Greenbook/Tealbook
Prefatory Note
The attached document represents the most complete and accurate version available based on original copies culled from the files of the FOMC Secretariat at the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. This electronic document was created through a comprehensive digitization process which included identifying the bestpreserved paper copies, scanning those copies, 1 and then making the scanned versions text-searchable. 2 Though a stringent quality assurance process was employed, some imperfections may remain. Please note that some material may have been redacted from this document if that material was received on a confidential basis. Redacted material is indicated by occasional gaps in the text or by gray boxes around non-text content. All redacted passages are exempt from disclosure under applicable provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.
1
In some cases, original copies needed to be photocopied before being scanned into electronic format. All scanned images were deskewed (to remove the effects of printer- and scanner-introduced tilting) and lightly cleaned (to remove dark spots caused by staple holes, hole punches, and other blemishes caused after initial printing).
2
A two-step process was used. An advanced optical character recognition computer program (OCR) first created electronic text from the document image. Where the OCR results were inconclusive, staff checked and corrected the text as necessary. Please note that the numbers and text in charts and tables were not reliably recognized by the OCR process and were not checked or corrected by staff.
Content last modified 6/05/2009.
CONFIDENTIAL (FR)
SUPPLEMENT CURRENT ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL CONDITIONS
Prepared for the Federal Open Market Committee
December 14, 1973 By the Staff Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
A - 1
APPENDIX A:
QUARTERLY SURVEY OF CHANGES IN BANK LENDING PRACTICES November 1973
The large majority of the 125 banks reporting in the November 15, 1973, Quarterly Survey of Changes in Bank Lending Practices were following essentially unchanged policies from three months earlier, when most banks reported that their policies had firmed. (See Table 1.) However, a significant minority of banks reported that their policies had firmed moderately in the most recent period, but a few banks did report some easing. In the preceding survey, virtually no easing was reported. Loan demand at the vast majority of banks had remained unchanged or weakened, and these trends generally were expected to continue. Detailed examination of the responses to the survey, though, revealed that the moves toward tightening seemed to represent lagged responses of banks to stronger loan demands in previous periods as well as increased demands for credit in the current period. There were modest moves toward greater firmness in nonprice terms of lending such as compensating balances and standards of credit worthiness. Banks also had a somewhat more stringent attitude toward new and nonlocal customers and scrutinized more closely the value of loan applicants as depositors or as a source of collateral business. There were no significant divergences between the policies of smaller and larger banks with respect to price and nonprice terms of lending (Table 2). Regionally, the pattern was fairly consistent as bankers generally were guided by policies adopted earlier this year (Table 3).
*Prepared by Paul W. Boltz, Economist, Banking Section, Division of Research and Statistics.
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR PUBLICATION
TABLE
1
QUARTERLY SURVEY OF CHANGES IN BANK LENDING PRACTICES AT SELECTED LARGE BANKS IN THE U.S. 1/ (STATUS OF POLICY ON NOVEMBER 15, 1973 COMPARED TO THREE MONTHS EARLIER) (NUMBER OF BANKS & PERCENT OF TOTAL RANKS REPORTING) MUCH STRONGER
TOTAL BANKS
PCT
RANKS
PeT
MODERATELY STRONGER
ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGED
MODERATELY WEAKER
BANKS
RANKS
BANKS
PCT
PCT
PCT
MUCH WEAKER BANKS
PCT
STRENGTH OF DEMAND FOR COMMERCIAL ANn INDUSTRIAL LOANS (AFTER ALLOWANCE FOR BANK'S USUAL SEASONAL VARTATIO) COMPARED
TO THREE MONTHS AGO
ANTICIPATED DEMAND IN NEXT 3 MMNTHI
125
100.0
0
0.0
22
17.6
53
42.4
50
40.0
0
0.0
124
100.0
1
0.8
16
12.9
69
55.7
37
29.8
1
0.O
ANSWERING QUFSTION RANKS
PCT
MUCH FIRMER POLICY RANKS
PCT
MODERATELY FIRMFR POLIY
ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGED POLICY
MODERATELY EASIER POLICY
BANKS
RANKS
BANKS
PCT
PCT
PCT
MUCH EASIER POLICY BANKS
PCT
LENDING TO NONFINANCIAL BUSTNESSFS TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
M
INTEREST HATES CHARGED
12b
100.0
9
7.2
27
21.6
60
48.0
29
23.2
0
0.0
COMPENSATING OR SUPPORTING BALANCE
124
100,0
4
3.P
18
14.q
98
79.1
4
3.2
0
0.0
STANDARDS OF CREDIT WORTHINESS
124
100.0
4
3.2
20
16.1
98
79.1
2
1.6
0
0.0
MATURITY OF TERM LOANS
124
100.0
1
0.R
16
12.9
99
79.8
8
6,5
0
0.0
ESTABLISHED CUSTOMERS
125
100.0
1
0.8
15
12.0
96
76.8
13
10.4
0
9.0
NEW CUSTOMERS
125
100.0
9
7.2
30
24.0
65
52.0
21
16.8
0
0.0
125
100.0
1
nR
16
12.8
94
75.2
14
11.2
0
0,0
125
100.0
10
8.0
25
20.0
78
62.4
12
9.6
0
0.0
REVIEWING CREOIT LINES OR LOAN APPLICATIONS
LOCAL SERVICE
AREA CUSTOMERS
NONLOCAL SERVICE AREA CUSTOMERc
1/ SURVEY OF LENDING PRACTICES AT 12f AS OF NOVEMBER 159 1973.
