Our financial statements include the consolidated accounts of National Rural Utilities Cooperative Finance Corporation (“CFC”), National Cooperative Services Corporation (“NCSC”), Rural Telephone Finance Cooperative (“RTFC”) and subsidiaries created and controlled by CFC to hold foreclosed assets resulting from defaulted loans or bankruptcy. CFC and its consolidated entities have not held any foreclosed assets since the fiscal year ended May 31, 2017. Our principal operations are currently organized for management reporting purposes into three business segments, which are based on the accounts of each of the legal entities included in our consolidated financial statements and discussed below.
The business affairs of CFC, NCSC and RTFC are governed by separate boards of directors for each entity. We provide information on CFC’s corporate governance in “Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.” We provide information on the members of each of these entities below in “Item 1. Business—Members” and describe the financing products offered to members by each entity under “Item 1. Business—Loan and Guarantee Programs.” Information on the financial performance of our business segments is disclosed in “Note 16—Business Segments.” Unless stated otherwise, references to “we,” “our” or “us” relate to CFC and its consolidated entities. All references to members within this document include members, associates and affiliates of CFC and its consolidated entities, except where indicated otherwise.
CFC
CFC is a member-owned, nonprofit finance cooperative association incorporated under the laws of the District of Columbia in April 1969. CFC’s principal purpose is to provide its members with financing to supplement the loan programs of the Rural Utilities Service (“RUS”) of the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”). CFC makesextends loans to its rural electric members so they can acquire, constructfor construction, acquisitions, system and operatefacility repairs and maintenance, enhancements and ongoing operations to support the goal of electric distribution and generation and transmission (“power supply”) systems and related facilities.of providing reliable, affordable power to the customers they service. CFC also provides its members with credit enhancements in the form of letters of credit and guarantees of debt obligations. As a cooperative, CFC is owned by and exclusively serves its membership, which consists of not-for-profit entities or subsidiaries or affiliates of not-for-profit entities. CFC is exempt from federal income taxes under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. As a member-owned cooperative, CFC’s objective is not to maximize profit, but rather to offer members cost-based financial products and services. As described below under “Allocation and Retirement of Patronage Capital,” CFC annually allocates its net earnings, which consist of net income excluding the effect of certain noncash accounting entries, to: (i) a cooperative educational fund; (ii) a general reserve, if necessary; (iii) members based on each member’s patronage of CFC’s loan programs during the year; and (iv) a members’ capital reserve. CFC funds its activities primarily through a combination of public and private issuances of debt securities, member investments and retained equity. As a Section 501(c)(4) tax-exempt, member-owned cooperative, weCFC cannot issue equity securities.
Our financial statements include the consolidated accounts of CFC, National Cooperative Services Corporation (“NCSC”), Rural Telephone Finance Cooperative (“RTFC”) and subsidiaries created and controlled by CFC to hold foreclosed assets resulting from defaulted loans or bankruptcy. We did not carry any foreclosed assets on our consolidated balance sheet as of May 31, 2019 or May 31, 2018. Unless stated otherwise, references to “we,” “our” or “us” relate to CFC and its consolidated entities. All references to members within this document include members, associates and affiliates of CFC and its consolidated entities, except where indicated otherwise.NCSC
NCSC is a taxable cooperative incorporated in 1981 in the District of Columbia as a member-owned cooperative association. The principal purpose of NCSC is to provide financing to its members, entities eligible to be members of CFC and the for-profit and not-for-profit entities that are owned, operated or controlled by, or provide significant benefit to Class
A, B and C members of CFC. See “Members” below for a description of our member classes. NCSC’s membership consists of distribution systems, power supply systems and statewide and regional associations that were members of CFC as of May 31, 2019.2022. CFC, which is the primary source of funding for NCSC, manages NCSC’s business operations under a management agreement that is automatically renewable on an annual basis unless terminated by either party. NCSC pays CFC a fee and, in exchange, CFC reimburses NCSC for loan losses under a guarantee agreement. As a taxable cooperative, NCSC pays income tax based on its reported taxable income and deductions. NCSC is headquartered with CFC in Dulles, Virginia.
RTFC
RTFC is a taxable Subchapter T cooperative association originally incorporated in South Dakota in 1987 and reincorporated as a member-owned cooperative association in the District of Columbia in 2005. RTFC’s principal purpose is to provide financing for its rural telecommunications members and their affiliates. RTFC’s membership consists of a combination of not-for-profit and for-profit entities. CFC is the sole lender to and manages RTFC’s business operations through a management agreement that is automatically renewable on an annual basis unless terminated by either party. RTFC pays CFC a fee and, in exchange, CFC reimburses RTFC for loan losses under a guarantee agreement. As permitted under Subchapter T of the Internal Revenue Code, RTFC pays income tax based on its taxable income, excluding patronage-sourced earnings allocated to its patrons. RTFC is headquartered with CFC in Dulles, Virginia.
Our principal operations are currently organized for management reporting purposes into three business segments: CFC, NCSC and RTFC. We provide information on the financial performance of our business segments in “Note 15—Business Segments.”
OurCFC was established by and for the rural electric cooperative network to provide affordable financing alternatives to electric cooperatives. While our business strategy and policies are set by our boardthe CFC Board of directorsDirectors and may be amended or revised from time to time, by the boardfundamental goal of directors. We are a nonprofit tax-exempt cooperative finance organization, whose primary focusour overall business model is to providework with our members with the credit products they need to fundensure that CFC is able to meet their operations. As such, our business focuses on lendingfinancing needs, as well as provide industry expertise and strategic services to electric systemsaid them in delivering affordable and securing accessreliable essential services to capital through diverse funding sources at rates that allow us to offer cost-based credit products to our members.their communities.
Focus on Electric Lending
CFC focusesAs a member-owned, nonprofit finance cooperative, our primary objective is to provide our members with the credit products they need to fund their operations. As such, we primarily focus on lending to its member electric utility cooperatives. Substantially allsystems and securing access to capital through diverse funding sources at rates that allow us to offer cost-based credit products to our members. Rural electric cooperatives, most of our electric cooperative borrowers continuewhich are not-for-profit entities, were established to demonstrate stable operating performance and strong financial ratios. Ourprovide electricity in rural areas historically deemed too costly to be served by investor-owned utilities. As such, our electric cooperative members experience limited competition asbecause they generally operate in exclusive territories, and the majority of which are not rate regulated. Loans to electric utility organizations representedaccounted for approximately 98% and 99% of our total loans outstanding as of both May 31, 20192022 and 2018,2021, respectively. Substantially all of our electric cooperative borrowers continued to demonstrate stable operating performance and strong financial ratios as of May 31, 2022.
Maintain Diversified Funding Sources
We strive to maintain diversified funding sources beyond capital market offerings of debt securities. We offer various short- and long-term unsecured investment products to our members and affiliates, including commercial paper, select notes, daily liquidity fund notes, medium-term notes and subordinated certificates. We continue to issue debt securities, such as secured collateral trust bonds, unsecured medium-term notes and dealer commercial paper, in the capital markets. We also have access to funds through bank revolving line of credit arrangements, government-guaranteed programs such as funding from the Federal Financing Bank that is guaranteed by RUS through the Guaranteed Underwriter Program of the USDA (the “Guaranteed Underwriter Program”), as well as private placement note purchase agreements with the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation (“Farmer Mac”). We provide additional information on our funding sources in “Item 7. MD&A—Consolidated Balance Sheet Analysis,” “Item 7. MD&A—Liquidity Risk,” “Note 6—Short-Term Borrowings,” “Note 7—Long-Term Debt,” “Note 8—Subordinated Deferrable Debt” and “Note 9—Members’ Subordinated Certificates.”
Our consolidated membership, after taking into consideration entities that are members of both CFC and NCSC and eliminating overlapping members between CFC, NCSC and RTFC, totaled 1,425 members and 248 associates as of May 31, 2022, compared with 1,424 members and 246 associates as of May 31, 2021.
CFC
CFC lends to its members and associates.associates and also provides credit enhancements in the form of guarantees of debt obligations and letters of credit. Membership in CFC is limited to cooperative or not-for-profit rural electric systems that are eligible to borrow from RUS under its Electric Loan Program and affiliates of these entities. CFC categorizes its members, all of which are not-for-profit entities or subsidiaries or affiliates of not-for-profit entities, into classes based on member type because the demands and needs of each member class differs. Affiliates represent holding companies, subsidiaries and other entities that are owned, controlled or operated by members. Members are not required to have outstanding loans from RUS as a condition of borrowing from CFC. CFC membership consists of members in 50 states and three U.S. territories. In addition to members, CFC has associates that are nonprofit groups or entities organized on a cooperative basis that are owned, controlled or operated by members and are engaged in or plan to engage in furnishing non-electric services primarily for the benefit of the ultimate consumers of CFC members. Associates are not eligible to vote on matters put to a vote of the membership. CFC’s members, by member class, and associates were as follows as of May 31, 2022.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CFC Member | | |
Member Type | | Class | | May 31, 2022 |
Distribution systems | | A | | 842 |
Power supply systems | | B | | 68 |
Statewide and regional associations, including NCSC | | C | | 62 |
National association of cooperatives(1) | | D | | 1 |
Total CFC members | | | | 973 |
Associates, including RTFC | | | | 45 |
Total CFC members and associates | | | | 1,018 |
____________________________
(1) National Rural Electric Cooperative Association is our sole class D member.
NCSC
Membership in NCSC lendsincludes organizations that are Class A, B and C members of CFC, or eligible for such membership and are approved for membership by the NCSC Board of Directors. In addition to its members, NCSC has associates that may include members of CFC, entities eligible to be members of CFC and its associates, for-profit and nonprofitnot-for-profit entities that are owned, operatedcontrolled or controlledoperated by, or provide significant benefit to, Class A, B and C members of CFC. All of NCSC’s members also were CFC members. members as of May 31, 2022. CFC is not, however, a member of NCSC. NCSC’s members and associates were as follows as of May 31, 2022.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CFC Member | | |
Member Type | | Class | | May 31, 2022 |
Distribution systems | | A | | 447 |
Power supply systems | | B | | 3 |
Statewide associations | | C | | 6 |
Total NCSC members | | | | 456 |
Associates | | | | 198 |
Total NCSC members and associates | | | | 654 |
RTFC
Membership in RTFC is limited to cooperative corporations, nonprofit corporations, private corporations, public corporations, utility districts and other public bodies that are approved by the RTFC Board of Directors and are actively borrowing or are eligible to borrow from RUS’s traditional infrastructure loan program. These companies must be engaged directly or indirectly in furnishing telephone services as the licensed incumbent carrier. Holding companies, subsidiaries and other organizations that are owned, controlled or operated by members, which are referred to as affiliates, are eligible to borrow from RTFC. Associates are organizations that provide non-telephone or non-telecommunications services to rural telecommunications companies that are approved by the RTFC Board of Directors. Neither affiliates nor associates are eligible to vote on matters put to a vote of the membership. CFC and NCSC are not members of RTFC. RTFC’s members and associates were as follows as of May 31, 2022.
| | | | | | | | |
Member Type | | May 31, 2022 |
Members | | 453 |
Associates | | 6 |
Total RTFC members and associates | | 459 |
| | |
LOAN AND GUARANTEE PROGRAMS |
CFC lends to its members and associates and organizations affiliated with itsalso provides credit enhancements in the form of guarantees of debt obligations and letters of credit. NCSC and RTFC also lend and provide credit enhancements to their members and associates. See “Item 1. Business—Members” for additionalFor information on the entities that comprise our membership. Loans to NCSC associates may require a guaranteemembership of repayment to NCSC from the CFC member cooperative with which it is affiliated. CFC, NCSC and RTFC, loanssee “Item 1. Business—Members.”
CFC, NCSC and RTFC loan commitments generally contain provisions that restrict further borrower advances or trigger an event of default if there is any material adverse change in the business or condition, financial or otherwise, of the borrower. Below is additional information on the loan and guarantee programs offered by CFC, NCSC and RTFC.
CFC Loan Programs
Long-Term Loans
CFC’s long-term loans generally have the following characteristics:
•terms of up to 35 years on a senior secured basis and terms of up to five years on an unsecured basis;
•amortizing, bullet maturity or serial payment structures;
•the property, plant and equipment financed by and securing the long-term loan has a useful life generally equal to or in excess of the loan maturity;
•flexibility for the borrower to select a fixed interest rate for periods of one to 35 years or a variable interest rate; and
•the ability for the borrower to select various tranches with either a fixed or variable interest rate for each tranche.
Borrowers typically have the option of selecting a fixed or variable interest rate at the time of each advance on long-term loan facilities. When selecting a fixed rate, the borrower has the option to choose a fixed rate for a term of one year through the final maturity of the loan. When the selected fixed interest rate term expires, the borrower may select another fixed rate for a term of one year through the remaining loan maturity or the current variable rate. Long-term fixed rates are set daily for new loan advances and loans that reprice. The fixed rate on each loan is generally determined on the day the loan is advanced or repriced based on the term selected. The variable rate is set on the first day of each month.
To be in compliance with the covenants in the loan agreement and eligible for loan advances, distribution systems generally must maintain an average modified debt service coverage ratio, as defined in the loan agreement, of 1.35 or greater. CFC may make long-term loans to distribution systems, on a case-by-case basis, that do not meet thesethis general criteria.criterion. Power supply systems generally are required: (i) to maintain an average modified debt service coverage ratio, as defined in the loan agreement, of 1.00 or greater; (ii) to establish and collect rates and other revenue in an amount to yield margins for interest, as defined in an indenture, in each fiscal year sufficient to equal at least 1.00; or (iii) both. CFC may make long-term loans to power supply systems, on a case-by-case basis, that may include other requirements, such as maintenance of a minimum equity level.
Line of Credit Loans
Line of credit loans are designed primarily to assist borrowers with liquidity and cash management and are generally advanced at variable interest rates. Line of credit loans are typically revolving facilities. Certain line of credit loans require the borrower to pay off the principal balance for at least five consecutive business days at least once during each 12-month period. Line of credit loans are generally unsecured and may be conditional or unconditional facilities.
Line of credit loans can be made on an emergency basis when financing is needed quickly to address weather-related or other unexpected events and can also arebe made available as interim financing when a member either receives RUS approval to obtain a loan and is awaiting its initial advance of funds or submits a loan application that is pending approval from RUS (sometimes referred to as “bridge loans”). In these cases, when the borrower receives the RUS loan advance, the funds must be used to repay the bridge loans.
Syndicated Line of Credit and Term Loans
A syndicatedSyndicated line of credit loan isand term loans are typically a large financingfinancings offered by a group of lenders that work together to provide funds for a single borrower. Syndicated loans are generally unsecured, floating-rate loans that can be provided on a
revolving or term basis for tenors that range from several months to five years. Syndicated financings are arranged for borrowers on a case-by-case basis. CFC may act as lead lender, arranger and/or administrative agent for the syndicated facilities. CFC will syndicate these line of credit facilities on a best effort basis.
NCSC Loan Programs
NCSC makes loans to electric cooperatives and their subsidiaries that provide non-electric services in the energy and telecommunication industries as well as to entities that provide substantial benefit to CFC members, including eligible solar energy providers and investor-owned utilities. Loans to NCSC associates may require a guarantee of repayment to NCSC from the CFC member cooperative with which it is affiliated.
Long-Term Loans
NCSC’s long-term loans generally have the following characteristics:
•terms of up to 3530 years on a senior secured orbasis and terms of up to five years on an unsecured basis;
•amortizing, balloon, bullet maturity or serial payment structures;
•the property, plant and equipment financed by and securing the long-term loan has a useful life equal to or in excess of the loan maturity;
•flexibility for the borrower to select a fixed interest rate for periods of one to 3530 years or a variable interest rate; and
•the ability for the borrower to select various tranches with either a fixed or variable interest rate for each tranche.
NCSC allows borrowers to select a fixed interest rate or a variable interest rate at the time of each advance on long-term loan facilities. When selecting a fixed rate, the borrower has the option to choose a fixed rate for a term of one year through the final maturity of the loan. When the selected fixed interest rate term expires, the borrower may select another fixed rate for a term of one year through the remaining loan maturity or the current variable rate. The fixed rate on a loan generally is determined on the day the loan is advanced or repriced based on the term selected. The variable rate is set on the first day of each month.
Line of Credit Loans
NCSC also provides revolving line of credit loans to assist borrowers with liquidity and cash management on terms similar to those provided by CFC as described herein.
RTFC Loan Programs
Long-Term Loans
RTFC primarily makes long-term loans to rural local exchange carriers or holding companies of rural local exchange carriers for debt refinancing, construction or upgrades of infrastructure, acquisitions and other corporate purposes. Most of these rural telecommunications companies have diversified their operations and also provide broadband services.
Long-Term Loans
RTFC’s long-term loans generally have the following characteristics:
•terms not exceeding 10 years on a senior secured basis and terms of up to five years on an unsecured basis;
•amortizing or bullet maturity payment structures;
•the property, plant and equipment financed by and securing the long-term loan has a useful life generally equal to or in excess of the loan maturity;
•flexibility for the borrower to select a fixed interest rate for periods from one year to the final loan maturity or a variable interest rate; and
•the ability for the borrower to select various tranches with either a fixed or variable interest rate for each tranche.
When a selected fixed interest rate term expires, generally the borrower may select another fixed-rate term or the current variable rate. The fixed rate on a loan is generally determined on the day the loan is advanced or converted to a fixed rate based on the term selected. The variable rate is set on the first day of each month.
To borrow from RTFC, a rural telecommunication system generally must be able to demonstrate the ability to achieve and maintain an annual debt service coverage ratio of 1.25. RTFC may make long-term loans to rural telecommunication systems, on a case-by-case basis, that do not meet this general criterion.
Line of Credit Loans
RTFC also provides revolving line of credit loans to assist borrowers with liquidity and cash management on terms similar to those provided by CFC as described herein.
Loan Features and Options
Interest Rates
As a member-owned cooperative finance organization, we areCFC is a cost-based lender. As such, our interest rates are set based on a yield that we believe will generate a reasonable level of earnings to cover our cost of funding, general and administrative expenses and provision for credit losses. Long-term fixed rates are set daily for new loan loss provision.advances and loans that reprice. The fixed rate on each loan is generally determined on the day the loan is advanced or repriced based on the term selected. The variable rate is established monthly. Various standardized discounts may reduce the stated interest rates for borrowers meeting certain criteria related to performance, volume, collateral and equity requirements.
Conversion Option
Generally, a borrower may convert a long-term loan from a variable interest rate to a fixed interest rate at any time without a fee and convert a long-term loan from a fixed rate to another fixed rate or to a variable rate at any time based on current loan policies.generally subject to a make-whole premium.
Prepayment Option
Generally, borrowers may prepay long-term fixed-rate loans at any time, subject to payment of an administrative fee and a make-whole premium, and prepay long-term variable-rate loans at any time, subject to payment of an administrative fee. Line of credit loans may be prepaid at any time without a fee.
Loan Security
Long-term loans made by CFC typically are senior secured on parity with other secured lenders (primarily RUS), if any, by all assets and revenue of the borrower, subject to standard liens typical in utility mortgages such as those related to taxes, worker’s compensation awards, mechanics’ and similar liens, rights-of-way and governmental rights. We are able to obtain liens on parity with liens for the benefit of RUS because RUS’ form of mortgage expressly provides for other lenders such as CFC to have a parity lien position if the borrower satisfies certain conditions or obtains a written lien accommodation from RUS. When we make loans to borrowers that have existing loans from RUS, we generally require those borrowers to either obtain such a lien accommodation or satisfy the conditions necessary for our loan to be secured on parity under the mortgage with the loan from RUS. As noted above, CFC line of credit loans generally are unsecured.
We provide additional information on our loan programs in the sections “Item 7. MD&A—Consolidated Balance Sheet Analysis,” “Item 7. MD&A—Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements” and “Item 7. MD&A—Credit Risk.”
When we guarantee our members’ debt obligations, we use the same credit policies and monitoring procedures for guarantees as for loans. If a member system defaults in its obligation to pay debt service, then we are obligated to pay any required amounts under our guarantees. Meeting our guarantee obligations satisfies the underlying obligation of our member systems and prevents the exercise of remedies by the guarantee beneficiary based upon a payment default by a member system. The member system is required to repay any amount advanced by us with interest pursuant to the documents evidencing the member system’s reimbursement obligation. We were not required to perform pursuant to any of our guarantee obligations during the year ended May 31, 2019.
Guarantees of Long-Term Tax-Exempt Bonds
We guarantee debt issued for our members’ construction or acquisition of pollution control, solid waste disposal, industrial development and electric distribution facilities. Governmental authorities issue such debt on a nonrecourse basis and the
interest thereon is exempt from federal taxation. The proceeds of the offering are made available to the member system, which in turn is obligated to pay the governmental authority amounts sufficient to service the debt.
If a system defaults for failure to make the debt payments and any available debt service reserve funds have been exhausted, we are obligated to pay scheduled debt service under our guarantee. Such payment will prevent the occurrence of an event of payment default that would otherwise permit acceleration of the bond issue. The system is required to repay any amount that we advance pursuant to our guarantee plus interest on that advance. This repayment obligation, together with the interest thereon, is typically senior secured on parity with other lenders (including, in most cases, RUS), by a lien on substantially all of the system’s assets. If the security instrument is a common mortgage with RUS, then in general, we may not exercise remedies for up to two years following default. However, if the debt is accelerated under the common mortgage because of a determination that the related interest is not tax-exempt, the system’s obligation to reimburse us for any guarantee payments will be treated as a long-term loan. The system is required to pay us initial and/or ongoing guarantee fees in connection with these transactions.
Certain guaranteed long-term debt bears interest at variable rates that are adjusted at intervals of one to 270 days including weekly, every five weeks or semi-annually to a level favorable to their resale or auction at par. If funding sources are available, the member that issued the debt may choose a fixed interest rate on the debt. When the variable rate is reset, holders of variable-rate debt have the right to tender the debt for purchase at par. In some transactions, we have committed to purchase this debt as liquidity provider if it cannot otherwise be re-marketed. If we hold the securities, the member cooperative pays us the interest earned on the bonds or interest calculated based on our short-term variable interest rate, whichever is greater. The system is required to pay us stand-by liquidity fees in connection with these transactions.
Letters of Credit
In exchange for a fee, we issue irrevocable letters of credit to support members’ obligations to energy marketers, other third parties and to the USDA Rural Business-Cooperative Service. Each letter of credit is supported by a reimbursement agreement with the member on whose behalf the letter of credit was issued. In the event a beneficiary draws on a letter of credit, the agreement generally requires the member to reimburse us within one year from the date of the draw, with interest accruing from the draw date at our line of credit variable interest rate.
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) has designated CFC as an acceptable source for letters of credit in support of USDA and FCC programs that encourage deployment of high-speed broadband services throughout rural America. The designation allows CFC to provide credit support for rural electric cooperatives and telecommunication cooperativesproviders that participate in programs designed to increase deployment of broadband services to underserved rural areas.
Other Guarantees
We may provide other guarantees as requested by our members. Other guarantees are generally unsecured with guarantee fees payable to us.
We provide additional information on our guarantee programs and outstanding guarantee amounts as of May 31, 20192022 and 20182021 in “Item 7. MD&A—Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements” and “Note 13—Guarantees.”
We invest funds in accordance with policies adopted by our board of directors. Pursuant to our current investment policy, an Investment Management Committee was established to oversee and administer our investments with the objective of seeking returns consistent with the preservation of principal and maintenanceto provide a supplementary source of adequate liquidity. The Investment Management Committee may direct funds to be invested in:in direct obligations of, or obligations guaranteed by, the United States (“U.S.”) or agencies thereof and investments in relatively short-term U.S. dollar-denominated fixed-income securities such as government-sponsored enterprises, certain financial institutions in the form of overnight investment products and Eurodollar deposits, bankers’ acceptances, certificates of deposit, working capital acceptances or other deposits. Other permitted investments include highly rated obligations, such as commercial paper, certain obligations of foreign governments, municipal securities, asset backedasset-backed securities, mortgage-backed securities and certain corporate bonds. In addition, we may invest in overnight or term repurchase agreements. Investments are denominated in USU.S. dollars exclusively. All of these investments are subject to requirements and limitations set forth in our board investment policy.
Overview
SinceOur rural electric cooperative members operate in the enactmentenergy sector, which is one of 16 critical infrastructure sectors identified by the U.S. government because the services provided by each sector, all of which have an impact on other sectors, are deemed as essential in supporting and maintaining the overall functioning of the U.S. economy. Rural Electrification Act in 1936, RUS has financed the construction of electric generating plants, transmission facilities and distribution systems to provide electricity to rural areas. Today, with CFC membership comprised, incooperatives are an integral part of ruralthe U.S. electric utility systems in 49 states and three U.S. territories, the percentage of farms and residences in rural areasindustry, a sub-sector of the United States receiving central stationenergy sector. According to the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (“NRECA”,) electric service increased from 11%cooperatives serve as power providers for approximately 1 in 19348 individuals in the U.S., totaling approximately 42 million people, including over 20 million businesses, homes, schools and farms across 48 states. Electric cooperatives provide power to almost 100% currently.
RUS provides loans, guarantees and other formsapproximately 56% of financial assistance to rural electric system borrowers. Under the Rural Electrification Act, RUS is authorized to make direct loans to systems that qualify fornation’s land mass. Based on the hardship program (5% interest rate), the municipal rate program (based on a municipal government obligation index) and a Treasury rate program (at Treasury plus 0.125%). RUS also is authorized to guarantee loans that bear interest at a rate agreed uponlatest annual data reported by the borrowerU.S. Energy Information Administration, a statistical and analytical agency within the lender (which generally has beenU.S. Department of Energy, the Federal Financing Bank). RUS exercises oversightelectric utility industry had revenue of borrowers’ operations. Its loans and guarantees are securedapproximately $394 billion in 2020.
CFC was established by a mortgage or indenture on substantially all of the system’s assets and revenue.
Leading up to CFC’s formation in 1969, there was a growing need for capital for electric utility cooperatives to build new electric facilities due to growth in rural America. The electric cooperatives formed CFC to provideserve as a supplemental financing source to RUS loan programs and to mitigate uncertainty related to government funding.
CFC aggregates the combined strength of its rural electric member cooperatives to access the public capital markets and other funding sources. CFC works cooperatively with RUS; however, CFC is not a federal agency or a government-sponsored enterprise. Our members are not required to have outstanding loans from RUS as a condition of borrowing from CFC. CFC meets the financial needs of its rural electric members by:
•providing financing to RUS-eligible rural electric utility systems for infrastructure, including for those facilities that are not eligible for financing from RUS;
•providing bridge loans required by borrowers in anticipation of receiving RUS funding;
•providing financial products not otherwise available from RUS, including lines of credit, letters of credit, guarantees on tax-exempt financing, weather-related disaster recoveryemergency lines of credit, unsecured loans and investment products such as commercial paper, select notes, medium-term notes and member capital securities, select notessecurities; and medium-term notes; and
•meeting the financing needs of those rural electric systems that repay or prepay their RUS loans and replace the government loans with private capital.
Many electric cooperatives are making investments in fiber to support core electric plant communications. Some of these electric cooperatives are leveraging these fiber assets to offer broadband services, either directly or through partnering with local telecommunication companies and others.
Electric Member Operating Environment
In general, electric cooperatives have not been significantly impacted by the effects of retail deregulation. There were 19 states that had adopted programs that allow consumers to choose their supplier of electricity as of May 31, 2019.2022. Depending on the state, the choices can range from being limited to commercial and industrial consumers to “retail choice” for all consumers. In most states, cooperatives have been exempted from or have been allowed to opt out of the regulations allowing for competition. In states offering retail competition, it is important to note that while consumers may be able to
choose their energy supplier, the electric utility still receives compensation for the necessary service of delivering electricity to consumers through its utility transmission and distribution plant.
The electric utility industry is facing a potential decrease to kilowatt-hour sales due to technology advances that increase energy efficiency of all appliances and devices used in the home and in businesses as well as from distributed generation in the form of rooftop solar and home generators (“behind-the-meter generation”). Electric cooperatives are facing the same issues, but in general to a lesser extent than investor-owned power systems. To date, we have not seen negative impacts in the electric cooperative financial results due to behind-the-meter generation.
Electric cooperatives have options available to mitigate the impact of such issues, such as rate structures to ensure that costs are appropriately recovered for grid and other necessary ancillary services. To date,services and the use of electricity for end-uses that would otherwise be powered by fossil fuels where doing so reduces emissions and saves consumers money (“beneficial electrification”). The push away from fossil fuel use may continue the trend toward beneficial electrification such as the adoption of electric vehicles, which may increase kilowatt-hour sales to many utilities. Beneficial electrification may also improve the utilities’ ability to balance load profiles by leveraging and balancing consumer and system assets such as electric vehicles and battery storage.
Facilitation of Rural Broadband Expansion by Electric Cooperatives
Many electric cooperatives are making investments in fiber to support core electric plant communications. Some of these electric cooperatives are leveraging these fiber assets to offer broadband services, either directly or through partnering with local telecommunication companies and others. Over 30 electric cooperatives were awarded approximately $250 million in federal funding through the Connect America Fund Phase II auction (“CAF II”) process by the FCC that was held in 2018. The awarded funds are being distributed over a 10-year period. More than 190 electric cooperatives, many of which are already offering or building out projects, were awarded approximately $1.6 billion though the FCC’s Rural Development Opportunity Fund (“RDOF”). Those funds also will be distributed over a 10-year period. As federal and state governments increase funding opportunities for electric cooperatives in order to offer broadband services, we have not seen negative impactswill continue to increase our credit support, which may include loans and/or letters of credit, to borrowers who participate in CAF II, RDOF and other programs designed to increase broadband services in rural areas. CFC began tracking loans for broadband services in October 2017. We estimate, based on information available to us, loans outstanding to our members related to the electric cooperative financial results dueconstruction and operation of broadband services increased to behind-the-meter generation.approximately $1,647 million as of May 31, 2022, from approximately $854 million as of May 31, 2021.
Regulatory Oversight of Electric Cooperatives
There are 11 states in which some or all electric cooperatives are subject to state regulatory oversight of their rates and tariffs (terms and conditions) by state utility commissions.commissions and do not have a right to opt out of regulation. Those states are Arizona, Arkansas, Hawaii, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, New Mexico, Vermont, Virginia and West Virginia.
Regulatory jurisdiction by state commissions generally includes rate and tariff regulation, the issuance of securities and the enforcement of service territory as provided for by state law.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) has regulatory authority over three aspects of electric power, as provided for under Parts II and III of the Federal Power Act (“FPA”) provide the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) with regulatory authority over three aspects of electric power::
•the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce;
•the sale of electric energy at wholesale in interstate commerce; and
•the approval and enforcement of reliability standards affecting all users, owners and operators of the bulk power system.
TheIn addition, FERC also regulates the issuance of securities by public utilities under the FPA providedin the event the applicable state commission does not.
Our electric distribution and power supply members are subject to regulation by various federal, regional, state and local authorities with respect to the environmental effects of their operations. At the federal level, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) from time to time proposes rulemakings that could force the electric utility industry to incur capital costs to comply with potential new regulations and possibly retire coal-fired generating capacity. Since there are only
11 states in which some or all electric cooperatives are subject to state regulatory oversight of their rates and tariffs, in most cases any associated costs of compliance can be passed on to cooperative consumers without additional regulatory approval. On
On June 19, 2019,30, 2022, the Supreme Court limited the power of the EPA issuedto regulate greenhouse gas emissions from existing power plants. The Supreme Court noted that Congress did not give the final Affordable Clean Energy (“ACE”) rule. The ACE rule replacesEPA the 2015authority to adopt a regulatory scheme that devised emissions caps based on the generation-shifting approach the EPA took in the Clean Power Plan, whicha 2015 rule that was stayed bypreviously repealed. However, the U.S. Supreme Court and never went into effect. Falling under Section 111(d)also noted that it was not deciding whether EPA's authority was limited solely to measures that improve the pollution performance of the Federal Clean Air Act, the ACE rule addresses existing sources of emissions and sets a framework under which states should develop plans establishing standards of performance for their existing emissions sources and then submit those plans to the EPA for approval. States will have three years from the date of the final rule to prepare and submit a plan that establishes a standard of performance. It is expected that certain states and environmental groups will challenge the ACE rule in federal litigation.specific individual sources.
Overview
RUS is the largest lender to electric cooperatives. RUS providescooperatives, providing them with long-term secured loans. CFC provides financial products and services to its members, primarily in the form of long-term secured and short-term unsecured loans, to its electric cooperative members to supplement RUS financing, to provide loans to members that have elected not to borrow from RUS, and to bridge long-term financing provided by RUS. We also offer other financing options, such as credit support in the form of letters of credit and guarantees, loan syndications and loan participations. Our credit products are tailored to meet the specific needs of each borrower, and we often offer specific transaction structures that our competitors do not provide. CFC also offers certain risk-mitigation products and interest rate discounts on secured, long-term loans for its members that meet performance, volume, collateral and equity requirements.
Primary Lending Competitors
CFC’s primary competitor is CoBank, ACB, a federally chartered instrumentality of the United StatesU.S. that is a member of the Farm Credit System. CFC also competes with banks, other financial institutions and the capital markets to provide loans and other financial products to our members. As a result, we are competing with the customer service, pricing and funding options our members are able to obtain from these sources. We attempt to minimize the effect of competition by offering a variety of loan options and value-added services and by leveraging the working relationships developed with the majority of our members over the past 5053 years. Further, on an annual basis, we allocate substantially all net earnings to members (i) in the form of patronage capital, which reduces our members’ effective cost of borrowing, and (ii) through the members’ capital reserve. The value-added services that we provide include, but are not limited to, benchmarking tools, financial models, publications and various conferences, meetings, facilitation services and training workshops.
In order to meet other financing needs of our members, we offer options that include credit support in the form of letters of credit and guarantees, loan syndications and loan participations. Our credit products are tailored to meet the specific needs of each member cooperative, and we often offer specific transaction structures that our competitors do not provide. CFC also offers certain risk mitigation products and interest rate discounts on secured, long-term loans for its members that meet certain criteria, including performance, volume, collateral and equity requirements.
CFC has established certain funds to benefit its members. Since 1981, CFC has set aside a portion of its annual net earnings in a cooperative educational fund to promote awareness and appreciation of the cooperative principles. As directed by the CFC Board of Directors, a portion of the contributions to the fund are distributed through the electric cooperative statewide associations. Since 1986, CFC has supported its members’ efforts to protect their service territories from erosion or takeover by other utilities through assistance from the cooperative system integrity fund, which is funded through voluntary contributions from members. Amounts from the integrity fund are distributed to applicants who establish that: (i) all or a significant portion of their consumers, services or facilities face a hostile threat of acquisition or annexation by a competing entity; (ii) face a significant threat in their ability to continue to provide non-electric energy services to customers; or (iii) are facing regulatory, judicial or legislative challenges that threaten their existence under the cooperative business model.
Our rural electric borrowers are mostly private companies; thus, the overall size of the rural electric lending market cannot be determined from public information. We estimate the size of the overall rural electric lending market from the annual financial and statistical reports filed with us by our members using calendar year data; however, there are certain limitations with regard to these estimates, including the following:
while the underlying data included in the financial and statistical reports may be audited, the preparation of the financial and statistical reports is not audited;
in some cases, not all members provide the annual financial and statistical reports on a timely basis to be included in summarized results; and
the financial and statistical reports do not include comprehensive data on indebtedness by lenders other than RUS.
The following table displays long-term debt outstanding to CFC, RUS and other lenders in the electric cooperative industry as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, based on financial data reported to us by our electric utility cooperative members. The data as of December 31, 2018 was provided by 812 distribution systems and 54 power supply systems, while the data as of December 31, 2017 was provided by 812 distribution systems and 58 power supply systems.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | December 31, |
| | 2018 | | 2017 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Debt Outstanding | | % of Total | | Debt Outstanding | | % of Total |
Total long-term debt reported by members:(1) | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 49,464,999 |
| | | | $ | 48,147,703 |
| | |
Power supply | | 44,876,633 |
| | | | 47,862,984 |
| | |
Less: Long-term debt funded by RUS | | (40,039,961 | ) | | | | (39,180,420 | ) | | |
Members’ non-RUS long-term debt | | $ | 54,301,671 |
| | | | $ | 56,830,267 |
| | |
| | | | | | | | |
Funding source of members’ long-term debt: | | | | | | | | |
Long-term debt funded by CFC | | $ | 22,897,749 |
| | 42 | % | | $ | 22,671,264 |
| | 40 | % |
Long-term debt funded by other lenders | | 31,403,922 |
| | 58 |
| | 34,159,003 |
| | 60 |
|
Members’ non-RUS long-term debt | | $ | 54,301,671 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 56,830,267 |
| | 100 | % |
____________________________
(1) Reported amounts are based on member-provided information, which may not have been subject to audit by an independent accounting firm.
Members’ long-term debt funded by CFC, by type, as of December 31, 2018 and 2017 is summarized further below.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | December 31, |
| | 2018 | | 2017 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Debt Outstanding | | % of Total | | Debt Outstanding | | % of Total |
Distribution | | $ | 18,782,014 |
| | 82 | % | | $ | 18,489,086 |
| | 82 | % |
Power supply | | 4,115,735 |
| | 18 |
| | 4,182,178 |
| | 18 |
|
Long-term debt funded by CFC | | $ | 22,897,749 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 22,671,264 |
| | 100 | % |
We are not able to specifically identify the amount of debt our members have outstanding to CoBank, ACB from either the annual financial and statistical reports our members file with us or from CoBank, ACB’s public disclosure; however, we believe CoBank, ACB is the additional lender, along with CFC and RUS, with significant long-term debt outstanding to rural electric cooperatives.
Rural Electric Lending Market
Most of our rural electric borrowers are non-for-profit, private companies owned by the members they serve. As such, there is limited publicly available information to accurately determine the overall size of the rural electric lending market. We utilize the annual financial and statistical reports submitted to us by our members to estimate the overall size of the rural electric lending market. The substantial majority of our members have a fiscal year-end that corresponds with the calendar year-end. Therefore, the annual information we use to estimate the size of the rural electric market is typically based on the calendar year-end rather than CFC’s fiscal year-end.
Based on financial data submitted to us by our electric utility members, we present the long-term debt outstanding to CFC by member class, RUS and other lenders in the electric cooperative industry as of December 31, 2021 and 2020 in the table below. The data presented as of December 31, 2021, were based on information reported by 812 distribution systems and 47 power supply systems. The data presented as of December 31, 2020, were based on information reported by 811 distribution systems and 52 power supply systems.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | December 31, |
| | 2021 | | 2020 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Debt Outstanding | | % of Total | | Debt Outstanding | | % of Total |
Total long-term debt reported by members:(1) | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 54,909,778 | | | | | $ | 52,274,309 | | | |
Power supply | | 39,789,348 | | | | | 44,830,704 | | | |
Less: Long-term debt funded by RUS | | (41,511,338) | | | | | (39,660,041) | | | |
Members’ non-RUS long-term debt | | $ | 53,187,788 | | | | | $ | 57,444,972 | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
Funding sources of members’ long-term debt: | | | | | | | | |
Long-term debt funded by CFC by member class: | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 21,287,049 | | | 40 | % | | $ | 20,382,616 | | | 36 | % |
Power supply | | 4,791,465 | | | 9 | | | 4,723,956 | | | 8 | |
Long-term debt funded by CFC | | 26,078,514 | | | 49 | | | 25,106,572 | | | 44 | |
Long-term debt funded by other lenders | | 27,109,274 | | | 51 | | | 32,338,400 | | | 56 | |
Members’ non-RUS long-term debt | | $ | 53,187,788 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 57,444,972 | | | 100 | % |
____________________________
(1) Reported amounts are based on member-provided financial information, which may not have been subject to audit by an independent accounting firm.
While we believe our estimates of the overall size of the rural electric lending market serve as a useful tool in gauging the size of this lending sector, they should be viewed as estimates rather than precise measures as there are certain limitations in our estimation methodology, including, but not limited to, the following:
•Although certain underlying data included in the financial and statistical reports provided to us by members may have been audited by an independent accounting firm, our accumulation of the data from these reports has not been subject to a review for accuracy by an independent accounting firm.
•The data presented is not necessarily inclusive of all members because in some cases our receipt of annual member financial and statistical reports may be delayed and not received in a timely manner to incorporate into our market estimates.
•The financial and statistical reports submitted by members include information on indebtedness to RUS, but the reports do not include comprehensive data on indebtedness to other lenders and are not on a consolidated basis.
General
CFC, NCSC and RTFC are not subject to direct federal regulatory oversight or supervision with regard to lending. CFC, NCSC and RTFC are subject to state and local jurisdiction commercial lending and tax laws that pertain to business conducted in each state, including but not limited to lending laws, usury laws and laws governing mortgages. These state and local laws regulate the manner in which we make loans and conduct other types of transactions. The statutes, regulations and policies to which the companies are subject may change at any time. In addition, the interpretation and application by regulators of the laws and regulations to which we are subject may change from time to time. Certain of our contractual arrangements, such as those pertaining to funding obtained through the Guaranteed Underwriter Program, provide for the Federal Financing Bank and RUS to periodically review and assess CFC’s compliance with program terms and conditions.
Derivatives Regulation
CFC engages in over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivative transactions, primarily interest rate swaps, to managehedge interest rate risk. As an end user of derivative financial instruments, CFC is subject to regulations that apply to derivatives generally. The Dodd-Frank Act (“DFA”), enacted July 2010, resulted in, among other things, comprehensive regulation of the over-the-counter (“OTC”) OTC
derivatives market. The DFA provides for an extensive framework for the regulation of OTC derivatives, including mandatory clearing, exchange
trading and transaction reporting of certain OTC derivatives. Subsequent to the enactment of the DFA, the U.S. CommoditiesCommodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) issued a final rule, “Clearing Exemption for Certain Swaps Entered into by Cooperatives,” which created an exemption from mandatory clearing for cooperatives. The CFTC’s final rule, “Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps for Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants,” includes an exemption from margin requirements for uncleared swaps for cooperatives that are financial end users. CFC is an exempt cooperative end user of derivative financial instruments and does not participate in the derivatives markets for speculative, trading or investing purposes and does not make a market in derivatives.
|
| |
MEMBERSHUMAN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT |
CFC’s success in providing industry expertise and responsive service to meet the needs of our members across the U.S. is dependent on the quality of service provided by our employees and their relationships with our members. We therefore strive to align our human capital management strategy with our member-focused mission and core values of service, integrity and excellence. Our consolidated membership, after taking into consideration entitiesobjectives are (i) to attract, develop and retain a highly qualified workforce with diverse backgrounds and experience in multiple areas whose skills and strengths are consistent with CFC’s mission, and (ii) to create an engaged, inclusive and collaborative work culture, both of which we believe are critical to deliver exceptional service to our members.
Governance of Human Capital
CFC’s executive leadership team and board of directors work together to provide oversight on most human capital matters. The compensation committee of the board of directors meets quarterly to review updates to our compensation programs including our salary structure, incentive plans and executive compensation. Our board is provided with periodic updates on succession planning efforts, current human capital management risks and mitigation efforts in addition to any other matters that affect our ability to attract, develop and maintain the talent needed to execute on our corporate objectives.
Recruiting and Retaining Talent
As a financial services organization, our recruitment goal is to attract and retain a highly skilled workforce in a highly competitive talent market. We strive to provide both external candidates and internal employees who are membersseeking a different role with challenging and stimulating career opportunities ranging from entry-level to management and executive positions.
We use a variety of bothmethods to attract highly talented and engaged professionals, including outreach to local universities, recruitment job boards including sites focusing on diversity, a referral bonus program and targeted industry-related job posting sites. When appropriate, we engage with recruiting firms to ensure that we have surveyed a broad scope of active and passive candidates for certain critical positions. We strive to ensure that our employment value proposition presented to candidates accurately reflects the features of working for a mission-driven cooperative like CFC so that we can attract individuals who are highly engaged with our vision to be our members’ most trusted financial resource.
Because much of our business operations involves significant member-facing interaction with a relatively stable base of long-standing member borrowers, we place a priority on the retention of high-performing employees who have extensive, in-depth experience serving the needs of our members. In the prior four fiscal years, our voluntary turnover rate has remained at or below 10%; however, in fiscal year 2022 it substantially increased to 19%. Multiple factors including the COVID-19 pandemic, competition in the labor market, as well as increased CFC staff retirements contributed to the staff turnover increase. Our total turnover remains lower than the average annual financial industry sector separation rates reported by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retirements represented 37% of the departures from CFC in fiscal year 2022, which is a 7% increase over last year. We welcomed 55 new hires this fiscal year and NCSC and eliminating memberships between CFC, NCSC and RTFC, totaled 1,447employed 259 staff members and 222 associates as of May 31, 2019.2022, all of which were located in the U.S. The majority of our workforce is located in our headquarters in Dulles, Virginia.
CFCCFC’s organizational structure has experienced significant changes this fiscal year resulting from the appointment of a new chief executive officer in May 2021 and subsequent changes to the executive team composition. Four senior vice president positions were filled through promotions and one was an external hire. This change in the executive level has also resulted
CFC’s bylaws provide that cooperativein many new opportunities for advancement at other levels within the organization. Of the positions filled by promotion or nonprofit corporations, public corporations, utility districtsexternal hire this fiscal year, 43% were through internal promotions.
Employee Engagement and other public bodies that received or are eligibleDevelopment
As part of our efforts to receive a loan or commitment for a loan from RUS or any successor agency (aspromote an engaged, inclusive and collaborative workplace culture, we encourage employees to expand their capabilities and enhance their career potential through employer-funded onsite training, external training, tuition assistance and professional events. In fiscal year 2022, CFC employees completed more than 3,000 training hours through our internal corporate training as well as subsidiaries, federations or statewidethrough our support of employees’ enrollment in external professional training opportunities. We seek to tailor our training programs to evolving events and regional associationsemployee interests. Examples of training programs offered in the reporting period include Developing Resilience—Balancing Work and Life, Developing Your Leadership Potential, Advanced Leadership Skills, professional and technical topics, and mental health awareness workshops to promote employee well-being. CFC also supports employee development though a company-sponsored Toastmasters chapter, guest speakers from cooperative partners and, when feasible, staff trips to local electric cooperatives to allow new employees to learn first-hand how their efforts contribute to our members’ success.
Compensation and Benefits Packages
Attracting, developing and retaining high-level talent is a key component of our human capital objectives, so we seek to provide competitive compensation and benefits packages. CFC launched an employee Total Rewards survey this fiscal year to solicit feedback on our Total Rewards components, including compensation, benefits and employee development, to determine which offerings are most valued by our staff. In response to employee feedback and talent market conditions, we have implemented several changes to our compensation programs. Effective June 1, 2022, we transitioned to a base salary range structure, which provides greater flexibility in meeting labor market demands and enhances our ability to differentiate pay based on experience and performance. The salary ranges are structured in zones aligned with median market pay for the positions in each zone. We have increased our fiscal year 2023 merit increase budget in order to retain and attract exceptional staff in a highly competitive talent market.
We have also made prospective changes to our incentive compensation program. The short-term and long-term incentive programs will be replaced by a single annual incentive bonus plan in fiscal year 2023. These changes were initiated based on feedback received in our employee Total Rewards survey that are wholly owned or controlled by such entities) are eligible for membership. Oneour current incentive plans did not adequately differentiate pay based on performance and were not achieving the intended purpose of promoting long-term retention and alignment with company performance that employees could directly influence. The new annual incentive plan is based on attainment of our targeted corporate scorecard goals as established at the beginning of each fiscal year and individual performance ratings from our annual review process. Attainment of the criteria for eligibility for RUS financing isannual scorecard goals requires the collective engagement and effort of employees across the company, which we believe incentivizes teamwork and fosters a “rural area” test. CFC relies on the definition of “rural” as specified in the Rural Electrification Act, as amended. “Rural” is defined in the Rural Electrification Act as any area other than a city, town or unincorporated area that has a population of less than 20,000, or any area within the service areacollaborative working environment. The addition of a borrower who, atperformance rating component will enable the dateorganization to differentiate a portion of enactmentincentive compensation, which demonstrates the value of the Food, Conservation and Energy Acta high-performance culture on behalf of 2008, had an outstanding RUS electric loan.our members. The definition of “rural” under the act permits an area to be defined as “rural” regardless of the development of such area subsequent to the approval of the outstanding loan. Thus, those entities that received or qualify for financing from RUS are eligible to apply for membership, upon approval of membershipnew annual incentive plan was approved by the CFC Board of Directors,Directions in May 2022 and subsequently to borrow from CFC regardlesswill be in place for fiscal year 2023.
The employee benefits components of whether there is an outstanding loan with RUS. There are no requirements to maintain membership, although the board has the authority to suspend a member under certain circumstances. CFC has not suspended a member to date.
CFC has the following types of members, allour Total Rewards package include vacation and leave programs; health, dental, vision, life and disability insurance coverage; and flexible spending and health savings plans, most of which are not-for-profit entitiesfunded in whole or subsidiaries or affiliatesin part by CFC. We make investments in the future financial security of not-for-profit entities.
Class A – Distribution Systems
Cooperative or nonprofit corporations, public corporations, utility districtsour employees by offering retirement plans that consist of a 401(k) plan with a company match component and other public bodies,an employer-funded defined benefit retirement plan in which received or are eligible to receive a loan or commitment for a loan from RUS or any successor agency, andCFC makes an annual contribution in an amount that are engaged or planningapproximates 18% of each employee’s base salary, which we believe helps in our efforts to engage employees, retain high-performing employees and reduce turnover. We also offer programs and resources intended to promote work-life balance, assist in furnishing utility servicesnavigating life events and improve employee well-being, such as flexible work schedules, remote work options, an employee assistance program, legal insurance and identity theft coverage services.
COVID-19 Response
We continue to theirplace a high priority on the health and safety of our employees, and also ensure that we are able to meet the needs of our members in an effective and patrons for their use as ultimate consumers. Theefficient manner. In July 2021, the majority of our distribution systemstaff returned to work at CFC’s corporate headquarters building, while continuing to adhere to the COVID-19 workplace safety and health standards
established by Virginia and guidance provided by the CDC. We have been able to maintain business continuity throughout the pandemic and experienced no pandemic-related employee furloughs or layoffs, providing the highest quality of service and delivering effectively on our member-focused mission. We implemented an updated remote work practice that allows for a hybrid work arrangement, providing for employee flexibility while promoting collaboration and efficiency in serving our members.
Open-Door Communications
CFC maintains a strong focus on our core value of integrity in pursuit of our mission. To promote open communications, we maintain an open-door policy and provide multiple avenues for employees to voice their concerns and offer suggestions. Employees are encouraged to report any issues to their manager, senior vice president, corporate compliance, human resources or our corporate ethics helpline. All new employees receive Code of Conduct & Business Ethics training, and we maintain a practice of annual employee review and training to foster a culture of integrity and accountability.
For more than half a century, CFC has helped electric cooperatives provide essential services to rural America. Since their creation in the 1930s to bring electricity to rural homes, electric cooperatives have been essential to the economic vitality and quality of life in communities nationwide, including those in persistent poverty counties.
As a value-based, financial services cooperative, CFC is engaged in sustaining our environment across multiple fronts—from our Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (“LEED”) Gold-certified building and 42-acre ecofriendly campus that serves as CFC’s headquarters to the renewable energy projects we’ve helped finance for the electric cooperative network. CFC’s members are consumer-owned electric cooperatives.
Distribution systems are utilities engaged in retail sales of electricitymoving forward with renewable energy adoption, and we continue to residential and commercial consumers in their defined service areas. Such sales are generally on an exclusive basis using the distribution system’ssupport them by funding renewable energy initiatives that will help build out greater renewable infrastructure including substations, wires and related support systems. Distribution systems vary in size from small systems that serve a few thousand customers to large systems that serve more than 200,000 customers. Thus, the amount of loan funding required by different distribution systems varies significantly. Distribution systems may serve customers in more than one state.
Most distribution systems have long-term power purchase contracts with their power supply systems, which are owned and controlled by the member distribution systems. Wholesale power for resale also comes from other sources, including power supply contracts with government agencies, investor-owned utilities and other entities, and, in some cases, the distribution systems own generating facilities.
Class B – Power Supply Systems
Cooperative or nonprofit corporations that are federations of Class A members or of other Class B members, or both, or that are owned and controlled by Class A members or by other Class B members, or both, and that are engaged or planning to
engage in furnishing utility services primarily to Class A members or other Class B members. Our power supply system members are member-owned electric cooperatives.
The power supply systems vary in size from one with thousands of megawatts of power generation capacity to systems that have no generating capacity, which generally operate transmission lines to supply certain distribution systems or manage power supply purchase arrangements for the benefit of their distribution system members. Thus, the amount of loan funding required by different power supply systems varies significantly. Power supply members may serve distribution systems located in more than one state.
The wholesale power supply contracts with their distribution system members permit the power supply system, subject to regulatory approval in certain instances, to establish rates to produce revenue sufficient to cover debt service, to meet the cost of operation and maintenance of all power supply systems and related facilities and to pay the cost of any power and energy purchased for resale.
Class C – Statewide and Regional Associations
Statewide and regional associations that are wholly owned or controlled by Class A members or Class B members, or both, or that are wholly owned subsidiaries of a CFC member, and that do not furnish utility services but supply other forms of service to their members. Certain states have an organization that represents and serves the distribution systems and power supply systems located in the state. Such statewide organizations provide training and legislative, regulatory, media and related services.
Class D – National Associations of Cooperatives
National associations of cooperatives that are Class A, Class B and Class C members, provided said national associations have, at the time of admission to membership in CFC, members domiciled in at least 80% of the states in the United States. National
CFC has developed a Sustainability Bond Framework, which aligns with the Sustainability Bond Guidelines (“SBG”), as administered by the International Capital Markets Association (“ICMA”), under which we can issue sustainability bonds and use the proceeds to finance or refinance projects to enhance access to broadband services and renewable energy projects that will provide positive environmental and social impact in rural America. CFC issued its first sustainability bond in October 2020, the first sustainability bond issued for the electric cooperative industry. Today, CFC is proud to support the electric cooperatives by providing approximately $1,647 million in outstanding loans to support broadband expansion. These efforts have opened new opportunities in many rural communities by providing access to affordable high-speed internet service for the first time.
True to our core values of service, integrity and excellence, CFC continues to help electric cooperatives support the communities that created them, whether it’s through contributions from the CFC Educational Fund or helping them access capital from the USDA’s Rural Electric Cooperative AssociationEconomic Development Loan and Grant (“NRECA”REDL&G”) is our sole Class D member. NRECA provides training, sponsors regional and national meetings, and provides legislative, regulatory, media and related services for nearly all rural electric cooperatives.program, which fosters economic development. Over the past 20 years, CFC has contributed an estimated $203 million to the REDL&G program.
CFC Class A, B, C and D members are eligibleelectric cooperatives operate under seven cooperative principles: open and voluntary membership; democratic member control; members’ economic participation; autonomy and independence; education, training and information; cooperation among cooperatives; and concern for community. Through our “Commitment to vote on matters put to a vote of the membership.
CFC’s membership as of May 31, 2019 consisted of:
842 Class A distribution systems;
67 Class B power supply systems;
64 Class C statewide and regional associations, including NCSC; and
1 Class D national association of cooperatives.
In addition,Excellence” workshops, CFC has associates that are nonprofit groups or entities organizedtrained electric cooperative directors and executive staff on agovernance best practices, including how electric cooperative basis that are owned, controlled or operated by Class A, B, C or D membersleaders should demonstrate principled leadership, financial stewardship, and are engaged in or planeffective governance and management risk oversight.
With these efforts CFC empowers electric cooperatives to engage in furnishing non-electric services primarily for the benefitfulfill their historic mission of the ultimate consumers of CFC members. CFC had 46 associates, including RTFC, as of May 31, 2019. Associates are not eligibleservice and contribute to vote on matters put to a vote of the membership.sustainability efforts.
NCSC
Membership in NCSC includes organizations that are Class A, B or C members of CFC, or eligible for such membership and are approved for membership by the NCSC Board of Directors.
NCSC’s membership consisted of 441 distribution systems, two power supply systems and five statewide associations as of May 31, 2019. All of NCSC’s members also were CFC members. CFC, however, is not a member of NCSC. In addition to members, NCSC had 171 associates as of May 31, 2019. NCSC’s associates may include members of CFC, entities eligible to be members of CFC and for-profit and not-for-profit entities that are owned, controlled or operated by or provide significant benefit to Class A, B and C members of CFC.
RTFC
Membership in RTFC is limited to cooperative corporations, nonprofit corporations, private corporations, public corporations, utility districts and other public bodies that are approved by the RTFC Board of Directors and are actively borrowing or are eligible to borrow from RUS’s traditional infrastructure loan program. These companies must be engaged directly or indirectly in furnishing telephone services as the licensed incumbent carrier. Holding companies, subsidiaries and other organizations that are owned, controlled or operated by members are referred to as affiliates, and are eligible to borrow from RTFC. Associates are organizations that provide non-telephone or non-telecommunications services to rural telecommunications companies that are approved by the RTFC Board of Directors. Neither affiliates nor associates are eligible to vote at meetings of the members.
RTFC’s membership consisted of 474 members as of May 31, 2019. RTFC also had six associates as of May 31, 2019. CFC is not a member of RTFC.
The business affairs of CFC, NCSC and RTFC are governed by separate boards of directors for each entity. We provide additional information on CFC’s corporate governance in “Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.”
|
| |
TAX STATUSAVAILABLE INFORMATION |
In 1969, CFC obtained a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service recognizing CFC’s exemption from the payment of federal income taxes as an organization described under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. In order for CFC to maintain its exemption under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code, CFC must be “not organized for profit” and must be “operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare” within the meaning of that section of the tax code. The Internal Revenue Service determined that CFC is an organization that is “operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare” because the ultimate beneficiaries of its lending activities, like those of the RUS loan program, are the consumers of electricity produced by rural electric systems, the communities served by these systems and the nation as a whole.
As an organization described under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code, no part of CFC’s net earnings can inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. This requirement is referred to as the private inurement prohibition and was added to Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code in 1996. A legislative exception allows organizations like CFC to continue to make allocations of net earnings to members in accordance with its cooperative status.
CFC believes its operations have not changed materially from those described to the Internal Revenue Service in its exemption filing. CFC reviews the impact on operations of any new activity or potential change in product offerings or business in general to determine whether such change in activity or operations would be inconsistent with its status as an organization described under Section 501(c)(4).
NCSC is a taxable cooperative that pays income tax based on its taxable income and deductions.
RTFC is a taxable cooperative under Subchapter T of the Internal Revenue Code and is not subject to income taxes on income from patronage sources that is allocated to its borrowers, as long as the allocation is properly noticed and at least 20% of the amount allocated is retired in cash prior to filing the applicable tax return. RTFC pays income tax based on its taxable income and deductions, excluding amounts allocated to its borrowers.
|
|
ALLOCATION AND RETIREMENT OF PATRONAGE CAPITAL |
District of Columbia cooperative law requires cooperatives to allocate net earnings to patrons, to a general reserve in an amount sufficient to maintain a balance of at least 50% of paid-up capital and to a cooperative educational fund, as well as permits additional allocations to board-approved reserves. District of Columbia cooperative law also requires that a cooperative’s net earnings be allocated to all patrons in proportion to their individual patronage and each patron’s allocation be distributed to the patron unless the patron agrees that the cooperative may retain its share as additional capital.
CFC
Annually, the CFC Board of Directors allocates its net earnings to its patrons in the form of patronage capital, to a cooperative educational fund, to a general reserve, if necessary, and to other board-approved reserves. Net earnings are calculated by adjusting net income to exclude the noncash effects of the accounting for derivative financial instruments. Net losses, if any, are not allocated to board approved reserves or members and do not affect amounts previously allocated as patronage capital or to the reserves. Net earnings are first applied against prior-period losses, if any, before an allocation of patronage capital is made. CFC has never experienced an adjusted net loss.
An allocation to the general reserve is made, if necessary, to maintain the balance of the general reserve at 50% of the membership fees collected. CFC’s bylaws require the allocation to the cooperative educational fund to be at least 0.25% of its net earnings. Funds from the cooperative educational fund are disbursed annually to statewide cooperative organizations to fund the teaching of cooperative principles and for other cooperative education programs.
Currently, CFC has one additional board-approved reserve, the members’ capital reserve. The CFC Board of Directors determines the amount of net earnings that is allocated to the members’ capital reserve, if any. The members’ capital reserve represents net earnings that CFC holds to increase equity retention. The net earnings held in the members’ capital reserve have not been specifically allocated to members, but may be allocated to individual members in the future as patronage capital if authorized by the CFC Board of Directors.
All remaining net earnings are allocated to CFC’s members in the form of patronage capital. The amount of net earnings allocated to each member is based on the member’s patronage of CFC’s lending programs during the year. No interest is earned by members on allocated patronage capital. There is no effect on CFC’s total equity as a result of allocating net earnings to members in the form of patronage capital or to board-approved reserves. The CFC Board of Directors has voted annually on whether or not to retire a portion of the patronage capital allocation. Upon retirement, patronage capital is paid out in cash to the members to which it was allocated. CFC’s total equity is reduced by the amount of patronage capital retired to its members and by amounts disbursed from board-approved reserves.
Pursuant to CFC’s bylaws, the CFC Board of Directors determines the method, basis, priority and order of retirement of amounts allocated. The current policy of the CFC Board of Directors is to retire 50% of the prior fiscal year’s allocated net earnings following the end of each fiscal year and to hold the remaining 50% for 25 years to fund operations. The amount and timing of future retirements remains subject to annual approval by the CFC Board of Directors, and may be affected by CFC’s financial condition and other factors. The CFC Board of Directors has the authority to change the current practice for allocating and retiring net earnings at any time, subject to applicable cooperative law.
NCSC
In accordance with District of Columbia cooperative law and its bylaws and board policies, NCSC allocates its net earnings to a cooperative educational fund, to a general reserve, if necessary, and to other board-approved reserves. Net earnings are calculated by adjusting net income to exclude the noncash effects of the accounting for derivative financial instruments. Net losses, if any, are not allocated to board-approved reserves and do not affect amounts previously allocated to the reserves.
Pursuant to NCSC’s bylaws, the NCSC Board of Directors shall determine the method, basis, priority and order of amounts allocated. An allocation to the general reserve is made, if necessary, to maintain the balance of the general reserve at 50% of the membership fees collected. There is no effect on NCSC's total equity due to the allocation of net earnings to board-approved reserves. NCSC’s bylaws require the allocation to the cooperative educational fund to be at least 0.25% of its net earnings. Funds from the cooperative educational fund are disbursed annually to fund the teaching of cooperative principles and for other cooperative education programs.
RTFC
In accordance with District of Columbia cooperative law and its bylaws and board policies, RTFC allocates its net earnings to its patrons, a cooperative educational fund and a general reserve, if necessary. Net losses are not allocated to members and do not affect amounts previously allocated as patronage capital or to the reserves. Current period earnings are first applied against any prior year losses before allocating patronage capital.
Pursuant to RTFC’s bylaws, the RTFC Board of Directors shall determine the method, basis, priority and order of retirement of amounts allocated. RTFC’s bylaws require that it allocate at least 1% of net earnings to a cooperative educational fund. Funds from the cooperative educational fund are disbursed annually to fund the teaching of cooperative principles and for other cooperative education programs. An allocation to the general reserve is made, if necessary, to maintain the balance of the general reserve at 50% of the membership fees collected. The remainder is allocated to borrowers in proportion to their patronage. RTFC provides notice to its members of the amount allocated and retires 20% of the allocation for that year in cash prior to the filing of the applicable tax return. Any additional amounts are retired as determined by the RTFC Board of Directors with due regard for RTFC’s financial condition. There is no effect on RTFC's total equity due to the allocation of net earnings to members or board-approved reserves. The retirement of amounts previously allocated to members or amounts disbursed from board-approved reserves reduces RTFC's total equity.
We had 257 employees as of May 31, 2019. We believe that our relations with our employees are good.
Our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to these reports, are available for free at www.nrucfc.coop as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with or furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). These reports also are available for free on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Information posted on our website is not incorporated by reference into this Form 10-K.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Our financial condition, results of operations and liquidity are subject to various risks and uncertainties, some of which are inherent in the financial services industry and others of which are more specific to our own business. If anyThe discussion below addresses the most significant risks, of the events or circumstances described in the following risks actually occur,which we are currently aware, that could have a material adverse impact on our business, liquidity, financial condition, or results of operations could be adversely affected. The risks described below are the risks we consider to be material to our business. Otheror liquidity. However, other risks and uncertainties, including those not currently known to us, could also negatively impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and financial condition.liquidity. Therefore, the following should not be considered a complete discussion of all the risks and uncertainties we may face. For information on how we manage our key risks, see “Item 7. MD&A—Enterprise Risk Management.” You should consider the following risks together with all of the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.report.
Credit Risks
We are subject to credit risk that borrowers may not be able to meet their contractual obligations in accordance with agreed-upon terms, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and liquidity. Because we lend primarily to U.S. rural electric utility systems, we also are inherently subject to single-industry and single-obligor concentration risks.
As a lender, our primary credit risk arises from the extension of credit to borrowers. Our loan portfolio, which represents the largest component of assets on our balance sheet, accounts for the substantial majority of our credit risk exposure. Loans outstanding to electric utility organizations represented approximately 98% of our total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022. We had 883 borrowers with loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022, and our 20 largest borrowers accounted for 21% of total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022. The largest total exposure to a single borrower or controlled group represented less than 2% of total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022. Texas historically has had the largest number of borrowers with loans outstanding and the largest loan concentration in any one state. Loans outstanding to Texas borrowers represented 17% of total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022.
We face the risk that the principal of, or interest on, a loan will not be paid on a timely basis or at all or that the value of any underlying collateral securing a loan will be insufficient to cover our outstanding exposure. A deterioration in the financial condition of a borrower or underlying collateral could impair the ability of a borrower to repay a loan or our ability to recover unpaid amounts from the underlying collateral. We maintain an internal borrower risk rating system in which we assign a rating to each borrower and credit facility that are intended to reflect the ability of a borrower to repay its obligations and assess the probability of default and loss given default. The borrower risk rating system comprises both quantitative metrics and qualitative considerations. Each component is risk weighted in accordance with its importance. Unforeseen events and developments that affect specific borrowers or that occur in a region where we have a high concentration of credit risk may result in risk rating downgrades. Such an event may result in an increase in the allowance for credit losses; delinquent, nonperforming and criticized loans; net charge-offs; and an increase in our credit risk.
We establish an allowance for credit losses based on management’s current estimate of credit losses that are expected to occur over the remaining life of the loans in our portfolio. Because the process for determining our allowance for credit losses requires informed judgments about the ability of borrowers to repay their loans, we identify the estimation of our allowance for credit losses as a critical accounting estimate. Our borrower risk ratings are a key input in establishing our allowance for credit losses. Therefore, the deterioration in the financial condition of a borrower may result in a significant increase in our allowance for credit losses and provision for credit losses and may have a material adverse impact on our results of operations, financial condition and liquidity. In addition, we might underestimate expected credit losses and have
credit losses in excess of the established allowance for credit losses if we fail to timely identify a deterioration in a borrower’s financial condition or due to other factors, such as if the methodology and process we use in assigning borrower risk ratings and making judgments in extending credit to our borrowers does not accurately capture the level of our credit risk exposure or our historical loss experience proves to be not indicative of our expected future losses.
Adverse changes, developments or uncertainties in the rural electric utility industry could adversely impact the operations or financial performance of our member electric cooperatives, which, in turn, could have an adverse impact on our financial results.
Our focus as a member-owned finance cooperative is on lending to our rural member electric utility cooperatives, which is the primary source of our revenue. As a result of lending primarily to our members, we have a loan portfolio with single-industry concentration. Loans to rural electric utility cooperatives accounted for approximately 98% of our total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022. While we historically have experienced limited defaults and very low credit losses in our electric utility loan portfolio, factors that may have a negative impact on the operations of our member rural electric cooperatives include but are not limited to, the price and availability of distributed energy resources, regulatory or compliance factors related to managing greenhouse gas emissions (including the potential for stranded assets) and extreme weather conditions, including weather conditions related to climate change. The factors listed above, individually or in combination, could result in declining sales or increased power supply and operating costs and could potentially cause a deterioration in the financial performance of our members and the value of the collateral securing their loans. This could impair their ability to repay us in accordance with the terms of their loans. In such case, it may lead to risk rating downgrades, which may result in an increase in our allowance for credit losses and a decrease in our net income.
The threat of weather-related events or shifts in climate patterns resulting from climate change, including, but not limited to, increases in storm intensity, number of intense storms and temperature extremes in areas in which our member rural electric cooperatives operate, could result in increased power supply and operating costs, adversely impacting our members’ results of operations, liquidity and ability to make payments to us. While we believe our members would largely be reimbursed by Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) relief programs for storm-related damages, such programs may not be implemented as currently constructed or payments may not be received on a timely basis. For increased power costs, although we believe our members have the ability to pass through increased costs to their members, in some cases it may be difficult to pass through the entire costs on a timely basis if they are significant. To the extent CFC makes bridge loans to members as they wait for FEMA payments, changes to FEMA programs or delays in payments from FEMA could adversely impact the quality of our loan portfolio and our financial condition. Additionally, our member rural electric cooperatives are subject to evolving local, state and federal laws, regulations and expectations regarding the environment. These requirements and expectations may increase the time and costs of efforts to monitor and comply with such obligations and expose them to liability. The impacts of climate change present notable risks, including damage to the assets of our members, which could adversely impact the quality of our loan portfolio and our financial condition.
Advances in technology may change the way electricity is generated and transmitted, which could adversely affect the business operations of our members and negatively impact the credit quality of our loan portfolio and financial results.
Advances in technology could reduce demand for power supply systems and distribution services. The development of alternative technologies that produce electricity, including solar cells, wind power and microturbines, has expanded and could ultimately provide affordable alternative sources of electricity and permit end users to adopt distributed generation systems that would allow them to generate electricity for their own use. As these and other technologies, including energy conservation measures, are created, developed and improved, the quantity and frequency of electricity usage by rural customers could decline. Advances in technology and conservation that cause our electric system members’ power supply, transmission and/or distribution facilities to become obsolete prior to the maturity of loans secured by these assets could have an adverse impact on the ability of our members to repay such loans, which could result in an increase in nonperforming or restructured loans. These conditions could negatively impact the credit quality of our loan portfolio and financial results.
We may obtain entities or other assets through foreclosure, which would subject us to the same performance and financial risks as any other owner or operator of similar businesses or assets.
As a financial institution, from time to time we may obtain entities and assets of borrowers in default through foreclosure proceedings. If we become the owner and operator of entities or assets obtained through foreclosure, we are subject to the same performance and financial risks as any other owner or operator of similar assets or entities. In particular, the value of
the foreclosed assets or entities may deteriorate and have a negative impact on our results of operations. We assess foreclosed assets, if any, for impairment periodically as required under generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S. (“U.S. GAAP.”) Impairment charges, if required, represent a reduction to earnings in the period of the charge. There may be substantial judgment used in the determination of whether such assets are impaired and in the calculation of the amount of the impairment. In addition, when foreclosed assets are sold to a third party, the sale price we receive may be below the amount previously recorded in our financial statements, which will result in a loss being recorded in the period of the sale.
The nonperformance of our derivative counterparties could impair our financial results.
We use interest rate swaps to manage our interest rate risk. There is a risk that the counterparties to these agreements will not perform as agreed, which could adversely affect our results of operations. The nonperformance of a counterparty on an agreement would result in the derivative no longer being an effective risk-management tool, which could negatively affect our overall interest rate risk position. In addition, if a counterparty fails to perform on our derivative obligation, we could incur a financial loss to replace the derivative with another counterparty and/or a loss through the failure of the counterparty to pay us amounts owed. We were in a net receivable position for all of our interest rate swaps, after taking into consideration master netting agreements, of $94 million as of May 31, 2022.
A decline in our credit rating could trigger payments under our derivative agreements, which could impair our financial results.
We have certain interest rate swaps that contain credit risk-related contingent features referred to as rating triggers. Under certain rating triggers, if the credit rating for either counterparty falls to the level specified in the agreement, the other counterparty may, but is not obligated to, terminate the agreement. If either counterparty terminates the agreement, a net payment may be due from one counterparty to the other based on the prevailing fair value, excluding credit risk, of the underlying derivative instrument. These rating triggers are based on our senior unsecured credit ratings by Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”) and S&P Global Inc. (“S&P”). Based on our interest rate swap agreements subject to rating triggers, if all agreements for which we owe amounts were terminated as of May 31, 2022 and our senior unsecured ratings fell below Baa2 by Moody’s or below BBB by S&P, we were in a net receivable position of up $56 million as of that date. In addition, if our senior unsecured ratings fell below Baa3 by Moody’s, below BBB- by S&P or below BBB- by Fitch Ratings Inc. (“Fitch”), we would have been due a payment from the swap counterparty of up to $13 million as of that date. In calculating the required payments, we only consider agreements that, when netted for each counterparty pursuant to a master netting agreement, would require a payment upon termination. In the event that we are required to make a payment as a result of a rating trigger, it could have a material adverse impact on our financial results.
Liquidity Risks
If we are unable to access the capital markets or other external sources for funding, our liquidity position may be negatively affected and we may not have sufficient funds to meet all of our financial obligations as they become due.
We depend on access to the capital markets and other sources of financing, such as our investment portfolio, repurchase agreements, bank revolving credit agreements, investments from our members, private debt issuances through Farmer Mac and through the Guaranteed Underwriter Program, to fund new loan advances and refinance our long- and short-term debt and, if necessary, to fulfill our obligations under our guarantee and repurchase agreements. MarketProlonged market disruptions, downgrades to our long-term and/or short-term debt ratings, adverse changes in our business or performance, downturns in the electric industry and other events over which we have no control may deny or limit our access to the capital markets and/or subject us to higher costs for such funding. Our access to other sources of funding also could be limited by the same factors, by adverse changes in the business or performance of our members, by the banks committed to our revolving credit agreements or Farmer Mac, or by changes in federal law or the Guaranteed Underwriter Program. Our funding needs are determined primarily by scheduled short- and long-term debt maturities and the amount of our loan advances to our borrowers relative to the scheduled payment amortization of loans previously made by us. If we are unable to timely issue debt into the capital markets or obtain funding from other sources, we may not have the funds to meet all of our obligations as they become due.
A reduction in the credit ratings for our debt could adversely affect our liquidity and/or cost of debt.
Our credit ratings are important to maintaining our liquidity position. We currently contract with three nationally recognized statistical rating organizations to receive ratings for our secured and unsecured debt and our commercial paper. In order to
access the commercial paper markets at current levels, we believe that we need to maintain our short-term ratings at the current ratings for commercial paper of P-1level from Moody’s, Investors Service (“Moody’s”), A-1 from S&P Global Inc. (“S&P”) and F1 from
Fitch Ratings Inc. (“Fitch”).Fitch. Changes in rating agencies’ rating methodology, actions by governmental entities or others, losses from impaired loansdeterioration in the credit quality of our loan portfolios, increased leverage and other factors could adversely affect the credit ratings on our debt. A reduction in our credit ratings could adversely affect our liquidity, and competitive position, increase our borrowing costs or limit our access to the capital markets and the sources of financing available to us. A significant increase in our cost of borrowings and interest expense could cause us to sustain losses or impairimpact our liquidity by requiring us to seek other sources of financing, which may be difficult to obtain.competitive position within the industry.
Our ability to maintain compliance with the covenants related to our revolving credit agreements, collateral trust bond and medium-term note indentures and debt agreements could affect our ability to retire patronage capital, result in the acceleration of the repayment of certain debt obligations, adversely impact our credit ratings and hinder our ability to obtain financing.
We must maintain compliance with all covenants and conditions related to our revolving credit agreements and debt indentures. We are required to maintain a minimum average adjusted times interest earned ratio (“adjusted TIER”) for the six most recent fiscal quarters of 1.025 and an adjusted leverage ratio of no more than 10-to-1. In addition, we must maintain loans pledged as collateral for various debt issuances at or below 150% of the related secured debt outstanding as a condition to borrowing under our revolving credit agreements. If we were unable to borrow under the revolving credit agreements, our short-term debt ratings would likely decline, and our ability to issue commercial paper could become significantly impaired. Our revolving credit agreements also require that we earn a minimum annual adjusted TIER of 1.05 in order to retire patronage capital to members. See “Item 7. MD&A—Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for additional information on our adjusted measures and a reconciliation to the most comparable U.S. GAAP measures.
PursuantPursuant to our collateral trust bond indentures, we are required to maintain eligible pledged collateral at least equal to 100% of the principal amount of the bonds issued under the indenture. Pursuant to one of our collateral trust bond indentures and our medium-term note indenture, we are required to limit senior indebtedness to 20 times the sum of our members’ equity, subordinated deferrable debt and members’ subordinated certificates. If we were in default under our collateral trust bond or medium-term note indentures, the existing holders of these securities have the right to accelerate the repayment of the full amount of the outstanding debt of the security before the stated maturity of such debt. That acceleration of debt repayments poses a significant liquidity risk, as we might not have enough cash or committed credit available to repay the debt. In addition, if we are not in compliance with the collateral trust bond and medium-term note covenants, we would be unable to issue new debt securities under such indentures. If we were unable to issue new collateral trust bonds and medium-term notes, our ability to fund new loan advances and refinance maturing debt would be impaired.
We are required to pledge eligible distribution system or power supply system loans as collateral equal to at least 100% of the outstanding balance of debt issued under a revolving note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac. We also are required to pledge distribution or power supply loans as collateral equal to at least 100% of the outstanding balance of debt under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program. Collateral coverage less than 100% for either of these debt programs constitutes an event of default, which if not cured within 30 days, could result in creditors accelerating the repayment of the outstanding debt principal before the stated maturity. An acceleration of the repayment of debt could pose a liquidity risk if we had insufficient cash or committed credit available to repay the debt. In addition, we would be unable to issue new debt securities under the applicable debt agreement, which could impair our ability to fund new loan advances and refinance maturing debt.
Market Risks
Changes in the level and direction of interest rates or our ability to successfully manage interest rate risk could adversely affect our financial results and condition.
Our earnings are largely dependent on net interest income. Our interest rate risk exposure is primarily related to the funding of a fixed-rate loan portfolio. We have a matched funding objective that is intended to manage the funding of asset and liability repricing terms within a range of total assets based on the current environment and extended outlook for interest rates. We maintain a limited unmatched position, or interest rate gap, on our fixed-rate assets within a targeted range of adjusted total assets to provide us with funding flexibility.
Our primary strategies for managing interest rate risk include the use of derivatives and limitingin order to manage the amounttiming of interest rate gapcash flows between fixed-rateinterest-earning assets and fixed-rate liabilities to a specified percentage of total assets based on prevailing market conditions.interest-bearing liabilities. We face the risk that changes in interest rates could reduce our net interest income and our earnings, especially if actual conditions turn out to be materially different than those we assumed.earnings. Fluctuations in interest rates, including changes
in the relationship between short-term rates and long-term rates may affect the pricing of loans to borrowers and our cost of funds, which could adversely affect the difference between the interest that we earn on assets and the interest we pay on liabilities used to fund assets. Such changes may also affect our abilityresult in increased costs to hedge various forms of market andexisting interest rate risk, andwhich may decrease the effectiveness of those hedges in helping to manage such risks, which could cause our interest rate gap to exceed our targeted range and have an adverse impact on the net interest income, earnings and cash flows. See “Item 7. MD&A—Market Risk” for additional information.
The uncertainty as to the nature of potential changes or other reforms in the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) benchmark interest rate may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
We have loans, derivative contracts, debt securities and other financial instruments with attributes that are either directly or indirectly dependent on the LIBOR. In 2017, the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”), which regulates LIBOR, announced that the FCA intends to stop persuading or compelling banks to submit the rates required to calculate LIBOR after December 31, 2021. This announcement indicatesIn March 2021, the FCA and the Intercontinental Exchange (“ICE”) Benchmark Administration, the administrator for LIBOR, concurrently confirmed the intention to stop requesting banks to submit the rates required to calculate LIBOR after December 31, 2021 for one-week and two-month LIBOR and June 30, 2023 for all remaining LIBOR tenors.
The Federal Reserve-sponsored Alternative Reference Rates Committee (“ARRC”) has recommended the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”) as an alternative to U.S. dollar LIBOR. SOFR is a measure of the cost of borrowing cash overnight, collateralized by U.S. Treasury securities, and is based on directly observable U.S. Treasury-based repurchase transactions. In the fiscal quarter ended November 30, 2021 (the “second quarter of fiscal year 2022,”) we began entering into transactions that reference SOFR. While the continuation ofARRC has selected SOFR as its recommended alternative to U.S. dollar LIBOR, on the current basis cannot and willother replacement rates may emerge as alternatives. We are not be guaranteed after 2021. Consequently, at this time, it is not possibleable to predict whether and to what extent bankshow SOFR or an alternate rate will continue to provide submissions for the calculation of LIBOR. Similarly, it is not possible to predict whether LIBOR will continue to be viewed as an acceptable market benchmark, what rate or rates may become accepted alternativesperform in comparison to LIBOR orin response to changing market conditions, what the effect of any such changes in views or alternativesrate’s implementation may be on the markets for LIBOR-indexedfloating-rate financial instruments. instruments or whether such rates will be vulnerable to manipulation. Further, the transition from LIBOR to an alternative reference rate has required changes to risk and pricing models, valuation tools, product design, information technology systems, operational processes and controls and hedging strategies, and may result in or require further changes in the future.
