurance. Total premiums were $1,330 million and total payments were $1,490. The loss ratio was 1.12 and payments averaged $36.60 per insured acre.



Figure 3 shows a map of county loss ratios for wheat RP polices. As can be seen, many counties in Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas had loss ratios above 1.00. Many farms in this area had low yields. Other areas of payments occurred in Washington, Wisconsin, Illinois, and along the Mississippi Delta. Large areas with low loss ratios include Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina.



Summary

Lower prices for corn and soybeans resulted in RP payments for corn and soybeans. These payments were made in northern and central Iowa and Minnesota. Because of above average yields, loss ratios were low in most of Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio.

LINK to FarmDocDaily Article: 2014 Loss Experience for Revenue Protection on Corn, Soybeans, and Wheat

How Much Would a Corn Acre in 2015 Make

The ag economists at ILLINOIS have done an interesting exercise to see how much an acre of corn might gross in 2015. Or maybe it might be better explained as what would happen in 2015 if this year was like 1979.



Or what if it were like 2012, or 1983, or 1995, or just pick a year. The idea is to give farmers some hard data on how variable gross revenue from a corn acre is over time by moving that time into 2015. So that’s what U of I ag economists Gary Schnitkey did.

He wanted to look and see what gross revenues would be like for 2015 considering crop revenue, crop insurance, government payments, and price risk. The goal was to know under what conditions would a corn acre produce higher gross revenues this year?



The question then is, “In 2015 what would revenue be like this year if a year like 1972 happened?”.
"When we looked at it, 50% of the revenues were above and 50% of the revenues were below $825 per acre."
Schnitkey put those all into a table on the Farm Doc Daily website from 1972 to 2014. It shows how much of gross revenue would come from price x yield, crop insurance, and government payments.


At $825 most $300 an acre cash rented farms in central Illinois would lose money. Over the span of the years this would happen about 75% of the time and a big yield does not solve the problem - it takes higher prices from some other force. You may read the “Gross Revenues in 2015” article on the Farm Doc Daily website.

Estimated 2014 ARC County Payments

Farmers throughout the nation are deciding which of the new farm programs to take. Another piece of that puzzle was put into place when USDA released the county wide corn and soybean yields late last month. These can be used to estimate some of the 2014 farm program payments.



County wide yields as calculated by USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service along with the estimated season's average cash price - the marketing year average - can be used to forward figure 2014 ARC County payments. It is possible therefore to know

WILLAg Farm Assets Outlook Panel Discussions

USDA Finalizes Farm Program Rules

by Jonathan Coppess, Gary Schnitkey, Nick Paulson, and Carl Zulauf
University of Illinois College of ACES and The Ohio State University

Thursday, September 25, 2014, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack announced the regulations for the Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC) programs created by the 2014 Farm Bill. Along with the regulation, Secretary Vilsack also announced the public release of the web-based decision tools that have been developed under cooperative agreements with the Farm Service Agency. This article provides more information on these items.
Background
The Agriculture Act of 2014 (the 2014 Farm Bill) revised the commodity support programs beginning with the 2014 crop year. Direct payments, counter-cyclical payments and the Average Crop Revenue Election payments were eliminated by this farm bill. In place of those support programs, three new programs were created for covered commodities or program crops. These programs are: Agriculture Risk Coverage, County Option (ARC-CO), Agriculture Risk Coverage, Individual Farm Coverage (ARC-IC), and Price Loss Coverage (PLC). The 2014 Farm Bill also provided one-time opportunities for farm owners to update the payment yields for the FSA farm and a one-time opportunity to reallocate the base acres among program crops planted on the FSA farm. Finally, the farm bill included funds for the development of web-based decision aids or tools that farmers, landowners and others could use to help sort through the program decisions required.

Discussion
The University of Illinois as the lead institution for a national coalition has worked under a cooperative agreement to develop the web-based decision tools. In addition to the web-based tools, the coalition has also created an online resource site affiliated with farmdoc and will be conducting outreach, education and training on the programs and the web-based tools. The following is an overview of the resources currently available.
(1) The Farm Bill Toolbox on farmdoc: a one-stop resource for all aspects of the farm bill program decisions, it is available here (or by entering the following web address: http://farmbilltoolbox.farmdoc.illinois.edu) provides a seven-step decision process or matrix to guide producers through the program decisions and use of the web-based tool. The Toolbox also provides one-page fact sheets and links to additional resources such as previously published articles and new articles on farm bill program issues and topics. Finally, the farmdoc team will be conducting weekly webinars explaining the programs, the web-based tool and analysis, as well as program and harvest updates. These webinars will be every Friday morning at 8:00 a.m. (CST) beginning September 26th and continuing through the end of October. Webinars will be archived and available for review. Additional webinars are also available in the archives. For registration, more information and archives please visit the Farm Bill Toolbox.
(2) The Agriculture Policy Analysis System (APAS): available here (or by entering the following web address: http://fsa.usapas.com) this web-based application provides the ability to calculate updated payment yields for the FSA farm, calculate reallocated base acres for the FSA farm and analyze, compare and understand the program choices (ARC-CO, ARC-IC and PLC/SCO). Program analysis and information is available in two forms. First, the Sample Farms button allows for a quick program comparison and analysis based on a data-generated sample farm for your state and county, both expected program payments and per-acre, crop-by-crop payments. Producers can also select the Build Your Own Farm (BYOF) option that will allow them to input their farm-specific information and run estimates of program payments. Both options also provide a "safety net" analysis using specific revenue targets and providing the probability of reaching those revenue targets under different program scenarios.
(3) Farm Service Agency: the APAS web-based tool is also available on the FSA website, along with detailed fact sheets and other related program information (available here or by entering the following web address: www.fsa.usda.gov/arc-plc).
FSA has not announced a final deadline for making the farm program decisions (payment yields, base acre reallocation and program election), but it is anticipated that the deadline will be sometime in 2015, maybe as late as March. Producers and landowners are encouraged to wait until later in the year or early next year. More information about prices and yields will be known at that time, allowing for a more informed, better decision. With many farmers already in the fields, or about to begin harvesting, there is no immediate action needed. There is time to learn more about the programs, use the web-based tools and understand the analysis before any decision will have to be made. Updates on deadlines and program decisions will be available on the Farm Bill Toolbox and through farmdoc daily.