LARGE HANKS REPORTING IN THE FEDERAL RESERVE QUARTERLY
INTEREST RATE SURVEY
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR PUBLICATION
TABLE 1
ANSIERING QUFSTION RANKS
PCT
(CONTINUED)
MUCH FIRMER POLICY RANKS
PCT
MODERATELY FIRMER POLIrY BANKS
PCT
FSSENTIALLY UNCHANGED POLICY
MODERATELY EASIER POLICY
RANKS
BANKS
PCT
PCT
MUCH EASIER POLICY BANKS
PCT
FACTORS RELATING TO APPLICANT 2/ VALUE AS DEPOSITOR OR SOURCE OF COLLATERAL BUSINESS
125
100.0
17.
90
72.0
INTENDED USE OF THE LOAN
125
100.0
13.6
96
76.8
INTEREST RATES CHARGED
100.0
13.6
88
70.4
COMPENSATING OR SUPPORTING HALANCF
100.0
113
90.4
1.6
ENFORCEMENT OF BALANCE PEQIIRE-4ENTR
100.0
13.6
101
80.8
1.6
100.0
12.0
88
70.4
9.6
LENDING TO TERMS AND
"NONCAPTIVF" FINANCE COMPANIES CONDITIONS:
ESTABLISHING NEW
OR LARGEP CREDIT IINES
ANSWERING QUESTION RANKS
PCT
6.4
CONSIDERARLY LESS WILLING RANKS
PCT
MODERATELY LESS WILLING
FSSENTIALLY UNCHANGED
BANKS
RANKS
PCT
PCT
12.8
MODERATELY MORE WILLING BANKS
PCT
WILLINNESS TO MAKE OTHFR TYPES OF LOANS
100.0
1.6
12
9.6
92
73.6
15.2
CONSUMER INSTALMENT LOANS
100.0
0.0
2
1.6
105
84.7
12,9
SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE LOANS
100.0
7.4
16
13.1
83
68.0
11.5
MULTI-FAMILY MORTGAGE LOANS
100.0
16
13.2
84
69.4
5.8
ALL OTHER MORTGAGF LOANS
100.0
5.7
17
13.R
91
74.0
6.5
TERM LOANS
TO RUSINFSSES
11.6
PARTICIPATION LOANS WITH CORRESPONDENT RANKS
125
100.0
1
0.8
11
8.8
99
79.2
LOANS TO
125
100.0
5
4.0
13
10.4
102
81.6
BROKERS
2/ FOR THESE FACTORS, FIRMER MEANS TwE FACTORS WERE CONSIDERED MORE IMPORTANT AND EASIER MFANS THEY WERE LESS IMPORTANT. CREDIT REQUESTS
11.2
IN MAKING DECISIONS FOR APPROVING
4.0
CONSIDERABLY MORE WILLING BANKS
PCT
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR PUBLICATION
TABLE 2
COMPARISON OF QUARTERLY CHANGES IN BANK LENDING PRACTICES AT BANKS GROUPED BY SIZE OF TOTAL (STATUS OF POLICY ON NOVEMBER 15, 1973, COMPARED TO THREE MONTHS EARLIER) (NUMBER OF BANKS IN EACH COLUMN AS PER CENT OF TOTAL BANKS ANSWERING QUESTION)
SIZE
TOTAL
OF RANK
MIUCH STRONGER
$1
UNDFH
1oo
Inn
0
0
1o0
Iion
2
0
&
nvr
TOTAL OFPOSITS
MODERATELY STRONGER
S1 & OVER
$1
--
UNnER ;1
i$ & OVER
UNDER SI
DEPOSITS
1/
IN BILLIONS
ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGED
MODERATELY WEAKER
$1 & OVER
Sl & OVER
UNDER 51
UNDER Si
MUCH WEAKER 51 & OVER
UNDER Sl
STRFNGTH OF IEMAND FOR COMMERCIAL AN INDUSTRIAL LOANS (AFTER ALLOWANCE FOR RANK'S USUAL SEASONAL VARTATIOt) COMPARED
TO
ANTICIPATED
THREE
MONTHS
DEMANP
IN
AGO
NFXT
3
MONTHs
TOTAL
sI & LENDING TO NONFINANCIAL
IJNnFP
MUCH FIRMER
1l & OVFR
MODERATELY FIRMER
UNPER 1l
$1 & OVER
IUNDFR $1
FSSENTIALLY UNCHANGED
MODERATELY EASIER
«1 & OVER
$1 & OVER
UNDER $1
UNDER 51
MUCH EASIER
SI & OVER
UNDER 51
0 VER
$1
100
100
In
15
50
46
31
17
Inn
Io
4
9
R3
76
6
1
0
0 0 0
HIISTNESSFS
TERMS AND CONDITIONS: INTEREST RATES CHARbEO COMPENSATING OR SUPPORTING
MALANCES
STANDARDS OF CREDTT wnRTHINESS
85
75
4
0
0
MATURITY OF TERM LOANS
90
72
6
7
0
REVIEWING CREDIT LINES OR LOAN APPLICATIONS ESTABLISHED CUSTOMERS
7
15
78
77
15
7
NFW CUSTOMERS
100
100
9
2P
53
51
22
13
LOCAL SERVICE AREA CUSTOMFRS
100
100oo
7
17
76
75
17
7
NONLOCAL SERVICE
100
100
7
23
64
60
17
4
ARFA CUSTOMERS
1/ SURVEY OF LENDING PRACTICES AT 5S LARGE BANKS (DEPOSITS OF $1 RILLION OR MORF) AND 71 SMALL BANKS (DEPOSITS OF LESS THAN 19 HILLION) REPORTING IN THE FFDERAL RESERVE QUARTERLY INTEREST RATE SURVEY aS OF NOVFMBER 159 1973.