The replacement of LIBOR creates operational and market risks which will become clear as replacement choices are developed.risks. We will continue to assess all of our contracts and financial instruments, including loans that we service, that are directly or indirectly dependent on LIBOR to determine thewhat impact the replacement of LIBOR will have on us. Uncertainty as to the nature of such potential changes or other reforms may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
We are subject to credit risk that a borrower or other counterparty may not be able to meet its contractual obligations in accordance with agreed-upon terms, which could result in significantly higher, unexpected losses.Operations and Business Risks
Our loan portfolio, which represents the largest component of assets on our balance sheet, accounts for the substantial majority of exposure to credit risk. We had total loans outstanding of $25,906 million as of May 31, 2019. We reserve for credit losses in our loan portfolio by establishing an allowance for loan losses through a provision charge to earnings. The amount of the allowance for loan losses, which was $18 million as of May 31, 2019, is based on our assessment of credit losses inherent in our loan portfolio as of each balance sheet date, taking into consideration management's continuing evaluation of credit risk related to: industry concentrations; macro-economic conditions; specific credit risks; loan loss experience; current loan portfolio quality; present political and regulatory conditions; and unidentified losses and risks inherent in the current loan portfolio. We consider the process for determining the amount of the allowance as one of our critical accounting policies because it involves significant judgments and assumptions about highly complex and inherently uncertain matters, and the use of reasonably different estimates and assumptions could have a material impact on our results of operations or financial condition. Management believes that the allowance for loan losses appropriately reflects credit losses inherent in our loan portfolio as of May 31, 2019. However, our actual credit losses could exceed our estimate of probable losses due to changes in economic conditions that adversely affect borrowers, new information regarding existing loans, identification of additional problem loans and other factors, both within and outside of our control. In those cases, we may be required to increase the allowance for loan losses through an increase in the provision for loan losses, which would reduce net income and may have a material adverse effect on our financial results.
Adverse changes, developments or uncertainties in the rural electric utility industry could adversely impact the operations or financial performance of our member electric cooperatives, which, in turn, could have an adverse impact on our financial results.
Our focus as a tax-exempt, member-owned finance cooperative is on lending to our rural member electric utility cooperatives, which is the primary source of our revenue. As a result of lending primarily to our members, we have a loan portfolio with single-industry concentration. Loans to rural electric utility cooperatives accounted for approximately 99% of our total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2019. While we historically have experienced limited defaults and very low credit losses in our electric utility loan portfolio, factors that have a negative impact on the operations of our member rural electric cooperatives, including but not limited to, the price and availability of alternative energy sources and weather conditions, such as hurricanes, tornados or other weather-related events, could cause a deterioration in their financial performance and the value of the collateral securing their loans, which could impair their ability to repay us in accordance with the terms of their loans. In such case, it may be necessary to increase our allowance for loan losses, which would result in an increase in the provision for loan losses and a decrease in our net income.
We may obtain entities or other assets through foreclosure, which would subject us to the same performance and financial risks as any other owner or operator of similar businesses or assets.
As a financial institution, from time to time we may obtain entities and assets of borrowers in default through foreclosure proceedings. If we become the owner and operator of entities or assets obtained through foreclosure, we are subject to the same performance and financial risks as any other owner or operator of similar assets or entities. In particular, the value of the foreclosed assets or entities may deteriorate and have a negative impact on our results of operations. We assess foreclosed assets, if any, for impairment periodically as required under generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“GAAP”). Impairment charges, if required, represent a reduction to earnings in the period of the charge. There may be substantial judgment used in the determination of whether such assets are impaired and in the calculation of the amount of the impairment. In addition, when foreclosed assets are sold to a third party, the sale price we receive may be below the amount previously recorded in our financial statements, which will result in a loss being recorded in the period of the sale.
The nonperformance of our derivative counterparties could impair our financial results.
We use interest rate swaps to manage our interest rate risk. There is a risk that the counterparties to these agreements will not perform as agreed, which could adversely affect our results of operations. The nonperformance of a counterparty on an agreement would result in the derivative no longer being an effective risk management tool, which could negatively affect our overall interest rate risk position. In addition, if a counterparty fails to perform on our derivative obligation, we could incur a financial loss to replace the derivative with another counterparty and/or a loss through the failure of the counterparty to pay us amounts owed. We were in a net payable position for all of our interest rate swaps, after taking into consideration master netting agreements, of $351 million as of May 31, 2019.
A decline in our credit rating could trigger payments under our derivative agreements, which could impair our financial results.
We have certain interest rate swaps that contain credit risk-related contingent features referred to as rating triggers. Under certain rating triggers, if the credit rating for either counterparty falls to the level specified in the agreement, the other counterparty may, but is not obligated to, terminate the agreement. If either counterparty terminates the agreement, a net payment may be due from one counterparty to the other based on the prevailing fair value, excluding credit risk, of the underlying derivative instrument. These rating triggers are based on our senior unsecured credit ratings by Moody’s and S&P. Based on our interest rate swap agreements subject to rating triggers, if all agreements for which we owe amounts were terminated as of May 31, 2019 and our senior unsecured ratings fell below Baa3 by Moody’s or below BBB- by S&P, we would have been required to make a payment of up to $253 million as of that date. In addition, if our senior unsecured ratings fell below Baa3 by Moody’s, below BBB- by S&P or below BBB- by Fitch, we would have been required to make a payment of up to $20 million as of that date. In calculating the required payments, we only considered agreements that, when netted for each counterparty pursuant to a master netting agreement, would require a payment upon termination. In the event that we are required to make a payment as a result of a rating trigger, it could have a material adverse impact on our financial results.
Advances in technology may change the way electricity is generated and transmitted, which could adversely affect the business operations of our members and negatively impact the credit quality of our loan portfolio and financial results.
Advances in technology could reduce demand for power supply systems and distribution services. The development of alternative technologies that produce electricity, including solar cells, wind power and microturbines, has expanded and could ultimately provide affordable alternative sources of electricity and permit end users to adopt distributed generation systems that would allow them to generate electricity for their own use. As these and other technologies, including energy conservation measures, are created, developed and improved, the quantity and frequency of electricity usage by rural customers could decline. Advances in technology and conservation that cause our electric system members’ power supply, transmission and/or distribution facilities to become obsolete prior to the maturity of loans secured by these assets could have an adverse impact on the ability of our members to repay such loans, which could result in an increase in nonperforming or restructured loans. These conditions could negatively impact the credit quality of our loan portfolio and financial results.
Breaches of our information technology systems, or those managed by third parties, may damage relationships with our members or subject us to reputational, financial, legal or operational consequences.
Cyber-related attacks pose a risk to the security of our members’ strategic business information and the confidentiality and integrity of our data, which includesinclude strategic and proprietary information. Security breaches may occur through the actions of third parties, employee error, malfeasance, technology failures or other irregularities. Any such breach or unauthorized access could result in a loss of this information, a loss of integrity of this information, a delay or inability to provide service of affected products, damage to our reputation, including a loss of confidence in the security of our products and services, and significant legal and financial exposure. Because the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access, disable or degrade service or sabotage systems change frequently, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures. As a result, cyber-related attacks may remain undetected for an extended period and may be costly to remediate.
Our business depends on the reliable and secure operation of computer systems, network infrastructure and other information technology managed by third parties including, but not limited to:to, our service providers for external storage and processing of our information on cloud-based systems; our consulting and advisory firms and contractors that have access to our confidential and proprietary data; and administrators for our employee payroll and benefits management. We have limited control and visibility over third-party systems that we rely on for our business. The occurrence of a cyber-related attack, breach, unauthorized access or other cybersecurity event could result in damage to our third parties’ operations. The failure of third parties to provide services agreed upon through service levelservice-level agreements, whether as a result of the occurrence of a cyber-related attack or other event, could result in the loss of access to our data, the loss of integrity of our data, disruptions to our corporate functions, loss of business opportunities or reputational damage, or otherwise adversely impact our financial results and result incause significant costs and liabilities.
While CFC maintains insurance coverage that, subject to policy terms and conditions, covers certain aspects of cyber risks, including business interruptions caused by cyber-related attacks on information technology systems managed by third
parties, such insurance coverage may be insufficient to cover all losses. Our failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations regarding data security and privacy could result in fines, sanctions and litigation. Additionally, new regulation in the areas of data security and privacy may increase our costs and our members’ costs.
Loss of our tax-exempt status could adversely affect our earnings.
CFC has been recognized by the Internal Revenue Service as an organization for which income is exempt from federal taxation under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code (other than any net income from an unrelated trade or business). In order to maintain CFC’s tax-exempt status, it must continue to operate exclusively for the promotion of social welfare by operating on a cooperative basis for the benefit of its members by providing them cost-based financial products and services consistent with sound financial management, and no part of CFC’s netearnings may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual other than the allocation or return of net earnings or capital to its members in accordance with CFC’s bylaws and incorporating statute in effect in 1996.
If CFC were to lose its status as a 501(c)(4) organization, it would become a taxable cooperative and would be required to pay income tax based on its taxable income. If this event occurred, we would evaluate all options available to modify CFC’s structure and/or operations to minimize any potential tax liability.
As a tax-exempt cooperative and nonbank financial institution, our lending activities are not subject to the regulations and oversight of U.S. financial regulators such as the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Office of Comptroller of Currency. Because we are not under the purview of such regulation, we could engage in activities that could expose us to greater credit, market and liquidity risk, reduce our safety and soundness and adversely affect our financial results.
Financial institutions subject to regulations, oversight and monitoring by U.S. financial regulators are required to maintain specified levels of capital and may be restricted from engaging in certain lending-related and other activities that could adversely affect the safety and soundness of the financial institution or are considered conflicts of interest. As a tax-exempt, nonbank financial institution, we are not subject to the same oversight and supervision. There is no federal financial regulator that monitors compliance with our risk policies and practices or that identifies and addresses potential deficiencies that could adversely affect our financial results. Without regulatory oversight and monitoring, there is a greater potential for us to engage in activities that could pose a risk to our safety and soundness relative to regulated financial institutions.
Competition from other lenders could adversely impact our financial results.
We compete with other lenders for the portion of the rural utility loan demand for which RUS will not lend and for loans to members that have elected not to borrow from RUS. The primary competition for the non-RUS loan volume is from CoBank, ACB, a federally chartered instrumentality of the United States that is a member of the Farm Credit System. As a government-sponsored enterprise, CoBank, ACB has the benefit of an implied government guarantee with respect to its funding. Competition may limit our ability to raise rates to adequately cover increases in costs, which could have an adverse impact on our results of operations, and increasing interest rates to cover costs could cause a reduction in new lending business.
Our elected directors also serve as officers or directors of certain of our individual member cooperatives, which may result in a potential conflict of interest with respect to loans, guarantees and extensions of credit that we may make to or on behalf of such member cooperatives.
In accordance with our charter documents and the purpose for which we were formed, we lend only to our members and associates. CFC’s directors are elected or appointed from our membership, with 10 director positions filled by directors of members, 10 director positions filled by general managers or chief executive officers of members, two positions appointed by NRECA and one at-large position that must, among other things, be a director, financial officer, general manager or chief executive of one of our members. CFC currently has loans outstanding to members that are affiliated with CFC directors and may periodically extend new loans to such members. The relationship of CFC’s directors to our members may give rise to conflicts of interests from time to time. See “Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence—Review and Approval of Transactions with Related Persons” for a description of our policies with regard to approval of loans to members affiliated with CFC directors.
Natural or man-made disasters, including widespread health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic, or other external events beyond our control such as the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, could disrupt our business and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. | |
Item 1B. | Unresolved Staff Comments |
Our operations may be subject to disruption due to the occurrence of natural disasters, acts of terrorism or war, such as the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, public health emergencies, such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, or other unexpected or disastrous conditions, events or emergencies beyond our control, some of which may be intensified by the effects of a government response to the event, or climate change and changing weather patterns.
COVID-19 resulted in the declaration of the COVID-19 outbreak as a pandemic by the World Health Organization and caused significant economic and financial turmoil both in the U.S. and around the world. Although the global economy has begun to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic and most health and safety restrictions have been lifted, the extent to which the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic impact us will depend on future developments that remain uncertain and cannot be predicted including, but not limited to, the severity and duration of any resurgence of COVID-19 variants and future actions taken by governmental authorities to contain COVID-19 and mitigate its effects.
The growth in economic activity that resulted from the lifting of COVID-19 health and safety restrictions, combined with labor shortages and supply chain complications exacerbated by the invasion of Ukraine by Russia and subsequent sanctions and export controls against Russia, has contributed to rising inflationary pressures. General inflation in the United States has risen to levels not experienced in recent decades. The rising energy prices, interest rates and wages, among other things, may increase our operating costs as well as both the operating and borrowing costs of our members and disrupt our business.
Although we have implemented a business continuity management program that we enhance on an ongoing basis, there can be no assurance that the program will adequately mitigate the risks of business disruptions. Further, events such as natural disasters and public health emergencies may divert our attention away from normal operations and limit necessary resources. We generally must resume operations promptly following any interruption. If we were to suffer a disruption or interruption and were not able to resume normal operations within a period consistent with industry standards, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be adversely affected in a material manner. In addition, depending on the nature and duration of the disruption or interruption, we might become vulnerable to fraud, additional expense or other losses, or to a loss of business.
Competition from other lenders could adversely impact our financial results.
We compete with other lenders for the portion of the rural utility loan demand for which RUS will not lend and for loans to members that have elected not to borrow from RUS. The primary competition for the non-RUS loan volume is from CoBank, ACB, a federally chartered instrumentality of the U.S. that is a member of the Farm Credit System. As a government-sponsored enterprise, CoBank, ACB has the benefit of an implied government guarantee with respect to its funding. Competition may limit our ability to raise rates to adequately cover increases in costs, which could have an adverse
impact on our results of operations, and increasing interest rates to cover costs could cause a reduction in new lending business.
The failure to attract, retain or motivate highly skilled and qualified employees could impair our ability to successfully execute our strategic plan and otherwise adversely affect our business.
We rely on our employees’ depth of knowledge of CFC and its related industries to run our business operations successfully. Because much of our business operations involve significant member-facing interaction with a relatively stable base of long-standing member borrowers, we place a priority on the retention of high-performing employees with extensive experience in the rural utility industry. Retirements represented 37% of the departures from CFC in fiscal year 2022, an increase of 7% over fiscal year 2021, and CFC experienced a higher than usual 19% rate of voluntary turnover during fiscal year 2022. Our ability to implement our strategic plan and our future success depends on our ability to attract, retain and motivate highly skilled and qualified employees. The failure to attract or retain, including due to retirement, or replace a sufficient number of appropriately skilled and key employees could place us at a significant competitive disadvantage and prevent us from successfully implementing our strategy. Further, the marketplace for skilled employees is becoming more competitive, which means the cost of hiring, incentivizing and retaining skilled employees may continue to increase. The failure to attract, retain or motivate skilled employees, along with the increased costs, could impair our ability to achieve our performance targets and otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Regulatory and Compliance Risks
Loss of our tax-exempt status could adversely affect our earnings.
CFC has been recognized by the IRS as an organization for which income is exempt from federal taxation under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code (other than any net income from an unrelated trade or business). In order to maintain CFC’s tax-exempt status, it must continue to operate exclusively for the promotion of social welfare by operating on a cooperative basis for the benefit of its members by providing them cost-based financial products and services consistent with sound financial management, and no part of CFC’s net earnings may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual other than the allocation or return of net earnings or capital to its members in accordance with CFC’s bylaws and incorporating statute in effect in 1996.
If CFC were to lose its status as a 501(c)(4) organization, it would become a taxable cooperative and would be required to pay income tax based on its taxable income. If this event occurred, we would evaluate all options available to modify CFC’s structure and/or operations to minimize any potential tax liability.
As a tax-exempt cooperative and nonbank financial institution, our lending activities are not subject to the regulations and oversight of U.S. financial regulators such as the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Office of Comptroller of Currency. Because we are not under the purview of such regulation, we could engage in activities that could expose us to greater credit, market and liquidity risk, reduce our safety and soundness and adversely affect our financial results.
Financial institutions subject to regulations, oversight and monitoring by U.S. financial regulators are required to maintain specified levels of capital and may be restricted from engaging in certain lending-related and other activities that could adversely affect the safety and soundness of the financial institution or are considered conflicts of interest. As a tax-exempt, nonbank financial institution, we are not subject to the same oversight and supervision. There is no federal financial regulator that monitors compliance with our risk policies and practices or that identifies and addresses potential deficiencies that could adversely affect our financial results. Without regulatory oversight and monitoring, there is a greater potential for us to engage in activities that could pose a risk to our safety and soundness relative to regulated financial institutions.
Changes in accounting standards or assumptions in applying accounting policies could materially impact our financial statements.
Our accounting policies and methods are fundamental to how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. Some of these policies require the use of estimates and assumptions that may affect the reported carrying amount of our assets or liabilities and our results of operations. We consider the accounting policies that require management to make difficult, subjective and complex judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain as our most critical accounting
estimates. The use of reasonably different estimates and assumptions could have a material impact on our financial statements or if the assumptions, estimates or judgments were incorrectly made, we could be required to correct and restate prior-period financial statements. In addition, from time to time, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) and the SEC change the accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of our financial statements. These changes can be hard to predict and can materially impact how CFC records and reports its financial condition and results of operations. We could be required to apply a new or revised standard retroactively or apply an existing standard differently, on a retroactive basis, in each case potentially resulting in restating prior-period financial statements. For information on what we consider to be our most critical accounting estimates and recent accounting changes, see “Item 7. MD&A—Critical Accounting Estimates” and “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—New Accounting Standards” to our consolidated financial statements.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
None.
Item 2. Properties
CFC owns an office building, with approximately 141,000 gross square footage, in Loudoun County, Virginia, that serves as its headquarters in Loudoun County, Virginia.headquarters.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
From time to time, CFC is subject to certain legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of business, including litigation with borrowers related to enforcement or collection actions. Management presently believes that the ultimate outcome of these proceedings, individually and in the aggregate, will not materially harm our financial position, liquidity or results of operations. CFC establishes reserves for specific legal matters when it determines that the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome is probable and the loss is reasonably estimable. Accordingly, no reserve has been recorded with respect to any legal proceedings at this time.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures
Not applicable.
PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Not applicable.
Item 6. Reserved
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (“MD&A”)
| | |
Item 4. | Mine Safety DisclosuresINTRODUCTION |
Not applicable.
Our financial statements include the consolidated accounts of CFC, NCSC, RTFC and any subsidiaries created and controlled by CFC to hold foreclosed assets resulting from defaulted loans or bankruptcy. CFC and its consolidated entities have not held any foreclosed assets since the fiscal year ended May 31, 2017 (“fiscal year 2017”). We provide information on the business structure, mission, principal purpose and core business activities of each of these entities under “Item 1. Business.” Unless stated otherwise, references to “we,” “our” or “us” relate to CFC and its consolidated entities.
PART IIWe conduct our operations through three business segments, which are based on each of the legal entities included in our consolidated financial statements: CFC, NCSC and RTFC. CFC’s business segment has historically accounted for the substantial majority of our consolidated loans and total revenue. Consolidated loans to members totaled $30,063 million as of May 31, 2022, of which 96% was attributable to CFC. We generated consolidated total revenue, which consists of consolidated net interest income and consolidated fee and other income, of $453 million for fiscal year ended May 31, 2022 (“fiscal year 2022”), of which 99% was attributable to CFC. In comparison, we generated consolidated total revenue of $433 million for fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 (“fiscal year 2021”), of which 99% was attributable to CFC. We provide additional financial information on the financial performance of our business segments in “Note 16—Business Segments.”
The following MD&A is intended to enhance the understanding of our consolidated financial statements by providing material information that we believe is relevant in evaluating our results of operations, financial condition and liquidity and the potential impact of material known events or uncertainties that, based on management’s assessment, are reasonably likely to cause the financial information included in this Report not to be necessarily indicative of our future financial performance. Management monitors a variety of key indicators and metrics to evaluate our business performance. We discuss these key measures and factors influencing changes from period to period. Our MD&A is provided as a supplement to, and should be read in conjunction with, our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2022 included in this Report and additional information contained elsewhere in this Report, including the risk factors discussed under “Item 1A. Risk Factors.”
| | |
Item 5. | Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity SecuritiesSUMMARY OF SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA |
Not applicable.
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
The following table provides a summary of consolidated selected financial data for the fiscal five-year period ended
May 31, 2019. In addition to financial measures determined in accordanceconformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”), management also evaluates performance based on certain non-GAAP measures and metrics, which we refer to as “adjusted” measures. Certain financial covenant provisions in our credit agreements are also based on non-GAAP financial measures. Our key non-GAAP financial measures are adjusted net income, adjusted net interest income, adjusted interest expense, adjusted net interest yield, adjusted times interest earned ratio (“adjusted TIER”) and adjusted debt-to-equity ratio. The most comparable U.S. GAAP measures are net income, net interest income, interest expense, net interest yield, TIER and debt-to-equity ratio, respectively. The primary adjustments we make to calculate these non-GAAP measures consist of (i) adjusting interest expense and net interest income to include the impact of net periodic derivative cash settlements expense;expense amounts; (ii) adjusting net income, senior debttotal liabilities and total equity to exclude the non-cash impact of the accounting for derivative financial instruments; (iii) adjusting senior debttotal liabilities to exclude the amount that funds CFC member loans guaranteed by RUS, subordinated deferrable debt and members’ subordinated certificates; and (iv) adjusting total equity to include subordinated deferrable debt and members’ subordinated certificates and exclude cumulative derivative forward value gains and losses and accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”).
We believe our non-GAAP adjusted measures, which areshould not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for GAAP and may not be consistentmeasures determined in conformity with similarly titled non-GAAP measures used by other companies,U.S. GAAP, provide meaningful information and are useful to investors because management evaluates performance based on these metrics for purposes of (i) establishing short- and long-term performance goals; (ii) budgeting and forecasting; (iii) comparing period-to-period operating results, analyzing changes in results and identifying potential trends; and (iv) making compensation decisions. In addition, certain of the financial covenants in our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements and debt indentures are based on non-GAAP adjusted measures. See “Item 7. MD&A—Non-GAAP Financial Measures” formeasures, as the forward fair value gains and losses related to our interest rate swaps that are excluded from our non-GAAP measures do not
affect our cash flows, liquidity or ability to service our debt. Our non-GAAP adjusted measures may not be comparable to similarly titled measures reported by other companies due to differences in the way that these measures are calculated.
We provide a detailed reconciliation of theseour non-GAAP adjusted measures to the most directly comparable U.S. GAAP measures.measures in the section “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
Five-YearTable 1 provides a summary of selected financial data and key metrics used by management in evaluating performance for each fiscal year in the five-year period ended May 31, 2022.
Table 1: Summary of Selected Financial Data(1)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Change | |
| | Year Ended May 31, | | 2022 vs. | | 2021 vs. | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2021 | | 2020 | |
Statements of operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net interest income: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | $ | 1,141,243 | | | $ | 1,116,601 | | | $ | 1,151,286 | | | $ | 1,135,670 | | | $ | 1,077,357 | | | 2 | | % | (3) | | % |
Interest expense | | (705,534) | | | | (702,063) | | | | (821,089) | | | | (836,209) | | | | (792,735) | | | — | | | (14) | | |
Net interest income | | 435,709 | | 414,538 | | 330,197 | | 299,461 | | 284,622 | | 5 | | | 26 | | |
Fee and other income | | | 17,193 | | | | 18,929 | | | | 22,961 | | | | 15,355 | | | | 17,578 | | | (9) | | | (18) | | |
Total revenue | | | 452,902 | | | | 433,467 | | | | 353,158 | | | | 314,816 | | | | 302,200 | | | 4 | | | 23 | | |
Benefit (provision) for credit losses | | 17,972 | | | (28,507) | | | (35,590) | | | | 1,266 | | | | 18,575 | | | ** | | (20) | | |
Derivative gains (losses): | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative cash settlements interest expense(2) | | | (101,385) | | | | (115,645) | | | | (55,873) | | | | (43,611) | | | | (74,281) | | | (12) | | | 107 | | |
Derivative forward value gains (losses)(3) | | | 557,867 | | | | 621,946 | | | | (734,278) | | | | (319,730) | | | | 306,002 | | | (10) | | | ** | |
Derivative gains (losses) | | | 456,482 | | | | 506,301 | | | | (790,151) | | | | (363,341) | | | | 231,721 | | | (10) | | | ** | |
Other non-interest income (loss) | | (30,179) | | | 1,495 | | | 9,431 | | | | (1,799) | | | | — | | | ** | | (84) | | |
Operating expenses(4) | | (95,186) | | | (94,705) | | | (101,167) | | | | (93,166) | | | | (90,884) | | | 1 | | | (6) | | |
Other non-interest expense | | (2,306) | | | (3,075) | | | (26,271) | | | | (8,775) | | | | (1,943) | | | (25) | | | (88) | | |
Income (loss) before income taxes | | | 799,685 | | | | 814,976 | | | | (590,590) | | | | (150,999) | | | | 459,669 | | | (2) | | | ** | |
Income tax benefit (provision) | | | (1,148) | | | (998) | | | 1,160 | | | | (211) | | | | (2,305) | | | 15 | | | ** | |
Net income (loss) | | $ | 798,537 | | | $ | 813,978 | | | $ | (589,430) | | | $ | (151,210) | | | $ | 457,364 | | | (2) | | | ** | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted statement of operations measures | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | $ | 1,141,243 | | | $ | 1,116,601 | | | $ | 1,151,286 | | | $ | 1,135,670 | | | $ | 1,077,357 | | | 2 | | % | (3) | | % |
Interest expense | | | (705,534) | | | | (702,063) | | | | (821,089) | | | | (836,209) | | | | (792,735) | | | — | | | (14) | | |
Include: Derivative cash settlements interest expense(2) | | | (101,385) | | | | (115,645) | | | | (55,873) | | | | (43,611) | | | | (74,281) | | | (12) | | | 107 | | |
Adjusted interest expense(5) | | | (806,919) | | | (817,708) | | | (876,962) | | | (879,820) | | | (867,016) | | | (1) | | | (7) | | |
Adjusted net interest income(5) | | $ | 334,324 | | | $ | 298,893 | | | $ | 274,324 | | | $ | 255,850 | | | $ | 210,341 | | | 12 | | | 9 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net income (loss) | | $ | 798,537 | | | $ | 813,978 | | | $ | (589,430) | | | $ | (151,210) | | | $ | 457,364 | | | (2) | | | ** | |
Exclude: Derivative forward value gains (losses)(3) | | | 557,867 | | | | 621,946 | | | | (734,278) | | | | (319,730) | | | | 306,002 | | | (10) | | | ** | |
Adjusted net income(5) | | $ | 240,670 | | | $ | 192,032 | | | $ | 144,848 | | | $ | 168,520 | | | $ | 151,362 | | | 25 | | | 33 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Profitability ratios | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Times interest earned ratio (TIER)(6) | | 2.13 | | | 2.16 | | | 0.28 | | | 0.82 | | | 1.58 | | | (1) | | % | 671 | | % |
Adjusted TIER(5) | | 1.30 | | | 1.23 | | | 1.17 | | | 1.19 | | | 1.17 | | | 6 | | | 5 | | |
Net interest yield(7) | | 1.46 | % | | 1.47 | % | | 1.21 | % | | 1.14 | % | | 1.12 | % | | (1) | | bps | 26 | | bps |
Adjusted net interest yield(5)(8) | | 1.12 | | | 1.06 | | | 1.00 | | | 0.97 | | | 0.83 | | | 6 | | | 6 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Credit quality ratios | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net charge-off rate(9) | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, | | Change |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 |
| 2018 |
| 2017 |
| 2016 |
| 2015 | | 2019 vs. 2018 | | 2018 vs. 2017 |
Statement of operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | $ | 1,135,670 |
| | $ | 1,077,357 |
| | $ | 1,036,634 |
| | $ | 1,012,636 |
| | $ | 952,976 |
| | 5% | | 4% |
Interest expense | | (836,209 | ) | | (792,735 | ) | | (741,738 | ) | | (681,850 | ) | | (635,684 | ) | | 5 | | 7 |
Net interest income | | 299,461 |
| | 284,622 |
|
| 294,896 |
|
| 330,786 |
|
| 317,292 |
| | 5 | | (3) |
Fee and other income | | 15,355 |
| | 17,578 |
| | 19,713 |
| | 21,785 |
| | 36,783 |
| | (13) | | (11) |
Total revenue | | 314,816 |
| | 302,200 |
| | 314,609 |
| | 352,571 |
| | 354,075 |
| | 4 | | (4) |
Benefit (provision) for loan losses | | 1,266 |
| | 18,575 |
| | (5,978 | ) | | 646 |
| | 21,954 |
| | (93) | | ** |
Derivative gains (losses)(2) | | (363,341 | ) | | 231,721 |
| | 94,903 |
| | (309,841 | ) | | (196,999 | ) | | ** | | 144 |
Results of operations of foreclosed assets | | — |
| | — |
| | (1,749 | ) | | (6,899 | ) | | (120,148 | ) | | — | | ** |
Unrealized losses on equity securities | | (1,799 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | ** | | — |
Operating expenses(3) | | (93,166 | ) | | (90,884 | ) | | (86,226 | ) | | (86,343 | ) | | (76,530 | ) | | 3 | | 5 |
Other non-interest expense | | (8,775 | ) | | (1,943 | ) | | (1,756 | ) | | (1,593 | ) | | (870 | ) | | 352 | | 11 |
Income (loss) before income taxes | | (150,999 | ) | | 459,669 |
| | 313,803 |
| | (51,459 | ) | | (18,518 | ) | | ** | | 46 |
Income tax benefit (expense) | | (211 | ) | | (2,305 | ) | | (1,704 | ) | | (57 | ) | | (409 | ) | | (91) | | 35 |
Net income (loss) | | $ | (151,210 | ) | | $ | 457,364 |
| | $ | 312,099 |
| | $ | (51,516 | ) | | $ | (18,927 | ) | | ** | | 47 |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | |
Adjusted operational financial measures | |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| | | | | |
| | |
Adjusted interest expense(4) | | $ | (879,820 | ) | | $ | (867,016 | ) | | $ | (826,216 | ) | | $ | (770,608 | ) | | $ | (718,590 | ) | | 1% | | 5% |
Adjusted net interest income(4) | | 255,850 |
| | 210,341 |
| | 210,418 |
| | 242,028 |
| | 234,386 |
| | 22 | | — |
Adjusted net income(4) | | 168,520 |
| | 151,362 |
| | 132,718 |
| | 169,567 |
| | 95,166 |
| | 11 | | 14 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Selected ratios | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-charge coverage ratio/TIER(5) | | 0.82 |
| | 1.58 |
| | 1.42 |
| | 0.92 |
| | 0.97 |
| | (76) bps | | 16 bps |
Adjusted TIER(4) | | 1.19 |
| | 1.17 |
| | 1.16 |
| | 1.22 |
| | 1.13 |
| | 2 | | 1 |
Net interest yield(6) | | 1.14 | % | | 1.12 | % | | 1.20 | % | | 1.43 | % | | 1.47 | % | | 2 | | (8) |
Adjusted net interest yield(4)(7) | | 0.97 |
| | 0.83 |
| | 0.86 |
| | 1.05 |
| | 1.08 |
| | 14 | | (3) |
Net charge-off rate(8) | | 0.00 |
| | 0.00 |
| | 0.01 |
| | 0.00 |
| | 0.00 |
| | 0 | | (1) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Change | |
| | Year Ended May 31, | | 2022 | | 2021 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 | | 2019 | | 2018 | | vs. 2021 | | vs. 2020 | |
Balance sheet | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash | | $ | 161,114 | | | $ | 303,361 | | | $ | 680,019 | | | $ | 186,204 | | | $ | 238,824 | | | (47) | | % | (55) | | % |
Investment securities | | 599,904 | | | 611,277 | | | 370,135 | | | 652,977 | | | 609,851 | | | (2) | | | 65 | | |
Loans to members(10) | | 30,063,386 | | | 28,426,961 | | | 26,702,380 | | | 25,916,904 | | | 25,178,608 | | | 6 | | | 6 | | |
Allowance for credit losses(11) | | (67,560) | | | (85,532) | | | (53,125) | | | (17,535) | | | (18,801) | | | (21) | | | 61 | | |
Loans to members, net | | 29,995,826 | | | 28,341,429 | | | 26,649,255 | | | 25,899,369 | | | 25,159,807 | | | 6 | | | 6 | | |
Total assets | | 31,251,382 | | | 29,638,363 | | | 28,157,605 | | | 27,124,372 | | | 26,690,204 | | | 5 | | | 5 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Liabilities and equity: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Short-term borrowings | | 4,981,167 | | | 4,582,096 | | | 3,961,985 | | | 3,607,726 | | | 3,795,910 | | | 9 | | | 16 | | |
Long-term debt | | 21,545,440 | | | 20,603,123 | | | 19,712,024 | | | 19,210,793 | | | 18,714,960 | | | 5 | | | 5 | | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,518 | | | 986,315 | | | 986,119 | | | 986,020 | | | 742,410 | | | — | | | — | | |
Members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,234,161 | | | 1,254,660 | | | 1,339,618 | | | 1,357,129 | | | 1,379,982 | | | (2) | | | (6) | | |
Total debt outstanding | | 28,747,286 | | | 27,426,194 | | | 25,999,746 | | | 25,161,668 | | | 24,633,262 | | | 5 | | | 5 | | |
Total liabilities | | 29,109,413 | | | 28,238,484 | | | 27,508,783 | | | 25,820,490 | | | 25,184,351 | | | 3 | | | 3 | | |
Total equity | | 2,141,969 | | | 1,399,879 | | | 648,822 | | | 1,303,882 | | | 1,505,853 | | | 53 | | | 116 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted balance sheet measures | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted total liabilities(5) | | $ | 26,629,324 | | | $ | 25,273,384 | | | $ | 23,777,823 | | | $ | 22,931,626 | | | $ | 22,625,162 | | | 5 | | % | 6 | | % |
Adjusted total equity(5) | | 4,270,476 | | | 4,106,172 | | | 4,061,411 | | | 3,999,164 | | | 3,661,239 | | | 4 | | | 1 | | |
Members’ equity(5) | | 2,019,952 | | | 1,836,135 | | | 1,707,770 | | | 1,626,847 | | | 1,496,620 | | | 10 | | | 8 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Debt ratios | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Debt-to-equity ratio(12) | | 13.59 | | 20.17 | | 42.40 | | 19.80 | | 16.72 | | (33) | | % | (52) | | % |
Adjusted debt-to-equity ratio(5) | | 6.24 | | 6.15 | | 5.85 | | 5.73 | | 6.18 | | 1 | | | 5 | | |
Liquidity coverage ratio(13) | | 0.99 | | 0.99 | | 1.17 | | 1.32 | | 1.09 | | — | | | (15) | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Credit quality ratios | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Nonperforming loans ratio(14) | | 0.76 | % | | 0.84 | % | | 0.63 | % | | — | % | | — | % | | (8) | | bps | 21 | | bps |
Criticized loans ratio(15) | | 1.65 | | | 3.12 | | | 1.39 | | | 0.78 | | | 0.71 | | | (147) | | | 173 | | |
Allowance coverage ratio(16) | | 0.22 | | | 0.30 | | | 0.20 | | | 0.07 | | | 0.07 | | | (8) | | | 10 | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, | | Change |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2019 vs. 2018 | | 2018 vs. 2017 |
Balance sheet | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash | | $ | 186,204 |
| | $ | 238,824 |
| | $ | 188,421 |
| | $ | 209,168 |
| | $ | 249,321 |
| | (22)% | | 27% |
Investment securities | | 652,977 |
| | 609,851 |
| | 92,554 |
| | 87,940 |
| | 84,472 |
| | 7 | | 559 |
Loans to members(9) | | 25,916,904 |
| | 25,178,608 |
| | 24,367,044 |
| | 23,162,696 |
| | 21,469,017 |
| | 3 | | 3 |
Allowance for loan losses | | (17,535 | ) | | (18,801 | ) | | (37,376 | ) | | (33,258 | ) | | (33,690 | ) | | (7) | | (50) |
Loans to members, net | | 25,899,369 |
| | 25,159,807 |
|
| 24,329,668 |
|
| 23,129,438 |
|
| 21,435,327 |
| | 3 | | 3 |
Total assets | | 27,124,372 |
| | 26,690,204 |
| | 25,205,692 |
| | 24,270,200 |
| | 22,846,059 |
| | 2 | | 6 |
Short-term borrowings | | 3,607,726 |
| | 3,795,910 |
| | 3,342,900 |
| | 2,938,848 |
| | 3,127,754 |
| | (5) | | 14 |
Long-term debt | | 19,210,793 |
| | 18,714,960 |
| | 17,955,594 |
| | 17,473,603 |
| | 16,244,794 |
| | 3 | | 4 |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,020 |
| | 742,410 |
| | 742,274 |
| | 742,212 |
| | 395,699 |
| | 33 | | — |
Members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,357,129 |
| | 1,379,982 |
| | 1,419,025 |
| | 1,443,810 |
| | 1,505,420 |
| | (2) | | (3) |
Total debt outstanding | | 25,161,668 |
| | 24,633,262 |
| | 23,459,793 |
| | 22,598,473 |
| | 21,273,667 |
| | 2 | | 5 |
Total liabilities | | 25,820,490 |
| | 25,184,351 |
| | 24,106,887 |
| | 23,452,822 |
| | 21,934,273 |
| | 3 | | 4 |
Total equity | | 1,303,882 |
| | 1,505,853 |
| | 1,098,805 |
| | 817,378 |
| | 911,786 |
| | (13) | | 37 |
Guarantees(10) | | 837,435 |
| | 805,161 |
| | 889,617 |
| | 909,208 |
| | 986,500 |
| | 4 | | (9) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Selected ratios period end | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Allowance coverage ratio(11) | | 0.07 | % | | 0.07 | % | | 0.15 | % | | 0.14 | % | | 0.16 | % | | — | | (8) bps |
Debt-to-equity ratio(12) | | 19.80 |
| | 16.72 |
| | 21.94 |
| | 28.69 |
| | 24.06 |
| | 308 | | (522) |
Adjusted debt-to-equity ratio(4) | | 5.73 |
| | 6.18 |
| | 5.95 |
| | 5.82 |
| | 6.26 |
| | (45) | | 23 |
____________________________
**Calculation of percentage change is not meaningful.
(1)Certain reclassifications may have been made to prior periodsfor prior-periods to conform to the current periodcurrent-period presentation.
(2)Consists of net periodic contractual interest amounts on our interest rate swapswaps, which we refer to as derivatives cash settlements expense andinterest expense.
(3)Consists of derivative forward value gains (losses). Derivative cash settlement amounts represent net periodic contractual interest accruals related to derivatives not designated for hedge accounting. Derivative forward value gains (losses), which represent changes in fair value during the period, excluding net periodic contractual interest accruals, relatedsettlement amounts, attributable to derivatives not designated for hedge accounting and expense amounts reclassified into income related to the cumulative transition loss recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income on June 1, 2001, as a resultaccounting.
(4)Consists of the adoption of the derivative accounting guidance that required derivatives to be reported at fair value on the balance sheet.
(3)Consists oftotal non-interest expense components (i) salaries and employee benefits and the(ii) other general and administrative expenses, components of non-interest expense, each of which areis presented separately on ourthe consolidated statements of operations.
(4)(5)See “Item 7. MD&A—Non-GAAP“Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for detailsa description of each of our non-GAAP measures and additional detail on the calculationreconciliation of thesethe non-GAAP adjusted measures and the reconciliationpresented in this Report to the most comparable U.S. GAAP measures.measure.
(5)Calculated(6)Calculated based on net income (loss) plus interest expense for the period divided by interest expense for the period. The fixed-charge coverage ratios and TIER were the same during each period presented because we did not have any capitalized interest during these periods.
(6)(7)Calculated based on net interest income for the period divided by average interest-earning assets for the period.
(7)(8)Calculated based on adjusted net interest income for the period divided by average interest-earning assets for the period.
(8)(9)Calculated based on net charge-offs (recoveries) for the period divided by average total loans outstanding loans for the period.
(9)(10)Consists of the outstandingunpaid principal balance of member loans plus unamortized deferred loan origination costs which totaledof $12 million as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021, and $11 million as of May 31, 2020, 2019,, 2018 and 2017, and $10 million2018.
(11)On June 1, 2020, we adopted Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2016-13, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments, which replaces the incurred loss methodology previously used for estimating our allowance for credit losses
with an expected loss methodology referred to as the current expected credit loss (“CECL”) model. Our allowance for credit losses prior to June 1, 2020 was determined based on the incurred loss methodology.
(12)Calculated based on total liabilities at period-end divided by total equity at period-end.
(13)Calculated based on available liquidity at period-end divided by the amount of maturing debt obligations over the next 12 months at period-end as of both May 31, 2016each respective date.
(14)Calculated based on total nonperforming loans at period-end divided by total loans outstanding at period-end.
(15)Calculated based on loans outstanding at period-end to borrowers with a risk rating that falls within the criticized risk rating category, which consists of special mention, substandard and 2015.doubtful, divided by total loans outstanding at period-end.
(10)Reflects the total amount of member obligations for which CFC has guaranteed payment to a third party as of the end of each period. This amount represents our maximum exposure to loss, which significantly exceeds the guarantee liability recorded on our consolidated balance sheets. See “Note 13—Guarantees” for additional information.
(11)(16)Calculated based on the allowance for loancredit losses at period endperiod-end divided by total loans outstanding loans at period end.period-end.
(12)Calculated based on total liabilities at period end divided by total equity at period end.
| | |
Item 7. | Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (“MD&A”) |
|
|
INTRODUCTIONEXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
Our financial statements include the consolidated accounts of CFC, NCSC, RTFC and any subsidiaries created and controlled by CFC to hold foreclosed assets resulting from defaulted loans or bankruptcy. CFC did not hold and did not have any subsidiaries or other entities that held foreclosed assets as of either May 31, 2019 or May 31, 2018. See “Item 1. Business—Overview” for information on the business activities of each of these entities. Unless stated otherwise, references to “we,” “our” or “us” relate to CFC and its consolidated entities. All references to members within this document include members, associates and affiliates of CFC and its consolidated entities.
Our principal operations are currently organized for management reporting purposes into three business segments: CFC, NCSC and RTFC. Loans to members totaled $25,917 million as of May 31, 2019, of which 96% was attributable to CFC. We generated total revenue, which consists of net interest income and fee and other income, of $315 million and $302 million for fiscal years ended May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, of which 99% and 97% were attributable to CFC. We provide information on the financial performance of each ofAs a member-owned, nonprofit finance cooperative, our business segments in “Note 15—Business Segments.”
Management monitors a variety of key indicators to evaluate our business performance. In addition to financial measures determined in accordance with GAAP, management also evaluates performance based on certain non-GAAP measures and metrics, which we refer to as “adjusted” measures. We identify our non-GAAP measures and discuss why these measures are useful in “Item 6. Selected Financial Data.” We provide a reconciliation of our non-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP measures below under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
The following MD&A is intended to provide the reader with an understanding of our consolidated results of operations, financial condition and liquidity by discussing the factors influencing changes from period to period and the key measures used by management to evaluate performance, such as net interest income, net interest yield, loan growth, debt-to-equity ratio, credit quality metrics and also non-GAAP measures. The MD&A section is provided as a supplement to, and should be read in conjunction with, our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2019, and the additional information contained elsewhere in this Report, including the risk factors discussed under “Item 1A. Risk Factors.”
Our primary objective as a member-owned cooperative lender is to provide cost-based financial products to our rural electric utility members with access to affordable, flexible financing products; while also maintaining a sound, stable financial position required forand adequate liquidity to meet our financial obligations and maintain ongoing investment-grade credit ratings on our debt instruments. Our objectiveratings. Because maximizing profit is not our primary objective, the interest rates on lending products offered to maximize net income; therefore, the rates we charge our member-borrowersmember borrowers reflect our funding costs plus a spread to cover our operating expenses a provision for loanand estimated credit losses and generate sufficient earnings sufficient to cover interest owed on our debt obligations and achieve interest coverage to meet ourcertain financial objectives.target goals. Our goal is to earnfinancial goals focus on earning an annual minimum adjusted TIER of 1.10 and to maintainmaintaining an adjusted debt-to-equity ratio at approximately 6.00-to-1 or below 6.00-to-1.below.
We are subject to period-to-period volatility in our reported U.S. GAAP results due to changes in market conditions and differences in the way our financial assets and liabilities are accounted for under U.S. GAAP. Our financial assets and liabilities expose us to interest-rate risk. We use derivatives, primarily interest rate swaps, as part of our strategy in managing this risk. Our derivatives are intended to economically hedge and manage the interest-rate sensitivity mismatch between our financial assets and liabilities. We are required under U.S. GAAP to carry derivatives at fair value on our consolidated balance sheet;sheets; however, the financial assets and liabilities for which we use derivatives to economically hedge are carried at amortized cost. Changes in interest rates and the shape of the yieldswap curve result in periodic fluctuations in the fair value of our derivatives, which may cause volatility in our earnings because we do not apply hedge accounting for our interest rate swaps. As a result, the mark-to-market changes in our interest rate swaps are recorded in earnings. Because our derivative portfolio consists of a higher proportion of pay-fixed swaps, the majority of which are longer dated, than receive-fixed swaps, the majority of which are shorter dated, we generally record derivative losses when interest rates decline and derivative gains when interest rates rise. This earnings volatility generally is not indicative of the underlying economics of our business, as the derivative forward fair value gains or losses recorded each period may or may not be realized over time, depending on the terms of our derivative instruments and future changes in market conditions
that impact the periodic cash settlement amounts of our interest rate swaps. As such,Therefore, as discussed above under “Summary of Selected Financial Data,” management uses our non-GAAP adjusted non-GAAP resultsmeasures to evaluate our operatingfinancial performance. Our adjusted financial results include the realized net periodic contractual interest expense amounts on our interest rate swap settlement amountsswaps but exclude the impact of unrealized forward fair value gains and losses. Our financial debt covenants are also based on our non-GAAP adjusted results, as the forward fair value gains and losses related to our interest rate swaps do not affect our cash flows, liquidity or ability to service our debt.
Financial Performance
Reported Results
We reported a net loss of $151 million for fiscal year ended May 31, 2019 (“fiscal year 2019”), which resulted in a TIER of 0.82. In comparison, we reported net income of $457$799 million and a TIER of 1.582.13 for fiscal year ended May 31, 20182022 (“current fiscal year”), compared with net income of $814 million and TIER of 2.16 for fiscal year 2018”). The significant variance between our reported results for the current fiscal year and the 2021 (“prior fiscal year was primarily attributable to mark-to-market changes in the fair value of our derivative instruments.year”). Our debt-to-equity ratio increaseddecreased to 19.8013.59 as of May 31, 2019,2022, from 16.7220.17 as of May 31, 2018,2021, primarily due to the decreasean increase in equity resulting from our reported net lossincome of $151$799 million for fiscal year 2019 and2022, which was partially offset by a decrease in equity attributable to the CFC Board of Directors’ authorized patronage capital retirement in July 2021 of $48 million$58 million.
The decrease in August 2018.
The variance of $609 million between our reported net lossincome of $151$15 million to $799 million for fiscal year 20192022 from $814 million for fiscal year 2021, was primarily driven by the combined impact of a reduction in derivative gains of $50 million and an unfavorable shift in gains and losses recorded on our investment securities of $32 million, partially offset by a favorable shift in the provision for credit losses of $47 million and an increase in net interest income of $457$21 million. We recorded derivative gains of $456 million for fiscal year 2018 was driven by a shift in derivative fair value changes of $595 million. We recorded derivative losses of $363 million in fiscal year 2019, due to decreases in the fair value of our pay-fixed swaps2022, attributable to a decline in medium and longer-term interest rates during the second half of fiscal year 2019. Short-term interest rates rose and exceeded medium and longer-term interest rates during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2019, which resulted in an inverted yield curve. In comparison, we reported derivative gains of $232 million in fiscal year 2018 due to a riseincreases in interest rates across the entire swap yield curve. Netcurve during the period. In comparison, we recorded derivative gains of $506 million for fiscal year 2021, driven by a pronounced increase in
medium- and longer-term swap rates. As noted above, the substantial majority of our swap portfolio consists of longer-dated, pay-fixed swaps. Therefore, increases and decreases in medium- and longer-term swap rates generally have a more pronounced corresponding impact on the change in the net fair value of our swap portfolio. The unfavorable shift in gains and losses recorded on our investment securities was primarily attributable to unrealized losses resulting from period-to-period market fluctuations in fair value.
We recorded a benefit for credit losses of $18 million for fiscal year 2022. In contrast, we recorded a provision for credit losses of $29 million for fiscal year 2021. The benefit for credit losses for fiscal year 2022 was primarily attributable to a decrease in the collective allowance, stemming largely from positive developments during the fiscal quarter ended February 28, 2022 (the “third quarter of fiscal year 2022”) related to Rayburn Country Electric Cooperative, Inc. (“Rayburn”) that resulted in an improvement in Rayburn’s credit risk profile and also a significant reduction in loans outstanding to Rayburn. In June 2021, Texas enacted securitization legislation that offers a financing program for qualifying electric cooperatives exposed to elevated power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex. In February 2022, Rayburn successfully completed a securitization transaction pursuant to this legislation to cover extraordinary costs and expenses incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex. Subsequent to the completion of the securitization transaction, Rayburn fully paid its related outstanding obligations to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (“ERCOT”). As a result, we revised our borrower risk rating for Rayburn to a rating in the pass category from a previous rating in the criticized category. In addition, we received loan payments from Rayburn during the current fiscal year that reduced our loans outstanding to Rayburn to $167 million as of May 31, 2022, consisting of secured and unsecured loans outstanding of $151 million and $16 million, respectively. Loans outstanding to Rayburn totaled $379 million as of the prior fiscal year-end May 31, 2021, consisting of secured and unsecured loans outstanding of $167 million and $212 million, respectively. The provision for credit losses of $29 million recorded for fiscal year 2021 was attributable to an allowance build due to the significant adverse financial impact on Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. (“Brazos”) and Rayburn as a result of their exposure to elevated wholesale electric power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex, discussed further below under “Consolidated Results of Operations.”
The increase in net interest income which accounted for 95% and 94% of total revenue for fiscal years 2019 and 2018, respectively, increased $15$21 million, or 5%, to $436 million for fiscal year 2022 was attributable to an increase in average interest-earning assets of $1,629 million, or 6%, partially offset by a decrease in the net interest yield of 1 basis point, or 1%, to 1.46%. The increase in average interest-earning assets was primarily driven by growth in average total loans. The decrease in the net interest yield reflected the combined impact of a decrease in the average yield on interest-earning assets of 13 basis points to 3.82% and a reduction in the benefit from non-interest bearing funding of 1 basis point to 0.17%, which was largely offset by a reduction in our average cost of borrowings of 13 basis points to 2.53%. The decreases in the average yield on interest-earning assets and our average cost of borrowings reflected the impact of the
continued low interest rate environment during the majority of fiscal year 2022.
Non-GAAP Adjusted Results
Adjusted net income totaled $241 million and adjusted TIER was 1.30 for fiscal year 2022, compared with adjusted net income of $192 million and adjusted TIER of 1.23 for fiscal year 2021. The adjusted TIER for both fiscal year 2022 and 2021 was well above our target of 1.10.While our goal is to maintain an adjusted debt-to-equity ratio of approximately 6.00-to-1, the adjusted debt-to-equity ratio of 6.24 and 6.15 as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, was above our targeted goal due to increased borrowings to fund growth in our loan portfolio.
The increase in adjusted net income of $49 million to $241 million for fiscal year 2022, from $192 million for fiscal year 2021, was primarily driven by the combined impact of a favorable shift in our provision for credit losses of $47 million and an increase in adjusted net interest income of $35 million, or 12%, partially offset by an unfavorable shift in gains and losses recorded on our investment securities of $32 million, primarily due to period-to-period market fluctuations in fair value. As discussed above under “ Reported Results,” we recorded a benefit for credit losses of $18 million for fiscal year 2022, primarily due to a reduction in our collective allowance resulting from an improvement in the credit risk profile of Rayburn following payment in full of its obligations to ERCOT upon the successful completion of a securitization transaction in February 2022 to cover extraordinary costs and expenses incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex and a significant reduction in loans outstanding to Rayburn. In contrast, we recorded a provision for credit losses of $29 million for fiscal year 2021 due to the allowance build for loans outstanding to Brazos and Rayburn as discussed above under “Reported Results.”
The increase in adjusted net interest income of $35 million, or 12%, to $334 million for fiscal year 2022 was attributable to the combined impact of an increase in the net interest yield of 2 basis points, or 2%, to 1.14%, and an increase in our average interest-earning assets of $942$1,629 million, or 4%. The increase in the net interest yield reflected an increase in the average yield on our interest-earning assets of 7 basis points to 4.31%6%, which was largely offset by an increase in our average cost of funds of 6 basis points to 3.36%, both of which were largelyprimarily due to the increasegrowth in short-term interest rates that resulted in higher average yields on line of creditloans outstanding, and variable-rate loans and a higher average cost on short-term and variable-rate funding. On July 12, 2018, we early redeemed $300 million of the $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 10.375% collateral trust bonds and repaid the remaining $700 million principal amount of these bonds on the maturity date of November 1, 2018. We replaced this high-cost debt with lower-cost funding. While we experienced an overall increase in our average cost of funds during fiscal year 2019, resulting primarily from the increase in the average cost of our short-term and variable-rate funding, the cost savings from the repayment of the 10.375% collateral trust bonds mitigated this increase.
Other factors affecting the variance between our current year results and the prior fiscal year include a loss on the early redemption of the 10.375% collateral trust bonds of $7 million attributable to the premium paid to redeem the bonds and a decrease in the benefit for loan losses of $17 million. The premium paid for the early redemption of the collateral trust bonds was offset by the interest cost savings following the redemption. We recorded a benefit for loan losses of $1 million for fiscal year 2019, compared with a benefit for loan losses of $18 million for fiscal year 2018. The benefit for loan losses of $18 million for fiscal year 2018 was attributable to a reduction in the allowance for loan losses resulting from favorable changes in the loss severity rate, or recovery rate, assumptions used in determining the collective allowance for our electric distribution and power supply loan portfolios.
Adjusted Non-GAAP Results
Our adjusted net income totaled $169 million and our adjusted TIER was 1.19 for fiscal year 2019, compared with adjusted net income of $151 million and adjusted TIER of 1.17 for fiscal year 2018. Our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio decreased to 5.73 as of May 31, 2019, from 6.18 as of May 31, 2018, primarily attributable to an increase in adjusted equity resulting from the issuance of subordinated deferrable debt totaling $250 million in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2019.
The increase in adjusted net income of $18 million in fiscal year 2019 from fiscal year 2018 was attributable to an increase in adjusted net interest income of $46 million, or 22%, which was partially offset by the reduction in the benefit for loan
losses of $17 million and the loss on the early extinguishment of debt of $7 million. The increase in adjusted net interest income was driven by an increase in the adjusted net interest yield of 146 basis points, or 17%6%, to 0.97%, coupled with the increase in average interest-earning assets of 4%1.12%. The increase in theour adjusted net interest yield reflected the combinedfavorable impact of an increasea reduction in our adjusted average cost of borrowings of 20 basis points to 2.89%, which was partially offset by a decrease in the average yield on interest-earning assets of 713 basis points to 4.31% and a reduction3.82% as the continued low interest rate environment during the majority of fiscal year 2022 contributed to reductions in our adjusted average cost of funds of 7 basis points to 3.54%. This reduction was largely due to the interest savings from the repayment of the $1 billion aggregate principal amount of the 10.375% collateral trust bonds, the replacement of this debt with lower-cost fundingborrowing and a decrease in the net periodic derivative settlement expense amountsaverage yield on our interest rate swaps resulting from higher short-term interest rates, which together more than offset the increase in the average cost of our short-term, variable-rate borrowings resulting from the increase in short-term interest rates.interest-earning assets.
See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for additional information on our adjusted measures, including a reconciliation of these measures to the most directly comparable U.S. GAAP measures.
Lending Activity
Loans to members totaled $25,917$30,063 million as of May 31, 2019,2022, an increase of $738$1,636 million, or 3%6%, from May 31, 2018.2021, reflecting net increases in long-term and line of credit loans of $1,599 million and $37 million, respectively. We experienced increases in CFC distribution loans, CFC statewide and power supplyassociate loans, increased by $603 million and $182 million, respectively, which was partially offset by a decrease in NCSC loans and RTFC loans of $43$1,817 million, $21 million, $4 million and $18 million, respectively. Long-term and line-of-credit revolving loans accounted for $425 million and $313$47 million, respectively, and a decrease in CFC power supply loans of the $738 million increase in loans. Based on our historical experience, however, long-term loans typically account for the substantial majority of loan growth.$253 million.
Long-term loan advances totaled $1,843$3,386 million during fiscal year 2019, with2022, of which approximately 87% of those advances80% was provided to members for capital expenditures byand 18% was provided to members for other expenses, primarily to fund operating expenses attributable to the elevated power cost obligations incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex. In comparison, long-term loan advances totaled $2,514 million during fiscal year 2021, of which approximately 86% was provided to members for capital expenditures and 10%8% was provided for the refinancing of loans made by other lenders. In comparison,Of the $3,386 million total long-term loans advanced during fiscal year 2022, $2,911 million were fixed-rate loan advances with a weighted average fixed-rate term of 23 years.
Many rural electric distribution cooperatives have made or are making infrastructure investments that include building fiber optic lines to improve electric grid system reliability and efficiency, as fiber operations offer enhanced communication to monitor electric systems, identify outages and speed electric restoration. Some of these electric cooperatives are leveraging these fiber assets to offer access to broadband services, either directly or by partnering with local telecommunication companies and others, to the communities they serve. Aggregate loans outstanding to CFC electric distribution cooperative members relating to broadband projects, which we started tracking in October 2017, increased to an estimated $1,647 million as of May 31, 2022, from approximately $854 million as of May 31, 2021. The three states with the largest CFC loans outstanding for broadband projects were Oklahoma, Indiana and Arkansas as of May 31, 2022, and broadband loans outstanding for these states totaled $2,203$205 million, during fiscal year 2018, with approximately 67%$191 million and $155 million, respectively, as of those advancesthis date. Many of these broadband projects are also financially supported by various states and the federal government, which reduces the credit risk for capital expenditures by membersCFC and 24% for the refinancing of loans made by other lenders. The decreaseour electric cooperative members. We expect our member electric cooperatives to continue in long-term loan advances from the same prior-year period primarily resulted from weaker demand from borrowerstheir efforts to refinance other lender debt. CFC had long-term fixed-rate loans totaling $761 million that were scheduledexpand broadband access to reprice during fiscal year 2019. Of this total, $568 million repriced to a new long-term fixed rate; $124 million repriced to a long-term variable rate;unserved and $69 million was repaid in full.underserved communities.
Credit Quality
TheWe believe the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio remained highstrong as of May 31, 2019, as evidenced by our strong credit performance metrics. We had no delinquent or nonperforming loans as of May 31, 2019, and2022. Historically, we have not experienced any charge-offs for two consecutive fiscal years. Outstanding loans to electric utility organizations represented approximately 99% of total outstanding loan portfolio as of May 31, 2019, unchanged from May 31, 2018. We historically have had limited defaults and losses on loans in our electric utility loan portfolio. Weportfolio largely because of the essential nature of the service provided by electric utility cooperatives as well as other factors, such as limited rate regulation and competition, which we discuss further in the section “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk.” In addition, we generally lend to members on a senior secured basis, which reduces the risk of loss in the event of a borrower default. Loans outstanding to electric utility organizations of $29,584 million and $27,995 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, represented approximately 98% and 99% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. Of our total loans outstanding, 92%93% were secured as of both May 31, 2022 and 8% were unsecured2021.
We had loans to three borrowers totaling $228 million classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2019, compared with 93% secured and 7% unsecured2022. In comparison we had loans to four borrowers totaling $237 million classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2018.2021. Nonperforming loans represented 0.76% and 0.84% of total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The allowance forreduction in nonperforming loans of $9 million during fiscal year 2022 was due in part to our receipt during fiscal year 2022 of full payment of all amounts due on nonperforming loans to two RTFC borrowers totaling $9 million. In addition, we have
continued to receive payments on the remaining outstanding nonperforming loan losses was $18to a CFC electric power supply borrower, including payments totaling $29 million and $19during fiscal year 2022, which reduced the balance of this loan to $114 million as of May 31, 20192022, from $143 million as of May 31, 2021. These reductions were partially offset by the classification during the fiscal quarter ended May 31, 2022 (the “fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022”) of the $28 million loan outstanding to Brazos Sandy Creek Electric Cooperative Inc. (“Brazos Sandy Creek”) as nonperforming following its bankruptcy filing, as discussed below.
Loans outstanding to Brazos, which filed for bankruptcy in March 2021 due to its exposure to elevated wholesale electric power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex, accounted for $86 million and 2018,$85 million of our total nonperforming loans as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Brazos is not permitted to make scheduled loan payments without approval of the bankruptcy court. As a result, we have not received payments from Brazos since March 2021, and its loans outstanding to us were delinquent as of each respective date.
On March 18, 2022, Brazos Sandy Creek, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Brazos and a CFC Texas-based electric power supply borrower, filed for bankruptcy following the filing of a motion by Brazos to reject its power purchase agreement with Brazos Sandy Creek as part of Brazos’ bankruptcy proceedings. A Chapter 7 Trustee has been appointed, and the Chapter 7 Trustee was approved by the bankruptcy court to operate Brazos Sandy Creek as a going concern. CFC had a secured loan outstanding to Brazos Sandy Creek totaling $28 million as of May 31, 2022, which, upon notification of the bankruptcy filing by Brazos Sandy Creek, we classified as nonperforming during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022. Brazos Sandy Creek’s loan outstanding of $28 million was delinquent as of May 31, 2022 and on nonaccrual status as of this date. Aggregate loans outstanding to Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek totaled $114 million as of May 31, 2022, of which $49 million were secured and $65 million were unsecured. Prior to Brazos’ and Brazos Sandy Creek’s bankruptcy filings in March 2021 and March 2022, respectively, we had not experienced any defaults or charge-offs in our electric utility and telecommunications loan portfolios since fiscal years 2013 and 2017, respectively.
Our allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio decreased to $68 million and 0.22%, respectively, as of May 31, 2022, from $86 million and 0.30%, respectively, as of May 31, 2021. The decrease in the allowance for credit losses of $18 million reflected a decrease in the collective and asset-specific allowance of $14 million and $4 million, respectively. The collective allowance decrease of $14 million was attributable to an improvement in Rayburn’s credit risk profile following Rayburn’s successful completion of a securitization transaction in February 2022 and subsequent payment in full of its obligations to ERCOT and a significant reduction in loans outstanding to Rayburn, as discussed above. The asset-specific allowance decrease of $4 million stemmed from the combined impact of the elimination of an asset-specific allowance attributable to nonperforming loans totaling $9 million that were paid in full during the second quarter of fiscal year 2022 and the decrease of an asset-specific allowance for a nonperforming CFC power supply borrower, attributable to loan payments received on this loan, partially offset by the addition of an asset-specific allowance for Brazos Sandy Creek due to its bankruptcy filing, as discussed above.
As a result of Rayburn’s payment in full of its February 2021 polar vortex-related outstanding obligations to ERCOT, we believe our exposure to the significant adverse financial impact on some electric utilities from the surge in wholesale power costs in Texas during the February 2021 polar vortex is now limited to loans outstanding to Brazos and its wholly-owned subsidiary Brazos Sandy Creek.
We discuss our methodology for estimating the allowance for credit losses in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” of this Report. We also provide additional information on the credit quality of our loan portfolio and the allowance coverage ratio was 0.07% asfor credit losses below in the sections “Critical Accounting Estimates” and “Credit Risk—Allowance for Credit Losses” and “Note 4—Loans” and “Note 5—Allowance for Credit Losses” of each date.this Report.
Financing Activity
We issue debt primarily to fund growth in our loan portfolio. As such, our outstanding debt volumeoutstanding generally increases and decreases in response to member loan demand. Total debt outstanding increased by $528$1,321 million, or 2%5%, from the prior fiscal year endto $28,747 million as of May 31, 2022, due to an increase in borrowings to fund the increase in loans to members. The increase was primarily attributable to a net increase in borrowings under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program of $554 million, a net increase in subordinated deferrable debt of $244 million, a net increase in Farmer Mac notes payable of $163 million and a net increase in member commercial paper, select notes and daily liquidity fund notes of $51 million. These increases were partially offset by net decreases in collateral trust bonds outstanding of $255 million, dealer commercial paper of $120 million and dealer medium-term notes of $61 million. Outstanding dealer commercial paper of $945$1,025 million as of May 31, 20192022 was within our quarter-end target range. Our goal is to maintain dealer commercial paper balance at each quarter-end within a range of $1,000 million and $1,500 million. We provide additional information on our financing activities during fiscal year 2022 in the below our targeted limit of $1,250 million.
Outlook for the Next 12 Months
We currently expect that our net interest income, adjusted net interest income, tier, adjusted tier, net interest yield and adjusted net interest yield will increase over the next 12 months, largely due to the cost savings from the repayment of the $1 billion aggregate principal amount of 10.375% collateral trust bonds, which matured on November 1, 2018, and the replacementin section “Consolidated Balance Sheet Analysis—Debt” of this Report.
On December 13, 2021, S&P affirmed CFC’s credit ratings and stable outlook under its revised criteria and updated methodology for rating financial institutions published on December 9, 2021. On December 16, 2021, Moody’s affirmed CFC’s credit ratings and stable outlook. On February 4, 2022, Fitch issued a credit ratings report review of CFC in which Fitch affirmed CFC’s credit ratings and stable outlook. Table 31 presents our credit ratings for each CFC debt with lower-cost funding.
Long-term debt scheduled to mature over the next 12 months totaled $1,638 millionproduct type as of May 31, 2019, consisting2022, which remain unchanged as of $1,416 millionthe date of fixed-rate debt at a weighted average costthis Report, in the below section “Liquidity Risk—Credit Ratings” of 2.26% and $222 millionthis Report.
Liquidity
Our primary sources of variable-rate debt. We believe we have sufficient liquidity from the combination of existing cash and cash equivalents,funds include member loan principal repayments, securities held in our investment portfolio, committed bank revolving lines of credit, committed loan facilities under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program, revolving note purchase agreements with Farmer Mac and our ability to issueproceeds from debt in the capital markets,issuances to our members and in private placementsthe public capital markets. Although as a non-bank financial institution we are not subject to regulatory liquidity requirements, we monitor our liquidity and funding positions on an ongoing basis and assess our ability to meet our scheduled debt obligations and other cash flow requirements based on point-in-time metrics as well as forward-looking projections. Our liquidity and funding assessment takes into consideration amounts available under existing liquidity sources, the demand forexpected rollover of member short-term investments and scheduled loan advancesprincipal repayment amounts, as well as our continued ability to access the private placement and satisfy our obligations to repay long-term debt maturing over the next 12 months. public capital markets.
As of May 31, 2019, sources of2022, our available liquidity readily available for access totaled $6,945$6,797 million, consisting of (i) $178 million in cash and cash equivalents;equivalents of $154 million; (ii) investments in debt securities with an aggregate fair value of $566 million, which is subject to changes based on market fluctuations; (iii) up to $1,350$2,597 million available under committed bank revolving line of credit agreements; (iv) up to $1,075 million available under committed loan facilities under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program; (iii)and (v) up to $2,972 million available for access under committed bank revolving line of credit agreements; (iv) up to $2,145$2,405 million available under a revolving note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac, subject to market conditions;conditions. In addition to our existing available liquidity of $6,797 million as of May 31, 2022, we expect to receive $1,479 million from scheduled long-term loan principal payments over the next 12 months.
Debt scheduled to mature over the next 12 months totaled $6,894 million as of May 31, 2022, consisting of short-term borrowings of $4,981 million and (v) up to $300long-term and subordinated debt of $1,913 million. The short-term borrowings scheduled maturity amount of $4,981 million consists of member investments of $3,956 million and dealer commercial paper of $1,025 million. The long-term and subordinated scheduled debt obligations over the next 12 months of $1,913 million consist of debt maturities and scheduled debt payment amounts.
Our available under a committed revolving note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac.
liquidity of $6,797 million as of May 31, 2022, was $97 million below our total scheduled debt obligations over the next 12 months of $6,894 million. We believe we can continue to roll over outstandingour member short-term debtinvestments of $2,663$3,956 million as of May 31, 2019,2022, based on our expectation that our members will continue to reinvest their excess cash in ourshort-term investment products offered by CFC. Our members historically have maintained a relatively stable level of short-term investments in CFC in the form of commercial paper, select notes, daily liquidity fund notes select notes and medium-term notes. Member short-term investments in CFC have averaged $3,584 million over the last 12 fiscal quarter-end reporting periods. In addition, we expect to receive $1,479 million from scheduled long-term loan principal payments over the next 12 months. Our available liquidity of $6,797 million as of May 31, 2022 was $3,859 million in excess of, or 2.3 times, our total scheduled debt obligations, excluding member short-term investments, over the next 12 months of $2,938 million.
We expect to continue accessing the dealer commercial paper market to help meetas a cost-effective means of satisfying our incremental short-term liquidity needs. Although the intra-period amount of outstanding dealer commercial paper outstanding may fluctuate based on our liquidity requirements, we intendour intent is to manage our short-term wholesale funding risk by maintaining outstanding dealer commercial paper outstanding at an amount near or below $1,250each quarter-end within a range of $1,000 million for the foreseeable future. We expect to continue to be in compliance with the covenants underand $1,500 million. Maintaining our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements which will allow usand continuing to be in compliance with the covenants of these agreements serve to mitigate roll-overour rollover risk, as we can draw on these facilities, if necessary, to repay dealer or member commercial paper that cannot be refinanced with similar debt.
While In addition, under master repurchase agreements we are nothave with counterparties, we can obtain short-term funding in secured borrowing transactions by selling investment-grade corporate debt securities from our investment securities portfolio subject to bank regulatoryan obligation to repurchase the same or similar securities at an agreed-upon price and date.
The issuance of long-term debt, which represents the most significant component of our funding, allows us to reduce our reliance on short-term borrowings, as well as effectively manage our refinancing and interest rate risk. We expect to continue to issue debt in the private placement and public capital rules,markets to meet our funding needs and believe that we generally aimhave sufficient sources of liquidity to meet our debt obligations and support our operations over the next 12 months.
We provide additional information on our liquidity profile and our primary sources and uses of funds, including projected amounts, by quarter, over each of the next six fiscal quarters through the quarter ending November 30, 2023, in the below section “Liquidity Risk” of this Report.
COVID-19
We believe that the COVID-19 pandemic has not adversely affected our primary objective of providing our members with the credit products they need to fund their operations and that we have been able to successfully navigate the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic to date. Our electric utility cooperative borrowers operate in a sector identified by the U.S. government as one of the 16 critical infrastructure sectors because the nature of the services provided in these sectors is considered essential and vital in supporting and maintaining the overall functioning of the U.S. economy. Historically, the utility sector in which our electric utility borrowers operate has been resilient to economic downturns. To date, we believe that the pandemic has not had a significant negative impact on the overall financial performance of our members. We also believe that the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio has not been adversely affected by market, economic and other disruptions caused by the pandemic, as we have not experienced any delinquencies in scheduled loan payments or received requests for payment deferrals from our borrowers due to the pandemic.
CFC has been able to maintain business continuity throughout the pandemic and has experienced no pandemic-related employee furloughs or layoffs. We have remote-work options available for most employees while also providing for in- person collaboration at our headquarters in Loudoun County, Virginia, as we believe this working model allows CFC to provide the highest quality of service and deliver more effectively on our member-focused mission. Effective March 2, 2022, we lifted our mask requirement at CFC’s headquarters for vaccinated employees based on the CDC’s updated guidance and the COVID-19 Community Level low classification for Loudoun County at that time. We plan to continue to monitor and update our practices in response to changes in the COVID-19 workplace safety and health standards established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) and Virginia as they relate to Loudoun County and guidance provided by the CDC.
Although most health and safety restrictions in response to COVID-19 have been lifted, we cannot predict the potential future impact that the COVID-19 pandemic may have on our operations and financial performance, or the specific ways the pandemic may uniquely impact our members. We provide additional information on actions taken in response to the pandemic to protect the safety and health of our employees under “Item 1. Business—Human Capital Management” in this Report. We discuss the potential adverse impact of natural disasters, including weather-related events such as the February 2021 polar vortex, and widespread health emergencies, such as COVID-19, on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity under “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Operations and Business Risks” in this Report.
Electric Cooperative Industry Trends and Developments
We believe there are emerging developments and trends in the electric cooperative sector that may present opportunities as well as challenges for our electric cooperative members. These trends include (i) expanded investments by some electric cooperatives to deploy broadband services to their members; (ii) inflation and supply chain disruptions; (iii) an increased focus on enhancing electric system resiliency and reliability; (iv) evolving relationships between some electric cooperative power supply systems and electric cooperative distribution systems to increase investments in renewable power supply; and (v) growing support of beneficial electrification strategies to reduce overall carbon emissions, while also providing benefits to cooperative members.
Expanded Investments to Deploy Broadband Services
Many rural electric distribution cooperatives have made or are making infrastructure investments that include building fiber optic lines to improve electric grid system reliability, efficiency and cost savings, as fiber operations offers enhanced communication to monitor electric systems, identify outages and speed electric restoration. Some of these electric
cooperatives are leveraging these fiber assets to offer access to broadband services, either directly or by partnering with local telecommunication companies and others, to the communities they serve. We are currently aware of 185 broadband projects by different CFC member cooperatives, and we financed or are financing 112 of these 185 broadband projects. Capital expenditures for the completion of these 185 broadband projects are expected to total approximately $9,632 million. We believe that the capital expenditures for the completion of the broadband projects that we financed or are financing will total approximately $3,985 million. Our aggregate loans outstanding to CFC electric distribution cooperative members relating to broadband projects, which we started tracking in October 2017, increased to an estimated $1,647 million as of May 31, 2022, from approximately $854 million as of May 31, 2021. The three states with the largest CFC loans outstanding for broadband projects were Oklahoma, Indiana and Arkansas as of May 31, 2022, and broadband loans outstanding for these states totaled $205 million, $191 million and $155 million, respectively, as of this date. Many of these broadband projects are also financially supported by various states and the federal government, which reduces the credit risk for CFC and the investment risk for our electric cooperative members. We expect our member electric cooperatives to continue in their efforts to expand broadband access to unserved and underserved communities.
Inflation and Supply Chain Disruptions
Many rural electric cooperatives are experiencing increasing cost in power supply, labor and materials. Power supply cost for many cooperatives is increasingly volatile based on natural gas and coal market pricing. For example, according to the Economic News Release from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics published on July 13, 2022, the index for natural gas increased 38.4% over the last 12 months, the largest increase since the period ending October 2005. In addition to increasing material cost, supply chain disruptions have extended delivery times for utility hardware and are causing project timelines to be extended as well. Labor cost and competition for employees has increased for some cooperatives due to labor shortages.
Increased Focus on Enhancing Electric System Resiliency and Reliability
We have observed an increase in capital investments by electric cooperatives to proactively strengthen existing electric systems as well as replace systems in the aftermath of damages from recent weather-related incidents, including hurricanes and winter storms. We believe that the adverse impact on electric systems from weather-related incidents and wildfires has resulted in a heightened awareness by electric cooperatives of the need to focus attention on making infrastructure upgrades to improve both the resiliency and reliability of electric systems.
Evolving Cooperative Focus on Clean Energy Supply Investments
We also have observed that many electric power supply and electric distribution cooperatives are increasingly focused on efforts to identify potential opportunities to increase investments in renewable power supply and storage. This includes both on-balance sheet construction of renewable generation and off-balance sheet acquisition of renewable power through power purchase agreements. According to the NRECA, electric cooperatives more than tripled their renewable capacity from 3.9 gigawatts to more than 13 gigawatts from 2010 to 2021, including adding 1.4 gigawatts of renewable capacity in 2021 alone.
Growing Support for Beneficial Electrification
Rural electric cooperatives have become increasingly supportive of beneficial electrification, which refers to the replacement of fossil-fuel powered systems with electrical ones in a way that reduces overall emissions, while providing benefits to the environment and to households. The increased support among electric cooperatives reflects an expectation that beneficial electrification will result in increased sales, while also saving money for members and reducing carbon emission.
We believe the above trends and current investment priorities of our electric cooperative members will require reliable, affordable sources of funding and may result in a steady demand for capital from CFC.
Outlook
As further described below in the “Liquidity Risk—Projected Near-Term Sources and Uses of Funds” section, we currently anticipate net long-term loan growth of $1,150 million over the next 12 months. On March 16, 2022, the Federal Open
Market Committee (“FOMC”) of the Federal Reserve raised the target range for the federal funds rate by 0.25% to a range of 0.25% to 0.50%, the first rate increase since December 2018. The FOMC further raised the target range for the federal funds rate at each of its meetings held in May, June and July 2022, with the federal funds rate reaching a target range of 2.25% to 2.50%. The FOMC also signaled an expectation of ongoing increases in the federal funds rate at each of its remaining three meetings in 2022, and pointed to a consensus target rate of 3.40% by December 31, 2022, an increase from its March 2022 estimated target rate of 1.90%, due to an increase in inflation projections. The yield curve has flattened throughout 2022, was briefly inverted in late March 2022 and again in June and July 2022. The consensus market outlook for interest rates as of the second half of June 2022 pointed to rising interest rates across the yield curve, with the yield curve remaining flat or inverted over the remainder of 2022. Based on this yield curve forecast, we anticipate a decrease in our reported net interest income, reported net interest yield and adjusted net interest yield over the next 12 months relative to the prior 12-month period ended May 31, 2022. However, we expect a slight increase in our adjusted net interest income over the next 12 months relative to the prior 12-month period ended May 31, 2022, due to an anticipated reduction in our derivative net periodic cash settlements expense as short-term interest rates rise.
We anticipate a slight decrease in our adjusted net income and adjusted TIER over the next 12 months. While our goal is to maintain an adjusted debt-to-equity ratio atof approximately or below 6.00-to-1. As discussed above, 6.00-to-1, we issued $250 million of subordinated deferrable debt in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2019. Subordinated debt is treated in the same manner as equity in calculating our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio, pursuant to the financial covenants under our revolving bank line of credit agreements, as further discussed below under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.” The subordinated deferrable debt issuance contributed to a reduction in our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio to 5.73 as of May 31, 2019, from 6.18 as of May 31, 2018. Based on our projection of loan advances and adjusted equity over the next 12 months, we anticipateexpect that our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio will remain belownear the current level due to the anticipated loan growth. As discussed above, we are subject to earnings volatility, often significant, because we do not apply hedge accounting to our target thresholdinterest rate swaps. Therefore, the periodic unrealized fluctuations in the fair value of 6.00-to-1.our interest rate swaps are recorded in our earnings. The variances in our earnings between periods are generally attributable to significant shifts in recorded unrealized derivative forward value gain and loss amounts. We exclude the impact of unrealized derivative forward fair value gains and losses from our non-GAAP adjusted measures.
We are unable to provide a reconciliation of our projected adjusted net income, adjusted TIER and adjusted debt-to-equity ratio to the most directly comparable GAAP measures or directional guidance for the most directly comparable GAAP measures on a forward-looking basis without unreasonable effort due to the significant shifts in the unrealized derivative forward value gains and losses recorded each period. The majority of our swaps are long-term, with an average remaining life of approximately 15 years as of May 31, 2022. We can reasonably estimate the realized net periodic derivative cash settlement amounts over the next 12 months for our interest rate swaps, which are typically based on the 3-month LIBOR and the fixed rate of the swap. In contrast, the unrealized periodic derivative forward value gains and losses are largely based on future expected changes in longer-term interest rates, which we are unable to accurately predict for each reporting period over the next 12 months. Because unrealized periodic derivative forward value gain and loss amounts are a key driver of changes in our earnings between periods, this unavailable information is likely to have a significant impact on our reported net income, TIER and debt-to-equity ratio, which represent the most directly comparable GAAP measures. We provide reconciliations of our non-GAAP adjusted net income, adjusted TIER and adjusted debt-to-equity ratio to the most directly comparable GAAP measures for each reporting period included in this Report in the section “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.” These reconciliations illustrate the potential significant impact that unrealized derivative forward value gains and losses could have on our future reported net income, reported TIER and reported adjusted debt-to-equity ratio.
|
| |
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES |
The preparation of financial statements in accordanceconformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make a number of judgments, estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets, liabilities, income and expenses in theour consolidated financial statements. Understanding our accounting policies and the extent to which we use management’s judgment and estimates in applying these policies is integral to understanding our financial statements. We provide a discussion of our significant accounting policies underin “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.”
We have identified certainCertain accounting policies asestimates are considered critical because they involve significant judgments and assumptions about highly complex and inherently uncertain matters, and the use of reasonably different estimates and assumptions could have a material impact on our results of operations or financial condition. Our most critical accounting policies and estimates involve theThe determination of the allowance for expected credit losses over the remaining expected life of the loans in our loan portfolio involves a significant degree of management judgment and level of estimation uncertainty. As such, we have identified our accounting policy governing the estimation of the allowance for credit losses as a critical accounting estimate. Management established policies and fair value. control procedures intended to ensure that the methodology used for determining our allowance for credit losses, including any judgments and assumptions made as part of such method, are well-controlled and applied consistently from period to period. We evaluate
our critical accounting estimates and judgments required by our policies on an ongoing basis and update them as necessary based on changing conditions. Management has discussed significant judgmentsWe describe our allowance methodology and assumptions in applying our critical accounting policies withprocess for estimating the Audit Committeeallowance for credit losses under “Note 1—Summary of our board of directors. See “Item 1A. Risk Factors” for a discussion of the risks associated with management’s judgments and estimates in applying our accounting policies and methods.
