|
Have
land prices peaked?
A
thoughtful letter from a reader got me thinking about land prices.
Given the number of issues that face agriculture, have farmland
prices peaked? While it is impossible to answer that question with
any degree of certainty, one can identify a number of factors that
have the potential to put downward pressure on land prices.
At or near the top of the list is the recent U.S. General Accounting
Office (GAO) report, "Farm Program Payments: USDA Needs to
Strengthen Regulations and Oversight to Better Ensure Recipients
Do Not Circumvent Payment Limitations." In a summary, the report
says, "Individuals may circumvent the farm payment limitations
because of weaknesses in FSA's [Farm Service Agency's] regulations."
The report went on to say, "We found examples of farming operations
where recipients may circumvent the payment limits by organizing
farming operations to maximize program payments and then channeling
the payments to affiliated nonfarming operations. . ."
As a result of this report and pressure from legislative leaders,
it now seems certain that congress will adopt more restrictive payment
limitations. If the advocates of these measures are correct, revised
payment limitations, especially if the levels are lowered, will
reduce the amount of money larger operators have available to bid
up cash rents and the price of farmland.
Next on the list of factors that have the potential to put downward
pressure on farmland prices is the recent WTO ruling in the Brazil-U.S.
cotton case. The ruling went against the U.S. declaring that U.S.
subsidy levels were not in compliance with international agreements.
While the ruling was limited to cotton, the principles involved
in the decision could extend its impact to other crops as well.
If, to settle the dispute, the U.S. were to drastically reduce farm
payments, U.S. net farm income could plummet. Farmland prices would
head south and fast.
Coupled with the above two factors is the current U.S. federal budget
deficit that seems to increase with every bit of news out of Iraq.
Even in the absence of the payment limitations controversy and the
WTO legal action, the deficit alone has the potential to put pressure
on current farm program payment levels. While the Defense Department
and Social Security may be spared any cutbacks, the USDA certainly
would be affected by any action aimed at reducing the deficit by
making across-the-board cuts in all remaining program areas. Again,
lower farm payments could put pressure on both cash rents and land
prices.
The recent surge in oil and natural gas prices will drive up input
costs for most farmers, reducing profit levels and the attractiveness
of higher priced land. Likewise, as interest rates rise, the profitably
of purchasing additional farmland will decline. Also, the financial
obligation of those with variable rate loans will increase. These
factors could be mitigated if current crop and cattle prices become
the norm. But that, of course, is unlikely.
In each case, the price of land and cash rents are where economic
readjustments will take place. Cash renters will benefit from lower
cash rents but lower and more variable crop prices are likely to
wash away that benefit.
Currently, the cushion of government payments and the expectation
of continued support have a stabilizing and, yes, a bolstering impact
on land prices. Current market prices have combined with these to
put additional upward pressure on farmland prices.
With the policy uncertainties and the inevitable decline in crop
prices from current levels, this year or next could mark a short
to medium-term peak in farmland prices.
We are not suggesting that we are facing a catastrophe like we saw
in the mid-1980s. But, what we do see are a number of factors that
could come together to contribute to a downward trend in farmland
prices in the foreseeable future. The exact impact will depend upon
public policy measures that are put in place in response to these
factors.
Daryll
E. Ray holds the Blasingame Chair of Excellence in Agricultural
Policy, Institute of Agriculture, University of Tennessee, and is
the Director of UT's Agricultural Policy Analysis Center (APAC).
(865) 974-7407; Fax: (865) 974-7298; dray@utk.edu;
http://www.agpolicy.org. Daryll
Ray's column is written with the research and assistance of Harwood
D. Schaffer, Research Associate with APAC.
Reproduction
Permission Granted with:
1) Full attribution to Daryll E. Ray and the Agricultural Policy
Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN;
2) An email sent to hdschaffer@utk.edu
indicating how often you intend on running Dr. Ray's column and
your total circulation. Also, please send one copy of the first
issue with Dr. Ray's column in it to Harwood Schaffer, Agricultural
Policy Analysis Center, 310 Morgan Hall, Knoxville, TN 37996-4519.
|