NOT FOR
QUOTATION
OP PUBLICATION
TAB'.E
2
(CONTINUED)
1I7t
OF RANK MUCH FIRMEP POLICY
NUMBER ANSWERING OUESTION $1 & OVFR FACTORS
RELATING TO
APPLICANT
inn
INTENDED USE OF THE LOAN
100
TO "NONCAPTIVE"
1
.1 &
OVER
UNnER 191
$1 & OVER
UNDER $1
Sl & OVER
UNDER $1
$1 &
()VER
UNDER $1
MUCH EASIER POLICY 51 & OVER
UNDER 1S
2/
VALUE AS DEPOSITOR OR SOURCE OF COLLATERAL PUSINESS
LENDINb
UNDER S1
-TOTAL DEPOSTTS IN BILLIONS 0ODERATELY FSSENTIALLY MODERATELY EASIER FIRMFR UNCHANGED POLICY POLIrY POLICY
100
0
0
n10
FTNPNCE rOMP-NIFS
TERMS ANO CONDITIONq: INTEREST RATES CHARGfD COMPENSATING OR SUPPORTING HALANCE; ENFORCEMFNT OF HALANCF REOUIRF"ENT(; ESTABLISHING NEW
OR LARGER CREnIT LINES
NUMREFP ANSWERING QUPSTTON & $1 OVER
UNOFR $1
CONSIDERARLY LFSS WILLING $1 & OVER
UNnFR
41
MODERATELY LESS WILLING $1 & OVER
UNDFR
S1
FSSENTIALLY UNCHANGED
51
& OVER
UNDER Sl
MUDERATELY MORE WILLING 51 & OVER
UNDER S1
WILLINGNESS TO MAKE OTHER TYPES OF LANS TERM LOANS TO RUSTNFSSFS CONSUMER SINGLE
INSTALMENT LOANS
FAMILY MORTGAGF LOANS
MULTI-FAMILY MORTGAGE LOAMS ALL OTHER MORTGAbF
LOANS
PARTICIPATION LOANS WITH CORRESPONDENT BANKS LOANS TO BROKERS
loo 100 100
Ion 100 10
e/ FOR THESE FACTORS, FIRMER MEA"IS THE FACTORS WERE CONSIDERED MORE CREDIT REQUESTS9 AND EASTER MFANS THEY WERE LESS IMPORTANT.
81
78
85
79
IMPORTANT IN MAKING DFCISIONS FOR APPROVING
CONSIDERABLY MORE WILLING S1 L OVER
UNDER Sl
NOT FOR QUOTATION OF PUBLICATION
TABLE 3
QUARTERLY SURVEY OF CHANGES IN BANK LENDING PRACTICES AT SELECTED LARGE BANKS IN THE U.S. STATUS OF POLICY ON NOVEMBER 15, 1973 COMPARED TO THREE MONTHS EARLIER (NUMBER OF RANKS)
ALI. DSTS
NEW YORK BOSTON TOTAL CITY OUTSIDE
PHILADFL.
CLEVE- RICHLAND MONO
ATLAN- CHICAGO TA
ST. LOUIS
1/
MINNE- KANS. CITY APOLIS
DALLAS
SAN FRAN
STRENGTH OF DEMAND FOR COMMERCIAI ANII INDUSTRIAL LOANS (AFTER ALLOWANCE FOR BANK'S USUAL SEASONAL VARIATION) COMPARED TO 3 MONTHS AGO MUCH STRONGER MODERATELY STRONGER ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGED MODERATELY WEAKFR MUCH WEAKER ANTICIPATED DEMAND NEXT THREt MONTHS MUCH STRONGER MODERATELY STRONGFR ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGED MODERATELY WEAKER MUCH WEAKER
12'4 n 2> 51 5n
0 6 1 1 0
0 2 10 f 0
0 0 4 5 0
0 2 6 3 0
0 ] 1 0
0 0 5 6 0
1 3 3 1 0
0 4 11 5 0
0 1 6 ? 0
0 3 5 3 0
0 1 4 1 0
0 0 9 2 0
2 2 4 0 0
2 4 10 4
0 1 6 ? 0
2
0
3 4 2 0
1 4 1 0
1 4 3 0 0
1 5 13 1 0
0 0 8 1 0
1 5 5 0 0
0 A 0 0
p
5 a 0
0 2 4 3 0
O 0 3 0 0
0 1 5 3 0
0 3 4 2 0
0 0 4 9 0
2 3 4 1
0 3 4 B 0
0 1 7 1 0
0 0 2 1 0
0 0 5 4 0
0 1 6 1 0
0 1 9 3 0
0 6 6 0 0
0 3 6 1 0
2 1 7 5 0
2 1 4 2 0
0 1 2 0 O
0 1 4 4 0
1 3 3 2 0
0 2 3 8 0
2 10 0 0
2 8 0 0
0 14 0 0
1 0 8 0 0
0 0 3 0 0
0 1 7 0 0
0 2 7 0 0
0 2 9 2 0
0 2 5 5 0
0 3 4 3 0
0 0 6 6 0
0 2 7 2 0
0 0 10 1 0
0
2
124 1 1A
AJ 37 1
0
LENDTNb TO NONFINANCIAL BUSINESSES TERMS
AND CONDITIONS
INTEkFST RATES CHARGED MUCH FIRMER POLICY MODERATELY FIRMFR POLICY ESSFNTTALLY UINCHANGEI) POLICY MODERATELY EASIER POLICY MUCH EASIER POLICY COMPENSATING BALANCES MUCH FIRMER POLICY MODERATELY FIRMER POLICY ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGFD POLICY MODERATELY EASIFR POLICY MUCH EASIER POLICY
17?