Significant Accounting Policies—Allowance for Credit Losses—Loan LossesPortfolio—Current Methodology.”
WeUpon our adoption of CECL on June 1, 2020, we are required to maintain an allowance for loanbased on a current estimate of credit losses that represents management’s estimateare expected to occur over the remaining life of probable losses inherent in our loan portfolio as of each balance sheet date. Our allowance for loan losses consists of a collective allowance forthe loans in our portfolio that are not individually impaired and a specific allowance for loans identified as individually impaired. Our allowance for loan losses was $18 million and $19 million as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, and the allowance coverage ratio was 0.07% as of each date.portfolio. The methodology usedmethods utilized to estimate the allowance for loancredit losses, key assumptions and quantitative and qualitative information considered by management in determining the appropriate allowance for credit losses is describeddiscussed in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.”
Key inputs, such as our historical loss data and third-party default data, that we use in determining the appropriate allowance for credit losses are more readily quantifiable, while other inputs, such as our internally assigned borrower risk ratings that are intended to assess a borrower’s capacity to meet its financial obligations and provide information on the probability of default, require more qualitative judgment. Degrees of imprecision exist in each of these inputs due in part to subjective judgments involved and an inherent lag in the data available to quantify current conditions and events that may affect our credit loss estimate.
Our internally assigned borrower risk ratings serve as the primary credit quality indicator for our loan portfolio. We perform an annual comprehensive review of each of our borrowers, following the receipt of the borrower’s annual audited financial statements, to reassess the borrower’s risk rating. In addition, interim risk-rating adjustments may occur as a result of updated information affecting a borrower’s ability to fulfill its obligations or other significant developments and trends. Our Credit Risk Management Group and Corporate Credit Committee review and provide rigorous oversight and governance around our internally assigned risk ratings to ensure the ratings process is consistent. In addition, we engage third-party credit risk management experts to conduct an independent annual review of our risk rating system to validate its overall integrity. This review involves an evaluation of the accuracy and timeliness of individual risk ratings and the overall effectiveness of our risk-rating framework relative to the risk profile of our credit exposures. While we have a robust risk-rating process, changes in our borrower risk ratings may not always directly coincide with changes in the risk profile of an individual borrower due to the timing of the rating process and a potential lag in the receipt of information necessary to evaluate the impact of emerging developments and current conditions on the risk ratings of our borrower. Although our allowance for credit losses is sensitive to each key input, shifts in the credit risk ratings of our borrowers generally have the most notable impact on our allowance for credit losses.
Allowance for Credit Losses
Our allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio decreased to $68 million and 0.22%, respectively, as of May 31, 2022, from $86 million and 0.30%, respectively, as of May 31, 2021. The decrease in the allowance for credit losses of $18 million reflected a decrease in the collective and asset-specific allowance of $14 million and $4 million, respectively. We discuss the methodology used to estimate the allowance for credit losses in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.”
Key Assumptions
Determining the appropriateness of the allowance for loancredit losses is subject to numerous estimates and assumptions requiring significant management judgment about matters that involve a high degree of subjectivity and are difficult to predict. The key assumptions in determining our collective allowance that require significant management judgment and may have a material impact on the amount of the allowance include:include the segmentation of our evaluation of the risk profile of various loan portfolio segments andportfolio; our internally assigned borrower risk ratings; the estimated loss emergence period; the probability of default; the loss severity or recovery rate in the event of default for each portfolio segment; and management’s judgment in the selection and evaluationconsideration of qualitativefactors that may cause estimated credit losses associated with our existing loan portfolio to assess the overall current level of exposure withindiffer from our loan portfolio.historical loss experience.
As discussed below in “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk,” CFC has experienced only 1618 defaults in its 50-year history. In addition,53-year history, and prior to Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek we have had no defaults in our electric utility loan portfolio during the past fivesince fiscal years.
year 2013. As such, we have a limited history of defaults to develop reasonable and supportable estimated probability of default rates for our existing loan portfolio. We therefore utilize third-party default data for the utility sector as a proxy to estimate
probability of default rates for our loan portfolio segments. However, we utilize our internal historical loss experience to estimate loss given default, or the recovery rate, for each of our loan portfolio segments,segments. We believe our internal historical loss experience serves as we believe it provides a more reliable estimate of loss severity than third-party loss severity data due to the organizational structure and operating environment of rural utility cooperatives, our lending practice of generally requiring a senior security position on the assets and revenuesrevenue of borrowers for long-term loans, the approach we take in working with borrowers that may be experiencing operational or financial issues and other factors discussed underin “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk.”
We generally consider nonperforming loans as well as loans that have been or are anticipated to be modified under a troubled debt restructuring for individual evaluation given the risk characteristics of such loans and establish an asset-specific allowance for these loans. The key assumptions in determining our specificasset-specific allowance that require significant management judgment and may have a material impact on the amount of the allowance include estimatingmeasuring the amount and timing of expectedfuture cash flows from impairedfor individually evaluated loans that are not collateral-dependent and estimating the value of the underlying collateral each of which impacts loss severity and certain cash flow assumptions. for individually evaluated loans that are collateral-dependent.
The degree to which any particular assumption affects the allowance for loancredit losses depends on the severity of the change and its relationship to the other assumptions. We regularly evaluate the underlyingkey inputs and assumptions used in determining the allowance for loancredit losses and periodically update our assumptionsthem, as necessary, to better reflect present conditions, including current trends in credit performance and borrower risk profile, portfolio concentration risk, changes in risk-management practices, changes in the regulatory environment general economic trends and other factors specificrelevant to our loan portfolio segments. We did not change theour allowance methodology or nature of the underlying assumptions andkey inputs used and assumptions used in determiningmeasuring our allowance for loancredit losses during fiscal year 2019.2022.
Sensitivity Analysis
As noted above, our allowance for credit losses is sensitive to a variety of factors. While management uses its best judgment to assess loss data and other factors to determine the allowance for loancredit losses, changes in our loss assumptions, adjustments to assigned borrower risk ratings, the use of alternate external data sources or other factors could affect our estimate of probable credit losses inherent in the portfolio as of each balance sheet date, which would also impact the related provision for loancredit losses recognized in our consolidated statements of operations. For example, changes in the inputs below, without taking into consideration the impact of other potential offsetting or correlated inputs, would have the following effect on our allowance of loancredit losses as of May 31, 2019.2022.
•A 10% increase or decreasedecrease in the default rates for all of our portfolio segments would result in a corresponding increase or decrease of approximately $2$3 million.
•A 1% increase or decrease in the recovery rates for all of our portfolio segments would result in a corresponding decrease or increase of approximately $4$9 million.
•A one-notch downgrade in the internal borrower risk ratings for our entire loan portfolio would result in an increase of approximately $17$13 million, while a one-notch upgrade would result in a decrease of approximately $11$14 million.
These sensitivity analyses are intended to provide an indication of the isolated impact of hypothetical alternative assumptions on our allowance for loancredit losses. Because management evaluates a variety of factors and inputs in determining the allowance for loancredit losses, these sensitivity analyses are not considered probable and do not imply an expectation of future changes in loss rates or borrower risk ratings. Given current processes employed in estimating the allowance for loancredit losses, management believes the inherent loss rates and currently assigned risk ratings are appropriate. It is possible that others performing the analyses, given the same information, may at any point in time reach different reasonable conclusions that could be significant to our consolidated financial statements.
We discuss the risks and uncertainties related to management’s judgments and estimates in applying accounting policies that have been identified as a critical accounting estimates under “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Regulatory and Compliance Risks” in this Report. We provide additional information on ourthe allowance for loancredit losses under the below section “Credit Risk—Allowance for LoanCredit Losses” and “Note 5—Allowance for Loan Losses.” Also refer to “Credit Risk—Loan and Guarantee Portfolio Credit Risk—Credit Quality” andLosses” in this Report.
“Note 4—Loans” for information on the credit performance and quality of our loan portfolios.
Fair Value
Certain of our financial instruments are carried at fair value on our consolidated balance sheet, with changes in fair value recorded either through earnings or other comprehensive income (loss) in accordance with applicable accounting standards. These include our equity securities and derivatives. The determination of fair value is important for certain other assets that are periodically evaluated for impairment using fair value, such as individually impaired loans.
Fair value is defined as the price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date (also referred to as an exit price). The fair value accounting guidance provides a three-level fair value hierarchy for classifying fair value measurement techniques. This hierarchy is based on the markets in which the assets or liabilities trade and whether the inputs to the valuation techniques used to measure fair value are observable or unobservable. Fair value measurement is assigned a level based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are summarized below:
Level 1: Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities
Level 2: Observable market-based inputs, other than quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities
Level 3: Unobservable inputs
The degree of management judgment involved in determining fair value is dependent upon the availability of quoted prices in active markets or observable market parameters. When quoted prices and observable data in active markets are not fully available, management’s judgment is necessary to estimate fair value. Changes in market conditions, such as reduced liquidity in the capital markets or changes in secondary market activities, may reduce the availability and reliability of quoted prices or observable data used to determine fair value.
Significant judgment may be required to determine whether certain assets and liabilities measured at fair value are classified as Level 2 or Level 3. In making this determination, we consider all available information that market participants use to measure fair value, including observable market data, indications of market liquidity and orderliness, and our understanding of the valuation techniques and significant inputs used. Based upon the specific facts and circumstances, judgments are made regarding the significance of Level 3 inputs used in determining the fair value of the asset or liability in its entirety. If Level 3 inputs are considered significant, the valuation technique is classified as Level 3. The process for determining fair value using unobservable inputs is generally more subjective and involves a high degree of management judgment and assumptions.
Financial instruments recorded at fair value on a recurring basis, which consisted primarily of equity securities, deferred compensation investments and derivatives, represented approximately 1% of our total assets as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, and 2% and 1%, respectively, of total liabilities as of May 31, 2019 and 2018. The fair value of these financial instruments was determined using either Level 1 or 2 inputs. We did not have any financial instruments recorded at fair value on a recurring basis for which the fair value was determined using Level 3 inputs as of May 31, 2019 and 2018.
We discuss the valuation inputs and assumptions used in determining the fair value, including the extent to which we have relied on significant unobservable inputs to estimate fair value, in “Note 14—Fair Value Measurement.”
|
| |
RECENT ACCOUNTING CHANGES AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTS |
Recent Accounting Changes
See “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” forWe provide information on recently adopted accounting standards adopted duringand the current year, as well asadoption impact on CFC’s consolidated financial statements and recently issued accounting standards not yet required to be adopted and the expected adoption impact in “Note 1—Summary of the adoption of these accounting standards.Significant Accounting Policies.” To the extent we believe the adoption of new accounting standards has had or will have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations, financial condition or liquidity, we also discuss the impact in the applicable section(s) of this MD&A.
Other Developments
SEC Rule—FAST Act Modernization and Simplification of Regulation S-K
In March 2019, the SEC adopted amendments to modernize and simplify certain disclosure requirements in Regulation S-K
FAST Act Modernization and Simplification of Regulation S-K and related rules and forms. The amendments, which, among other things, change the requirements for the content of MD&A and change the process for redacting confidential information in certain exhibits, are intended to improve the readability and navigability of disclosure documents and discourage repetition and disclosure of immaterial information. The final rule became effective May 2, 2019.
The provisions of the rule that have the most significant impact on our disclosures under Regulation S-K and the content of this Report include: (i) the elimination of the requirement to disclose business segment information in “Item 1. Business” because this information is also required to be disclosed in the financial statements; (ii) the elimination of the requirement to include in MD&A a discussion of the earliest year for registrants that provide financial statements covering three years in their filings, as such discussion is already included in prior filings; and (iii) a requirement that registrants identify the location in the prior filing where the omitted discussion can be found.
|
| |
CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS |
TheThis section below provides a comparative discussion of our consolidated results of operations between fiscal year 2019years 2022 and 2018.2021. Following this section, we provide a comparativediscussion and analysis of material changes in amounts reported on our consolidated balance sheetssheet as of May 31, 20192022 and 2018.amounts reported as of May 31, 2021. You should read these sections together with our “Executive Summary—Outlook for the Next 12 Months”Outlook” where we discuss trends and other factors that we expect will affect our future results of operations. See “Item 7. MD&A—Consolidated Results of Operations ”Operations” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31, 20182021 (“2021 Form 10-K”) for a comparative discussion of our consolidated results of operations between fiscal year 20182021 and 2017.the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020 (“fiscal year 2020”).
Net Interest Income
Net interest income, which is our largest source of revenue, represents the difference between the interest income earned on our interest-earning assets which includes loans and investment securities, and the interest expense on our interest-bearing liabilities. Our net interest yield represents the difference between the yield on our interest-earning assets and the cost of our interest-bearing liabilities plus the impact fromof non-interest bearing funding. We expect net interest income and our net interest yield to fluctuate based on changes in interest rates and changes in the amount and composition of our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. We do not fund each individual loan with specific debt. Rather, we attempt to minimize costs and maximize efficiency by proportionately funding large aggregated amounts of loans.
Table 12 presents average balances for fiscal years 2019, 20182022, 2021 and 2017,2020, and for each major category of our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, the interest income earned or interest expense incurred, and the average yield or cost. Table 12 also presents non-GAAP adjusted interest expense, adjusted net interest income and adjusted net interest yield, which reflect the inclusion of net accrued periodic derivative cash settlements expense in interest expense. We provide reconciliations of our non-GAAP adjusted measures to the most comparable U.S. GAAP measures under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
Table 1:2: Average Balances, Interest Income/Interest Expense and Average Yield/Cost | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Assets: | | Average Balance | | Interest Income/Expense | | Average Yield/Cost | | Average Balance | | Interest Income/Expense | | Average Yield/Cost | | Average Balance | | Interest Income/Expense | | Average Yield/Cost |
Long-term fixed-rate loans(1) | | $ | 25,974,724 | | | $ | 1,062,223 | | | 4.09 | % | | $ | 24,978,267 | | | $ | 1,051,524 | | | 4.21 | % | | $ | 23,890,577 | | | $ | 1,043,918 | | | 4.37 | % |
Long-term variable-rate loans | | 749,131 | | | 16,895 | | | 2.26 | | | 645,819 | | | 14,976 | | | 2.32 | | | 891,541 | | | 31,293 | | | 3.51 | |
Line of credit loans | | 2,148,197 | | | 46,887 | | | 2.18 | | | 1,626,092 | | | 35,596 | | | 2.19 | | | 1,718,364 | | | 55,140 | | | 3.21 | |
Troubled debt restructuring (“TDR”) loans | | 9,528 | | | 735 | | | 7.71 | | | 10,328 | | | 790 | | | 7.65 | | | 11,238 | | | 836 | | | 7.44 | |
Nonperforming loans | | 227,795 | | | — | | | — | | | 185,554 | | | — | | | — | | | 5,957 | | | — | | | — | |
Other, net(2) | | — | | | (1,448) | | | — | | | — | | | (1,381) | | | — | | | — | | | (1,304) | | | — | |
Total loans | | 29,109,375 | | | 1,125,292 | | | 3.87 | | | 27,446,060 | | | 1,101,505 | | | 4.01 | | | 26,517,677 | | | 1,129,883 | | | 4.26 | |
Cash, time deposits and investment securities | | 762,489 | | | 15,951 | | | 2.09 | | | 796,566 | | | 15,096 | | | 1.90 | | | 866,013 | | | 21,403 | | | 2.47 | |
Total interest-earning assets | | $ | 29,871,864 | | | $ | 1,141,243 | | | 3.82 | % | | $ | 28,242,626 | | | $ | 1,116,601 | | | 3.95 | % | | $ | 27,383,690 | | | $ | 1,151,286 | | | 4.20 | % |
Other assets, less allowance for credit losses(3) | | 466,329 | | | | | | | 537,506 | | | | | | | 551,378 | | | | | |
Total assets(3) | | $ | 30,338,193 | | | | | | | $ | 28,780,132 | | | | | | | $ | 27,935,068 | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper | | $ | 2,565,629 | | | $ | 11,086 | | | 0.43 | % | | $ | 2,189,558 | | | $ | 8,330 | | | 0.38 | % | | $ | 2,318,112 | | | $ | 45,713 | | | 1.97 | % |
Other short-term borrowings | | 2,006,020 | | | 7,179 | | | 0.36 | | | 2,148,767 | | | 6,400 | | | 0.30 | | | 1,795,351 | | | 32,282 | | | 1.80 | |
Short-term borrowings(4) | | 4,571,649 | | | 18,265 | | | 0.40 | | | 4,338,325 | | | 14,730 | | | 0.34 | | | 4,113,463 | | | 77,995 | | | 1.90 | |
Medium-term notes | | 4,854,421 | | | 108,769 | | | 2.24 | | | 3,904,603 | | | 113,582 | | | 2.91 | | | 3,551,973 | | | 125,954 | | | 3.55 | |
Collateral trust bonds | | 7,050,468 | | | 248,413 | | | 3.52 | | | 6,938,534 | | | 249,248 | | | 3.59 | | | 7,185,910 | | | 257,396 | | | 3.58 | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 6,165,206 | | | 169,166 | | | 2.74 | | | 6,146,410 | | | 167,403 | | | 2.72 | | | 5,581,854 | | | 162,929 | | | 2.92 | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 3,059,946 | | | 55,245 | | | 1.81 | | | 2,844,252 | | | 50,818 | | | 1.79 | | | 2,986,469 | | | 87,617 | | | 2.93 | |
Other notes payable | | 6,774 | | | 155 | | | 2.29 | | | 10,246 | | | 241 | | | 2.35 | | | 17,586 | | | 671 | | | 3.82 | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,407 | | | 51,541 | | | 5.23 | | | 986,209 | | | 51,551 | | | 5.23 | | | 986,035 | | | 51,527 | | | 5.23 | |
Subordinated certificates | | 1,245,120 | | | 53,980 | | | 4.34 | | | 1,270,385 | | | 54,490 | | | 4.29 | | | 1,349,454 | | | 57,000 | | | 4.22 | |
Total interest-bearing liabilities | | $ | 27,939,991 | | | $ | 705,534 | | | 2.53 | % | | $ | 26,438,964 | | | $ | 702,063 | | | 2.66 | % | | $ | 25,772,744 | | | $ | 821,089 | | | 3.19 | % |
Other liabilities(3) | | 897,751 | | | | | | | 1,380,414 | | | | | | | 1,141,884 | | | | | |
Total liabilities(3) | | 28,837,742 | | | | | | | 27,819,378 | | | | | | | 26,914,628 | | | | | |
Total equity(3) | | 1,500,451 | | | | | | | 960,754 | | | | | | | 1,020,440 | | | | | |
Total liabilities and equity(3) | | $ | 30,338,193 | | | | | | | $ | 28,780,132 | | | | | | | $ | 27,935,068 | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net interest spread(5) | | | | | | 1.29 | % | | | | | | 1.29 | % | | | | | | 1.01 | % |
Impact of non-interest bearing funding(6) | | | | | | 0.17 | | | | | | | 0.18 | | | | | | | 0.20 | |
Net interest income/net interest yield(7) | | | | $ | 435,709 | | | 1.46 | % | | | | $ | 414,538 | | | 1.47 | % | | | | $ | 330,197 | | | 1.21 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted net interest income/adjusted net interest yield: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | | | $ | 1,141,243 | | | 3.82 | % | | | | $ | 1,116,601 | | | 3.95 | % | | | | $ | 1,151,286 | | | 4.20 | % |
Interest expense | | | | 705,534 | | | 2.53 | | | | | 702,063 | | | 2.66 | | | | | 821,089 | | | 3.19 | |
Add: Net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense(8) | | | | 101,385 | | | 1.21 | | | | | 115,645 | | | 1.28 | | | | | 55,873 | | | 0.55 | |
Adjusted interest expense/adjusted average cost(9) | | | | $ | 806,919 | | | 2.89 | % | | | | $ | 817,708 | | | 3.09 | % | | | | $ | 876,962 | | | 3.40 | % |
Adjusted net interest spread(7) | | | | | | 0.93 | % | | | | | | 0.86 | % | | | | | | 0.80 | % |
Impact of non-interest bearing funding(6) | | | | | | 0.19 | | | | | | | 0.20 | | | | | | | 0.20 | |
Adjusted net interest income/adjusted net interest yield(10) | | | | $ | 334,324 | | | 1.12 | % | | | | $ | 298,893 | | | 1.06 | % | | | | $ | 274,324 | | | 1.00 | % |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 |
Assets: | | Average Balance | | Interest Income/Expense | | Average Yield/Cost | | Average Balance | | Interest Income/Expense | | Average Yield/Cost | | Average Balance | | Interest Income/Expense | | Average Yield/Cost |
Long-term fixed-rate loans(1) | | $ | 22,811,905 |
| | $ | 1,012,277 |
| | 4.44 | % | | $ | 22,570,209 |
| | $ | 1,000,492 |
| | 4.43 | % | | $ | 21,896,200 |
| | $ | 980,173 |
| | 4.48 | % |
Long-term variable-rate loans | | 1,093,455 |
| | 41,219 |
| | 3.77 |
| | 925,910 |
| | 27,152 |
| | 2.93 |
| | 799,412 |
| | 19,902 |
| | 2.49 |
|
Line of credit loans | | 1,609,629 |
| | 57,847 |
| | 3.59 |
| | 1,402,555 |
| | 38,195 |
| | 2.72 |
| | 1,124,471 |
| | 25,389 |
| | 2.26 |
|
TDR loans (2) | | 12,183 |
| | 846 |
| | 6.94 |
| | 12,885 |
| | 889 |
| | 6.90 |
| | 14,349 |
| | 905 |
| | 6.31 |
|
Other income, net(3) | | — |
| | (1,128 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (1,185 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (1,082 | ) | | — |
|
Total loans | | 25,527,172 |
| | 1,111,061 |
| | 4.35 |
| | 24,911,559 |
| | 1,065,543 |
| | 4.28 |
| | 23,834,432 |
| | 1,025,287 |
| | 4.30 |
|
Cash, time deposits and investment securities | | 838,599 |
| | 24,609 |
| | 2.93 |
| | 512,517 |
| | 11,814 |
| | 2.31 |
| | 734,095 |
| | 11,347 |
| | 1.55 |
|
Total interest-earning assets | | $ | 26,365,771 |
| | $ | 1,135,670 |
| | 4.31 | % | | $ | 25,424,076 |
| | $ | 1,077,357 |
| | 4.24 | % | | $ | 24,568,527 |
| | $ | 1,036,634 |
| | 4.22 | % |
Other assets, less allowance for loan losses | | 879,817 |
| | | | | | 644,563 |
| | | | | | 574,682 |
| | | | |
Total assets | | $ | 27,245,588 |
| | | | | | $ | 26,068,639 |
| | | | | | $ | 25,143,209 |
| | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Short-term borrowings | | $ | 3,729,239 |
| | $ | 92,854 |
| | 2.49 | % | | $ | 3,294,573 |
| | $ | 50,616 |
| | 1.54 | % | | $ | 3,185,084 |
| | $ | 26,684 |
| | 0.84 | % |
Medium-term notes | | 3,813,666 |
| | 133,797 |
| | 3.51 |
| | 3,361,484 |
| | 111,814 |
| | 3.33 |
| | 3,345,410 |
| | 99,022 |
| | 2.96 |
|
Collateral trust bonds | | 7,334,957 |
| | 273,413 |
| | 3.73 |
| | 7,625,182 |
| | 336,079 |
| | 4.41 |
| | 7,293,251 |
| | 340,854 |
| | 4.67 |
|
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 5,045,478 |
| | 147,895 |
| | 2.93 |
| | 4,956,417 |
| | 140,551 |
| | 2.84 |
| | 4,873,520 |
| | 142,661 |
| | 2.93 |
|
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 2,807,705 |
| | 90,942 |
| | 3.24 |
| | 2,578,793 |
| | 56,004 |
| | 2.17 |
| | 2,355,324 |
| | 33,488 |
| | 1.42 |
|
Other notes payable | | 28,044 |
| | 1,237 |
| | 4.41 |
| | 33,742 |
| | 1,509 |
| | 4.47 |
| | 39,314 |
| | 1,780 |
| | 4.53 |
|
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 759,838 |
| | 38,628 |
| | 5.08 |
| | 742,336 |
| | 37,661 |
| | 5.07 |
| | 742,203 |
| | 37,657 |
| | 5.07 |
|
Subordinated certificates | | 1,369,051 |
| | 57,443 |
| | 4.20 |
| | 1,396,449 |
| | 58,501 |
| | 4.19 |
| | 1,433,657 |
| | 59,592 |
| | 4.16 |
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities | | $ | 24,887,978 |
| | $ | 836,209 |
| | 3.36 | % | | $ | 23,988,976 |
| | $ | 792,735 |
| | 3.30 | % | | $ | 23,267,763 |
| | $ | 741,738 |
| | 3.19 | % |
Other liabilities | | 816,074 |
| | | | | | 822,745 |
| | | | | | 921,749 |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | 25,704,052 |
| | | | | | 24,811,721 |
| | | | | | 24,189,512 |
| | | | |
Total equity | | 1,541,536 |
| | | | | | 1,256,918 |
| | | | | | 953,697 |
| | | | |
Total liabilities and equity | | $ | 27,245,588 |
| | | | | | $ | 26,068,639 |
| | | | | | $ | 25,143,209 |
| | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net interest spread(4) | | | | | | 0.95 | % | | | | | | 0.94 | % | | | | | | 1.03 | % |
Impact of non-interest bearing funding(5) | | | | | | 0.19 |
| | | | | | 0.18 |
| | | | | | 0.17 |
|
Net interest income/net interest yield(6) | | | | $ | 299,461 |
| | 1.14 | % | | | | $ | 284,622 |
| | 1.12 | % | | | | $ | 294,896 |
| | 1.20 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted net interest income/adjusted net interest yield: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | | | $ | 1,135,670 |
| | 4.31 | % | | | | $ | 1,077,357 |
| | 4.24 | % | | | | $ | 1,036,634 |
| | 4.22 | % |
Interest expense | | | | 836,209 |
| | 3.36 |
| | | | 792,735 |
| | 3.30 |
| | | | 741,738 |
| | 3.19 |
|
Add: Net accrued periodic derivative cash settlement(7) | | | | 43,611 |
| | 0.40 |
| | | | 74,281 |
| | 0.69 |
| | | | 84,478 |
| | 0.80 |
|
Adjusted interest expense/adjusted average cost(8) | | | | $ | 879,820 |
| | 3.54 | % | | | | $ | 867,016 |
| | 3.61 | % | | | | $ | 826,216 |
| | 3.55 | % |
Adjusted net interest spread(4) | | | | | | 0.77 | % | | | | | | 0.63 | % | | | | | | 0.67 | % |
Impact of non-interest bearing funding | | | | | | 0.20 |
| | | | | | 0.20 |
| | | | | | 0.19 |
|
Adjusted net interest income/adjusted net interest yield(9) | | | | $ | 255,850 |
| | 0.97 | % | | | | $ | 210,341 |
| | 0.83 | % | | | | $ | 210,418 |
| | 0.86 | % |
____________________________
____________________________
(1)Interest income on long-term, fixed-rate loans includes loan conversion fees, which are generally deferred and recognized as interest income using the effective interest method.
(2)Troubled debt restructuring (“TDR”) loans.
(3)Consists of late payment fees and net amortization of deferred loan fees and loan origination costs.
(3)The average balance represents average monthly balances, which is calculated based on the month-end balance as of the beginning of the reporting period and the balances as of the end of each month included in the specified reporting period.
(4)Short-term borrowings reported on our consolidated balance sheets consist of borrowings with an original contractual maturity of one year or less. However, short-term borrowings presented in Table 2 consist of commercial paper, select notes, daily liquidity fund notes and secured borrowings under repurchase agreements. Short-term borrowings presented on our consolidated balance sheets related to medium-term notes, Farmer Mac notes payable and other notes payable are reported in the respective category for presentation purposes in Table 2. The period-end amounts reported as short-term borrowings on our consolidated balances sheets, which are excluded from the calculation of average short-term borrowings presented in Table 2, totaled $417 million, $363 million, and $537 million as of May 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.
(5)Net interest spread represents the difference between the average yield on total average interest-earning assets and the average cost of total average interest-bearing liabilities. Adjusted net interest spread represents the difference between the average yield on total average interest-earning assets and the adjusted average cost of total average interest-bearing liabilities.
(5)(6)Includes other liabilities and equity.
(6)(7)Net interest yield is calculated based on net interest income for the period divided by total average interest-earning assets for the period.
(7)(8)Represents the impact of net accrued periodic contractual interest amounts on our interest rate swap settlementsswaps during the period. This amount is added to interest expense to derive non-GAAP adjusted interest expense. The average (benefit)/cost associated with derivatives is calculated based on net accrued periodic swap settlement interest rate swap settlementsamount during the period divided by the average outstanding notional amount of derivatives during the period. The average outstanding notional amount of interest rate swaps was $10,968$8,406 million, $10,816$9,062 million and $10,590$10,180 million for fiscal year 2019, 2018years 2022, 2021 and 2017,2020, respectively.
(8)(9)Adjusted interest expense representsconsists of interest expense plus net accrued periodic interest rate swapderivative cash settlements interest expense during the period. Net accrued periodic derivative cash settlementssettlement interest amounts are reported on our consolidated statements of operations as a component of derivative gains (losses). Adjusted average cost is calculated based on adjusted interest expense for the period divided by total average interest-bearing liabilities during the period.
(9)(10)Adjusted net interest yield is calculated based on adjusted net interest income for the period divided by total average interest-earning assets for the period.
Table 23 displays the change in net interest income between periods and the extent to which the variance for each category of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities is attributable to:to (i) changes in volume, which represents the volumechange in the average balances of our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities or volume, and (ii) changes in the rate, which represents the change in the average interest rates of these assets and liabilities. The table also presents the change in adjusted net interest income between periods. Changes that are not solely due to either volume or rate are allocated to these categories on a pro-rata basis based on the absolute value of the change due to average volume and average rate.
Table 2:3: Rate/Volume Analysis of Changes in Interest Income/Interest Expense | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 2022 versus 2021 | | 2021 versus 2020 |
| | Total | | Variance Due To:(1) | | Total | | Variance Due To:(1) |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Variance | | Volume | | Rate | | Variance | | Volume | | Rate |
Interest income: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term fixed-rate loans | | $ | 10,699 | | | $ | 41,948 | | | $ | (31,249) | | | $ | 7,606 | | | $ | 47,527 | | | $ | (39,921) | |
Long-term variable-rate loans | | 1,919 | | | 2,396 | | | (477) | | | (16,317) | | | (8,625) | | | (7,692) | |
Line of credit loans | | 11,291 | | | 11,429 | | | (138) | | | (19,544) | | | (2,961) | | | (16,583) | |
TDR loans | | (55) | | | (61) | | | 6 | | | (46) | | | (68) | | | 22 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Other, net | | (67) | | | — | | | (67) | | | (77) | | | — | | | (77) | |
Total loans | | 23,787 | | | 55,712 | | | (31,925) | | | (28,378) | | | 35,873 | | | (64,251) | |
Cash, time deposits and investment securities | | 855 | | | (646) | | | 1,501 | | | (6,307) | | | (1,716) | | | (4,591) | |
Total interest income | | $ | 24,642 | | | $ | 55,066 | | | $ | (30,424) | | | $ | (34,685) | | | $ | 34,157 | | | $ | (68,842) | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest expense: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper | | $ | 2,756 | | | $ | 1,431 | | | $ | 1,325 | | | $ | (37,383) | | | $ | (2,535) | | | $ | (34,848) | |
Other short-term borrowings | | 779 | | | (425) | | | 1,204 | | | (25,882) | | | 6,355 | | | (32,237) | |
Short-term borrowings | | 3,535 | | | 1,006 | | | 2,529 | | | (63,265) | | | 3,820 | | | (67,085) | |
Medium-term notes | | (4,813) | | | 27,629 | | | (32,442) | | | (12,372) | | | 12,504 | | | (24,876) | |
Collateral trust bonds | | (835) | | | 4,021 | | | (4,856) | | | (8,148) | | | (8,861) | | | 713 | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 1,763 | | | 512 | | | 1,251 | | | 4,474 | | | 16,479 | | | (12,005) | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 4,427 | | | 3,854 | | | 573 | | | (36,799) | | | (4,172) | | | (32,627) | |
Other notes payable | | (86) | | | (82) | | | (4) | | | (430) | | | (280) | | | (150) | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | (10) | | | 10 | | | (20) | | | 24 | | | 9 | | | 15 | |
Subordinated certificates | | (510) | | | (1,084) | | | 574 | | | (2,510) | | | (3,340) | | | 830 | |
Total interest expense | | 3,471 | | | 35,866 | | | (32,395) | | | (119,026) | | | 16,159 | | | (135,185) | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net interest income | | $ | 21,171 | | | $ | 19,200 | | | $ | 1,971 | | | $ | 84,341 | | | $ | 17,998 | | | $ | 66,343 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted net interest income: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | $ | 24,642 | | | $ | 55,066 | | | $ | (30,424) | | | $ | (34,685) | | | $ | 34,157 | | | $ | (68,842) | |
Interest expense | | 3,471 | | | 35,866 | | | (32,395) | | | (119,026) | | | 16,159 | | | (135,185) | |
Net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense(2) | | (14,260) | | | (8,367) | | | (5,893) | | | 59,772 | | | (6,137) | | | 65,909 | |
Adjusted interest expense(3) | | (10,789) | | | 27,499 | | | (38,288) | | | (59,254) | | | 10,022 | | | (69,276) | |
Adjusted net interest income | | $ | 35,431 | | | $ | 27,567 | | | $ | 7,864 | | | $ | 24,569 | | | $ | 24,135 | | | $ | 434 | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 2019 vs. 2018 | | 2018 vs. 2017 |
| | Total |
| Variance due to:(1) | | Total | | Variance due to:(1) |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Variance | | Volume | | Rate | | Variance | | Volume | | Rate |
Interest income: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term fixed-rate loans | | $ | 11,785 |
| | $ | 10,714 |
| | $ | 1,071 |
| | $ | 20,319 |
| | $ | 30,172 |
| | $ | (9,853 | ) |
Long-term variable-rate loans | | 14,067 |
| | 4,913 |
| | 9,154 |
| | 7,250 |
| | 3,149 |
| | 4,101 |
|
Line of credit loans | | 19,652 |
| | 5,639 |
| | 14,013 |
| | 12,806 |
| | 6,279 |
| | 6,527 |
|
Restructured loans | | (43 | ) | | (48 | ) | | 5 |
| | (16 | ) | | (92 | ) | | 76 |
|
Other income, net | | 57 |
| | — |
| | 57 |
| | (103 | ) | | — |
| | (103 | ) |
Total loans | | 45,518 |
| | 21,218 |
| | 24,300 |
| | 40,256 |
| | 39,508 |
| | 748 |
|
Cash, time deposits and investment securities | | 12,795 |
| | 7,516 |
| | 5,279 |
| | 467 |
| | (3,425 | ) | | 3,892 |
|
Interest income | | $ | 58,313 |
| | $ | 28,734 |
| | $ | 29,579 |
| | $ | 40,723 |
| | $ | 36,083 |
| | $ | 4,640 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest expense: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Short-term borrowings | | $ | 42,238 |
| | $ | 6,678 |
| | $ | 35,560 |
| | $ | 23,932 |
| | $ | 917 |
| | $ | 23,015 |
|
Medium-term notes | | 21,983 |
| | 15,041 |
| | 6,942 |
| | 12,792 |
| | 476 |
| | 12,316 |
|
Collateral trust bonds | | (62,666 | ) | | (12,792 | ) | | (49,874 | ) | | (4,775 | ) | | 15,513 |
| | (20,288 | ) |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 7,344 |
| | 2,526 |
| | 4,818 |
| | (2,110 | ) | | 2,427 |
| | (4,537 | ) |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 34,938 |
| | 4,971 |
| | 29,967 |
| | 22,516 |
| | 3,177 |
| | 19,339 |
|
Other notes payable | | (272 | ) | | (255 | ) | | (17 | ) | | (271 | ) | | (252 | ) | | (19 | ) |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 967 |
| | 888 |
| | 79 |
| | 4 |
| | 7 |
| | (3 | ) |
Subordinated certificates | | (1,058 | ) | | (1,148 | ) | | 90 |
| | (1,091 | ) | | (1,547 | ) | | 456 |
|
Interest expense | | 43,474 |
| | 15,909 |
| | 27,565 |
| | 50,997 |
| | 20,718 |
| | 30,279 |
|
Net interest income | | $ | 14,839 |
| | $ | 12,825 |
| | $ | 2,014 |
| | $ | (10,274 | ) | | $ | 15,365 |
| | $ | (25,639 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted net interest income: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | $ | 58,313 |
| | $ | 28,734 |
| | $ | 29,579 |
| | $ | 40,723 |
| | $ | 36,083 |
| | $ | 4,640 |
|
Interest expense | | 43,474 |
| | 15,909 |
| | 27,565 |
| | 50,997 |
| | 20,718 |
| | 30,279 |
|
Net accrued periodic derivative cash settlements expense(2) | | (30,670 | ) | | 1,047 |
| | (31,717 | ) | | (10,197 | ) | | 1,802 |
| | (11,999 | ) |
Adjusted interest expense(3) | | 12,804 |
| | 16,956 |
| | (4,152 | ) | | 40,800 |
| | 22,520 |
| | 18,280 |
|
Adjusted net interest income | | $ | 45,509 |
| | $ | 11,778 |
| | $ | 33,731 |
| | $ | (77 | ) | | $ | 13,563 |
| | $ | (13,640 | ) |
________________________________________________________
(1)The changes for each category of interest income and interest expense are divided betweenrepresent changes in either average balances (volume) or average rates for both interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. We allocate the portion of change attributable to the variance in volume and the portion of change attributable to the variance in rate for that category. The amount attributable to the combined impact of volume and rate has been allocated to each category based on the proportionate absolute dollar amount of change for that category.rate variance.
(2)For the net accrued periodic derivative cash settlements interest amount, the variance due to average volume represents the change in the net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amount resulting from the change in the average notional amount of derivative contracts outstanding. The variance due to average rate represents the change in the net periodic derivative cash settlements amount resulting from the net difference between the average rate paid and the average rate received for interest rate swaps during the period.
(3) See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for additional information on our adjusted non-GAAP measures.
Reported Net Interest Income
Reported net interest income of $299$436 million for fiscal year 2019 was up $152022 increased $21 million, or 5%, from fiscal year 2018,2021, driven by an increase in average interest-earning assets of 4%$1,629 million, or 6%, coupled with an increasepartially offset by a decrease in the net interest yield of 2% (21% (1 basis points)point) to 1.14%1.46%.
•Average Interest-Earning Assets:The increase in average interest-earning assets of 4%6% during fiscal year 20192022 was primarily attributable to growth in average total loans of $616$1,663 million, or 2%6%, over the priorfrom fiscal year 2021, driven by an increase in average long-term fixed-rate loans of $996 million and an expansionincrease in average line of our investment securities portfolio.
credit loans of $522 million. The continued low interest rate environment presented an opportunity for members to obtain long-term loan advances to fund capital investments at a low fixed rate of interest. The increase in average line of credit loans was mainly attributable to loan advances to one distribution member that experienced an adverse financial impact from restoration costs incurred to repair damage caused by two successive hurricanes and loan advances to several CFC Texas-based power supply borrowers that were subject to elevated power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex.
•Net Interest Yield: The increase of 2 basis points in the net interest yield in fiscal year 2019 reflectedof 1 basis point, or 1%, was primarily attributable to the combined impact of an increasea decrease in the average yield on interest-earning assets of 713 basis points to 4.31%3.82% and a reduction in the benefit from non-interest bearing funding of 1 basis point to 0.17%, which was partiallywere largely offset by an increasea reduction in theour average cost of fundsborrowings of 613 basis points to 3.36%2.53%. The increasedecreases in the average yield on interest-earning assets was primarily attributable to higher rates on our line of credit and variable-rate loans due to a rise in short-term interest rates. On July 12, 2018, we early redeemed $300 million aggregate principal amount of our 10.375% collateral trust bonds and repaid the remaining $700 million principal amount of these bonds on the maturity date of November 1, 2018. We replaced this high-cost debt with lower-cost funding. While we experienced an overall increase in our average cost of fundsborrowings reflected the impact of the continued low interest rate environment during fiscal year 2019, largely due to the increase in the average cost of our short-term and variable-rate funding, the cost savings from the repayment of the 10.375% collateral trust bonds and replacement with lower-cost funding mitigated this increase. The 3-month London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) and federal funds target rate, which are benchmark rates used as references in establishing pricing for line of credit and variable-rate loans and determining the cost of our short-term and variable-rate borrowings, were both 2.50% as of May 31, 2019. The 3-month LIBOR rate was up 18 basis points from May 31, 2018, while the federal funds target rate was up 75 basis points.
2022.
Adjusted Net Interest Income
Adjusted net interest income of $256$334 million for fiscal year 2019 was up $462022 increased $35 million, or 22%12%, from fiscal year 2018,2021, driven by the combined impact of an increase in average interest-earning assets of $1,629 million, or 6%, and an increase in the adjusted net interest yield of 17% (146 basis points)points, or 6%, to 0.97% and the1.12%.
•Average Interest-Earning Assets: The increase in average interest-earning assets of 4%. 6% was driven by the growth in average total loans of $1,663 million, or 6%, from fiscal year 2021, primarily attributable to an increase in average long-term fixed-rate and line of credit loans as discussed above.
•Adjusted Net Interest Yield: The increase in the adjusted net interest yield was primarily due toof 6 basis points, or 6%, reflected the combinedfavorable impact of an increasea reduction in our adjusted average cost of borrowings of 20 basis points to 2.89%, which was partially offset by a decrease in the average yield on interest-earning assets of 713 basis points to 4.31% and a reduction in our adjusted average cost3.82%, both of funds of 7 basis points to 3.54%. As noted above, the increase in the average yield on interest-earning assets was attributable to higher rates on our line of credit and variable-rate loans due to the rise in short-term interest rates. The reduction in our adjusted average cost of funds was largelywhich were attributable to the cost savings fromlower interest rate environment during fiscal year 2022.
We include the early redemption and maturity of the $1 billion aggregate principal amount of the 10.375% collateral trust bonds, the replacement of this debt with lower-cost funding and a decrease in net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts. Together these amounts more than offset the increase in the average cost of our short-term, variable-rate borrowings resulting from higher short-term interest rates throughout the fiscal year.
Net periodic derivative cash settlements expense totaled $44 million in fiscal year 2019, a decrease of $31 million, or 41%, from $74 million in fiscal years 2018. Pay-fixed swaps represent the substantial majority of our derivatives portfolio. The floating rate payments on our interest rate swaps are typically determined based on the 3-month LIBOR. The increase in the 3-month LIBOR rate resulted in an increase in the periodic floating rate interest payments due to us on our pay-fixed, receive-variable swaps and a significant reduction in our net periodic derivative cash settlements expense in fiscal year 2019.
We include net accrued periodic derivative cash settlements during the period in the calculation of our adjusted average cost of funds,borrowings, which, as a result, also impacts the calculation of adjusted net interest income and adjusted net interest yield. We recorded net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense of $101 million for fiscal year 2022, compared with $116 million and $56 million for fiscal years 2021 and 2020.
The floating-rate payments on our interest rate swaps are typically based on 3-month LIBOR. Because our derivative portfolio consists of a higher proportion of pay-fixed swaps than receive-fixed swaps, the net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts generally change based on changes in the floating interest amount received each period. When the 3-month LIBOR rate increases during the period, the received floating interest amounts on our pay-fixed swaps increase and, conversely, when the 3-month LIBOR swap rate decreases, the received floating interest amounts on our pay-fixed swaps decrease. The 3-month LIBOR rate began to increase during the second half of fiscal year 2022, resulting in an increase in received floating interest amounts and contributing to lower net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts in the current fiscal year. In contrast, the 3-month LIBOR rate decreased during fiscal year 2021 resulting in a reduction in received floating interest amounts and contributing to higher net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts in the prior fiscal year.
See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for additional information on our adjusted measures, including a reconciliation of these measures to the most comparable U.S. GAAP measures.
Provision for LoanCredit Losses
Our provisionprovision for loancredit losses in each period is primarily driven by the levelchanges in our measurement of allowance that we determine is necessarylifetime expected credit losses for probable incurred loan losses inherent in our loan portfolio as of each balance sheet date. Therecorded in the allowance for loancredit losses. Our allowance for credit losses was $18and allowance coverage ratio were $68 million and $19 million0.22%, respectively, as of May 31, 20192022. In comparison, our allowance for credit losses and 2018, respectively.allowance coverage ratio were $86 million and 0.30%, respectively, as of May 31, 2021.
We recorded a benefit for loancredit losses of $1$18 million infor fiscal year 2019.2022. In comparison,contrast, we recorded a benefitprovision for credit losses of $18$29 million infor fiscal year 2018, which2021. The current fiscal year benefit was due to an allowance releaseprimarily attributable to increasesa decrease in the recovery rate assumptions used in determining the collective allowance, for our electric distribution and power supply loan portfolios. The increase in the recovery rate assumptions were based on management’s assessment of the most recent credit performance of electric utility loan portfolios, including consecutive fiscal years in which we had no payment defaults, delinquent loans, nonperforming
loans or charge-offs in our electric utility loan portfolios, and the overall credit quality of these portfolios. The credit quality and performance statistics of our loan portfolio continues to remain strong. We had no payment defaults or charge-offsstemming largely from positive developments during fiscal year 2019,2022 related to Rayburn that resulted in an improvement in Rayburn’s credit risk profile and no delinquent loans or nonperforming loansalso a significant reduction in our loans outstanding to Rayburn. In June 2021, Texas enacted securitization legislation that offers a financing program for qualifying electric cooperatives exposed to elevated power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex. In February 2022, Rayburn successfully completed a securitization transaction pursuant to this legislation to cover extraordinary costs and expenses incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex. Subsequent to the completion of the securitization transaction, Rayburn fully paid its outstanding obligations to ERCOT. As a result, we revised our borrower risk rating for Rayburn to a rating in the pass category from a previous rating in the criticized category. In addition, we received loan portfoliopayments from Rayburn during fiscal year 2022 that reduced our loans outstanding to Rayburn to $167 million as of May 31, 2019.2022, consisting of secured and unsecured loans outstanding of $151 million and $16 million, respectively. Loans outstanding to Rayburn totaled $379 million as of the prior fiscal year ended May 31, 2021, consisting of secured and unsecured loans outstanding of $167 million and $212 million, respectively.
The provision for credit losses of $29 million recorded for fiscal year 2021 reflected the allowance build due to the significant adverse financial impact on Brazos and Rayburn resulting from their exposure to elevated wholesale electric power supply costs during the February 2021 polar vortex.
We discuss our methodology for estimating the allowance for credit losses in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—Allowance for Credit Losses—Current Methodology.” We also provide additional information on our allowance for loancredit losses below under section “Credit Risk—Allowance for LoanCredit Losses” and “Note 5��5—Allowance for LoanCredit Losses” of this Report. For additional information on our allowance methodology, see “Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates” above and “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” ofin this Report.
Non-Interest Income
Non-interest income consists of fee and other income, gains and losses on derivatives not accounted for in hedge accounting
relationships, and resultsgains and losses on equity and debt investment securities, which consists of operations of foreclosed assets.both unrealized and realized
gains and losses.
Table 34 presents the components of non-interest income (loss) recorded in our consolidated resultsstatements of operations for fiscal years 2019, 20182022, 2021 and 2017.2020.
Table 3:4: Non-Interest Income | | | | Year Ended May 31, | | | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 | (Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Non-interest income (loss): | | | | | | | |
Non-interest income components: | | Non-interest income components: | | | | | | |
Fee and other income | | $ | 15,355 |
| | $ | 17,578 |
| | $ | 19,713 |
| Fee and other income | | $ | 17,193 | | | $ | 18,929 | | | $ | 22,961 | |
Derivative gains (losses) | | (363,341 | ) | | 231,721 |
| | 94,903 |
| Derivative gains (losses) | | 456,482 | | | 506,301 | | | (790,151) | |
Results of operations of foreclosed assets | | — |
| | — |
| | (1,749 | ) | |
Unrealized losses on equity securities | | (1,799 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| |
| Investment securities gains (losses) | | Investment securities gains (losses) | | (30,179) | | | 1,495 | | | 9,431 | |
Total non-interest income (loss) | | $ | (349,785 | ) | | $ | 249,299 |
| | $ | 112,867 |
| Total non-interest income (loss) | | $ | 443,496 | | | $ | 526,725 | | | $ | (757,759) | |
The significant variancesvariance in non-interest income (loss) between fiscal years werewas primarily attributable to changes in netthe derivative gains (losses) recognized in our consolidated statements of operations. In addition, we experienced an unfavorable shift in unrealized investment securities gains of $32 million for the current fiscal year compared with the prior fiscal year. We
expect period-to-period market fluctuations in the fair value of our equity and debt investment securities, which we report together with realized gains and losses from the sale of investment securities on our consolidated statements of operations.
Derivative Gains (Losses)
Our derivative instruments are an integral part of our interest rate risk managementrisk-management strategy. Our principal purpose in using derivatives is to manage our aggregate interest rate risk profile within prescribed risk parameters. The derivative instruments we use primarily include interest rate swaps, which we typically hold to maturity. In addition, we may on occasion use treasury locks to manage the interest rate risk associated with debt that is scheduled to reprice in the future. The primary factors affecting the fair value of our derivatives and derivative gains (losses) recorded in our results of operations include changes in interest rates, the shape of the swap curve and the composition of our derivative portfolio. We generally do not designate our interest rate swaps, which currently account for the substantial majority ofall our derivatives, for hedge accounting. Accordingly, changes in the fair value of interest rate swaps are reported in our condensed consolidated statements of operations under derivative gains (losses). However, if we execute a treasury lock, we typically designate the treasury lockslock as a cash flow hedges. We did not have any derivatives designated as accounting hedges as of May 31, 2019.hedge.
We currently use two types of interest rate swap agreements: (i) we pay a fixed rate of interest and receive a variable rate of interest (“pay-fixed swaps”);, and (ii) we pay a variable rate of interest and receive a fixed rate of interest (“receive-fixed swaps”). The interest amounts are based on a specified notional balance, which is used for calculation purposes only.
The benchmark variable rate for the substantial majority of the floating ratefloating-rate payments under our swap agreements is 3-month LIBOR.
Table 4 displays the average notional amount outstanding, by swap agreement type, and the weighted-average interest rate paid and received for interest rate swap settlements during fiscal years 2019, 2018 and 2017. As indicated in Table 4, our derivative portfolio consists of a higher proportion of pay-fixed swaps than receive-fixed swaps. The profile of our interest
rate swap portfolio, however, may change as a result of changes in market conditions and actions taken to manage exposure to interest rate risk.
Table 4: Derivative Average Notional Amounts and Average Interest Rates
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
| | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Average Notional Balance | | Weighted- Average Rate Paid | | Weighted- Average Rate Received | | Average Notional Balance | | Weighted- Average Rate Paid | | Weighted- Average Rate Received | | Average Notional Balance | | Weighted- Average Rate Paid | | Weighted- Average Rate Received |
Pay-fixed swaps | | $ | 7,352,704 |
| | 2.83 | % | | 2.53 | % | | $ | 7,007,207 |
| | 2.82 | % | | 1.58 | % | | $ | 6,675,617 |
| | 2.89 | % | | 0.90 | % |
Receive-fixed swaps | | 3,615,781 |
| | 3.15 |
| | 2.53 |
| | 3,808,794 |
| | 2.16 |
| | 2.60 |
| | 3,914,479 |
| | 1.34 |
| | 2.71 |
|
Total | | $ | 10,968,485 |
| | 2.93 | % | | 2.53 | % | | $ | 10,816,001 |
| | 2.58 | % | | 1.94 | % | | $ | 10,590,096 |
| | 2.32 | % | | 1.57 | % |
Pay-fixed swaps represented approximately 68% and 65% of the outstanding notional amount of our derivative portfolio as of May 31, 2019 and May 31, 2018, respectively. The average remaining maturity of our pay-fixed and receive-fixed swaps was 19 years and four years, respectively, as of May 31, 2019. In comparison, the average remaining maturity of our pay-fixed and receive-fixed swaps was 19 years and five years, respectively, as of May 31, 2018.
As interest rates decline, pay-fixed swaps generally decrease in value and result in the recognition of derivative losses, as the amount of interest we pay remains fixed, while the amount of interest we receive declines. In contrast, as interest rates rise, pay-fixed swaps generally increase in value and result in the recognition of derivative gains, as the amount of interest we pay remains fixed, but the amount we receive increases. With a receive-fixed swap, the opposite results occur as interest rates decline or rise. Our derivative portfolio consists of a higher proportion of pay-fixed swaps than receive-fixed swaps; therefore, we generally record derivative losses when interest rates decline and derivative gains when interest rates rise. Because our pay-fixed and receive-fixed swaps are referenced to different maturity terms along the swap curve, different changes in the swap curve—parallel, flattening, inversion or steepening—will also impact the fair value of our derivatives.
On July 20, 2021, we executed two treasury lock agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $250 million to lock in the underlying U.S. Treasury interest rate component of interest rate payments on anticipated debt issuances and repricings. The chart below provides comparative swap curvestreasury locks, which were scheduled to mature on October 29, 2021, were designated and qualified as cash flow hedges. In October 2021, we borrowed $250 million under our Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement and terminated the treasury locks. Prior to this anticipated borrowing and the termination of the treasury locks, we recorded changes in the fair value of the treasury locks in AOCI. At termination, the treasury locks were in a gain position of $5 million, of which $4 million is being accreted from AOCI to interest expense over the term of the related Farmer Mac borrowings and the remainder was recognized in earnings. We did not have any derivatives designated as accounting hedges as of May 31, 2019, 2018, 2017 and 2016.2022 or May 31, 2021.
____________________________Benchmark rates obtained from Bloomberg.
Table 5 presents the components of net derivative gains (losses) recorded in our consolidated resultsstatements of operations.operations for fiscal years 2022, 2021 and 2020. Derivative cash settlements interest expense represents the net periodic contractual interest amount for our interest-rateinterest rate swaps forduring the reporting period. Derivative forward value gains (losses) represent the change in fair value of our interest rate swaps during the applicable reporting period due to changes in expected future interest rates over the remaining life of our derivative contracts.
Table 5: Derivative Gains (Losses)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Derivative gains (losses) attributable to: | | | | | | |
Derivative cash settlements interest expense | | $ | (101,385) | | | $ | (115,645) | | | $ | (55,873) | |
Derivative forward value gains (losses) | | 557,867 | | | 621,946 | | | (734,278) | |
Derivative gains (losses) | | $ | 456,482 | | | $ | 506,301 | | | $ | (790,151) | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 |
Derivative gains (losses) attributable to: | | | | | | |
Derivative cash settlements expense | | $ | (43,611 | ) | | $ | (74,281 | ) | | $ | (84,478 | ) |
Derivative forward value gains (losses) | | (319,730 | ) | | 306,002 |
| | 179,381 |
|
Derivative gains (losses) | | $ | (363,341 | ) | | $ | 231,721 |
| | $ | 94,903 |
|
The netWe recorded derivative lossesgains of $363$456 million infor fiscal year 2019 were primarily2022, attributable to increases in interest rates across the entire swap curve during the period. In contrast, we recorded derivative gains of $506 million for fiscal year 2021, driven by pronounced increases in medium- and longer-term swap rates, namely five-year to 30-year swap rates.
As noted above, the substantial majority of our swap portfolio consists of longer-dated, pay-fixed swaps. Therefore, increases and decreases in medium- and longer-term swap rates generally have a net decreasemore pronounced corresponding impact on the change in the net fair value of our pay-fixed swaps resulting from a declineswap portfolio. We present comparative swap curves, which depict the relationship between swap rates at varying maturities, for our reported periods in mediumTable 7 below.
Derivative Cash Settlements
As indicated in Table 5 above, and longer-term interest rates during the year, as depicted by the May 31, 2019 swap curve presented in thediscussed above chart. As medium and longer-term interest rates fell, short-term interest rates rose and exceeded medium and longer-term interest rates, resulting in an inverted yield curve beginning in March 2019. The rise in the 3-month LIBOR resulted in an increase in the floating rate payments due to us on our pay-fixed, receive-variable swaps, which drove a significant reduction in ourunder “Consolidated Results of Operations—Net Interest Income—Adjusted Net Interest Income,” we recorded net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts in fiscal year 2019.
The net derivative gains of $232$101 million in fiscal year 2018 resulted from a net2022, compared with $116 million for fiscal year 2021. The 3-month LIBOR rate began to increase during the second half of fiscal year 2022, resulting in an increase in received floating interest amounts and contributing to lower net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts in the fair valuecurrent fiscal year. In contrast, the 3-month LIBOR rate decreased during fiscal year 2021, resulting in a reduction in received floating interest amounts and contributing to higher net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts in the prior fiscal year.
Table 6 displays, by interest rate swap agreement type, the average notional amount and the weighted-average interest rate paid and received for the net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense during each respective period. As discussed above, our derivative portfolio consists of a higher proportion of pay-fixed swaps than receive-fixed swaps, with pay-fixed swaps accounting for approximately 75% and 73% of the outstanding notional amount of our derivative portfolio as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
Table 6: Derivatives—Average Notional Amounts and Interest Rates
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
| | Average | | Weighted- | | Average | | Weighted- | | Average | | Weighted- |
| | Notional | | Average Rate | | Notional | | Average Rate | | Notional | | Average Rate |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | Paid | | Received | | Amount | | Paid | | Received | | Amount | | Paid | | Received |
Interest rate swap type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Pay-fixed swaps | | $ | 6,145,318 | | | 2.61 | % | | 0.36 | % | | $ | 6,566,734 | | | 2.73 | % | | 0.27 | % | | $ | 7,092,961 | | | 2.82 | % | | 1.91 | % |
Receive-fixed swaps | | 2,260,663 | | | 1.01 | | | 2.82 | | | 2,494,890 | | | 1.03 | | | 2.78 | | | 3,086,705 | | | 2.62 | | | 2.64 | |
Total | | $ | 8,405,981 | | | 2.18 | % | | 1.03 | % | | $ | 9,061,624 | | | 2.26 | % | | 0.96 | % | | $ | 10,179,666 | | | 2.76 | % | | 2.13 | % |
The average remaining maturity of our pay-fixed and receive-fixed swaps primarily attributable to an increase in interestwas 19 years and three years, respectively, as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Comparative Swap Curves
Table 7 below provides comparative swap curves as of May 31, 2022, 2021, 2020 and 2019.
Table 7: Comparative Swap Curves
____________________________ Benchmark rates across the swap curve.obtained from Bloomberg.
See “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—Derivative Instruments” and “Note 10—Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” for additional information on our derivative instruments. Also refer to “Note 14—Fair Value Measurement” for information on how we estimatemeasure the fair value of our derivative instruments.
Results of Operations of Foreclosed Assets
Results of operations of foreclosed assets consists of the operating results of entities controlled by CFC that hold foreclosed assets, impairment charges related to those entities, gains or losses related to the disposition of the assets and potential subsequent charges related to those assets. On July 1, 2016, we completed the sale of Caribbean Asset Holdings, LLC (“CAH”). As a result, we did not carry any foreclosed assets on our consolidated balance sheet as of May 31, 2019 or
May 31, 2018.
Non-Interest Expense
Non-interest expense consists of salaries and employee benefit expense, general and administrative expenses, gains (losses)and losses on the early extinguishment of debt and other miscellaneous expenses.
Table 68 presents the components of non-interest expense recorded in our consolidated resultsstatements of operations in fiscal years 2019, 20182022, 2021 and 2017.2020.
Table 6:8: Non-Interest Expense
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Non-interest expense components: | | | | | | |
Salaries and employee benefits | | $ | (51,863) | | | $ | (55,258) | | | $ | (54,522) | |
Other general and administrative expenses | | (43,323) | | | (39,447) | | | (46,645) | |
Operating expenses | | (95,186) | | | (94,705) | | | (101,167) | |
Losses on early extinguishment of debt | | (754) | | | (1,456) | | | (683) | |
Other non-interest expense | | (1,552) | | | (1,619) | | | (25,588) | |
Total non-interest expense | | $ | (97,492) | | | $ | (97,780) | | | $ | (127,438) | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 |
Non-interest expense: | | | | | | |
Salaries and employee benefits | | $ | (49,824 | ) | | $ | (51,422 | ) | | $ | (47,769 | ) |
Other general and administrative expenses | | (43,342 | ) | | (39,462 | ) | | (38,457 | ) |
Gains (losses) on early extinguishment of debt | | (7,100 | ) | | — |
| | 192 |
|
Other non-interest expense | | (1,675 | ) | | (1,943 | ) | | (1,948 | ) |
Total non-interest expense | | $ | (101,941 | ) | | $ | (92,827 | ) | | $ | (87,982 | ) |
Non-interest expense of $102$97 million for fiscal year 2019 increased by $9 million, or 10%,2022 decreased slightly from fiscal year 2018. The increase was largely due to2021, as the lossdecrease in salaries and employee benefits and lower losses on the early extinguishment of debt, of $7 million, attributablewere largely offset by an increase in other general and administrative expenses as we resumed business travel and in-person corporate meetings and events that were cancelled during the prior fiscal year due to the premium for the early redemption of $300 million of the $1 billion collateral trust bonds.pandemic.
Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests
Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests represents 100% of the results of operations of NCSC and RTFC, as the members of NCSC and RTFC own or control 100% of the interest in their respective companies. The fluctuations in net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests are primarily due to changes in the fair value of NCSC’s derivative instruments recognized in NCSC’s earnings.
We recorded a net income attributable to noncontrolling interests of $3 million for fiscal year 2022. In comparison, we recorded a net income attributable to noncontrolling interests of $2 million for fiscal years 2021 and a net loss attributable to noncontrolling interests of $2$4 million for fiscal year 2020.
| | |
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET ANALYSIS |
Total assets increased $1,613 million, or 5%, in fiscal year 2019, compared with net income of $2 million in both fiscal years 2018 and 2017.
|
|
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET ANALYSIS |
Total assets of $27,1242022 to $31,251 million as of May 31, 2019 increased by $434 million, or 2%, from May 31, 2018,2022, primarily due to growth in our loan portfolio. TotalWe experienced an increase in total liabilities of $25,820$871 million, or 3%, to $29,109 million as of May 31, 2019 increased by $636 million, or 3%, from May 31, 2018,2022, largely due to the issuances of debt issuances to fund the growth in our loan growth.portfolio. Total equity decreased by $202increased $742 million during fiscal year 2019 to $1,304$2,142 million as of May 31, 2019,2022, attributable to our reported net lossincome of $151$799 million andfor the current fiscal year, which was partially offset by the CFC Board of Directors’ authorized patronage capital retirement in July 2021 of $48 million in August 2018.$58 million.
Following
Below is a discussion of changes in the major components of our assets and liabilities during fiscal year 2019.2022. Period-end balance sheet amounts may vary from average balance sheet amounts due to liquidity and balance sheet management activities that are intended to manage our liquidity requirements for the company and our customers, and our market risk exposure in accordance with our risk appetite.appetite framework.
Loan Portfolio
We segregate our loan portfolio into segments, by legal entity, based on the borrower member class, which consists of CFC distribution, CFC power supply, CFC statewide and associate, NCSC and RTFC. We offer both long-term loans that provide borrowers the option to select fixed- and variable-rate loan advances and line of credit loans. The substantial majorityloans to our borrowers. Under our long-term loan facilities, a borrower may select a fixed interest rate or a variable interest rate at the time of loans in our portfolio represent fixed-rate advances under secured long-term facilities with terms up to 35 years.each loan advance. Line of credit loans are typically variable-rate revolving loan facilities and are generally unsecured.have a variable interest rate. We describe and provide additional information on our member classes under “Item 1. Business—Members” and information about our loan programs and loan product types under “Item 1. Business—Loan and Guarantee Programs” in this Report.
Loans Outstanding
Table 7 summarizes9 presents loans outstanding by legal entity, member class and loan product type as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 9: Loans—Outstanding Amount by Member Class and Loan Type
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | | | | | | | |
Member class: | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total | | Change | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 23,844,242 | | | 79 | % | | $ | 22,027,423 | | | 78 | % | | $ | 1,816,819 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Power supply | | 4,901,770 | | | 17 | | | 5,154,312 | | | 18 | | | (252,542) | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Statewide and associate | | 126,863 | | | — | | | 106,121 | | | — | | | 20,742 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC | | 28,872,875 | | | 96 | | | 27,287,856 | | | 96 | | | 1,585,019 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NCSC | | 710,878 | | | 2 | | | 706,868 | | | 3 | | | 4,010 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
RTFC | | 467,601 | | | 2 | | | 420,383 | | | 1 | | | 47,218 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | 30,051,354 | | | 100 | % | | 28,415,107 | | | 100 | % | | 1,636,247 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Deferred loan origination costs—CFC(2) | | 12,032 | | | — | | | 11,854 | | | — | | | 178 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Loans to members | | $ | 30,063,386 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 28,426,961 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 1,636,425 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate | | $ | 26,952,372 | | | 90 | % | | $ | 25,514,766 | | | 90 | % | | $ | 1,437,606 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Variable-rate | | 820,201 | | | 2 | | | 658,579 | | | 2 | | | 161,622 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total long-term loans | | 27,772,573 | | | 92 | | | 26,173,345 | | | 92 | | | 1,599,228 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Line of credit loans | | 2,278,781 | | | 8 | | | 2,241,762 | | | 8 | | | 37,019 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | 30,051,354 | | | 100 | % | | 28,415,107 | | | 100 | % | | 1,636,247 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Deferred loan origination costs—CFC(2) | | 12,032 | | | — | | | 11,854 | | | — | | | 178 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Loans to members | | $ | 30,063,386 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 28,426,961 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 1,636,425 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
____________________________
(1) Represents the unpaid principal balance, net of charge-offs and recoveries, of loans as of the end of each period.
(2)Deferred loan origination costs are recorded on the books of CFC.
Loans to members totaled $30,063 million and $28,427 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Loans to CFC distribution and power supply borrowers accounted for 96% of total loans to members by loan type and by member class, for the five-year period endedas of both May 31, 2019. As indicated in Table 7,2022 and 2021, and long-term fixed-rate loans accounted for 89% and 90% of loans to members as of both May 31, 20192022 and 2018, respectively.
Table 7: Loans Outstanding by Type and Member Class
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in millions) | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 | | 2015 |
Loans by type: | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate | | $ | 23,094 |
| | 89 | % | | $ | 22,696 |
| | 90 | % | | $ | 22,137 |
| | 91 | % | | $ | 21,391 |
| | 93 | % | | $ | 19,722 |
| | 92 | % |
Variable-rate | | 1,067 |
| | 4 |
| | 1,040 |
| | 4 |
| | 847 |
| | 3 |
| | 757 |
| | 3 |
| | 699 |
| | 3 |
|
Total long-term loans | | 24,161 |
| | 93 |
| | 23,736 |
| | 94 |
| | 22,984 |
| | 94 |
| | 22,148 |
| | 96 |
| | 20,421 |
| | 95 |
|
Lines of credit | | 1,745 |
| | 7 |
| | 1,432 |
| | 6 |
| | 1,372 |
| | 6 |
| | 1,005 |
| | 4 |
| | 1,038 |
| | 5 |
|
Total loans outstanding | | $ | 25,906 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 25,168 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 24,356 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 23,153 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 21,459 |
| | 100 | % |
Deferred loan origination costs | | 11 |
| | — |
| | 11 |
| | — |
| | 11 |
| | — |
| | 10 |
| | — |
| | 10 |
| | — |
|
Loans to members | | $ | 25,917 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 25,179 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 24,367 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 23,163 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 21,469 |
| | 100 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Loans by member class: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
Distribution | | $ | 20,155 |
| | 78 | % | | $ | 19,552 |
| | 78 | % | | $ | 18,825 |
| | 77 | % | | $ | 17,674 |
| | 77 | % | | $ | 16,095 |
| | 75 | % |
Power supply | | 4,579 |
| | 18 |
| | 4,397 |
| | 18 |
| | 4,505 |
| | 19 |
| | 4,401 |
| | 19 |
| | 4,181 |
| | 20 |
|
Statewide and associate | | 84 |
| | — |
| | 70 |
| | — |
| | 58 |
| | — |
| | 55 |
| | — |
| | 65 |
| | — |
|
CFC total | | 24,818 |
| | 96 |
| | 24,019 |
| | 96 |
| | 23,388 |
| | 96 |
| | 22,130 |
| | 96 |
| | 20,341 |
| | 95 |
|
NCSC | | 743 |
| | 3 |
| | 786 |
| | 3 |
| | 614 |
| | 3 |
| | 681 |
| | 3 |
| | 732 |
| | 3 |
|
RTFC | | 345 |
| | 1 |
| | 363 |
| | 1 |
| | 354 |
| | 1 |
| | 342 |
| | 1 |
| | 386 |
| | 2 |
|
Total loans outstanding | | $ | 25,906 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 25,168 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 24,356 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 23,153 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 21,459 |
| | 100 | % |
Deferred loan origination costs | | 11 |
| | — |
| | 11 |
| | — |
| | 11 |
| | — |
| | 10 |
| | — |
| | 10 |
| | — |
|
Loans to members | | $ | 25,917 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 25,179 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 24,367 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 23,163 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 21,469 |
| | 100 | % |
Loans2021. The increase in loans to members totaled $25,917 million as of May 31, 2019, an increase of $738$1,636 million, or 3%6%, from May 31, 2018.2021, was attributable to net increases in long-term and line of credit loans of $1,599 million and $37 million, respectively. We experienced increases in CFC distribution loans, CFC statewide and power supplyassociate loans, increased by $603 million and $182 million, respectively, which was partially offset by a decrease in NCSC loans and RTFC loans of $43$1,817 million, $21 million, $4 million and $18 million, respectively. Long-term and line-of-credit revolving loans accounted for $425 million and $313$47 million, respectively, and a decrease in CFC power supply loans of the $738 million increase in loans. Based on our historical experience, however, long-term loans typically account for the substantial majority of loan growth.$253 million.
Long-term loan advances totaled $1,843$3,386 million during fiscal year 2019, with2022, of which approximately 87% of those advances80% was provided to members for capital expenditures byand 18% was provided to members for other expenses, primarily to fund operating expenses attributable to the elevated power cost obligations incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex. In comparison, long-term loan advances totaled $2,514 million during fiscal year 2021, of which approximately 86% was provided to members for capital expenditures and 10%8% was provided for the refinancing of loans made by other lenders. In comparison,Of the $3,386 million total long-term loans advanced during fiscal year 2022, $2,911 million were fixed-rate loan advances totaled $2,203with a weighted average fixed-rate term of 23 years.
Many rural electric distribution cooperatives have made or are making infrastructure investments that include building fiber optic lines to improve electric grid system reliability and efficiency, as fiber operations offers enhanced communication to monitor electric systems, identify outages and speed electric restoration. Some of these electric cooperatives are leveraging
these fiber assets to offer access to broadband services, either directly or by partnering with local telecommunication companies and others, to the communities they serve. Aggregate loans outstanding to CFC electric distribution cooperative members relating to broadband projects, which we started tracking in October 2017, increased to an estimated $1,647 million during fiscal year 2018, withas of May 31, 2022, from approximately 67%$854 million as of those advancesMay 31, 2021. Many of these broadband projects are also financially supported by various states and the federal government, which reduces the credit risk for capital expenditures by membersCFC and 24% for the refinancing of loans made by other lenders. The decreaseour electric cooperative members. We expect our member electric cooperatives to continue in long-term loan advances from the same prior-year period primarily resulted from weaker demand from borrowerstheir efforts to refinance other lender debt.expand broadband access to unserved and underserved communities.
We provide additional information on our loan product types in “Item 1. Business—Loan Programs” and“Note 4—Loans.” See “Debt—Collateral Pledged” below for information on encumbered and unencumbered loans and “Credit Risk Management” for information on the credit performance and risk profile of our loan portfolio.portfolio below under the section “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk” in this Report. Also refer to “Item 1. Business—Loan and Guarantee Programs” and “Note 4—Loans” in this Report for addition information on our loans to members.”
Loan Loans—Retention Rate
Table 8 presentsLong-term fixed-rate loans accounted for 90% as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021 of our loans to members of $30,063 million and $28,427 million, respectively. Borrowers that select a comparisonfixed rate on a loan advance under a long-term loan facility have the option of choosing a term on the advance between one year and the historical retentionfinal maturity date of the loan. At the expiration of a selected fixed-rate term, or the repricing date, borrowers have the option of: (i) selecting CFC’s current long-term fixed rate for a term ranging from one year up to the full remaining term of the loan; (ii) selecting CFC’s current long-term variable rate; or (iii) repaying the loan in full.
The continued low interest rate environment over the last several years presented an opportunity for our members to obtain new long-term loan advances at a lower fixed-to-maturity interest rate or lock in a lower fixed interest rate to maturity at the repricing date on existing outstanding long-term loan advances. Because many of our members have locked in at or near historic low interest rates on outstanding loan advances for extended terms, the amount of long-term fixed-rate loans that repriced during each fiscal year over the last five fiscal years has gradually decreased, from $987 million in fiscal year 2017 to $379 million in fiscal year 2022. Long-term fixed-rate loans scheduled to reprice over the next 12 months totaled $338 million as of May 31, 2022, and long-term fixed-rate loans scheduled to reprice over the subsequent five fiscal years through the fiscal year ended May 31, 2027 totaled $1,584 million as of May 31, 2022, representing an average of $317 million per fiscal year.
CFC’s long-term fixed-rate loans that repriced in accordance with our standard loan repricing provisions totaled $379 million during fiscal year 2022. Of this total, $361 million, or 95%, was retained and the past three fiscal years and provides information on the percentage of loans that repriced to either another fixed-rate term or a variable rate.remaining amount was repaid. The average annual retention rate, is calculated based on the election made by the borrower at the repricing date. The average annual retention rate of CFC’sdate, was 97% for CFC loans that repriced loans has been 96% over the last three fiscal years.
Table 8: Historical Retention Rate and Repricing Selection(1)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total |
Loans retained: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term fixed rate selected | | $ | 568,252 |
| | 75 | % | | $ | 741,792 |
| | 82 | % | | $ | 824,415 |
| | 84 | % |
Long-term variable rate selected | | 123,636 |
| | 16 |
| | 157,539 |
| | 17 |
| | 137,835 |
| | 14 |
|
Total loans retained by CFC | | 691,888 |
| | 91 |
| | 899,331 |
| | 99 |
| | 962,250 |
| | 98 |
|
Loans repaid(2) | | 69,250 |
| | 9 |
| | 4,637 |
| | 1 |
| | 25,076 |
| | 2 |
|
Total | | $ | 761,138 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 903,968 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 987,326 |
| | 100 | % |
____________________________
(1) Does not include NCSC and RTFC loans.
(2) Includes loans totaling $1 million as of both May 31, 2018 and 2017 that were converted to new loans at the repricing date and transferred to a third party as part of our direct loan sale program. See “Note 4—Loans” for information on our sale of loans.
Scheduled Loan Principal Payments
Table 9 displays scheduled long-term loan principal payments as of May 31, 2019, forduring each of the fivethree fiscal years subsequent toended May 31, 2019 and thereafter.2022.
Table 9: Long-Term Loan Scheduled Principal Payments
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Fixed Rate | | Variable Rate | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Scheduled Principal Payments | | Weighted-Average Interest Rate | | Scheduled Principal Payments | | Total Scheduled Principal Payments(1) |
Fiscal year: | | | | | | | | |
2020 | | $ | 1,181,811 |
| | 4.42 | % | | $ | 72,027 |
| | $ | 1,253,838 |
|
2021 | | 1,179,099 |
| | 4.46 |
| | 49,686 |
| | 1,228,785 |
|
2022 | | 1,180,497 |
| | 4.50 |
| | 50,727 |
| | 1,231,224 |
|
2023 | | 1,177,197 |
| | 4.52 |
| | 42,846 |
| | 1,220,043 |
|
2024 | | 1,136,044 |
| | 4.59 |
| | 48,153 |
| | 1,184,197 |
|
Thereafter | | 17,239,605 |
| | 4.67 |
| | 803,441 |
| | 18,043,046 |
|
Total | | $ | 23,094,253 |
| | 4.62 |
| | $ | 1,066,880 |
| | $ | 24,161,133 |
|
____________________________
(1)Excludes line of credit loans.
Debt
We utilize both short-term borrowings and long-term debt as part of our funding strategy and asset/liability interest rate risk management. We seek to maintain diversified funding sources, including our members, affiliates, the capital markets and other funding sources, across products, programs and markets to manage funding concentrations and reduce our liquidity or debt rollover risk. Our funding sources include a variety of secured and unsecured debt securities in a wide range of maturities to our members, and affiliates, and in the capital markets.markets and other funding sources.
Debt Product Types
We offer various short- and long-term unsecured debt securities to our members and affiliates, including commercial paper, select notes, daily liquidity fund notes, medium-term notes and subordinated certificates. We also issue commercial paper, medium-term notes and collateral trust bonds in the capital markets. Additionally, we have access to funds under borrowing arrangements with banks, private placements and U.S. government agencies. Table 10 displays our primary funding sources and their selected key attributes.
Table 10: Debt—Debt Product Types
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Debt Product Type: | | Maturity Range | | Market | | Secured/Unsecured |
Short-term funding programs: | | | | | | |
Commercial paper | | 1 to 270 days | | Capital markets, members and affiliates | | Unsecured |
Select notes | | 30 to 270 days | | Members and affiliates | | Unsecured |
Daily liquidity fund notes | | Demand note | | Members and affiliates | | Unsecured |
Securities sold under repurchase agreements | | 1 to 90 days | | Capital markets | | Secured |
Other funding programs: | | | | | | |
Medium-term notes | | 9 months to 30 years | | Capital markets, members and affiliates | | Unsecured |
Collateral trust bonds(1) | | Up to 30 years | | Capital markets | | Secured |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable(2) | | Up to 2030 years | | U.S. government | | Secured |
Farmer Mac notes payable(3) | | Up to 30 years | | Private placement | | Secured |
Other notes payable(4) | | Up to 303 years | | Private placement | | Both |
Subordinated deferrable debt(5) | | Up to 45 years | | Capital markets | | Unsecured |
Members’ subordinated certificates(6) | | Up to 100 years | | Members | | Unsecured |
Revolving credit agreements | | 3Up to 5 years | | Bank institutions | | Unsecured |
____________________________
(1)Collateral trust bonds are secured by the pledge of permitted investments and eligible mortgage notes from distribution system borrowers in an amount at least equal to the outstanding principal amount of collateral trust bonds.
(2)Represents notes payable under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program, which supports the Rural Economic Development Loan and Grant program. The Federal Financing Bank provides the financing for these notes, and RUS provides a guarantee of repayment. We are required to pledge eligible mortgage notes from distribution and power supply system borrowers in an amount at least equal to the outstanding principal amount of the notes payable.
(3)We are required to pledge eligible mortgage notes from distribution and power supply system borrowers in an amount at least equal to the outstanding principal amount under note purchase agreements with Farmer Mac.
(4)Other notes payable consist of unsecured and secured Clean Renewable Energy Bonds and unsecured notes payable issued by NCSC.Bonds. We are required to pledge eligible mortgage notes from distribution and power supply system borrowers in an amount at least equal to the outstanding principal amount under the Clean Renewable Energy Bonds Series 2009A note purchase agreement.
(5)Subordinated deferrable debt is subordinate and junior to senior debt and debt obligations we guarantee, but senior to subordinated certificates. We have the right at any time, and from time to time, during the term of the subordinated deferrable debt to suspend interest payments for a maximum period of 20 consecutive quarters for $1,000 par notes, or a maximum period of 40 consecutive quarters for $25 par notes. To date, we have not exercised our option to suspend interest payments. We have the right to call the subordinated deferrable debt, at par, any time after 10 years for $1,000 par notes or 5 years for $25 par notes.
(6)Members’ subordinated certificates consist of membership subordinated certificates, loan and guarantee certificates and member capital securities, and are subordinated and junior to senior debt, subordinated debt and debt obligations we guarantee. Membership subordinated certificates generally mature 100 years subsequent to issuance. Loan and guarantee subordinated certificates have the same maturity as the related long-term loan. Some certificates also may amortize annually based on the outstanding loan balance. Member capital securities mature 30 years subsequent to issuance. Member capital securities are callable at par beginning either five or 10 years subsequent to the issuance and anytime thereafter.
Debt Outstanding
Table 11 displays the composition, by product type, of our outstanding debt and the weighted average interest rate as of May 31, 2019, 20182022 and 2017.2021. Table 11 also displays the composition of our debt based on several additional selected attributes.