USDA Updates Cash Rents by County

 

In recent weeks, two sources released cash rent information for Illinois. The U.S. Department of Agriculture released county average cash rents for 2014. The Illinois Society of Professional Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers released 2014 and expected 2015 cash rents for professionally managed farmland. Expected 2015 rents point to decreasing cash rent levels on professionally managed farmland. Whether or not other cash rents follow professionally managed cash rents down is an open question.

Average Cash Rents in Illinois

The National Agricultural Statistical Service (NASS) - an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture - released 2014 average rents per county on September 5, 2014. A number of counties do not have cash rents reported, likely because statistically reliable rents could not be obtained with survey responses.

As can be seen in Figure 1, there is a considerable range in cash rents across Illinois. Four counties had average cash rents over $300 per acre: Logan ($308 per acre), Piatt ($303 per acre), Sangamon ($302 per acre), and Ogle ($300 per acre). Except for Ogle County, these high-rent counties are located in central Illinois. The five counties with the lowest cash rents are Johnson ($80 per acre), Williamson County ($92 per acre), Perry ($106 per acre), Saline ($107 per acre), and Franklin ($108 per acre). These counties with the lowest cash rents are located in southern Illinois. Generally, average cash rent levels are related to productivity, with counties having more productive farmland have higher cash rents than those counties with less productive farmland (farmdoc daily, September 10, 2013).

figure1.jpg

Overall, 2014 average cash rents were higher in 2014 than 2013. According to NASS, the average rent in Illinois increased from $224 per acre in 2013 to $234 per acre in 2014, an increase of 5%. This continued a string of years of large increases. Since 2006, average state rents in Illinois have increased from $132 per acre in 2006 to $234 per acre in 2014, an increase over this eight year period of 77%.

Professional Cash Rents Levels

The Illinois Society of Professional Farm Managers and Rural Appraiser released results of its annual mid-year survey. This survey asked for 2014 and expected 2015 cash rents on professionally managed farmland. These rents, along with 2013 cash rents from a previous survey, are shown in Table 1. Average rent levels are shown for four classes of farmland productivity:

Excellent - expected corn yields are over 190 bushels per acre
Good - expected corn yields are between 170 and 190 bushels per acre,
Average - expected corn yields are between 150 and 170 bushels per acre, and
Fair - expected corn yields are below 150 bushels per acre.
table1.jpg

Average cash rents decreased between 2013 and 2014. For excellent quality farmland, cash rents decreased from $396 per acre to $374 per acre in 2014, a decrease of $14 per acre.

Decreases for professionally managed farmland stands in contrast to average cash rents, which increased from $224 per acre in 2013 to $234 per acre in 2014. Farm managers follow agricultural markets, likely much more closely than land owners without management. As a result, farm managers likely set rents closer to those suggested by market conditions. Cash rents on professionally managed farmland increased faster than average cash rents between 2006 and 2013, when returns rose as a result of higher prices. Now that prices have decreased from levels experienced during 2009 through 2013, farm managers are lowering cash rents. On farmland, not managed there may be considerably more lagged relationship between changes in returns and changes in rent levels.

On professionally managed farmland, cash rents likely will continue to decline into 2015. For all quality classes, Society members indicated that rents would be lower in 2015. For excellent quality farmland, for example, cash rents are projected to decrease from $374 per acre in 2014 to $338 per acre in 2014, a decrease of $36 per acre (see Table 1). If the decrease occurs, cash rents would decrease by about 10%.

There is a considerable range in cash rents for similar productivity farmland within a small geographical area, with some rents above the average by $100 and other rents below the average by $100. Below average cash rents could continue to increase to "catch up" with average levels. At the same time, above average cash rents could decrease, as indicated by results from the Illinois Society. These two forces could counter each other, leading to stable or maybe even increasing average cash rent levels.