4 27 (i 20 ' 124
1 94
0
1/ SURVFY OF LENDING PRACTICES AT 12b LARGE BANKS REPORTING IN THE FEDERAL RESERVE QUARTERLY AS OF NOVEMBER 15. 1973.
INTEREST RATE SURVEY
a o
NOT FOR
QUOTATION
OR PUBLICATION
TABLF 3
ALI DSTs
8OSTON
NFW YORK TOTAL CITY OUTSIDE
(CONTINUED)
PHTLAnFL.
CLEVE- RICHLAND MOND
ATLAN- CHICTA AGO
ST. LOUIS
MINNE- KANS. CITY APOLIS
DALLAS
SAN FRAN
LENDIN6 TO NONFINANCIAL BUSINESSES TERMS AND
CONDITIONS
STANDAROD
OF
CREDIT WORTHINESS
124
MUCH FIRMER POLICY MODERATELY FIRMFR POLICY FSSENTIALLY UNCHANGED POLICY MODERATELY EASIER POLICY MUCH EASIER POLICY
4 2" 94 P
MATURITY OF TERM LOANS MUCH FIRMER POLICY MODERATELY FIRMFR POLICY ESSFNTIALLY UNCHANGED POLICY MODERATELY EASIER POLICY MUCH EASIER POLICY
1 3 4 0 0
1 5 14 0 0
0 0 q 0
1 5 5 0 0 0
n 1 5 0
0 2 9 0 0
0 3 9 0 0
0 1 9 0 0
1 2 12 0 0
0 2 7 0 0
0 0 3 0 0
1 1 6 0 0
0 0 9 0 0
0 0 11 2 0
0 1
0 2 10 0 0
0 1 9 0 0
0 1 13 1 0
0 2 6 1 0
0 1 2 0 0
1 1 5 1 0
0 0 7 2 0
0 0 12 1 0
0 3 0
1 8 0
0 0 8 1
0
0
0
0
0 1 2 0 0
0 2 5 2 0
0 2 5 2 0
1 2 5 5 0
0 3 0 0
0 2 6 1 0
0 8 1 0
0 0 9 4 0
0
124 1 16 9c f
0 4 4 0 0
0 3 17 0 0
0 0 9 0 0
0 3 8 U 0
0 n
0 4 4 0
1 4 13 2
0n 0 8 1
4 5 1
1 9 n
0
0
0
0
2 2 4 0 0
3 6 8 3 0
0 1 6 2 0
3 5 2 1 0
n
0 3 5 0 0
1 4 13 2 0
0 H 1 0
4 5 1
1 5 n
2 0
0
REVIEWING CREDIT LINES OR LOANq ESTABLISHED CUSTOMERS MUCH FIRrER POLICY MODERATELY FIRMFR POLICY ESSENTIALLY (INCHANGFO POLICY MODERATELY EASIFR POLICY
12" 1 1 9A 11
MUCH FASIER POLICY NEW CUSTOMERS
0
0
0
0
2 8 2
0 9 1
2 11 2
0
0
0
0
0 2 7 2 0
0 5 5 2 0
0 4 5 1 0
1 2 9 3 0
2 0 7 0 0
0 0 10 1 0
0 1 9 2
0 1 A 1
0 2 12 1 0
0 2 6 1
1 8 0
0
0
0 0 9 4
121
MUCH FIRMER POLICY MODERATELY FIRMFR POLICY ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGED POLICY MODERATELY EASIFR POLICY MUCH EASIER POLICY LOCAL SERVICE AREA
0 0 10 1
CUSTOMeRS
MUCH FIRMER POLICY MODERATELY FIRMER POLICY ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGED POLICY MODERATELY EASIFR POLICY MUCH EASIER POLICY
Q 3' 6 21
? 1 1 0
121
I' 9q 14
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR PUBLICATION
TARLF 3
ALI DSTS
NFW YORK HOSTON TOTAL CITY OUTSIDE
(CONTINUED)
PHTLADEL.