Table 11: Total Debt Outstanding and Weighted-Average Interest Rates | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | | | | |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Outstanding Amount | | Weighted- Average Interest Rate | | Outstanding Amount | | Weighted- Average Interest Rate | | Change | | | |
Debt product type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial Paper: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Members, at par | | $ | 1,358,069 | | 0.92 | % | | $ | 1,124,607 | | 0.14 | % | | $ | 233,462 | | | |
Dealer, net of discounts | | 1,024,813 | | 0.96 | | | 894,977 | | 0.16 | | | 129,836 | | | |
Total commercial paper | | 2,382,882 | | 0.94 | | | 2,019,584 | | 0.15 | | | 363,298 | | | |
Select notes to members | | 1,753,441 | | 1.11 | | | 1,539,150 | | 0.30 | | | 214,291 | | | |
Daily liquidity fund notes to members | | 427,790 | | 0.80 | | | 460,556 | | 0.08 | | | (32,766) | | | |
Securities sold under repurchase agreements | | — | | — | | | 200,115 | | 0.30 | | | (200,115) | | | |
Medium-term notes: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Members, at par | | 667,451 | | 1.43 | | | 595,037 | | 1.28 | | | 72,414 | | | |
Dealer, net of discounts | | 5,241,687 | | 2.20 | | | 3,923,385 | | 2.31 | | | 1,318,302 | | | |
Total medium-term notes | | 5,909,138 | | 2.11 | | | 4,518,422 | | 2.17 | | | 1,390,716 | | | |
Collateral trust bonds | | 6,848,490 | | 3.17 | | | 7,191,944 | | 3.15 | | | (343,454) | | | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 6,105,473 | | 2.69 | | | 6,269,303 | | 2.76 | | | (163,830) | | | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 3,094,679 | | 2.33 | | | 2,977,909 | | 1.68 | | | 116,770 | | | |
Other notes payable | | 4,714 | | 1.80 | | | 8,236 | | 1.68 | | | (3,522) | | | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,518 | | 5.11 | | | 986,315 | | 5.11 | | | 203 | | | |
Members’ subordinated certificates: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Membership subordinated certificates | | 628,603 | | 4.95 | | | 628,594 | | 4.95 | | | 9 | | | |
Loan and guarantee subordinated certificates | | 365,388 | | 2.88 | | | 386,896 | | 2.89 | | | (21,508) | | | |
Member capital securities | | 240,170 | | 5.00 | | | 239,170 | | 5.00 | | | 1,000 | | | |
Total members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,234,161 | | 4.35 | | | 1,254,660 | | 4.32 | | | (20,499) | | | |
Total debt outstanding | | $ | 28,747,286 | | 2.54 | % | | $ | 27,426,194 | | 2.42 | % | | $ | 1,321,092 | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Security type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Secured debt | | 56 | % | | | | 61 | % | | | | | | | |
Unsecured debt | | 44 | | | | | 39 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Funding source: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Members | | 19 | % | | | | 18 | % | | | | | | | |
Private placement: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 21 | | | | | 23 | | | | | | | | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 11 | | | | | 11 | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total private placement | | 32 | | | | | 34 | | | | | | | | |
Capital markets | | 49 | | | | | 48 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest rate type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate debt | | 77 | % | | | | 77 | % | | | | | | | |
Variable-rate debt | | 23 | | | | | 23 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest rate type including the impact of swaps: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate debt(1) | | 91 | % | | | | 93 | % | | | | | | | |
Variable-rate debt(2) | | 9 | | | | | 7 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Maturity classification:(3) | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Short-term borrowings | | 17 | % | | | | 17 | % | | | | | | | |
Long-term and subordinated debt(4) | | 83 | | | | | 83 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
____________________________
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Outstanding Amount | | Weighted- Average Interest Rate | | Outstanding Amount | | Weighted- Average Interest Rate | | Outstanding Amount | | Weighted- Average Interest Rate |
Debt product type: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Members, at par | | $ | 1,111,795 |
| | 2.52 | % | | $ | 1,202,105 |
| | 1.89 | % | | $ | 928,158 |
| | 0.95 | % |
Dealer, net of discounts | | 944,616 |
| | 2.46 |
| | 1,064,266 |
| | 1.87 |
| | 999,691 |
| | 0.93 |
|
Total commercial paper | | 2,056,411 |
| | 2.49 |
| | 2,266,371 |
| | 1.88 |
| | 1,927,849 |
| | 0.94 |
|
Select notes to members | | 1,023,952 |
| | 2.70 |
| | 780,472 |
| | 2.04 |
| | 696,889 |
| | 1.12 |
|
Daily liquidity fund notes to members | | 298,817 |
| | 2.25 |
| | 400,635 |
| | 1.50 |
| | 527,990 |
| | 0.80 |
|
Medium-term notes: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Members, at par | | 625,626 |
| | 2.97 |
| | 643,821 |
| | 2.31 |
| | 612,951 |
| | 1.97 |
|
Dealer, net of discounts | | 2,942,045 |
| | 3.55 |
| | 3,002,979 |
| | 3.51 |
| | 2,364,671 |
| | 3.48 |
|
Total medium-term notes | | 3,567,671 |
| | 3.45 |
| | 3,646,800 |
| | 3.30 |
| | 2,977,622 |
| | 3.17 |
|
Collateral trust bonds | | 7,383,732 |
| | 3.19 |
| | 7,639,093 |
| | 3.89 |
| | 7,634,048 |
| | 4.08 |
|
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 5,410,507 |
| | 2.97 |
| | 4,856,143 |
| | 2.85 |
| | 4,985,484 |
| | 2.83 |
|
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 3,054,914 |
| | 3.33 |
| | 2,891,496 |
| | 2.88 |
| | 2,513,389 |
| | 1.71 |
|
Other notes payable | | 22,515 |
| | 3.46 |
| | 29,860 |
| | 3.42 |
| | 35,223 |
| | 3.55 |
|
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,020 |
| | 5.11 |
| | 742,410 |
| | 4.98 |
| | 742,274 |
| | 4.98 |
|
Members’ subordinated certificates: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Membership subordinated certificates | | 630,474 |
| | 4.95 |
| | 630,448 |
| | 4.94 |
| | 630,098 |
| | 4.94 |
|
Loan and guarantee subordinated certificates | | 505,485 |
| | 2.95 |
| | 528,386 |
| | 2.93 |
| | 567,830 |
| | 3.02 |
|
Member capital securities | | 221,170 |
| | 5.00 |
| | 221,148 |
| | 5.00 |
| | 221,097 |
| | 5.00 |
|
Total members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,357,129 |
| | 4.21 |
| | 1,379,982 |
| | 4.18 |
| | 1,419,025 |
| | 4.18 |
|
Total debt outstanding | | $ | 25,161,668 |
| | 3.24 | % | | $ | 24,633,262 |
| | 3.25 | % | | $ | 23,459,793 |
| | 3.07 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Security type: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Unsecured debt | | 37 | % | | | | 37 | % | | | | 35 | % | | |
Secured debt | | 63 |
| | | | 63 |
| | | | 65 |
| | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Funding source: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Members | | 18 | % | | | | 18 | % | | | | 18 | % | | |
Private placement: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 21 |
| | | | 20 |
| | | | 21 |
| | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 12 |
| | | | 12 |
| | | | 11 |
| | |
Total private placement | | 33 |
| | | | 32 |
| | | | 32 |
| | |
Capital markets | | 49 |
| | | | 50 |
| | | | 50 |
| | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest rate type: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate debt | | 77 | % | | | | 74 | % | | | | 74 | % | | |
Variable-rate debt | | 23 |
| | | | 26 |
| | | | 26 |
| | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest rate type including the impact of swaps: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate debt(1) | | 93 | % | | | | 87 | % | | | | 87 | % | | |
Variable-rate debt(2) | | 7 |
| | | | 13 |
| | | | 13 |
| | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Maturity classification:(3) | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Short-term borrowings | | 14 | % | | | | 15 | % | | | | 14 | % | | |
Long-term and subordinated debt(4) | | 86 |
| | | | 85 |
| | | | 86 |
| | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | |
____________________________
(1) Includes variable-rate debt that has been swapped to a fixed rate, net of any fixed-rate debt that has been swapped to a variable rate.
(2) Includes fixed-rate debt that has been swapped to a variable rate, net of any variable-rate debt that has been swapped to a fixed rate. Also includes commercial paper notes, which generally have maturities of less than 90 days. The interest rate on commercial paper notes does not change once the note has been issued; however, the interest rate for new commercial paper issuances changes daily.
(3) Borrowings with an original contractual maturity of one year or less are classified as short-term borrowings. Borrowings with an original contractual maturity of greater than one year are classified as long-term debt.
(4) Consists of long-term debt, subordinated deferrable debt and total members’ subordinated debt reported on theour consolidated balance sheets. Maturity classification is based on the original contractual maturity as of the date of issuance of the debt.
OurWe issue debt primarily to fund growth in our loan portfolio. As such, our debt outstanding debt volume generally increases and decreases in response to member loan demand. As outstanding loan balances increased during the year ended May 31, 2019, our debt volume also increased. Total debt outstanding of $25,162increased $1,321 million, or 5%, to $28,747 million as of May 31, 2019, increased by $528 million, or 2%, from May 31, 2018,2022, due to an increase in borrowings to fund the increase in loans to members. The increase was primarily attributable to an increase in borrowings under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program of $554 million, a net increase in Farmer Mac notes payable of $163 million, a net increase in subordinated deferrable debt of $244 million and an aggregate increase in member commercial paper, select notes and daily liquidity fund notes of $51 million. These increases were partially offset by net decreases in collateral trust bonds of $255 million, a decrease inOutstanding dealer commercial paper outstanding of $120$1,025 million as of May 31, 2022 was within our quarter-end target range of $1,000 million and a net decreases in medium-term notes of $79$1,500 million.
Below is a summary of significant financing activities during fiscal year 2019.2022:
•On July 12, 2018, we redeemed $300 million of the $1 billion 10.375% collateral trust bonds due November 1, 2018, at a premium of $7 million. We repaid the remaining $700 million of these bonds on the maturity date.
On July 26, 2018, we issued $300 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a variable rate of 3-month LIBOR plus 37.5 basis points due 2021.
On October 31, 2018, we issued $325 million aggregate principal amount of 3.90% collateral trust bonds due 2028 and $300 million aggregate principal amount of 4.40% collateral trust bonds due 2048.
On November 15, 2018, we closed on a $750 million committed loan facility (“Series N”) from the Federal Financing Bank under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program.
On November 28, 2018,June 7, 2021, we amended the three-year and five-year committed bank revolving line of credit agreements to extend the maturity dates to November 28, 20212024 and November 28, 2023,2025, respectively, and to terminate certain third-party bank commitments.commitments totaling $70 million under the three-year agreement and $55 million under the five-year agreement. The terminations reduced the total commitment amount under the three-year facility to $1,245 million and the five-year facility to $1,355 million, resulting in an aggregate commitment amount under the two facilities of $2,600 million.
•On January 31, 2019,October 18, 2021, we issued $450$400 million aggregate principal amount of 3.70% collateral trust bondsdealer medium-term notes at a fixed rate of 1.000%, due 2029on October 18, 2024, and $500$350 million aggregate principal amount of 4.30% collateral trust bondsdealer medium-term notes at a variable rate based on SOFR plus 0.33%, due 2049.on October 18, 2024.
•In October 2021, November 2021, January 2022 and May 2022, we borrowed $250 million, $200 million, $170 million, and $100 million respectively, under the Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement.
•In November 2021 and February 2022, we borrowed $200 million and $250 million, respectively, under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program.
•On November 4, 2021, we closed on a $550 million committed loan facility (“Series S”) under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program. Pursuant to this facility, we may borrow any time before July 15, 2026. Each advance is subject to quarterly amortization and a final maturity not longer than 30 years from the date of the advance.
•On November 15, 2021, we early redeemed all $400 million of our 3.05% Collateral Trust Bonds due February 15, 2022.
•On February 7, 2022, we issued $600 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a fixed rate of 1.875%, due on February 7, 2025, and $400 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a variable rate based on SOFR plus 0.40%, due on August 7, 2023.
•On February 7, 2022, we issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of 2.75% Collateral Trust Bonds due April 15, 2032.
•On March 25, 2022, we early redeemed all $450 million of our 2.40% of Collateral Trust Bonds due April 25, 2022.
•On May 6, 2019,4, 2022, we issued $250$300 million aggregate principal amount of 5.50% subordinated deferrable debtdealer medium-term notes at a fixed rate of 3.450%, due 2064, which isJune 15, 2025.
•On May 9, 2022, we issued $100 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a fixed for the liferate of the transaction and is callable at par on or after May3.859%, due June 15, 2024.2029.
Member Investments
Debt securities issued to our members represent an important, stable source of funding. Table 12 displays outstanding member debt outstanding, by debt product type, as of May 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021.
Table 12: Member Investments
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | Change |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | % of Total (1) | | Amount | | % of Total (1) | |
Member investment product type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper | | $ | 1,358,069 | | 57 | % | | $ | 1,124,607 | | 56 | % | | $ | 233,462 | |
Select notes | | 1,753,441 | | 100 | | | 1,539,150 | | 100 | | | 214,291 | |
Daily liquidity fund notes | | 427,790 | | 100 | | | 460,556 | | 100 | | | (32,766) | |
Medium-term notes | | 667,451 | | 11 | | | 595,037 | | 13 | | | 72,414 | |
Members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,234,161 | | 100 | | | 1,254,660 | | 100 | | | (20,499) | |
Total member investments | | $ | 5,440,912 | | | | $ | 4,974,010 | | | | $ | 466,902 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Percentage of total debt outstanding | | 19 | % | | | | 18 | % | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | Change |
| | 2019 | | 2018 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | % of Total (1) | | Amount | | % of Total (1) | |
Commercial paper | | $ | 1,111,795 |
| | 54 | % | | $ | 1,202,105 |
| | 53 | % | | $ | (90,310 | ) |
Select notes | | 1,023,952 |
| | 100 |
| | 780,472 |
| | 100 |
| | 243,480 |
|
Daily liquidity fund notes | | 298,817 |
| | 100 |
| | 400,635 |
| | 100 |
| | (101,818 | ) |
Medium-term notes | | 625,626 |
| | 18 |
| | 643,821 |
| | 18 |
| | (18,195 | ) |
Members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,357,129 |
| | 100 |
| | 1,379,982 |
| | 100 |
| | (22,853 | ) |
Total outstanding member debt | | $ | 4,417,319 |
| | | | $ | 4,407,015 |
| | | | $ | 10,304 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Percentage of total debt outstanding | | 18 | % | | | | 18 | % | | | | |
________________________________________________________
(1) Represents outstanding debt attributable to members for each debt product type as a percentage of the total outstanding debt for each debt product type.
Member investments accounted for 19% and 18% of total debt outstanding as of both May 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021, respectively. Over the last three fiscal years, our member investments have averaged $5,173 million, calculated based on outstanding member investments as of the end of each quarterly reporting period have averaged $4,426 million.fiscal quarter during the period.
Short-Term Borrowings
Short-term borrowings consist of borrowings with an original contractual maturity of one year or less and do not include the current portion of long-term debt. Short-term borrowings totaled $3,608increased to $4,981 million as of May 31, 2022, from $4,582 million as of May 31, 2021, primarily due to an increase in short-term member investments, and accounted for 14%17% of total debt outstanding as of May 31, 2019, compared with $3,796 million, or 15%, of total debt outstanding as of May 31, 2018.each respective date. See “Liquidity Risk” below and “Note 6—Short-Term Borrowings” for information on the composition of our short-term borrowings.
Long-Term and Subordinated Debt
Long-term debt, defined as debt with an original contractual maturity term of greater than one year, primarily consists of medium-term notes, collateral trust bonds, notes payable under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program and notes payable under our Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac.agreement. Subordinated debt consists of subordinated deferrable debt and members’ subordinated certificates. Our subordinated deferrable debt and members’ subordinated certificates have original contractual maturity terms of greater than one year.
Long-term and subordinated debt totaled $21,554of $23,766 million and $22,844 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, accounted for 86%83% of total debt outstanding as of May 31, 2019, compared with $20,837 million, or 85%, of total debt outstanding as of May 31, 2018. As discussed above, the increase in total debt outstanding, including long-term and subordinated debt, was primarily due to the issuance of debt to fund the growth in our loan portfolio. See Table 32 in the “Liquidity Risk” section for a summary of long-term subordinated debt issuances and repayments for fiscal year 2019.
Collateral Pledged
We are required to pledge loans or other collateral in transactions under our collateral trust bond indentures, note purchase agreements with Farmer Mac and bond agreements under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program. We are required to maintain pledged collateral equal to at least 100% of the face amount of outstanding borrowings. However, as discussed below, we typically maintain pledged collateral in excess of the required percentage. Under the provisions of our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements, the excess collateral that we are allowed to pledge cannot exceed 150% of the outstanding borrowings under our collateral trust bond indentures, Farmer Mac note purchase agreements or the Guaranteed Underwriter Program. In certain cases, provided that all conditions of eligibility under the different programs are satisfied, we may withdraw excess pledged collateral or transfer collateral from one borrowing program to another to facilitate a new debt issuance.
Table 13 displays the collateral coverage ratios as of May 31, 2019 and 2018 for the debt agreements noted above that require us to pledge collateral.
Table 13: Collateral Pledged
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Requirement/Limit | | Actual(1) |
| | Debt Indenture Minimum | | Committed Bank Revolving Line of Credit Agreements Maximum | | May 31, |
Debt Agreement | | | | 2019 | | 2018 |
Collateral trust bonds 1994 indenture | | 100 | % | | 150 | % | | 118 | % | | 111 | % |
Collateral trust bonds 2007 indenture | | 100 |
| | 150 |
| | 117 |
| | 114 |
|
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 100 |
| | 150 |
| | 114 |
| | 119 |
|
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 100 |
| | 150 |
| | 123 |
| | 115 |
|
Clean Renewable Energy Bonds Series 2009A | | 100 |
| | 150 |
| | 112 |
| | 109 |
|
____________________________
(1) Calculated based on the amount of collateral pledged divided by the face amount of outstanding secured debt.
Of our total debt outstanding of $25,162 million as of May 31, 2019, $15,858 million, or 63%, was secured by pledged loans totaling $18,877 million. In comparison, of our total debt outstanding of $24,633 million as of May 31, 2018, $15,398 million, or 63%, was secured by pledged loans totaling $18,145 million. Total debt outstanding on our consolidated balance sheet is presented net of unamortized discounts and issuance costs. However, our collateral pledging requirements are based on the face amount of secured outstanding debt, which does not take into consideration the impact of net unamortized discounts and issuance costs.
Table 14 displays the unpaid principal balance of loans pledged for secured debt, the excess collateral pledged and unencumbered loans as of May 31, 2019 and 2018.
Table 14: Unencumbered Loans
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 25,905,664 |
| | $ | 25,167,494 |
|
Less: Loans required to be pledged for secured debt (2) | | (16,137,357 | ) | | (15,677,138 | ) |
Loans pledged in excess of requirement(2)(3) | | (2,739,248 | ) | | (2,467,444 | ) |
Total pledged loans | | $ | (18,876,605 | ) | | $ | (18,144,582 | ) |
Unencumbered loans | | $ | 7,029,059 |
| | $ | 7,022,912 |
|
Unencumbered loans as a percentage of total loans | | 27 | % | | 28 | % |
____________________________
(1)Represents the unpaid principal amount of loans as of the end of each period presented and excludes unamortized deferred loan origination costs of $11 million as of both May 31, 2019 and 2018.
(2)Reflects unpaid principal balance of pledged loans.
(3)Excludes cash collateral pledged to secure debt. If there is an event of default under most of our indentures, we can only withdraw the excess collateral
if we substitute cash or permitted investments of equal value.
As displayed above in Table 14, we had excess loans pledged as collateral totaling $2,739 million and $2,467 million as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. We typically pledge loans in excess of the required amount for the following reasons: (i) our distribution and power supply loans are typically amortizing loans that require scheduled principal payments over the life of the loan, whereas the debt securities issued under secured indentures and agreements typically have bullet maturities; (ii) distribution and power supply borrowers have the option to prepay their loans; and (iii) individual loans may become ineligible for various reasons, some of which may be temporary.
respective date. We provide additional information on our borrowings, includinglong-term debt below under the maturity profile, below insection “Liquidity Risk.” Refer to “Note 4—Loans—Pledging of Loans” for additional information related to pledged collateral. Also refer to “Note 6—Short-
Term Borrowings,”Risk” and “Note 7—Long-Term Debt,”Debt” and “Note 8—Subordinated Deferrable Debt” and “Note 9—Members’ Subordinated Certificates” for additional information on each of our debt product types.in this Report.
Equity
Table 1513 presents the components of total CFC equity and total equity as of May 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021.
Table 15:13: Equity
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | Change |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | |
Equity components: | | | | | | |
Membership fees and educational fund: | | | | | | |
Membership fees | | $ | 970 | | | $ | 968 | | | $ | 2 | |
Educational fund | | 2,417 | | | 2,157 | | | 260 | |
Total membership fees and educational fund | | 3,387 | | | 3,125 | | | 262 | |
Patronage capital allocated | | 954,988 | | | 923,970 | | | 31,018 | |
Members’ capital reserve | | 1,062,286 | | | 909,749 | | | 152,537 | |
Total allocated equity | | 2,020,661 | | | 1,836,844 | | | 183,817 | |
Unallocated net income (loss): | | | | | | |
Prior fiscal year-end cumulative derivative forward value losses(1) | | (461,162) | | | (1,079,739) | | | 618,577 | |
Year-to-date derivative forward value gains(1) | | 553,525 | | | 618,577 | | | (65,052) | |
Period-end cumulative derivative forward value gains (losses)(1) | | 92,363 | | | (461,162) | | | 553,525 | |
Other unallocated net loss | | (709) | | | (709) | | | — | |
Unallocated net income (loss) | | 91,654 | | | (461,871) | | | 553,525 | |
CFC retained equity | | 2,112,315 | | | 1,374,973 | | | 737,342 | |
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | | 2,258 | | | (25) | | | 2,283 | |
Total CFC equity | | 2,114,573 | | | 1,374,948 | | | 739,625 | |
Noncontrolling interests | | 27,396 | | | 24,931 | | | 2,465 | |
Total equity | | $ | 2,141,969 | | | $ | 1,399,879 | | | $ | 742,090 | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | Change |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | |
Membership fees and educational fund: | | | | | | |
Membership fees | | $ | 969 |
| | $ | 969 |
| | $ | — |
|
Educational fund | | 2,013 |
| | 1,976 |
| | 37 |
|
Total membership fees and educational fund | | 2,982 |
| | 2,945 |
| | 37 |
|
Patronage capital allocated | | 860,578 |
| | 811,493 |
| | 49,085 |
|
Members’ capital reserve | | 759,097 |
| | 687,785 |
| | 71,312 |
|
Total allocated equity | | 1,622,657 |
| | 1,502,223 |
| | 120,434 |
|
Unallocated net income (loss): | | | | | |
|
|
Prior year-end cumulative derivative forward value losses | | (30,831 | ) | | (332,525 | ) | | 301,694 |
|
Current year derivative forward value gains (losses)(1) | | (318,134 | ) | | 301,694 |
| | (619,828 | ) |
Current year-end cumulative derivative forward value losses | | (348,965 | ) | | (30,831 | ) | | (318,134 | ) |
Other unallocated net income (loss) | | 3,190 |
| | (5,603 | ) | | 8,793 |
|
Unallocated net loss | | (345,775 | ) | | (36,434 | ) | | (309,341 | ) |
CFC retained equity | | 1,276,882 |
| | 1,465,789 |
| | (188,907 | ) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | | (147 | ) | | 8,544 |
| | (8,691 | ) |
Total CFC equity | | 1,276,735 |
| | 1,474,333 |
| | (197,598 | ) |
Noncontrolling interests | | 27,147 |
| | 31,520 |
| | (4,373 | ) |
Total equity | | $ | 1,303,882 |
| | $ | 1,505,853 |
| | $ | (201,971 | ) |
________________________________________________________
(1)Represents derivative forward value gains (losses) for CFC only, as total CFC equity does not include the noncontrolling interests of the variable interest entities NCSC and RTFC, which we are required to consolidate. SeeWe present the consolidated total derivative forward value gains (losses) in Table 37 in the “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section below. Also, see “Note 15—16—Business Segments” for the statements of operations for CFC.
TotalThe increase in total equity decreased by $202of $742 million during fiscal year 2019 to $1,304$2,142 million as of May 31, 2019,2022 was attributable to our reported net lossincome of $151$799 million andfor fiscal year 2022, partially offset by the CFC Board of Directors’ authorized patronage capital retirement in July 2021 of $48 million$58 million.
Allocation and Retirement of Patronage Capital
We are subject to District of Columbia law governing cooperatives, under which CFC is required to make annual allocations of net earnings, if any, in August 2018.
In July 2019,accordance with the provisions of the District of Columbia statutes. District of Columbia cooperative law requires cooperatives to allocate net earnings to patrons, to a general reserve in an amount sufficient to maintain a balance of at least 50% of paid-up capital and to a cooperative educational fund, as well as permits additional allocations to board-approved reserves. District of Columbia cooperative law also requires that a cooperative’s net earnings be allocated to all patrons in proportion to their individual patronage and each patron’s allocation be distributed to the patron unless the patron agrees that the cooperative may retain its share as additional capital. Pursuant to these provisions, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocationis required to make annual allocations of fiscal year 2019 adjusted net income as follows: $97 million to members in the form of patronage capital; $71 million to the members’ capital reserve and $1 million to the cooperative educational fund. The amount of patronage capital allocated each year byearnings, if any. CFC’s Board of Directorsnet earnings for determining allocations is based on non-GAAP adjusted non-GAAP net income, which excludes the impact of derivative forward value gains (losses). We provide a reconciliation of our adjusted net income to our reported net income and an explanation of the adjustments below in “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
In May 2022, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of $1 million of net earnings for fiscal year 2022 to the cooperative educational fund. In July 2019,2022, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of fiscal year 2022 adjusted net income follows: $89 million to members in the form of patronage capital and $153 million to the members’ capital reserve. In July 2022, the CFC Board of Directors also authorized the retirement of patronage capital totaling $63$59 million, consisting of $48which $44 million which represented 50% of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2019,2022 and $15 million which represented the portion of the allocation from fiscal year 19941997 net earnings that has been held for 25 years pursuant to the CFC Board of DirectorsDirectors’ policy. We expect to return the $63authorized patronage capital retirement amount of $59 million to members in cash in the firstsecond quarter of fiscal year 2020.2023. The remaining portion of the allocated amountpatronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2022 will be retained by CFC for 25 years underpursuant to the guidelines adopted by the CFC Board of Directors in June 2009.
In May 2021, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of $1 million of net earnings for fiscal year 2021 to the cooperative educational fund. In July 2018,2021 the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of fiscal year 2021 adjusted net income as follows: $90 million to members in the form of patronage capital and $102 million to the members’ capital reserve. In July 2021, the CFC Board of Directors also authorized the retirement of patronage capital totaling $48$58 million, of which $45 million represented 50% of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2018.2021 and $13 million represented the portion of the allocation from fiscal year 1996 net earnings that has been held for 25 years pursuant to the CFC Board of Directors’ policy. This amount was returned to members in cash in
August 2018. September 2021. The remaining portion of the allocated amountpatronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2021 will be retained by CFC for 25 years underpursuant to the guidelines adopted by the CFC Board of Directors in June 2009.
The CFC Board of Directors is required to make annual allocations of adjusted net income, if any. CFC has made annual retirements of allocated net earningsearnings in 3942 of the last 4043 fiscal years; however,however, future retirements of allocated amounts are determined based on CFC’s financial condition. The CFC Board of Directors has the authority to change the current practice for allocating and retiring net earnings at any time, subject to applicable laws. See “Item 1. Business—Allocation and Retirement of Patronage Capital” for additional information.
|
| |
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTSENTERPRISE RISK MANAGEMENT |
In the ordinary course of business, we engage in financial transactions that are not presented on our consolidated balance sheets, or may be recorded on our consolidated balance sheets in amounts that are different from the full contract or notional amount of the transaction. Our off-balance sheet arrangements consist primarily of guarantees of member obligations and unadvanced loan commitments intended to meet the financial needs of our members.
Guarantees
We provide guarantees for certain contractual obligations of our members to assist them in obtaining various forms of financing. We use the same credit policies and monitoring procedures in providing guarantees as we do for loans and commitments. If a member defaults on its obligation, we are obligated to pay required amounts pursuant to our guarantees. Meeting our guarantee obligations satisfies the underlying obligation of our member systems and prevents the exercise of remedies by the guarantee beneficiary based upon a payment default by a member. In general, the member is required to repay any amount advanced by us with accrued interest, pursuant to the documents evidencing the member’s reimbursement obligation. Table 16 displays the notional amount of our outstanding guarantee obligations, by guarantee type and by company, as of May 31, 2019 and 2018.
Table 16: Guarantees Outstanding
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | Change |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | |
Guarantee type: | | | | | | |
Long-term tax-exempt bonds | | $ | 312,190 |
| | $ | 316,985 |
| | $ | (4,795 | ) |
Letters of credit | | 379,001 |
| | 343,970 |
| | 35,031 |
|
Other guarantees | | 146,244 |
| | 144,206 |
| | 2,038 |
|
Total | | $ | 837,435 |
| | $ | 805,161 |
| | $ | 32,274 |
|
| | | | | | |
Company: | | |
| | | | |
CFC | | $ | 826,117 |
| | $ | 793,156 |
| | $ | 32,961 |
|
NCSC | | 8,714 |
| | 10,431 |
| | (1,717 | ) |
RTFC | | 2,604 |
| | 1,574 |
| | 1,030 |
|
Total | | $ | 837,435 |
| | $ | 805,161 |
| | $ | 32,274 |
|
Of the total notional amount of our outstanding guarantee obligations of $837 million and $805 million as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, 55% and 57%, respectively, were secured by a mortgage lien on substantially all of the assets and future revenue of our member cooperatives for which we provide guarantees.
In addition to providing a guarantee on long-term tax-exempt bonds issued by member cooperatives totaling $312 million as of May 31, 2019, we also were the liquidity provider on $247 million of those tax-exempt bonds. As liquidity provider, we may be required to purchase bonds that are tendered or put by investors. Investors provide notice to the remarketing agent that they will tender or put a certain amount of bonds at the next interest rate reset date. If the remarketing agent is unable to sell such bonds to other investors by the next interest rate reset date, we have unconditionally agreed to purchase such bonds. We were not required to perform as liquidity provider pursuant to these obligations during fiscal year 2019 or 2018.
We had outstanding letters of credit for the benefit of our members totaling $379 million as of May 31, 2019. These letters of credit relate to obligations for which we may be required to advance funds based on various trigger events specified in the letter of credit agreements. If we are required to advance funds, the member is obligated to repay the advance amount and accrued interest to us. In addition to these letters of credit, we had master letter of credit facilities in place under which we may be required to issue letters of credit to third parties for the benefit of our members up to an additional $53 million as of May 31, 2019. All of our master letter of credit facilities as of May 31, 2019 were subject to material adverse change clauses at the time of issuance. Prior to issuing a letter of credit under these facilities, we confirm that there has been no material adverse change in the business or condition, financial or otherwise, of the borrower since the time the loan was approved and that the borrower is currently in compliance with the letter of credit terms and conditions.
Table 17 presents the maturities for each of the next five fiscal years and thereafter of the notional amount of our outstanding guarantee obligations of $837 million as of May 31, 2019.
Table 17: Maturities of Guarantee Obligations
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Outstanding Amount | | Maturities of Guarantee Obligations |
(Dollars in thousands) | | | 2020 | | 2021 | | 2022 | | 2023 | | 2024 | | Thereafter |
Guarantees | | $ | 837,435 |
| | $ | 246,143 |
| | $ | 133,015 |
| | $ | 30,882 |
| | $ | 159,059 |
| | $ | 31,162 |
| | $ | 237,174 |
|
We recorded a guarantee liability of $14 million and $11 million as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, for our guarantee and liquidity obligations associated with our members’ debt. We provide additional information about our guarantee obligations in “Note 13—Guarantees.”
Unadvanced Loan Commitments
Unadvanced loan commitments represent approved and executed loan contracts for which funds have not been advanced to borrowers. Our line of credit commitments include both contracts that are subject to material adverse change clauses and contracts that are not subject to material adverse change clauses, while our long-term loan commitments are typically subject to material adverse change clauses.
Table 18 displays the amount of unadvanced loan commitments, which consist of line of credit and long-term loan commitments, as of May 31, 2019 and 2018.
Table 18: Unadvanced Loan Commitments
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | Change |
| | 2019 | | 2018 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total | |
Line of credit commitments: | | | | | | | | | | |
Conditional(1) | | $ | 4,845,306 |
| | 37 | % | | $ | 4,835,434 |
| | 38 | % | | $ | 9,872 |
|
Unconditional(2) | | 2,943,616 |
| | 22 |
| | 2,857,350 |
| | 23 |
| | 86,266 |
|
Total line of credit unadvanced commitments | | 7,788,922 |
| | 59 |
| | 7,692,784 |
| | 61 |
| | 96,138 |
|
Total long-term loan unadvanced commitments(1) | | 5,448,636 |
|
| 41 |
| | 4,952,834 |
| | 39 |
| | 495,802 |
|
Total unadvanced loan commitments | | $ | 13,237,558 |
|
| 100 | % | | $ | 12,645,618 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 591,940 |
|
____________________________
(1)Represents amount related to facilities that are subject to material adverse change clauses.
(2)Represents amount related to facilities that are not subject to material adverse change clauses.
Table 19 presents the amount of unadvanced loan commitments, by loan type, as of May 31, 2019 and the maturities of the commitment amounts for each of the next five fiscal years and thereafter.
Table 19: Notional Maturities of Unadvanced Loan Commitments
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Available Balance | | Notional Maturities of Unadvanced Loan Commitments |
(Dollars in thousands) | | | 2020 | | 2021 | | 2022 | | 2023 | | 2024 | | Thereafter |
Line of credit | | $ | 7,788,922 |
| | $ | 3,998,036 |
| | $ | 908,628 |
| | $ | 488,017 |
| | $ | 1,391,887 |
| | $ | 872,813 |
| | $ | 129,541 |
|
Long-term loans | | 5,448,636 |
| | 389,799 |
| | 736,621 |
| | 1,404,204 |
| | 1,210,164 |
| | 1,694,441 |
| | 13,407 |
|
Total | | $ | 13,237,558 |
| | $ | 4,387,835 |
| | $ | 1,645,249 |
| | $ | 1,892,221 |
| | $ | 2,602,051 |
| | $ | 2,567,254 |
| | $ | 142,948 |
|
Unadvanced line of credit commitments accounted for 59% of total unadvanced loan commitments as of May 31, 2019, while unadvanced long-term loan commitments accounted for 41% of total unadvanced loan commitments. Unadvanced line of credit commitments are typically revolving facilities for periods not to exceed five years and generally serve as supplemental back-up liquidity to our borrowers. Historically, borrowers have not drawn the full commitment amount for line of credit facilities, and we have experienced a very low utilization rate on line of credit loan facilities regardless of whether or not we are obligated to fund the facility where a material adverse change exists.
Our unadvanced long-term loan commitments generally have a five-year draw period under which a borrower may advance funds prior to the expiration of the commitment. We expect that the majority of the long-term unadvanced loan commitments of $5,449 million will be advanced prior to the expiration of the commitment.
Because we historically have experienced a very low utilization rate on line of credit loan facilities, which account for the majority of our total unadvanced loan commitments, we believe the unadvanced loan commitment total of $13,238 million as of May 31, 2019 is not necessarily representative of our future funding requirements.
Unadvanced Loan Commitments—Conditional
The majority of our line of credit commitments and all of our unadvanced long-term loan commitments include material adverse change clauses. Unadvanced loan commitments subject to material adverse change clauses totaled $10,294 million and $9,789 million as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, and accounted for 78% and 77% of the combined total of unadvanced line of credit and long-term loan commitments as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. Prior to making advances on these facilities, we confirm that there has been no material adverse change in the borrower’s business or condition, financial or otherwise, since the time the loan was approved and confirm that the borrower is currently in compliance with loan terms and conditions. In some cases, the borrower’s access to the full amount of the facility is further constrained by use of proceeds restrictions, imposition of borrower-specific restrictions, or by additional conditions that must be met prior to advancing funds. Since we generally do not charge a fee for the borrower to have an unadvanced amount on a loan facility that is subject to a material adverse change clause, our borrowers tend to request amounts in excess of their immediate estimated loan requirements.
Unadvanced Loan Commitments—Unconditional
Unadvanced loan commitments not subject to material adverse change clauses at the time of each advance consisted of unadvanced committed lines of credit totaling $2,944 million and $2,857 million as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. For contracts not subject to a material adverse change clause, we are generally required to advance amounts on the committed facilities as long as the borrower is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the facility.
Syndicated loan facilities, where the pricing is set at a spread over a market index rate as agreed upon by all of the participating financial institutions based on market conditions at the time of syndication, accounted for 90% of unconditional line of credit commitments as of May 31, 2019. The remaining 10% represented unconditional committed line of credit loans, which under any new advance would be made at rates determined by us.
Table 20 presents the maturities for each of the next five fiscal years of the notional amount of unconditional committed lines of credit not subject to a material adverse change clause as of May 31, 2019.
Table 20: Maturities of Notional Amount of Unconditional Committed Lines of Credit
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Available Balance | | Notional Maturities of Unconditional Committed Lines of Credit |
(Dollars in thousands) | | | 2020 | | 2021 | | 2022 | | 2023 | | 2024 |
Committed lines of credit | | $ | 2,943,616 |
| | $ | 340,361 |
| | $ | 451,865 |
| | $ | 191,634 |
| | $ | 1,239,917 |
| | $ | 719,839 |
|
Overview
We face a variety of risks that can significantly affect our financial performance, liquidity, reputation and ability to meet the expectations of our members, investors and other stakeholders. As a financial services company, the major categories of risk exposures inherent in our business activities include credit risk, liquidity risk, market risk and operational risk. These risk categories are summarized below.
•Credit risk is the risk that a borrower or other counterparty will be unable to meet its obligations in accordance with agreed-upon terms.
•Liquidity risk is the risk that we will be unable to fund our operations and meet our contractual obligations or that we will be unable to fund new loans to borrowers at a reasonable cost and tenor in a timely manner.
•Market risk is the risk that changes in market variables, such as movements in interest rates, may adversely affect the match between the timing of the contractual maturities, re-pricing and prepayments of our financial assets and the related financial liabilities funding those assets.
•Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal controls, processes, systems, human error or external events.events, including natural disasters or public health emergencies, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic. Operational risk also includes cybersecurity risk, compliance risk, fiduciary risk, reputational risk and litigation risk.
Effective risk management is critical to our overall operations and to achieving our primary objective of providing cost-based financial products to our rural electric members while maintaining the sound financial results required for investment-grade credit ratings on our rated debt instruments. Accordingly, we have a risk-management framework that is intended to govern the principal risks we face in conducting our business and the aggregate amount of risk we are willing to accept, referred to as risk appetite and risk guidelines, in the context of CFC’s mission and strategic objectives and initiatives.
Risk-Management Framework
Our risk-managementEnterprise Risk Management (“ERM”) framework consists of a defined policies, procedurespolicy and risk tolerances that are intendedprocess for measuring, assessing and responding to alignkey risks in alignment with CFC’s mission. The CFCmission and CFC’s Board of Directors is responsibleDirector’s strategic objectives. The board of directors has responsibility for risk governance by approving the enterprise risk-managementoversight and strategic direction of the ERM framework and providing oversight on risk policies, risk appetitehas adopted a comprehensive risk-management policy that describes the roles and our performance against established goals.responsibilities of the board and management within this framework for identifying and managing risks. In fulfilling its risk governance responsibility,risk-management oversight duties, the CFC Boardboard of Directorsdirectors receives periodic reports on business activities and risk-management activities from management. TheThroughout the year at its periodic meetings, the CFC Board of Directors reviews CFC’s risk profileimportant trends and management’s assessment of thoseemerging developments across key risks throughout the year at its periodic meetings.as assessed, measured and evaluated by management. The board also establishes CFC’s loan policies and has established a Loan Committee of the board comprising no fewer than 10 directors that reviews the performance of the loan portfolio in accordance with those policies. For additional information about the role of the CFC Board of Directors in risk governance and oversight, see “Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.”
Management is responsibleprimarily accountable for execution of the risk-management framework, risk policy formationERM responsibilities and daily management of the risks associated with our business. Management executes its responsibility by establishing processes for identifying, measuring, assessing, managing, monitoring and reporting risks. Management and operating groups maintain policies and procedures, specific to each major risk category, to identify and measure our primary risk exposures at the transaction, obligor and portfolio levels and ensure that our exposures remain within prescribed limits. Management also is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls to mitigate key risks. We have a number of management-level risk oversight committees across the organization and groups within the organization that have a defined set of authorities and responsibilities specific to one or more risk types, including the Corporate Credit Committee, Credit Risk Management
group, Treasury group, Asset Liability Committee, Investment Management Committee, Corporate Compliance, Internal Audit group and Disclosure Committee. TheseManagement provides reports to the board of directors at each regularly scheduled board meeting, and more frequently as requested by the board of directors, relating to, among other things, the ongoing progress of managing risk oversight committeesat CFC given the ERM framework; management’s responses for the critical business risks identified during the risk assessment process and groups collectively help management facilitate enterprise-wide understandingthe status of any gaps or deficiencies; and monitoring of CFC’s risk profile and the control processes with respect to our inherent risks. Management and the risk oversight committees periodically report actual results, significant current andtrends, as well as emerging risks initiatives and risk-management concerns to the CFC Board of Directors.opportunities.
Our loan portfolio, which represents the largest component of assets on our balance sheet, and guarantees accountaccounts for the substantial majority of our credit risk exposure. We also engage in certain non-lending activities that may give rise to counterparty credit and counterparty settlement risk, including the purchase of investment securities andsuch as entering into derivative transactions to manage interest rate risk. Our primary credit exposure is to rural electric cooperatives that provide essential electric services to end-users, the majority of which are residential customers. We also have a limited portfolio of loans to not-for-profitrisk and for-profit telecommunication companies.purchasing investment securities.
Credit Risk Management
We manage portfolio and borrower credit risk related to our loan portfolio consistent with credit policies established by the CFC Board of Directors and through credit underwriting, approval and monitoring processes and practices adopted by management. Our board-established credit policies include guidelines regarding the types of credit products we offer, limits on credit we extend to individual borrowers, approval authorities delegated to management, and use of syndications and loan sales. We maintain an internal risk rating system in which we assign a rating to each borrower and credit facility. We review and update the risk ratings at least annually. Assigned risk ratings inform our credit approval, borrower monitoring and portfolio review processes. Our Corporate Credit Committee approves individual credit actions within its own authority and together with our Credit Risk Management group, establishes standards for credit underwriting, oversees credits deemed to be higher risk, reviews assigned risk ratings for accuracy, and monitors the overall credit quality and performance statistics of our loan portfolio.
Loan Portfolio Credit Risk
Our primary credit exposure is loans to rural electric cooperatives, which provide essential electric services to end-users, the majority of which are residential customers. We also have a limited portfolio of loans to not-for-profit and for-profit telecommunication companies. As a member-owned finance cooperative, CFC’s principal focus is to provide funding to its rural electric utility cooperative members to assist them in acquiring, constructing and operating electric distribution systems, power supply systems and related facilities. Loans outstanding to electric utility organizations totaled $29,584 million and $27,995 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, representing 98% and 99% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. The remaining loans outstanding in our loan portfolio were to RTFC members,
affiliates and associates in the telecommunications industry sector. The substantial majority of loans to our borrowers are long-term fixed-rate loans with terms of up to 35 years. Long-term fixed-rate loans accounted for 90% of total loans outstanding as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Because we lend primarily to our rural electric utility cooperative members, we have had a loan portfolio inherently subject to single-industry and single-obligor credit concentration risk since our inception in 1969. We historically, however, have experienced limited defaults and losses in our electric utility loan portfolio due to several factors. First, the majority of our electric cooperative borrowers operate in states where electric cooperatives are not subject to rate regulation. Thus, they are able to make rate adjustments to pass along increased costs to the end customer without first obtaining state regulatory approval, allowing them to cover operating costs and generate sufficient earnings and cash flows to service their debt obligations. Second, electric cooperatives face limited competition, as they tend to operate in exclusive territories not serviced by public investor-owned utilities. Third, electric cooperatives typically are consumer-owned, not-for-profit entities that provide an essential service to end-users, the majority of which are residential customers. As not-for-profit entities, rural electric cooperatives, unlike investor-owned utilities, generally are eligible to apply for assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) and states to help recover from major disasters or emergencies. Fourth, electric cooperatives tend to adhere to a conservative core business strategy model that has historically resulted in a relatively stable, resilient operating environment and overall strong financial performance and credit strength for the electric cooperative network. Finally, we generally lend to our members on a senior secured basis, which reduces the risk of loss in the event of a borrower default.
Below we provide information on the credit risk profile of our loan portfolio, including security provisions, loancredit concentration, credit performancequality indicators and our allowance for loancredit losses.
Security Provisions
Except when providing line of credit loans, we generally lend to our members on a senior secured basis. Long-term loans are generally secured on parity with other secured lenders (primarily RUS), if any, by all assets and revenue of the borrower with exceptions typical in utility mortgages. Line of credit loans are generally unsecured. In addition to the collateral pledged to secure our loans, distribution and power supply borrowers also are required to set rates charged to customers to achieve certain specified financial ratios.
Table 2114 presents, by loan typelegal entity and member class and by company, the amount and percentage ofloan type, secured and unsecured loans in our loan portfolio as of May 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021. Of our total loans outstanding, 92% were secured and 8% were unsecured as of May 31, 2019. In comparison, of our total loans outstanding, 93% were secured and 7% were unsecured as of both May 31, 2018.2022 and 2021.
Table 21: 14: Loans—Loan Portfolio Security Profile(1)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2022 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Secured | | % of Total | | Unsecured | | % of Total | | Total |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 22,405,486 | | | 94 | % | | $ | 1,438,756 | | | 6 | % | | $ | 23,844,242 | |
Power supply | | 4,455,098 | | | 91 | | | 446,672 | | 9 | | | 4,901,770 | |
Statewide and associate | | 83,759 | | | 66 | | | 43,104 | | 34 | | | 126,863 | |
Total CFC | | 26,944,343 | | | 93 | | | 1,928,532 | | | 7 | | | 28,872,875 | |
NCSC | | 689,887 | | | 97 | | | 20,991 | | | 3 | | | 710,878 | |
RTFC | | 454,985 | | | 97 | | | 12,616 | | | 3 | | | 467,601 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 28,089,215 | | | 93 | | | $ | 1,962,139 | | | 7 | | | $ | 30,051,354 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate | | $ | 26,731,763 | | | 99 | % | | $ | 220,609 | | | 1 | % | | $ | 26,952,372 | |
Variable-rate | | 817,866 | | | 100 | | | 2,335 | | | — | | | 820,201 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total long-term loans | | 27,549,629 | | | 99 | | | 222,944 | | | 1 | | | 27,772,573 | |
Line of credit loans | | 539,586 | | | 24 | | | 1,739,195 | | | 76 | | | 2,278,781 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 28,089,215 | | | 93 | | | $ | 1,962,139 | | | 7 | | | $ | 30,051,354 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | May 31, 2021 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | (Dollars in thousands) | | Secured | | % of Total | | Unsecured | | % of Total | | Total |
Member class: | | Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | CFC: | |
Distribution | | Distribution | | $ | 20,702,657 | | | 94 | % | | $ | 1,324,766 | | | 6 | % | | $ | 22,027,423 | |
Power supply | | Power supply | | 4,458,311 | | | 86 | | | 696,001 | | 14 | | | 5,154,312 | |
Statewide and associate | | Statewide and associate | | 88,004 | | | 83 | | | 18,117 | | 17 | | | 106,121 | |
Total CFC | | Total CFC | | 25,248,972 | | | 93 | | | 2,038,884 | | | 7 | | | 27,287,856 | |
NCSC | | NCSC | | 662,782 | | | 94 | | | 44,086 | | | 6 | | | 706,868 | |
RTFC | | RTFC | | 399,717 | | | 95 | | | 20,666 | | | 5 | | | 420,383 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 26,311,471 | | | 93 | | | $ | 2,103,636 | | | 7 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | |
| Loan type: | | Loan type: | |
Long-term loans: | | Long-term loans: | |
Fixed-rate | | Fixed-rate | | $ | 25,278,805 | | | 99 | % | | $ | 235,961 | | | 1 | % | | $ | 25,514,766 | |
Variable-rate | | Variable-rate | | 655,675 | | | 100 | | | 2,904 | | | — | | | 658,579 | |
| Total long-term loans | | Total long-term loans | | 25,934,480 | | | 99 | | | 238,865 | | | 1 | | | 26,173,345 | |
Line of credit loans | | Line of credit loans | | 376,991 | | | 17 | | | 1,864,771 | | | 83 | | | 2,241,762 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 26,311,471 | | | 93 | | | $ | 2,103,636 | | | 7 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | |
| | | | May 31, 2019 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Secured | | % of Total | | Unsecured | | % of Total | | Total | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term fixed-rate loans | | $ | 22,674,330 |
| | 98 | % | | $ | 419,923 |
| | 2 | % | | $ | 23,094,253 |
| |
Long-term variable-rate loans | | 1,058,434 |
| | 99 |
| | 8,446 |
| | 1 |
| | 1,066,880 |
| |
Total long-term loans | | 23,732,764 |
| | 98 |
| | 428,369 |
| | 2 |
| | 24,161,133 |
| |
Line of credit loans | | 121,741 |
| | 7 |
| | 1,622,790 |
| | 93 |
| | 1,744,531 |
| |
Total loans outstanding | | $ | 23,854,505 |
| | 92 |
| | $ | 2,051,159 |
| | 8 |
| | $ | 25,905,664 |
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Company: | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC | | $ | 22,861,414 |
| | 92 | % | | $ | 1,956,262 |
| | 8 | % | | $ | 24,817,676 |
| |
NCSC | | 664,618 |
| | 89 |
| | 78,270 |
| | 11 |
| | 742,888 |
| |
RTFC | | 328,473 |
| | 95 |
| | 16,627 |
| | 5 |
| | 345,100 |
| |
Total loans outstanding | | $ | 23,854,505 |
| | 92 |
| | $ | 2,051,159 |
| | 8 |
| | $ | 25,905,664 |
| |
|
____________________________ |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2018 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Secured | | % of Total | | Unsecured | | % of Total | | Total |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term fixed-rate loans | | $ | 22,220,087 |
| | 98 | % | | $ | 476,098 |
| | 2 | % | | $ | 22,696,185 |
|
Long-term variable-rate loans | | 996,970 |
| | 96 |
| | 42,521 |
| | 4 |
| | 1,039,491 |
|
Total long-term loans | | 23,217,057 |
| | 98 |
| | 518,619 |
| | 2 |
| | 23,735,676 |
|
Line of credit loans | | 69,097 |
| | 5 |
| | 1,362,721 |
| | 95 |
| | 1,431,818 |
|
Total loans outstanding | | $ | 23,286,154 |
| | 93 |
| | $ | 1,881,340 |
| | 7 |
| | $ | 25,167,494 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Company: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC | | $ | 22,233,592 |
| | 93 | % | | $ | 1,784,327 |
| | 7 | % | | $ | 24,017,919 |
|
NCSC | | 703,396 |
| | 89 |
| | 83,061 |
| | 11 |
| | 786,457 |
|
RTFC | | 349,166 |
| | 96 |
| | 13,952 |
| | 4 |
| | 363,118 |
|
Total loans outstanding | | $ | 23,286,154 |
| | 93 |
| | $ | 1,881,340 |
| | 7 |
| | $ | 25,167,494 |
|
____________________________
(1)Represents the unpaid principal amountbalance, net of charge-offs and recoveries of loans as of the end of each period presented and excludesperiod. Excludes unamortized deferred loan origination costs of $11$12 million as of both May 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021.
As part of our strategy in managing our credit risk exposure, we entered into a long-term standby purchase commitment agreement with Farmer Mac in fiscal year 2016. Under this agreement, we may designate certain loans to be covered under the commitment, as approved by Farmer Mac, and in the event any such loan later goes into payment default for at least 90 days, upon request by us, Farmer Mac must purchase such loan at par value. The outstanding principal balance of loans covered under this agreement totaled $619 million as of May 31, 2019, compared with $660 million as of May 31, 2018. No loans have been put to Farmer Mac for purchase pursuant to this agreement. Our credit exposure is also mitigated by long-term loans guaranteed by RUS. Guaranteed RUS loans totaled $154 million and $161 million as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively.
Credit ConcentrationQuality
ConcentrationsWe believe the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio remained strong as of May 31, 2022. Historically, we have had limited defaults and losses on loans in our electric utility loan portfolio largely because of the essential nature of the service provided by electric utility cooperatives as well as other factors, such as limited rate regulation and competition, which we discuss further in the section “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk.” In addition, we generally lend to members on a senior secured basis, which reduces the risk of loss in the event of a borrower default. Loans outstanding to electric utility organizations of $29,584 million and $27,995 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, represented approximately 98% and 99% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. Of our total loans outstanding, 93% were secured as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
We had loans to three borrowers totaling $228 million classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2022. In comparison we had loans to four borrowers totaling $237 million classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2021. Nonperforming loans represented 0.76% and 0.84% of total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The reduction in nonperforming loans of $9 million during fiscal year 2022 was due in part to our receipt during fiscal year 2022 of full payment of all amounts due on nonperforming loans to two RTFC borrowers totaling $9 million. In addition, we have
continued to receive payments on the remaining outstanding nonperforming loan to a CFC electric power supply borrower, including payments totaling $29 million during fiscal year 2022, which reduced the balance of this loan to $114 million as of May 31, 2022, from $143 million as of May 31, 2021. These reductions were partially offset by the classification during the fiscal quarter ended May 31, 2022 (the “fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022”) of the $28 million loan outstanding to Brazos Sandy Creek Electric Cooperative Inc. (“Brazos Sandy Creek”) as nonperforming following its bankruptcy filing, as discussed below.
Loans outstanding to Brazos, which filed for bankruptcy in March 2021 due to its exposure to elevated wholesale electric power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex, accounted for $86 million and $85 million of our total nonperforming loans as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Brazos is not permitted to make scheduled loan payments without approval of the bankruptcy court. As a result, we have not received payments from Brazos since March 2021, and its loans outstanding to us were delinquent as of each respective date.
On March 18, 2022, Brazos Sandy Creek, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Brazos and a CFC Texas-based electric power supply borrower, filed for bankruptcy following the filing of a motion by Brazos to reject its power purchase agreement with Brazos Sandy Creek as part of Brazos’ bankruptcy proceedings. A Chapter 7 Trustee has been appointed, and the Chapter 7 Trustee was approved by the bankruptcy court to operate Brazos Sandy Creek as a going concern. CFC had a secured loan outstanding to Brazos Sandy Creek totaling $28 million as of May 31, 2022, which, upon notification of the bankruptcy filing by Brazos Sandy Creek, we classified as nonperforming during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022. Brazos Sandy Creek’s loan outstanding of $28 million was delinquent as of May 31, 2022 and on nonaccrual status as of this date. Aggregate loans outstanding to Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek totaled $114 million as of May 31, 2022, of which $49 million were secured and $65 million were unsecured. Prior to Brazos’ and Brazos Sandy Creek’s bankruptcy filings in March 2021 and March 2022, respectively, we had not experienced any defaults or charge-offs in our electric utility and telecommunications loan portfolios since fiscal years 2013 and 2017, respectively.
Our allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio decreased to $68 million and 0.22%, respectively, as of May 31, 2022, from $86 million and 0.30%, respectively, as of May 31, 2021. The decrease in the allowance for credit losses of $18 million reflected a decrease in the collective and asset-specific allowance of $14 million and $4 million, respectively. The collective allowance decrease of $14 million was attributable to an improvement in Rayburn’s credit risk profile following Rayburn’s successful completion of a securitization transaction in February 2022 and subsequent payment in full of its obligations to ERCOT and a significant reduction in loans outstanding to Rayburn, as discussed above. The asset-specific allowance decrease of $4 million stemmed from the combined impact of the elimination of an asset-specific allowance attributable to nonperforming loans totaling $9 million that were paid in full during the second quarter of fiscal year 2022 and the decrease of an asset-specific allowance for a nonperforming CFC power supply borrower, attributable to loan payments received on this loan, partially offset by the addition of an asset-specific allowance for Brazos Sandy Creek due to its bankruptcy filing, as discussed above.
As a result of Rayburn’s payment in full of its February 2021 polar vortex-related outstanding obligations to ERCOT, we believe our exposure to the significant adverse financial impact on some electric utilities from the surge in wholesale power costs in Texas during the February 2021 polar vortex is now limited to loans outstanding to Brazos and its wholly-owned subsidiary Brazos Sandy Creek.
We discuss our methodology for estimating the allowance for credit losses in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” of this Report. We also provide additional information on the credit quality of our loan portfolio and the allowance for credit losses below in the sections “Critical Accounting Estimates” and “Credit Risk—Allowance for Credit Losses” and “Note 4—Loans” and “Note 5—Allowance for Credit Losses” of this Report.
Financing Activity
We issue debt primarily to fund growth in our loan portfolio. As such, our debt outstanding generally increases and decreases in response to member loan demand. Total debt outstanding increased $1,321 million, or 5%, to $28,747 million as of May 31, 2022, due to borrowings to fund the increase in loans to members. Outstanding dealer commercial paper of $1,025 million as of May 31, 2022 was within our quarter-end target range. Our goal is to maintain dealer commercial paper balance at each quarter-end within a range of $1,000 million and $1,500 million. We provide additional information on our financing activities during fiscal year 2022 in the below in section “Consolidated Balance Sheet Analysis—Debt” of this Report.
On December 13, 2021, S&P affirmed CFC’s credit ratings and stable outlook under its revised criteria and updated methodology for rating financial institutions published on December 9, 2021. On December 16, 2021, Moody’s affirmed CFC’s credit ratings and stable outlook. On February 4, 2022, Fitch issued a credit ratings report review of CFC in which Fitch affirmed CFC’s credit ratings and stable outlook. Table 31 presents our credit ratings for each CFC debt product type as of May 31, 2022, which remain unchanged as of the date of this Report, in the below section “Liquidity Risk—Credit Ratings” of this Report.
Liquidity
Our primary sources of funds include member loan principal repayments, securities held in our investment portfolio, committed bank revolving lines of credit, committed loan facilities under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program, revolving note purchase agreements with Farmer Mac and proceeds from debt issuances to our members and in the public capital markets. Although as a non-bank financial institution we are not subject to regulatory liquidity requirements, we monitor our liquidity and funding positions on an ongoing basis and assess our ability to meet our scheduled debt obligations and other cash flow requirements based on point-in-time metrics as well as forward-looking projections. Our liquidity and funding assessment takes into consideration amounts available under existing liquidity sources, the expected rollover of member short-term investments and scheduled loan principal repayment amounts, as well as our continued ability to access the private placement and public capital markets.
As of May 31, 2022, our available liquidity totaled $6,797 million, consisting of (i) cash and cash equivalents of $154 million; (ii) investments in debt securities with an aggregate fair value of $566 million, which is subject to changes based on market fluctuations; (iii) up to $2,597 million available under committed bank revolving line of credit agreements; (iv) up to $1,075 million available under committed loan facilities under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program; and (v) up to $2,405 million available under a revolving note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac, subject to market conditions. In addition to our existing available liquidity of $6,797 million as of May 31, 2022, we expect to receive $1,479 million from scheduled long-term loan principal payments over the next 12 months.
Debt scheduled to mature over the next 12 months totaled $6,894 million as of May 31, 2022, consisting of short-term borrowings of $4,981 million and long-term and subordinated debt of $1,913 million. The short-term borrowings scheduled maturity amount of $4,981 million consists of member investments of $3,956 million and dealer commercial paper of $1,025 million. The long-term and subordinated scheduled debt obligations over the next 12 months of $1,913 million consist of debt maturities and scheduled debt payment amounts.
Our available liquidity of $6,797 million as of May 31, 2022, was $97 million below our total scheduled debt obligations over the next 12 months of $6,894 million. We believe we can continue to roll over our member short-term investments of $3,956 million as of May 31, 2022, based on our expectation that our members will continue to reinvest their excess cash in short-term investment products offered by CFC. Our members historically have maintained a relatively stable level of short-term investments in CFC in the form of commercial paper, select notes, daily liquidity fund notes and medium-term notes. Member short-term investments in CFC have averaged $3,584 million over the last 12 fiscal quarter-end reporting periods. In addition, we expect to receive $1,479 million from scheduled long-term loan principal payments over the next 12 months. Our available liquidity of $6,797 million as of May 31, 2022 was $3,859 million in excess of, or 2.3 times, our total scheduled debt obligations, excluding member short-term investments, over the next 12 months of $2,938 million.
We expect to continue accessing the dealer commercial paper market as a cost-effective means of satisfying our incremental short-term liquidity needs. Although the intra-period amount of dealer commercial paper outstanding may exist whenfluctuate based on our liquidity requirements, our intent is to manage our short-term wholesale funding risk by maintaining dealer commercial paper outstanding at each quarter-end within a range of $1,000 million and $1,500 million. Maintaining our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements and continuing to be in compliance with the covenants of these agreements serve to mitigate our rollover risk, as we can draw on these facilities, if necessary, to repay dealer or member commercial paper that cannot be refinanced with similar debt. In addition, under master repurchase agreements we have with counterparties, we can obtain short-term funding in secured borrowing transactions by selling investment-grade corporate debt securities from our investment securities portfolio subject to an obligation to repurchase the same or similar securities at an agreed-upon price and date.
The issuance of long-term debt, which represents the most significant component of our funding, allows us to reduce our reliance on short-term borrowings, as well as effectively manage our refinancing and interest rate risk. We expect to continue to issue debt in the private placement and public capital markets to meet our funding needs and believe that we have sufficient sources of liquidity to meet our debt obligations and support our operations over the next 12 months.
We provide additional information on our liquidity profile and our primary sources and uses of funds, including projected amounts, by quarter, over each of the next six fiscal quarters through the quarter ending November 30, 2023, in the below section “Liquidity Risk” of this Report.
COVID-19
We believe that the COVID-19 pandemic has not adversely affected our primary objective of providing our members with the credit products they need to fund their operations and that we have been able to successfully navigate the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic to date. Our electric utility cooperative borrowers operate in a sector identified by the U.S. government as one of the 16 critical infrastructure sectors because the nature of the services provided in these sectors is considered essential and vital in supporting and maintaining the overall functioning of the U.S. economy. Historically, the utility sector in which our electric utility borrowers operate has been resilient to economic downturns. To date, we believe that the pandemic has not had a significant negative impact on the overall financial performance of our members. We also believe that the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio has not been adversely affected by market, economic and other disruptions caused by the pandemic, as we have not experienced any delinquencies in scheduled loan payments or received requests for payment deferrals from our borrowers due to the pandemic.
CFC has been able to maintain business continuity throughout the pandemic and has experienced no pandemic-related employee furloughs or layoffs. We have remote-work options available for most employees while also providing for in- person collaboration at our headquarters in Loudoun County, Virginia, as we believe this working model allows CFC to provide the highest quality of service and deliver more effectively on our member-focused mission. Effective March 2, 2022, we lifted our mask requirement at CFC’s headquarters for vaccinated employees based on the CDC’s updated guidance and the COVID-19 Community Level low classification for Loudoun County at that time. We plan to continue to monitor and update our practices in response to changes in the COVID-19 workplace safety and health standards established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) and Virginia as they relate to Loudoun County and guidance provided by the CDC.
Although most health and safety restrictions in response to COVID-19 have been lifted, we cannot predict the potential future impact that the COVID-19 pandemic may have on our operations and financial performance, or the specific ways the pandemic may uniquely impact our members. We provide additional information on actions taken in response to the pandemic to protect the safety and health of our employees under “Item 1. Business—Human Capital Management” in this Report. We discuss the potential adverse impact of natural disasters, including weather-related events such as the February 2021 polar vortex, and widespread health emergencies, such as COVID-19, on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity under “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Operations and Business Risks” in this Report.
Electric Cooperative Industry Trends and Developments
We believe there are emerging developments and trends in the electric cooperative sector that may present opportunities as well as challenges for our electric cooperative members. These trends include (i) expanded investments by some electric cooperatives to deploy broadband services to their members; (ii) inflation and supply chain disruptions; (iii) an increased focus on enhancing electric system resiliency and reliability; (iv) evolving relationships between some electric cooperative power supply systems and electric cooperative distribution systems to increase investments in renewable power supply; and (v) growing support of beneficial electrification strategies to reduce overall carbon emissions, while also providing benefits to cooperative members.
Expanded Investments to Deploy Broadband Services
Many rural electric distribution cooperatives have made or are making infrastructure investments that include building fiber optic lines to improve electric grid system reliability, efficiency and cost savings, as fiber operations offers enhanced communication to monitor electric systems, identify outages and speed electric restoration. Some of these electric
cooperatives are leveraging these fiber assets to offer access to broadband services, either directly or by partnering with local telecommunication companies and others, to the communities they serve. We are currently aware of 185 broadband projects by different CFC member cooperatives, and we financed or are financing 112 of these 185 broadband projects. Capital expenditures for the completion of these 185 broadband projects are expected to total approximately $9,632 million. We believe that the capital expenditures for the completion of the broadband projects that we financed or are financing will total approximately $3,985 million. Our aggregate loans outstanding to CFC electric distribution cooperative members relating to broadband projects, which we started tracking in October 2017, increased to an estimated $1,647 million as of May 31, 2022, from approximately $854 million as of May 31, 2021. The three states with the largest CFC loans outstanding for broadband projects were Oklahoma, Indiana and Arkansas as of May 31, 2022, and broadband loans outstanding for these states totaled $205 million, $191 million and $155 million, respectively, as of this date. Many of these broadband projects are also financially supported by various states and the federal government, which reduces the credit risk for CFC and the investment risk for our electric cooperative members. We expect our member electric cooperatives to continue in their efforts to expand broadband access to unserved and underserved communities.
Inflation and Supply Chain Disruptions
Many rural electric cooperatives are experiencing increasing cost in power supply, labor and materials. Power supply cost for many cooperatives is increasingly volatile based on natural gas and coal market pricing. For example, according to the Economic News Release from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics published on July 13, 2022, the index for natural gas increased 38.4% over the last 12 months, the largest increase since the period ending October 2005. In addition to increasing material cost, supply chain disruptions have extended delivery times for utility hardware and are causing project timelines to be extended as well. Labor cost and competition for employees has increased for some cooperatives due to labor shortages.
Increased Focus on Enhancing Electric System Resiliency and Reliability
We have observed an increase in capital investments by electric cooperatives to proactively strengthen existing electric systems as well as replace systems in the aftermath of damages from recent weather-related incidents, including hurricanes and winter storms. We believe that the adverse impact on electric systems from weather-related incidents and wildfires has resulted in a heightened awareness by electric cooperatives of the need to focus attention on making infrastructure upgrades to improve both the resiliency and reliability of electric systems.
Evolving Cooperative Focus on Clean Energy Supply Investments
We also have observed that many electric power supply and electric distribution cooperatives are increasingly focused on efforts to identify potential opportunities to increase investments in renewable power supply and storage. This includes both on-balance sheet construction of renewable generation and off-balance sheet acquisition of renewable power through power purchase agreements. According to the NRECA, electric cooperatives more than tripled their renewable capacity from 3.9 gigawatts to more than 13 gigawatts from 2010 to 2021, including adding 1.4 gigawatts of renewable capacity in 2021 alone.
Growing Support for Beneficial Electrification
Rural electric cooperatives have become increasingly supportive of beneficial electrification, which refers to the replacement of fossil-fuel powered systems with electrical ones in a way that reduces overall emissions, while providing benefits to the environment and to households. The increased support among electric cooperatives reflects an expectation that beneficial electrification will result in increased sales, while also saving money for members and reducing carbon emission.
We believe the above trends and current investment priorities of our electric cooperative members will require reliable, affordable sources of funding and may result in a steady demand for capital from CFC.
Outlook
As further described below in the “Liquidity Risk—Projected Near-Term Sources and Uses of Funds” section, we currently anticipate net long-term loan growth of $1,150 million over the next 12 months. On March 16, 2022, the Federal Open
Market Committee (“FOMC”) of the Federal Reserve raised the target range for the federal funds rate by 0.25% to a range of 0.25% to 0.50%, the first rate increase since December 2018. The FOMC further raised the target range for the federal funds rate at each of its meetings held in May, June and July 2022, with the federal funds rate reaching a target range of 2.25% to 2.50%. The FOMC also signaled an expectation of ongoing increases in the federal funds rate at each of its remaining three meetings in 2022, and pointed to a consensus target rate of 3.40% by December 31, 2022, an increase from its March 2022 estimated target rate of 1.90%, due to an increase in inflation projections. The yield curve has flattened throughout 2022, was briefly inverted in late March 2022 and again in June and July 2022. The consensus market outlook for interest rates as of the second half of June 2022 pointed to rising interest rates across the yield curve, with the yield curve remaining flat or inverted over the remainder of 2022. Based on this yield curve forecast, we anticipate a decrease in our reported net interest income, reported net interest yield and adjusted net interest yield over the next 12 months relative to the prior 12-month period ended May 31, 2022. However, we expect a slight increase in our adjusted net interest income over the next 12 months relative to the prior 12-month period ended May 31, 2022, due to an anticipated reduction in our derivative net periodic cash settlements expense as short-term interest rates rise.
We anticipate a slight decrease in our adjusted net income and adjusted TIER over the next 12 months. While our goal is to maintain an adjusted debt-to-equity ratio of approximately 6.00-to-1, we expect that our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio will remain near the current level due to the anticipated loan growth. As discussed above, we are subject to earnings volatility, often significant, because we do not apply hedge accounting to our interest rate swaps. Therefore, the periodic unrealized fluctuations in the fair value of our interest rate swaps are recorded in our earnings. The variances in our earnings between periods are generally attributable to significant shifts in recorded unrealized derivative forward value gain and loss amounts. We exclude the impact of unrealized derivative forward fair value gains and losses from our non-GAAP adjusted measures.
We are unable to provide a reconciliation of our projected adjusted net income, adjusted TIER and adjusted debt-to-equity ratio to the most directly comparable GAAP measures or directional guidance for the most directly comparable GAAP measures on a forward-looking basis without unreasonable effort due to the significant shifts in the unrealized derivative forward value gains and losses recorded each period. The majority of our swaps are long-term, with an average remaining life of approximately 15 years as of May 31, 2022. We can reasonably estimate the realized net periodic derivative cash settlement amounts loanedover the next 12 months for our interest rate swaps, which are typically based on the 3-month LIBOR and the fixed rate of the swap. In contrast, the unrealized periodic derivative forward value gains and losses are largely based on future expected changes in longer-term interest rates, which we are unable to accurately predict for each reporting period over the next 12 months. Because unrealized periodic derivative forward value gain and loss amounts are a key driver of changes in our earnings between periods, this unavailable information is likely to have a significant impact on our reported net income, TIER and debt-to-equity ratio, which represent the most directly comparable GAAP measures. We provide reconciliations of our non-GAAP adjusted net income, adjusted TIER and adjusted debt-to-equity ratio to the most directly comparable GAAP measures for each reporting period included in this Report in the section “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.” These reconciliations illustrate the potential significant impact that unrealized derivative forward value gains and losses could have on our future reported net income, reported TIER and reported adjusted debt-to-equity ratio.
| | |
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES |
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make a number of judgments, estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets, liabilities, income and expenses in our consolidated financial statements. Understanding our accounting policies and the extent to which we use management’s judgment and estimates in applying these policies is integral to understanding our financial statements. We provide a discussion of our significant accounting policies in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.”
Certain accounting estimates are considered critical because they involve significant judgments and assumptions about highly complex and inherently uncertain matters, and the use of reasonably different estimates and assumptions could have a material impact on our results of operations or financial condition. The determination of the allowance for expected credit losses over the remaining expected life of the loans in our loan portfolio involves a significant degree of management judgment and level of estimation uncertainty. As such, we have identified our accounting policy governing the estimation of the allowance for credit losses as a critical accounting estimate. Management established policies and control procedures intended to ensure that the methodology used for determining our allowance for credit losses, including any judgments and assumptions made as part of such method, are well-controlled and applied consistently from period to period. We evaluate
our critical accounting estimates and judgments required by our policies on an ongoing basis and update them as necessary based on changing conditions. We describe our allowance methodology and process for estimating the allowance for credit losses under “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—Allowance for Credit Losses—Loan Portfolio—Current Methodology.”
Upon our adoption of CECL on June 1, 2020, we are required to maintain an allowance based on a current estimate of credit losses that are expected to occur over the remaining life of the loans in our portfolio. The methods utilized to estimate the allowance for credit losses, key assumptions and quantitative and qualitative information considered by management in determining the appropriate allowance for credit losses is discussed in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.”
Key inputs, such as our historical loss data and third-party default data, that we use in determining the appropriate allowance for credit losses are more readily quantifiable, while other inputs, such as our internally assigned borrower risk ratings that are intended to assess a borrower’s capacity to meet its financial obligations and provide information on the probability of default, require more qualitative judgment. Degrees of imprecision exist in each of these inputs due in part to subjective judgments involved and an inherent lag in the data available to quantify current conditions and events that may affect our credit loss estimate.
Our internally assigned borrower risk ratings serve as the primary credit quality indicator for our loan portfolio. We perform an annual comprehensive review of each of our borrowers, following the receipt of the borrower’s annual audited financial statements, to reassess the borrower’s risk rating. In addition, interim risk-rating adjustments may occur as a result of updated information affecting a borrower’s ability to fulfill its obligations or other significant developments and trends. Our Credit Risk Management Group and Corporate Credit Committee review and provide rigorous oversight and governance around our internally assigned risk ratings to ensure the ratings process is consistent. In addition, we engage third-party credit risk management experts to conduct an independent annual review of our risk rating system to validate its overall integrity. This review involves an evaluation of the accuracy and timeliness of individual risk ratings and the overall effectiveness of our risk-rating framework relative to the risk profile of our credit exposures. While we have a robust risk-rating process, changes in our borrower risk ratings may not always directly coincide with changes in the risk profile of an individual borrower due to the timing of the rating process and a potential lag in the receipt of information necessary to evaluate the impact of emerging developments and current conditions on the risk ratings of our borrower. Although our allowance for credit losses is sensitive to each key input, shifts in the credit risk ratings of our borrowers generally have the most notable impact on our allowance for credit losses.
Allowance for Credit Losses
Our allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio decreased to $68 million and 0.22%, respectively, as of May 31, 2022, from $86 million and 0.30%, respectively, as of May 31, 2021. The decrease in the allowance for credit losses of $18 million reflected a decrease in the collective and asset-specific allowance of $14 million and $4 million, respectively. We discuss the methodology used to estimate the allowance for credit losses in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.”
Key Assumptions
Determining the appropriateness of the allowance for credit losses is subject to numerous estimates and assumptions requiring significant management judgment about matters that involve a high degree of subjectivity and are difficult to predict. The key assumptions in determining our collective allowance that require significant management judgment and may have a material impact on the amount of the allowance include the segmentation of our loan portfolio; our internally assigned borrower risk ratings; the probability of default; the loss severity or recovery rate in the event of default for each portfolio segment; and management’s consideration of qualitative factors that may cause estimated credit losses associated with our existing loan portfolio to differ from our historical loss experience.
As discussed below in “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk,” CFC has experienced only 18 defaults in its 53-year history, and prior to Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek we had no defaults in our electric utility loan portfolio since fiscal year 2013. As such, we have a limited history of defaults to develop reasonable and supportable estimated probability of default rates for our existing loan portfolio. We therefore utilize third-party default data for the utility sector as a proxy to estimate
probability of default rates for our loan portfolio segments. However, we utilize our internal historical loss experience to estimate loss given default, or the recovery rate, for each of our loan portfolio segments. We believe our internal historical loss experience serves as a more reliable estimate of loss severity than third-party data due to the organizational structure and operating environment of rural utility cooperatives, our lending practice of generally requiring a senior security position on the assets and revenue of borrowers for long-term loans, the approach we take in working with borrowers that may be experiencing operational or financial issues and other factors discussed in “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk.”
We generally consider nonperforming loans as well as loans that have been or are anticipated to be modified under a troubled debt restructuring for individual evaluation given the risk characteristics of such loans and establish an asset-specific allowance for these loans. The key assumptions in determining our asset-specific allowance that require significant management judgment and may have a material impact on the amount of the allowance include measuring the amount and timing of future cash flows for individually evaluated loans that are not collateral-dependent and estimating the value of the underlying collateral for individually evaluated loans that are collateral-dependent.
The degree to which any particular assumption affects the allowance for credit losses depends on the severity of the change and its relationship to the other assumptions. We regularly evaluate the key inputs and assumptions used in determining the allowance for credit losses and update them, as necessary, to better reflect present conditions, including current trends in credit performance and borrower risk profile, portfolio concentration risk, changes in risk-management practices, changes in the regulatory environment and other factors relevant to our loan portfolio segments. We did not change our allowance methodology or nature of the underlying key inputs used and assumptions used in measuring our allowance for credit losses during fiscal year 2022.
Sensitivity Analysis
As noted above, our allowance for credit losses is sensitive to a variety of factors. While management uses its best judgment to assess loss data and other factors to determine the allowance for credit losses, changes in our loss assumptions, adjustments to assigned borrower risk ratings, the use of alternate external data sources or other factors could affect our estimate of probable credit losses inherent in the portfolio as of each balance sheet date, which would also impact the related provision for credit losses recognized in our consolidated statements of operations. For example, changes in the inputs below, without taking into consideration the impact of other potential offsetting or correlated inputs, would have the following effect on our allowance of credit losses as of May 31, 2022.
•A 10% increase or decrease in the default rates for all of our portfolio segments would result in a corresponding increase or decrease of approximately $3 million.
•A 1% increase or decrease in the recovery rates for all of our portfolio segments would result in a corresponding decrease or increase of approximately $9 million.
•A one-notch downgrade in the internal borrower risk ratings for our entire loan portfolio would result in an increase of approximately $13 million, while a one-notch upgrade would result in a decrease of approximately $14 million.
These sensitivity analyses are intended to provide an indication of the isolated impact of hypothetical alternative assumptions on our allowance for credit losses. Because management evaluates a variety of factors and inputs in determining the allowance for credit losses, these sensitivity analyses are not considered probable and do not imply an expectation of future changes in loss rates or borrower risk ratings. Given current processes employed in estimating the allowance for credit losses, management believes the inherent loss rates and currently assigned risk ratings are appropriate. It is possible that others performing the analyses, given the same information, may at any point in time reach different reasonable conclusions that could be significant to our consolidated financial statements.
We discuss the risks and uncertainties related to management’s judgments and estimates in applying accounting policies that have been identified as a critical accounting estimates under “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Regulatory and Compliance Risks” in this Report. We provide additional information on the allowance for credit losses under the below section “Credit Risk—Allowance for Credit Losses” and “Note 5—Allowance for Credit Losses” in this Report.
| | |
RECENT ACCOUNTING CHANGES AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTS |
Recent Accounting Changes
We provide information on recently adopted accounting standards and the adoption impact on CFC’s consolidated financial statements and recently issued accounting standards not yet required to be adopted and the expected adoption impact in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.” To the extent we believe the adoption of new accounting standards has had or will have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations, financial condition or liquidity, we discuss the impact in the applicable section(s) of this MD&A.
| | |
CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS |
This section provides a comparative discussion of our consolidated results of operations between fiscal years 2022 and 2021. Following this section, we provide a discussion and analysis of material changes in amounts reported on our consolidated balance sheet as of May 31, 2022 and amounts reported as of May 31, 2021. You should read these sections together with our “Executive Summary—Outlook” where we discuss trends and other factors that we expect will affect our future results of operations. See “Item 7. MD&A—Consolidated Results of Operations” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 (“2021 Form 10-K”) for a comparative discussion of our consolidated results of operations between fiscal year 2021 and the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020 (“fiscal year 2020”).
Net Interest Income
Net interest income, which is our largest source of revenue, represents the difference between the interest income earned on our interest-earning assets and the interest expense on our interest-bearing liabilities. Our net interest yield represents the difference between the yield on our interest-earning assets and the cost of our interest-bearing liabilities plus the impact of non-interest bearing funding. We expect net interest income and our net interest yield to fluctuate based on changes in interest rates and changes in the amount and composition of our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. We do not fund each individual loan with specific debt. Rather, we attempt to minimize costs and maximize efficiency by proportionately funding large aggregated amounts of loans.
