Author
Listed:
- Curtiss, Jarmila
- Forstner, Bernhard
Abstract
In recent years, many farms in Germany have been confronted with often serious liquidity prob-lems as a result of income loss due to unfavorable product price developments and weather con-ditions. To improve liquidity, farms sometimes capitalize on hidden reserves by selling agricultural land and leasing it back (Sale and lease back – SLB) on a long-term basis. This study examines whether the conditions of recent years including high investor demand for agricultural land has led to the wider use of SLB in agriculture, and/or whether the instrument has also been used for other strategic purposes in the context of generational change, rising land prices and unequal market power on the land market. Furthermore, the study investigates the microstructure of the SLB mar-ket, i.e. who the land buyers are and how the contractual relationships are designed. Barriers and perspectives of SLB use in agriculture are also examined. Results based on expert interviews suggest that SLB have been used by farms for various purposes, especially in the new Federal States – for example, to avoid financial crisis, but also to finance growth and rationalization investments. In particular, the existence of high hidden reserves in con-nection with a sharp increase in the value of agricultural land can have positive effects on the com-pany's development as a result of SLB. Land buyers are mostly private non-agricultural investors, dominated (in terms of area) by private individuals with high financial assets. Such buyers aim at investment security by avoiding production risks, securing stable values and generating moderate returns (approximately 1.5 to 2.0 %). However, the activity of this group is estimated by experts to be slightly declining. In addition to private investors, the various Land Settlement Companies (LSLG) also act as SLB agents with the aim of fulfilling their agricultural-structural mandate from the fed-eral states. Unlike other investors, LSLGs provide a conditioned buyback option for the seller. How-ever, due to the relatively short period within which this option can be used, LSLG's overall SLB market share is small. The Land Transaction Act, which gives pre-emption rights to active farmers over non-farmers in farmland sales, together with the high affinity of farmers towards their own land, are considered to be essential barriers to more SLB. Expert opinions on the future development of SLB are ambiguous. Model calculations show that bank loans are in most cases preferable to SLB given the current favorable interest rates, although multiple aspects have to be taken into account. Mainly the medium- to long-term business strategy and future land prices can have decisive influence on the comparative advantage of each alternative. Experts see SLB as having no significant effects on agricultural structural developments in Germany.
Suggested Citation
Curtiss, Jarmila & Forstner, Bernhard, 2020.
"Verkauf und Rückpacht von Agrarflächen (Sale and lease back): Analyse und Bewertung aus betriebswirtschaftlicher Sicht,"
Thünen Working Paper
305509, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI), Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
Handle:
RePEc:ags:jhimwp:305509
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.305509
Download full text from publisher
Other versions of this item:
More about this item
Keywords
Agribusiness;
Agricultural Finance;
Farm Management;
All these keywords.
JEL classification:
- Q10 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - General
- Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
- Q14 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Finance
- Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
Statistics
Access and download statistics
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:jhimwp:305509. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/imagvde.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.