CLEVE- RICHLAND MOND
ST. ATLAN- CHICTA AGO LOUIS
MINNE- KANS. CITY APOLIS
DALLAS
SAN FRAN
LENDING TO NONFINANCIAL BUSINESSES RFVIEWING CREDIT LINFS OR
LOAN;
NONLOCAL SEWVICF AREA COST
12,
MUCH FIRMER POLICY MODERATELY FIHMER POLICY FSSENTIALLY UNCHANGFI POLICY MOOFRATELY EASIFR POLICY MUCH EASIER POLICY
1" '
7. 1
1 2 5 0 0
3 5 10 2 0
1 1 6 0 0
3 lb n 0
n 1 7 1 0
3 4 3 1
" 1 8 n
?
n
9 4 n
u
0 2 8 1 0
2 1 7 2 0
0 5 5 0 0
1 4 h 2 0
2 0 7 0 0
0 1 2 0 0
1 1 6 1 0
0 1 7 1 0
0 1 9 3 0
0 1 9 1 0
1 3 8 0 0
1 3 6 0 0
1 3 10 1 0
2 1 6 0 0
0 1 2 0 0
1 1 7 0 0
0 2 7 0 0
1 3 8 1 0
0 1 9 1 0
0 3
1 p? 7 n 0
1
0 0 3 0 0
0 1 7 1 0
0 1
11 1 0
1 1 7 0 0
0 0
0 1 10 2 0
0 1 7 n 0
1 0 11 3 0
1 1 b 2 0
0 1 2 0 0
0 1 6 2 0
0 1 6 2 0
0 1 9 3 0
FACTORS RELATING TO APPIICA'T ?/ VALUE AS DEPOSITOR OR SOUurt OF COLLATFkAL HUSTNFSR
1-
MUCH FIRMER POLICY MODERATFIY HIRMFR POLICY FSSENTIALLY IINCHANGFd POLIrY MOUEOATtLY F'SIFR PO ICY MUCH EASIER POLICY INrENnED USF OF LOAN
1' 2/ 9'
n
2 7 P
0
A n 0
1" < I ah
MUCH FIRMER POLICY MODERATELY FIMMFR POLICY ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGEI Po ICY MODERATELY EASIFR POLICY MUCH EASIbP POLICY
0 22 6 0 0
1
0
15
7 ? 0
0
1 / H 0 0
n 1 r n
1
0
A
8 1 0
P
LENDING TO "NONCAPTIVF" FINANCE CO'4PANIFS TFPMS
ANO CONDiTInNS
IfJTERHFT
HATES CHAUGFnO
MUCH FIkMRC POLTCY MOURATETY F-IRMFP PnOLICY FSSENTIALI Y 'JNCHANGFI) POLICY MODERATELY FAIFR POLICY MLICH EASIER POLICY
1
1 1? 4, !
0 7 0 0
1 3 14 2 0
1
0 0
17 6 2 0
2/ FOR THESE FACTORS. FTRMER MFA.S THE FACTOPS WERF CONSIDERFn MORF CREDIT PFOUESTS. AND EASIER MFANS THEY WERF LESS IMPORTANT.
n 0
0 2 8 1 0
IMPORTANT IN
0 3
8 1 0
MAKING DFCISIONS FOR APPROVING
NOT
FOR QUOTATION
OR
PUBLICATION
TABLE 3
ALI nSTS LENnIN, FINANC TEkMq ST7F
HOSTON
NFW YOHK TOTAL CITY OUTSInE
(CONTINUED)
PHTLADEL.
CLFVE- RICHLAND MOND
ATLAN- CHICTA AGO
ST. LOUIS
MINNE- KANS. APOLIS CITY
DALLAS
SAN FRAN
Tn "I(IOCAPTTVF" COMPANIFS ANtD
CONITIUNqI
0E r(O 4oMPFATTNCI
RALAICF
POLT(Y FITMFR r TCY FSSt NTTALLY IINCHANGFIJ POLICY MOi)F1ATI Y FAkEAIF POLICY 'UC# EAcIFR POLTCY
1?l
4IMUC FTtM-F.R
0 0 8 0 0
0 2 17 1 0
0 n 9 0 0
0 2 8 1 0
n 1 ;
0 2 6 0 0
0 5 15 0 0
0 0 1 0 0
1 1 b 0 0
2 4 11 3 0
1 1 6 0 0
I ?