Table 2 presents average balances for fiscal years 2022, 2021 and 2020, and for each major category of our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, the interest income earned or interest expense incurred, and the average yield or cost. Table 2 also presents non-GAAP adjusted interest expense, adjusted net interest income and adjusted net interest yield, which reflect the inclusion of net accrued periodic derivative cash settlements expense in interest expense. We provide reconciliations of our non-GAAP adjusted measures to the most comparable U.S. GAAP measures under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
Table 2: Average Balances, Interest Income/Interest Expense and Average Yield/Cost | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Assets: | | Average Balance | | Interest Income/Expense | | Average Yield/Cost | | Average Balance | | Interest Income/Expense | | Average Yield/Cost | | Average Balance | | Interest Income/Expense | | Average Yield/Cost |
Long-term fixed-rate loans(1) | | $ | 25,974,724 | | | $ | 1,062,223 | | | 4.09 | % | | $ | 24,978,267 | | | $ | 1,051,524 | | | 4.21 | % | | $ | 23,890,577 | | | $ | 1,043,918 | | | 4.37 | % |
Long-term variable-rate loans | | 749,131 | | | 16,895 | | | 2.26 | | | 645,819 | | | 14,976 | | | 2.32 | | | 891,541 | | | 31,293 | | | 3.51 | |
Line of credit loans | | 2,148,197 | | | 46,887 | | | 2.18 | | | 1,626,092 | | | 35,596 | | | 2.19 | | | 1,718,364 | | | 55,140 | | | 3.21 | |
Troubled debt restructuring (“TDR”) loans | | 9,528 | | | 735 | | | 7.71 | | | 10,328 | | | 790 | | | 7.65 | | | 11,238 | | | 836 | | | 7.44 | |
Nonperforming loans | | 227,795 | | | — | | | — | | | 185,554 | | | — | | | — | | | 5,957 | | | — | | | — | |
Other, net(2) | | — | | | (1,448) | | | — | | | — | | | (1,381) | | | — | | | — | | | (1,304) | | | — | |
Total loans | | 29,109,375 | | | 1,125,292 | | | 3.87 | | | 27,446,060 | | | 1,101,505 | | | 4.01 | | | 26,517,677 | | | 1,129,883 | | | 4.26 | |
Cash, time deposits and investment securities | | 762,489 | | | 15,951 | | | 2.09 | | | 796,566 | | | 15,096 | | | 1.90 | | | 866,013 | | | 21,403 | | | 2.47 | |
Total interest-earning assets | | $ | 29,871,864 | | | $ | 1,141,243 | | | 3.82 | % | | $ | 28,242,626 | | | $ | 1,116,601 | | | 3.95 | % | | $ | 27,383,690 | | | $ | 1,151,286 | | | 4.20 | % |
Other assets, less allowance for credit losses(3) | | 466,329 | | | | | | | 537,506 | | | | | | | 551,378 | | | | | |
Total assets(3) | | $ | 30,338,193 | | | | | | | $ | 28,780,132 | | | | | | | $ | 27,935,068 | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper | | $ | 2,565,629 | | | $ | 11,086 | | | 0.43 | % | | $ | 2,189,558 | | | $ | 8,330 | | | 0.38 | % | | $ | 2,318,112 | | | $ | 45,713 | | | 1.97 | % |
Other short-term borrowings | | 2,006,020 | | | 7,179 | | | 0.36 | | | 2,148,767 | | | 6,400 | | | 0.30 | | | 1,795,351 | | | 32,282 | | | 1.80 | |
Short-term borrowings(4) | | 4,571,649 | | | 18,265 | | | 0.40 | | | 4,338,325 | | | 14,730 | | | 0.34 | | | 4,113,463 | | | 77,995 | | | 1.90 | |
Medium-term notes | | 4,854,421 | | | 108,769 | | | 2.24 | | | 3,904,603 | | | 113,582 | | | 2.91 | | | 3,551,973 | | | 125,954 | | | 3.55 | |
Collateral trust bonds | | 7,050,468 | | | 248,413 | | | 3.52 | | | 6,938,534 | | | 249,248 | | | 3.59 | | | 7,185,910 | | | 257,396 | | | 3.58 | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 6,165,206 | | | 169,166 | | | 2.74 | | | 6,146,410 | | | 167,403 | | | 2.72 | | | 5,581,854 | | | 162,929 | | | 2.92 | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 3,059,946 | | | 55,245 | | | 1.81 | | | 2,844,252 | | | 50,818 | | | 1.79 | | | 2,986,469 | | | 87,617 | | | 2.93 | |
Other notes payable | | 6,774 | | | 155 | | | 2.29 | | | 10,246 | | | 241 | | | 2.35 | | | 17,586 | | | 671 | | | 3.82 | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,407 | | | 51,541 | | | 5.23 | | | 986,209 | | | 51,551 | | | 5.23 | | | 986,035 | | | 51,527 | | | 5.23 | |
Subordinated certificates | | 1,245,120 | | | 53,980 | | | 4.34 | | | 1,270,385 | | | 54,490 | | | 4.29 | | | 1,349,454 | | | 57,000 | | | 4.22 | |
Total interest-bearing liabilities | | $ | 27,939,991 | | | $ | 705,534 | | | 2.53 | % | | $ | 26,438,964 | | | $ | 702,063 | | | 2.66 | % | | $ | 25,772,744 | | | $ | 821,089 | | | 3.19 | % |
Other liabilities(3) | | 897,751 | | | | | | | 1,380,414 | | | | | | | 1,141,884 | | | | | |
Total liabilities(3) | | 28,837,742 | | | | | | | 27,819,378 | | | | | | | 26,914,628 | | | | | |
Total equity(3) | | 1,500,451 | | | | | | | 960,754 | | | | | | | 1,020,440 | | | | | |
Total liabilities and equity(3) | | $ | 30,338,193 | | | | | | | $ | 28,780,132 | | | | | | | $ | 27,935,068 | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net interest spread(5) | | | | | | 1.29 | % | | | | | | 1.29 | % | | | | | | 1.01 | % |
Impact of non-interest bearing funding(6) | | | | | | 0.17 | | | | | | | 0.18 | | | | | | | 0.20 | |
Net interest income/net interest yield(7) | | | | $ | 435,709 | | | 1.46 | % | | | | $ | 414,538 | | | 1.47 | % | | | | $ | 330,197 | | | 1.21 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted net interest income/adjusted net interest yield: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | | | $ | 1,141,243 | | | 3.82 | % | | | | $ | 1,116,601 | | | 3.95 | % | | | | $ | 1,151,286 | | | 4.20 | % |
Interest expense | | | | 705,534 | | | 2.53 | | | | | 702,063 | | | 2.66 | | | | | 821,089 | | | 3.19 | |
Add: Net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense(8) | | | | 101,385 | | | 1.21 | | | | | 115,645 | | | 1.28 | | | | | 55,873 | | | 0.55 | |
Adjusted interest expense/adjusted average cost(9) | | | | $ | 806,919 | | | 2.89 | % | | | | $ | 817,708 | | | 3.09 | % | | | | $ | 876,962 | | | 3.40 | % |
Adjusted net interest spread(7) | | | | | | 0.93 | % | | | | | | 0.86 | % | | | | | | 0.80 | % |
Impact of non-interest bearing funding(6) | | | | | | 0.19 | | | | | | | 0.20 | | | | | | | 0.20 | |
Adjusted net interest income/adjusted net interest yield(10) | | | | $ | 334,324 | | | 1.12 | % | | | | $ | 298,893 | | | 1.06 | % | | | | $ | 274,324 | | | 1.00 | % |
____________________________
(1)Interest income on long-term, fixed-rate loans includes loan conversion fees, which are generally deferred and recognized as interest income using the effective interest method.
(2)Consists of late payment fees and net amortization of deferred loan fees and loan origination costs.
(3)The average balance represents average monthly balances, which is calculated based on the month-end balance as of the beginning of the reporting period and the balances as of the end of each month included in the specified reporting period.
(4)Short-term borrowings reported on our consolidated balance sheets consist of borrowings with an original contractual maturity of one year or less. However, short-term borrowings presented in Table 2 consist of commercial paper, select notes, daily liquidity fund notes and secured borrowings under repurchase agreements. Short-term borrowings presented on our consolidated balance sheets related to medium-term notes, Farmer Mac notes payable and other notes payable are reported in the respective category for presentation purposes in Table 2. The period-end amounts reported as short-term borrowings on our consolidated balances sheets, which are excluded from the calculation of average short-term borrowings presented in Table 2, totaled $417 million, $363 million, and $537 million as of May 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.
(5)Net interest spread represents the difference between the average yield on total average interest-earning assets and the average cost of total average interest-bearing liabilities. Adjusted net interest spread represents the difference between the average yield on total average interest-earning assets and the adjusted average cost of total average interest-bearing liabilities.
(6)Includes other liabilities and equity.
(7)Net interest yield is calculated based on net interest income for the period divided by total average interest-earning assets for the period.
(8)Represents the impact of net periodic contractual interest amounts on our interest rate swaps during the period. This amount is added to interest expense to derive non-GAAP adjusted interest expense. The average (benefit)/cost associated with derivatives is calculated based on net periodic swap settlement interest amount during the period divided by the average outstanding notional amount of derivatives during the period. The average outstanding notional amount of interest rate swaps was $8,406 million, $9,062 million and $10,180 million for fiscal years 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.
(9)Adjusted interest expense consists of interest expense plus net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense during the period. Net periodic derivative cash settlement interest amounts are reported on our consolidated statements of operations as a component of derivative gains (losses). Adjusted average cost is calculated based on adjusted interest expense for the period divided by total average interest-bearing liabilities during the period.
(10)Adjusted net interest yield is calculated based on adjusted net interest income for the period divided by total average interest-earning assets for the period.
Table 3 displays the change in net interest income between periods and the extent to which the variance for each category of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities is attributable to (i) changes in volume, which represents the change in the average balances of our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities or volume, and (ii) changes in the rate, which represents the change in the average interest rates of these assets and liabilities. The table also presents the change in adjusted net interest income between periods.
Table 3: Rate/Volume Analysis of Changes in Interest Income/Interest Expense | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 2022 versus 2021 | | 2021 versus 2020 |
| | Total | | Variance Due To:(1) | | Total | | Variance Due To:(1) |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Variance | | Volume | | Rate | | Variance | | Volume | | Rate |
Interest income: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term fixed-rate loans | | $ | 10,699 | | | $ | 41,948 | | | $ | (31,249) | | | $ | 7,606 | | | $ | 47,527 | | | $ | (39,921) | |
Long-term variable-rate loans | | 1,919 | | | 2,396 | | | (477) | | | (16,317) | | | (8,625) | | | (7,692) | |
Line of credit loans | | 11,291 | | | 11,429 | | | (138) | | | (19,544) | | | (2,961) | | | (16,583) | |
TDR loans | | (55) | | | (61) | | | 6 | | | (46) | | | (68) | | | 22 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Other, net | | (67) | | | — | | | (67) | | | (77) | | | — | | | (77) | |
Total loans | | 23,787 | | | 55,712 | | | (31,925) | | | (28,378) | | | 35,873 | | | (64,251) | |
Cash, time deposits and investment securities | | 855 | | | (646) | | | 1,501 | | | (6,307) | | | (1,716) | | | (4,591) | |
Total interest income | | $ | 24,642 | | | $ | 55,066 | | | $ | (30,424) | | | $ | (34,685) | | | $ | 34,157 | | | $ | (68,842) | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest expense: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper | | $ | 2,756 | | | $ | 1,431 | | | $ | 1,325 | | | $ | (37,383) | | | $ | (2,535) | | | $ | (34,848) | |
Other short-term borrowings | | 779 | | | (425) | | | 1,204 | | | (25,882) | | | 6,355 | | | (32,237) | |
Short-term borrowings | | 3,535 | | | 1,006 | | | 2,529 | | | (63,265) | | | 3,820 | | | (67,085) | |
Medium-term notes | | (4,813) | | | 27,629 | | | (32,442) | | | (12,372) | | | 12,504 | | | (24,876) | |
Collateral trust bonds | | (835) | | | 4,021 | | | (4,856) | | | (8,148) | | | (8,861) | | | 713 | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 1,763 | | | 512 | | | 1,251 | | | 4,474 | | | 16,479 | | | (12,005) | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 4,427 | | | 3,854 | | | 573 | | | (36,799) | | | (4,172) | | | (32,627) | |
Other notes payable | | (86) | | | (82) | | | (4) | | | (430) | | | (280) | | | (150) | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | (10) | | | 10 | | | (20) | | | 24 | | | 9 | | | 15 | |
Subordinated certificates | | (510) | | | (1,084) | | | 574 | | | (2,510) | | | (3,340) | | | 830 | |
Total interest expense | | 3,471 | | | 35,866 | | | (32,395) | | | (119,026) | | | 16,159 | | | (135,185) | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net interest income | | $ | 21,171 | | | $ | 19,200 | | | $ | 1,971 | | | $ | 84,341 | | | $ | 17,998 | | | $ | 66,343 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted net interest income: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | $ | 24,642 | | | $ | 55,066 | | | $ | (30,424) | | | $ | (34,685) | | | $ | 34,157 | | | $ | (68,842) | |
Interest expense | | 3,471 | | | 35,866 | | | (32,395) | | | (119,026) | | | 16,159 | | | (135,185) | |
Net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense(2) | | (14,260) | | | (8,367) | | | (5,893) | | | 59,772 | | | (6,137) | | | 65,909 | |
Adjusted interest expense(3) | | (10,789) | | | 27,499 | | | (38,288) | | | (59,254) | | | 10,022 | | | (69,276) | |
Adjusted net interest income | | $ | 35,431 | | | $ | 27,567 | | | $ | 7,864 | | | $ | 24,569 | | | $ | 24,135 | | | $ | 434 | |
____________________________
(1)The changes for each category of interest income and interest expense represent changes in either average balances (volume) or average rates for both interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. We allocate the amount attributable to the combined impact of volume and rate to the rate variance.
(2)For the net periodic derivative cash settlements interest amount, the variance due to average volume represents the change in the net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amount resulting from the change in the average notional amount of derivative contracts outstanding. The variance due to average rate represents the change in the net periodic derivative cash settlements amount resulting from the net difference between the average rate paid and the average rate received for interest rate swaps during the period.
(3) See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for additional information on our adjusted non-GAAP measures.
Reported Net Interest Income
Reported net interest income of $436 million for fiscal year 2022 increased $21 million, or 5%, from fiscal year 2021, driven by an increase in average interest-earning assets of $1,629 million, or 6%, partially offset by a decrease in the net interest yield of 1% (1 basis point) to 1.46%.
•Average Interest-Earning Assets: The increase in average interest-earning assets of 6% during fiscal year 2022 was primarily attributable to growth in average total loans of $1,663 million, or 6%, from fiscal year 2021, driven by an increase in average long-term fixed-rate loans of $996 million and an increase in average line of credit loans of $522 million. The continued low interest rate environment presented an opportunity for members to obtain long-term loan advances to fund capital investments at a low fixed rate of interest. The increase in average line of credit loans was mainly attributable to loan advances to one distribution member that experienced an adverse financial impact from restoration costs incurred to repair damage caused by two successive hurricanes and loan advances to several CFC Texas-based power supply borrowers that were subject to elevated power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex.
•Net Interest Yield: The increase in the net interest yield of 1 basis point, or 1%, was primarily attributable to the combined impact of a decrease in the average yield on interest-earning assets of 13 basis points to 3.82% and a reduction in the benefit from non-interest bearing funding of 1 basis point to 0.17%, which were largely offset by a reduction in our average cost of borrowings of 13 basis points to 2.53%. The decreases in the average yield on interest-earning assets and our average cost of borrowings reflected the impact of the continued low interest rate environment during fiscal year 2022.
Adjusted Net Interest Income
Adjusted net interest income of $334 million for fiscal year 2022 increased $35 million, or 12%, from fiscal year 2021, driven by the combined impact of an increase in average interest-earning assets of $1,629 million, or 6%, and an increase in the adjusted net interest yield of 6 basis points, or 6%, to 1.12%.
•Average Interest-Earning Assets: The increase in average interest-earning assets of 6% was driven by the growth in average total loans of $1,663 million, or 6%, from fiscal year 2021, primarily attributable to an increase in average long-term fixed-rate and line of credit loans as discussed above.
•Adjusted Net Interest Yield: The increase in the adjusted net interest yield of 6 basis points, or 6%, reflected the favorable impact of a reduction in our adjusted average cost of borrowings of 20 basis points to 2.89%, which was partially offset by a decrease in the average yield on interest-earning assets of 13 basis points to 3.82%, both of which were attributable to the lower interest rate environment during fiscal year 2022.
We include the net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts on our interest rate swaps in the calculation of our adjusted average cost of borrowings, which, as a result, also impacts the calculation of adjusted net interest income and adjusted net interest yield. We recorded net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense of $101 million for fiscal year 2022, compared with $116 million and $56 million for fiscal years 2021 and 2020.
The floating-rate payments on our interest rate swaps are typically based on 3-month LIBOR. Because our derivative portfolio consists of a higher proportion of pay-fixed swaps than receive-fixed swaps, the net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts generally change based on changes in the floating interest amount received each period. When the 3-month LIBOR rate increases during the period, the received floating interest amounts on our pay-fixed swaps increase and, conversely, when the 3-month LIBOR swap rate decreases, the received floating interest amounts on our pay-fixed swaps decrease. The 3-month LIBOR rate began to increase during the second half of fiscal year 2022, resulting in an increase in received floating interest amounts and contributing to lower net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts in the current fiscal year. In contrast, the 3-month LIBOR rate decreased during fiscal year 2021 resulting in a reduction in received floating interest amounts and contributing to higher net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts in the prior fiscal year.
See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for additional information on our adjusted measures, including a reconciliation of these measures to the most comparable U.S. GAAP measures.
Provision for Credit Losses
Our provision for credit losses each period is driven by changes in our measurement of lifetime expected credit losses for our loan portfolio recorded in the allowance for credit losses. Our allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio were $68 million and 0.22%, respectively, as of May 31, 2022. In comparison, our allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio were $86 million and 0.30%, respectively, as of May 31, 2021.
We recorded a benefit for credit losses of $18 million for fiscal year 2022. In contrast, we recorded a provision for credit losses of $29 million for fiscal year 2021. The current fiscal year benefit was primarily attributable to a decrease in the collective allowance, stemming largely from positive developments during fiscal year 2022 related to Rayburn that resulted in an improvement in Rayburn’s credit risk profile and also a significant reduction in our loans outstanding to Rayburn. In June 2021, Texas enacted securitization legislation that offers a financing program for qualifying electric cooperatives exposed to elevated power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex. In February 2022, Rayburn successfully completed a securitization transaction pursuant to this legislation to cover extraordinary costs and expenses incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex. Subsequent to the completion of the securitization transaction, Rayburn fully paid its outstanding obligations to ERCOT. As a result, we revised our borrower risk rating for Rayburn to a rating in the pass category from a previous rating in the criticized category. In addition, we received loan payments from Rayburn during fiscal year 2022 that reduced our loans outstanding to Rayburn to $167 million as of May 31, 2022, consisting of secured and unsecured loans outstanding of $151 million and $16 million, respectively. Loans outstanding to Rayburn totaled $379 million as of the prior fiscal year ended May 31, 2021, consisting of secured and unsecured loans outstanding of $167 million and $212 million, respectively.
The provision for credit losses of $29 million recorded for fiscal year 2021 reflected the allowance build due to the significant adverse financial impact on Brazos and Rayburn resulting from their exposure to elevated wholesale electric power supply costs during the February 2021 polar vortex.
We discuss our methodology for estimating the allowance for credit losses in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—Allowance for Credit Losses—Current Methodology.” We also provide additional information on our allowance for credit losses below under section “Credit Risk—Allowance for Credit Losses” and “Note 5—Allowance for Credit Losses” in this Report.
Non-Interest Income
Non-interest income consists of fee and other income, gains and losses on derivatives not accounted for in hedge accounting relationships, and gains and losses on equity and debt investment securities, which consists of both unrealized and realized
gains and losses.
Table 4 presents the components of non-interest income (loss) recorded in our consolidated statements of operations for fiscal years 2022, 2021 and 2020.
Table 4: Non-Interest Income
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Non-interest income components: | | | | | | |
Fee and other income | | $ | 17,193 | | | $ | 18,929 | | | $ | 22,961 | |
Derivative gains (losses) | | 456,482 | | | 506,301 | | | (790,151) | |
| | | | | | |
Investment securities gains (losses) | | (30,179) | | | 1,495 | | | 9,431 | |
Total non-interest income (loss) | | $ | 443,496 | | | $ | 526,725 | | | $ | (757,759) | |
The significant variance in non-interest income between fiscal years was primarily attributable to changes in the derivative gains (losses) recognized in our consolidated statements of operations. In addition, we experienced an unfavorable shift in unrealized investment securities gains of $32 million for the current fiscal year compared with the prior fiscal year. We
expect period-to-period market fluctuations in the fair value of our equity and debt investment securities, which we report together with realized gains and losses from the sale of investment securities on our consolidated statements of operations.
Derivative Gains (Losses)
Our derivative instruments are an integral part of our interest rate risk-management strategy. Our principal purpose in using derivatives is to manage our aggregate interest rate risk profile within prescribed risk parameters. The derivative instruments we use primarily include interest rate swaps, which we typically hold to maturity. In addition, we may on occasion use treasury locks to manage the interest rate risk associated with debt that is scheduled to reprice in the future. The primary factors affecting the fair value of our derivatives and derivative gains (losses) recorded in our results of operations include changes in interest rates, the shape of the swap curve and the composition of our derivative portfolio. We generally do not designate our interest rate swaps, which currently account for all our derivatives, for hedge accounting. Accordingly, changes in the fair value of interest rate swaps are reported in our consolidated statements of operations under derivative gains (losses). However, if we execute a treasury lock, we typically designate the treasury lock as a cash flow hedge.
We currently use two types of interest rate swap agreements: (i) we pay a fixed rate of interest and receive a variable rate of interest (“pay-fixed swaps”), and (ii) we pay a variable rate of interest and receive a fixed rate of interest (“receive-fixed swaps”). The interest amounts are based on a specified notional balance, which is used for calculation purposes only. The benchmark variable rate for the substantial majority of the floating-rate payments under our swap agreements is 3-month LIBOR. As interest rates decline, pay-fixed swaps generally decrease in value and result in the recognition of derivative losses, as the amount of interest we pay remains fixed, while the amount of interest we receive declines. In contrast, as interest rates rise, pay-fixed swaps generally increase in value and result in the recognition of derivative gains, as the amount of interest we pay remains fixed, but the amount we receive increases. With a receive-fixed swap, the opposite results occur as interest rates decline or rise. Our derivative portfolio consists of a higher proportion of pay-fixed swaps than receive-fixed swaps; therefore, we generally record derivative losses when interest rates decline and derivative gains when interest rates rise. Because our pay-fixed and receive-fixed swaps are referenced to different maturity terms along the swap curve, different changes in the swap curve—parallel, flattening, inversion or steepening—will also impact the fair value of our derivatives.
On July 20, 2021, we executed two treasury lock agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $250 million to lock in the underlying U.S. Treasury interest rate component of interest rate payments on anticipated debt issuances and repricings. The treasury locks, which were scheduled to mature on October 29, 2021, were designated and qualified as cash flow hedges. In October 2021, we borrowed $250 million under our Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement and terminated the treasury locks. Prior to this anticipated borrowing and the termination of the treasury locks, we recorded changes in the fair value of the treasury locks in AOCI. At termination, the treasury locks were in a gain position of $5 million, of which $4 million is being accreted from AOCI to interest expense over the term of the related Farmer Mac borrowings and the remainder was recognized in earnings. We did not have any derivatives designated as accounting hedges as of May 31, 2022 or May 31, 2021.
Table 5 presents the components of net derivative gains (losses) recorded in our consolidated statements of operations for fiscal years 2022, 2021 and 2020. Derivative cash settlements interest expense represents the net periodic contractual interest amount for our interest rate swaps during the reporting period. Derivative forward value gains (losses) represent the change in fair value of our interest rate swaps during the applicable reporting period due to changes in expected future interest rates over the remaining life of our derivative contracts.
Table 5: Derivative Gains (Losses)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Derivative gains (losses) attributable to: | | | | | | |
Derivative cash settlements interest expense | | $ | (101,385) | | | $ | (115,645) | | | $ | (55,873) | |
Derivative forward value gains (losses) | | 557,867 | | | 621,946 | | | (734,278) | |
Derivative gains (losses) | | $ | 456,482 | | | $ | 506,301 | | | $ | (790,151) | |
We recorded derivative gains of $456 million for fiscal year 2022, attributable to increases in interest rates across the entire swap curve during the period. In contrast, we recorded derivative gains of $506 million for fiscal year 2021, driven by pronounced increases in medium- and longer-term swap rates, namely five-year to 30-year swap rates.
As noted above, the substantial majority of our swap portfolio consists of longer-dated, pay-fixed swaps. Therefore, increases and decreases in medium- and longer-term swap rates generally have a more pronounced corresponding impact on the change in the net fair value of our swap portfolio. We present comparative swap curves, which depict the relationship between swap rates at varying maturities, for our reported periods in Table 7 below.
Derivative Cash Settlements
As indicated in Table 5 above, and discussed above under “Consolidated Results of Operations—Net Interest Income—Adjusted Net Interest Income,” we recorded net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense of $101 million in fiscal year 2022, compared with $116 million for fiscal year 2021. The 3-month LIBOR rate began to increase during the second half of fiscal year 2022, resulting in an increase in received floating interest amounts and contributing to lower net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts in the current fiscal year. In contrast, the 3-month LIBOR rate decreased during fiscal year 2021, resulting in a reduction in received floating interest amounts and contributing to higher net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts in the prior fiscal year.
Table 6 displays, by interest rate swap agreement type, the average notional amount and the weighted-average interest rate paid and received for the net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense during each respective period. As discussed above, our derivative portfolio consists of a higher proportion of pay-fixed swaps than receive-fixed swaps, with pay-fixed swaps accounting for approximately 75% and 73% of the outstanding notional amount of our derivative portfolio as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
Table 6: Derivatives—Average Notional Amounts and Interest Rates
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
| | Average | | Weighted- | | Average | | Weighted- | | Average | | Weighted- |
| | Notional | | Average Rate | | Notional | | Average Rate | | Notional | | Average Rate |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | Paid | | Received | | Amount | | Paid | | Received | | Amount | | Paid | | Received |
Interest rate swap type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Pay-fixed swaps | | $ | 6,145,318 | | | 2.61 | % | | 0.36 | % | | $ | 6,566,734 | | | 2.73 | % | | 0.27 | % | | $ | 7,092,961 | | | 2.82 | % | | 1.91 | % |
Receive-fixed swaps | | 2,260,663 | | | 1.01 | | | 2.82 | | | 2,494,890 | | | 1.03 | | | 2.78 | | | 3,086,705 | | | 2.62 | | | 2.64 | |
Total | | $ | 8,405,981 | | | 2.18 | % | | 1.03 | % | | $ | 9,061,624 | | | 2.26 | % | | 0.96 | % | | $ | 10,179,666 | | | 2.76 | % | | 2.13 | % |
The average remaining maturity of our pay-fixed and receive-fixed swaps was 19 years and three years, respectively, as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Comparative Swap Curves
Table 7 below provides comparative swap curves as of May 31, 2022, 2021, 2020 and 2019.
Table 7: Comparative Swap Curves
____________________________ Benchmark rates obtained from Bloomberg.
See “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—Derivative Instruments” and “Note 10—Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” for additional information on our derivative instruments. Also refer to “Note 14—Fair Value Measurement” for information on how we measure the fair value of our derivative instruments.
Non-Interest Expense
Non-interest expense consists of salaries and employee benefit expense, general and administrative expenses, gains and losses on the early extinguishment of debt and other miscellaneous expenses.
Table 8 presents the components of non-interest expense recorded in our consolidated statements of operations in fiscal years 2022, 2021 and 2020.
Table 8: Non-Interest Expense
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Non-interest expense components: | | | | | | |
Salaries and employee benefits | | $ | (51,863) | | | $ | (55,258) | | | $ | (54,522) | |
Other general and administrative expenses | | (43,323) | | | (39,447) | | | (46,645) | |
Operating expenses | | (95,186) | | | (94,705) | | | (101,167) | |
Losses on early extinguishment of debt | | (754) | | | (1,456) | | | (683) | |
Other non-interest expense | | (1,552) | | | (1,619) | | | (25,588) | |
Total non-interest expense | | $ | (97,492) | | | $ | (97,780) | | | $ | (127,438) | |
Non-interest expense of $97 million for fiscal year 2022 decreased slightly from fiscal year 2021, as the decrease in salaries and employee benefits and lower losses on the early extinguishment of debt, were largely offset by an increase in other general and administrative expenses as we resumed business travel and in-person corporate meetings and events that were cancelled during the prior fiscal year due to the pandemic.
Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests
Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests represents 100% of the results of operations of NCSC and RTFC, as the members of NCSC and RTFC own or control 100% of the interest in their respective companies. The fluctuations in net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests are primarily due to changes in the fair value of NCSC’s derivative instruments recognized in NCSC’s earnings.
We recorded a net income attributable to noncontrolling interests of $3 million for fiscal year 2022. In comparison, we recorded a net income attributable to noncontrolling interests of $2 million for fiscal years 2021 and a net loss attributable to noncontrolling interests of $4 million for fiscal year 2020.
| | |
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET ANALYSIS |
Total assets increased $1,613 million, or 5%, in fiscal year 2022 to $31,251 million as of May 31, 2022, primarily due to growth in our loan portfolio. We experienced an increase in total liabilities of $871 million, or 3%, to $29,109 million as of May 31, 2022, largely due to the issuances of debt to fund the growth in our loan portfolio. Total equity increased $742 million to $2,142 million as of May 31, 2022, attributable to our reported net income of $799 million for the current fiscal year, which was partially offset by the CFC Board of Directors’ authorized patronage capital retirement in July 2021 of $58 million.
Below is a discussion of changes in the major components of our assets and liabilities during fiscal year 2022. Period-end balance sheet amounts may vary from average balance sheet amounts due to liquidity and balance sheet management activities that are intended to manage our liquidity requirements and market risk exposure in accordance with our risk appetite framework.
Loan Portfolio
We segregate our loan portfolio into segments, by legal entity, based on the borrower member class, which consists of CFC distribution, CFC power supply, CFC statewide and associate, NCSC and RTFC. We offer both long-term and line of credit loans to our borrowers. Under our long-term loan facilities, a borrower may select a fixed interest rate or a variable interest rate at the time of each loan advance. Line of credit loans are revolving loan facilities and generally have a variable interest rate. We describe and provide additional information on our member classes under “Item 1. Business—Members” and information about our loan programs and loan product types under “Item 1. Business—Loan and Guarantee Programs” in this Report.
Loans Outstanding
Table 9 presents loans outstanding by legal entity, member class and loan product type as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 9: Loans—Outstanding Amount by Member Class and Loan Type
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | | | | | | | |
Member class: | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total | | Change | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 23,844,242 | | | 79 | % | | $ | 22,027,423 | | | 78 | % | | $ | 1,816,819 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Power supply | | 4,901,770 | | | 17 | | | 5,154,312 | | | 18 | | | (252,542) | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Statewide and associate | | 126,863 | | | — | | | 106,121 | | | — | | | 20,742 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC | | 28,872,875 | | | 96 | | | 27,287,856 | | | 96 | | | 1,585,019 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NCSC | | 710,878 | | | 2 | | | 706,868 | | | 3 | | | 4,010 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
RTFC | | 467,601 | | | 2 | | | 420,383 | | | 1 | | | 47,218 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | 30,051,354 | | | 100 | % | | 28,415,107 | | | 100 | % | | 1,636,247 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Deferred loan origination costs—CFC(2) | | 12,032 | | | — | | | 11,854 | | | — | | | 178 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Loans to members | | $ | 30,063,386 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 28,426,961 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 1,636,425 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate | | $ | 26,952,372 | | | 90 | % | | $ | 25,514,766 | | | 90 | % | | $ | 1,437,606 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Variable-rate | | 820,201 | | | 2 | | | 658,579 | | | 2 | | | 161,622 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total long-term loans | | 27,772,573 | | | 92 | | | 26,173,345 | | | 92 | | | 1,599,228 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Line of credit loans | | 2,278,781 | | | 8 | | | 2,241,762 | | | 8 | | | 37,019 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | 30,051,354 | | | 100 | % | | 28,415,107 | | | 100 | % | | 1,636,247 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Deferred loan origination costs—CFC(2) | | 12,032 | | | — | | | 11,854 | | | — | | | 178 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Loans to members | | $ | 30,063,386 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 28,426,961 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 1,636,425 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
____________________________
(1) Represents the unpaid principal balance, net of charge-offs and recoveries, of loans as of the end of each period.
(2)Deferred loan origination costs are recorded on the books of CFC.
Loans to members totaled $30,063 million and $28,427 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Loans to CFC distribution and power supply borrowers accounted for 96% of total loans to members as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021, and long-term fixed-rate loans accounted for 90% of loans to members as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021. The increase in loans to members of $1,636 million, or 6%, from May 31, 2021, was attributable to net increases in long-term and line of credit loans of $1,599 million and $37 million, respectively. We experienced increases in CFC distribution loans, CFC statewide and associate loans, NCSC loans and RTFC loans of $1,817 million, $21 million, $4 million and $47 million, respectively, and a decrease in CFC power supply loans of $253 million.
Long-term loan advances totaled $3,386 million during fiscal year 2022, of which approximately 80% was provided to members for capital expenditures and 18% was provided to members for other expenses, primarily to fund operating expenses attributable to the elevated power cost obligations incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex. In comparison, long-term loan advances totaled $2,514 million during fiscal year 2021, of which approximately 86% was provided to members for capital expenditures and 8% was provided for the refinancing of loans made by other lenders. Of the $3,386 million total long-term loans advanced during fiscal year 2022, $2,911 million were fixed-rate loan advances with a weighted average fixed-rate term of 23 years.
Many rural electric distribution cooperatives have made or are making infrastructure investments that include building fiber optic lines to improve electric grid system reliability and efficiency, as fiber operations offers enhanced communication to monitor electric systems, identify outages and speed electric restoration. Some of these electric cooperatives are leveraging
these fiber assets to offer access to broadband services, either directly or by partnering with local telecommunication companies and others, to the communities they serve. Aggregate loans outstanding to CFC electric distribution cooperative members relating to broadband projects, which we started tracking in October 2017, increased to an estimated $1,647 million as of May 31, 2022, from approximately $854 million as of May 31, 2021. Many of these broadband projects are also financially supported by various states and the federal government, which reduces the credit risk for CFC and our electric cooperative members. We expect our member electric cooperatives to continue in their efforts to expand broadband access to unserved and underserved communities.
We provide information on the credit performance and risk profile of our loan portfolio below under the section “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk” in this Report. Also refer to “Item 1. Business—Loan and Guarantee Programs” and “Note 4—Loans” in this Report for addition information on our loans to members.”
Loans—Retention Rate
Long-term fixed-rate loans accounted for 90% as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021 of our loans to members of $30,063 million and $28,427 million, respectively. Borrowers that select a fixed rate on a loan advance under a long-term loan facility have the option of choosing a term on the advance between one year and the final maturity date of the loan. At the expiration of a selected fixed-rate term, or the repricing date, borrowers have the option of: (i) selecting CFC’s current long-term fixed rate for a term ranging from one year up to the full remaining term of the loan; (ii) selecting CFC’s current long-term variable rate; or (iii) repaying the loan in full.
The continued low interest rate environment over the last several years presented an opportunity for our members to obtain new long-term loan advances at a lower fixed-to-maturity interest rate or lock in a lower fixed interest rate to maturity at the repricing date on existing outstanding long-term loan advances. Because many of our members have locked in at or near historic low interest rates on outstanding loan advances for extended terms, the amount of long-term fixed-rate loans that repriced during each fiscal year over the last five fiscal years has gradually decreased, from $987 million in fiscal year 2017 to $379 million in fiscal year 2022. Long-term fixed-rate loans scheduled to reprice over the next 12 months totaled $338 million as of May 31, 2022, and long-term fixed-rate loans scheduled to reprice over the subsequent five fiscal years through the fiscal year ended May 31, 2027 totaled $1,584 million as of May 31, 2022, representing an average of $317 million per fiscal year.
CFC’s long-term fixed-rate loans that repriced in accordance with our standard loan repricing provisions totaled $379 million during fiscal year 2022. Of this total, $361 million, or 95%, was retained and the remaining amount was repaid. The average annual retention rate, calculated based on the election made by the borrower at the repricing date, was 97% for CFC loans that repriced during each of the three fiscal years ended May 31, 2022.
Debt
We utilize both short-term borrowings and long-term debt as part of our funding strategy and asset/liability interest rate risk management. We seek to maintain diversified funding sources, including our members, affiliates, the capital markets and other funding sources, across products, programs and markets to manage funding concentrations and reduce our liquidity or debt rollover risk. Our funding sources include a variety of secured and unsecured debt securities in a wide range of maturities to our members, affiliates, the capital markets and other funding sources.
Debt Product Types
We offer various short- and long-term unsecured debt securities to our members and affiliates, including commercial paper, select notes, daily liquidity fund notes, medium-term notes and subordinated certificates. We also issue commercial paper, medium-term notes and collateral trust bonds in the capital markets. Additionally, we have access to funds under borrowing arrangements with banks, private placements and U.S. government agencies. Table 10 displays our primary funding sources and their selected key attributes.
Table 10: Debt—Debt Product Types
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Debt Product Type: | | Maturity Range | | Market | | Secured/Unsecured |
Short-term funding programs: | | | | | | |
Commercial paper | | 1 to 270 days | | Capital markets, members and affiliates | | Unsecured |
Select notes | | 30 to 270 days | | Members and affiliates | | Unsecured |
Daily liquidity fund notes | | Demand note | | Members and affiliates | | Unsecured |
Securities sold under repurchase agreements | | 1 to 90 days | | Capital markets | | Secured |
Other funding programs: | | | | | | |
Medium-term notes | | 9 months to 30 years | | Capital markets, members and affiliates | | Unsecured |
Collateral trust bonds(1) | | Up to 30 years | | Capital markets | | Secured |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable(2) | | Up to 30 years | | U.S. government | | Secured |
Farmer Mac notes payable(3) | | Up to 30 years | | Private placement | | Secured |
Other notes payable(4) | | Up to 3 years | | Private placement | | Both |
Subordinated deferrable debt(5) | | Up to 45 years | | Capital markets | | Unsecured |
Members’ subordinated certificates(6) | | Up to 100 years | | Members | | Unsecured |
Revolving credit agreements | | Up to 5 years | | Bank institutions | | Unsecured |
____________________________
(1)Collateral trust bonds are secured by the pledge of permitted investments and eligible mortgage notes from distribution system borrowers in an amount at least equal to the outstanding principal amount of collateral trust bonds.
(2)Represents notes payable under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program, which supports the Rural Economic Development Loan and Grant program. The Federal Financing Bank provides the financing for these notes, and RUS provides a guarantee of repayment. We are required to pledge eligible mortgage notes from distribution and power supply system borrowers in an amount at least equal to the outstanding principal amount of the notes payable.
(3)We are required to pledge eligible mortgage notes from distribution and power supply system borrowers in an amount at least equal to the outstanding principal amount under note purchase agreements with Farmer Mac.
(4)Other notes payable consist of unsecured and secured Clean Renewable Energy Bonds. We are required to pledge eligible mortgage notes from distribution and power supply system borrowers in an amount at least equal to the outstanding principal amount under the Clean Renewable Energy Bonds Series 2009A note purchase agreement.
(5)Subordinated deferrable debt is subordinate and junior to senior debt and debt obligations we guarantee, but senior to subordinated certificates. We have the right at any time, and from time to time, during the term of the subordinated deferrable debt to suspend interest payments for a maximum period of 20 consecutive quarters for $1,000 par notes, or a maximum period of 40 consecutive quarters for $25 par notes. To date, we have not exercised our option to suspend interest payments. We have the right to call the subordinated deferrable debt, at par, any time after 10 years for $1,000 par notes or 5 years for $25 par notes.
(6)Members’ subordinated certificates consist of membership subordinated certificates, loan and guarantee certificates and member capital securities, and are subordinated and junior to senior debt, subordinated debt and debt obligations we guarantee. Membership subordinated certificates generally mature 100 years subsequent to issuance. Loan and guarantee subordinated certificates have the same maturity as the related long-term loan. Some certificates also may amortize annually based on the outstanding loan balance. Member capital securities mature 30 years subsequent to issuance. Member capital securities are callable at par beginning either five or 10 years subsequent to the issuance and anytime thereafter.
Debt Outstanding
Table 11 displays the composition, by product type, of our outstanding debt and the weighted average interest rate as of May 31, 2022 and 2021. Table 11 also displays the composition of our debt based on several additional selected attributes.
Table 11: Total Debt Outstanding and Weighted-Average Interest Rates | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | | | | |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Outstanding Amount | | Weighted- Average Interest Rate | | Outstanding Amount | | Weighted- Average Interest Rate | | Change | | | |
Debt product type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial Paper: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Members, at par | | $ | 1,358,069 | | 0.92 | % | | $ | 1,124,607 | | 0.14 | % | | $ | 233,462 | | | |
Dealer, net of discounts | | 1,024,813 | | 0.96 | | | 894,977 | | 0.16 | | | 129,836 | | | |
Total commercial paper | | 2,382,882 | | 0.94 | | | 2,019,584 | | 0.15 | | | 363,298 | | | |
Select notes to members | | 1,753,441 | | 1.11 | | | 1,539,150 | | 0.30 | | | 214,291 | | | |
Daily liquidity fund notes to members | | 427,790 | | 0.80 | | | 460,556 | | 0.08 | | | (32,766) | | | |
Securities sold under repurchase agreements | | — | | — | | | 200,115 | | 0.30 | | | (200,115) | | | |
Medium-term notes: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Members, at par | | 667,451 | | 1.43 | | | 595,037 | | 1.28 | | | 72,414 | | | |
Dealer, net of discounts | | 5,241,687 | | 2.20 | | | 3,923,385 | | 2.31 | | | 1,318,302 | | | |
Total medium-term notes | | 5,909,138 | | 2.11 | | | 4,518,422 | | 2.17 | | | 1,390,716 | | | |
Collateral trust bonds | | 6,848,490 | | 3.17 | | | 7,191,944 | | 3.15 | | | (343,454) | | | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 6,105,473 | | 2.69 | | | 6,269,303 | | 2.76 | | | (163,830) | | | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 3,094,679 | | 2.33 | | | 2,977,909 | | 1.68 | | | 116,770 | | | |
Other notes payable | | 4,714 | | 1.80 | | | 8,236 | | 1.68 | | | (3,522) | | | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,518 | | 5.11 | | | 986,315 | | 5.11 | | | 203 | | | |
Members’ subordinated certificates: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Membership subordinated certificates | | 628,603 | | 4.95 | | | 628,594 | | 4.95 | | | 9 | | | |
Loan and guarantee subordinated certificates | | 365,388 | | 2.88 | | | 386,896 | | 2.89 | | | (21,508) | | | |
Member capital securities | | 240,170 | | 5.00 | | | 239,170 | | 5.00 | | | 1,000 | | | |
Total members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,234,161 | | 4.35 | | | 1,254,660 | | 4.32 | | | (20,499) | | | |
Total debt outstanding | | $ | 28,747,286 | | 2.54 | % | | $ | 27,426,194 | | 2.42 | % | | $ | 1,321,092 | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Security type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Secured debt | | 56 | % | | | | 61 | % | | | | | | | |
Unsecured debt | | 44 | | | | | 39 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Funding source: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Members | | 19 | % | | | | 18 | % | | | | | | | |
Private placement: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 21 | | | | | 23 | | | | | | | | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 11 | | | | | 11 | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total private placement | | 32 | | | | | 34 | | | | | | | | |
Capital markets | | 49 | | | | | 48 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest rate type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate debt | | 77 | % | | | | 77 | % | | | | | | | |
Variable-rate debt | | 23 | | | | | 23 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest rate type including the impact of swaps: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate debt(1) | | 91 | % | | | | 93 | % | | | | | | | |
Variable-rate debt(2) | | 9 | | | | | 7 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Maturity classification:(3) | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Short-term borrowings | | 17 | % | | | | 17 | % | | | | | | | |
Long-term and subordinated debt(4) | | 83 | | | | | 83 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
____________________________
(1) Includes variable-rate debt that has been swapped to a fixed rate, net of any fixed-rate debt that has been swapped to a variable rate.
(2) Includes fixed-rate debt that has been swapped to a variable rate, net of any variable-rate debt that has been swapped to a fixed rate. Also includes commercial paper notes, which generally have maturities of less than 90 days. The interest rate on commercial paper notes does not change once the note has been issued; however, the interest rate for new commercial paper issuances changes daily.
(3) Borrowings with an original contractual maturity of one year or less are classified as short-term borrowings. Borrowings with an original contractual maturity of greater than one year are classified as long-term debt.
(4) Consists of long-term debt, subordinated deferrable debt and total members’ subordinated debt reported on our consolidated balance sheets. Maturity classification is based on the original contractual maturity as of the date of issuance of the debt.
We issue debt primarily to fund growth in our loan portfolio. As such, our debt outstanding generally increases and decreases in response to member loan demand. Total debt outstanding increased $1,321 million, or 5%, to $28,747 million as of May 31, 2022, due to borrowings to fund the increase in loans to members. Outstanding dealer commercial paper of $1,025 million as of May 31, 2022 was within our quarter-end target range of $1,000 million and $1,500 million.
Below is a summary of significant financing activities during fiscal year 2022:
•On June 7, 2021, we amended the three-year and five-year committed bank revolving line of credit agreements to extend the maturity dates to November 28, 2024 and November 28, 2025, respectively, and to terminate certain bank commitments totaling $70 million under the three-year agreement and $55 million under the five-year agreement. The terminations reduced the total commitment amount under the three-year facility to $1,245 million and the five-year facility to $1,355 million, resulting in an aggregate commitment amount under the two facilities of $2,600 million.
•On October 18, 2021, we issued $400 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a fixed rate of 1.000%, due on October 18, 2024, and $350 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a variable rate based on SOFR plus 0.33%, due on October 18, 2024.
•In October 2021, November 2021, January 2022 and May 2022, we borrowed $250 million, $200 million, $170 million, and $100 million respectively, under the Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement.
•In November 2021 and February 2022, we borrowed $200 million and $250 million, respectively, under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program.
•On November 4, 2021, we closed on a $550 million committed loan facility (“Series S”) under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program. Pursuant to this facility, we may borrow any time before July 15, 2026. Each advance is subject to quarterly amortization and a final maturity not longer than 30 years from the date of the advance.
•On November 15, 2021, we early redeemed all $400 million of our 3.05% Collateral Trust Bonds due February 15, 2022.
•On February 7, 2022, we issued $600 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a fixed rate of 1.875%, due on February 7, 2025, and $400 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a variable rate based on SOFR plus 0.40%, due on August 7, 2023.
•On February 7, 2022, we issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of 2.75% Collateral Trust Bonds due April 15, 2032.
•On March 25, 2022, we early redeemed all $450 million of our 2.40% of Collateral Trust Bonds due April 25, 2022.
•On May 4, 2022, we issued $300 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a fixed rate of 3.450%, due June 15, 2025.
•On May 9, 2022, we issued $100 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a fixed rate of 3.859%, due June 15, 2029.
Member Investments
Debt securities issued to our members represent an important, stable source of funding. Table 12 displays member debt outstanding, by product type, as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 12: Member Investments
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | Change |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | % of Total (1) | | Amount | | % of Total (1) | |
Member investment product type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper | | $ | 1,358,069 | | 57 | % | | $ | 1,124,607 | | 56 | % | | $ | 233,462 | |
Select notes | | 1,753,441 | | 100 | | | 1,539,150 | | 100 | | | 214,291 | |
Daily liquidity fund notes | | 427,790 | | 100 | | | 460,556 | | 100 | | | (32,766) | |
Medium-term notes | | 667,451 | | 11 | | | 595,037 | | 13 | | | 72,414 | |
Members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,234,161 | | 100 | | | 1,254,660 | | 100 | | | (20,499) | |
Total member investments | | $ | 5,440,912 | | | | $ | 4,974,010 | | | | $ | 466,902 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Percentage of total debt outstanding | | 19 | % | | | | 18 | % | | | | |
____________________________
(1) Represents outstanding debt attributable to members for each debt product type as a percentage of the total outstanding debt for each debt product type.
Member investments accounted for 19% and 18% of total debt outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Over the last three fiscal years, our member investments have averaged $5,173 million, calculated based on outstanding member investments as of the end of each fiscal quarter during the period.
Short-Term Borrowings
Short-term borrowings consist of borrowings with an original contractual maturity of one year or less and do not include the current portion of long-term debt. Short-term borrowings increased to $4,981 million as of May 31, 2022, from $4,582 million as of May 31, 2021, primarily due to an increase in short-term member investments, and accounted for 17% of total debt outstanding as of each respective date. See “Liquidity Risk” below and “Note 6—Short-Term Borrowings” for information on the composition of our short-term borrowings.
Long-Term and Subordinated Debt
Long-term debt, defined as debt with an original contractual maturity term of greater than one year, primarily consists of medium-term notes, collateral trust bonds, notes payable under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program and notes payable under our Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement. Subordinated debt consists of subordinated deferrable debt and members’ subordinated certificates. Our subordinated deferrable debt and members’ subordinated certificates have original contractual maturity terms of greater than one year.
Long-term and subordinated debt of $23,766 million and $22,844 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, accounted for 83% of total debt outstanding as of each respective date. We provide additional information on our long-term debt below under the section “Liquidity Risk” and “Note 7—Long-Term Debt” and “Note 8—Subordinated Deferrable Debt” in this Report.
Equity
Table 13 presents the components of total CFC equity and total equity as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 13: Equity
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | Change |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | |
Equity components: | | | | | | |
Membership fees and educational fund: | | | | | | |
Membership fees | | $ | 970 | | | $ | 968 | | | $ | 2 | |
Educational fund | | 2,417 | | | 2,157 | | | 260 | |
Total membership fees and educational fund | | 3,387 | | | 3,125 | | | 262 | |
Patronage capital allocated | | 954,988 | | | 923,970 | | | 31,018 | |
Members’ capital reserve | | 1,062,286 | | | 909,749 | | | 152,537 | |
Total allocated equity | | 2,020,661 | | | 1,836,844 | | | 183,817 | |
Unallocated net income (loss): | | | | | | |
Prior fiscal year-end cumulative derivative forward value losses(1) | | (461,162) | | | (1,079,739) | | | 618,577 | |
Year-to-date derivative forward value gains(1) | | 553,525 | | | 618,577 | | | (65,052) | |
Period-end cumulative derivative forward value gains (losses)(1) | | 92,363 | | | (461,162) | | | 553,525 | |
Other unallocated net loss | | (709) | | | (709) | | | — | |
Unallocated net income (loss) | | 91,654 | | | (461,871) | | | 553,525 | |
CFC retained equity | | 2,112,315 | | | 1,374,973 | | | 737,342 | |
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | | 2,258 | | | (25) | | | 2,283 | |
Total CFC equity | | 2,114,573 | | | 1,374,948 | | | 739,625 | |
Noncontrolling interests | | 27,396 | | | 24,931 | | | 2,465 | |
Total equity | | $ | 2,141,969 | | | $ | 1,399,879 | | | $ | 742,090 | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
____________________________
(1)Represents derivative forward value gains (losses) for CFC only, as total CFC equity does not include the noncontrolling interests of the variable interest entities NCSC and RTFC, which we are required to consolidate. We present the consolidated total derivative forward value gains (losses) in Table 37 in the “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section below. Also, see “Note 16—Business Segments” for the statements of operations for CFC.
The increase in total equity of $742 million to $2,142 million as of May 31, 2022 was attributable to our reported net income of $799 million for fiscal year 2022, partially offset by the CFC Board of Directors’ authorized patronage capital retirement in July 2021 of $58 million.
Allocation and Retirement of Patronage Capital
We are subject to District of Columbia law governing cooperatives, under which CFC is required to make annual allocations of net earnings, if any, in accordance with the provisions of the District of Columbia statutes. District of Columbia cooperative law requires cooperatives to allocate net earnings to patrons, to a general reserve in an amount sufficient to maintain a balance of at least 50% of paid-up capital and to a cooperative educational fund, as well as permits additional allocations to board-approved reserves. District of Columbia cooperative law also requires that a cooperative’s net earnings be allocated to all patrons in proportion to their individual patronage and each patron’s allocation be distributed to the patron unless the patron agrees that the cooperative may retain its share as additional capital. Pursuant to these provisions, the CFC Board of Directors is required to make annual allocations of net earnings, if any. CFC’s net earnings for determining allocations is based on non-GAAP adjusted net income, which excludes the impact of derivative forward value gains (losses). We provide a reconciliation of our adjusted net income to our reported net income and an explanation of the adjustments below in “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
In May 2022, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of $1 million of net earnings for fiscal year 2022 to the cooperative educational fund. In July 2022, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of fiscal year 2022 adjusted net income follows: $89 million to members in the form of patronage capital and $153 million to the members’ capital reserve. In July 2022, the CFC Board of Directors also authorized the retirement of patronage capital totaling $59 million, of which $44 million represented 50% of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2022 and $15 million represented the portion of the allocation from fiscal year 1997 net earnings that has been held for 25 years pursuant to the CFC Board of Directors’ policy. We expect to return the authorized patronage capital retirement amount of $59 million to members in cash in the second quarter of fiscal year 2023. The remaining portion of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2022 will be retained by CFC for 25 years pursuant to the guidelines adopted by the CFC Board of Directors in June 2009.
In May 2021, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of $1 million of net earnings for fiscal year 2021 to the cooperative educational fund. In July 2021 the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of fiscal year 2021 adjusted net income as follows: $90 million to members in the form of patronage capital and $102 million to the members’ capital reserve. In July 2021, the CFC Board of Directors also authorized the retirement of patronage capital totaling $58 million, of which $45 million represented 50% of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2021 and $13 million represented the portion of the allocation from fiscal year 1996 net earnings that has been held for 25 years pursuant to the CFC Board of Directors’ policy. This amount was returned to members in cash in September 2021. The remaining portion of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2021 will be retained by CFC for 25 years pursuant to the guidelines adopted by the CFC Board of Directors in June 2009.
The CFC Board of Directors is required to make annual allocations of adjusted net income, if any. CFC has made annual retirements of allocated net earnings in 42 of the last 43 fiscal years; however, future retirements of allocated amounts are determined based on CFC’s financial condition. The CFC Board of Directors has the authority to change the current practice for allocating and retiring net earnings at any time, subject to applicable laws.
| | |
ENTERPRISE RISK MANAGEMENT |
Overview
We face a variety of risks that can significantly affect our financial performance, liquidity, reputation and ability to meet the expectations of our members, investors and other stakeholders. As a financial services company, the major categories of risk exposures inherent in our business activities include credit risk, liquidity risk, market risk and operational risk. These risk categories are summarized below.
•Credit risk is the risk that a borrower or other counterparty will be unable to meet its obligations in accordance with agreed-upon terms.
•Liquidity risk is the risk that we will be unable to fund our operations and meet our contractual obligations or that we will be unable to fund new loans to borrowers engagedat a reasonable cost and tenor in similara timely manner.
•Market risk is the risk that changes in market variables, such as movements in interest rates, may adversely affect the match between the timing of the contractual maturities, re-pricing and prepayments of our financial assets and the related financial liabilities funding those assets.
•Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal controls, processes, systems, human error or external events, including natural disasters or public health emergencies, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic. Operational risk also includes cybersecurity risk, compliance risk, fiduciary risk, reputational risk and litigation risk.
Effective risk management is critical to our overall operations and to achieving our primary objective of providing cost-based financial products to our rural electric members while maintaining the sound financial results required for investment-grade credit ratings on our rated debt instruments. Accordingly, we have a risk-management framework that is intended to govern the principal risks we face in conducting our business and the aggregate amount of risk we are willing to accept, referred to as risk appetite and risk guidelines, in the context of CFC’s mission and strategic objectives and initiatives.
Risk-Management Framework
Our Enterprise Risk Management (“ERM”) framework consists of a defined policy and process for measuring, assessing and responding to key risks in alignment with CFC’s mission and CFC’s Board of Director’s strategic objectives. The board of directors has responsibility for the oversight and strategic direction of the ERM framework and has adopted a comprehensive risk-management policy that describes the roles and responsibilities of the board and management within this framework for identifying and managing risks. In fulfilling its risk-management oversight duties, the board of directors receives periodic reports on business activities and risk-management activities from management. Throughout the year at its periodic meetings, the CFC Board of Directors reviews important trends and emerging developments across key risks as assessed, measured and evaluated by management. The board also establishes CFC’s loan policies and has established a Loan Committee of the board comprising no fewer than 10 directors that reviews the performance of the loan portfolio in accordance with those policies. For additional information about the role of the CFC Board of Directors in risk governance and oversight, see “Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.”
Management is primarily accountable for execution of the ERM responsibilities and daily management of the risks associated with our business. Management executes its responsibility by establishing processes for identifying, measuring, assessing, managing, monitoring and reporting risks. Management also is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls to mitigate key risks. We have a number of management-level risk oversight committees across the organization and groups within the organization that have a defined set of authorities and responsibilities specific to one or more risk types, including the Corporate Credit Committee, Asset Liability Committee, Investment Management Committee, and Disclosure Committee. Management provides reports to the board of directors at each regularly scheduled board meeting, and more frequently as requested by the board of directors, relating to, among other things, the ongoing progress of managing risk at CFC given the ERM framework; management’s responses for the critical business risks identified during the risk assessment process and the status of any gaps or deficiencies; and CFC’s risk profile and trends, as well as emerging risks and opportunities.
Our loan portfolio, which represents the largest component of assets on our balance sheet, accounts for the substantial majority of our credit risk exposure. We also engage in geographic areascertain non-lending activities that would cause themmay give rise to counterparty credit risk, such as entering into derivative transactions to manage interest rate risk and purchasing investment securities.
Credit Risk Management
We manage credit risk related to our loan portfolio consistent with credit policies established by the CFC Board of Directors and through credit underwriting, approval and monitoring processes and practices adopted by management. Our board-established credit policies include guidelines regarding the types of credit products we offer, limits on credit we extend to individual borrowers, approval authorities delegated to management, and use of syndications and loan sales. We maintain an internal risk rating system in which we assign a rating to each borrower and credit facility. We review and update the risk ratings at least annually. Assigned risk ratings inform our credit approval, borrower monitoring and portfolio review processes. Our Corporate Credit Committee approves individual credit actions within its own authority and together with our Credit Risk Management group, establishes standards for credit underwriting, oversees credits deemed to be similarly impacted by economic or other conditions or when therehigher risk, reviews assigned risk ratings for accuracy, and monitors the overall credit quality and performance statistics of our loan portfolio.
Loan Portfolio Credit Risk
Our primary credit exposure is loans to rural electric cooperatives, which provide essential electric services to end-users, the majority of which are large exposuresresidential customers. We also have a limited portfolio of loans to single borrowers.not-for-profit and for-profit telecommunication companies. As a tax-exempt, member-owned finance cooperative, CFC’s principal focus is to provide funding to its rural
electric utility cooperative members to assist them in acquiring, constructing and operating electric distribution systems, power supply systems and related facilities. Loans outstanding to electric utility organizations totaled $29,584 million and $27,995 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, representing 98% and 99% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. The remaining loans outstanding in our loan portfolio were to RTFC members,
affiliates and associates in the telecommunications industry sector. The substantial majority of loans to our borrowers are long-term fixed-rate loans with terms of up to 35 years. Long-term fixed-rate loans accounted for 90% of total loans outstanding as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Because we lend primarily to our rural electric utility cooperative members, we have had a loan portfolio inherently subject to single-industry and single-obligor credit concentration risks. Outstanding loans to electric utility organizations represented approximately 99% ofrisk since our total outstanding loan portfolio as of May 31, 2019, unchanged from May 31, 2018. Although our organizational structure and mission results in single-industry concentration, we serve a geographically diverse group of electric and telecommunications members throughout the United States and its territories, including all 50 states, the District of Columbia, American Samoa and Guam. Our consolidated membership totaled 1,447 members and 222 associates as of May 31, 2019.
Geographic Concentration
We currently have loans outstanding to borrowers in 49 states. Texas had the largest concentration of outstanding loans to borrowers in any one state, with approximately 15% of total loans outstanding as of both May 31, 2019 and 2018, and also the largest concentration of borrowers, with 70 borrowers as of both May 31, 2019 and 2018. In addition to having the largest number of borrowers, Texas also had the largest concentration of electric power supply borrowers. Electric power supply borrowers generally require significantly more capital than electric distribution and telecommunications borrowers. Of our 67 electric power supply borrowers, eight were located in Texas as of May 31, 2019.
Table 22 presents the number of CFC, NCSC and RTFC borrowers and the percentage of total loans outstanding by state or U.S. territory as of May 31, 2019 and 2018.
Table 22: Loan Geographic Concentration
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2019 | | 2018 |
U.S. State/Territory | | Number of Borrowers | | % of Total Loans Outstanding | | Number of Borrowers | | % of Total Loans Outstanding |
Texas | | 70 |
| | 15.31 | % | | 70 |
| | 15.11 | % |
Missouri | | 47 |
| | 5.57 |
| | 48 |
| | 5.43 |
|
Georgia | | 47 |
| | 5.53 |
| | 48 |
| | 5.83 |
|
Colorado | | 24 |
| | 5.46 |
| | 26 |
| | 5.41 |
|
Kansas | | 31 |
| | 4.55 |
| | 30 |
| | 4.77 |
|
Florida | | 17 |
| | 4.31 |
| | 17 |
| | 3.70 |
|
Alaska | | 17 |
| | 3.70 |
| | 17 |
| | 3.79 |
|
Illinois | | 28 |
| | 3.53 |
| | 29 |
| | 3.65 |
|
North Dakota | | 17 |
| | 3.26 |
| | 18 |
| | 3.42 |
|
North Carolina | | 28 |
| | 3.16 |
| | 28 |
| | 3.01 |
|
South Carolina | | 24 |
| | 3.11 |
| | 23 |
| | 3.05 |
|
Indiana | | 39 |
| | 2.88 |
| | 37 |
| | 2.89 |
|
Oklahoma | | 27 |
| | 2.85 |
| | 26 |
| | 2.86 |
|
Kentucky | | 24 |
| | 2.85 |
| | 25 |
| | 2.86 |
|
Minnesota | | 53 |
| | 2.67 |
| | 53 |
| | 2.84 |
|
Arkansas | | 20 |
| | 2.40 |
| | 20 |
| | 2.26 |
|
Ohio | | 28 |
| | 2.29 |
| | 28 |
| | 2.10 |
|
Iowa | | 38 |
| | 2.24 |
| | 39 |
| | 2.00 |
|
Alabama | | 27 |
| | 2.22 |
| | 27 |
| | 2.28 |
|
Pennsylvania | | 17 |
| | 1.96 |
| | 17 |
| | 2.04 |
|
Wisconsin | | 23 |
| | 1.88 |
| | 24 |
| | 1.91 |
|
Maryland | | 2 |
| | 1.72 |
| | 2 |
| | 1.67 |
|
Mississippi | | 19 |
| | 1.64 |
| | 19 |
| | 1.58 |
|
Oregon | | 20 |
| | 1.38 |
| | 22 |
| | 1.42 |
|
Washington | | 10 |
| | 1.30 |
| | 11 |
| | 1.34 |
|
Virginia | | 18 |
| | 1.19 |
| | 19 |
| | 1.25 |
|
Utah | | 6 |
| | 1.17 |
| | 6 |
| | 1.39 |
|
Wyoming | | 11 |
| | 1.16 |
| | 13 |
| | 0.99 |
|
Nevada | | 8 |
| | 0.97 |
| | 6 |
| | 1.00 |
|
Louisiana | | 10 |
| | 0.96 |
| | 10 |
| | 1.25 |
|
Michigan | | 12 |
| | 0.88 |
| | 13 |
| | 0.92 |
|
Montana | | 25 |
| | 0.80 |
| | 25 |
| | 0.78 |
|
Arizona | | 11 |
| | 0.80 |
| | 11 |
| | 0.73 |
|
South Dakota | | 32 |
| | 0.78 |
| | 31 |
| | 0.86 |
|
Tennessee | | 19 |
| | 0.57 |
| | 18 |
| | 0.51 |
|
Idaho | | 12 |
| | 0.49 |
| | 12 |
| | 0.51 |
|
Hawaii | | 2 |
| | 0.46 |
| | 2 |
| | 0.52 |
|
Delaware | | 3 |
| | 0.44 |
| | 3 |
| | 0.44 |
|
New Hampshire | | 1 |
| | 0.33 |
| | 1 |
| | 0.36 |
|
New Mexico | | 16 |
| | 0.24 |
| | 16 |
| | 0.27 |
|
Massachusetts | | 1 |
| | 0.23 |
| | 1 |
| | 0.24 |
|
Vermont | | 6 |
| | 0.20 |
| | 5 |
| | 0.21 |
|
California | | 4 |
| | 0.14 |
| | 4 |
| | 0.13 |
|
New York | | 7 |
| | 0.13 |
| | 7 |
| | 0.12 |
|
Nebraska | | 13 |
| | 0.12 |
| | 13 |
| | 0.12 |
|
New Jersey | | 1 |
| | 0.07 |
| | 2 |
| | 0.07 |
|
West Virginia | | 2 |
| | 0.05 |
| | 2 |
| | 0.06 |
|
Maine | | 3 |
| | 0.03 |
| | 3 |
| | 0.04 |
|
Rhode Island | | 1 |
| | 0.02 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
District of Columbia | | — |
| | — |
| | 1 |
| | 0.01 |
|
Total | | 921 |
| | 100.00 | % | | 928 |
| | 100.00 | % |
Single-Obligor Concentration
Table 23 displays the outstanding loan exposure for the 20 largest borrowers, by company, as of May 31, 2019 and 2018. The 20 borrowers with the largest exposure consisted of 10 distribution systems, nine power supply systems and one NCSC associate as of both May 31, 2019 and 2018. The largest total exposure to a single borrower or controlled group represented approximately 2% of total loans outstanding as of both May 31, 2019 and 2018.
Table 23: Loan Exposure to 20 Largest Borrowers
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | Change |
| | 2019 | | 2018 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total | |
By company: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC | | $ | 5,369,879 |
| | 21 | % | | $ | 5,551,562 |
| | 22 | % | | $ | (181,683 | ) |
NCSC | | 245,559 |
| | 1 |
| | 257,334 |
| | 1 |
| | (11,775 | ) |
Total loan exposure to 20 largest borrowers | | 5,615,438 |
| | 22 |
| | 5,808,896 |
| | 23 |
| | (193,458 | ) |
Less: Loans covered under Farmer Mac standby purchase commitment | | (360,012 | ) | | (1 | ) | | (382,132 | ) | | (2 | ) | | 22,120 |
|
Net loan exposure to 20 largest borrowers | | $ | 5,255,426 |
| | 21 | % | | $ | 5,426,764 |
| | 21 | % | | $ | (171,338 | ) |
Although CFC has been exposed to single-industry and single-obligor concentrations since inception in 1969, we1969. We historically, however, have experienced limited defaults and very low credit losses in our electric utility loan portfolio. The likelihood of default and loss for our electric cooperative borrowers, which account for 99% of our outstanding loans as of May 31, 2019, has been lowportfolio due to several factors. First, as discussed above, we generally lend to our members on a senior secured basis. Second, electric cooperatives typically are consumer-owned, not-for-profit entities that provide an essential service to end-users, the majority of which are residential customers. Third,our electric cooperatives face limited competition, as they tend to operate in exclusive territories not serviced by public investor-owned utilities. Fourth, the majoritycooperative borrowers operate in states where electric cooperatives are not subject to rate regulation. Thus, they are able to make rate adjustments to pass along increased costs to the end customer without first obtaining state regulatory approval, allowing them to cover operating costs and generate sufficient earnings and cash flows to service their debt obligations. Finally,Second, electric cooperatives face limited competition, as they tend to operate in exclusive territories not serviced by public investor-owned utilities. Third, electric cooperatives typically are consumer-owned, not-for-profit entities that provide an essential service to end-users, the majority of which are residential customers. As not-for-profit entities, rural electric cooperatives, unlike investor-owned utilities, generally are eligible to apply for assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) and states to help recover from major disasters or emergencies. Fourth, electric cooperatives tend to adhere to a conservative core business strategy model that has historically resulted in a relatively stable, resilient operating environment and overall strong financial performance and credit strength for the electric cooperative network. Finally, we generally lend to our members on a senior secured basis, which reduces the risk of loss in the event of a borrower default.
Below we provide information on the credit risk profile of our loan portfolio, including security provisions, credit concentration, credit quality indicators and our allowance for credit losses.
Security Provisions
Except when providing line of credit loans, we generally lend to our members on a senior secured basis. Long-term loans are generally secured on parity with other secured lenders (primarily RUS), if any, by all assets and revenue of the borrower with exceptions typical in utility mortgages. Line of credit loans are generally unsecured. In addition to the collateral pledged to secure our loans, distribution and power supply borrowers also are required to set rates charged to customers to achieve certain specified financial ratios. Table 14 presents, by legal entity and member class and by loan type, secured and unsecured loans in our loan portfolio as of May 31, 2022 and 2021. Of our total loans outstanding, 93% were secured as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 14: Loans—Loan Portfolio Security Profile
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2022 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Secured | | % of Total | | Unsecured | | % of Total | | Total |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 22,405,486 | | | 94 | % | | $ | 1,438,756 | | | 6 | % | | $ | 23,844,242 | |
Power supply | | 4,455,098 | | | 91 | | | 446,672 | | 9 | | | 4,901,770 | |
Statewide and associate | | 83,759 | | | 66 | | | 43,104 | | 34 | | | 126,863 | |
Total CFC | | 26,944,343 | | | 93 | | | 1,928,532 | | | 7 | | | 28,872,875 | |
NCSC | | 689,887 | | | 97 | | | 20,991 | | | 3 | | | 710,878 | |
RTFC | | 454,985 | | | 97 | | | 12,616 | | | 3 | | | 467,601 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 28,089,215 | | | 93 | | | $ | 1,962,139 | | | 7 | | | $ | 30,051,354 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate | | $ | 26,731,763 | | | 99 | % | | $ | 220,609 | | | 1 | % | | $ | 26,952,372 | |
Variable-rate | | 817,866 | | | 100 | | | 2,335 | | | — | | | 820,201 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total long-term loans | | 27,549,629 | | | 99 | | | 222,944 | | | 1 | | | 27,772,573 | |
Line of credit loans | | 539,586 | | | 24 | | | 1,739,195 | | | 76 | | | 2,278,781 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 28,089,215 | | | 93 | | | $ | 1,962,139 | | | 7 | | | $ | 30,051,354 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2021 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Secured | | % of Total | | Unsecured | | % of Total | | Total |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 20,702,657 | | | 94 | % | | $ | 1,324,766 | | | 6 | % | | $ | 22,027,423 | |
Power supply | | 4,458,311 | | | 86 | | | 696,001 | | 14 | | | 5,154,312 | |
Statewide and associate | | 88,004 | | | 83 | | | 18,117 | | 17 | | | 106,121 | |
Total CFC | | 25,248,972 | | | 93 | | | 2,038,884 | | | 7 | | | 27,287,856 | |
NCSC | | 662,782 | | | 94 | | | 44,086 | | | 6 | | | 706,868 | |
RTFC | | 399,717 | | | 95 | | | 20,666 | | | 5 | | | 420,383 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 26,311,471 | | | 93 | | | $ | 2,103,636 | | | 7 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate | | $ | 25,278,805 | | | 99 | % | | $ | 235,961 | | | 1 | % | | $ | 25,514,766 | |
Variable-rate | | 655,675 | | | 100 | | | 2,904 | | | — | | | 658,579 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total long-term loans | | 25,934,480 | | | 99 | | | 238,865 | | | 1 | | | 26,173,345 | |
Line of credit loans | | 376,991 | | | 17 | | | 1,864,771 | | | 83 | | | 2,241,762 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 26,311,471 | | | 93 | | | $ | 2,103,636 | | | 7 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
____________________________
(1)Represents the unpaid principal balance, net of charge-offs and recoveries of loans as of the end of each period. Excludes unamortized deferred loan origination costs of $12 million as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Credit Quality
We believe the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio remained strong as of May 31, 2022. Historically, we have had limited defaults and losses on loans in our electric utility loan portfolio largely because of the essential nature of the service provided by electric utility cooperatives as well as other factors, such as limited rate regulation and competition, which we discuss further in the section “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk.” In addition, we generally lend to members on a senior secured basis, which reduces the risk of loss in the event of a borrower default. Loans outstanding to electric utility organizations of $29,584 million and $27,995 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, represented approximately 98% and 99% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. Of our total loans outstanding, 93% were secured as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
We had loans to three borrowers totaling $228 million classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2022. In comparison we had loans to four borrowers totaling $237 million classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2021. Nonperforming loans represented 0.76% and 0.84% of total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The reduction in nonperforming loans of $9 million during fiscal year 2022 was due in part to our receipt during fiscal year 2022 of full payment of all amounts due on nonperforming loans to two RTFC borrowers totaling $9 million. In addition, we have
continued to receive payments on the remaining outstanding nonperforming loan to a CFC electric power supply borrower, including payments totaling $29 million during fiscal year 2022, which reduced the balance of this loan to $114 million as of May 31, 2022, from $143 million as of May 31, 2021. These reductions were partially offset by the classification during the fiscal quarter ended May 31, 2022 (the “fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022”) of the $28 million loan outstanding to Brazos Sandy Creek Electric Cooperative Inc. (“Brazos Sandy Creek”) as nonperforming following its bankruptcy filing, as discussed below.
Loans outstanding to Brazos, which filed for bankruptcy in March 2021 due to its exposure to elevated wholesale electric power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex, accounted for $86 million and $85 million of our total nonperforming loans as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Brazos is not permitted to make scheduled loan payments without approval of the bankruptcy court. As a result, we have not received payments from Brazos since March 2021, and its loans outstanding to us were delinquent as of each respective date.
On March 18, 2022, Brazos Sandy Creek, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Brazos and a CFC Texas-based electric power supply borrower, filed for bankruptcy following the filing of a motion by Brazos to reject its power purchase agreement with Brazos Sandy Creek as part of Brazos’ bankruptcy proceedings. A Chapter 7 Trustee has been appointed, and the Chapter 7 Trustee was approved by the bankruptcy court to operate Brazos Sandy Creek as a going concern. CFC had a secured loan outstanding to Brazos Sandy Creek totaling $28 million as of May 31, 2022, which, upon notification of the bankruptcy filing by Brazos Sandy Creek, we classified as nonperforming during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022. Brazos Sandy Creek’s loan outstanding of $28 million was delinquent as of May 31, 2022 and on nonaccrual status as of this date. Aggregate loans outstanding to Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek totaled $114 million as of May 31, 2022, of which $49 million were secured and $65 million were unsecured. Prior to Brazos’ and Brazos Sandy Creek’s bankruptcy filings in March 2021 and March 2022, respectively, we had not experienced any defaults or charge-offs in our electric utility and telecommunications loan portfolios since fiscal years 2013 and 2017, respectively.
Our allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio decreased to $68 million and 0.22%, respectively, as of May 31, 2022, from $86 million and 0.30%, respectively, as of May 31, 2021. The decrease in the allowance for credit losses of $18 million reflected a decrease in the collective and asset-specific allowance of $14 million and $4 million, respectively. The collective allowance decrease of $14 million was attributable to an improvement in Rayburn’s credit risk profile following Rayburn’s successful completion of a securitization transaction in February 2022 and subsequent payment in full of its obligations to ERCOT and a significant reduction in loans outstanding to Rayburn, as discussed above. The asset-specific allowance decrease of $4 million stemmed from the combined impact of the elimination of an asset-specific allowance attributable to nonperforming loans totaling $9 million that were paid in full during the second quarter of fiscal year 2022 and the decrease of an asset-specific allowance for a nonperforming CFC power supply borrower, attributable to loan payments received on this loan, partially offset by the addition of an asset-specific allowance for Brazos Sandy Creek due to its bankruptcy filing, as discussed above.
As a result of Rayburn’s payment in full of its February 2021 polar vortex-related outstanding obligations to ERCOT, we believe our exposure to the significant adverse financial impact on some electric utilities from the surge in wholesale power costs in Texas during the February 2021 polar vortex is now limited to loans outstanding to Brazos and its wholly-owned subsidiary Brazos Sandy Creek.
We discuss our methodology for estimating the allowance for credit losses in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” of this Report. We also provide additional information on the credit quality of our loan portfolio and the allowance for credit losses below in the sections “Critical Accounting Estimates” and “Credit Risk—Allowance for Credit Losses” and “Note 4—Loans” and “Note 5—Allowance for Credit Losses” of this Report.
Financing Activity
We issue debt primarily to fund growth in our loan portfolio. As such, our debt outstanding generally increases and decreases in response to member loan demand. Total debt outstanding increased $1,321 million, or 5%, to $28,747 million as of May 31, 2022, due to borrowings to fund the increase in loans to members. Outstanding dealer commercial paper of $1,025 million as of May 31, 2022 was within our quarter-end target range. Our goal is to maintain dealer commercial paper balance at each quarter-end within a range of $1,000 million and $1,500 million. We provide additional information on our financing activities during fiscal year 2022 in the below in section “Consolidated Balance Sheet Analysis—Debt” of this Report.
On December 13, 2021, S&P affirmed CFC’s credit ratings and stable outlook under its revised criteria and updated methodology for rating financial institutions published on December 9, 2021. On December 16, 2021, Moody’s affirmed CFC’s credit ratings and stable outlook. On February 4, 2022, Fitch issued a credit ratings report review of CFC in which Fitch affirmed CFC’s credit ratings and stable outlook. Table 31 presents our credit ratings for each CFC debt product type as of May 31, 2022, which remain unchanged as of the date of this Report, in the below section “Liquidity Risk—Credit Ratings” of this Report.
Liquidity
Our primary sources of funds include member loan principal repayments, securities held in our investment portfolio, committed bank revolving lines of credit, committed loan facilities under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program, revolving note purchase agreements with Farmer Mac and proceeds from debt issuances to our members and in the public capital markets. Although as a non-bank financial institution we are not subject to regulatory liquidity requirements, we monitor our liquidity and funding positions on an ongoing basis and assess our ability to meet our scheduled debt obligations and other cash flow requirements based on point-in-time metrics as well as forward-looking projections. Our liquidity and funding assessment takes into consideration amounts available under existing liquidity sources, the expected rollover of member short-term investments and scheduled loan principal repayment amounts, as well as our continued ability to access the private placement and public capital markets.
As of May 31, 2022, our available liquidity totaled $6,797 million, consisting of (i) cash and cash equivalents of $154 million; (ii) investments in debt securities with an aggregate fair value of $566 million, which is subject to changes based on market fluctuations; (iii) up to $2,597 million available under committed bank revolving line of credit agreements; (iv) up to $1,075 million available under committed loan facilities under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program; and (v) up to $2,405 million available under a revolving note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac, subject to market conditions. In addition to our existing available liquidity of $6,797 million as of May 31, 2022, we expect to receive $1,479 million from scheduled long-term loan principal payments over the next 12 months.
Debt scheduled to mature over the next 12 months totaled $6,894 million as of May 31, 2022, consisting of short-term borrowings of $4,981 million and long-term and subordinated debt of $1,913 million. The short-term borrowings scheduled maturity amount of $4,981 million consists of member investments of $3,956 million and dealer commercial paper of $1,025 million. The long-term and subordinated scheduled debt obligations over the next 12 months of $1,913 million consist of debt maturities and scheduled debt payment amounts.
Our available liquidity of $6,797 million as of May 31, 2022, was $97 million below our total scheduled debt obligations over the next 12 months of $6,894 million. We believe we can continue to roll over our member short-term investments of $3,956 million as of May 31, 2022, based on our expectation that our members will continue to reinvest their excess cash in short-term investment products offered by CFC. Our members historically have maintained a relatively stable level of short-term investments in CFC in the form of commercial paper, select notes, daily liquidity fund notes and medium-term notes. Member short-term investments in CFC have averaged $3,584 million over the last 12 fiscal quarter-end reporting periods. In addition, we expect to receive $1,479 million from scheduled long-term loan principal payments over the next 12 months. Our available liquidity of $6,797 million as of May 31, 2022 was $3,859 million in excess of, or 2.3 times, our total scheduled debt obligations, excluding member short-term investments, over the next 12 months of $2,938 million.
We expect to continue accessing the dealer commercial paper market as a cost-effective means of satisfying our incremental short-term liquidity needs. Although the intra-period amount of dealer commercial paper outstanding may fluctuate based on our liquidity requirements, our intent is to manage our short-term wholesale funding risk by maintaining dealer commercial paper outstanding at each quarter-end within a range of $1,000 million and $1,500 million. Maintaining our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements and continuing to be in compliance with the covenants of these agreements serve to mitigate our rollover risk, as we can draw on these facilities, if necessary, to repay dealer or member commercial paper that cannot be refinanced with similar debt. In addition, under master repurchase agreements we have with counterparties, we can obtain short-term funding in secured borrowing transactions by selling investment-grade corporate debt securities from our investment securities portfolio subject to an obligation to repurchase the same or similar securities at an agreed-upon price and date.
The issuance of long-term debt, which represents the most significant component of our funding, allows us to reduce our reliance on short-term borrowings, as well as effectively manage our refinancing and interest rate risk. We expect to continue to issue debt in the private placement and public capital markets to meet our funding needs and believe that we have sufficient sources of liquidity to meet our debt obligations and support our operations over the next 12 months.
We provide additional information on our liquidity profile and our primary sources and uses of funds, including projected amounts, by quarter, over each of the next six fiscal quarters through the quarter ending November 30, 2023, in the below section “Liquidity Risk” of this Report.
COVID-19
We believe that the COVID-19 pandemic has not adversely affected our primary objective of providing our members with the credit products they need to fund their operations and that we have been able to successfully navigate the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic to date. Our electric utility cooperative borrowers operate in a sector identified by the U.S. government as one of the 16 critical infrastructure sectors because the nature of the services provided in these sectors is considered essential and vital in supporting and maintaining the overall functioning of the U.S. economy. Historically, the utility sector in which our electric utility borrowers operate has been resilient to economic downturns. To date, we believe that the pandemic has not had a significant negative impact on the overall financial performance of our members. We also believe that the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio has not been adversely affected by market, economic and other disruptions caused by the pandemic, as we have not experienced any delinquencies in scheduled loan payments or received requests for payment deferrals from our borrowers due to the pandemic.
