IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Southeastern Minnesota Farm Business Management Association 2006 Annual Report

Listed author(s):
  • Nordquist, Dale W.
  • Westman, Lorin L.
Registered author(s):

    The average net farm income was $171,925 for the 38 farms included in the 2006 annual report of the Southeastern Minnesota Farm Business Management Association, an increase of 43% from 2005. In constant dollars, 2006 was the most profitable year for association members in the last twenty years (Figure 1). Higher crop prices and strong crop yields were among factors that combined to make 2006 a very profitable year for the average association farm. Dairy farms, however, experienced sharply lower profitability. As in previous years, the income levels experienced by individual farms vary greatly from the overall average. When the net farm incomes for the 38 farms in the report are ranked from lowest to highest, the resulting graph (Figure 2) shows how much the incomes vary. Only 32% earned net farm incomes over the association average; 14% of the farms experienced negative net farm incomes. The median or middle income was $106,750, considerably lower than the association average. The high 20% of these farms had an average net farm income of $537,591; farms in the low 20% averaged $-37,343. Average gross cash farm income in 2006 was $555,309 for these 38 farms, an 8% increase from 2005. Milk sales were 37% of gross income, down from 41% in 2005. Corn and soybean sales accounted for another 38% of income. Total crop sales accounted for 40% while livestock sales accounted for 47% of total cash receipts (Figure 4). Government payments (of all types) averaged $37,310 in 2006, down 33% from the previous year. LDP payments dropped dramatically from $25,778 in 2005 down to zero in 2006 as crop prices recovered Entire report is available at: 2005 harvest lows and rallied into 2006 harvest. Government payments were $55,750 in 2005, $33,294 in 2004, $31,195 in 2003, and $19,375 in 2002. As a percent of gross cash income, they were 5% in 2006 as compared to 11% in 2005, 7% in 2004, 7% in 2003, and 5% in 2002. Average total cash expenses were $444,771 in 2006. This was an increase of 12% from the 2005 average. As a percentage of total expenses, seed, fertilizer, and crop chemicals and feed were the largest expense items (Figures 5 and 6). Fuel and oil expense accounted for 5% of total expenses, up from 4% in 2005. Average rate of return on assets (ROA) was 10% in 2006 with assets valued at adjusted cost basis, up from 8% in 2005 (Figure 7). Rate of return on equity (ROE) averaged 12%, up from 9% for the previous year. The fact that ROE exceeded ROA indicates that debt capital earned more than its interest cost. Average total equity (of the 25 sole proprietors) was $1,146,788 at the end of 2006, an increase of $136,106 during the year for these farms (assets valued at adjusted cost basis). Except for a slight decline in 1993, average equity has improved steadily since 1986 (Figure 8). The average debt to asset ratio decreased slightly, from 33% to 32%. The average corn yield was 176 bushels per acre, down slightly from last year’s association record yield of 179 bushels per acre. Soybeans averaged 53 bushels per acre, unchanged from 2005 (Figure 9). Results by Type of Farm The 38 farms in the report were classified as a certain type (e.g., dairy) on the basis of having 70 percent or more of their gross sales from that category. Using this criteria, there were 13 crop farms and 10 dairy farms. There were 6 farms which did not have a single source (or pair of sources) of income over 70%. The results for other types of farm are not reported because the required minimum of 5 farms in a reported group was not met. Crop farms earned strong profits in 2006 with average net farm income of $213,714, up from $105,432 in 2005 (Figure 10). Dairy farms profits fell dramatically, from $176,112 in 2005 down to $129,703 in 2006. Crop farms average rate of return on assets (ROA) was 15%, up from 8% the previous year (Figure 11). Dairy farms averaged 6%, down from 11%. (Assets are valued at adjusted cost basis for ROA calculations.) Dairy farms had an average debt-to-asset ratio of 24% at the end of 2006 (assets valued at estimated market value); crop farms averaged 31% in debt (Figure 12). The full report provides additional information on profitability, liquidity, and solvency as well as other whole-farm information and detailed information on crop and livestock enterprises. Also reported are whole-farm financial condition and performance by year, county, type of farm, farm size, and age of operator.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics in its series Staff Papers with number 7311.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 2007
    Handle: RePEc:ags:umaesp:7311
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    231ClaOff Building, 1994 Buford Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108-6040

    Phone: (612) 625-1222
    Fax: (612) 625-6245
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:umaesp:7311. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.