0 0
10 1A 1
0 0
MOI)FRAT'YF
ENFOH('CFINT OF BAL ANCF PFt'lIRPFMFr T
F* JI
n
114
0
0 1 9 1 0
0 0 12 0 0
0 2 A 0 0
1 0 14 0 0
1 0 8 0 0
0 0 3 0 0
0 1 R 0 0
0 1 8 0 0
0 0 13 0 0
0 5 6 0 0
1 n N A n
0 1 9 1 0
1 0 11 0 0
1 4 5 0 0
1 0 14 0 0
1 0 8 0 0
0 0 3 0 0
0 2 7 0 0
0 1 A 0 0
0 2 10 1 0
1 6 2 0
2 3 5 1 0
1 n 4 1
1 1 8 1 0
0 2 10 0 0
1 2 7 0 0
1 1 11 2 0
1 1 7 0 0
0 0 3 0 0
1 1 6 1 0
0 2 6 1 0
1 0 9 3 0
0 2 14 4 0
0 0 7 2 0
0 .2 7 2 0
0 A n 0
0 0 9 2 0
0 2 9 1 0
0 1 8 1 0
0 1 12 2
1 1 7 0 0
0 1 2 0 0
0 3 4 2 0
0 0 7 2 0
0 0 8 5 0
0 1 15i 3 0
0 0 8 0 0
0 1 7 3 0
n n 6 n 0
0 0 10 1 0
0 0 12 0 0
0 0 7 3 0
0 0 14 1 0
0 1 7 1 0
0 0 3 0 0
0 0 8 1 0
0 0 8 1 0
0 0 7 5 1
I
MUCH FIrFP POLTCY MOUFRATkLY FIMFH POLICY ESSIb TTALI Y (UNCHANGFD POI IrY MOOIwATtl Y tASIFW POLICY MUC, FASIFU PLICY ESTAH ISuI1 CREDIT LINFS
*
1' 1l'1 -
'
I AkrEu
MULN FIRMIF POLICY MO(OIfATIY FIRMFR POLICY Er NTIALI Y JINCHANGFU) POLICY MODEPATELY FASIFR POLICY MUCH EPSIFR POLICY
I" 1' 1 H1,
TO MAHE ITHHR WILLTNGNFS TYPFS OF LOANS TERM LOANS TO RUSINFSSES COhSIDFRABLY LESS WILLIMODERATELY LESS WILLING ESSENTIALLY IJNCHANGEO MOUERATELY MORE WILLING CONSIDERABLY MOPE WILLING CONSUMER
INSTALMENT LOANS
CONSIDFRABLY LESS WILLING MODERATELY LERS WILLING ESSENTIALLY UNCHANGED MODERATELY MORE WILLING CONSIDERABLY MORE WILLING
12" ,' Ii n' lu .1 I13
NOT FOR QUOTATION OR PUBLICATION
TA8LE 3 (I0
805-
ALI DST
Tc
NFW YORK TOTAL CITY OUTSUnE
TINIIED)
PHILADEL.
CLEVE- RICHLAND MONi
ATLAN- CHICST. LUI; TA AGO
MINNE- KANS. CITY APOIS
DALLAS
SAN FRAN
WILLINGNESS TO MAKE OTHER TYPES OF LOnANS SINGLE
AMILY MORTGAF LOANS
CONSTnFREARLY LESS wILLING MODERATELY LESS WILLING ESSEATrALLY UNCHANGED MODEPATELY MORE WILLINh CONSIDFkAHLY MORE WILLING MULTIFAMILY MORTGAGE
OANS
CONSIFRAHLY LESS WILLING MOUF4ATLLY LFSS WILLING -SSE,)TIALLY I)NCHANGFI MOUERATFLY MORE WILLING CONSIDFRAA Y MORE WILLI4N ALL OTHER MORTGAGF LOANS CONSTOERARLY LESS WILLING MOUVRATELY LESS WILLING ESSENTIALLY IINCHANGED MODERATELY MOHRE WILLING (ONSIDFHAHLY MOPE WILLING PARTICIPATION LOANS WITH COPHLSPONDENT RANKS CONSIFRARLY LESS WIILI', MODERATELY LESS WILLING FSENTT4aLLY JNCwANrFl MODEPATELY MORE WILLING CONSIDHARILY MOPE WILLING LOANS
TO HROKLRN
CONSIDFAHALY LESS 4ILL11' MOI)DERATLY IFhh WILLING FSSINTIALLY JNCHANGFD MODERATELY MOHF WILLING CONSInFAHLY MORE wTLING
NIINRFA
OF
lANKS
122 1 1
0 0
41
8
1%
0
2 3 9 4
0
0
0
0
0 0 8 0 0
1 4
0
0 1 5 1 0
1
0
4
1 7
3
2 0
I
2 0
1 4 12 3 0
A 1
1
1
1 5 1
4 3
n 4 n
a 2
2
0 4 9 2
1 7 J
0 2 1 0
2 0 7 0
1 0 6 2
0 1 11 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
?
c
6 1
12
4
2 1 6
1 a
a a
U 2 1
01)
0
n
1
0
a
A a
0
n
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0 4
0 2
9
1 1 7
1 0
7
0 0 3 0 0
8
0
0 0
0 0 11 2 0
14
1 7
0 0 3
0 0 7
0 0 A
I
1
0
p
1
1)
0
0
0
0 0 9 4 0
0
0
1
0
0
II
1
0
8
0
11 2
0
0
1
1 2 H 1
0
0
1
I 3
8
1 1
121 14 1' A( 7 6
'
1 3 4 2 0
n 4
1
1 11
1
123 7
17 91
0 1 7 0 0
12
0
n
4 1
0
1 1 7 1 0
9
n
0
0
0 0
0
0
(
12 1 11 9go
1'
0 1 7 0
0
8 1
1 4 4 2 0
0 2
1
1 1ll 1
2 A
0
0
0
0
n r
0
2
1
0
2 a
1 9
1 7
2 12
7
3
1 7
0
1
0
n
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1P N
I 1O> '
121
0 1 7 0 0
2 17
9 0
1 2
9 0
0
A
1
0
0
0
B-1 SUPPLEMENTAL APPENDIX B* MONTHLY SURVEY OF BANK LOAN COMMITMENTS As reported by 134 banks in the Monthly Survey of Bank Loan Commitments, unused commitments during October grew at a fairly rapid pace comThe growth may in part be reflective of the pared to oher recent months. very slow rate of takedowns in October when the spreads between the commercial paper rates and the prime rate made the commercial paper market attrac-ive to borrowers. Bank customers apparently let their commitments go unused, as outstanding loans under commitments declined slightly over the month. In addition, new commitments advanced briskly compared to the previous month, but the volatility of the series makes interpretation of one-month movements risky. The October data in greater detail, in Table 1, columns 1 and 2, show that unused commitments of commercial and industrial firms grew rather rapidly, which was largely accounted for by a jump in confirmed lines of credit. The unused commitments of nonbank financial institutions also showed rapid growth, even though these institutions drew substantially on their Unused commitments for real estate mortgages, commitments (columns 4 and 5). following the trend of recent months, declined even though new commitments for real estate mortgages increased well above September's level--possibly in anticipation of the large expenditures on plant widely predicted for next year. The reported increase in outstanding mortgages under commitments was modest, but the actual increase was somewhat larger due to loan sales. Table 2 permits a comparison of the most recent figures on unused commitments with such data since the inception of the survey. 1/ Data on unused commitments for July through October 1973, from the 131 banks that reported in all of those months, are presented. Survey information on new commitments and loans under commitments, however, are not shown due to reporting problems in the early months of the survey with those series. Over the entire July-October period, unused C & I commitments increased very little (column 1) while unused commitments for real estate In contrast, nonbank financial institutions, mortgages declined (column 8). reacting to disintermediation earlier perhaps due to thrift institutions this year, built up their commitments from commercial banks appreciably (column 7). 1/ Although the first month of the survey was June, those data were excluded because many banks were unable to provide complete information.