CFC has been able to maintain business continuity throughout the pandemic and has experienced no pandemic-related employee furloughs or layoffs. We have remote-work options available for most employees while also providing for in- person collaboration at our headquarters in Loudoun County, Virginia, as we believe this working model allows CFC to provide the highest quality of service and deliver more effectively on our member-focused mission. Effective March 2, 2022, we lifted our mask requirement at CFC’s headquarters for vaccinated employees based on the CDC’s updated guidance and the COVID-19 Community Level low classification for Loudoun County at that time. We plan to continue to monitor and update our practices in response to changes in the COVID-19 workplace safety and health standards established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) and Virginia as they relate to Loudoun County and guidance provided by the CDC.
Although most health and safety restrictions in response to COVID-19 have been lifted, we cannot predict the potential future impact that the COVID-19 pandemic may have on our operations and financial performance, or the specific ways the pandemic may uniquely impact our members. We provide additional information on actions taken in response to the pandemic to protect the safety and health of our employees under “Item 1. Business—Human Capital Management” in this Report. We discuss the potential adverse impact of natural disasters, including weather-related events such as the February 2021 polar vortex, and widespread health emergencies, such as COVID-19, on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity under “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Operations and Business Risks” in this Report.
Electric Cooperative Industry Trends and Developments
We believe there are emerging developments and trends in the electric cooperative sector that may present opportunities as well as challenges for our electric cooperative members. These trends include (i) expanded investments by some electric cooperatives to deploy broadband services to their members; (ii) inflation and supply chain disruptions; (iii) an increased focus on enhancing electric system resiliency and reliability; (iv) evolving relationships between some electric cooperative power supply systems and electric cooperative distribution systems to increase investments in renewable power supply; and (v) growing support of beneficial electrification strategies to reduce overall carbon emissions, while also providing benefits to cooperative members.
Expanded Investments to Deploy Broadband Services
Many rural electric distribution cooperatives have made or are making infrastructure investments that include building fiber optic lines to improve electric grid system reliability, efficiency and cost savings, as fiber operations offers enhanced communication to monitor electric systems, identify outages and speed electric restoration. Some of these electric
cooperatives are leveraging these fiber assets to offer access to broadband services, either directly or by partnering with local telecommunication companies and others, to the communities they serve. We are currently aware of 185 broadband projects by different CFC member cooperatives, and we financed or are financing 112 of these 185 broadband projects. Capital expenditures for the completion of these 185 broadband projects are expected to total approximately $9,632 million. We believe that the capital expenditures for the completion of the broadband projects that we financed or are financing will total approximately $3,985 million. Our aggregate loans outstanding to CFC electric distribution cooperative members relating to broadband projects, which we started tracking in October 2017, increased to an estimated $1,647 million as of May 31, 2022, from approximately $854 million as of May 31, 2021. The three states with the largest CFC loans outstanding for broadband projects were Oklahoma, Indiana and Arkansas as of May 31, 2022, and broadband loans outstanding for these states totaled $205 million, $191 million and $155 million, respectively, as of this date. Many of these broadband projects are also financially supported by various states and the federal government, which reduces the credit risk for CFC and the investment risk for our electric cooperative members. We expect our member electric cooperatives to continue in their efforts to expand broadband access to unserved and underserved communities.
Inflation and Supply Chain Disruptions
Many rural electric cooperatives are experiencing increasing cost in power supply, labor and materials. Power supply cost for many cooperatives is increasingly volatile based on natural gas and coal market pricing. For example, according to the Economic News Release from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics published on July 13, 2022, the index for natural gas increased 38.4% over the last 12 months, the largest increase since the period ending October 2005. In addition to increasing material cost, supply chain disruptions have extended delivery times for utility hardware and are causing project timelines to be extended as well. Labor cost and competition for employees has increased for some cooperatives due to labor shortages.
Increased Focus on Enhancing Electric System Resiliency and Reliability
We have observed an increase in capital investments by electric cooperatives to proactively strengthen existing electric systems as well as replace systems in the aftermath of damages from recent weather-related incidents, including hurricanes and winter storms. We believe that the adverse impact on electric systems from weather-related incidents and wildfires has resulted in a heightened awareness by electric cooperatives of the need to focus attention on making infrastructure upgrades to improve both the resiliency and reliability of electric systems.
Evolving Cooperative Focus on Clean Energy Supply Investments
We also have observed that many electric power supply and electric distribution cooperatives are increasingly focused on efforts to identify potential opportunities to increase investments in renewable power supply and storage. This includes both on-balance sheet construction of renewable generation and off-balance sheet acquisition of renewable power through power purchase agreements. According to the NRECA, electric cooperatives more than tripled their renewable capacity from 3.9 gigawatts to more than 13 gigawatts from 2010 to 2021, including adding 1.4 gigawatts of renewable capacity in 2021 alone.
Growing Support for Beneficial Electrification
Rural electric cooperatives have become increasingly supportive of beneficial electrification, which refers to the replacement of fossil-fuel powered systems with electrical ones in a way that reduces overall emissions, while providing benefits to the environment and to households. The increased support among electric cooperatives reflects an expectation that beneficial electrification will result in increased sales, while also saving money for members and reducing carbon emission.
We believe the above trends and current investment priorities of our electric cooperative members will require reliable, affordable sources of funding and may result in a steady demand for capital from CFC.
Outlook
As further described below in the “Liquidity Risk—Projected Near-Term Sources and Uses of Funds” section, we currently anticipate net long-term loan growth of $1,150 million over the next 12 months. On March 16, 2022, the Federal Open
Market Committee (“FOMC”) of the Federal Reserve raised the target range for the federal funds rate by 0.25% to a range of 0.25% to 0.50%, the first rate increase since December 2018. The FOMC further raised the target range for the federal funds rate at each of its meetings held in May, June and July 2022, with the federal funds rate reaching a target range of 2.25% to 2.50%. The FOMC also signaled an expectation of ongoing increases in the federal funds rate at each of its remaining three meetings in 2022, and pointed to a consensus target rate of 3.40% by December 31, 2022, an increase from its March 2022 estimated target rate of 1.90%, due to an increase in inflation projections. The yield curve has flattened throughout 2022, was briefly inverted in late March 2022 and again in June and July 2022. The consensus market outlook for interest rates as of the second half of June 2022 pointed to rising interest rates across the yield curve, with the yield curve remaining flat or inverted over the remainder of 2022. Based on this yield curve forecast, we anticipate a decrease in our reported net interest income, reported net interest yield and adjusted net interest yield over the next 12 months relative to the prior 12-month period ended May 31, 2022. However, we expect a slight increase in our adjusted net interest income over the next 12 months relative to the prior 12-month period ended May 31, 2022, due to an anticipated reduction in our derivative net periodic cash settlements expense as short-term interest rates rise.
We anticipate a slight decrease in our adjusted net income and adjusted TIER over the next 12 months. While our goal is to maintain an adjusted debt-to-equity ratio of approximately 6.00-to-1, we expect that our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio will remain near the current level due to the anticipated loan growth. As discussed above, we are subject to earnings volatility, often significant, because we do not apply hedge accounting to our interest rate swaps. Therefore, the periodic unrealized fluctuations in the fair value of our interest rate swaps are recorded in our earnings. The variances in our earnings between periods are generally attributable to significant shifts in recorded unrealized derivative forward value gain and loss amounts. We exclude the impact of unrealized derivative forward fair value gains and losses from our non-GAAP adjusted measures.
We are unable to provide a reconciliation of our projected adjusted net income, adjusted TIER and adjusted debt-to-equity ratio to the most directly comparable GAAP measures or directional guidance for the most directly comparable GAAP measures on a forward-looking basis without unreasonable effort due to the significant shifts in the unrealized derivative forward value gains and losses recorded each period. The majority of our swaps are long-term, with an average remaining life of approximately 15 years as of May 31, 2022. We can reasonably estimate the realized net periodic derivative cash settlement amounts over the next 12 months for our interest rate swaps, which are typically based on the 3-month LIBOR and the fixed rate of the swap. In contrast, the unrealized periodic derivative forward value gains and losses are largely based on future expected changes in longer-term interest rates, which we are unable to accurately predict for each reporting period over the next 12 months. Because unrealized periodic derivative forward value gain and loss amounts are a key driver of changes in our earnings between periods, this unavailable information is likely to have a significant impact on our reported net income, TIER and debt-to-equity ratio, which represent the most directly comparable GAAP measures. We provide reconciliations of our non-GAAP adjusted net income, adjusted TIER and adjusted debt-to-equity ratio to the most directly comparable GAAP measures for each reporting period included in this Report in the section “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.” These reconciliations illustrate the potential significant impact that unrealized derivative forward value gains and losses could have on our future reported net income, reported TIER and reported adjusted debt-to-equity ratio.
| | |
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES |
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make a number of judgments, estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets, liabilities, income and expenses in our consolidated financial statements. Understanding our accounting policies and the extent to which we use management’s judgment and estimates in applying these policies is integral to understanding our financial statements. We provide a discussion of our significant accounting policies in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.”
Certain accounting estimates are considered critical because they involve significant judgments and assumptions about highly complex and inherently uncertain matters, and the use of reasonably different estimates and assumptions could have a material impact on our results of operations or financial condition. The determination of the allowance for expected credit losses over the remaining expected life of the loans in our loan portfolio involves a significant degree of management judgment and level of estimation uncertainty. As such, we have identified our accounting policy governing the estimation of the allowance for credit losses as a critical accounting estimate. Management established policies and control procedures intended to ensure that the methodology used for determining our allowance for credit losses, including any judgments and assumptions made as part of such method, are well-controlled and applied consistently from period to period. We evaluate
our critical accounting estimates and judgments required by our policies on an ongoing basis and update them as necessary based on changing conditions. We describe our allowance methodology and process for estimating the allowance for credit losses under “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—Allowance for Credit Losses—Loan Portfolio—Current Methodology.”
Upon our adoption of CECL on June 1, 2020, we are required to maintain an allowance based on a current estimate of credit losses that are expected to occur over the remaining life of the loans in our portfolio. The methods utilized to estimate the allowance for credit losses, key assumptions and quantitative and qualitative information considered by management in determining the appropriate allowance for credit losses is discussed in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.”
Key inputs, such as our historical loss data and third-party default data, that we use in determining the appropriate allowance for credit losses are more readily quantifiable, while other inputs, such as our internally assigned borrower risk ratings that are intended to assess a borrower’s capacity to meet its financial obligations and provide information on the probability of default, require more qualitative judgment. Degrees of imprecision exist in each of these inputs due in part to subjective judgments involved and an inherent lag in the data available to quantify current conditions and events that may affect our credit loss estimate.
Our internally assigned borrower risk ratings serve as the primary credit quality indicator for our loan portfolio. We perform an annual comprehensive review of each of our borrowers, following the receipt of the borrower’s annual audited financial statements, to reassess the borrower’s risk rating. In addition, interim risk-rating adjustments may occur as a result of updated information affecting a borrower’s ability to fulfill its obligations or other significant developments and trends. Our Credit Risk Management Group and Corporate Credit Committee review and provide rigorous oversight and governance around our internally assigned risk ratings to ensure the ratings process is consistent. In addition, we engage third-party credit risk management experts to conduct an independent annual review of our risk rating system to validate its overall integrity. This review involves an evaluation of the accuracy and timeliness of individual risk ratings and the overall effectiveness of our risk-rating framework relative to the risk profile of our credit exposures. While we have a robust risk-rating process, changes in our borrower risk ratings may not always directly coincide with changes in the risk profile of an individual borrower due to the timing of the rating process and a potential lag in the receipt of information necessary to evaluate the impact of emerging developments and current conditions on the risk ratings of our borrower. Although our allowance for credit losses is sensitive to each key input, shifts in the credit risk ratings of our borrowers generally have the most notable impact on our allowance for credit losses.
Allowance for Credit Losses
Our allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio decreased to $68 million and 0.22%, respectively, as of May 31, 2022, from $86 million and 0.30%, respectively, as of May 31, 2021. The decrease in the allowance for credit losses of $18 million reflected a decrease in the collective and asset-specific allowance of $14 million and $4 million, respectively. We discuss the methodology used to estimate the allowance for credit losses in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.”
Key Assumptions
Determining the appropriateness of the allowance for credit losses is subject to numerous estimates and assumptions requiring significant management judgment about matters that involve a high degree of subjectivity and are difficult to predict. The key assumptions in determining our collective allowance that require significant management judgment and may have a material impact on the amount of the allowance include the segmentation of our loan portfolio; our internally assigned borrower risk ratings; the probability of default; the loss severity or recovery rate in the event of default for each portfolio segment; and management’s consideration of qualitative factors that may cause estimated credit losses associated with our existing loan portfolio to differ from our historical loss experience.
As discussed below in “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk,” CFC has experienced only 18 defaults in its 53-year history, and prior to Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek we had no defaults in our electric utility loan portfolio since fiscal year 2013. As such, we have a limited history of defaults to develop reasonable and supportable estimated probability of default rates for our existing loan portfolio. We therefore utilize third-party default data for the utility sector as a proxy to estimate
probability of default rates for our loan portfolio segments. However, we utilize our internal historical loss experience to estimate loss given default, or the recovery rate, for each of our loan portfolio segments. We believe our internal historical loss experience serves as a more reliable estimate of loss severity than third-party data due to the organizational structure and operating environment of rural utility cooperatives, our lending practice of generally requiring a senior security position on the assets and revenue of borrowers for long-term loans, the approach we take in working with borrowers that may be experiencing operational or financial issues and other factors discussed in “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk.”
We generally consider nonperforming loans as well as loans that have been or are anticipated to be modified under a troubled debt restructuring for individual evaluation given the risk characteristics of such loans and establish an asset-specific allowance for these loans. The key assumptions in determining our asset-specific allowance that require significant management judgment and may have a material impact on the amount of the allowance include measuring the amount and timing of future cash flows for individually evaluated loans that are not collateral-dependent and estimating the value of the underlying collateral for individually evaluated loans that are collateral-dependent.
The degree to which any particular assumption affects the allowance for credit losses depends on the severity of the change and its relationship to the other assumptions. We regularly evaluate the key inputs and assumptions used in determining the allowance for credit losses and update them, as necessary, to better reflect present conditions, including current trends in credit performance and borrower risk profile, portfolio concentration risk, changes in risk-management practices, changes in the regulatory environment and other factors relevant to our loan portfolio segments. We did not change our allowance methodology or nature of the underlying key inputs used and assumptions used in measuring our allowance for credit losses during fiscal year 2022.
Sensitivity Analysis
As noted above, our allowance for credit losses is sensitive to a variety of factors. While management uses its best judgment to assess loss data and other factors to determine the allowance for credit losses, changes in our loss assumptions, adjustments to assigned borrower risk ratings, the use of alternate external data sources or other factors could affect our estimate of probable credit losses inherent in the portfolio as of each balance sheet date, which would also impact the related provision for credit losses recognized in our consolidated statements of operations. For example, changes in the inputs below, without taking into consideration the impact of other potential offsetting or correlated inputs, would have the following effect on our allowance of credit losses as of May 31, 2022.
•A 10% increase or decrease in the default rates for all of our portfolio segments would result in a corresponding increase or decrease of approximately $3 million.
•A 1% increase or decrease in the recovery rates for all of our portfolio segments would result in a corresponding decrease or increase of approximately $9 million.
•A one-notch downgrade in the internal borrower risk ratings for our entire loan portfolio would result in an increase of approximately $13 million, while a one-notch upgrade would result in a decrease of approximately $14 million.
These sensitivity analyses are intended to provide an indication of the isolated impact of hypothetical alternative assumptions on our allowance for credit losses. Because management evaluates a variety of factors and inputs in determining the allowance for credit losses, these sensitivity analyses are not considered probable and do not imply an expectation of future changes in loss rates or borrower risk ratings. Given current processes employed in estimating the allowance for credit losses, management believes the inherent loss rates and currently assigned risk ratings are appropriate. It is possible that others performing the analyses, given the same information, may at any point in time reach different reasonable conclusions that could be significant to our consolidated financial statements.
We discuss the risks and uncertainties related to management’s judgments and estimates in applying accounting policies that have been identified as a critical accounting estimates under “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Regulatory and Compliance Risks” in this Report. We provide additional information on the allowance for credit losses under the below section “Credit Risk—Allowance for Credit Losses” and “Note 5—Allowance for Credit Losses” in this Report.
| | |
RECENT ACCOUNTING CHANGES AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTS |
Recent Accounting Changes
We provide information on recently adopted accounting standards and the adoption impact on CFC’s consolidated financial statements and recently issued accounting standards not yet required to be adopted and the expected adoption impact in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.” To the extent we believe the adoption of new accounting standards has had or will have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations, financial condition or liquidity, we discuss the impact in the applicable section(s) of this MD&A.
| | |
CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS |
This section provides a comparative discussion of our consolidated results of operations between fiscal years 2022 and 2021. Following this section, we provide a discussion and analysis of material changes in amounts reported on our consolidated balance sheet as of May 31, 2022 and amounts reported as of May 31, 2021. You should read these sections together with our “Executive Summary—Outlook” where we discuss trends and other factors that we expect will affect our future results of operations. See “Item 7. MD&A—Consolidated Results of Operations” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 (“2021 Form 10-K”) for a comparative discussion of our consolidated results of operations between fiscal year 2021 and the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020 (“fiscal year 2020”).
Net Interest Income
Net interest income, which is our largest source of revenue, represents the difference between the interest income earned on our interest-earning assets and the interest expense on our interest-bearing liabilities. Our net interest yield represents the difference between the yield on our interest-earning assets and the cost of our interest-bearing liabilities plus the impact of non-interest bearing funding. We expect net interest income and our net interest yield to fluctuate based on changes in interest rates and changes in the amount and composition of our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. We do not fund each individual loan with specific debt. Rather, we attempt to minimize costs and maximize efficiency by proportionately funding large aggregated amounts of loans.
Table 2 presents average balances for fiscal years 2022, 2021 and 2020, and for each major category of our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, the interest income earned or interest expense incurred, and the average yield or cost. Table 2 also presents non-GAAP adjusted interest expense, adjusted net interest income and adjusted net interest yield, which reflect the inclusion of net accrued periodic derivative cash settlements expense in interest expense. We provide reconciliations of our non-GAAP adjusted measures to the most comparable U.S. GAAP measures under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
Table 2: Average Balances, Interest Income/Interest Expense and Average Yield/Cost | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Assets: | | Average Balance | | Interest Income/Expense | | Average Yield/Cost | | Average Balance | | Interest Income/Expense | | Average Yield/Cost | | Average Balance | | Interest Income/Expense | | Average Yield/Cost |
Long-term fixed-rate loans(1) | | $ | 25,974,724 | | | $ | 1,062,223 | | | 4.09 | % | | $ | 24,978,267 | | | $ | 1,051,524 | | | 4.21 | % | | $ | 23,890,577 | | | $ | 1,043,918 | | | 4.37 | % |
Long-term variable-rate loans | | 749,131 | | | 16,895 | | | 2.26 | | | 645,819 | | | 14,976 | | | 2.32 | | | 891,541 | | | 31,293 | | | 3.51 | |
Line of credit loans | | 2,148,197 | | | 46,887 | | | 2.18 | | | 1,626,092 | | | 35,596 | | | 2.19 | | | 1,718,364 | | | 55,140 | | | 3.21 | |
Troubled debt restructuring (“TDR”) loans | | 9,528 | | | 735 | | | 7.71 | | | 10,328 | | | 790 | | | 7.65 | | | 11,238 | | | 836 | | | 7.44 | |
Nonperforming loans | | 227,795 | | | — | | | — | | | 185,554 | | | — | | | — | | | 5,957 | | | — | | | — | |
Other, net(2) | | — | | | (1,448) | | | — | | | — | | | (1,381) | | | — | | | — | | | (1,304) | | | — | |
Total loans | | 29,109,375 | | | 1,125,292 | | | 3.87 | | | 27,446,060 | | | 1,101,505 | | | 4.01 | | | 26,517,677 | | | 1,129,883 | | | 4.26 | |
Cash, time deposits and investment securities | | 762,489 | | | 15,951 | | | 2.09 | | | 796,566 | | | 15,096 | | | 1.90 | | | 866,013 | | | 21,403 | | | 2.47 | |
Total interest-earning assets | | $ | 29,871,864 | | | $ | 1,141,243 | | | 3.82 | % | | $ | 28,242,626 | | | $ | 1,116,601 | | | 3.95 | % | | $ | 27,383,690 | | | $ | 1,151,286 | | | 4.20 | % |
Other assets, less allowance for credit losses(3) | | 466,329 | | | | | | | 537,506 | | | | | | | 551,378 | | | | | |
Total assets(3) | | $ | 30,338,193 | | | | | | | $ | 28,780,132 | | | | | | | $ | 27,935,068 | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper | | $ | 2,565,629 | | | $ | 11,086 | | | 0.43 | % | | $ | 2,189,558 | | | $ | 8,330 | | | 0.38 | % | | $ | 2,318,112 | | | $ | 45,713 | | | 1.97 | % |
Other short-term borrowings | | 2,006,020 | | | 7,179 | | | 0.36 | | | 2,148,767 | | | 6,400 | | | 0.30 | | | 1,795,351 | | | 32,282 | | | 1.80 | |
Short-term borrowings(4) | | 4,571,649 | | | 18,265 | | | 0.40 | | | 4,338,325 | | | 14,730 | | | 0.34 | | | 4,113,463 | | | 77,995 | | | 1.90 | |
Medium-term notes | | 4,854,421 | | | 108,769 | | | 2.24 | | | 3,904,603 | | | 113,582 | | | 2.91 | | | 3,551,973 | | | 125,954 | | | 3.55 | |
Collateral trust bonds | | 7,050,468 | | | 248,413 | | | 3.52 | | | 6,938,534 | | | 249,248 | | | 3.59 | | | 7,185,910 | | | 257,396 | | | 3.58 | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 6,165,206 | | | 169,166 | | | 2.74 | | | 6,146,410 | | | 167,403 | | | 2.72 | | | 5,581,854 | | | 162,929 | | | 2.92 | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 3,059,946 | | | 55,245 | | | 1.81 | | | 2,844,252 | | | 50,818 | | | 1.79 | | | 2,986,469 | | | 87,617 | | | 2.93 | |
Other notes payable | | 6,774 | | | 155 | | | 2.29 | | | 10,246 | | | 241 | | | 2.35 | | | 17,586 | | | 671 | | | 3.82 | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,407 | | | 51,541 | | | 5.23 | | | 986,209 | | | 51,551 | | | 5.23 | | | 986,035 | | | 51,527 | | | 5.23 | |
Subordinated certificates | | 1,245,120 | | | 53,980 | | | 4.34 | | | 1,270,385 | | | 54,490 | | | 4.29 | | | 1,349,454 | | | 57,000 | | | 4.22 | |
Total interest-bearing liabilities | | $ | 27,939,991 | | | $ | 705,534 | | | 2.53 | % | | $ | 26,438,964 | | | $ | 702,063 | | | 2.66 | % | | $ | 25,772,744 | | | $ | 821,089 | | | 3.19 | % |
Other liabilities(3) | | 897,751 | | | | | | | 1,380,414 | | | | | | | 1,141,884 | | | | | |
Total liabilities(3) | | 28,837,742 | | | | | | | 27,819,378 | | | | | | | 26,914,628 | | | | | |
Total equity(3) | | 1,500,451 | | | | | | | 960,754 | | | | | | | 1,020,440 | | | | | |
Total liabilities and equity(3) | | $ | 30,338,193 | | | | | | | $ | 28,780,132 | | | | | | | $ | 27,935,068 | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net interest spread(5) | | | | | | 1.29 | % | | | | | | 1.29 | % | | | | | | 1.01 | % |
Impact of non-interest bearing funding(6) | | | | | | 0.17 | | | | | | | 0.18 | | | | | | | 0.20 | |
Net interest income/net interest yield(7) | | | | $ | 435,709 | | | 1.46 | % | | | | $ | 414,538 | | | 1.47 | % | | | | $ | 330,197 | | | 1.21 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted net interest income/adjusted net interest yield: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | | | $ | 1,141,243 | | | 3.82 | % | | | | $ | 1,116,601 | | | 3.95 | % | | | | $ | 1,151,286 | | | 4.20 | % |
Interest expense | | | | 705,534 | | | 2.53 | | | | | 702,063 | | | 2.66 | | | | | 821,089 | | | 3.19 | |
Add: Net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense(8) | | | | 101,385 | | | 1.21 | | | | | 115,645 | | | 1.28 | | | | | 55,873 | | | 0.55 | |
Adjusted interest expense/adjusted average cost(9) | | | | $ | 806,919 | | | 2.89 | % | | | | $ | 817,708 | | | 3.09 | % | | | | $ | 876,962 | | | 3.40 | % |
Adjusted net interest spread(7) | | | | | | 0.93 | % | | | | | | 0.86 | % | | | | | | 0.80 | % |
Impact of non-interest bearing funding(6) | | | | | | 0.19 | | | | | | | 0.20 | | | | | | | 0.20 | |
Adjusted net interest income/adjusted net interest yield(10) | | | | $ | 334,324 | | | 1.12 | % | | | | $ | 298,893 | | | 1.06 | % | | | | $ | 274,324 | | | 1.00 | % |
____________________________
(1)Interest income on long-term, fixed-rate loans includes loan conversion fees, which are generally deferred and recognized as interest income using the effective interest method.
(2)Consists of late payment fees and net amortization of deferred loan fees and loan origination costs.
(3)The average balance represents average monthly balances, which is calculated based on the month-end balance as of the beginning of the reporting period and the balances as of the end of each month included in the specified reporting period.
(4)Short-term borrowings reported on our consolidated balance sheets consist of borrowings with an original contractual maturity of one year or less. However, short-term borrowings presented in Table 2 consist of commercial paper, select notes, daily liquidity fund notes and secured borrowings under repurchase agreements. Short-term borrowings presented on our consolidated balance sheets related to medium-term notes, Farmer Mac notes payable and other notes payable are reported in the respective category for presentation purposes in Table 2. The period-end amounts reported as short-term borrowings on our consolidated balances sheets, which are excluded from the calculation of average short-term borrowings presented in Table 2, totaled $417 million, $363 million, and $537 million as of May 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.
(5)Net interest spread represents the difference between the average yield on total average interest-earning assets and the average cost of total average interest-bearing liabilities. Adjusted net interest spread represents the difference between the average yield on total average interest-earning assets and the adjusted average cost of total average interest-bearing liabilities.
(6)Includes other liabilities and equity.
(7)Net interest yield is calculated based on net interest income for the period divided by total average interest-earning assets for the period.
(8)Represents the impact of net periodic contractual interest amounts on our interest rate swaps during the period. This amount is added to interest expense to derive non-GAAP adjusted interest expense. The average (benefit)/cost associated with derivatives is calculated based on net periodic swap settlement interest amount during the period divided by the average outstanding notional amount of derivatives during the period. The average outstanding notional amount of interest rate swaps was $8,406 million, $9,062 million and $10,180 million for fiscal years 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively.
(9)Adjusted interest expense consists of interest expense plus net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense during the period. Net periodic derivative cash settlement interest amounts are reported on our consolidated statements of operations as a component of derivative gains (losses). Adjusted average cost is calculated based on adjusted interest expense for the period divided by total average interest-bearing liabilities during the period.
(10)Adjusted net interest yield is calculated based on adjusted net interest income for the period divided by total average interest-earning assets for the period.
Table 3 displays the change in net interest income between periods and the extent to which the variance for each category of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities is attributable to (i) changes in volume, which represents the change in the average balances of our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities or volume, and (ii) changes in the rate, which represents the change in the average interest rates of these assets and liabilities. The table also presents the change in adjusted net interest income between periods.
Table 3: Rate/Volume Analysis of Changes in Interest Income/Interest Expense | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 2022 versus 2021 | | 2021 versus 2020 |
| | Total | | Variance Due To:(1) | | Total | | Variance Due To:(1) |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Variance | | Volume | | Rate | | Variance | | Volume | | Rate |
Interest income: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term fixed-rate loans | | $ | 10,699 | | | $ | 41,948 | | | $ | (31,249) | | | $ | 7,606 | | | $ | 47,527 | | | $ | (39,921) | |
Long-term variable-rate loans | | 1,919 | | | 2,396 | | | (477) | | | (16,317) | | | (8,625) | | | (7,692) | |
Line of credit loans | | 11,291 | | | 11,429 | | | (138) | | | (19,544) | | | (2,961) | | | (16,583) | |
TDR loans | | (55) | | | (61) | | | 6 | | | (46) | | | (68) | | | 22 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Other, net | | (67) | | | — | | | (67) | | | (77) | | | — | | | (77) | |
Total loans | | 23,787 | | | 55,712 | | | (31,925) | | | (28,378) | | | 35,873 | | | (64,251) | |
Cash, time deposits and investment securities | | 855 | | | (646) | | | 1,501 | | | (6,307) | | | (1,716) | | | (4,591) | |
Total interest income | | $ | 24,642 | | | $ | 55,066 | | | $ | (30,424) | | | $ | (34,685) | | | $ | 34,157 | | | $ | (68,842) | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest expense: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper | | $ | 2,756 | | | $ | 1,431 | | | $ | 1,325 | | | $ | (37,383) | | | $ | (2,535) | | | $ | (34,848) | |
Other short-term borrowings | | 779 | | | (425) | | | 1,204 | | | (25,882) | | | 6,355 | | | (32,237) | |
Short-term borrowings | | 3,535 | | | 1,006 | | | 2,529 | | | (63,265) | | | 3,820 | | | (67,085) | |
Medium-term notes | | (4,813) | | | 27,629 | | | (32,442) | | | (12,372) | | | 12,504 | | | (24,876) | |
Collateral trust bonds | | (835) | | | 4,021 | | | (4,856) | | | (8,148) | | | (8,861) | | | 713 | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 1,763 | | | 512 | | | 1,251 | | | 4,474 | | | 16,479 | | | (12,005) | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 4,427 | | | 3,854 | | | 573 | | | (36,799) | | | (4,172) | | | (32,627) | |
Other notes payable | | (86) | | | (82) | | | (4) | | | (430) | | | (280) | | | (150) | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | (10) | | | 10 | | | (20) | | | 24 | | | 9 | | | 15 | |
Subordinated certificates | | (510) | | | (1,084) | | | 574 | | | (2,510) | | | (3,340) | | | 830 | |
Total interest expense | | 3,471 | | | 35,866 | | | (32,395) | | | (119,026) | | | 16,159 | | | (135,185) | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net interest income | | $ | 21,171 | | | $ | 19,200 | | | $ | 1,971 | | | $ | 84,341 | | | $ | 17,998 | | | $ | 66,343 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted net interest income: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | $ | 24,642 | | | $ | 55,066 | | | $ | (30,424) | | | $ | (34,685) | | | $ | 34,157 | | | $ | (68,842) | |
Interest expense | | 3,471 | | | 35,866 | | | (32,395) | | | (119,026) | | | 16,159 | | | (135,185) | |
Net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense(2) | | (14,260) | | | (8,367) | | | (5,893) | | | 59,772 | | | (6,137) | | | 65,909 | |
Adjusted interest expense(3) | | (10,789) | | | 27,499 | | | (38,288) | | | (59,254) | | | 10,022 | | | (69,276) | |
Adjusted net interest income | | $ | 35,431 | | | $ | 27,567 | | | $ | 7,864 | | | $ | 24,569 | | | $ | 24,135 | | | $ | 434 | |
____________________________
(1)The changes for each category of interest income and interest expense represent changes in either average balances (volume) or average rates for both interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. We allocate the amount attributable to the combined impact of volume and rate to the rate variance.
(2)For the net periodic derivative cash settlements interest amount, the variance due to average volume represents the change in the net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amount resulting from the change in the average notional amount of derivative contracts outstanding. The variance due to average rate represents the change in the net periodic derivative cash settlements amount resulting from the net difference between the average rate paid and the average rate received for interest rate swaps during the period.
(3) See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for additional information on our adjusted non-GAAP measures.
Reported Net Interest Income
Reported net interest income of $436 million for fiscal year 2022 increased $21 million, or 5%, from fiscal year 2021, driven by an increase in average interest-earning assets of $1,629 million, or 6%, partially offset by a decrease in the net interest yield of 1% (1 basis point) to 1.46%.
•Average Interest-Earning Assets: The increase in average interest-earning assets of 6% during fiscal year 2022 was primarily attributable to growth in average total loans of $1,663 million, or 6%, from fiscal year 2021, driven by an increase in average long-term fixed-rate loans of $996 million and an increase in average line of credit loans of $522 million. The continued low interest rate environment presented an opportunity for members to obtain long-term loan advances to fund capital investments at a low fixed rate of interest. The increase in average line of credit loans was mainly attributable to loan advances to one distribution member that experienced an adverse financial impact from restoration costs incurred to repair damage caused by two successive hurricanes and loan advances to several CFC Texas-based power supply borrowers that were subject to elevated power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex.
•Net Interest Yield: The increase in the net interest yield of 1 basis point, or 1%, was primarily attributable to the combined impact of a decrease in the average yield on interest-earning assets of 13 basis points to 3.82% and a reduction in the benefit from non-interest bearing funding of 1 basis point to 0.17%, which were largely offset by a reduction in our average cost of borrowings of 13 basis points to 2.53%. The decreases in the average yield on interest-earning assets and our average cost of borrowings reflected the impact of the continued low interest rate environment during fiscal year 2022.
Adjusted Net Interest Income
Adjusted net interest income of $334 million for fiscal year 2022 increased $35 million, or 12%, from fiscal year 2021, driven by the combined impact of an increase in average interest-earning assets of $1,629 million, or 6%, and an increase in the adjusted net interest yield of 6 basis points, or 6%, to 1.12%.
•Average Interest-Earning Assets: The increase in average interest-earning assets of 6% was driven by the growth in average total loans of $1,663 million, or 6%, from fiscal year 2021, primarily attributable to an increase in average long-term fixed-rate and line of credit loans as discussed above.
•Adjusted Net Interest Yield: The increase in the adjusted net interest yield of 6 basis points, or 6%, reflected the favorable impact of a reduction in our adjusted average cost of borrowings of 20 basis points to 2.89%, which was partially offset by a decrease in the average yield on interest-earning assets of 13 basis points to 3.82%, both of which were attributable to the lower interest rate environment during fiscal year 2022.
We include the net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts on our interest rate swaps in the calculation of our adjusted average cost of borrowings, which, as a result, also impacts the calculation of adjusted net interest income and adjusted net interest yield. We recorded net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense of $101 million for fiscal year 2022, compared with $116 million and $56 million for fiscal years 2021 and 2020.
The floating-rate payments on our interest rate swaps are typically based on 3-month LIBOR. Because our derivative portfolio consists of a higher proportion of pay-fixed swaps than receive-fixed swaps, the net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts generally change based on changes in the floating interest amount received each period. When the 3-month LIBOR rate increases during the period, the received floating interest amounts on our pay-fixed swaps increase and, conversely, when the 3-month LIBOR swap rate decreases, the received floating interest amounts on our pay-fixed swaps decrease. The 3-month LIBOR rate began to increase during the second half of fiscal year 2022, resulting in an increase in received floating interest amounts and contributing to lower net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts in the current fiscal year. In contrast, the 3-month LIBOR rate decreased during fiscal year 2021 resulting in a reduction in received floating interest amounts and contributing to higher net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts in the prior fiscal year.
See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for additional information on our adjusted measures, including a reconciliation of these measures to the most comparable U.S. GAAP measures.
Provision for Credit Losses
Our provision for credit losses each period is driven by changes in our measurement of lifetime expected credit losses for our loan portfolio recorded in the allowance for credit losses. Our allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio were $68 million and 0.22%, respectively, as of May 31, 2022. In comparison, our allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio were $86 million and 0.30%, respectively, as of May 31, 2021.
We recorded a benefit for credit losses of $18 million for fiscal year 2022. In contrast, we recorded a provision for credit losses of $29 million for fiscal year 2021. The current fiscal year benefit was primarily attributable to a decrease in the collective allowance, stemming largely from positive developments during fiscal year 2022 related to Rayburn that resulted in an improvement in Rayburn’s credit risk profile and also a significant reduction in our loans outstanding to Rayburn. In June 2021, Texas enacted securitization legislation that offers a financing program for qualifying electric cooperatives exposed to elevated power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex. In February 2022, Rayburn successfully completed a securitization transaction pursuant to this legislation to cover extraordinary costs and expenses incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex. Subsequent to the completion of the securitization transaction, Rayburn fully paid its outstanding obligations to ERCOT. As a result, we revised our borrower risk rating for Rayburn to a rating in the pass category from a previous rating in the criticized category. In addition, we received loan payments from Rayburn during fiscal year 2022 that reduced our loans outstanding to Rayburn to $167 million as of May 31, 2022, consisting of secured and unsecured loans outstanding of $151 million and $16 million, respectively. Loans outstanding to Rayburn totaled $379 million as of the prior fiscal year ended May 31, 2021, consisting of secured and unsecured loans outstanding of $167 million and $212 million, respectively.
The provision for credit losses of $29 million recorded for fiscal year 2021 reflected the allowance build due to the significant adverse financial impact on Brazos and Rayburn resulting from their exposure to elevated wholesale electric power supply costs during the February 2021 polar vortex.
We discuss our methodology for estimating the allowance for credit losses in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—Allowance for Credit Losses—Current Methodology.” We also provide additional information on our allowance for credit losses below under section “Credit Risk—Allowance for Credit Losses” and “Note 5—Allowance for Credit Losses” in this Report.
Non-Interest Income
Non-interest income consists of fee and other income, gains and losses on derivatives not accounted for in hedge accounting relationships, and gains and losses on equity and debt investment securities, which consists of both unrealized and realized
gains and losses.
Table 4 presents the components of non-interest income (loss) recorded in our consolidated statements of operations for fiscal years 2022, 2021 and 2020.
Table 4: Non-Interest Income
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Non-interest income components: | | | | | | |
Fee and other income | | $ | 17,193 | | | $ | 18,929 | | | $ | 22,961 | |
Derivative gains (losses) | | 456,482 | | | 506,301 | | | (790,151) | |
| | | | | | |
Investment securities gains (losses) | | (30,179) | | | 1,495 | | | 9,431 | |
Total non-interest income (loss) | | $ | 443,496 | | | $ | 526,725 | | | $ | (757,759) | |
The significant variance in non-interest income between fiscal years was primarily attributable to changes in the derivative gains (losses) recognized in our consolidated statements of operations. In addition, we experienced an unfavorable shift in unrealized investment securities gains of $32 million for the current fiscal year compared with the prior fiscal year. We
expect period-to-period market fluctuations in the fair value of our equity and debt investment securities, which we report together with realized gains and losses from the sale of investment securities on our consolidated statements of operations.
Derivative Gains (Losses)
Our derivative instruments are an integral part of our interest rate risk-management strategy. Our principal purpose in using derivatives is to manage our aggregate interest rate risk profile within prescribed risk parameters. The derivative instruments we use primarily include interest rate swaps, which we typically hold to maturity. In addition, we may on occasion use treasury locks to manage the interest rate risk associated with debt that is scheduled to reprice in the future. The primary factors affecting the fair value of our derivatives and derivative gains (losses) recorded in our results of operations include changes in interest rates, the shape of the swap curve and the composition of our derivative portfolio. We generally do not designate our interest rate swaps, which currently account for all our derivatives, for hedge accounting. Accordingly, changes in the fair value of interest rate swaps are reported in our consolidated statements of operations under derivative gains (losses). However, if we execute a treasury lock, we typically designate the treasury lock as a cash flow hedge.
We currently use two types of interest rate swap agreements: (i) we pay a fixed rate of interest and receive a variable rate of interest (“pay-fixed swaps”), and (ii) we pay a variable rate of interest and receive a fixed rate of interest (“receive-fixed swaps”). The interest amounts are based on a specified notional balance, which is used for calculation purposes only. The benchmark variable rate for the substantial majority of the floating-rate payments under our swap agreements is 3-month LIBOR. As interest rates decline, pay-fixed swaps generally decrease in value and result in the recognition of derivative losses, as the amount of interest we pay remains fixed, while the amount of interest we receive declines. In contrast, as interest rates rise, pay-fixed swaps generally increase in value and result in the recognition of derivative gains, as the amount of interest we pay remains fixed, but the amount we receive increases. With a receive-fixed swap, the opposite results occur as interest rates decline or rise. Our derivative portfolio consists of a higher proportion of pay-fixed swaps than receive-fixed swaps; therefore, we generally record derivative losses when interest rates decline and derivative gains when interest rates rise. Because our pay-fixed and receive-fixed swaps are referenced to different maturity terms along the swap curve, different changes in the swap curve—parallel, flattening, inversion or steepening—will also impact the fair value of our derivatives.
On July 20, 2021, we executed two treasury lock agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $250 million to lock in the underlying U.S. Treasury interest rate component of interest rate payments on anticipated debt issuances and repricings. The treasury locks, which were scheduled to mature on October 29, 2021, were designated and qualified as cash flow hedges. In October 2021, we borrowed $250 million under our Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement and terminated the treasury locks. Prior to this anticipated borrowing and the termination of the treasury locks, we recorded changes in the fair value of the treasury locks in AOCI. At termination, the treasury locks were in a gain position of $5 million, of which $4 million is being accreted from AOCI to interest expense over the term of the related Farmer Mac borrowings and the remainder was recognized in earnings. We did not have any derivatives designated as accounting hedges as of May 31, 2022 or May 31, 2021.
Table 5 presents the components of net derivative gains (losses) recorded in our consolidated statements of operations for fiscal years 2022, 2021 and 2020. Derivative cash settlements interest expense represents the net periodic contractual interest amount for our interest rate swaps during the reporting period. Derivative forward value gains (losses) represent the change in fair value of our interest rate swaps during the applicable reporting period due to changes in expected future interest rates over the remaining life of our derivative contracts.
Table 5: Derivative Gains (Losses)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Derivative gains (losses) attributable to: | | | | | | |
Derivative cash settlements interest expense | | $ | (101,385) | | | $ | (115,645) | | | $ | (55,873) | |
Derivative forward value gains (losses) | | 557,867 | | | 621,946 | | | (734,278) | |
Derivative gains (losses) | | $ | 456,482 | | | $ | 506,301 | | | $ | (790,151) | |
We recorded derivative gains of $456 million for fiscal year 2022, attributable to increases in interest rates across the entire swap curve during the period. In contrast, we recorded derivative gains of $506 million for fiscal year 2021, driven by pronounced increases in medium- and longer-term swap rates, namely five-year to 30-year swap rates.
As noted above, the substantial majority of our swap portfolio consists of longer-dated, pay-fixed swaps. Therefore, increases and decreases in medium- and longer-term swap rates generally have a more pronounced corresponding impact on the change in the net fair value of our swap portfolio. We present comparative swap curves, which depict the relationship between swap rates at varying maturities, for our reported periods in Table 7 below.
Derivative Cash Settlements
As indicated in Table 5 above, and discussed above under “Consolidated Results of Operations—Net Interest Income—Adjusted Net Interest Income,” we recorded net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense of $101 million in fiscal year 2022, compared with $116 million for fiscal year 2021. The 3-month LIBOR rate began to increase during the second half of fiscal year 2022, resulting in an increase in received floating interest amounts and contributing to lower net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts in the current fiscal year. In contrast, the 3-month LIBOR rate decreased during fiscal year 2021, resulting in a reduction in received floating interest amounts and contributing to higher net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense amounts in the prior fiscal year.
Table 6 displays, by interest rate swap agreement type, the average notional amount and the weighted-average interest rate paid and received for the net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense during each respective period. As discussed above, our derivative portfolio consists of a higher proportion of pay-fixed swaps than receive-fixed swaps, with pay-fixed swaps accounting for approximately 75% and 73% of the outstanding notional amount of our derivative portfolio as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
Table 6: Derivatives—Average Notional Amounts and Interest Rates
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
| | Average | | Weighted- | | Average | | Weighted- | | Average | | Weighted- |
| | Notional | | Average Rate | | Notional | | Average Rate | | Notional | | Average Rate |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | Paid | | Received | | Amount | | Paid | | Received | | Amount | | Paid | | Received |
Interest rate swap type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Pay-fixed swaps | | $ | 6,145,318 | | | 2.61 | % | | 0.36 | % | | $ | 6,566,734 | | | 2.73 | % | | 0.27 | % | | $ | 7,092,961 | | | 2.82 | % | | 1.91 | % |
Receive-fixed swaps | | 2,260,663 | | | 1.01 | | | 2.82 | | | 2,494,890 | | | 1.03 | | | 2.78 | | | 3,086,705 | | | 2.62 | | | 2.64 | |
Total | | $ | 8,405,981 | | | 2.18 | % | | 1.03 | % | | $ | 9,061,624 | | | 2.26 | % | | 0.96 | % | | $ | 10,179,666 | | | 2.76 | % | | 2.13 | % |
The average remaining maturity of our pay-fixed and receive-fixed swaps was 19 years and three years, respectively, as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Comparative Swap Curves
Table 7 below provides comparative swap curves as of May 31, 2022, 2021, 2020 and 2019.
Table 7: Comparative Swap Curves
____________________________ Benchmark rates obtained from Bloomberg.
See “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—Derivative Instruments” and “Note 10—Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” for additional information on our derivative instruments. Also refer to “Note 14—Fair Value Measurement” for information on how we measure the fair value of our derivative instruments.
Non-Interest Expense
Non-interest expense consists of salaries and employee benefit expense, general and administrative expenses, gains and losses on the early extinguishment of debt and other miscellaneous expenses.
Table 8 presents the components of non-interest expense recorded in our consolidated statements of operations in fiscal years 2022, 2021 and 2020.
Table 8: Non-Interest Expense
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Non-interest expense components: | | | | | | |
Salaries and employee benefits | | $ | (51,863) | | | $ | (55,258) | | | $ | (54,522) | |
Other general and administrative expenses | | (43,323) | | | (39,447) | | | (46,645) | |
Operating expenses | | (95,186) | | | (94,705) | | | (101,167) | |
Losses on early extinguishment of debt | | (754) | | | (1,456) | | | (683) | |
Other non-interest expense | | (1,552) | | | (1,619) | | | (25,588) | |
Total non-interest expense | | $ | (97,492) | | | $ | (97,780) | | | $ | (127,438) | |
Non-interest expense of $97 million for fiscal year 2022 decreased slightly from fiscal year 2021, as the decrease in salaries and employee benefits and lower losses on the early extinguishment of debt, were largely offset by an increase in other general and administrative expenses as we resumed business travel and in-person corporate meetings and events that were cancelled during the prior fiscal year due to the pandemic.
Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests
Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests represents 100% of the results of operations of NCSC and RTFC, as the members of NCSC and RTFC own or control 100% of the interest in their respective companies. The fluctuations in net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests are primarily due to changes in the fair value of NCSC’s derivative instruments recognized in NCSC’s earnings.
We recorded a net income attributable to noncontrolling interests of $3 million for fiscal year 2022. In comparison, we recorded a net income attributable to noncontrolling interests of $2 million for fiscal years 2021 and a net loss attributable to noncontrolling interests of $4 million for fiscal year 2020.
| | |
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET ANALYSIS |
Total assets increased $1,613 million, or 5%, in fiscal year 2022 to $31,251 million as of May 31, 2022, primarily due to growth in our loan portfolio. We experienced an increase in total liabilities of $871 million, or 3%, to $29,109 million as of May 31, 2022, largely due to the issuances of debt to fund the growth in our loan portfolio. Total equity increased $742 million to $2,142 million as of May 31, 2022, attributable to our reported net income of $799 million for the current fiscal year, which was partially offset by the CFC Board of Directors’ authorized patronage capital retirement in July 2021 of $58 million.
Below is a discussion of changes in the major components of our assets and liabilities during fiscal year 2022. Period-end balance sheet amounts may vary from average balance sheet amounts due to liquidity and balance sheet management activities that are intended to manage our liquidity requirements and market risk exposure in accordance with our risk appetite framework.
Loan Portfolio
We segregate our loan portfolio into segments, by legal entity, based on the borrower member class, which consists of CFC distribution, CFC power supply, CFC statewide and associate, NCSC and RTFC. We offer both long-term and line of credit loans to our borrowers. Under our long-term loan facilities, a borrower may select a fixed interest rate or a variable interest rate at the time of each loan advance. Line of credit loans are revolving loan facilities and generally have a variable interest rate. We describe and provide additional information on our member classes under “Item 1. Business—Members” and information about our loan programs and loan product types under “Item 1. Business—Loan and Guarantee Programs” in this Report.
Loans Outstanding
Table 9 presents loans outstanding by legal entity, member class and loan product type as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 9: Loans—Outstanding Amount by Member Class and Loan Type
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | | | | | | | |
Member class: | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total | | Change | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 23,844,242 | | | 79 | % | | $ | 22,027,423 | | | 78 | % | | $ | 1,816,819 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Power supply | | 4,901,770 | | | 17 | | | 5,154,312 | | | 18 | | | (252,542) | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Statewide and associate | | 126,863 | | | — | | | 106,121 | | | — | | | 20,742 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC | | 28,872,875 | | | 96 | | | 27,287,856 | | | 96 | | | 1,585,019 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NCSC | | 710,878 | | | 2 | | | 706,868 | | | 3 | | | 4,010 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
RTFC | | 467,601 | | | 2 | | | 420,383 | | | 1 | | | 47,218 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | 30,051,354 | | | 100 | % | | 28,415,107 | | | 100 | % | | 1,636,247 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Deferred loan origination costs—CFC(2) | | 12,032 | | | — | | | 11,854 | | | — | | | 178 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Loans to members | | $ | 30,063,386 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 28,426,961 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 1,636,425 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate | | $ | 26,952,372 | | | 90 | % | | $ | 25,514,766 | | | 90 | % | | $ | 1,437,606 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Variable-rate | | 820,201 | | | 2 | | | 658,579 | | | 2 | | | 161,622 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total long-term loans | | 27,772,573 | | | 92 | | | 26,173,345 | | | 92 | | | 1,599,228 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Line of credit loans | | 2,278,781 | | | 8 | | | 2,241,762 | | | 8 | | | 37,019 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | 30,051,354 | | | 100 | % | | 28,415,107 | | | 100 | % | | 1,636,247 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Deferred loan origination costs—CFC(2) | | 12,032 | | | — | | | 11,854 | | | — | | | 178 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Loans to members | | $ | 30,063,386 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 28,426,961 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 1,636,425 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
____________________________
(1) Represents the unpaid principal balance, net of charge-offs and recoveries, of loans as of the end of each period.
(2)Deferred loan origination costs are recorded on the books of CFC.
Loans to members totaled $30,063 million and $28,427 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Loans to CFC distribution and power supply borrowers accounted for 96% of total loans to members as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021, and long-term fixed-rate loans accounted for 90% of loans to members as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021. The increase in loans to members of $1,636 million, or 6%, from May 31, 2021, was attributable to net increases in long-term and line of credit loans of $1,599 million and $37 million, respectively. We experienced increases in CFC distribution loans, CFC statewide and associate loans, NCSC loans and RTFC loans of $1,817 million, $21 million, $4 million and $47 million, respectively, and a decrease in CFC power supply loans of $253 million.
Long-term loan advances totaled $3,386 million during fiscal year 2022, of which approximately 80% was provided to members for capital expenditures and 18% was provided to members for other expenses, primarily to fund operating expenses attributable to the elevated power cost obligations incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex. In comparison, long-term loan advances totaled $2,514 million during fiscal year 2021, of which approximately 86% was provided to members for capital expenditures and 8% was provided for the refinancing of loans made by other lenders. Of the $3,386 million total long-term loans advanced during fiscal year 2022, $2,911 million were fixed-rate loan advances with a weighted average fixed-rate term of 23 years.
Many rural electric distribution cooperatives have made or are making infrastructure investments that include building fiber optic lines to improve electric grid system reliability and efficiency, as fiber operations offers enhanced communication to monitor electric systems, identify outages and speed electric restoration. Some of these electric cooperatives are leveraging
these fiber assets to offer access to broadband services, either directly or by partnering with local telecommunication companies and others, to the communities they serve. Aggregate loans outstanding to CFC electric distribution cooperative members relating to broadband projects, which we started tracking in October 2017, increased to an estimated $1,647 million as of May 31, 2022, from approximately $854 million as of May 31, 2021. Many of these broadband projects are also financially supported by various states and the federal government, which reduces the credit risk for CFC and our electric cooperative members. We expect our member electric cooperatives to continue in their efforts to expand broadband access to unserved and underserved communities.
We provide information on the credit performance and risk profile of our loan portfolio below under the section “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk” in this Report. Also refer to “Item 1. Business—Loan and Guarantee Programs” and “Note 4—Loans” in this Report for addition information on our loans to members.”
Loans—Retention Rate
Long-term fixed-rate loans accounted for 90% as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021 of our loans to members of $30,063 million and $28,427 million, respectively. Borrowers that select a fixed rate on a loan advance under a long-term loan facility have the option of choosing a term on the advance between one year and the final maturity date of the loan. At the expiration of a selected fixed-rate term, or the repricing date, borrowers have the option of: (i) selecting CFC’s current long-term fixed rate for a term ranging from one year up to the full remaining term of the loan; (ii) selecting CFC’s current long-term variable rate; or (iii) repaying the loan in full.
The continued low interest rate environment over the last several years presented an opportunity for our members to obtain new long-term loan advances at a lower fixed-to-maturity interest rate or lock in a lower fixed interest rate to maturity at the repricing date on existing outstanding long-term loan advances. Because many of our members have locked in at or near historic low interest rates on outstanding loan advances for extended terms, the amount of long-term fixed-rate loans that repriced during each fiscal year over the last five fiscal years has gradually decreased, from $987 million in fiscal year 2017 to $379 million in fiscal year 2022. Long-term fixed-rate loans scheduled to reprice over the next 12 months totaled $338 million as of May 31, 2022, and long-term fixed-rate loans scheduled to reprice over the subsequent five fiscal years through the fiscal year ended May 31, 2027 totaled $1,584 million as of May 31, 2022, representing an average of $317 million per fiscal year.
CFC’s long-term fixed-rate loans that repriced in accordance with our standard loan repricing provisions totaled $379 million during fiscal year 2022. Of this total, $361 million, or 95%, was retained and the remaining amount was repaid. The average annual retention rate, calculated based on the election made by the borrower at the repricing date, was 97% for CFC loans that repriced during each of the three fiscal years ended May 31, 2022.
Debt
We utilize both short-term borrowings and long-term debt as part of our funding strategy and asset/liability interest rate risk management. We seek to maintain diversified funding sources, including our members, affiliates, the capital markets and other funding sources, across products, programs and markets to manage funding concentrations and reduce our liquidity or debt rollover risk. Our funding sources include a variety of secured and unsecured debt securities in a wide range of maturities to our members, affiliates, the capital markets and other funding sources.
Debt Product Types
We offer various short- and long-term unsecured debt securities to our members and affiliates, including commercial paper, select notes, daily liquidity fund notes, medium-term notes and subordinated certificates. We also issue commercial paper, medium-term notes and collateral trust bonds in the capital markets. Additionally, we have access to funds under borrowing arrangements with banks, private placements and U.S. government agencies. Table 10 displays our primary funding sources and their selected key attributes.
Table 10: Debt—Debt Product Types
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Debt Product Type: | | Maturity Range | | Market | | Secured/Unsecured |
Short-term funding programs: | | | | | | |
Commercial paper | | 1 to 270 days | | Capital markets, members and affiliates | | Unsecured |
Select notes | | 30 to 270 days | | Members and affiliates | | Unsecured |
Daily liquidity fund notes | | Demand note | | Members and affiliates | | Unsecured |
Securities sold under repurchase agreements | | 1 to 90 days | | Capital markets | | Secured |
Other funding programs: | | | | | | |
Medium-term notes | | 9 months to 30 years | | Capital markets, members and affiliates | | Unsecured |
Collateral trust bonds(1) | | Up to 30 years | | Capital markets | | Secured |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable(2) | | Up to 30 years | | U.S. government | | Secured |
Farmer Mac notes payable(3) | | Up to 30 years | | Private placement | | Secured |
Other notes payable(4) | | Up to 3 years | | Private placement | | Both |
Subordinated deferrable debt(5) | | Up to 45 years | | Capital markets | | Unsecured |
Members’ subordinated certificates(6) | | Up to 100 years | | Members | | Unsecured |
Revolving credit agreements | | Up to 5 years | | Bank institutions | | Unsecured |
____________________________
(1)Collateral trust bonds are secured by the pledge of permitted investments and eligible mortgage notes from distribution system borrowers in an amount at least equal to the outstanding principal amount of collateral trust bonds.
(2)Represents notes payable under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program, which supports the Rural Economic Development Loan and Grant program. The Federal Financing Bank provides the financing for these notes, and RUS provides a guarantee of repayment. We are required to pledge eligible mortgage notes from distribution and power supply system borrowers in an amount at least equal to the outstanding principal amount of the notes payable.
(3)We are required to pledge eligible mortgage notes from distribution and power supply system borrowers in an amount at least equal to the outstanding principal amount under note purchase agreements with Farmer Mac.
(4)Other notes payable consist of unsecured and secured Clean Renewable Energy Bonds. We are required to pledge eligible mortgage notes from distribution and power supply system borrowers in an amount at least equal to the outstanding principal amount under the Clean Renewable Energy Bonds Series 2009A note purchase agreement.
(5)Subordinated deferrable debt is subordinate and junior to senior debt and debt obligations we guarantee, but senior to subordinated certificates. We have the right at any time, and from time to time, during the term of the subordinated deferrable debt to suspend interest payments for a maximum period of 20 consecutive quarters for $1,000 par notes, or a maximum period of 40 consecutive quarters for $25 par notes. To date, we have not exercised our option to suspend interest payments. We have the right to call the subordinated deferrable debt, at par, any time after 10 years for $1,000 par notes or 5 years for $25 par notes.
(6)Members’ subordinated certificates consist of membership subordinated certificates, loan and guarantee certificates and member capital securities, and are subordinated and junior to senior debt, subordinated debt and debt obligations we guarantee. Membership subordinated certificates generally mature 100 years subsequent to issuance. Loan and guarantee subordinated certificates have the same maturity as the related long-term loan. Some certificates also may amortize annually based on the outstanding loan balance. Member capital securities mature 30 years subsequent to issuance. Member capital securities are callable at par beginning either five or 10 years subsequent to the issuance and anytime thereafter.
Debt Outstanding
Table 11 displays the composition, by product type, of our outstanding debt and the weighted average interest rate as of May 31, 2022 and 2021. Table 11 also displays the composition of our debt based on several additional selected attributes.
Table 11: Total Debt Outstanding and Weighted-Average Interest Rates | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | | | | |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Outstanding Amount | | Weighted- Average Interest Rate | | Outstanding Amount | | Weighted- Average Interest Rate | | Change | | | |
Debt product type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial Paper: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Members, at par | | $ | 1,358,069 | | 0.92 | % | | $ | 1,124,607 | | 0.14 | % | | $ | 233,462 | | | |
Dealer, net of discounts | | 1,024,813 | | 0.96 | | | 894,977 | | 0.16 | | | 129,836 | | | |
Total commercial paper | | 2,382,882 | | 0.94 | | | 2,019,584 | | 0.15 | | | 363,298 | | | |
Select notes to members | | 1,753,441 | | 1.11 | | | 1,539,150 | | 0.30 | | | 214,291 | | | |
Daily liquidity fund notes to members | | 427,790 | | 0.80 | | | 460,556 | | 0.08 | | | (32,766) | | | |
Securities sold under repurchase agreements | | — | | — | | | 200,115 | | 0.30 | | | (200,115) | | | |
Medium-term notes: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Members, at par | | 667,451 | | 1.43 | | | 595,037 | | 1.28 | | | 72,414 | | | |
Dealer, net of discounts | | 5,241,687 | | 2.20 | | | 3,923,385 | | 2.31 | | | 1,318,302 | | | |
Total medium-term notes | | 5,909,138 | | 2.11 | | | 4,518,422 | | 2.17 | | | 1,390,716 | | | |
Collateral trust bonds | | 6,848,490 | | 3.17 | | | 7,191,944 | | 3.15 | | | (343,454) | | | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 6,105,473 | | 2.69 | | | 6,269,303 | | 2.76 | | | (163,830) | | | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 3,094,679 | | 2.33 | | | 2,977,909 | | 1.68 | | | 116,770 | | | |
Other notes payable | | 4,714 | | 1.80 | | | 8,236 | | 1.68 | | | (3,522) | | | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,518 | | 5.11 | | | 986,315 | | 5.11 | | | 203 | | | |
Members’ subordinated certificates: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Membership subordinated certificates | | 628,603 | | 4.95 | | | 628,594 | | 4.95 | | | 9 | | | |
Loan and guarantee subordinated certificates | | 365,388 | | 2.88 | | | 386,896 | | 2.89 | | | (21,508) | | | |
Member capital securities | | 240,170 | | 5.00 | | | 239,170 | | 5.00 | | | 1,000 | | | |
Total members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,234,161 | | 4.35 | | | 1,254,660 | | 4.32 | | | (20,499) | | | |
Total debt outstanding | | $ | 28,747,286 | | 2.54 | % | | $ | 27,426,194 | | 2.42 | % | | $ | 1,321,092 | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Security type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Secured debt | | 56 | % | | | | 61 | % | | | | | | | |
Unsecured debt | | 44 | | | | | 39 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Funding source: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Members | | 19 | % | | | | 18 | % | | | | | | | |
Private placement: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 21 | | | | | 23 | | | | | | | | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 11 | | | | | 11 | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total private placement | | 32 | | | | | 34 | | | | | | | | |
Capital markets | | 49 | | | | | 48 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest rate type: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate debt | | 77 | % | | | | 77 | % | | | | | | | |
Variable-rate debt | | 23 | | | | | 23 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest rate type including the impact of swaps: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate debt(1) | | 91 | % | | | | 93 | % | | | | | | | |
Variable-rate debt(2) | | 9 | | | | | 7 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Maturity classification:(3) | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Short-term borrowings | | 17 | % | | | | 17 | % | | | | | | | |
Long-term and subordinated debt(4) | | 83 | | | | | 83 | | | | | | | | |
Total | | 100 | % | | | | 100 | % | | | | | | | |
____________________________
(1) Includes variable-rate debt that has been swapped to a fixed rate, net of any fixed-rate debt that has been swapped to a variable rate.
(2) Includes fixed-rate debt that has been swapped to a variable rate, net of any variable-rate debt that has been swapped to a fixed rate. Also includes commercial paper notes, which generally have maturities of less than 90 days. The interest rate on commercial paper notes does not change once the note has been issued; however, the interest rate for new commercial paper issuances changes daily.
(3) Borrowings with an original contractual maturity of one year or less are classified as short-term borrowings. Borrowings with an original contractual maturity of greater than one year are classified as long-term debt.
(4) Consists of long-term debt, subordinated deferrable debt and total members’ subordinated debt reported on our consolidated balance sheets. Maturity classification is based on the original contractual maturity as of the date of issuance of the debt.
We issue debt primarily to fund growth in our loan portfolio. As such, our debt outstanding generally increases and decreases in response to member loan demand. Total debt outstanding increased $1,321 million, or 5%, to $28,747 million as of May 31, 2022, due to borrowings to fund the increase in loans to members. Outstanding dealer commercial paper of $1,025 million as of May 31, 2022 was within our quarter-end target range of $1,000 million and $1,500 million.
Below is a summary of significant financing activities during fiscal year 2022:
•On June 7, 2021, we amended the three-year and five-year committed bank revolving line of credit agreements to extend the maturity dates to November 28, 2024 and November 28, 2025, respectively, and to terminate certain bank commitments totaling $70 million under the three-year agreement and $55 million under the five-year agreement. The terminations reduced the total commitment amount under the three-year facility to $1,245 million and the five-year facility to $1,355 million, resulting in an aggregate commitment amount under the two facilities of $2,600 million.
•On October 18, 2021, we issued $400 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a fixed rate of 1.000%, due on October 18, 2024, and $350 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a variable rate based on SOFR plus 0.33%, due on October 18, 2024.
•In October 2021, November 2021, January 2022 and May 2022, we borrowed $250 million, $200 million, $170 million, and $100 million respectively, under the Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement.
•In November 2021 and February 2022, we borrowed $200 million and $250 million, respectively, under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program.
•On November 4, 2021, we closed on a $550 million committed loan facility (“Series S”) under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program. Pursuant to this facility, we may borrow any time before July 15, 2026. Each advance is subject to quarterly amortization and a final maturity not longer than 30 years from the date of the advance.
•On November 15, 2021, we early redeemed all $400 million of our 3.05% Collateral Trust Bonds due February 15, 2022.
•On February 7, 2022, we issued $600 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a fixed rate of 1.875%, due on February 7, 2025, and $400 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a variable rate based on SOFR plus 0.40%, due on August 7, 2023.
•On February 7, 2022, we issued $500 million aggregate principal amount of 2.75% Collateral Trust Bonds due April 15, 2032.
•On March 25, 2022, we early redeemed all $450 million of our 2.40% of Collateral Trust Bonds due April 25, 2022.
•On May 4, 2022, we issued $300 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a fixed rate of 3.450%, due June 15, 2025.
•On May 9, 2022, we issued $100 million aggregate principal amount of dealer medium-term notes at a fixed rate of 3.859%, due June 15, 2029.
Member Investments
Debt securities issued to our members represent an important, stable source of funding. Table 12 displays member debt outstanding, by product type, as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 12: Member Investments
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | Change |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | % of Total (1) | | Amount | | % of Total (1) | |
Member investment product type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper | | $ | 1,358,069 | | 57 | % | | $ | 1,124,607 | | 56 | % | | $ | 233,462 | |
Select notes | | 1,753,441 | | 100 | | | 1,539,150 | | 100 | | | 214,291 | |
Daily liquidity fund notes | | 427,790 | | 100 | | | 460,556 | | 100 | | | (32,766) | |
Medium-term notes | | 667,451 | | 11 | | | 595,037 | | 13 | | | 72,414 | |
Members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,234,161 | | 100 | | | 1,254,660 | | 100 | | | (20,499) | |
Total member investments | | $ | 5,440,912 | | | | $ | 4,974,010 | | | | $ | 466,902 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Percentage of total debt outstanding | | 19 | % | | | | 18 | % | | | | |
____________________________
(1) Represents outstanding debt attributable to members for each debt product type as a percentage of the total outstanding debt for each debt product type.
Member investments accounted for 19% and 18% of total debt outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Over the last three fiscal years, our member investments have averaged $5,173 million, calculated based on outstanding member investments as of the end of each fiscal quarter during the period.
Short-Term Borrowings
Short-term borrowings consist of borrowings with an original contractual maturity of one year or less and do not include the current portion of long-term debt. Short-term borrowings increased to $4,981 million as of May 31, 2022, from $4,582 million as of May 31, 2021, primarily due to an increase in short-term member investments, and accounted for 17% of total debt outstanding as of each respective date. See “Liquidity Risk” below and “Note 6—Short-Term Borrowings” for information on the composition of our short-term borrowings.
Long-Term and Subordinated Debt
Long-term debt, defined as debt with an original contractual maturity term of greater than one year, primarily consists of medium-term notes, collateral trust bonds, notes payable under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program and notes payable under our Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement. Subordinated debt consists of subordinated deferrable debt and members’ subordinated certificates. Our subordinated deferrable debt and members’ subordinated certificates have original contractual maturity terms of greater than one year.
Long-term and subordinated debt of $23,766 million and $22,844 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, accounted for 83% of total debt outstanding as of each respective date. We provide additional information on our long-term debt below under the section “Liquidity Risk” and “Note 7—Long-Term Debt” and “Note 8—Subordinated Deferrable Debt” in this Report.
Equity
Table 13 presents the components of total CFC equity and total equity as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 13: Equity
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | Change |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | |
Equity components: | | | | | | |
Membership fees and educational fund: | | | | | | |
Membership fees | | $ | 970 | | | $ | 968 | | | $ | 2 | |
Educational fund | | 2,417 | | | 2,157 | | | 260 | |
Total membership fees and educational fund | | 3,387 | | | 3,125 | | | 262 | |
Patronage capital allocated | | 954,988 | | | 923,970 | | | 31,018 | |
Members’ capital reserve | | 1,062,286 | | | 909,749 | | | 152,537 | |
Total allocated equity | | 2,020,661 | | | 1,836,844 | | | 183,817 | |
Unallocated net income (loss): | | | | | | |
Prior fiscal year-end cumulative derivative forward value losses(1) | | (461,162) | | | (1,079,739) | | | 618,577 | |
Year-to-date derivative forward value gains(1) | | 553,525 | | | 618,577 | | | (65,052) | |
Period-end cumulative derivative forward value gains (losses)(1) | | 92,363 | | | (461,162) | | | 553,525 | |
Other unallocated net loss | | (709) | | | (709) | | | — | |
Unallocated net income (loss) | | 91,654 | | | (461,871) | | | 553,525 | |
CFC retained equity | | 2,112,315 | | | 1,374,973 | | | 737,342 | |
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | | 2,258 | | | (25) | | | 2,283 | |
Total CFC equity | | 2,114,573 | | | 1,374,948 | | | 739,625 | |
Noncontrolling interests | | 27,396 | | | 24,931 | | | 2,465 | |
Total equity | | $ | 2,141,969 | | | $ | 1,399,879 | | | $ | 742,090 | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
____________________________
(1)Represents derivative forward value gains (losses) for CFC only, as total CFC equity does not include the noncontrolling interests of the variable interest entities NCSC and RTFC, which we are required to consolidate. We present the consolidated total derivative forward value gains (losses) in Table 37 in the “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section below. Also, see “Note 16—Business Segments” for the statements of operations for CFC.
The increase in total equity of $742 million to $2,142 million as of May 31, 2022 was attributable to our reported net income of $799 million for fiscal year 2022, partially offset by the CFC Board of Directors’ authorized patronage capital retirement in July 2021 of $58 million.
Allocation and Retirement of Patronage Capital
We are subject to District of Columbia law governing cooperatives, under which CFC is required to make annual allocations of net earnings, if any, in accordance with the provisions of the District of Columbia statutes. District of Columbia cooperative law requires cooperatives to allocate net earnings to patrons, to a general reserve in an amount sufficient to maintain a balance of at least 50% of paid-up capital and to a cooperative educational fund, as well as permits additional allocations to board-approved reserves. District of Columbia cooperative law also requires that a cooperative’s net earnings be allocated to all patrons in proportion to their individual patronage and each patron’s allocation be distributed to the patron unless the patron agrees that the cooperative may retain its share as additional capital. Pursuant to these provisions, the CFC Board of Directors is required to make annual allocations of net earnings, if any. CFC’s net earnings for determining allocations is based on non-GAAP adjusted net income, which excludes the impact of derivative forward value gains (losses). We provide a reconciliation of our adjusted net income to our reported net income and an explanation of the adjustments below in “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
In May 2022, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of $1 million of net earnings for fiscal year 2022 to the cooperative educational fund. In July 2022, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of fiscal year 2022 adjusted net income follows: $89 million to members in the form of patronage capital and $153 million to the members’ capital reserve. In July 2022, the CFC Board of Directors also authorized the retirement of patronage capital totaling $59 million, of which $44 million represented 50% of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2022 and $15 million represented the portion of the allocation from fiscal year 1997 net earnings that has been held for 25 years pursuant to the CFC Board of Directors’ policy. We expect to return the authorized patronage capital retirement amount of $59 million to members in cash in the second quarter of fiscal year 2023. The remaining portion of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2022 will be retained by CFC for 25 years pursuant to the guidelines adopted by the CFC Board of Directors in June 2009.
In May 2021, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of $1 million of net earnings for fiscal year 2021 to the cooperative educational fund. In July 2021 the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of fiscal year 2021 adjusted net income as follows: $90 million to members in the form of patronage capital and $102 million to the members’ capital reserve. In July 2021, the CFC Board of Directors also authorized the retirement of patronage capital totaling $58 million, of which $45 million represented 50% of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2021 and $13 million represented the portion of the allocation from fiscal year 1996 net earnings that has been held for 25 years pursuant to the CFC Board of Directors’ policy. This amount was returned to members in cash in September 2021. The remaining portion of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2021 will be retained by CFC for 25 years pursuant to the guidelines adopted by the CFC Board of Directors in June 2009.
The CFC Board of Directors is required to make annual allocations of adjusted net income, if any. CFC has made annual retirements of allocated net earnings in 42 of the last 43 fiscal years; however, future retirements of allocated amounts are determined based on CFC’s financial condition. The CFC Board of Directors has the authority to change the current practice for allocating and retiring net earnings at any time, subject to applicable laws.
| | |
ENTERPRISE RISK MANAGEMENT |
Overview
We face a variety of risks that can significantly affect our financial performance, liquidity, reputation and ability to meet the expectations of our members, investors and other stakeholders. As a financial services company, the major categories of risk exposures inherent in our business activities include credit risk, liquidity risk, market risk and operational risk. These risk categories are summarized below.
•Credit risk is the risk that a borrower or other counterparty will be unable to meet its obligations in accordance with agreed-upon terms.
•Liquidity risk is the risk that we will be unable to fund our operations and meet our contractual obligations or that we will be unable to fund new loans to borrowers at a reasonable cost and tenor in a timely manner.
•Market risk is the risk that changes in market variables, such as movements in interest rates, may adversely affect the match between the timing of the contractual maturities, re-pricing and prepayments of our financial assets and the related financial liabilities funding those assets.
•Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal controls, processes, systems, human error or external events, including natural disasters or public health emergencies, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic. Operational risk also includes cybersecurity risk, compliance risk, fiduciary risk, reputational risk and litigation risk.
Effective risk management is critical to our overall operations and to achieving our primary objective of providing cost-based financial products to our rural electric members while maintaining the sound financial results required for investment-grade credit ratings on our rated debt instruments. Accordingly, we have a risk-management framework that is intended to govern the principal risks we face in conducting our business and the aggregate amount of risk we are willing to accept, referred to as risk appetite and risk guidelines, in the context of CFC’s mission and strategic objectives and initiatives.
Risk-Management Framework
Our Enterprise Risk Management (“ERM”) framework consists of a defined policy and process for measuring, assessing and responding to key risks in alignment with CFC’s mission and CFC’s Board of Director’s strategic objectives. The board of directors has responsibility for the oversight and strategic direction of the ERM framework and has adopted a comprehensive risk-management policy that describes the roles and responsibilities of the board and management within this framework for identifying and managing risks. In fulfilling its risk-management oversight duties, the board of directors receives periodic reports on business activities and risk-management activities from management. Throughout the year at its periodic meetings, the CFC Board of Directors reviews important trends and emerging developments across key risks as assessed, measured and evaluated by management. The board also establishes CFC’s loan policies and has established a Loan Committee of the board comprising no fewer than 10 directors that reviews the performance of the loan portfolio in accordance with those policies. For additional information about the role of the CFC Board of Directors in risk governance and oversight, see “Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.”
Management is primarily accountable for execution of the ERM responsibilities and daily management of the risks associated with our business. Management executes its responsibility by establishing processes for identifying, measuring, assessing, managing, monitoring and reporting risks. Management also is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls to mitigate key risks. We have a number of management-level risk oversight committees across the organization and groups within the organization that have a defined set of authorities and responsibilities specific to one or more risk types, including the Corporate Credit Committee, Asset Liability Committee, Investment Management Committee, and Disclosure Committee. Management provides reports to the board of directors at each regularly scheduled board meeting, and more frequently as requested by the board of directors, relating to, among other things, the ongoing progress of managing risk at CFC given the ERM framework; management’s responses for the critical business risks identified during the risk assessment process and the status of any gaps or deficiencies; and CFC’s risk profile and trends, as well as emerging risks and opportunities.
Our loan portfolio, which represents the largest component of assets on our balance sheet, accounts for the substantial majority of our credit risk exposure. We also engage in certain non-lending activities that may give rise to counterparty credit risk, such as entering into derivative transactions to manage interest rate risk and purchasing investment securities.
Credit Risk Management
We manage credit risk related to our loan portfolio consistent with credit policies established by the CFC Board of Directors and through credit underwriting, approval and monitoring processes and practices adopted by management. Our board-established credit policies include guidelines regarding the types of credit products we offer, limits on credit we extend to individual borrowers, approval authorities delegated to management, and use of syndications and loan sales. We maintain an internal risk rating system in which we assign a rating to each borrower and credit facility. We review and update the risk ratings at least annually. Assigned risk ratings inform our credit approval, borrower monitoring and portfolio review processes. Our Corporate Credit Committee approves individual credit actions within its own authority and together with our Credit Risk Management group, establishes standards for credit underwriting, oversees credits deemed to be higher risk, reviews assigned risk ratings for accuracy, and monitors the overall credit quality and performance statistics of our loan portfolio.
Loan Portfolio Credit Risk
Our primary credit exposure is loans to rural electric cooperatives, which provide essential electric services to end-users, the majority of which are residential customers. We also have a limited portfolio of loans to not-for-profit and for-profit telecommunication companies. As a member-owned finance cooperative, CFC’s principal focus is to provide funding to its rural electric utility cooperative members to assist them in acquiring, constructing and operating electric distribution systems, power supply systems and related facilities. Loans outstanding to electric utility organizations totaled $29,584 million and $27,995 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, representing 98% and 99% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. The remaining loans outstanding in our loan portfolio were to RTFC members,
affiliates and associates in the telecommunications industry sector. The substantial majority of loans to our borrowers are long-term fixed-rate loans with terms of up to 35 years. Long-term fixed-rate loans accounted for 90% of total loans outstanding as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Because we lend primarily to our rural electric utility cooperative members, we have had a loan portfolio inherently subject to single-industry and single-obligor credit concentration risk since our inception in 1969. We historically, however, have experienced limited defaults and losses in our electric utility loan portfolio due to several factors. First, the majority of our electric cooperative borrowers operate in states where electric cooperatives are not subject to rate regulation. Thus, they are able to make rate adjustments to pass along increased costs to the end customer without first obtaining state regulatory approval, allowing them to cover operating costs and generate sufficient earnings and cash flows to service their debt obligations. Second, electric cooperatives face limited competition, as they tend to operate in exclusive territories not serviced by public investor-owned utilities. Third, electric cooperatives typically are consumer-owned, not-for-profit entities that provide an essential service to end-users, the majority of which are residential customers. As not-for-profit entities, rural electric cooperatives, unlike investor-owned utilities, generally are eligible to apply for assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) and states to help recover from major disasters or emergencies. Fourth, electric cooperatives tend to adhere to a conservative core business strategy model that has historically resulted in a relatively stable, resilient operating environment and overall strong financial performance and credit strength for the electric cooperative network. Finally, we generally lend to our members on a senior secured basis, which reduces the risk of loss in the event of a borrower default.
Below we provide information on the credit risk profile of our loan portfolio, including security provisions, credit concentration, credit quality indicators and our allowance for credit losses.
Security Provisions
Except when providing line of credit loans, we generally lend to our members on a senior secured basis. Long-term loans are generally secured on parity with other secured lenders (primarily RUS), if any, by all assets and revenue of the borrower with exceptions typical in utility mortgages. Line of credit loans are generally unsecured. In addition to the collateral pledged to secure our loans, distribution and power supply borrowers also are required to set rates charged to customers to achieve certain specified financial ratios. Table 14 presents, by legal entity and member class and by loan type, secured and unsecured loans in our loan portfolio as of May 31, 2022 and 2021. Of our total loans outstanding, 93% were secured as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 14: Loans—Loan Portfolio Security Profile
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2022 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Secured | | % of Total | | Unsecured | | % of Total | | Total |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 22,405,486 | | | 94 | % | | $ | 1,438,756 | | | 6 | % | | $ | 23,844,242 | |
Power supply | | 4,455,098 | | | 91 | | | 446,672 | | 9 | | | 4,901,770 | |
Statewide and associate | | 83,759 | | | 66 | | | 43,104 | | 34 | | | 126,863 | |
Total CFC | | 26,944,343 | | | 93 | | | 1,928,532 | | | 7 | | | 28,872,875 | |
NCSC | | 689,887 | | | 97 | | | 20,991 | | | 3 | | | 710,878 | |
RTFC | | 454,985 | | | 97 | | | 12,616 | | | 3 | | | 467,601 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 28,089,215 | | | 93 | | | $ | 1,962,139 | | | 7 | | | $ | 30,051,354 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate | | $ | 26,731,763 | | | 99 | % | | $ | 220,609 | | | 1 | % | | $ | 26,952,372 | |
Variable-rate | | 817,866 | | | 100 | | | 2,335 | | | — | | | 820,201 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total long-term loans | | 27,549,629 | | | 99 | | | 222,944 | | | 1 | | | 27,772,573 | |
Line of credit loans | | 539,586 | | | 24 | | | 1,739,195 | | | 76 | | | 2,278,781 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 28,089,215 | | | 93 | | | $ | 1,962,139 | | | 7 | | | $ | 30,051,354 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2021 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Secured | | % of Total | | Unsecured | | % of Total | | Total |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 20,702,657 | | | 94 | % | | $ | 1,324,766 | | | 6 | % | | $ | 22,027,423 | |
Power supply | | 4,458,311 | | | 86 | | | 696,001 | | 14 | | | 5,154,312 | |
Statewide and associate | | 88,004 | | | 83 | | | 18,117 | | 17 | | | 106,121 | |
Total CFC | | 25,248,972 | | | 93 | | | 2,038,884 | | | 7 | | | 27,287,856 | |
NCSC | | 662,782 | | | 94 | | | 44,086 | | | 6 | | | 706,868 | |
RTFC | | 399,717 | | | 95 | | | 20,666 | | | 5 | | | 420,383 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 26,311,471 | | | 93 | | | $ | 2,103,636 | | | 7 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate | | $ | 25,278,805 | | | 99 | % | | $ | 235,961 | | | 1 | % | | $ | 25,514,766 | |
Variable-rate | | 655,675 | | | 100 | | | 2,904 | | | — | | | 658,579 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total long-term loans | | 25,934,480 | | | 99 | | | 238,865 | | | 1 | | | 26,173,345 | |
Line of credit loans | | 376,991 | | | 17 | | | 1,864,771 | | | 83 | | | 2,241,762 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 26,311,471 | | | 93 | | | $ | 2,103,636 | | | 7 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
____________________________
(1)Represents the unpaid principal balance, net of charge-offs and recoveries of loans as of the end of each period. Excludes unamortized deferred loan origination costs of $12 million as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Credit Concentration
Concentrations of credit may exist when a lender has large credit exposures to single borrowers, large credit exposures to borrowers in the same industry sector or engaged in similar activities or large credit exposures to borrowers in a geographic region that would cause the borrowers to be similarly impacted by economic or other conditions in the region. As discussed above under “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk,” because we lend primarily to our rural electric utility cooperative members, our loan portfolio is inherently subject to single-industry and single-obligor credit concentration risk, and loans outstanding to electric utility organizations totaled $29,584 million and $27,995 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, representing 98% and 99% of our total loans outstanding of each respective date.