Projections are for much lower returns in 2014 and 2015 return (farmdoc daily, July 8, 2014). Even with decreases in cash rents projected by the Illinois Society, farmer returns would be projected to decrease because returns have decreased more than cash rents.

Summary

Rents on professionally managed farmland could decrease in 2015. Other above average cash rents could decrease as well. However, below average cash rents may remain stable or increase. Overall, rent decreases likely will not cover decreases in lower returns projected for 2014 and 2015.

ARC-CO and PLC Payment Indicator Using August WASDE U.S. Yield and Price

by Carl Zulauf, The Ohio State University & Gary Schnitkey, University of Illinois
The 2014 farm bill gives Farm Service Agency (FSA) farm owners the option to choose their crop program for the 2014 through 2018 crop years. A factor, perhaps key factor that will influence this decision is the payment by the program choices for the 2014 crop year. This article uses the just released U.S. yield and price estimates in the August 2014 World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) to calculate an indicator of potential payments by the Agriculture Revenue Coverage - county program (ARC-CO) and the Price Loss Coverage (PLC) program. The indicator estimates are for the 2014 crop year for barley, corn, oats, long grain rice, medium (and short) grain rice, sorghum, soybeans, and wheat.  These are indicator estimates because they use U.S. yield not county yield or farm payment yield, as ARC-CO and PLC use, respectively.  AR-CO payments, for example, will vary across counties, with some counties having no payments due to high yields and some counties having large payments due to low yields.  Thus, this article is not estimating payments that an individual FSA farm owner would receive.  Nevertheless, the indicator estimates using U.S. yields should help frame questions and perspectives for FSA farm owners regarding program choices.
Calculation of Estimated Program Payments
ARC-CO makes payments when county revenue for the crop year is less than 86% of the county's benchmark revenue.  ARC-CO pays when actual revenue is between 76% and 86% of benchmark revenue.  PLC makes payments when the U.S. crop year average price is less than the crop's reference price.  The reference price is

USDA says ARC/PLC Sign Up Winter 2015

Friday the United States Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency made a series of announcements related to the new farm programs' signup period. Farmers will make final irrevocable decisions between the ARC & PLC programs sometime after January 1, 2015.

timeline posted to USDA FSA website August 1, 2014
Letters are in the mail this month notifying farm operators of current base acres and yields, along with 2009-2012 planting histories. The letter asks these numbers be confirmed or updated as the first part of the sign up process. 

Online tools are under development at the University of Illinois to aid producers throughout the nation. Those tools may be ready by the official end of summer (September 22, 2014), but have not yet been released.

The following note was posted the USDA FSA website August 1, 2014;

WASHINGTON, Aug. 1, 2014 — U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Farm Service Agency (FSA) Administrator Juan M. Garcia announced today that farmers should start receiving notices updating them on their current base acres, yields and 2009-2012 planting history. The written updates are an important part of preparing agricultural producers for the new safety net programs established by the 2014 Farm Bill.

“We’re sending these reports to make sure that farmers and ranchers have key information as they make critical decisions about programs that impact their livelihood,” said Garcia. “It’s important that producers take a few minutes to cross check the information they receive with their own farm records. If the information is correct, no further action is needed at this time. But if our letter is incomplete or incorrect, producers need to contact their local FSA county office as soon as possible.”

Verifying the accuracy of data on a farm’s acreage history is an important step for producers enrolling in the upcoming Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) program and the Price Loss Coverage (PLC) program. Later this summer, farmers and ranchers will have an opportunity to update their crop yield information and reallocate base acres.

“We’re working hard to prepare and educate farmers on the new programs created by the 2014 Farm Bill,” added Garcia. “I encourage producers to bring their USDA notice to any scheduled appointments with the local FSA county office. This will help ensure they have the information they need with them to discuss the available program options.”

By mid-winter all producers on a farm will be required to make a one-time, unanimous and irrevocable election between price protection and county revenue protection or individual revenue protection for 2014-2018 crop years. Producers can expect to sign contracts for ARC or PLC for the 2014 and 2015 crop years in early 2015.

Covered commodities include barley, canola, large and small chickpeas, corn, crambe, flaxseed, grain sorghum, lentils, mustard seed, oats, peanuts, dry peas, rapeseed, long grain rice, medium grain rice (includes short grain rice and temperate japonica rice), safflower seed, sesame, soybeans, sunflower seed, and wheat. Upland cotton is no longer a covered commodity.

Will Crop Insurance Make Payments in 2014?



by Gary Schnitkey, University of Illinois

In Illinois, crop insurance payments on corn likely will be lower in 2014 than in 2012 and 2013. Crop insurance payments in 2014 likely will not be large for soybeans. For both corn and soybeans, harvest prices will be lower than projected prices. However, above average yields likely will counter price decreases, leading to low crop insurance payments. Somewhat ironically, crop insurance payments likely will be lower in 2014 than in 2012 and 2013. At the same time, revenue and returns will be much lower in 2014 than in 2012 and 2013.

Product Choices of Farmers

In this article, focus is placed on revenue insurance products at high coverage levels, as most farmers purchase these products. The four revenue products available in