- B-2 Interpretation of the commitments data may be aided by analysis of
the utilization ratio, defined as the ratio of outstanding loans made under commitments to unused commitments plus outstanding loans under commitments. The ratio is often used by bankers to interpret their position regarding commitments. With growth in unused commitments strong over the month of October, the utilization ratio for all commitments declined, led by the drop in the C & I ratio, as shown in Table 3. Only the utilization ratio for real estate mortgages rose in October in response to the decline of unused mortgage commitments.
*
Prepared by Paul W. Boltz, Economist, Banking Section, Division of Research and Statistics.
Table 1 Monthly Changes in Loan Commitments and Loans Under Commitments at Large U.S. Banks September 30, 1973, to October 31, 1973 (Dollar amounts in billions) Unused commitments--
New commitments
One-month changes
(1) Amount
(2) Per cent
1/
Loans under commitments-One-month changes 2/
(4)
(3) Amount
(5)
Amount
Per cent
Total commercial and industrial Term loans Revolving credits Total: term and revolving Confirmed lines Other
2.89 .12 .18 .30 2.37 .22
3.6 2.3 1.0 1.9 4.6 5.1
4.44 .75 1.03 1.78 1.72 .89
-1.17 -. 14 .21 .07 -1.28 .05
-1.7 -0.7 1.1 0.2 -4.9 0.8
Nonbank financial institutions
1.16
4.5
.92
.41
2.8
Real estate mortgages
-.41
-4.5
1.07
.20e
1.1
Total
3.64
3.2
6.42
-1.06
-1.0
Number of banks = 134
It no New commitments is a different concept from that used in the Quarterly Survey of Bank Loan Commitments. longer includes renewals and cannot account for the total change in unused commitments. 2/ Loans under commitments are those loans made under commitments currently or previously in force, less repayments principal. The change in loans under commitments is thus the net increase in outstanding loans made under commitments over the period September 30, 1973, to October 31, 1973. It is a proxy for takedowns minus repayments. The stock of loans under commitments and its increment over the period are distorted by takedowns of loan commitments by overseas branches of U.S. banks and loan sales. e-- Partially estimated. NOTE: Minor inconsistencies may occur in the figures due to rounding. 1/
Table 2 Unused Commitments at Large U.S. Banks July 1973 to October 1973 (Dollar amounts in billions)
Total Ck T
C& I
C & I term
revolving
1 nn
C&I term and revolving
redi t
redA
t
C & I confirmed
Nonbank financial
C & I c&I
nthsr
lines
inatitu
on
Real estate mrt
Ca
o
Total unused commiternts
amt.
7 chg.
amt.
% chg.
amt.
% chg.
amt.
% chg.
ame.
% chg.
amt.
7 chg.
amt.
% chg.
amt.
% chg.
amt.
7 chg.
July 31
77.8
--
5.3
--
18.1
--
24.1
--
50.5
--
3.2
--
23.5
--
9.3
--
110.6
--
August 31
78.0
0.2
5.7
-0.6
18.6
2.9
23.8 -1.2
51.2
1.4
3.0
-8.0
24.7
5.1
9.4
0.9
112.1
1.4
September 30
77.1
-1.2
5.0
-3.8
17.9 -3.5
23.0 -3.6
51.2
0.1
2.8
-3.7
24.9
0.8
8.9
-4.8
110.9
-1.1
October 31
79.9
3.7
5.2
2.8
18.1
1.0
23.3
53.5
4.5
3.0
6.6
26.1
4.5
8.5
-4.5
114.5
3.2
2.1
2.7
-0.1
-1.9
--
-0.8 -3.3
3.0
5.9
-0,2
-6.3
2.6
11.1
-0.8
-8.6
3.9
3.5
July 1973 - Oct. 1973 change
--
Fumber of banks = 134
NOTE:
Minor inconsistencies
may occur in the figures due to rounding.