Single-Obligor Concentration
Table 15 displays the outstanding loan exposure for our 20 largest borrowers, by legal entity and member class, as of May 31, 2022 and 2021. Our 20 largest borrowers consisted of 12 distribution systems and eight power supply systems as of May 31, 2022. In comparison, our 20 largest borrowers consisted of 10 distribution systems and 10 power supply systems as of May 31, 2021. The largest total exposure to a single borrower or controlled group represented less than 2% of total loans outstanding as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 15: Loans—Loan Exposure to 20 Largest Borrowers
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 3,929,160 | | | 13 | % | | $ | 3,312,571 | | | 12 | % | | |
Power supply | | 2,095,640 | | | 7 | | | 2,665,771 | | | 9 | | | |
Total CFC | | 6,024,800 | | | 20 | | | 5,978,342 | | | 21 | | | |
NCSC | | 195,001 | | | 1 | | | 203,392 | | | 1 | | | |
Total loan exposure to 20 largest borrowers | | 6,219,801 | | | 21 | | | 6,181,734 | | | 22 | | | |
Less: Loans covered under Farmer Mac standby purchase commitment | | (316,367) | | | (1) | | | (308,580) | | | (1) | | | |
Net loan exposure to 20 largest borrowers | | $ | 5,903,434 | | | 20 | % | | $ | 5,873,154 | | | 21 | % | | |
As part of our strategy in managing credit exposure to large borrowers, we entered into a long-term standby purchase commitment agreement with Farmer Mac during fiscal year 2016. Under this agreement, we may designate certain long-term loans to be covered under the commitment, subject to approval by Farmer Mac, and in the event any such loan later goes into payment default for at least 90 days, upon request by us, Farmer Mac must purchase such loan at par value. The aggregate unpaid principal balance of designated and Farmer Mac-approved loans was $493 million and $512 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Loan exposure to our 20 largest borrowers covered under the Farmer Mac agreement totaled $316 million and $309 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, which reduced our exposure to the 20 largest borrowers to 20% and 21% as of each respective date. No loans have been put to Farmer Mac for purchase pursuant to this agreement. Our credit exposure is also mitigated by long-term loans guaranteed by RUS, which totaled $131 million and $139 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
Geographic Concentration
Although our organizational structure and mission results in single-industry concentration, we serve a geographically diverse group of electric and telecommunications borrowers throughout the U.S. The consolidated number of borrowers with loans outstanding totaled 883 and 892 as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, located in 49 states and the District of Columbia. Of the 883 and 892 borrowers with loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, 49 were electric power supply borrowers as of each respective date. Electric power supply borrowers generally require significantly more capital than electric distribution and telecommunications borrowers.
Texas, which had 68 and 67 borrowers with loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, accounted for the largest number of borrowers with loans outstanding in any one state as of each respective date, as well as the largest concentration of loan exposure in any one state. Loans outstanding to Texas-based electric utility organizations totaled $5,104 million and $4,878 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, and accounted for approximately 17% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. Of the loans outstanding to Texas-based electric utility organizations, $163 million and $172 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, were covered by the Farmer Mac standby repurchase agreement, which reduced our credit risk exposure to Texas-based borrowers to 16% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. Of the 49 electric power supply borrowers with loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022, eight were located in Texas.
Table 16 provides a breakdown, by state or U.S. territory, of the total number of borrowers with loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021 and the outstanding loan exposure to borrowers in each jurisdiction as a percentage of total loans outstanding of $30,051 million and $28,415 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
Table 16: Loans—Loan Geographic Concentration
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2022 | | 2021 |
U.S. State/Territory | | Number of Borrowers | | % of Total Loans Outstanding | | Number of Borrowers | | % of Total Loans Outstanding |
Alabama | | 21 | | 2.37 | % | | 24 | | 2.28 | % |
Alaska | | 16 | | 3.29 | | | 16 | | 3.48 | |
Arizona | | 11 | | 0.95 | | | 11 | | 0.80 | |
Arkansas | | 21 | | 2.42 | | | 20 | | 2.21 | |
California | | 4 | | 0.12 | | | 4 | | 0.12 | |
Colorado | | 27 | | 5.53 | | | 27 | | 5.70 | |
Delaware | | 3 | | 0.26 | | | 3 | | 0.31 | |
District of Columbia | | 1 | | 0.10 | | | — | | | — | |
Florida | | 19 | | 3.65 | | | 18 | | 3.84 | |
Georgia | | 45 | | 5.33 | | | 45 | | 5.42 | |
Hawaii | | 2 | | 0.32 | | | 2 | | 0.36 | |
Idaho | | 10 | | 0.41 | | | 11 | | 0.40 | |
Illinois | | 32 | | 3.23 | | | 31 | | 3.22 | |
Indiana | | 40 | | 3.67 | | | 39 | | 3.21 | |
Iowa | | 35 | | 2.31 | | | 34 | | 2.32 | |
Kansas | | 28 | | 3.78 | | | 29 | | 4.13 | |
Kentucky | | 23 | | 2.47 | | | 23 | | 2.65 | |
Louisiana | | 8 | | 2.49 | | | 9 | | 1.95 | |
Maine | | 3 | | 0.07 | | | 3 | | 0.08 | |
Maryland | | 2 | | 1.48 | | | 2 | | 1.56 | |
Massachusetts | | 1 | | 0.20 | | | 1 | | 0.21 | |
Michigan | | 11 | | 1.70 | | | 11 | | 1.32 | |
Minnesota | | 46 | | 2.16 | | | 48 | | 2.38 | |
Mississippi | | 21 | | 1.86 | | | 20 | | 1.58 | |
Missouri | | 44 | | 5.65 | | | 46 | | 5.65 | |
Montana | | 23 | | 0.80 | | | 25 | | 0.77 | |
Nebraska | | 9 | | 0.10 | | | 12 | | 0.10 | |
Nevada | | 8 | | 0.82 | | | 8 | | 0.80 | |
New Hampshire | | 2 | | 0.36 | | | 2 | | 0.30 | |
New Jersey | | 2 | | 0.07 | | | 2 | | 0.06 | |
New Mexico | | 12 | | 0.17 | | | 13 | | 0.20 | |
New York | | 13 | | 0.42 | | | 13 | | 0.43 | |
North Carolina | | 26 | | 2.85 | | | 28 | | 3.08 | |
North Dakota | | 16 | | 2.83 | | | 14 | | 2.90 | |
Ohio | | 27 | | 2.10 | | | 27 | | 2.18 | |
Oklahoma | | 25 | | 3.18 | | | 27 | | 3.40 | |
Oregon | | 19 | | 1.24 | | | 19 | | 1.27 | |
Pennsylvania | | 15 | | 1.75 | | | 16 | | 1.78 | |
Rhode Island | | 1 | | 0.03 | | | 1 | | 0.02 | |
South Carolina | | 23 | | 2.80 | | | 24 | | 2.77 | |
South Dakota | | 29 | | 0.67 | | | 29 | | 0.64 | |
Tennessee | | 17 | | 0.78 | | | 16 | | 0.71 | |
Texas | | 68 | | 17.01 | | | 67 | | 17.17 | |
Utah | | 4 | | 0.78 | | | 4 | | 0.92 | |
Vermont | | 5 | | 0.16 | | | 5 | | 0.18 | |
Virginia | | 17 | | 1.38 | | | 17 | | 1.08 | |
Washington | | 10 | | 1.02 | | | 10 | | 1.12 | |
West Virginia | | 2 | | 0.03 | | | 2 | | 0.04 | |
Wisconsin | | 24 | | 1.79 | | | 23 | | 1.82 | |
Wyoming | | 12 | | 1.04 | | | 11 | | 1.08 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total | | 883 | | | 100.00 | % | | 892 | | | 100.00 | % |
Credit Quality Indicators
Assessing the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio and measuring our credit risk is an ongoing process that involves tracking payment status, troubled debt restructurings, nonperforming loans, charge-offs, the internal risk ratings of our borrowers troubled debt restructurings, nonperforming and impaired loans, charge-offs and other indicators of credit risk. We monitor and subject each borrower and loan facility in our loan portfolio to an individual risk assessment based on quantitative and qualitative factors. InternalPayment status trends and internal risk ratings and payment status trends are indicators, among others, of the probability of borrower default and leveloverall credit quality of credit risk in our loan portfolio.
The We believe the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio remained high, as evidenced by our strong asset performance metrics, including low levels of criticized exposure. As displayed in Table 21 above, 92% and 93% of our total outstanding loans were secured as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. We had no delinquent or nonperforming loans as of May 31, 2019 and 2018. In addition, we had no loan defaults or charge-offs during the year ended May 31, 2019.2022.
Borrower Risk Ratings
Our borrower risk ratings are intended to align with banking regulatory agency credit risk rating definitions of pass and criticized classifications, with loans classified as criticized further classified as special mention, substandard or doubtful. Pass ratings reflect relatively low probability of default, while criticized ratings have a higher probability of default. Loans with borrowers classified as criticized totaled $202 million, or 0.78%, of total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2019. Of this amount, $176 million was classified as substandard. In comparison, loans with borrowers classified as criticized totaled $178 million, or 0.71%, of total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2018. Of this amount, $171 million was classified as
substandard. We did not have any loans classified as doubtful as of May 31, 2019 or 2018. See “Note 4—Loans” for a description of each of the risk rating classifications.
Troubled Debt Restructurings
We actively monitor problem loans and, from time to time, attempt to work with borrowers to manage such exposures through loan workouts or modifications that better align with the borrower’s current ability to pay. A loan restructuring or modification of terms is accounted for as a TDRtroubled debt restructuring (“TDR”) if, for economic or legal reasons related to the borrower’s financial difficulties, a concession is granted to the borrower that we would not otherwise consider. TDR loans generally are initially classified as nonperforming and placed on nonaccrual status, although in many cases such loans were already on nonaccrual statusclassified as nonperforming prior to modification. Interest accrued but not collected at the date a loan is placed on nonaccrual status is reversed against earnings. These loans may be returned to performing status and the accrual of interest resumed if the borrower performs under the modified terms for an extended period of time, and we expect the borrower to continue to perform in accordance with the modified terms. In certain limited circumstances in which a TDR loan is current at the modification date, the loan may remain on accrual status at the time of modification.
We have not had any loan modifications that were required to be accounted for as TDRs since fiscal year 2016. Table 2417 presents the carrying valueoutstanding amount of modified loans modifiedaccounted for as TDRs in prior periods, by member class, and the performance status of these loans as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 17: Loans—Troubled Debt Restructured Loans
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Number of Borrowers | | Outstanding Amount(1) | | % of Total Loans Outstanding | | Number of Borrowers | | Outstanding Amount(1) | | % of Total Loans Outstanding | |
TDR loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC—Distribution | | 1 | | $ | 5,092 | | | 0.02 | % | | 1 | | $ | 5,379 | | | 0.02 | % | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
RTFC | | 1 | | 4,092 | | | 0.01 | | | 1 | | 4,592 | | | 0.02 | | |
Total TDR loans | | 2 | | $ | 9,184 | | | 0.03 | % | | 2 | | $ | 9,971 | | | 0.04 | % | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Performance status of TDR loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Performing TDR loans | | 2 | | $ | 9,184 | | | 0.03 | % | | 2 | | $ | 9,971 | | | 0.04 | % | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total TDR loans | | 2 | | $ | 9,184 | | | 0.03 | % | | 2 | | $ | 9,971 | | | 0.04 | % | |
____________________________
(1) Represents the unpaid principal balance net of charge-offs and recoveries as of the end of each period.
We had TDR loans outstanding to two borrowers totaling $9 million and $10 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, consisting of loan modifications to a CFC electric distribution borrower and an RTFC telecommunications borrower, which at the time of the last five fiscal years. Our last modification, were experiencing financial difficulty. Since the modification date, the loans have been performing in accordance with the terms of atheir respective restructured loan that met the definitionagreement for an extended period of atime and were classified as performing and on accrual status as of May 31, 2022 and 2021. We did not have any TDR occurred in fiscal year 2017.loans classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2022 or May 31, 2021. Although TDR loans may be returned to performing status if the borrower performs under the modified terms of the loan for an extended period of time, we evaluate TDR loans are considered individually impaired.on an individual basis in measuring expected credit losses for these loans.
Table 24: Troubled Debt Restructured Loans
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 | | 2015 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Carrying Amount | | % of Total Loans | | Carrying Amount | | % of Total Loans | | Carrying Amount | | % of Total Loans | | Carrying Amount | | % of Total Loans | | Carrying Amount | | % of Total Loans |
TDR loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC | | $ | 6,261 |
| | 0.03 | % | | $ | 6,507 |
| | 0.03 | % | | $ | 6,581 |
| | 0.02 | % | | $ | 6,716 |
| | 0.03 | % | | $ | 7,221 |
| | 0.03 | % |
NCSC | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 294 |
| | — |
|
RTFC | | 5,592 |
| | 0.02 |
| | 6,092 |
| | 0.02 |
| | 6,592 |
| | 0.03 |
| | 10,598 |
| | 0.04 |
| | 4,221 |
| | 0.02 |
|
Total TDR loans | | $ | 11,853 |
| | 0.05 | % | | $ | 12,599 |
| | 0.05 | % | | $ | 13,173 |
| | 0.05 | % | | $ | 17,314 |
| | 0.07 | % | | $ | 11,736 |
| | 0.05 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Performance status of TDR loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Performing TDR loans | | $ | 11,853 |
| | 0.05 | % | | $ | 12,599 |
| | 0.05 | % | | $ | 13,173 |
| | 0.05 | % | | $ | 13,808 |
| | 0.06 | % | | $ | 11,736 |
| | 0.05 | % |
Nonperforming TDR loans | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,506 |
| | 0.01 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Total TDR loans | | $ | 11,853 |
| | 0.05 | % | | $ | 12,599 |
| | 0.05 | % | | $ | 13,173 |
| | 0.05 | % | | $ | 17,314 |
| | 0.07 | % | | $ | 11,736 |
| | 0.05 | % |
As indicated in Table 24 above, we did not have any TDR loans classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2019 or 2018.
Nonperforming Loans
In addition to TDR loans that may be classified as nonperforming, we also may have nonperforming loans that have not been modified as a TDR loan.TDR. We classify such loans as nonperforming at the earlier of the date when we determine: (i) interest or principal payments on the loan is past due 90 days or more; (ii) as a result of court proceedings, the collection of interest or principal payments based on the original contractual terms is not expected; or (iii) the full and timely collection of interest or principal is otherwise uncertain. Once a loan is classified as nonperforming, we generally place the loan on nonaccrual status. Interest accrued but not collected at the date a loan is placed on nonaccrual status is reversed against earnings. Table 18 presents the outstanding balance of nonperforming loans, by member class, as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 18: Loans—Nonperforming Loans
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2022 | | 2021 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Number of Borrowers | | Outstanding Amount (1) | | % of Total Loans Outstanding | | | Number of Borrowers | | Outstanding Amount (1) | | % of Total Loans Outstanding |
Nonperforming loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC—Power supply(2) | | 3 | | $ | 227,790 | | | 0.76 | % | | | 2 | | $ | 228,312 | | | 0.81 | % |
RTFC | | — | | | — | | | — | | | | 2 | | 9,185 | | | 0.03 | |
Total nonperforming loans | | 3 | | $ | 227,790 | | | 0.76 | % | | | 4 | | $ | 237,497 | | | 0.84 | % |
____________________________
(1) Represents the unpaid principal balance net of charge-offs and recoveries as of the end of each period.
(2) In addition, we had less than $1 million in letters of credit outstanding to Brazos as of May 31, 2021.
We have not had any loans to three borrowers totaling $228 million classified as nonperforming other than TDRas of May 31, 2022. In comparison, we had loans sinceto four borrowers totaling $237 million classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2021. Nonperforming loans represented 0.76% and 0.84% of total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The reduction in nonperforming loans of $9 million during the current fiscal year ended
was due in part to our receipt of full payment of all amounts due on nonperforming loans to two RTFC borrowers totaling $9 million during the second quarter of fiscal year 2022. In addition, we have continued to receive payments on the remaining outstanding nonperforming loan to a CFC electric power supply borrower, including payments of $29 million during the current fiscal year, which reduced the balance of this loan to $114 million as of May 31, 2014.2022, from $143 million as of May 31, 2021. These reductions were partially offset by the classification during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022 of the $28 million loan outstanding to Brazos Sandy Creek as nonperforming following its bankruptcy filing, as discussed below.
Loans outstanding to Brazos, which filed for bankruptcy in March 2021 due to its exposure to elevated wholesale electric power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex, accounted for $86 million and $85 million of our total nonperforming loans as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Brazos is not permitted to make scheduled loan payments without approval of the bankruptcy court. As a result, we have not received payments from Brazos since March 2021, and its loans outstanding were delinquent as of each respective date.
On March 18, 2022, Brazos Sandy Creek, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Brazos and a CFC Texas-based electric power supply borrower, filed for bankruptcy following the filing of a motion by Brazos to reject its power purchase agreement with Brazos Sandy Creek as part of Brazos’ bankruptcy proceedings. A Chapter 7 Trustee has been appointed, and the Chapter 7 Trustee has been approved by the bankruptcy court to operate Brazos Sandy Creek as a going concern. CFC had a secured loan outstanding to Brazos Sandy Creek totaling $28 million as of May 31, 2022, which, upon notification of the bankruptcy filing by Brazos Sandy Creek, was classified as nonperforming during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022. Brazos Sandy Creek’s loan outstanding of $28 million was delinquent as of May 31, 2022 and on nonaccrual status as of this date. Aggregate loans outstanding to Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek totaled $114 million as of May 31, 2022, of which $49 million were secured and $65 million were unsecured.
Net Charge-Offs
Charge-offs represent the amount of a loan that has been removed from our consolidated balance sheet when the loan is deemed uncollectible. Generally the amount of a charge-off is the recorded investment in excess of the fair value of the
expected cash flows from the loan, or, if the loan is collateral dependent, the fair value of the underlying collateral securing the loan. We report charge-offs net of amounts recovered on previously charged off loans. Table 25 presents charge-offs, net of recoveries, and the net charge-off rate for each of the last five fiscal years.
Table 25: Net Charge-Offs (Recoveries)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 | | 2015 |
Charge-offs: | | | | | | | | | | |
RTFC | | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,119 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 999 |
|
Recoveries: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC | | — |
| | — |
| | (159 | ) | | (214 | ) | | (214 | ) |
RTFC | | — |
| | — |
| | (100 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
Total recoveries | | — |
| | — |
| | (259 | ) | | (214 | ) | | (214 | ) |
Net charge-offs (recoveries) | | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 1,860 |
| | $ | (214 | ) | | $ | 785 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Average total loans outstanding | | $ | 25,527,172 |
| | $ | 24,911,559 |
| | $ | 23,834,432 |
| | $ | 22,490,847 |
| | $ | 20,821,944 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Net charge-off rate(1) | | 0.00 | % |
| 0.00 | % |
| 0.01 | % |
| 0.00 | % |
| 0.00 | % |
____________________________
(1)Calculated based on annualized net charge-offs (recoveries) for the period divided by average total outstanding loans for the period.
We had no loan defaults or charge-offs during fiscal years 20192022, 2021 or 2018. The gross charge-offs of $3 million over the last five fiscal years were all attributable2020. Prior to our RTFC telecommunications loan portfolio. We now haveBrazos’ and Brazos Sandy Creek’s bankruptcy filings, we had not experienced an extended period of six consecutive fiscal years for which we have had noany defaults or charge-offs in our electric utility and telecommunications loan portfolio.portfolios since fiscal year 2013 and 2017, respectively.
Historical Loan Losses
In its 50-yearour 53-year history, CFC haswe have experienced only 18 defaults in our electric utility loan portfolio, which includes our most recent defaults by Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek due to their bankruptcy filing in March 2021 and March 2022, respectively. Of the 16 defaults of which 10prior to Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek, one remains unresolved with an expected ultimate resolution date in calendar year 2025, nine resulted in no loss and six resulted in cumulative historical net charge-offs of $86 million for our electric utility loan portfolio.million. Of this amount, $67 million was attributable to five electric utility power supply cooperatives and $19 million was attributable to one electric distribution cooperatives.cooperative. We discusscite the reasons loansfactors that have historically contributed to the relatively low risk of default by our electric utility cooperatives, our principal lending market, typically have a relatively low risk of default above under “Credit Concentration.Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk.”
In comparison, since RTFC’s inception in 1987, we have hadexperienced 15 defaults and cumulative net charge-offs attributable to telecommunication borrowers totalingof $427 million in our telecommunications loan portfolio, the most significant of which was a charge-off of $354 million in fiscal year 2011. This charge-off related to outstanding loans to Innovative Communications Corporation (“ICC”), a former RTFC member, and the transfer of ICC’s assets in foreclosure to Caribbean Asset Holdings, LLC.
Outstanding loans to electric utility organizations totaled $25,561 million and accounted for 99%Borrower Risk Ratings
As part of our total outstandingmanagement of credit risk, we maintain a credit risk rating framework under which we employ a consistent process for assessing the credit quality of our loan portfolio. We evaluate each borrower and loan facility in our loan portfolio and assign internal borrower and loan facility risk ratings based on consideration of a number of quantitative and qualitative factors. We categorize loans in our portfolio based on our internally assigned borrower risk ratings, which are intended to assess the general creditworthiness of the borrower and probability of default. Our borrower risk ratings align with the U.S. federal banking regulatory agencies’ credit risk definitions of pass and criticized categories, with the criticized category further segmented among special mention, substandard and doubtful. Pass ratings reflect relatively low probability of default, while criticized ratings have a higher probability of default. Our internally assigned borrower risk ratings serve as the primary credit quality indicator for our loan portfolio. Because our internal borrower risk ratings provide important information on the probability of default, they are a key input in determining our allowance for credit losses.
We use our internal risk ratings to measure the credit risk of each borrower and loan facility, identify or confirm problem or potential problem loans in a timely manner, differentiate risk within each of our portfolio segments, assess the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio and manage overall risk levels. Our internally assigned borrower risk ratings, which we map to equivalent credit ratings by external credit rating agencies, serve as the primary credit quality indicator for our loan portfolio. Because our internal borrower risk ratings provide important information on the probability of default, they are a key input in estimating our allowance for credit losses.
Criticized loans decreased by $392 million to $494 million as of May 31, 2019, while outstanding RTFC telecommunications loans totaled $3452022, from $886 million and accounted for 1%, of our total outstanding loan portfolio as of May 31, 2019.2021, representing approximately 2% and 3% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. The decrease in criticized loans was primarily attributable to positive developments during the third quarter of fiscal year 2022 related to Rayburn that resulted in an improvement in Rayburn’s credit risk profile and also a significant reduction in loans outstanding to Rayburn. Loans outstanding to Rayburn totaled $167 million as of May 31, 2022, and Rayburn’s borrower risk rating was in the pass category. In comparison, loans outstanding to Rayburn totaled $379 million as of May 31, 2021, and Rayburn’s borrower risk rating was in the criticized category.
In February 2022, Rayburn successfully completed a securitization transaction to cover extraordinary costs and expenses incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex pursuant to a financing program enacted into law by Texas in June 2021 for qualifying electric cooperatives exposed to elevated power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex. Subsequent to the completion of the securitization transaction, Rayburn fully paid its outstanding obligations to ERCOT. As a result, we revised our borrower risk rating for Rayburn to a rating in the pass category from a previous rating in the criticized category. In addition, we received loan payments from Rayburn during the third quarter of fiscal year 2022 that reduced loans outstanding to Rayburn to $167 million as of May 31, 2022, from $379 million as of May 31, 2021. Rayburn was current on all of its debt obligations to us as of the date of this Report. Also, each of the borrowers with loans outstanding in the criticized category, with the exception of Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek, was current with regard to all principal and
interest amounts due to us as of May 31, 2022. In comparison, each of the borrowers with loans outstanding in the criticized category, with the exception of Brazos, was current with regard to all principal and interest amounts due to us as of May 31, 2021. As discussed above under “Nonperforming Loans,” Brazos is not permitted to make scheduled loan payments without approval of the bankruptcy court and Brazos Sandy Creek’s loan outstanding of $28 million was delinquent as of May 31, 2022 and on nonaccrual status as of this date, as a result of its bankruptcy filing.
We provide additional information on our borrower risk rating classifications, including the amount of loans outstanding in each of the criticized loan categories of special mention, substandard and doubtful, in “Note 1—Summary of Significant
Accounting Policies” and “Note 4—Loans” in this Report.
Allowance for LoanCredit Losses
TheWe are required to maintain an allowance based on a current estimate of credit losses that are expected to occur over the remaining contractual term of the loans in our portfolio. Our allowance for loancredit losses represents management’s estimateconsists of probable losses inherenta collective allowance and an asset-specific allowance. The collective allowance is established for loans in our loan portfolio that share similar risk characteristics and are therefore evaluated on a collective, or pool, basis in measuring expected credit losses. The asset-specific allowance is established for loans in our portfolio that do not share similar risk characteristics with other loans in our portfolio and are therefore evaluated on an individual basis in measuring expected credit losses.
Table 19 presents, by legal entity and member class, loans outstanding and the related allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio as of May 31, 2022 and 2021 and the allowance components as of each balance sheet date. We determine the allowance based on borrower risk ratings, historical loss experience, specific problem loans, economic conditions and other pertinent factors that, in management’s judgment, may affect the risk of loss in our loan portfolio.
Table 26 summarizes changes in the allowance for loan losses for the past five fiscal years and a comparison of the allowance by company as of the end of each of those years.
Table 26:19: Allowance for LoanCredit Losses by Borrower Member Class and Evaluation Methodology
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2022 | 2021 | | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Loans Outstanding(1) | | Allowance for Credit Losses | | Allowance Coverage Ratio (2) | | Loans Outstanding (1) | | Allowance for Credit Losses | | Allowance Coverage Ratio (2) | | | | | |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 23,844,242 | | | $ | 15,781 | | | 0.07 | % | | $ | 22,027,423 | | | $ | 13,426 | | | 0.06 | % | | | | | |
Power supply | | 4,901,770 | | | 47,793 | | | 0.98 | | | 5,154,312 | | | 64,646 | | | 1.25 | | | | | | |
Statewide and associate | | 126,863 | | | 1,251 | | | 0.99 | | | 106,121 | | | 1,391 | | | 1.31 | | | | | | |
Total CFC | | 28,872,875 | | | 64,825 | | | 0.22 | | | 27,287,856 | | | 79,463 | | | 0.29 | | | | | | |
NCSC | | 710,878 | | | 1,449 | | | 0.20 | | | 706,868 | | | 1,374 | | | 0.19 | | | | | | |
RTFC | | 467,601 | | | 1,286 | | | 0.28 | | | 420,383 | | | 4,695 | | | 1.12 | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 30,051,354 | | | $ | 67,560 | | | 0.22 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | | | $ | 85,532 | | | 0.30 | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Allowance components: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collective allowance | | $ | 29,814,380 | | | $ | 28,876 | | | 0.10 | % | | $ | 28,167,639 | | | $ | 42,442 | | | 0.15 | % | | | | | |
Asset-specific allowance | | 236,974 | | | 38,684 | | | 16.32 | | | 247,468 | | | 43,090 | | | 17.41 | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 30,051,354 | | | $ | 67,560 | | | 0.22 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | | | $ | 85,532 | | | 0.30 | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Allowance coverage ratios: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Nonperforming and nonaccrual loans (3) | | $ | 227,790 | | | | | 29.66 | % | | $ | 237,497 | | | | | 36.01 | % | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 |
| 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 | | 2015 |
Beginning balance | | $ | 18,801 |
| | $ | 37,376 |
| | $ | 33,258 |
| | $ | 33,690 |
| | $ | 56,429 |
|
Provision (benefit) for loan losses | | (1,266 | ) | | (18,575 | ) | | 5,978 |
| | (646 | ) | | (21,954 | ) |
Net (charge-offs) recoveries | | — |
| | — |
| | (1,860 | ) | | 214 |
| | (785 | ) |
Ending balance | | $ | 17,535 |
| | $ | 18,801 |
| | $ | 37,376 |
| | $ | 33,258 |
| | $ | 33,690 |
|
___________________________ |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Allowance for loan losses by company: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC | | $ | 13,120 |
| | $ | 12,300 |
| | $ | 29,499 |
| | $ | 24,559 |
| | $ | 23,716 |
|
NCSC | | 2,007 |
| | 2,082 |
| | 2,910 |
| | 3,134 |
| | 5,441 |
|
RTFC | | 2,408 |
| | 4,419 |
| | 4,967 |
| | 5,565 |
| | 4,533 |
|
Total | | $ | 17,535 |
| | $ | 18,801 |
| | $ | 37,376 |
| | $ | 33,258 |
| | $ | 33,690 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Allowance coverage ratios: | | | | | | | | | | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 25,905,664 |
| | $ | 25,167,494 |
| | $ | 24,356,330 |
| | $ | 23,152,517 |
| | $ | 21,459,220 |
|
Percentage of total loans outstanding | | 0.07 | % | | 0.07 | % | | 0.15 | % | | 0.14 | % | | 0.16 | % |
Percentage of total performing TDR loans outstanding | | 147.94 |
| | 149.23 |
| | 283.73 |
| | 240.86 |
| | 287.07 |
|
Percentage of total nonperforming TDR loans outstanding | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 948.60 |
| | — |
|
Percentage of loans on nonaccrual status | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 948.60 |
| | 287.07 |
|
___________________________
(1) Represents the unpaid principal amountbalance, net of charge-offs and recoveries, of loans as of the end of each period presented and excludesperiod-end. Excludes unamortized deferred loan origination costs of $11 million as of May 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017, and $10 million as of May 31, 2016 and 2015.
Our allowance for loan losses decreased by $1 million to $18 million as of May 31, 2019, from $19 million as of May 31, 2018. The allowance coverage ratio was 0.07% as of both May 31, 2019 and 2018. Loans designated as individually impaired totaled $12 million and $13 million as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, and the specific allowance related to those loans totaled $1 million as of both May 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021.
(2)Calculated based on the allowance for credit losses attributable to each member class and allowance components at period-end divided by the related loans outstanding at period-end.
See “Critical Accounting Policies(3)Calculated based on the total allowance for credit losses at period-end divided by loans outstanding classified as nonperforming and Estimates—Allowanceon nonaccrual status at period-end.
Our allowance for Loan Losses”credit losses and allowance coverage ratio decreased to $68 million and 0.22%, respectively, as of May 31, 2022, from $86 million and 0.30% respectively, as of May 31, 2021. The $18 million decrease in the allowance for credit losses reflected a decrease in the collective and asset-specific allowance of $14 million and $4 million, respectively. The collective allowance decrease of $14 million was attributable to an improvement in Rayburn’s credit risk profile following the successful completion by Rayburn of a securitization transaction in February 2022 to cover extraordinary costs and expenses incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex and subsequent payment in full of its obligations to ERCOT and a significant reduction in loans outstanding to Rayburn due to payments received from Rayburn during fiscal year 2022. The asset-specific allowance decrease of $4 million stemmed from the combined impact of the elimination of an asset-specific allowance attributable to nonperforming loans totaling $9 million that were paid in full during the second quarter of fiscal year 2022 and the decrease of an asset-specific allowance for a nonperforming CFC power supply borrower, attributable to loan payments received on this loan, partially offset by the addition of an asset-specific allowance for Brazos Sandy Creek, due to its bankruptcy filing, as discussed above under “Nonperforming Loans.”
As a result of Rayburn’s payment in full of its February 2021 polar vortex-related outstanding obligations to ERCOT, we believe our exposure to the significant adverse financial impact on some electric utilities from the surge in wholesale power costs in Texas during the February 2021 polar vortex is now limited to loans outstanding to Brazos and its wholly-owned subsidiary Brazos Sandy Creek.
We discuss our methodology for estimating the allowance for credit losses under the CECL model in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies”Policies—Allowance for Credit Losses” and provide information on the methodology formanagement judgment and uncertainties involved in our determining ourthe allowance for loancredit losses and the key assumptions. See “Note 4—Loans”in above section “Critical Accounting Estimates—Allowance for Credit Losses” of this Report forReport. We provide additional information on theour loans and allowance for credit qualitylosses under “Note 4—Loans” and “Note 5—Allowance for Credit Losses” of our loan portfolio.this Report.
Counterparty Credit Risk
We are exposedIn addition to credit exposure from our borrowers, we enter into other types of financial transactions in the ordinary course of business that expose us to counterparty credit risk, primarily related to the performance of the parties with which we enter into financial transactions primarily for derivative instruments,involving our cash and time deposit accounts andcash equivalents, securities held in our investment security holdings. Tosecurities portfolio and derivatives. We mitigate thisour risk weby only enterentering into these transactions with financial institutionscounterparties with investment-grade ratings. ratings, establishing operational guidelines and counterparty exposure limits and monitoring our counterparty credit risk position. We evaluate our counterparties based on certain quantitative and qualitative factors and periodically assign internal risk rating grades to our counterparties.
Cash and Investments Securities Counterparty Credit Exposure
Our cash and time depositscash equivalents and investment securities totaled $154 million and $600 million, respectively, as of May 31, 2022. The primary credit exposure associated with investments held in our investments portfolio is that issuers will not repay principal and interest in accordance with the contractual terms. Our cash and cash equivalents with financial institutions generally have an original maturity of less than one year.year and pursuant to our investment policy guidelines, all fixed-income debt securities, at the time of purchase, must be rated at least investment grade based on external credit ratings from at least two of the leading global credit rating agencies, when available, or the corresponding equivalent, when not available. We therefore believe that the risk of default by these counterparties is low.
We provide additional information on the holdings in our investment securities portfolio below under “Liquidity Risk—Investment Securities Portfolio” and in “Note 3—Investment Securities.”
Derivative Counterparty Credit Exposure
Our derivative counterparty credit exposure relates principally to interest-rate swap contracts. We generally engage in OTC derivative transactions, which expose us to individual counterparty credit risk because these transactions are executed and settled directly between us and each counterparty. We are exposed to the risk that an individual derivative counterparty will default on payments due to us, which we may not be able to collect or which may require us to seek a replacement derivative from a different counterparty. This replacement may be at a higher cost, or we may be unable to find a suitable replacement.
We manage our derivative counterparty credit riskexposure by monitoring the overallexecuting derivative transactions with financial institutions that have investment-grade credit worthiness of each counterparty based on our internal counterparty credit risk scoring model; using counterparty-specific credit risk limits; executingratings and maintaining enforceable master netting arrangements;arrangements with these counterparties, which allow us to net derivative assets and diversifying our derivative transactions among multiple counterparties.liabilities with the same counterparty. We also require that our derivative counterparties be a participant in one of our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements. Ourhad 12 active derivative counterparties hadwith credit ratings ranging from Aa1 to Baa1 and Aa2 to Baa2 by Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”)as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, and from AA- to BBB+A- by S&P Global Inc. (“S&P”)as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021. The total outstanding notional amount of derivatives with these counterparties was $8,062 million and $8,979 million as of May 31, 2019. Our largest2022 and 2021, respectively. The highest single derivative counterparty exposure, based on theconcentration, by outstanding
notional amount, representedaccounted for approximately 23% and 24% of the total outstanding notional amount of our derivatives as of
both May 31, 20192022 and 2018, respectively.2021.
Credit Risk-Related Contingent Features
OurWhile our derivative agreements include netting provisions that allow for offsetting of all contracts typically contain mutual early-termination provisions, generallywith a given counterparty in the formevent of a credit rating trigger. Under the mutual credit rating trigger provisions, either counterparty may, but is not obligated to, terminate and settle the agreement if the credit ratingdefault by one of the other counterparty falls belowtwo parties, we report the fair value of our derivatives on a level specified in the agreement. Ifgross basis by individual contract as either a derivative contract is terminated,asset or derivative liability on our consolidated balance sheets. However, we estimate our exposure to credit loss on our derivatives by calculating the amountreplacement cost to be received or paid by us would be equal to the prevailing fair value,settle at current market prices, as defined in our derivative agreements, all outstanding derivatives in a net gain position at the agreement,counterparty level where a right of legal offset exists. As indicated in “Note 10—Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities—Impact of Derivatives on Consolidated Balance Sheets,” our outstanding derivatives, at the individual counterparty level, were in a net gain position of $94 million as of May 31, 2022. In comparison, our outstanding derivatives, at the termination date.
Our senior unsecured credit ratings from Moody’s and S&Pindividual counterparty level, were A2 and A, respectively,in a net loss position of $464 million as of May 31, 2019. Both Moody’s and S&P had2021; as such, we did not have exposure to credit loss on our ratings on stable outlookoutstanding derivatives as of May 31, 2019. Table 27displays the notional amountsthis date.
We provide additional detail on our derivative agreements, including a discussion of our derivative contracts with credit rating triggers as of May 31, 2019, and the payments that would be required if the contracts were terminated as of that date because of a downgrade of our unsecured credit ratings or the counterparty’s unsecured credit ratings below A3/A-, below Baa1/BBB+, to or below Baa2/BBB, below Baa3/BBB- or to or below Ba2/BB+ by Moody’s or S&P, respectively. In calculating the paymentsettlement amounts that would be required upon termination of the derivative contracts, we assumed that the amounts for each counterparty would be netted in accordance with the provisions of the counterparty’s master netting agreements. The net payment amounts are based on the fair value of the underlying derivative instrument, excluding the credit risk valuation adjustment, plus any unpaid accrued interest amounts.
Table 27: Rating Triggers for Derivatives |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Notional Amount | | Payable Due From CFC | | Receivable Due to CFC | | Net (Payable)/Receivable |
Impact of rating downgrade trigger: | | | | | | | | |
Falls below A3/A-(1) | | $ | 50,460 |
| | $ | (9,379 | ) | | $ | — |
| | $ | (9,379 | ) |
Falls below Baa1/BBB+ | | 7,024,759 |
| | (224,501 | ) | | 5 |
| | (224,496 | ) |
Falls to or below Baa2/BBB (2) | | 562,062 |
| | (7,132 | ) | | — |
| | (7,132 | ) |
Falls below Baa3/BBB- | | 221,865 |
| | (12,292 | ) | | — |
| | (12,292 | ) |
Total | | $ | 7,859,146 |
| | $ | (253,304 | ) | | $ | 5 |
| | $ | (253,299 | ) |
___________________________
(1) Rating trigger for CFC falls below A3/A-, while rating trigger for counterparty falls below Baa1/BBB+ by Moody’s or S&P, respectively.
(2) Rating trigger for CFC falls to or below Baa2/BBB, while rating trigger for counterparty falls to or below Ba2/BB+ by Moody’s or S&P, respectively.
We have outstanding notional amount of derivatives with one counterparty subject to a ratings trigger and early termination provision in the event of a downgrade of CFC’s senior unsecured credit ratings below Baa3, BBB- or BBB- by Moody’s, S&P or Fitch Ratings Inc. (“Fitch”), respectively, which is not includedtrigger, in the above table, totaling $165 million as of May 31, 2019. These contracts were in an unrealized loss position of $20 million as of May 31, 2019.“Note 10—Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities.”
The aggregate fair value amount, including the credit valuation adjustment, of all interest rate swaps with rating triggers that were in a net liability position was $266 million as of May 31, 2019. There were no counterparties that fell below the rating trigger levels in our interest swap contracts as of May 31, 2019. If a counterparty has a credit rating that falls below the rating trigger level specified in the interest swap contract, we have the option to terminate all derivatives with the counterparty. However, we generally do not terminate such agreements prematurely because our interest rate swaps are critical to our matched funding strategy to mitigate interest rate risk.
See “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in this Report for additional information about credit riskrisks related to our business.
We define liquidity as the ability to convert assets into cash quickly and efficiently, maintain access to readily available funding and rolloverroll over or issue new debt under both normal operating conditions and periods of CFC-specific and/or market stress, to ensure that we can meet borrower loan requests, pay current and future obligations and fund our operations onin a cost-effective basis. manner.
Our primary sources of liquidityfunds include cash flows from operations, member loan principal repayments, securities held in our investment portfolio, committed bank revolving lines of credit, committed loan facilities under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program, revolving note purchase agreements with Farmer Mac and our abilityproceeds from debt issuances to issue debtmembers and in the capital markets,markets. Our primary uses of funds include loan advances to members, principal and interest payments on borrowings, periodic interest settlement payments related to our membersderivative contracts and in private placements. operating expenses.
Short-Term Borrowings
Short-term borrowings consist of borrowings with an original contractual maturity of one year or less and do not include the current portion of long-term debt. Short-term borrowings increased to $4,981 million as of May 31, 2022, from $4,582 million as of May 31, 2021, primarily due to an increase in short-term member investments, and accounted for 17% of total debt outstanding as of each respective date. See “Liquidity Risk” below and “Note 6—Short-Term Borrowings” for information on the composition of our short-term borrowings.
Long-Term and Subordinated Debt
Long-term debt, defined as debt with an original contractual maturity term of greater than one year, primarily consists of medium-term notes, collateral trust bonds, notes payable under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program and notes payable under our Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement. Subordinated debt consists of subordinated deferrable debt and members’ subordinated certificates. Our subordinated deferrable debt and members’ subordinated certificates have original contractual maturity terms of greater than one year.
Long-term and subordinated debt of $23,766 million and $22,844 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, accounted for 83% of total debt outstanding as of each respective date. We provide additional information on our long-term debt below under the section “Liquidity Risk” and “Note 7—Long-Term Debt” and “Note 8—Subordinated Deferrable Debt” in this Report.
Equity
Table 13 presents the components of total CFC equity and total equity as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 13: Equity
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | Change |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | |
Equity components: | | | | | | |
Membership fees and educational fund: | | | | | | |
Membership fees | | $ | 970 | | | $ | 968 | | | $ | 2 | |
Educational fund | | 2,417 | | | 2,157 | | | 260 | |
Total membership fees and educational fund | | 3,387 | | | 3,125 | | | 262 | |
Patronage capital allocated | | 954,988 | | | 923,970 | | | 31,018 | |
Members’ capital reserve | | 1,062,286 | | | 909,749 | | | 152,537 | |
Total allocated equity | | 2,020,661 | | | 1,836,844 | | | 183,817 | |
Unallocated net income (loss): | | | | | | |
Prior fiscal year-end cumulative derivative forward value losses(1) | | (461,162) | | | (1,079,739) | | | 618,577 | |
Year-to-date derivative forward value gains(1) | | 553,525 | | | 618,577 | | | (65,052) | |
Period-end cumulative derivative forward value gains (losses)(1) | | 92,363 | | | (461,162) | | | 553,525 | |
Other unallocated net loss | | (709) | | | (709) | | | — | |
Unallocated net income (loss) | | 91,654 | | | (461,871) | | | 553,525 | |
CFC retained equity | | 2,112,315 | | | 1,374,973 | | | 737,342 | |
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | | 2,258 | | | (25) | | | 2,283 | |
Total CFC equity | | 2,114,573 | | | 1,374,948 | | | 739,625 | |
Noncontrolling interests | | 27,396 | | | 24,931 | | | 2,465 | |
Total equity | | $ | 2,141,969 | | | $ | 1,399,879 | | | $ | 742,090 | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
____________________________
(1)Represents derivative forward value gains (losses) for CFC only, as total CFC equity does not include the noncontrolling interests of the variable interest entities NCSC and RTFC, which we are required to consolidate. We present the consolidated total derivative forward value gains (losses) in Table 37 in the “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section below. Also, see “Note 16—Business Segments” for the statements of operations for CFC.
The increase in total equity of $742 million to $2,142 million as of May 31, 2022 was attributable to our reported net income of $799 million for fiscal year 2022, partially offset by the CFC Board of Directors’ authorized patronage capital retirement in July 2021 of $58 million.
Allocation and Retirement of Patronage Capital
We are subject to District of Columbia law governing cooperatives, under which CFC is required to make annual allocations of net earnings, if any, in accordance with the provisions of the District of Columbia statutes. District of Columbia cooperative law requires cooperatives to allocate net earnings to patrons, to a general reserve in an amount sufficient to maintain a balance of at least 50% of paid-up capital and to a cooperative educational fund, as well as permits additional allocations to board-approved reserves. District of Columbia cooperative law also requires that a cooperative’s net earnings be allocated to all patrons in proportion to their individual patronage and each patron’s allocation be distributed to the patron unless the patron agrees that the cooperative may retain its share as additional capital. Pursuant to these provisions, the CFC Board of Directors is required to make annual allocations of net earnings, if any. CFC’s net earnings for determining allocations is based on non-GAAP adjusted net income, which excludes the impact of derivative forward value gains (losses). We provide a reconciliation of our adjusted net income to our reported net income and an explanation of the adjustments below in “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
In May 2022, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of $1 million of net earnings for fiscal year 2022 to the cooperative educational fund. In July 2022, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of fiscal year 2022 adjusted net income follows: $89 million to members in the form of patronage capital and $153 million to the members’ capital reserve. In July 2022, the CFC Board of Directors also authorized the retirement of patronage capital totaling $59 million, of which $44 million represented 50% of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2022 and $15 million represented the portion of the allocation from fiscal year 1997 net earnings that has been held for 25 years pursuant to the CFC Board of Directors’ policy. We expect to return the authorized patronage capital retirement amount of $59 million to members in cash in the second quarter of fiscal year 2023. The remaining portion of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2022 will be retained by CFC for 25 years pursuant to the guidelines adopted by the CFC Board of Directors in June 2009.
In May 2021, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of $1 million of net earnings for fiscal year 2021 to the cooperative educational fund. In July 2021 the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of fiscal year 2021 adjusted net income as follows: $90 million to members in the form of patronage capital and $102 million to the members’ capital reserve. In July 2021, the CFC Board of Directors also authorized the retirement of patronage capital totaling $58 million, of which $45 million represented 50% of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2021 and $13 million represented the portion of the allocation from fiscal year 1996 net earnings that has been held for 25 years pursuant to the CFC Board of Directors’ policy. This amount was returned to members in cash in September 2021. The remaining portion of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2021 will be retained by CFC for 25 years pursuant to the guidelines adopted by the CFC Board of Directors in June 2009.
The CFC Board of Directors is required to make annual allocations of adjusted net income, if any. CFC has made annual retirements of allocated net earnings in 42 of the last 43 fiscal years; however, future retirements of allocated amounts are determined based on CFC’s financial condition. The CFC Board of Directors has the authority to change the current practice for allocating and retiring net earnings at any time, subject to applicable laws.
| | |
ENTERPRISE RISK MANAGEMENT |
Overview
We face a variety of risks that can significantly affect our financial performance, liquidity, reputation and ability to meet the expectations of our members, investors and other stakeholders. As a financial services company, the major categories of risk exposures inherent in our business activities include credit risk, liquidity risk, market risk and operational risk. These risk categories are summarized below.
•Credit risk is the risk that a borrower or other counterparty will be unable to meet its obligations in accordance with agreed-upon terms.
•Liquidity risk is the risk that we will be unable to fund our operations and meet our contractual obligations or that we will be unable to fund new loans to borrowers at a reasonable cost and tenor in a timely manner.
•Market risk is the risk that changes in market variables, such as movements in interest rates, may adversely affect the match between the timing of the contractual maturities, re-pricing and prepayments of our financial assets and the related financial liabilities funding those assets.
•Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal controls, processes, systems, human error or external events, including natural disasters or public health emergencies, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic. Operational risk also includes cybersecurity risk, compliance risk, fiduciary risk, reputational risk and litigation risk.
Effective risk management is critical to our overall operations and to achieving our primary objective of providing cost-based financial products to our rural electric members while maintaining the sound financial results required for investment-grade credit ratings on our rated debt instruments. Accordingly, we have a risk-management framework that is intended to govern the principal risks we face in conducting our business and the aggregate amount of risk we are willing to accept, referred to as risk appetite and risk guidelines, in the context of CFC’s mission and strategic objectives and initiatives.
Risk-Management Framework
Our Enterprise Risk Management (“ERM”) framework consists of a defined policy and process for measuring, assessing and responding to key risks in alignment with CFC’s mission and CFC’s Board of Director’s strategic objectives. The board of directors has responsibility for the oversight and strategic direction of the ERM framework and has adopted a comprehensive risk-management policy that describes the roles and responsibilities of the board and management within this framework for identifying and managing risks. In fulfilling its risk-management oversight duties, the board of directors receives periodic reports on business activities and risk-management activities from management. Throughout the year at its periodic meetings, the CFC Board of Directors reviews important trends and emerging developments across key risks as assessed, measured and evaluated by management. The board also establishes CFC’s loan policies and has established a Loan Committee of the board comprising no fewer than 10 directors that reviews the performance of the loan portfolio in accordance with those policies. For additional information about the role of the CFC Board of Directors in risk governance and oversight, see “Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.”
Management is primarily accountable for execution of the ERM responsibilities and daily management of the risks associated with our business. Management executes its responsibility by establishing processes for identifying, measuring, assessing, managing, monitoring and reporting risks. Management also is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls to mitigate key risks. We have a number of management-level risk oversight committees across the organization and groups within the organization that have a defined set of authorities and responsibilities specific to one or more risk types, including the Corporate Credit Committee, Asset Liability Committee, Investment Management Committee, and Disclosure Committee. Management provides reports to the board of directors at each regularly scheduled board meeting, and more frequently as requested by the board of directors, relating to, among other things, the ongoing progress of managing risk at CFC given the ERM framework; management’s responses for the critical business risks identified during the risk assessment process and the status of any gaps or deficiencies; and CFC’s risk profile and trends, as well as emerging risks and opportunities.
Our loan portfolio, which represents the largest component of assets on our balance sheet, accounts for the substantial majority of our credit risk exposure. We also engage in certain non-lending activities that may give rise to counterparty credit risk, such as entering into derivative transactions to manage interest rate risk and purchasing investment securities.
Credit Risk Management
We manage credit risk related to our loan portfolio consistent with credit policies established by the CFC Board of Directors and through credit underwriting, approval and monitoring processes and practices adopted by management. Our liquidity risk-management frameworkboard-established credit policies include guidelines regarding the types of credit products we offer, limits on credit we extend to individual borrowers, approval authorities delegated to management, and use of syndications and loan sales. We maintain an internal risk rating system in which we assign a rating to each borrower and credit facility. We review and update the risk ratings at least annually. Assigned risk ratings inform our credit approval, borrower monitoring and portfolio review processes. Our Corporate Credit Committee approves individual credit actions within its own authority and together with our Credit Risk Management group, establishes standards for credit underwriting, oversees credits deemed to be higher risk, reviews assigned risk ratings for accuracy, and monitors the overall credit quality and performance statistics of our loan portfolio.
Loan Portfolio Credit Risk
Our primary credit exposure is designedloans to meet our liquidity objectivesrural electric cooperatives, which provide essential electric services to end-users, the majority of providingwhich are residential customers. We also have a reliable sourcelimited portfolio of loans to not-for-profit and for-profit telecommunication companies. As a member-owned finance cooperative, CFC’s principal focus is to provide funding to its rural electric utility cooperative members meet maturingto assist them in acquiring, constructing and operating electric distribution systems, power supply systems and related facilities. Loans outstanding to electric utility organizations totaled $29,584 million and $27,995 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, representing 98% and 99% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. The remaining loans outstanding in our loan portfolio were to RTFC members,
affiliates and associates in the telecommunications industry sector. The substantial majority of loans to our borrowers are long-term fixed-rate loans with terms of up to 35 years. Long-term fixed-rate loans accounted for 90% of total loans outstanding as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Because we lend primarily to our rural electric utility cooperative members, we have had a loan portfolio inherently subject to single-industry and single-obligor credit concentration risk since our inception in 1969. We historically, however, have experienced limited defaults and losses in our electric utility loan portfolio due to several factors. First, the majority of our electric cooperative borrowers operate in states where electric cooperatives are not subject to rate regulation. Thus, they are able to make rate adjustments to pass along increased costs to the end customer without first obtaining state regulatory approval, allowing them to cover operating costs and generate sufficient earnings and cash flows to service their debt obligations. Second, electric cooperatives face limited competition, as they tend to operate in exclusive territories not serviced by public investor-owned utilities. Third, electric cooperatives typically are consumer-owned, not-for-profit entities that provide an essential service to end-users, the majority of which are residential customers. As not-for-profit entities, rural electric cooperatives, unlike investor-owned utilities, generally are eligible to apply for assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) and otherstates to help recover from major disasters or emergencies. Fourth, electric cooperatives tend to adhere to a conservative core business strategy model that has historically resulted in a relatively stable, resilient operating environment and overall strong financial obligations, issue new debtperformance and fundcredit strength for the electric cooperative network. Finally, we generally lend to our operationsmembers on a cost-effectivesenior secured basis, which reduces the risk of loss in the event of a borrower default.
Below we provide information on the credit risk profile of our loan portfolio, including security provisions, credit concentration, credit quality indicators and our allowance for credit losses.
Security Provisions
Except when providing line of credit loans, we generally lend to our members on a senior secured basis. Long-term loans are generally secured on parity with other secured lenders (primarily RUS), if any, by all assets and revenue of the borrower with exceptions typical in utility mortgages. Line of credit loans are generally unsecured. In addition to the collateral pledged to secure our loans, distribution and power supply borrowers also are required to set rates charged to customers to achieve certain specified financial ratios. Table 14 presents, by legal entity and member class and by loan type, secured and unsecured loans in our loan portfolio as of May 31, 2022 and 2021. Of our total loans outstanding, 93% were secured as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 14: Loans—Loan Portfolio Security Profile
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2022 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Secured | | % of Total | | Unsecured | | % of Total | | Total |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 22,405,486 | | | 94 | % | | $ | 1,438,756 | | | 6 | % | | $ | 23,844,242 | |
Power supply | | 4,455,098 | | | 91 | | | 446,672 | | 9 | | | 4,901,770 | |
Statewide and associate | | 83,759 | | | 66 | | | 43,104 | | 34 | | | 126,863 | |
Total CFC | | 26,944,343 | | | 93 | | | 1,928,532 | | | 7 | | | 28,872,875 | |
NCSC | | 689,887 | | | 97 | | | 20,991 | | | 3 | | | 710,878 | |
RTFC | | 454,985 | | | 97 | | | 12,616 | | | 3 | | | 467,601 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 28,089,215 | | | 93 | | | $ | 1,962,139 | | | 7 | | | $ | 30,051,354 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate | | $ | 26,731,763 | | | 99 | % | | $ | 220,609 | | | 1 | % | | $ | 26,952,372 | |
Variable-rate | | 817,866 | | | 100 | | | 2,335 | | | — | | | 820,201 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total long-term loans | | 27,549,629 | | | 99 | | | 222,944 | | | 1 | | | 27,772,573 | |
Line of credit loans | | 539,586 | | | 24 | | | 1,739,195 | | | 76 | | | 2,278,781 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 28,089,215 | | | 93 | | | $ | 1,962,139 | | | 7 | | | $ | 30,051,354 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2021 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Secured | | % of Total | | Unsecured | | % of Total | | Total |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 20,702,657 | | | 94 | % | | $ | 1,324,766 | | | 6 | % | | $ | 22,027,423 | |
Power supply | | 4,458,311 | | | 86 | | | 696,001 | | 14 | | | 5,154,312 | |
Statewide and associate | | 88,004 | | | 83 | | | 18,117 | | 17 | | | 106,121 | |
Total CFC | | 25,248,972 | | | 93 | | | 2,038,884 | | | 7 | | | 27,287,856 | |
NCSC | | 662,782 | | | 94 | | | 44,086 | | | 6 | | | 706,868 | |
RTFC | | 399,717 | | | 95 | | | 20,666 | | | 5 | | | 420,383 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 26,311,471 | | | 93 | | | $ | 2,103,636 | | | 7 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate | | $ | 25,278,805 | | | 99 | % | | $ | 235,961 | | | 1 | % | | $ | 25,514,766 | |
Variable-rate | | 655,675 | | | 100 | | | 2,904 | | | — | | | 658,579 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total long-term loans | | 25,934,480 | | | 99 | | | 238,865 | | | 1 | | | 26,173,345 | |
Line of credit loans | | 376,991 | | | 17 | | | 1,864,771 | | | 83 | | | 2,241,762 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 26,311,471 | | | 93 | | | $ | 2,103,636 | | | 7 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
____________________________
(1)Represents the unpaid principal balance, net of charge-offs and recoveries of loans as of the end of each period. Excludes unamortized deferred loan origination costs of $12 million as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Credit Concentration
Concentrations of credit may exist when a lender has large credit exposures to single borrowers, large credit exposures to borrowers in the same industry sector or engaged in similar activities or large credit exposures to borrowers in a geographic region that would cause the borrowers to be similarly impacted by economic or other conditions in the region. As discussed above under normal operating conditions as well as under CFC-specific and/or market stress conditions. We engage in various activities“Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk,” because we lend primarily to manage liquidityour rural electric utility cooperative members, our loan portfolio is inherently subject to single-industry and single-obligor credit concentration risk, and achieveloans outstanding to electric utility organizations totaled $29,584 million and $27,995 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, representing 98% and 99% of our liquidity objectives.total loans outstanding of each respective date.
Single-Obligor Concentration
Table 15 displays the outstanding loan exposure for our 20 largest borrowers, by legal entity and member class, as of May 31, 2022 and 2021. Our Asset Liability Committee establishes guidelines that are intended20 largest borrowers consisted of 12 distribution systems and eight power supply systems as of May 31, 2022. In comparison, our 20 largest borrowers consisted of 10 distribution systems and 10 power supply systems as of May 31, 2021. The largest total exposure to ensure that we maintain sufficient, diversified sourcesa single borrower or controlled group represented less than 2% of liquiditytotal loans outstanding as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 15: Loans—Loan Exposure to cover potential funding requirements as well as unanticipated contingencies. Our Treasury group develops strategies to manage our targeted liquidity position, projects our funding needs under various scenarios, including adverse circumstances, and monitors our liquidity position on an ongoing basis.20 Largest Borrowers
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 3,929,160 | | | 13 | % | | $ | 3,312,571 | | | 12 | % | | |
Power supply | | 2,095,640 | | | 7 | | | 2,665,771 | | | 9 | | | |
Total CFC | | 6,024,800 | | | 20 | | | 5,978,342 | | | 21 | | | |
NCSC | | 195,001 | | | 1 | | | 203,392 | | | 1 | | | |
Total loan exposure to 20 largest borrowers | | 6,219,801 | | | 21 | | | 6,181,734 | | | 22 | | | |
Less: Loans covered under Farmer Mac standby purchase commitment | | (316,367) | | | (1) | | | (308,580) | | | (1) | | | |
Net loan exposure to 20 largest borrowers | | $ | 5,903,434 | | | 20 | % | | $ | 5,873,154 | | | 21 | % | | |
Available Liquidity
As part of our strategy in managing liquidity riskcredit exposure to large borrowers, we entered into a long-term standby purchase commitment agreement with Farmer Mac during fiscal year 2016. Under this agreement, we may designate certain long-term loans to be covered under the commitment, subject to approval by Farmer Mac, and meeting our liquidity objectives, we seek to maintain a substantial levelin the event any such loan later goes into payment default for at least 90 days, upon request by us, Farmer Mac must purchase such loan at par value. The aggregate unpaid principal balance of on-balance sheetdesignated and off-balance sheet sources of liquidity that are readily available for access to meet our near-term liquidity needs. Table 28 presents the sources of our available liquidityFarmer Mac-approved loans was $493 million and $512 million as of May 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021, respectively. Loan exposure to our 20 largest borrowers covered under the Farmer Mac agreement totaled $316 million and $309 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, which reduced our exposure to the 20 largest borrowers to 20% and 21% as of each respective date. No loans have been put to Farmer Mac for purchase pursuant to this agreement. Our credit exposure is also mitigated by long-term loans guaranteed by RUS, which totaled $131 million and $139 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
Table 28: AvailableLiquidityGeographic Concentration
Although our organizational structure and mission results in single-industry concentration, we serve a geographically diverse group of electric and telecommunications borrowers throughout the U.S. The consolidated number of borrowers with loans outstanding totaled 883 and 892 as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, located in 49 states and the District of Columbia. Of the 883 and 892 borrowers with loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, 49 were electric power supply borrowers as of each respective date. Electric power supply borrowers generally require significantly more capital than electric distribution and telecommunications borrowers.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2019 | | 2018 |
(Dollars in millions) | | Total | | Accessed | | Available | | Total | | Accessed | | Available |
Cash and cash equivalents | | $ | 178 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 178 |
| | $ | 231 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 231 |
|
Committed bank revolving line of credit agreements—unsecured(1) | | 2,975 |
| | 3 |
| | 2,972 |
| | 3,085 |
| | 3 |
| | 3,082 |
|
Guaranteed Underwriter Program committed facilities—secured(2) | | 7,298 |
| | 5,948 |
| | 1,350 |
| | 6,548 |
| | 5,323 |
| | 1,225 |
|
Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement, dated March 24, 2011, as amended—secured(3) | | 5,200 |
| | 3,055 |
| | 2,145 |
| | 5,200 |
| | 2,791 |
| | 2,409 |
|
Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement, dated July 31, 2015, as amended—secured | | 300 |
| | — |
| | 300 |
| | 300 |
| | 100 |
| | 200 |
|
Total | | $ | 15,951 |
| | $ | 9,006 |
| | $ | 6,945 |
| | $ | 15,364 |
| | $ | 8,217 |
| | $ | 7,147 |
|
Texas, which had 68 and 67 borrowers with loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, accounted for the largest number of borrowers with loans outstanding in any one state as of each respective date, as well as the largest concentration of loan exposure in any one state. Loans outstanding to Texas-based electric utility organizations totaled $5,104 million and $4,878 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, and accounted for approximately 17% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. Of the loans outstanding to Texas-based electric utility organizations, $163 million and $172 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, were covered by the Farmer Mac standby repurchase agreement, which reduced our credit risk exposure to Texas-based borrowers to 16% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. Of the 49 electric power supply borrowers with loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022, eight were located in Texas.____________________________
(1)The committed bank revolving lineTable 16 provides a breakdown, by state or U.S. territory, of the total number of borrowers with loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021 and the outstanding loan exposure to borrowers in each jurisdiction as a percentage of total loans outstanding of $30,051 million and $28,415 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
Table 16: Loans—Loan Geographic Concentration
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2022 | | 2021 |
U.S. State/Territory | | Number of Borrowers | | % of Total Loans Outstanding | | Number of Borrowers | | % of Total Loans Outstanding |
Alabama | | 21 | | 2.37 | % | | 24 | | 2.28 | % |
Alaska | | 16 | | 3.29 | | | 16 | | 3.48 | |
Arizona | | 11 | | 0.95 | | | 11 | | 0.80 | |
Arkansas | | 21 | | 2.42 | | | 20 | | 2.21 | |
California | | 4 | | 0.12 | | | 4 | | 0.12 | |
Colorado | | 27 | | 5.53 | | | 27 | | 5.70 | |
Delaware | | 3 | | 0.26 | | | 3 | | 0.31 | |
District of Columbia | | 1 | | 0.10 | | | — | | | — | |
Florida | | 19 | | 3.65 | | | 18 | | 3.84 | |
Georgia | | 45 | | 5.33 | | | 45 | | 5.42 | |
Hawaii | | 2 | | 0.32 | | | 2 | | 0.36 | |
Idaho | | 10 | | 0.41 | | | 11 | | 0.40 | |
Illinois | | 32 | | 3.23 | | | 31 | | 3.22 | |
Indiana | | 40 | | 3.67 | | | 39 | | 3.21 | |
Iowa | | 35 | | 2.31 | | | 34 | | 2.32 | |
Kansas | | 28 | | 3.78 | | | 29 | | 4.13 | |
Kentucky | | 23 | | 2.47 | | | 23 | | 2.65 | |
Louisiana | | 8 | | 2.49 | | | 9 | | 1.95 | |
Maine | | 3 | | 0.07 | | | 3 | | 0.08 | |
Maryland | | 2 | | 1.48 | | | 2 | | 1.56 | |
Massachusetts | | 1 | | 0.20 | | | 1 | | 0.21 | |
Michigan | | 11 | | 1.70 | | | 11 | | 1.32 | |
Minnesota | | 46 | | 2.16 | | | 48 | | 2.38 | |
Mississippi | | 21 | | 1.86 | | | 20 | | 1.58 | |
Missouri | | 44 | | 5.65 | | | 46 | | 5.65 | |
Montana | | 23 | | 0.80 | | | 25 | | 0.77 | |
Nebraska | | 9 | | 0.10 | | | 12 | | 0.10 | |
Nevada | | 8 | | 0.82 | | | 8 | | 0.80 | |
New Hampshire | | 2 | | 0.36 | | | 2 | | 0.30 | |
New Jersey | | 2 | | 0.07 | | | 2 | | 0.06 | |
New Mexico | | 12 | | 0.17 | | | 13 | | 0.20 | |
New York | | 13 | | 0.42 | | | 13 | | 0.43 | |
North Carolina | | 26 | | 2.85 | | | 28 | | 3.08 | |
North Dakota | | 16 | | 2.83 | | | 14 | | 2.90 | |
Ohio | | 27 | | 2.10 | | | 27 | | 2.18 | |
Oklahoma | | 25 | | 3.18 | | | 27 | | 3.40 | |
Oregon | | 19 | | 1.24 | | | 19 | | 1.27 | |
Pennsylvania | | 15 | | 1.75 | | | 16 | | 1.78 | |
Rhode Island | | 1 | | 0.03 | | | 1 | | 0.02 | |
South Carolina | | 23 | | 2.80 | | | 24 | | 2.77 | |
South Dakota | | 29 | | 0.67 | | | 29 | | 0.64 | |
Tennessee | | 17 | | 0.78 | | | 16 | | 0.71 | |
Texas | | 68 | | 17.01 | | | 67 | | 17.17 | |
Utah | | 4 | | 0.78 | | | 4 | | 0.92 | |
Vermont | | 5 | | 0.16 | | | 5 | | 0.18 | |
Virginia | | 17 | | 1.38 | | | 17 | | 1.08 | |
Washington | | 10 | | 1.02 | | | 10 | | 1.12 | |
West Virginia | | 2 | | 0.03 | | | 2 | | 0.04 | |
Wisconsin | | 24 | | 1.79 | | | 23 | | 1.82 | |
Wyoming | | 12 | | 1.04 | | | 11 | | 1.08 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total | | 883 | | | 100.00 | % | | 892 | | | 100.00 | % |
Credit Quality Indicators
Assessing the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio and measuring our credit risk is an ongoing process that involves tracking payment status, troubled debt restructurings, nonperforming loans, charge-offs, the internal risk ratings of our borrowers and other indicators of credit agreements consistrisk. We monitor and subject each borrower and loan facility in our loan portfolio to an individual risk assessment based on quantitative and qualitative factors. Payment status trends and internal risk ratings are indicators, among others, of the probability of borrower default and overall credit quality of our loan portfolio. We believe the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio remained strong as of May 31, 2022.
Troubled Debt Restructurings
We actively monitor problem loans and, from time to time, attempt to work with borrowers to manage such exposures through loan workouts or modifications that better align with the borrower’s current ability to pay. A loan restructuring or modification of terms is accounted for as a troubled debt restructuring (“TDR”) if, for economic or legal reasons related to the borrower’s financial difficulties, a concession is granted to the borrower that we would not otherwise consider. TDR loans generally are initially classified as nonperforming and placed on nonaccrual status, although in many cases such loans were already classified as nonperforming prior to modification. These loans may be returned to performing status and the accrual of interest resumed if the borrower performs under the modified terms for an extended period of time, and we expect the borrower to continue to perform in accordance with the modified terms. In certain limited circumstances in which a TDR loan is current at the modification date, the loan may remain on accrual status at the time of modification.
We have not had any loan modifications that were required to be accounted for as TDRs since fiscal year 2016. Table 17 presents the outstanding amount of modified loans accounted for as TDRs in prior periods, by member class, and the performance status of these loans as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 17: Loans—Troubled Debt Restructured Loans
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Number of Borrowers | | Outstanding Amount(1) | | % of Total Loans Outstanding | | Number of Borrowers | | Outstanding Amount(1) | | % of Total Loans Outstanding | |
TDR loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC—Distribution | | 1 | | $ | 5,092 | | | 0.02 | % | | 1 | | $ | 5,379 | | | 0.02 | % | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
RTFC | | 1 | | 4,092 | | | 0.01 | | | 1 | | 4,592 | | | 0.02 | | |
Total TDR loans | | 2 | | $ | 9,184 | | | 0.03 | % | | 2 | | $ | 9,971 | | | 0.04 | % | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Performance status of TDR loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Performing TDR loans | | 2 | | $ | 9,184 | | | 0.03 | % | | 2 | | $ | 9,971 | | | 0.04 | % | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total TDR loans | | 2 | | $ | 9,184 | | | 0.03 | % | | 2 | | $ | 9,971 | | | 0.04 | % | |
____________________________
(1) Represents the unpaid principal balance net of charge-offs and recoveries as of the end of each period.
We had TDR loans outstanding to two borrowers totaling $9 million and $10 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, consisting of loan modifications to a CFC electric distribution borrower and an RTFC telecommunications borrower, which at the time of the modification, were experiencing financial difficulty. Since the modification date, the loans have been performing in accordance with the terms of their respective restructured loan agreement for an extended period of time and were classified as performing and on accrual status as of May 31, 2022 and 2021. We did not have any TDR loans classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2022 or May 31, 2021. Although TDR loans may be returned to performing status if the borrower performs under the modified terms of the loan for an extended period of time, we evaluate TDR loans on an individual basis in measuring expected credit losses for these loans.
Nonperforming Loans
In addition to TDR loans that may be classified as nonperforming, we also may have nonperforming loans that have not been modified as a TDR. We classify such loans as nonperforming at the earlier of the date when we determine: (i) interest or principal payments on the loan is past due 90 days or more; (ii) as a result of court proceedings, the collection of interest or principal payments based on the original contractual terms is not expected; or (iii) the full and timely collection of interest or principal is otherwise uncertain. Once a loan is classified as nonperforming, we generally place the loan on nonaccrual status. Interest accrued but not collected at the date a loan is placed on nonaccrual status is reversed against earnings. Table 18 presents the outstanding balance of nonperforming loans, by member class, as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 18: Loans—Nonperforming Loans
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2022 | | 2021 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Number of Borrowers | | Outstanding Amount (1) | | % of Total Loans Outstanding | | | Number of Borrowers | | Outstanding Amount (1) | | % of Total Loans Outstanding |
Nonperforming loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC—Power supply(2) | | 3 | | $ | 227,790 | | | 0.76 | % | | | 2 | | $ | 228,312 | | | 0.81 | % |
RTFC | | — | | | — | | | — | | | | 2 | | 9,185 | | | 0.03 | |
Total nonperforming loans | | 3 | | $ | 227,790 | | | 0.76 | % | | | 4 | | $ | 237,497 | | | 0.84 | % |
____________________________
(1) Represents the unpaid principal balance net of charge-offs and recoveries as of the end of each period.
(2) In addition, we had less than $1 million in letters of credit outstanding to Brazos as of May 31, 2021.
We had loans to three borrowers totaling $228 million classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2022. In comparison, we had loans to four borrowers totaling $237 million classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2021. Nonperforming loans represented 0.76% and 0.84% of total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The reduction in nonperforming loans of $9 million during the current fiscal year was due in part to our receipt of full payment of all amounts due on nonperforming loans to two RTFC borrowers totaling $9 million during the second quarter of fiscal year 2022. In addition, we have continued to receive payments on the remaining outstanding nonperforming loan to a CFC electric power supply borrower, including payments of $29 million during the current fiscal year, which reduced the balance of this loan to $114 million as of May 31, 2022, from $143 million as of May 31, 2021. These reductions were partially offset by the classification during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022 of the $28 million loan outstanding to Brazos Sandy Creek as nonperforming following its bankruptcy filing, as discussed below.
Loans outstanding to Brazos, which filed for bankruptcy in March 2021 due to its exposure to elevated wholesale electric power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex, accounted for $86 million and $85 million of our total nonperforming loans as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Brazos is not permitted to make scheduled loan payments without approval of the bankruptcy court. As a result, we have not received payments from Brazos since March 2021, and its loans outstanding were delinquent as of each respective date.
On March 18, 2022, Brazos Sandy Creek, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Brazos and a CFC Texas-based electric power supply borrower, filed for bankruptcy following the filing of a three-yearmotion by Brazos to reject its power purchase agreement with Brazos Sandy Creek as part of Brazos’ bankruptcy proceedings. A Chapter 7 Trustee has been appointed, and the Chapter 7 Trustee has been approved by the bankruptcy court to operate Brazos Sandy Creek as a five-year linegoing concern. CFC had a secured loan outstanding to Brazos Sandy Creek totaling $28 million as of May 31, 2022, which, upon notification of the bankruptcy filing by Brazos Sandy Creek, was classified as nonperforming during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022. Brazos Sandy Creek’s loan outstanding of $28 million was delinquent as of May 31, 2022 and on nonaccrual status as of this date. Aggregate loans outstanding to Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek totaled $114 million as of May 31, 2022, of which $49 million were secured and $65 million were unsecured.
Net Charge-Offs
Charge-offs represent the amount of a loan that has been removed from our consolidated balance sheet when the loan is deemed uncollectible. Generally the amount of a charge-off is the recorded investment in excess of the fair value of the
expected cash flows from the loan, or, if the loan is collateral dependent, the fair value of the underlying collateral securing the loan. We report charge-offs net of amounts recovered on previously charged off loans. We had no loan charge-offs during fiscal years 2022, 2021 or 2020. Prior to Brazos’ and Brazos Sandy Creek’s bankruptcy filings, we had not experienced any defaults or charge-offs in our electric utility and telecommunications loan portfolios since fiscal year 2013 and 2017, respectively.
In our 53-year history, we have experienced only 18 defaults in our electric utility loan portfolio, which includes our most recent defaults by Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek due to their bankruptcy filing in March 2021 and March 2022, respectively. Of the 16 defaults prior to Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek, one remains unresolved with an expected ultimate resolution date in calendar year 2025, nine resulted in no loss and six resulted in cumulative net charge-offs of $86 million. Of this amount, $67 million was attributable to five electric power supply cooperatives and $19 million was attributable to one electric distribution cooperative. We cite the factors that have historically contributed to the relatively low risk of default by our electric utility cooperatives, our principal lending market, above under “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk.”
In comparison, since inception in 1987, we have experienced 15 defaults and cumulative net charge-offs of $427 million in our telecommunications loan portfolio, the most significant of which was a charge-off of $354 million in fiscal year 2011.
Borrower Risk Ratings
As part of our management of credit agreement.risk, we maintain a credit risk rating framework under which we employ a consistent process for assessing the credit quality of our loan portfolio. We evaluate each borrower and loan facility in our loan portfolio and assign internal borrower and loan facility risk ratings based on consideration of a number of quantitative and qualitative factors. We categorize loans in our portfolio based on our internally assigned borrower risk ratings, which are intended to assess the general creditworthiness of the borrower and probability of default. Our borrower risk ratings align with the U.S. federal banking regulatory agencies’ credit risk definitions of pass and criticized categories, with the criticized category further segmented among special mention, substandard and doubtful. Pass ratings reflect relatively low probability of default, while criticized ratings have a higher probability of default. Our internally assigned borrower risk ratings serve as the primary credit quality indicator for our loan portfolio. Because our internal borrower risk ratings provide important information on the probability of default, they are a key input in determining our allowance for credit losses.
We use our internal risk ratings to measure the credit risk of each borrower and loan facility, identify or confirm problem or potential problem loans in a timely manner, differentiate risk within each of our portfolio segments, assess the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio and manage overall risk levels. Our internally assigned borrower risk ratings, which we map to equivalent credit ratings by external credit rating agencies, serve as the primary credit quality indicator for our loan portfolio. Because our internal borrower risk ratings provide important information on the probability of default, they are a key input in estimating our allowance for credit losses.
Criticized loans decreased by $392 million to $494 million as of May 31, 2022, from $886 million as of May 31, 2021, representing approximately 2% and 3% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. The accesseddecrease in criticized loans was primarily attributable to positive developments during the third quarter of fiscal year 2022 related to Rayburn that resulted in an improvement in Rayburn’s credit risk profile and also a significant reduction in loans outstanding to Rayburn. Loans outstanding to Rayburn totaled $167 million as of May 31, 2022, and Rayburn’s borrower risk rating was in the pass category. In comparison, loans outstanding to Rayburn totaled $379 million as of May 31, 2021, and Rayburn’s borrower risk rating was in the criticized category.
In February 2022, Rayburn successfully completed a securitization transaction to cover extraordinary costs and expenses incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex pursuant to a financing program enacted into law by Texas in June 2021 for qualifying electric cooperatives exposed to elevated power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex. Subsequent to the completion of the securitization transaction, Rayburn fully paid its outstanding obligations to ERCOT. As a result, we revised our borrower risk rating for Rayburn to a rating in the pass category from a previous rating in the criticized category. In addition, we received loan payments from Rayburn during the third quarter of fiscal year 2022 that reduced loans outstanding to Rayburn to $167 million as of May 31, 2022, from $379 million as of May 31, 2021. Rayburn was current on all of its debt obligations to us as of the date of this Report. Also, each of the borrowers with loans outstanding in the criticized category, with the exception of Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek, was current with regard to all principal and
interest amounts due to us as of May 31, 2022. In comparison, each of the borrowers with loans outstanding in the criticized category, with the exception of Brazos, was current with regard to all principal and interest amounts due to us as of May 31, 2021. As discussed above under “Nonperforming Loans,” Brazos is not permitted to make scheduled loan payments without approval of the bankruptcy court and Brazos Sandy Creek’s loan outstanding of $28 million was delinquent as of May 31, 2022 and on nonaccrual status as of this date, as a result of its bankruptcy filing.
We provide additional information on our borrower risk rating classifications, including the amount of $3loans outstanding in each of the criticized loan categories of special mention, substandard and doubtful, in “Note 1—Summary of Significant
Accounting Policies” and “Note 4—Loans” in this Report.
Allowance for Credit Losses
We are required to maintain an allowance based on a current estimate of credit losses that are expected to occur over the remaining contractual term of the loans in our portfolio. Our allowance for credit losses consists of a collective allowance and an asset-specific allowance. The collective allowance is established for loans in our portfolio that share similar risk characteristics and are therefore evaluated on a collective, or pool, basis in measuring expected credit losses. The asset-specific allowance is established for loans in our portfolio that do not share similar risk characteristics with other loans in our portfolio and are therefore evaluated on an individual basis in measuring expected credit losses.
Table 19 presents, by legal entity and member class, loans outstanding and the related allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio as of May 31, 2022 and 2021 and the allowance components as of each date.
Table 19: Allowance for Credit Losses by Borrower Member Class and Evaluation Methodology
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2022 | 2021 | | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Loans Outstanding(1) | | Allowance for Credit Losses | | Allowance Coverage Ratio (2) | | Loans Outstanding (1) | | Allowance for Credit Losses | | Allowance Coverage Ratio (2) | | | | | |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 23,844,242 | | | $ | 15,781 | | | 0.07 | % | | $ | 22,027,423 | | | $ | 13,426 | | | 0.06 | % | | | | | |
Power supply | | 4,901,770 | | | 47,793 | | | 0.98 | | | 5,154,312 | | | 64,646 | | | 1.25 | | | | | | |
Statewide and associate | | 126,863 | | | 1,251 | | | 0.99 | | | 106,121 | | | 1,391 | | | 1.31 | | | | | | |
Total CFC | | 28,872,875 | | | 64,825 | | | 0.22 | | | 27,287,856 | | | 79,463 | | | 0.29 | | | | | | |
NCSC | | 710,878 | | | 1,449 | | | 0.20 | | | 706,868 | | | 1,374 | | | 0.19 | | | | | | |
RTFC | | 467,601 | | | 1,286 | | | 0.28 | | | 420,383 | | | 4,695 | | | 1.12 | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 30,051,354 | | | $ | 67,560 | | | 0.22 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | | | $ | 85,532 | | | 0.30 | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Allowance components: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collective allowance | | $ | 29,814,380 | | | $ | 28,876 | | | 0.10 | % | | $ | 28,167,639 | | | $ | 42,442 | | | 0.15 | % | | | | | |
Asset-specific allowance | | 236,974 | | | 38,684 | | | 16.32 | | | 247,468 | | | 43,090 | | | 17.41 | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 30,051,354 | | | $ | 67,560 | | | 0.22 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | | | $ | 85,532 | | | 0.30 | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Allowance coverage ratios: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Nonperforming and nonaccrual loans (3) | | $ | 227,790 | | | | | 29.66 | % | | $ | 237,497 | | | | | 36.01 | % | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
___________________________
(1) Represents the unpaid principal balance, net of charge-offs and recoveries, of loans as of each period-end. Excludes unamortized deferred loan origination costs of $12 million as of both May 31, 20192022 and 2021.
