Budgeting

Best practices for buying farm inputs

Source: Jonathan LaPorte, Michigan State University Extension

Are farm input prices better now or should you wait to make a purchase?

Answering that question presents quite a challenge. Historically, farms that prioritize purchasing inputs early, on average lower total input costs. But this past year revealed better input prices were realized in the spring. As input prices continue to fall, largely driven by lower prices in commodity markets, last year’s strategy may still be a viable option. To decide which approach is right for your farm requires thinking strategically about your buying options.

Understanding market conditions

Understanding market conditions is essential when buying farm inputs. Markets are influenced by a number of different factors, such as supply chains and commodity prices. Recent improvements in supply chains and product availability certainly favor purchases now. Especially when purchases are compared to recent production years.

Declines in commodity market prices have also driven demand for lower input costs. But as market prices decline, concerns of eroding farm profits may increase further demand for lowering costs. If demand is strong enough, it may make waiting to buy a better option.

Long-term commodity projections lean towards lower prices unless production estimates significantly change. A significant change is often brought on by global or domestic events. These events can include global trade, wars, or poor weather, such as drought. Many parts of the country experienced drought in the early summer months. But it remains unclear how drought conditions will impact commodity prices.

When uncertainty exists in the markets, other options to assist decision-making should be explored. One such option is to compare differences between current and historical prices. For fertilizer purchases, a crop to fertilizer price ratio helps consider short-term profits compared to product use. The fertilizer nutrient price ($/lb.) is divided by the crop price. Crop prices are then adjusted to a per pound value. For example, corn prices are divided by 56, while soybeans are divided by 60. A higher price ratio indicates a more expensive fertilizer (see Figure 1 below).

Continue reading →

Farmer Sentiment Dips Amid Weaker View of Current Conditions

Source: James Mintert and Michael Langemeier, Purdue Center for Commercial Agriculture

U.S. farmers’ sentiment weakened in August compared to July as the Purdue University-CME Group Ag Economy Barometer dipped 8 points to a reading of 115. This month’s decline was fueled by producers’ weaker perception of current conditions both on their farms and in U.S. agriculture as the Current Conditions Index fell 13 points to a reading of 108. The Future Expectations Index also declined in August to a reading of 119, 5 points below a month earlier. This month’s Ag Economy Barometer survey was conducted from August 14-18, 2023. Although producer sentiment weakened in August, producers’ rating of farm financial conditions changed little this month, as the Farm Financial Performance Index declined just one point to a reading of 86. However, producers’ perspectives on farm financial conditions were noticeably weaker than a year earlier when the index stood at 99. Weaker producer sentiment this month did translate into a decline in the Farm Capital Investment Index. The investment index fell to 37, eight points lower than in July and two points lower than a year earlier. Among producers with a negative view of the investment climate, the increase in prices for farm machinery and new construction along with rising interest rates were the two most commonly cited reasons for their negative view. In a related question, over half (60%) of producers in this month’s survey said they expect interest rates to rise in the upcoming year.

When asked about top concerns for their farming operations in the next 12 months, producers continue to point to higher input prices and rising interest rates as their top two concerns. Higher input prices was chosen by one out of three (34%) and rising interest rates was chosen by one out of four (24%) survey respondents as a top concern. Even though crop prices weakened significantly this summer, producers ranked declining commodity prices as their number three concern, chosen by one out of five (20%) producers.

Click here to download the full report

 

 

Farmers Remain Cautiously Optimistic About Agricultural Economy

Source: James Mintert and Michael Langemeier, Purdue Center for Commercial Agriculture

Click here to download the full report.

Agricultural producer sentiment improved slightly in July as the Purdue University-CME Group Ag Economy Barometer rose two points above its June reading to an index value of 123. This month’s two-percent rise in the barometer was primarily the result of farmers’ improved perception of current conditions on their farms as the Index of Current Conditions rose 5 points to a reading of 121. The Index of Future Expectations changed little compared to June, rising just one point to 124. This month’s Ag Economy Barometer survey was conducted from July 10-14, 2023.

Farmers’ rating of financial conditions on their farms was virtually unchanged in July, compared to June, as the Farm Financial Conditions Index rose just one point to 87 vs. a reading of 86 in June. Looking back to May, however, the percentage of producers rating their farm’s financial performance as better than last year improved from 14% to 17%, while those rating financial performance as worse than a year ago fell from 38% to 30% of respondents. When asked to look ahead one year, there was a one percentage point increase in farmers expecting farm financial conditions to improve in July vs. June and, correspondingly, a one-point decline in the percentage of farmers expecting conditions to worsen. And farmers’ longer-term perspective on the U.S. agricultural economy improved somewhat in July, as the percentage of respondents expecting bad times in the upcoming 5 years fell from 41% in June to 39% in July.