1.4
Table 3 Loan Commitments at Large U.S. Banks (Dollar amounts in billions)
As of October 31, 1973
Unused Commitments
Per Cent Distribution
Loans under 1/ Commitments
Per Cent Distribution
Memo: Sept. 30 Utilization , Utilization 2/ ratio (%)ratio (%) ,
82.0 5.9 18.3 23.7 53.9 4.5
69.8 4.6 15.6 20.2 45.9 3.8
68.2 18.3 18.8 37.1 24.8 6.3
65.8 17.7 18.1 35.8 23.9 6.1
45.4 77.2 50.7 61.0 31.5 58.3
46.7 77.7 50.7 61.4 33.6 59.4
Nonbank financial institutions 26.7
22.7
18.1
17.5
40.4
41.0
17.7e
16.6
66.8
65.6
100.0
46.9
47.9
Total C & I commitments Term loans Revolving credits Total: term and revolving Confirmed lines Other commitments
Real estate mortgages Total
8.8
7.5
117.5
100.0
104.1
Number of banks = 134
1/ Loans under commitments are those loans made under commitments currently or previously in force, less repayments of principal. 2/ The utilization ratio is the ratio expressed as a percentage of loans under commitments to the sum of unused commitments and loans under commitments. e -partially estinated. NOTE: Minor inconsistencies may occur in the figures due to rounding
C-
APPENDIX C:
1
DEMAND DEPOSIT OWNERSHIP SURVEY* October, 1973
Demand deposit ownership data for weekly reporting banks indicate a slightly larger increase in gross IPC deposits (not seasonally adjusted) at these institutions in October than in the same The October strength (See Table 1.) month of previous survey years. in IPC demand deposits followed relatively weak growth in September, which is consistent with the pattern of M1 expansion over the SeptemberOctober period. The largest proportion of the increase in total IPC balances at large banks in October occurred in deposits of nonfinancial businesses; but when compared to previous years, this growth appeard to be mostly seasonal. However, the $500 million increase in deposits held by financial businesses was considerably larger than the average October rise in the 3 previous survey years. The unusual pickup in financial institution deposits in October may have reflected in part an increa in balances of thrift institutions which during this period still faced considerable uncertainty about the future direction of thrift deposit flows. Consumer and foreign held IPC deposits at weekly reporting banks--which in previous October surveys have not grown at all-increased by very small amounts in the most recent survey month.
*Prepared by Martha Scanlon, Economist, Banking Section, Division
of Research and Statistics.
C-
2
Table 1 CHANGES IN THE LEVELS OF GROSS IPC DEMAND DEPOSITS BY OWNERSHIP CATEGORY, WEEKLY REPORTING BANKS (Billions of dollars, not seasonally adjusted) Month/ Year Jan. Feb. March April May June July August Sept. October Nov. Dec.
Jan. Feb. March April May June July August Sept. October Nov. Dec.
FINANCIAL BUSINESS 1970 1971 1972 1973
.1 -.9 .7 -.2 .4 -.1
.4 0 .3 0 -.4 .3 .1 -.8 .5 .1 -.1 .7
0 .7 .3 .3 -.6 .4 .3 -.7 .1 .4 .4 .2
1970
FOREIGN 1971 1972
0 -.2 0 0 -.1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -.1 0 0 0 .1
-.1 0 .1 0 .1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.3 -.7 .1 0 -.5 .4 .6 -.5 .2 .5
1973 0 .2 0 .2 .1 0 .1 0 0 .1
NONFINANCIAL BUSINESS 1970 1971 1972 1973
-.1 0 1.0 -.1 .2 2.2
-1.7 -2.2 .2 .9 - .5 1.3 .5 -1.3 1.2 .9 .3 2.8
1970
ALL OTHER 1971 1972
0 -.5 .6 .3 -.4 .1
0 0 .2 0 -.2 .5 -.6 -.4 .5 -.1 .1 .5
-1.8 -1.4 .5 1.0 - .8 1.1 1.3 -1.1 1.5 1.0 .5 3.9
0 0 .1 -.1 -.2 .3 0 -.2 .4 0 .1 .4
-1.3 -2.8 -1.2 .3 - .2 1.6 .3 -1.6 .9 1.0
1973 .2 -.2 -.2 0 0 -.1 .3 -.4 .4 .1
1970
.3 0 .6 -.3 .2 2.2
1970
.3 -1.5 2.9 - .3 .3 4.5
CONSUMER 1971 1972 .4 -.6 .8 1.4 -1.2 .4 .4 -,5 .3 0 .1 0
.7 -1.0 .6 2.0 -1.6 .4 .4 -.2 .3 0 .4 .5
TOTAL 1971 1972 -1.0 -2.8 1.6 2.4 -2.4 2.5 .4 -3.0 2.4 .8 .3 4.1
-1.2 -3.1 1.6 3.2 -3.2 2.2 2.0 -2.2 2.3 1.4 1.4 5.1
1973 .6 -1.5 .2 2.1 -1.7 .2 .2 0 .1 .1
1973 -.2 -5.1 -1.1 2.6 -2.4 2.1 1.5 -2.6 1.7 1.7
Cite this document
Federal Reserve (1973, December 17). Greenbook/Tealbook. Greenbooks, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/greenbook_19731218_part3
@misc{wtfs_greenbook_19731218_part3,
author = {Federal Reserve},
title = {Greenbook/Tealbook},
year = {1973},
month = {Dec},
howpublished = {Greenbooks, Federal Reserve},
url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/greenbook_19731218_part3},
note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}