Figure 1. Purdue/CME Group Ag Economy Barometer, October 2015-July 2023.
Figure 1. Purdue/CME Group Ag Economy Barometer, October 2015-July 2023.
Figure 2. Indices of Current Conditions and Future Expectations, October 2015-July 2023.
Figure 2. Indices of Current Conditions and Future Expectations, October 2015-July 2023.
Figure 3. In a year, will your farm operation be better off financially, worse off, or about the same as now?, October 2015–July 2023
Figure 3. In a year, will your farm operation be better off financially, worse off, or about the same as now?, October 2015–July 2023

Continue reading →

Benchmarking Crop Machinery Cost And Investment

by Michael Langemeier, Purdue University

The continued increase in size of tractors, combines, and other machinery has enabled farms to operate more acres and reduce labor use per acre. However, this increase in machinery size also makes it increasingly important to evaluate the efficient use of machinery. This article will discuss machinery cost and investment benchmarks, and illustrate the computation of crop machinery cost and investment for a case farm in west central Indiana.

Key Machinery Benchmarks
Crop machinery cost per acre is computed by summing depreciation, interest, property taxes, insurance, leasing, repairs, fuel and lubricants, and custom hire and rental expense; and dividing the resulting figure by crop acres or harvested acres. Interest should include both cash interest paid and an opportunity charge on machinery and equipment that is owned. In regions where double-cropping predominates, using harvested acres is preferable.

Crop machinery investment per acre is computed by dividing total crop machinery investment (i.e., investment in tractors, combines, and other machinery) by crop acres or harvested acres. Again, in regions where double-cropping is prevalent, using harvested acres gives a more accurate depiction of machinery investment.

Machinery investment per acre typically declines with farm size. Thus, it is important for farms to compare machinery investment per acre with similarly sized farms and to examine the trend in this benchmark for a particular farm. A farm with relatively high machinery investment per acre needs to determine whether this high value is a problem. If the farm faces serious labor or timeliness constraints, their machinery investment per acre may be relatively high. However, if their machinery investment per acre is high due to the purchase of assets used to mitigate income tax obligations or for some other reason, the farm needs to think about their long-term strategy with respect to purchasing machinery and equipment.

Click here to read the entire article.

 

Farm On financial management course offers farmers, ranchers training to meet new program requirements

A new online farm management course offered by The Ohio State University College of Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences (CFAES) will help Ohio’s beginning farmers qualify for the requirements of the Ohio Department of Agriculture’s Beginning Farmer Tax Credit program.

Called Farm On, the self-paced, on-demand farm financial management course was created by Ohio State University Extension professionals and is offered through OSU Extension’s new Farm Financial Management and Policy Institute (FFMPI), said Eric Richer, assistant professor and OSU Extension field specialist in farm management.

OSU Extension is the outreach arm of CFAES.

“The Farm On financial management course was created to address the needs of Ohio’s new and beginning farmers who want to better prepare themselves to operate a commercial farm in Ohio and do that with a high level of economic stability while remaining profitable and responsible at every step along the way,” said Richer, who is the lead instructor for the Farm On course. “We believe Farm On will be a great deliverable to Ohio’s agriculture industry because it is on-demand, self-paced, and taught by Ohio State’s expert farm management instructor.”

What’s unique about the Farm On course is that, not only does it comply with the regulations of the new Ohio House Bill 95 Beginning Farmer Tax Credit program, it also meets the borrower training requirements for the U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency’s Beginning Farmer and Rancher Loan Program, Richer said.

The Farm On course includes multiple video lessons, 10 quizzes, 10 exercises, individual and group consultations, and a 10-module course that covers the following topics: Continue reading →

Coffee & Grain Webinar Recap – Tight Supply Drives High Commodity Prices

On Monday morning’s Coffee and Grain Zoom, Dr. Seungki Lee (Assistant Professor in the Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics) discussed  the grain market outlook and the new crop prospects based on the USDA February World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) report. In all three major crops – corn, soybean, and wheat, strong prices are projected in the 2022/2023 market mainly due to the tight supply. Additionally, Brazil was singled out as its production can swing both the 2022/2023 and 2023/2024 commodity markets.

Click here to read Dr. Lee’s Summary Report

 

Ohio Farm Custom Rates 2022

Farming is a complex business and many Ohio farmers utilize outside assistance for specific farm-related work. This option is appealing for tasks requiring specialized equipment or technical expertise. Often, having someone else with specialized tools perform tasks is more cost effective and saves time. Farm work completed by others is often referred to as “custom farm work” or more simply, “custom work”. A “custom rate” is the amount agreed upon by both parties to be paid by the custom work customer to the custom work provider.

Ohio Farm Custom Rates

The “Ohio Farm Custom Rates 2022” publication reports custom rates based on a statewide survey of 223 farmers, custom operators, farm managers, and landowners conducted in 2022. These rates, except where noted, include the implement and tractor if required, all variable machinery costs such as fuel, oil, lube, twine, etc., and labor for the operation.

Some custom rates published in this study vary widely, possibly influenced by:

  • Type or size of equipment used (e.g. 20-shank chisel plow versus a 9-shank)
  • Size and shape of fields,
  • Condition of the crop (for harvesting operations)
  • Skill level of labor
  • Amount of labor needed in relation to the equipment capabilities
  • Cost margin differences for full-time custom operators compared to farmers supplementing current income

Some custom rates reflect discounted rates as the parties involved have family or community relationships, Discounted rates may also occur when the custom work provider is attempting to strengthen a relationship to help secure the custom farmed land in a future purchase, cash rental or other rental agreement. Some providers charge differently because they are simply attempting to spread their fixed costs over more acreage to decrease fixed costs per acre and are willing to forgo complete cost recovery.

New this year, the number of responses for each operation has been added to the data presented. In cases where there were too few responses to statistically analyze, summary statistics are not presented.

Charges may be added if the custom provider considers a job abnormal such as distance from the operator’s base location, difficulty of terrain, amount of product or labor involved with the operation, or other special requirements of the custom work customer.

The data from this survey are intended to show a representative farming industry cost for specified machines and operations in Ohio. As a custom farm work provider, the average rates reported in this publication may not cover your total costs for performing the custom service. As a customer, you may not be able to hire a custom service for the average rate published in this factsheet.

It is recommended that you calculate your own costs carefully before determining the custom rate to charge or pay. It may be helpful to compare the custom rates reported in this fact sheet with machinery costs calculated by economic engineering models available online. The following resources are available to help you calculate and consider the total costs of performing a given machinery operation.

Farm Machinery Cost Estimates, available by searching University of Minnesota.

Illinois Farm Management Handbook, available by searching University of Illinois farmdoc.

Estimating Farm Machinery Costs, available by searching Iowa State University agriculture decision maker and machinery management.

Fuel price changes may cause some uncertainty in setting a custom rate. Significant volatility in diesel price over the last several months has caused some concern for custom rate providers that seek to cover all or most of the costs associated with custom farm operations. The approximate price of diesel fuel during the survey period ranged from $4.50 – $5.25 per gallon for off-road (farm) usage. As a custom farm work provider, if you feel that your rate doesn’t capture your full costs due to fuel price increases you might consider a custom rate increase or fuel surcharge based on the increase in fuel costs.

For example, let’s assume the rate you planned to charge for a chisel plow operation was based on $4.50 per gallon diesel costs and the current on-farm diesel price is $5.50 per gallon. This is a $1 per gallon increase. The chisel plow operation uses 1.15 gallons of fuel per acre so the added fuel surcharge could be set at $1.15 per acre (1.15 gallons x $1 gallon).

Click here to to download or view the 2022 Ohio Farm Custom Rate Fact Sheet

 

How Will the Invasion of Ukraine Affect U.S. Agriculture?

by: Ian Sheldon, Professor and Andersons Chair of Agricultural Marketing, Trade, and Policy, Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics, Ohio State University and Chris Zoller, Associate Professor and Extension Educator, Agriculture & Natural Resources, Ohio State University Extension – Tuscarawas County

 

Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine: The Global Impact

The shock to global commodity markets following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is expected to be the largest in the post-war period, and certainly since the oil crisis of the 1970s.  Over the past 30 year, the two countries have become major agricultural exporters, accounting for a quarter of global grains trade in the 2021-22 season (International Grains Council, March 9, 2022).  Across key commodities, they account for a 34, 18, 27 and 75 percent share of volume traded of world wheat, corn, barley, and sunflower oil respectively (International Food Policy Research Institute, February 24, 2022).  With Russia blockading ports on the Black Sea, 16 million tons of grain are currently stranded in Ukraine, USDA forecasting Ukrainian-Russian wheat exports to fall by 7 million tons in 2021-22, Australian and Indian exports only partially filling the gap (USDA/WASDE Report, March 9, 2022)   Also, despite reports of some spring crops being planted in Ukraine, outgoing Agriculture Minister Roman Leshchenko expects total area sown to be reduced by 19 million acres (Reuters, March 22, 2022).

Not surprisingly a market shock of this magnitude has affected both the volatility and level of prices, wheat futures at one point moving above $14/bushel, and eventually falling back to just over $10/bushel, reflecting uncertainty among traders about the invasion.  In turn, the increase in grain prices, are having a significant effect on global food prices and hence food security.  Even before the invasion, several factors were already driving up food prices, including poor harvests in South America, strong global demand, supply chain issues, reduced global stocks of grains and oilseeds, and an input cost squeeze mostly due to rising fertilizer prices.  Adding in the effect of the invasion, global food prices are now reaching levels not seen since the so-called “Arab Spring” of the early 2010s (UN/FAO, March 2022). Continue reading →