(2)Calculated based on the allowance for credit losses attributable to each member class and allowance components at period-end divided by the related loans outstanding at period-end.
(3)Calculated based on the total allowance for credit losses at period-end divided by loans outstanding classified as nonperforming and on nonaccrual status at period-end.
Our allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio decreased to $68 million and 0.22%, respectively, as of May 31, 2018 relates2022, from $86 million and 0.30% respectively, as of May 31, 2021. The $18 million decrease in the allowance for credit losses reflected a decrease in the collective and asset-specific allowance of $14 million and $4 million, respectively. The collective allowance decrease of $14 million was attributable to lettersan improvement in Rayburn’s credit risk profile following the successful completion by Rayburn of a securitization transaction in February 2022 to cover extraordinary costs and expenses incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex and subsequent payment in full of its obligations to ERCOT and a significant reduction in loans outstanding to Rayburn due to payments received from Rayburn during fiscal year 2022. The asset-specific allowance decrease of $4 million stemmed from the combined impact of the elimination of an asset-specific allowance attributable to nonperforming loans totaling $9 million that were paid in full during the second quarter of fiscal year 2022 and the decrease of an asset-specific allowance for a nonperforming CFC power supply borrower, attributable to loan payments received on this loan, partially offset by the addition of an asset-specific allowance for Brazos Sandy Creek, due to its bankruptcy filing, as discussed above under “Nonperforming Loans.”
As a result of Rayburn’s payment in full of its February 2021 polar vortex-related outstanding obligations to ERCOT, we believe our exposure to the significant adverse financial impact on some electric utilities from the surge in wholesale power costs in Texas during the February 2021 polar vortex is now limited to loans outstanding to Brazos and its wholly-owned subsidiary Brazos Sandy Creek.
We discuss our methodology for estimating the allowance for credit issuedlosses under the CECL model in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—Allowance for Credit Losses” and provide information on the management judgment and uncertainties involved in our determining the allowance for credit losses in above section “Critical Accounting Estimates—Allowance for Credit Losses” of this Report. We provide additional information on our loans and allowance for credit losses under “Note 4—Loans” and “Note 5—Allowance for Credit Losses” of this Report.
Counterparty Credit Risk
In addition to credit exposure from our borrowers, we enter into other types of financial transactions in the ordinary course of business that expose us to counterparty credit risk, primarily related to transactions involving our cash and cash equivalents, securities held in our investment securities portfolio and derivatives. We mitigate our risk by only entering into these transactions with counterparties with investment-grade ratings, establishing operational guidelines and counterparty exposure limits and monitoring our counterparty credit risk position. We evaluate our counterparties based on certain quantitative and qualitative factors and periodically assign internal risk rating grades to our counterparties.
Cash and Investments Securities Counterparty Credit Exposure
Our cash and cash equivalents and investment securities totaled $154 million and $600 million, respectively, as of May 31, 2022. The primary credit exposure associated with investments held in our investments portfolio is that issuers will not repay principal and interest in accordance with the contractual terms. Our cash and cash equivalents with financial institutions generally have an original maturity of less than one year and pursuant to our investment policy guidelines, all fixed-income debt securities, at the five-year linetime of purchase, must be rated at least investment grade based on external credit agreement.ratings from at least two of the leading global credit rating agencies, when available, or the corresponding equivalent, when not available. We therefore believe that the risk of default by these counterparties is low.
(2)The committed facilities under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program are not revolving.
(3)Availability subject to market conditions.
We believeprovide additional information on the holdings in our investment securities portfolio below under “Liquidity Risk—Investment Securities Portfolio” and in “Note 3—Investment Securities.”
Derivative Counterparty Credit Exposure
Our derivative counterparty credit exposure relates principally to interest-rate swap contracts. We generally engage in OTC derivative transactions, which expose us to individual counterparty credit risk because these transactions are executed and settled directly between us and each counterparty. We are exposed to the risk that an individual derivative counterparty will default on payments due to us, which we may not be able to collect or which may require us to seek a replacement derivative from a different counterparty. This replacement may be at a higher cost, or we may be unable to find a suitable replacement.
We manage our derivative counterparty credit exposure by executing derivative transactions with financial institutions that have sufficient liquidityinvestment-grade credit ratings and maintaining enforceable master netting arrangements with these counterparties, which allow us to net derivative assets and liabilities with the same counterparty. We had 12 active derivative counterparties with credit ratings ranging from Aa1 to Baa1 and Aa2 to Baa2 by Moody’s as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, and from AA- to A- by S&P as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021. The total outstanding notional amount of derivatives with these counterparties was $8,062 million and $8,979 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The highest single derivative counterparty concentration, by outstanding notional amount, accounted for approximately 24% of the available on-total outstanding notional amount of our derivatives as of both May 31, 2022 and off-balance sheet liquidity sources presented above2021.
While our derivative agreements include netting provisions that allow for offsetting of all contracts with a given counterparty in Table 28the event of default by one of the two parties, we report the fair value of our derivatives on a gross basis by individual contract as either a derivative asset or derivative liability on our consolidated balance sheets. However, we estimate our exposure to credit loss on our derivatives by calculating the replacement cost to settle at current market prices, as defined in our derivative agreements, all outstanding derivatives in a net gain position at the counterparty level where a right of legal offset exists. As indicated in “Note 10—Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities—Impact of Derivatives on Consolidated Balance Sheets,” our abilityoutstanding derivatives, at the individual counterparty level, were in a net gain position of $94 million as of May 31, 2022. In comparison, our outstanding derivatives, at the individual counterparty level, were in a net loss position of $464 million as of May 31, 2021; as such, we did not have exposure to issue debt to meet demand for member loan advances and satisfycredit loss on our obligations to repay long-term debt maturing over the next 12 months.outstanding derivatives as of this date.
Borrowing Capacity Under Current Facilities
Following isWe provide additional detail on our derivative agreements, including a discussion of derivative contracts with credit rating triggers and settlement amounts that would be required in the event of a ratings trigger, in “Note 10—Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities.”
See “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in this Report for additional information about credit risks related to our borrowing capacitybusiness.
We define liquidity as the ability to convert assets into cash quickly and key termsefficiently, maintain access to available funding and roll over or issue new debt under normal operating conditions underand periods of CFC-specific and/or market stress, to ensure that we can meet borrower loan requests, pay current and future obligations and fund our revolving line of credit agreements with banks and committed loan facilities under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program and revolving note purchase agreements with Farmer Mac.operations in a cost-effective manner.
Committed Bank Revolving Line of Credit Agreements—Unsecured
Our primary sources of funds include member loan principal repayments, securities held in our investment portfolio, committed bank revolving lines of credit, may be used for general corporate purposes; however, we generally rely on them as a backup source of liquidity for our member and dealer commercial paper. We had $2,975 million of commitments under committed bank revolving line of credit agreements as of May 31, 2019. Under our current committed bank revolving line of credit agreements, we have the ability to request up to $300 million of letters of credit, which would result in a reduction in the remaining available amount under the facilities.
On November 28, 2018, we amended the three-year and five-year committed bank revolving line of credit agreements to extend the maturity dates to November 28, 2021 and November 28, 2023, respectively, and to terminate certain third-party bank commitments totaling $53 million under the three-year agreement and $57 million under the five- year agreement. As a result, the total commitment amount from third-parties under the three-year facility and the five-year facility is $1,440 million and $1,535 million, respectively, resulting in a combined total commitment amount under the two facilities of $2,975 million.
Table 29 presents the total commitment, the net amount available for use and the outstanding letters of credit under our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements as of May 31, 2019. We did not have any outstanding borrowings under our bank revolving line of credit agreements as of May 31, 2019.
Table 29: Committed Bank Revolving Line of Credit Agreements
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2019 | | | | |
(Dollars in millions) | | Total Commitment | | Letters of Credit Outstanding | | Net Available for Advance | | Maturity | | Annual Facility Fee (1) |
3-year agreement | | $ | 1,440 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 1,440 |
| | November 28, 2021 | | 7.5 bps |
| | | | | | | | | | |
5-year agreement | | 1,535 |
| | 3 |
| | 1,532 |
| | November 28, 2023 | | 10 bps |
Total | | $ | 2,975 |
| | $ | 3 |
| | $ | 2,972 |
| | | | |
___________________________
(1)Facility fee based on CFC’s senior unsecured credit ratings in accordance with the established pricing schedules at the inception of the related agreement.
Our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements do not contain a material adverse change clause or rating triggers that would limit the banks’ obligations to provide funding under the terms of the agreements; however, we must be in compliance with the covenants to draw on the facilities. We have been and expect to continue to be in compliance with the covenants under our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements. As such, we could draw on these facilities to repay dealer or member commercial paper that cannot be rolled over. See “Financial Ratios” and “Debt Covenants” below for additional information, including the specific financial ratio requirements under our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements.
Guaranteed Underwriter Program Committed Facilities—Secured
Under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program, we can borrow from the Federal Financing Bank and use the proceeds to make new loans and refinance existing indebtedness. As part of the program, we pay fees, based on outstanding borrowings, supporting the USDA Rural Economic Development Loan and Grant program. The borrowings under this program are guaranteed by RUS.
On November 15, 2018, we closed on a $750 million committed loan facility (“Series N”) from the Federal Financing Bank under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program. Pursuant to this facility, we may borrow any time before July 15, 2023. Each advance is subject to quarterly amortization and a final maturity not longer than 20 years from the advance date.
During fiscal year 2019, we borrowed $625 million under our committed loan facilities with the Federal Financing Bank. We had up to $1,350 million available for access under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program, as of May 31, 2019. Of this amount, $600 million is available for advance through July 15, 2022 and $750 million is available for advance through July 15, 2023.
We are required to pledge eligible distribution system loans or power supply system loans as collateral in an amount at least equal to the total outstanding borrowings under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program. See “Consolidated Balance Sheet Analysis—Debt—Collateral Pledged” and “Note 4—Loans” for additional information on pledged collateral.
Farmer Mac Revolving Note Purchase Agreements—Secured
As indicated in Table 28, we have two revolving note purchase agreements with Farmer Mac which together allow usand proceeds from debt issuances to borrow up to $5,500 million from Farmer Mac. Under our first revolving note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac dated March 24, 2011, as amended, we can borrow, subject to market conditions, up to $5,200 million at any time through January 11, 2022,members and such date shall automatically extend on each anniversary date of the closing for an additional year, unless prior to any such anniversary date, Farmer Mac provides us with a notice that the draw period will not be extended beyond the remaining term. This revolving note purchase agreement allows us to borrow, repay and re-borrow funds at any time through maturity, as market conditions permit, provided that the outstanding principal amount at any time does not exceed the total available under the agreement. Each borrowing under the note purchase agreement is evidenced by a pricing agreement setting forth the interest rate, maturity date and other related terms as we may negotiate with Farmer Mac at the time of each such borrowing. We may select a fixed rate or variable rate at the time of each advance with a maturity as determined in the applicable pricing agreement. We had outstanding secured notes payable totaling $3,055 million and $2,791 million ascapital markets. Our primary uses of May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, under the Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement of $5,200 million. We borrowed $575 million under this note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac during the year ended May 31, 2019. The available borrowing amount totaled $2,145 million as of May 31, 2019.
Under our second revolving note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac, dated July 31, 2015, as amended, we can borrow upfunds include loan advances to $300 million at any time through December 20, 2023 at a fixed spread over LIBOR. This agreement also allows us to borrow, repay and re-borrow funds at any time through maturity, provided that the outstandingmembers, principal amount at any time does not exceed the total available under the agreement. Prior to the maturity date, Farmer Mac may terminate the agreement upon 30 days written notice to us on periodic facility renewal dates, the first of which was January 31, 2019. Subsequent facility renewal dates are on each June 20 or December 20 thereafter until the maturity date. We may terminate the agreement upon 30 days written notice at any time. We did not have any outstanding notes payable under this revolving note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac as of May 31, 2019. Under the terms of the first revolving note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac described above, the $5,200 million commitment will increase to $5,500 million in the event the second revolving note purchase agreement is terminated.
Pursuant to both Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreements, we are required to pledge eligible distribution system or power supply system loans as collateral in an amount at least equal to the total principal amount of notes outstanding. See “Consolidated Balance Sheet Analysis—Debt—Collateral Pledged” and “Note 4—Loans” for additional information on pledged collateral.
Short-Term Borrowings and Long-Term and Subordinated Debt
Additional funding is provided by short-term borrowings and issuances of long-term and subordinated debt. We rely on short-term borrowings as a source to meet our daily, near-term funding needs. Long-term and subordinated debt represents the most significant component of our funding. The issuance of long-term debt allows us to reduce our reliance on short-term borrowings and effectively manage our refinancing and interest rate risk.payments on borrowings, periodic interest settlement payments related to our derivative contracts and operating expenses.
Short-Term Borrowings
Our short-termShort-term borrowings consist of commercial paper, which we offerborrowings with an original contractual maturity of one year or less and do not include the current portion of long-term debt. Short-term borrowings increased to members and dealers, select notes and daily liquidity fund notes offered to members, and bank-bid notes and medium-term notes offered to members and dealers.
Table 30 displays the composition, by funding source, of our short-term borrowings$4,981 million as of May 31, 2019 and 2018. Member borrowings accounted for 74% of total short-term borrowings2022, from $4,582 million as of May 31, 2019, compared with 69% of total2021, primarily due to an increase in short-term borrowings as of May 31, 2018.
Table 30: Short-Term Borrowings—Funding Sources
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2019 | | 2018 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Outstanding Amount | | % of Total Short-Term Borrowings | | Outstanding Amount | | % of Total Short-Term Borrowings |
Funding source: | | | | | | | | |
Members | | $ | 2,663,110 |
| | 74 | % | | $ | 2,631,644 |
| | 69 | % |
Private placement—Farmer Mac notes payable | | — |
| | — |
| | 100,000 |
| | 3 |
|
Capital markets | | 944,616 |
| | 26 |
| | 1,064,266 |
| | 28 |
|
Total | | $ | 3,607,726 |
| | 100 | % | | $ | 3,795,910 |
| | 100 | % |
Table 31 displays additional information on our short-term borrowings, including the maximum month-end and average outstanding amounts, the weighted average interest rate and the weighted average maturity, for each respective category of our short-term borrowings for fiscal years 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Table 31: Short-Term Borrowings
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2019 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount Outstanding | | Weighted- Average Interest Rate | | Weighted-Average Maturity | | Maximum Month-End Outstanding Amount | | Average Outstanding Amount |
Short-term borrowings: | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Commercial paper: | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper to dealers, net of discounts | | $ | 944,616 |
| | 2.46 | % | | 7 days |
| | $ | 2,277,820 |
| | $ | 1,322,039 |
|
Commercial paper to members, at par | | 1,111,795 |
| | 2.52 |
| | 34 days |
| | 1,380,324 |
| | 1,091,745 |
|
Total commercial paper | | 2,056,411 |
| | 2.49 |
| | 22 days |
| | 3,209,498 |
| | 2,413,784 |
|
Select notes to members | | 1,023,952 |
| | 2.70 |
| | 48 days |
| | 1,049,349 |
| | 907,490 |
|
Daily liquidity fund notes to members | | 298,817 |
| | 2.25 |
| | 1 day |
| | 572,898 |
| | 407,964 |
|
Medium-term notes sold to members | | 228,546 |
| | 2.87 |
| | 143 days |
| | 246,676 |
| | 237,331 |
|
Farmer Mac revolving facility | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 100,000 |
| | 3,288 |
|
Total short-term borrowings | | $ | 3,607,726 |
| | 2.56 |
| | 35 days |
| | | | $ | 3,969,857 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2018 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount Outstanding | | Weighted- Average Interest Rate | | Weighted-Average Maturity | | Maximum Month-End Outstanding Amount | | Average Outstanding Amount |
Short-term borrowings: | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper: | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper to dealers, net of discounts | | $ | 1,064,266 |
| | 1.87 | % | | 14 days | | $ | 2,548,147 |
| | $ | 942,931 |
|
Commercial paper to members, at par | | 1,202,105 |
| | 1.89 |
| | 34 days | | 1,268,515 |
| | 1,005,624 |
|
Total commercial paper | | 2,266,371 |
| | 1.88 |
| | 25 days | | 3,447,274 |
| | 1,948,555 |
|
Select notes to members | | 780,472 |
| | 2.04 |
| | 44 days | | 780,472 |
| | 727,313 |
|
Daily liquidity fund notes to members | | 400,635 |
| | 1.50 |
| | 1 day | | 866,065 |
| | 618,705 |
|
Medium-term notes sold to members | | 248,432 |
| | 1.90 |
| | 150 days | | 248,432 |
| | 217,122 |
|
Farmer Mac revolving facility | | 100,000 |
| | 2.23 |
| | 61 days | | 100,000 |
| | 548 |
|
Total short-term borrowings | | $ | 3,795,910 |
| | 1.88 |
| | 35 days | | | | $ | 3,512,243 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2017 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount Outstanding | | Weighted- Average Interest Rate | | Weighted-Average Maturity | | Maximum Month-End Outstanding Amount | | Average Outstanding Amount |
Short-term borrowings: | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper: | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper to dealers, net of discounts | | $ | 999,691 |
| | 0.93 | % | | 13 days | | $ | 2,048,954 |
| | $ | 988,538 |
|
Commercial paper to members, at par | | 928,158 |
| | 0.95 |
| | 24 days | | 1,080,737 |
| | 928,082 |
|
Total commercial paper | | 1,927,849 |
| | 0.94 |
| | 18 days | | 3,006,148 |
| | 1,916,620 |
|
Select notes to members | | 696,889 |
| | 1.12 |
| | 43 days | | 840,990 |
| | 726,276 |
|
Daily liquidity fund notes to members | | 527,990 |
| | 0.80 |
| | 1 day | | 687,807 |
| | 542,188 |
|
Medium-term notes sold to members | | 190,172 |
| | 1.50 |
| | 144 days | | 203,246 |
| | 194,045 |
|
Total short-term borrowings | | $ | 3,342,900 |
| | 0.99 |
| | 28 days | | | | $ | 3,379,129 |
|
Our short-term borrowings totaled $3,608 millionmember investments, and accounted for 14%17% of total debt outstanding as of May 31, 2019, compared with $3,796 million, or 15%, of total debt outstanding as of May 31, 2018. The weighted-average maturityeach respective date. See “Liquidity Risk” below and weighted-average cost“Note 6—Short-Term Borrowings” for information on the composition of our short-term borrowings was 35 days and 2.56%, respectively, as of May 31, 2019, compared with 35 days and 1.88%, respectively, as of May 31, 2018. Of the total outstanding commercial paper, $945 million, or 4% of total debt outstanding, was issued to dealers as of May 31, 2019, compared with the $1,064 million, or 4% of total debt outstanding, that was issued to dealers as of May 31, 2018. Our intent is to manage our short-term wholesale funding risk by maintaining outstanding dealer commercial paper at an amount below $1,250 million for the foreseeable future. Member borrowings accounted for 74% of our total short-term borrowings as of May 31, 2019, compared with 69% of total short-term borrowings as of May 31, 2018.borrowings.
Long-Term and Subordinated Debt
Long-term debt, defined as debt with an original contractual maturity term of greater than one year, primarily consists of medium-term notes, collateral trust bonds, notes payable under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program and notes payable under our Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement. Subordinated debt consists of subordinated deferrable debt and members’ subordinated certificates. Our subordinated deferrable debt and members’ subordinated certificates have original contractual maturity terms of greater than one year.
Long-term and subordinated debt of $23,766 million and $22,844 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, accounted for 83% of total debt outstanding as of each respective date. We provide additional information on our long-term debt below under the section “Liquidity Risk” and “Note 7—Long-Term Debt” and “Note 8—Subordinated Deferrable Debt” in this Report.
Equity
Table 13 presents the components of total CFC equity and total equity as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 13: Equity
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | Change |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | |
Equity components: | | | | | | |
Membership fees and educational fund: | | | | | | |
Membership fees | | $ | 970 | | | $ | 968 | | | $ | 2 | |
Educational fund | | 2,417 | | | 2,157 | | | 260 | |
Total membership fees and educational fund | | 3,387 | | | 3,125 | | | 262 | |
Patronage capital allocated | | 954,988 | | | 923,970 | | | 31,018 | |
Members’ capital reserve | | 1,062,286 | | | 909,749 | | | 152,537 | |
Total allocated equity | | 2,020,661 | | | 1,836,844 | | | 183,817 | |
Unallocated net income (loss): | | | | | | |
Prior fiscal year-end cumulative derivative forward value losses(1) | | (461,162) | | | (1,079,739) | | | 618,577 | |
Year-to-date derivative forward value gains(1) | | 553,525 | | | 618,577 | | | (65,052) | |
Period-end cumulative derivative forward value gains (losses)(1) | | 92,363 | | | (461,162) | | | 553,525 | |
Other unallocated net loss | | (709) | | | (709) | | | — | |
Unallocated net income (loss) | | 91,654 | | | (461,871) | | | 553,525 | |
CFC retained equity | | 2,112,315 | | | 1,374,973 | | | 737,342 | |
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | | 2,258 | | | (25) | | | 2,283 | |
Total CFC equity | | 2,114,573 | | | 1,374,948 | | | 739,625 | |
Noncontrolling interests | | 27,396 | | | 24,931 | | | 2,465 | |
Total equity | | $ | 2,141,969 | | | $ | 1,399,879 | | | $ | 742,090 | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
____________________________
(1)Represents derivative forward value gains (losses) for CFC only, as total CFC equity does not include the noncontrolling interests of the variable interest entities NCSC and RTFC, which we are required to consolidate. We present the consolidated total derivative forward value gains (losses) in Table 37 in the “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section below. Also, see “Note 16—Business Segments” for the statements of operations for CFC.
The increase in total equity of $742 million to $2,142 million as of May 31, 2022 was attributable to our reported net income of $799 million for fiscal year 2022, partially offset by the CFC Board of Directors’ authorized patronage capital retirement in July 2021 of $58 million.
Allocation and Retirement of Patronage Capital
We are subject to District of Columbia law governing cooperatives, under which CFC is required to make annual allocations of net earnings, if any, in accordance with the provisions of the District of Columbia statutes. District of Columbia cooperative law requires cooperatives to allocate net earnings to patrons, to a general reserve in an amount sufficient to maintain a balance of at least 50% of paid-up capital and to a cooperative educational fund, as well as permits additional allocations to board-approved reserves. District of Columbia cooperative law also requires that a cooperative’s net earnings be allocated to all patrons in proportion to their individual patronage and each patron’s allocation be distributed to the patron unless the patron agrees that the cooperative may retain its share as additional capital. Pursuant to these provisions, the CFC Board of Directors is required to make annual allocations of net earnings, if any. CFC’s net earnings for determining allocations is based on non-GAAP adjusted net income, which excludes the impact of derivative forward value gains (losses). We provide a reconciliation of our adjusted net income to our reported net income and an explanation of the adjustments below in “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
In May 2022, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of $1 million of net earnings for fiscal year 2022 to the cooperative educational fund. In July 2022, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of fiscal year 2022 adjusted net income follows: $89 million to members in the form of patronage capital and $153 million to the members’ capital reserve. In July 2022, the CFC Board of Directors also authorized the retirement of patronage capital totaling $59 million, of which $44 million represented 50% of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2022 and $15 million represented the portion of the allocation from fiscal year 1997 net earnings that has been held for 25 years pursuant to the CFC Board of Directors’ policy. We expect to return the authorized patronage capital retirement amount of $59 million to members in cash in the second quarter of fiscal year 2023. The remaining portion of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2022 will be retained by CFC for 25 years pursuant to the guidelines adopted by the CFC Board of Directors in June 2009.
In May 2021, the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of $1 million of net earnings for fiscal year 2021 to the cooperative educational fund. In July 2021 the CFC Board of Directors authorized the allocation of fiscal year 2021 adjusted net income as follows: $90 million to members in the form of patronage capital and $102 million to the members’ capital reserve. In July 2021, the CFC Board of Directors also authorized the retirement of patronage capital totaling $58 million, of which $45 million represented 50% of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2021 and $13 million represented the portion of the allocation from fiscal year 1996 net earnings that has been held for 25 years pursuant to the CFC Board of Directors’ policy. This amount was returned to members in cash in September 2021. The remaining portion of the patronage capital allocation for fiscal year 2021 will be retained by CFC for 25 years pursuant to the guidelines adopted by the CFC Board of Directors in June 2009.
The CFC Board of Directors is required to make annual allocations of adjusted net income, if any. CFC has made annual retirements of allocated net earnings in 42 of the last 43 fiscal years; however, future retirements of allocated amounts are determined based on CFC’s financial condition. The CFC Board of Directors has the authority to change the current practice for allocating and retiring net earnings at any time, subject to applicable laws.
| | |
ENTERPRISE RISK MANAGEMENT |
Overview
We face a variety of risks that can significantly affect our financial performance, liquidity, reputation and ability to meet the expectations of our members, investors and other stakeholders. As a financial services company, the major categories of risk exposures inherent in our business activities include credit risk, liquidity risk, market risk and operational risk. These risk categories are summarized below.
•Credit risk is the risk that a borrower or other counterparty will be unable to meet its obligations in accordance with agreed-upon terms.
•Liquidity risk is the risk that we will be unable to fund our operations and meet our contractual obligations or that we will be unable to fund new loans to borrowers at a reasonable cost and tenor in a timely manner.
•Market risk is the risk that changes in market variables, such as movements in interest rates, may adversely affect the match between the timing of the contractual maturities, re-pricing and prepayments of our financial assets and the related financial liabilities funding those assets.
•Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal controls, processes, systems, human error or external events, including natural disasters or public health emergencies, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic. Operational risk also includes cybersecurity risk, compliance risk, fiduciary risk, reputational risk and litigation risk.
Effective risk management is critical to our overall operations and to achieving our primary objective of providing cost-based financial products to our rural electric members while maintaining the sound financial results required for investment-grade credit ratings on our rated debt instruments. Accordingly, we have a risk-management framework that is intended to govern the principal risks we face in conducting our business and the aggregate amount of risk we are willing to accept, referred to as risk appetite and risk guidelines, in the context of CFC’s mission and strategic objectives and initiatives.
Risk-Management Framework
Our Enterprise Risk Management (“ERM”) framework consists of a defined policy and process for measuring, assessing and responding to key risks in alignment with CFC’s mission and CFC’s Board of Director’s strategic objectives. The board of directors has responsibility for the oversight and strategic direction of the ERM framework and has adopted a comprehensive risk-management policy that describes the roles and responsibilities of the board and management within this framework for identifying and managing risks. In fulfilling its risk-management oversight duties, the board of directors receives periodic reports on business activities and risk-management activities from management. Throughout the year at its periodic meetings, the CFC Board of Directors reviews important trends and emerging developments across key risks as assessed, measured and evaluated by management. The board also establishes CFC’s loan policies and has established a Loan Committee of the board comprising no fewer than 10 directors that reviews the performance of the loan portfolio in accordance with those policies. For additional information about the role of the CFC Board of Directors in risk governance and oversight, see “Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.”
Management is primarily accountable for execution of the ERM responsibilities and daily management of the risks associated with our business. Management executes its responsibility by establishing processes for identifying, measuring, assessing, managing, monitoring and reporting risks. Management also is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls to mitigate key risks. We have a number of management-level risk oversight committees across the organization and groups within the organization that have a defined set of authorities and responsibilities specific to one or more risk types, including the Corporate Credit Committee, Asset Liability Committee, Investment Management Committee, and Disclosure Committee. Management provides reports to the board of directors at each regularly scheduled board meeting, and more frequently as requested by the board of directors, relating to, among other things, the ongoing progress of managing risk at CFC given the ERM framework; management’s responses for the critical business risks identified during the risk assessment process and the status of any gaps or deficiencies; and CFC’s risk profile and trends, as well as emerging risks and opportunities.
Our loan portfolio, which represents the largest component of assets on our balance sheet, accounts for the substantial majority of our credit risk exposure. We also engage in certain non-lending activities that may give rise to counterparty credit risk, such as entering into derivative transactions to manage interest rate risk and purchasing investment securities.
Credit Risk Management
We manage credit risk related to our loan portfolio consistent with credit policies established by the CFC Board of Directors and through credit underwriting, approval and monitoring processes and practices adopted by management. Our board-established credit policies include guidelines regarding the types of credit products we offer, limits on credit we extend to individual borrowers, approval authorities delegated to management, and use of syndications and loan sales. We maintain an internal risk rating system in which we assign a rating to each borrower and credit facility. We review and update the risk ratings at least annually. Assigned risk ratings inform our credit approval, borrower monitoring and portfolio review processes. Our Corporate Credit Committee approves individual credit actions within its own authority and together with our Credit Risk Management group, establishes standards for credit underwriting, oversees credits deemed to be higher risk, reviews assigned risk ratings for accuracy, and monitors the overall credit quality and performance statistics of our loan portfolio.
Loan Portfolio Credit Risk
Our primary credit exposure is loans to rural electric cooperatives, which provide essential electric services to end-users, the majority of which are residential customers. We also have a limited portfolio of loans to not-for-profit and for-profit telecommunication companies. As a member-owned finance cooperative, CFC’s principal focus is to provide funding to its rural electric utility cooperative members to assist them in acquiring, constructing and operating electric distribution systems, power supply systems and related facilities. Loans outstanding to electric utility organizations totaled $29,584 million and $27,995 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, representing 98% and 99% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. The remaining loans outstanding in our loan portfolio were to RTFC members,
affiliates and associates in the telecommunications industry sector. The substantial majority of loans to our borrowers are long-term fixed-rate loans with terms of up to 35 years. Long-term fixed-rate loans accounted for 90% of total loans outstanding as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Because we lend primarily to our rural electric utility cooperative members, we have had a loan portfolio inherently subject to single-industry and single-obligor credit concentration risk since our inception in 1969. We historically, however, have experienced limited defaults and losses in our electric utility loan portfolio due to several factors. First, the majority of our electric cooperative borrowers operate in states where electric cooperatives are not subject to rate regulation. Thus, they are able to make rate adjustments to pass along increased costs to the end customer without first obtaining state regulatory approval, allowing them to cover operating costs and generate sufficient earnings and cash flows to service their debt obligations. Second, electric cooperatives face limited competition, as they tend to operate in exclusive territories not serviced by public investor-owned utilities. Third, electric cooperatives typically are consumer-owned, not-for-profit entities that provide an essential service to end-users, the majority of which are residential customers. As not-for-profit entities, rural electric cooperatives, unlike investor-owned utilities, generally are eligible to apply for assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) and states to help recover from major disasters or emergencies. Fourth, electric cooperatives tend to adhere to a conservative core business strategy model that has historically resulted in a relatively stable, resilient operating environment and overall strong financial performance and credit strength for the electric cooperative network. Finally, we generally lend to our members on a senior secured basis, which reduces the risk of loss in the event of a borrower default.
Below we provide information on the credit risk profile of our loan portfolio, including security provisions, credit concentration, credit quality indicators and our allowance for credit losses.
Security Provisions
Except when providing line of credit loans, we generally lend to our members on a senior secured basis. Long-term loans are generally secured on parity with other secured lenders (primarily RUS), if any, by all assets and revenue of the borrower with exceptions typical in utility mortgages. Line of credit loans are generally unsecured. In addition to the collateral pledged to secure our loans, distribution and power supply borrowers also are required to set rates charged to customers to achieve certain specified financial ratios. Table 14 presents, by legal entity and member class and by loan type, secured and unsecured loans in our loan portfolio as of May 31, 2022 and 2021. Of our total loans outstanding, 93% were secured as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 14: Loans—Loan Portfolio Security Profile
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2022 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Secured | | % of Total | | Unsecured | | % of Total | | Total |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 22,405,486 | | | 94 | % | | $ | 1,438,756 | | | 6 | % | | $ | 23,844,242 | |
Power supply | | 4,455,098 | | | 91 | | | 446,672 | | 9 | | | 4,901,770 | |
Statewide and associate | | 83,759 | | | 66 | | | 43,104 | | 34 | | | 126,863 | |
Total CFC | | 26,944,343 | | | 93 | | | 1,928,532 | | | 7 | | | 28,872,875 | |
NCSC | | 689,887 | | | 97 | | | 20,991 | | | 3 | | | 710,878 | |
RTFC | | 454,985 | | | 97 | | | 12,616 | | | 3 | | | 467,601 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 28,089,215 | | | 93 | | | $ | 1,962,139 | | | 7 | | | $ | 30,051,354 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate | | $ | 26,731,763 | | | 99 | % | | $ | 220,609 | | | 1 | % | | $ | 26,952,372 | |
Variable-rate | | 817,866 | | | 100 | | | 2,335 | | | — | | | 820,201 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total long-term loans | | 27,549,629 | | | 99 | | | 222,944 | | | 1 | | | 27,772,573 | |
Line of credit loans | | 539,586 | | | 24 | | | 1,739,195 | | | 76 | | | 2,278,781 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 28,089,215 | | | 93 | | | $ | 1,962,139 | | | 7 | | | $ | 30,051,354 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2021 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Secured | | % of Total | | Unsecured | | % of Total | | Total |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 20,702,657 | | | 94 | % | | $ | 1,324,766 | | | 6 | % | | $ | 22,027,423 | |
Power supply | | 4,458,311 | | | 86 | | | 696,001 | | 14 | | | 5,154,312 | |
Statewide and associate | | 88,004 | | | 83 | | | 18,117 | | 17 | | | 106,121 | |
Total CFC | | 25,248,972 | | | 93 | | | 2,038,884 | | | 7 | | | 27,287,856 | |
NCSC | | 662,782 | | | 94 | | | 44,086 | | | 6 | | | 706,868 | |
RTFC | | 399,717 | | | 95 | | | 20,666 | | | 5 | | | 420,383 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 26,311,471 | | | 93 | | | $ | 2,103,636 | | | 7 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed-rate | | $ | 25,278,805 | | | 99 | % | | $ | 235,961 | | | 1 | % | | $ | 25,514,766 | |
Variable-rate | | 655,675 | | | 100 | | | 2,904 | | | — | | | 658,579 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total long-term loans | | 25,934,480 | | | 99 | | | 238,865 | | | 1 | | | 26,173,345 | |
Line of credit loans | | 376,991 | | | 17 | | | 1,864,771 | | | 83 | | | 2,241,762 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 26,311,471 | | | 93 | | | $ | 2,103,636 | | | 7 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
____________________________
(1)Represents the unpaid principal balance, net of charge-offs and recoveries of loans as of the end of each period. Excludes unamortized deferred loan origination costs of $12 million as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Credit Concentration
Concentrations of credit may exist when a lender has large credit exposures to single borrowers, large credit exposures to borrowers in the same industry sector or engaged in similar activities or large credit exposures to borrowers in a geographic region that would cause the borrowers to be similarly impacted by economic or other conditions in the region. As discussed above under “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk,” because we lend primarily to our rural electric utility cooperative members, our loan portfolio is inherently subject to single-industry and single-obligor credit concentration risk, and loans outstanding to electric utility organizations totaled $29,584 million and $27,995 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, representing 98% and 99% of our total loans outstanding of each respective date.
Single-Obligor Concentration
Table 15 displays the outstanding loan exposure for our 20 largest borrowers, by legal entity and member class, as of May 31, 2022 and 2021. Our 20 largest borrowers consisted of 12 distribution systems and eight power supply systems as of May 31, 2022. In comparison, our 20 largest borrowers consisted of 10 distribution systems and 10 power supply systems as of May 31, 2021. The largest total exposure to a single borrower or controlled group represented less than 2% of total loans outstanding as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 15: Loans—Loan Exposure to 20 Largest Borrowers
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | | |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 3,929,160 | | | 13 | % | | $ | 3,312,571 | | | 12 | % | | |
Power supply | | 2,095,640 | | | 7 | | | 2,665,771 | | | 9 | | | |
Total CFC | | 6,024,800 | | | 20 | | | 5,978,342 | | | 21 | | | |
NCSC | | 195,001 | | | 1 | | | 203,392 | | | 1 | | | |
Total loan exposure to 20 largest borrowers | | 6,219,801 | | | 21 | | | 6,181,734 | | | 22 | | | |
Less: Loans covered under Farmer Mac standby purchase commitment | | (316,367) | | | (1) | | | (308,580) | | | (1) | | | |
Net loan exposure to 20 largest borrowers | | $ | 5,903,434 | | | 20 | % | | $ | 5,873,154 | | | 21 | % | | |
As part of our strategy in managing credit exposure to large borrowers, we entered into a long-term standby purchase commitment agreement with Farmer Mac during fiscal year 2016. Under this agreement, we may designate certain long-term loans to be covered under the commitment, subject to approval by Farmer Mac, and in the event any such loan later goes into payment default for at least 90 days, upon request by us, Farmer Mac must purchase such loan at par value. The aggregate unpaid principal balance of designated and Farmer Mac-approved loans was $493 million and $512 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Loan exposure to our 20 largest borrowers covered under the Farmer Mac agreement totaled $316 million and $309 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, which reduced our exposure to the 20 largest borrowers to 20% and 21% as of each respective date. No loans have been put to Farmer Mac for purchase pursuant to this agreement. Our credit exposure is also mitigated by long-term loans guaranteed by RUS, which totaled $131 million and $139 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
Geographic Concentration
Although our organizational structure and mission results in single-industry concentration, we serve a geographically diverse group of electric and telecommunications borrowers throughout the U.S. The consolidated number of borrowers with loans outstanding totaled 883 and 892 as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, located in 49 states and the District of Columbia. Of the 883 and 892 borrowers with loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, 49 were electric power supply borrowers as of each respective date. Electric power supply borrowers generally require significantly more capital than electric distribution and telecommunications borrowers.
Texas, which had 68 and 67 borrowers with loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, accounted for the largest number of borrowers with loans outstanding in any one state as of each respective date, as well as the largest concentration of loan exposure in any one state. Loans outstanding to Texas-based electric utility organizations totaled $5,104 million and $4,878 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, and accounted for approximately 17% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. Of the loans outstanding to Texas-based electric utility organizations, $163 million and $172 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, were covered by the Farmer Mac standby repurchase agreement, which reduced our credit risk exposure to Texas-based borrowers to 16% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. Of the 49 electric power supply borrowers with loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022, eight were located in Texas.
Table 16 provides a breakdown, by state or U.S. territory, of the total number of borrowers with loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021 and the outstanding loan exposure to borrowers in each jurisdiction as a percentage of total loans outstanding of $30,051 million and $28,415 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively.
Table 16: Loans—Loan Geographic Concentration
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2022 | | 2021 |
U.S. State/Territory | | Number of Borrowers | | % of Total Loans Outstanding | | Number of Borrowers | | % of Total Loans Outstanding |
Alabama | | 21 | | 2.37 | % | | 24 | | 2.28 | % |
Alaska | | 16 | | 3.29 | | | 16 | | 3.48 | |
Arizona | | 11 | | 0.95 | | | 11 | | 0.80 | |
Arkansas | | 21 | | 2.42 | | | 20 | | 2.21 | |
California | | 4 | | 0.12 | | | 4 | | 0.12 | |
Colorado | | 27 | | 5.53 | | | 27 | | 5.70 | |
Delaware | | 3 | | 0.26 | | | 3 | | 0.31 | |
District of Columbia | | 1 | | 0.10 | | | — | | | — | |
Florida | | 19 | | 3.65 | | | 18 | | 3.84 | |
Georgia | | 45 | | 5.33 | | | 45 | | 5.42 | |
Hawaii | | 2 | | 0.32 | | | 2 | | 0.36 | |
Idaho | | 10 | | 0.41 | | | 11 | | 0.40 | |
Illinois | | 32 | | 3.23 | | | 31 | | 3.22 | |
Indiana | | 40 | | 3.67 | | | 39 | | 3.21 | |
Iowa | | 35 | | 2.31 | | | 34 | | 2.32 | |
Kansas | | 28 | | 3.78 | | | 29 | | 4.13 | |
Kentucky | | 23 | | 2.47 | | | 23 | | 2.65 | |
Louisiana | | 8 | | 2.49 | | | 9 | | 1.95 | |
Maine | | 3 | | 0.07 | | | 3 | | 0.08 | |
Maryland | | 2 | | 1.48 | | | 2 | | 1.56 | |
Massachusetts | | 1 | | 0.20 | | | 1 | | 0.21 | |
Michigan | | 11 | | 1.70 | | | 11 | | 1.32 | |
Minnesota | | 46 | | 2.16 | | | 48 | | 2.38 | |
Mississippi | | 21 | | 1.86 | | | 20 | | 1.58 | |
Missouri | | 44 | | 5.65 | | | 46 | | 5.65 | |
Montana | | 23 | | 0.80 | | | 25 | | 0.77 | |
Nebraska | | 9 | | 0.10 | | | 12 | | 0.10 | |
Nevada | | 8 | | 0.82 | | | 8 | | 0.80 | |
New Hampshire | | 2 | | 0.36 | | | 2 | | 0.30 | |
New Jersey | | 2 | | 0.07 | | | 2 | | 0.06 | |
New Mexico | | 12 | | 0.17 | | | 13 | | 0.20 | |
New York | | 13 | | 0.42 | | | 13 | | 0.43 | |
North Carolina | | 26 | | 2.85 | | | 28 | | 3.08 | |
North Dakota | | 16 | | 2.83 | | | 14 | | 2.90 | |
Ohio | | 27 | | 2.10 | | | 27 | | 2.18 | |
Oklahoma | | 25 | | 3.18 | | | 27 | | 3.40 | |
Oregon | | 19 | | 1.24 | | | 19 | | 1.27 | |
Pennsylvania | | 15 | | 1.75 | | | 16 | | 1.78 | |
Rhode Island | | 1 | | 0.03 | | | 1 | | 0.02 | |
South Carolina | | 23 | | 2.80 | | | 24 | | 2.77 | |
South Dakota | | 29 | | 0.67 | | | 29 | | 0.64 | |
Tennessee | | 17 | | 0.78 | | | 16 | | 0.71 | |
Texas | | 68 | | 17.01 | | | 67 | | 17.17 | |
Utah | | 4 | | 0.78 | | | 4 | | 0.92 | |
Vermont | | 5 | | 0.16 | | | 5 | | 0.18 | |
Virginia | | 17 | | 1.38 | | | 17 | | 1.08 | |
Washington | | 10 | | 1.02 | | | 10 | | 1.12 | |
West Virginia | | 2 | | 0.03 | | | 2 | | 0.04 | |
Wisconsin | | 24 | | 1.79 | | | 23 | | 1.82 | |
Wyoming | | 12 | | 1.04 | | | 11 | | 1.08 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total | | 883 | | | 100.00 | % | | 892 | | | 100.00 | % |
Credit Quality Indicators
Assessing the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio and measuring our credit risk is an ongoing process that involves tracking payment status, troubled debt restructurings, nonperforming loans, charge-offs, the internal risk ratings of our borrowers and other indicators of credit risk. We monitor and subject each borrower and loan facility in our loan portfolio to an individual risk assessment based on quantitative and qualitative factors. Payment status trends and internal risk ratings are indicators, among others, of the probability of borrower default and overall credit quality of our loan portfolio. We believe the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio remained strong as of May 31, 2022.
Troubled Debt Restructurings
We actively monitor problem loans and, from time to time, attempt to work with borrowers to manage such exposures through loan workouts or modifications that better align with the borrower’s current ability to pay. A loan restructuring or modification of terms is accounted for as a troubled debt restructuring (“TDR”) if, for economic or legal reasons related to the borrower’s financial difficulties, a concession is granted to the borrower that we would not otherwise consider. TDR loans generally are initially classified as nonperforming and placed on nonaccrual status, although in many cases such loans were already classified as nonperforming prior to modification. These loans may be returned to performing status and the accrual of interest resumed if the borrower performs under the modified terms for an extended period of time, and we expect the borrower to continue to perform in accordance with the modified terms. In certain limited circumstances in which a TDR loan is current at the modification date, the loan may remain on accrual status at the time of modification.
We have not had any loan modifications that were required to be accounted for as TDRs since fiscal year 2016. Table 17 presents the outstanding amount of modified loans accounted for as TDRs in prior periods, by member class, and the performance status of these loans as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 17: Loans—Troubled Debt Restructured Loans
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, | |
| | 2022 | | 2021 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Number of Borrowers | | Outstanding Amount(1) | | % of Total Loans Outstanding | | Number of Borrowers | | Outstanding Amount(1) | | % of Total Loans Outstanding | |
TDR loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC—Distribution | | 1 | | $ | 5,092 | | | 0.02 | % | | 1 | | $ | 5,379 | | | 0.02 | % | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
RTFC | | 1 | | 4,092 | | | 0.01 | | | 1 | | 4,592 | | | 0.02 | | |
Total TDR loans | | 2 | | $ | 9,184 | | | 0.03 | % | | 2 | | $ | 9,971 | | | 0.04 | % | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Performance status of TDR loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Performing TDR loans | | 2 | | $ | 9,184 | | | 0.03 | % | | 2 | | $ | 9,971 | | | 0.04 | % | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total TDR loans | | 2 | | $ | 9,184 | | | 0.03 | % | | 2 | | $ | 9,971 | | | 0.04 | % | |
____________________________
(1) Represents the unpaid principal balance net of charge-offs and recoveries as of the end of each period.
We had TDR loans outstanding to two borrowers totaling $9 million and $10 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, consisting of loan modifications to a CFC electric distribution borrower and an RTFC telecommunications borrower, which at the time of the modification, were experiencing financial difficulty. Since the modification date, the loans have been performing in accordance with the terms of their respective restructured loan agreement for an extended period of time and were classified as performing and on accrual status as of May 31, 2022 and 2021. We did not have any TDR loans classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2022 or May 31, 2021. Although TDR loans may be returned to performing status if the borrower performs under the modified terms of the loan for an extended period of time, we evaluate TDR loans on an individual basis in measuring expected credit losses for these loans.
Nonperforming Loans
In addition to TDR loans that may be classified as nonperforming, we also may have nonperforming loans that have not been modified as a TDR. We classify such loans as nonperforming at the earlier of the date when we determine: (i) interest or principal payments on the loan is past due 90 days or more; (ii) as a result of court proceedings, the collection of interest or principal payments based on the original contractual terms is not expected; or (iii) the full and timely collection of interest or principal is otherwise uncertain. Once a loan is classified as nonperforming, we generally place the loan on nonaccrual status. Interest accrued but not collected at the date a loan is placed on nonaccrual status is reversed against earnings. Table 18 presents the outstanding balance of nonperforming loans, by member class, as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 18: Loans—Nonperforming Loans
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2022 | | 2021 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Number of Borrowers | | Outstanding Amount (1) | | % of Total Loans Outstanding | | | Number of Borrowers | | Outstanding Amount (1) | | % of Total Loans Outstanding |
Nonperforming loans: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC—Power supply(2) | | 3 | | $ | 227,790 | | | 0.76 | % | | | 2 | | $ | 228,312 | | | 0.81 | % |
RTFC | | — | | | — | | | — | | | | 2 | | 9,185 | | | 0.03 | |
Total nonperforming loans | | 3 | | $ | 227,790 | | | 0.76 | % | | | 4 | | $ | 237,497 | | | 0.84 | % |
____________________________
(1) Represents the unpaid principal balance net of charge-offs and recoveries as of the end of each period.
(2) In addition, we had less than $1 million in letters of credit outstanding to Brazos as of May 31, 2021.
We had loans to three borrowers totaling $228 million classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2022. In comparison, we had loans to four borrowers totaling $237 million classified as nonperforming as of May 31, 2021. Nonperforming loans represented 0.76% and 0.84% of total loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The reduction in nonperforming loans of $9 million during the current fiscal year was due in part to our receipt of full payment of all amounts due on nonperforming loans to two RTFC borrowers totaling $9 million during the second quarter of fiscal year 2022. In addition, we have continued to receive payments on the remaining outstanding nonperforming loan to a CFC electric power supply borrower, including payments of $29 million during the current fiscal year, which reduced the balance of this loan to $114 million as of May 31, 2022, from $143 million as of May 31, 2021. These reductions were partially offset by the classification during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022 of the $28 million loan outstanding to Brazos Sandy Creek as nonperforming following its bankruptcy filing, as discussed below.
Loans outstanding to Brazos, which filed for bankruptcy in March 2021 due to its exposure to elevated wholesale electric power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex, accounted for $86 million and $85 million of our total nonperforming loans as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Brazos is not permitted to make scheduled loan payments without approval of the bankruptcy court. As a result, we have not received payments from Brazos since March 2021, and its loans outstanding were delinquent as of each respective date.
On March 18, 2022, Brazos Sandy Creek, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Brazos and a CFC Texas-based electric power supply borrower, filed for bankruptcy following the filing of a motion by Brazos to reject its power purchase agreement with Brazos Sandy Creek as part of Brazos’ bankruptcy proceedings. A Chapter 7 Trustee has been appointed, and the Chapter 7 Trustee has been approved by the bankruptcy court to operate Brazos Sandy Creek as a going concern. CFC had a secured loan outstanding to Brazos Sandy Creek totaling $28 million as of May 31, 2022, which, upon notification of the bankruptcy filing by Brazos Sandy Creek, was classified as nonperforming during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022. Brazos Sandy Creek’s loan outstanding of $28 million was delinquent as of May 31, 2022 and on nonaccrual status as of this date. Aggregate loans outstanding to Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek totaled $114 million as of May 31, 2022, of which $49 million were secured and $65 million were unsecured.
Net Charge-Offs
Charge-offs represent the amount of a loan that has been removed from our consolidated balance sheet when the loan is deemed uncollectible. Generally the amount of a charge-off is the recorded investment in excess of the fair value of the
expected cash flows from the loan, or, if the loan is collateral dependent, the fair value of the underlying collateral securing the loan. We report charge-offs net of amounts recovered on previously charged off loans. We had no loan charge-offs during fiscal years 2022, 2021 or 2020. Prior to Brazos’ and Brazos Sandy Creek’s bankruptcy filings, we had not experienced any defaults or charge-offs in our electric utility and telecommunications loan portfolios since fiscal year 2013 and 2017, respectively.
In our 53-year history, we have experienced only 18 defaults in our electric utility loan portfolio, which includes our most recent defaults by Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek due to their bankruptcy filing in March 2021 and March 2022, respectively. Of the 16 defaults prior to Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek, one remains unresolved with an expected ultimate resolution date in calendar year 2025, nine resulted in no loss and six resulted in cumulative net charge-offs of $86 million. Of this amount, $67 million was attributable to five electric power supply cooperatives and $19 million was attributable to one electric distribution cooperative. We cite the factors that have historically contributed to the relatively low risk of default by our electric utility cooperatives, our principal lending market, above under “Credit Risk—Loan Portfolio Credit Risk.”
In comparison, since inception in 1987, we have experienced 15 defaults and cumulative net charge-offs of $427 million in our telecommunications loan portfolio, the most significant of which was a charge-off of $354 million in fiscal year 2011.
Borrower Risk Ratings
As part of our management of credit risk, we maintain a credit risk rating framework under which we employ a consistent process for assessing the credit quality of our loan portfolio. We evaluate each borrower and loan facility in our loan portfolio and assign internal borrower and loan facility risk ratings based on consideration of a number of quantitative and qualitative factors. We categorize loans in our portfolio based on our internally assigned borrower risk ratings, which are intended to assess the general creditworthiness of the borrower and probability of default. Our borrower risk ratings align with the U.S. federal banking regulatory agencies’ credit risk definitions of pass and criticized categories, with the criticized category further segmented among special mention, substandard and doubtful. Pass ratings reflect relatively low probability of default, while criticized ratings have a higher probability of default. Our internally assigned borrower risk ratings serve as the primary credit quality indicator for our loan portfolio. Because our internal borrower risk ratings provide important information on the probability of default, they are a key input in determining our allowance for credit losses.
We use our internal risk ratings to measure the credit risk of each borrower and loan facility, identify or confirm problem or potential problem loans in a timely manner, differentiate risk within each of our portfolio segments, assess the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio and manage overall risk levels. Our internally assigned borrower risk ratings, which we map to equivalent credit ratings by external credit rating agencies, serve as the primary credit quality indicator for our loan portfolio. Because our internal borrower risk ratings provide important information on the probability of default, they are a key input in estimating our allowance for credit losses.
Criticized loans decreased by $392 million to $494 million as of May 31, 2022, from $886 million as of May 31, 2021, representing approximately 2% and 3% of total loans outstanding as of each respective date. The decrease in criticized loans was primarily attributable to positive developments during the third quarter of fiscal year 2022 related to Rayburn that resulted in an improvement in Rayburn’s credit risk profile and also a significant reduction in loans outstanding to Rayburn. Loans outstanding to Rayburn totaled $167 million as of May 31, 2022, and Rayburn’s borrower risk rating was in the pass category. In comparison, loans outstanding to Rayburn totaled $379 million as of May 31, 2021, and Rayburn’s borrower risk rating was in the criticized category.
In February 2022, Rayburn successfully completed a securitization transaction to cover extraordinary costs and expenses incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex pursuant to a financing program enacted into law by Texas in June 2021 for qualifying electric cooperatives exposed to elevated power costs during the February 2021 polar vortex. Subsequent to the completion of the securitization transaction, Rayburn fully paid its outstanding obligations to ERCOT. As a result, we revised our borrower risk rating for Rayburn to a rating in the pass category from a previous rating in the criticized category. In addition, we received loan payments from Rayburn during the third quarter of fiscal year 2022 that reduced loans outstanding to Rayburn to $167 million as of May 31, 2022, from $379 million as of May 31, 2021. Rayburn was current on all of its debt obligations to us as of the date of this Report. Also, each of the borrowers with loans outstanding in the criticized category, with the exception of Brazos and Brazos Sandy Creek, was current with regard to all principal and
interest amounts due to us as of May 31, 2022. In comparison, each of the borrowers with loans outstanding in the criticized category, with the exception of Brazos, was current with regard to all principal and interest amounts due to us as of May 31, 2021. As discussed above under “Nonperforming Loans,” Brazos is not permitted to make scheduled loan payments without approval of the bankruptcy court and Brazos Sandy Creek’s loan outstanding of $28 million was delinquent as of May 31, 2022 and on nonaccrual status as of this date, as a result of its bankruptcy filing.
We provide additional information on our borrower risk rating classifications, including the amount of loans outstanding in each of the criticized loan categories of special mention, substandard and doubtful, in “Note 1—Summary of Significant
Accounting Policies” and “Note 4—Loans” in this Report.
Allowance for Credit Losses
We are required to maintain an allowance based on a current estimate of credit losses that are expected to occur over the remaining contractual term of the loans in our portfolio. Our allowance for credit losses consists of a collective allowance and an asset-specific allowance. The collective allowance is established for loans in our portfolio that share similar risk characteristics and are therefore evaluated on a collective, or pool, basis in measuring expected credit losses. The asset-specific allowance is established for loans in our portfolio that do not share similar risk characteristics with other loans in our portfolio and are therefore evaluated on an individual basis in measuring expected credit losses.
Table 19 presents, by legal entity and member class, loans outstanding and the related allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio as of May 31, 2022 and 2021 and the allowance components as of each date.
Table 19: Allowance for Credit Losses by Borrower Member Class and Evaluation Methodology
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2022 | 2021 | | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Loans Outstanding(1) | | Allowance for Credit Losses | | Allowance Coverage Ratio (2) | | Loans Outstanding (1) | | Allowance for Credit Losses | | Allowance Coverage Ratio (2) | | | | | |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 23,844,242 | | | $ | 15,781 | | | 0.07 | % | | $ | 22,027,423 | | | $ | 13,426 | | | 0.06 | % | | | | | |
Power supply | | 4,901,770 | | | 47,793 | | | 0.98 | | | 5,154,312 | | | 64,646 | | | 1.25 | | | | | | |
Statewide and associate | | 126,863 | | | 1,251 | | | 0.99 | | | 106,121 | | | 1,391 | | | 1.31 | | | | | | |
Total CFC | | 28,872,875 | | | 64,825 | | | 0.22 | | | 27,287,856 | | | 79,463 | | | 0.29 | | | | | | |
NCSC | | 710,878 | | | 1,449 | | | 0.20 | | | 706,868 | | | 1,374 | | | 0.19 | | | | | | |
RTFC | | 467,601 | | | 1,286 | | | 0.28 | | | 420,383 | | | 4,695 | | | 1.12 | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 30,051,354 | | | $ | 67,560 | | | 0.22 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | | | $ | 85,532 | | | 0.30 | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Allowance components: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collective allowance | | $ | 29,814,380 | | | $ | 28,876 | | | 0.10 | % | | $ | 28,167,639 | | | $ | 42,442 | | | 0.15 | % | | | | | |
Asset-specific allowance | | 236,974 | | | 38,684 | | | 16.32 | | | 247,468 | | | 43,090 | | | 17.41 | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 30,051,354 | | | $ | 67,560 | | | 0.22 | | | $ | 28,415,107 | | | $ | 85,532 | | | 0.30 | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Allowance coverage ratios: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Nonperforming and nonaccrual loans (3) | | $ | 227,790 | | | | | 29.66 | % | | $ | 237,497 | | | | | 36.01 | % | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
___________________________
(1) Represents the unpaid principal balance, net of charge-offs and recoveries, of loans as of each period-end. Excludes unamortized deferred loan origination costs of $12 million as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
(2)Calculated based on the allowance for credit losses attributable to each member class and allowance components at period-end divided by the related loans outstanding at period-end.
(3)Calculated based on the total allowance for credit losses at period-end divided by loans outstanding classified as nonperforming and on nonaccrual status at period-end.
Our allowance for credit losses and allowance coverage ratio decreased to $68 million and 0.22%, respectively, as of May 31, 2022, from $86 million and 0.30% respectively, as of May 31, 2021. The $18 million decrease in the allowance for credit losses reflected a decrease in the collective and asset-specific allowance of $14 million and $4 million, respectively. The collective allowance decrease of $14 million was attributable to an improvement in Rayburn’s credit risk profile following the successful completion by Rayburn of a securitization transaction in February 2022 to cover extraordinary costs and expenses incurred during the February 2021 polar vortex and subsequent payment in full of its obligations to ERCOT and a significant reduction in loans outstanding to Rayburn due to payments received from Rayburn during fiscal year 2022. The asset-specific allowance decrease of $4 million stemmed from the combined impact of the elimination of an asset-specific allowance attributable to nonperforming loans totaling $9 million that were paid in full during the second quarter of fiscal year 2022 and the decrease of an asset-specific allowance for a nonperforming CFC power supply borrower, attributable to loan payments received on this loan, partially offset by the addition of an asset-specific allowance for Brazos Sandy Creek, due to its bankruptcy filing, as discussed above under “Nonperforming Loans.”
As a result of Rayburn’s payment in full of its February 2021 polar vortex-related outstanding obligations to ERCOT, we believe our exposure to the significant adverse financial impact on some electric utilities from the surge in wholesale power costs in Texas during the February 2021 polar vortex is now limited to loans outstanding to Brazos and its wholly-owned subsidiary Brazos Sandy Creek.
We discuss our methodology for estimating the allowance for credit losses under the CECL model in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—Allowance for Credit Losses” and provide information on the management judgment and uncertainties involved in our determining the allowance for credit losses in above section “Critical Accounting Estimates—Allowance for Credit Losses” of this Report. We provide additional information on our loans and allowance for credit losses under “Note 4—Loans” and “Note 5—Allowance for Credit Losses” of this Report.
Counterparty Credit Risk
In addition to credit exposure from our borrowers, we enter into other types of financial transactions in the ordinary course of business that expose us to counterparty credit risk, primarily related to transactions involving our cash and cash equivalents, securities held in our investment securities portfolio and derivatives. We mitigate our risk by only entering into these transactions with counterparties with investment-grade ratings, establishing operational guidelines and counterparty exposure limits and monitoring our counterparty credit risk position. We evaluate our counterparties based on certain quantitative and qualitative factors and periodically assign internal risk rating grades to our counterparties.
Cash and Investments Securities Counterparty Credit Exposure
Our cash and cash equivalents and investment securities totaled $154 million and $600 million, respectively, as of May 31, 2022. The primary credit exposure associated with investments held in our investments portfolio is that issuers will not repay principal and interest in accordance with the contractual terms. Our cash and cash equivalents with financial institutions generally have an original maturity of less than one year and pursuant to our investment policy guidelines, all fixed-income debt securities, at the time of purchase, must be rated at least investment grade based on external credit ratings from at least two of the leading global credit rating agencies, when available, or the corresponding equivalent, when not available. We therefore believe that the risk of default by these counterparties is low.
We provide additional information on the holdings in our investment securities portfolio below under “Liquidity Risk—Investment Securities Portfolio” and in “Note 3—Investment Securities.”
Derivative Counterparty Credit Exposure
Our derivative counterparty credit exposure relates principally to interest-rate swap contracts. We generally engage in OTC derivative transactions, which expose us to individual counterparty credit risk because these transactions are executed and settled directly between us and each counterparty. We are exposed to the risk that an individual derivative counterparty will default on payments due to us, which we may not be able to collect or which may require us to seek a replacement derivative from a different counterparty. This replacement may be at a higher cost, or we may be unable to find a suitable replacement.
We manage our derivative counterparty credit exposure by executing derivative transactions with financial institutions that have investment-grade credit ratings and maintaining enforceable master netting arrangements with these counterparties, which allow us to net derivative assets and liabilities with the same counterparty. We had 12 active derivative counterparties with credit ratings ranging from Aa1 to Baa1 and Aa2 to Baa2 by Moody’s as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, and from AA- to A- by S&P as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021. The total outstanding notional amount of derivatives with these counterparties was $8,062 million and $8,979 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The highest single derivative counterparty concentration, by outstanding notional amount, accounted for approximately 24% of the total outstanding notional amount of our derivatives as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
While our derivative agreements include netting provisions that allow for offsetting of all contracts with a given counterparty in the event of default by one of the two parties, we report the fair value of our derivatives on a gross basis by individual contract as either a derivative asset or derivative liability on our consolidated balance sheets. However, we estimate our exposure to credit loss on our derivatives by calculating the replacement cost to settle at current market prices, as defined in our derivative agreements, all outstanding derivatives in a net gain position at the counterparty level where a right of legal offset exists. As indicated in “Note 10—Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities—Impact of Derivatives on Consolidated Balance Sheets,” our outstanding derivatives, at the individual counterparty level, were in a net gain position of $94 million as of May 31, 2022. In comparison, our outstanding derivatives, at the individual counterparty level, were in a net loss position of $464 million as of May 31, 2021; as such, we did not have exposure to credit loss on our outstanding derivatives as of this date.
We provide additional detail on our derivative agreements, including a discussion of derivative contracts with credit rating triggers and settlement amounts that would be required in the event of a ratings trigger, in “Note 10—Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities.”
See “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in this Report for additional information about credit risks related to our business.
We define liquidity as the ability to convert assets into cash quickly and efficiently, maintain access to available funding and roll over or issue new debt under normal operating conditions and periods of CFC-specific and/or market stress, to ensure that we can meet borrower loan requests, pay current and future obligations and fund our operations in a cost-effective manner.
Our primary sources of funds include member loan principal repayments, securities held in our investment portfolio, committed bank revolving lines of credit, committed loan facilities under Guaranteed Underwriter Program, revolving note purchase agreements with Farmer Mac and proceeds from debt issuances to members and in the capital markets. Our primary uses of funds include loan advances to members, principal and interest payments on borrowings, periodic interest settlement payments related to our derivative contracts and operating expenses.
Liquidity Risk Management
Our liquidity risk-management framework is designed to meet our liquidity objectives of providing a reliable source of funding to members, meet maturing debt and other financial obligations, issue new debt and fund our operations on a cost-effective basis under normal operating conditions as well as under CFC-specific and/or market stress conditions. We engage in various activities to manage liquidity risk and achieve our liquidity objectives. Our Asset Liability Committee establishes guidelines that are intended to ensure that we maintain sufficient, diversified sources of liquidity to cover potential funding requirements as well as unanticipated contingencies. Our Treasury group develops strategies to manage our targeted liquidity position, projects our funding needs under various scenarios, including adverse circumstances, and monitors our liquidity position on an ongoing basis.
Available Liquidity
As part of our strategy in managing liquidity risk and meeting our liquidity objectives, we seek to maintain various committed sources of funding that are available to meet our near-term liquidity needs. Table 20 presents a comparison
between our available liquidity, which consists of cash and cash equivalents, our debt securities investment portfolio and amounts under committed credit facilities as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 20: AvailableLiquidity
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2022 | | 2021 |
(Dollars in millions) | | Total | | Accessed | | Available | | Total | | Accessed | | Available |
Liquidity sources: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cash and investment debt securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cash and cash equivalents | | $ | 154 | | | $ | — | | | $ | 154 | | | $ | 295 | | | $ | — | | | $ | 295 | |
Debt securities investment portfolio(1) | | 566 | | | — | | | 566 | | | 576 | | | — | | | 576 | |
Total cash and investment debt securities | | 720 | | | — | | | 720 | | | 871 | | | — | | | 871 | |
Committed credit facilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Committed bank revolving line of credit agreements—unsecured(2) | | 2,600 | | | 3 | | | 2,597 | | | 2,725 | | | 3 | | | 2,722 | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program committed facilities—secured(3) | | 8,723 | | | 7,648 | | | 1,075 | | | 8,173 | | | 7,198 | | | 975 | |
Farmer Mac revolving note purchase agreement, dated March 24, 2011, as amended—secured(4) | | 5,500 | | | $3,095 | | 2,405 | | | 5,500 | | | 2,978 | | | 2,522 | |
Total committed credit facilities | | 16,823 | | 10,746 | | 6,077 | | 16,398 | | 10,179 | | 6,219 |
Total available liquidity | | $ | 17,543 | | | $ | 10,746 | | | $ | 6,797 | | | $ | 17,269 | | | $ | 10,179 | | | $ | 7,090 | |
____________________________
(1)Represents the aggregate fair value of our portfolio of debt securities as of period-end. Our portfolio of equity securities consists primarily of preferred stock securities that are not as readily redeemable; therefore, we exclude our portfolio of equity securities from our available liquidity. We had investment-grade corporate debt securities with an aggregate fair value of $211 million as of May 31, 2021 that we transferred and pledged as collateral in short-term repurchase transactions.
(2)The committed bank revolving line of credit agreements consist of a three-year and a five-year revolving line of credit agreement. The accessed amount of $3 million as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021, relates to letters of credit issued pursuant to the five-year revolving line of credit agreement.
(3)The committed facilities under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program are not revolving.
(4)Availability subject to market conditions.
Although as a non-bank financial institution we are not subject to regulatory liquidity requirements, our liquidity management framework includes monitoring our liquidity and funding positions on an ongoing basis and assessing our ability to meet our scheduled debt obligations and other cash flow requirements based on point-in-time metrics as well as forward-looking projections. Our liquidity and funding assessment takes into consideration amounts available under existing liquidity sources, the expected rollover of member short-term investments and scheduled loan principal payment amounts, as well as our continued ability to access the private placement and capital markets.
Liquidity Risk Assessment
We utilize several measures to assess our liquidity risk and ensure we have adequate coverage to meet our liquidity needs. Our primary liquidity measures indicate the extent to which we have sufficient liquidity to cover the payment of scheduled debt obligations over the next 12 months. We calculate our liquidity coverage ratios under several scenarios that take into consideration various assumptions about our near-term sources and uses of liquidity, including the assumption that maturities of member short-term investments will not have a significant impact on our anticipated cash outflows. Our members have historically maintained a stable level of short-term investments in CFC in the form of daily liquidity fund notes, commercial paper, select notes and medium-term notes. As such, we expect that our members will continue to reinvest their excess cash in short-term investment products offered by CFC.
Table 21 presents our primary liquidity coverage ratios as of May 31, 2022 and 2021 and displays the calculation of each ratio as of these respective dates based on the assumptions discussed above.
Table 21: Liquidity Coverage Ratios | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in millions) | | 2022 | | 2021 |
Liquidity coverage ratio:(1) | | | | |
Total available liquidity(2) | | $ | 6,797 | | | $ | 7,090 | |
Debt scheduled to mature over next 12 months: | | | | |
Short-term borrowings | | 4,981 | | | 4,582 | |
Long-term and subordinated debt scheduled to mature over next 12 months | | 1,913 | | | 2,604 | |
Total debt scheduled to mature over next 12 months | | 6,894 | | | 7,186 | |
Excess (deficit) in available liquidity over debt scheduled to mature over next 12 months | | $ | (97) | | | $ | (96) | |
| | | | |
Liquidity coverage ratio | | 0.99 | | 0.99 |
| | | | |
Liquidity coverage ratio, excluding expected maturities of member short-term investments(3) | | | | |
Total available liquidity(2) | | $ | 6,797 | | | $ | 7,090 | |
Total debt scheduled to mature over next 12 months | | 6,894 | | | 7,186 | |
Exclude: Member short-term investments | | (3,956) | | | (3,487) | |
Total debt, excluding member short-term investments, scheduled to mature over next 12 months | | 2,938 | | | 3,699 | |
Excess in available liquidity over total debt, excluding member short-term investments, scheduled to mature over next 12 months | | $ | 3,859 | | | $ | 3,391 | |
| | | | |
Liquidity coverage ratio, excluding expected maturities of member short-term investments | | 2.31 | | 1.92 |
___________________________
(1)Calculated based on available liquidity at period-end divided by total debt scheduled to mature over the next 12 months at period-end.
(2)Total available liquidity is presented above in Table 20.
(3)Calculated based on available liquidity at period-end divided by debt, excluding member short-term investments, scheduled to mature over the next 12 months.
Investment Securities Portfolio
We have an investment portfolio of debt securities classified as trading and equity securities, both of which are reported on our consolidated balance sheets at fair value. The aggregate fair value of the securities in our investment portfolio was $600 million as of May 31, 2022, consisting of debt securities with a fair value of $566 million and equity securities with a fair value of $34 million. In comparison, the aggregate fair value of the securities in our investment portfolio was $611 million as of May 31, 2021, consisting of debt securities with a fair value of $576 million and equity securities with a fair value of $35 million.
Our debt securities investment portfolio is intended to serve as an additional source of liquidity and is structured so that the securities generally have active secondary or resale markets under normal market conditions. The objective of the portfolio is to achieve returns commensurate with the level of risk assumed subject to CFC’s investment policy and guidelines and liquidity requirements. Pursuant to our investment policy and guidelines, all fixed-income debt securities, at the time of purchase, must be rated at least investment grade based on external credit ratings from at least two of the leading global credit rating agencies, when available, or the corresponding equivalent, when not available. Securities rated investment grade, that is those rated Baa3 or higher by Moody’s or BBB- or higher by S&P or BBB- or higher by Fitch, are generally considered by the rating agencies to be of lower credit risk than non-investment grade securities.
Under master repurchase agreements that we have with counterparties, we can obtain short-term funding by selling investment-grade corporate debt securities from our investment portfolio subject to an obligation to repurchase the same or similar securities at an agreed-upon price and date. Because we retain effective control over the transferred securities, transactions under these repurchase agreements are accounted for as collateralized financing agreements (i.e., secured borrowings) and not as a sale and subsequent repurchase of securities. The obligation to repurchase the securities is reflected
as a component of our short-term borrowings on our consolidated balance sheets. The aggregate fair value of debt securities underlying repurchase transactions is parenthetically disclosed on our consolidated balance sheets. We had no borrowings under repurchase transactions outstanding as of May 31, 2022; therefore, we had no debt securities in our investment portfolio pledged as collateral as of May 31, 2022. We had short-term borrowings under repurchase transactions of $200 million as of May 31, 2021. The debt securities underlying these transactions had an aggregate fair value of $211 million as of this date, and we repurchased the securities on June 2, 2021.
We provide additional information on our investment securities portfolio in “Note 3—Investment Securities” of this Report.
Borrowing Capacity Under Various Credit Facilities
The aggregate borrowing capacity under our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements, committed loan facilities under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program and revolving note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac totaled $16,823 million and $16,398 million as of May 31, 2022 and May 31, 2021, respectively, and the aggregate amount available for access totaled $6,077 million and $6,219 million as of each respective date. The following is a discussion of our borrowing capacity and key terms and conditions under each of these credit facilities.
Committed Bank Revolving Line of Credit Agreements—Unsecured
Our committed bank revolving lines of credit may be used for general corporate purposes; however, we generally rely on them as a backup source of liquidity for our member and dealer commercial paper. On June 7, 2021, we amended the three-year and five-year committed bank revolving line of credit agreements to extend the maturity dates to November 28, 2024 and November 28, 2025, respectively, and to terminate certain bank commitments totaling $70 million under the three-year agreement and $55 million under the five-year agreement. As a result, the total commitment amount under the three-year facility and the five-year facility is $1,245 million and $1,355 million, respectively, resulting in a combined total commitment amount under the two facilities of $2,600 million. Under our current committed bank revolving line of credit agreements, we have the ability to request up to $300 million of letters of credit, which would result in a reduction in the remaining available amount under the facilities.
Table 22 presents the total commitment amount under our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements, outstanding letters of credit and the amount available for access as of May 31, 2022.
Table 22: Committed Bank Revolving Line of Credit Agreements
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2022 | | | | |
(Dollars in millions) | | Total Commitment | | Letters of Credit Outstanding | | Amount Available for Access | | Maturity | | Annual Facility Fee (1) |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Bank revolving line of credit term: | | | | | | | | | | |
3-year agreement | | $ | 1,245 | | | $ | — | | | $ | 1,245 | | | November 28, 2024 | | 7.5 bps |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
5-year agreement | | 1,355 | | | 3 | | | 1,352 | | | November 28, 2025 | | 10.0 bps |
Total | | $ | 2,600 | | | $ | 3 | | | $ | 2,597 | | | | | |
___________________________
(1)Facility fee based on CFC’s senior unsecured credit ratings in accordance with the established pricing schedules at the inception of the related agreement.
We did not have any outstanding borrowings under our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements as of May 31, 2022; however, we had letters of credit outstanding of $3 million under the five-year committed bank revolving agreement as of this date.
Although our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements do not contain a material adverse change clause or rating triggers that would limit the banks’ obligations to provide funding under the terms of the agreements, we must be in compliance with the covenants to draw on the facilities. We have been and expect to continue to be in compliance with the covenants under our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements. As such, we could draw on these facilities to repay dealer or member commercial paper that cannot be rolled over.
Guaranteed Underwriter Program Committed Facilities—Secured
Under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program, we can borrow from the Federal Financing Bank and use the proceeds to extend new loans to our members and refinance existing member debt. As part of the program, we pay fees based on our outstanding borrowings that are intended to help fund the USDA Rural Economic Development Loan and Grant program, and thereby support additional investment in rural economic development projects. The borrowings under this program are guaranteed by RUS. Each advance is subject to quarterly amortization and a final maturity not longer than 30 years from the date of the advance.
On November 4, 2021, we closed on a committed loan facility for additional funding of $550 million (“Series S”) from the Federal Financing Bank under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program. Pursuant to this facility, we may borrow any time before July 15, 2026. Each advance is subject to quarterly amortization and a final maturity not longer than 30 years from the date of the advance. The closing of this facility increased our total committed borrowing amount under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program to $8,723 million as of May 31, 2022, from $8,173 million as of May 31, 2021.
As displayed in Table 20, we had accessed $7,648 million under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program and up to $1,075 million was available for borrowing as of May 31, 2022. Of the $1,075 million available borrowing amount, $150 million is available for advance through July 15, 2024, $375 million is available for advance through July 15, 2025 and $550 million is available for advance through July 15, 2026. We are required to pledge eligible distribution system loans or power supply system loans as collateral in an amount at least equal to our total outstanding borrowings under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program committed loan facilities, which totaled $6,105 million as of May 31, 2022.
The notes payable to FFB and guaranteed by RUS under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program contain a provision that if during any portion of the fiscal year, our senior secured credit ratings do not have at least two of the following ratings: (i) A3 or higher from Moody’s, (ii) A- or higher from S&P, (iii) A- or higher from Fitch or (iv) an equivalent rating from a successor rating agency to any of the above rating agencies, we may not make cash patronage capital distributions in excess of 5% of total patronage capital.
Farmer Mac Revolving Note Purchase Agreement—Secured
We have a revolving note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac, dated March 24, 2011, as amended, under which we can borrow up to $5,500 million from Farmer Mac, at any time, subject to market conditions through June 30, 2026 with successive automatic one-year renewals without notice by either party. Beginning June 30, 2025, the revolving note purchase agreement is subject to termination of the draw period by Farmer Mac upon 425 days’ prior written notice. Pursuant to this revolving note purchase agreement, we can borrow, repay and re-borrow funds at any time through maturity, as market conditions permit, provided that the outstanding principal amount at any time does not exceed the total available under the agreement. Each borrowing under the revolving note purchase agreement is evidenced by a pricing agreement setting forth the interest rate, maturity date and other related terms as we may negotiate with Farmer Mac at the time of each such borrowing. We may select a fixed rate or variable rate at the time of each advance with a maturity as determined in the applicable pricing agreement.
Under this agreement, we had outstanding secured notes payable totaling $3,095 million and $2,978 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. We borrowed $720 million in long-term notes payable under this note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac during the year ended May 31, 2022. As displayed in Table 20, the amount available for borrowing under this agreement was $2,405 million as of May 31, 2022. We are required to pledge eligible electric distribution system or electric power supply system loans as collateral in an amount at least equal to the total principal amount of notes outstanding, under this agreement.
On June 15, 2022, we amended the revolving note purchase agreement with Farmer Mac to increase the maximum borrowing availability to $6,000 million from $5,500 million, and extend the draw period from June 30, 2026 to June 30, 2027, with successive automatic one-year renewals without notice by either party, subject to the termination of the draw period by Farmer Mac upon 425 days’ prior written notice.
We provide additional information on pledged collateral below under “Pledged Collateral” in this section and in “Note 3—Investment Securities” and “Note 4—Loans.”
Short-Term Borrowings
Our short-term borrowings, which we rely on to meet our daily, near-term funding needs, consist of commercial paper, which we offer to members and dealers, select notes and daily liquidity fund notes offered to members, medium-term notes offered to members and dealers, and funds from repurchase secured borrowing transactions.
Table 23: Short-Term Borrowings—Outstanding Amount and Weighted-Average Interest Rates
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2022 | | 2021 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Outstanding Amount | | Weighted- Average Interest Rate | | Outstanding Amount | | Weighted-Average Interest Rate |
Short-term borrowings: | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper: | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper sold through dealers, net of discounts | | $ | 1,024,813 | | | 0.96 | % | | $ | 894,977 | | | 0.16 | % |
Commercial paper sold directly to members, at par | | 1,358,069 | | | 0.92 | | | 1,124,607 | | | 0.14 | |
Total commercial paper | | 2,382,882 | | | 0.94 | | | 2,019,584 | | | 0.15 | |
Select notes to members | | 1,753,441 | | | 1.11 | | | 1,539,150 | | | 0.30 | |
Daily liquidity fund notes | | 427,790 | | | 0.80 | | | 460,556 | | | 0.08 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Medium-term notes sold to members | | 417,054 | | | 0.66 | | | 362,691 | | | 0.42 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Securities sold under repurchase agreements | | — | | | — | | | 200,115 | | | 0.30 | |
Total short-term borrowings outstanding | | $ | 4,981,167 | | | 0.97 | | | $ | 4,582,096 | | | 0.22 | |
Short-term borrowings increased $399 million to $4,981 million as of May 31, 2022, from $4,582 million as of May 31, 2021, and accounted for 17% of total debt outstanding as of each respective date. The increase in short-term borrowings was driven primarily by an increase in short-term member investments. The weighted-average cost of our outstanding short-term borrowings increased to 0.97% as of May 31, 2022, from 0.22% as of May 31, 2021. The weighted-average maturity of our short-term borrowings increased to 42 days as of May 31, 2022, from 38 days as of May 31, 2021.
Table 24 displays our outstanding short-term borrowings, by funding source, as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 24: Short-Term Borrowings—Funding Sources
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2022 | | 2021 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Outstanding Amount | | % of Total Short-Term Borrowings | | Outstanding Amount | | % of Total Short-Term Borrowings |
Funding source: | | | | | | | | |
Members | | $ | 3,956,354 | | | 79 | % | | $ | 3,487,004 | | | 76 | % |
| | | | | | | | |
Capital markets | | 1,024,813 | | | 21 | | | 1,095,092 | | | 24 | |
Total | | $ | 4,981,167 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 4,582,096 | | | 100 | % |
Our intent is to manage our short-term wholesale funding risk by maintaining dealer commercial paper outstanding at each quarter-end within a range of $1,000 million and $1,500 million, although the intra-period amount of dealer commercial paper outstanding may fluctuate based on our liquidity requirements. Dealer commercial paper outstanding of $1,025 million as of May 31, 2022 and $895 million as of May 31, 2021 was within our quarter-end target range of $1,000 million and $1,500 million. We had borrowings under securities repurchase transactions of $200 million as of May 31, 2021.
See “Note 6—Short-Term Borrowing” for additional information on our short-term borrowings.
Long-Term and Subordinated Debt
Long-term and subordinated debt, which represents the most significant componentsource of our funding. funding, totaled $23,766 million and $22,844 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, and accounted for 83% of total debt outstanding as of each respective date. The increase in total debt outstanding, including long-term and subordinated debt, was primarily due to the issuance of debt to fund loan portfolio growth.
The issuance of long-term debt allows us to reduce our reliance on short-term borrowings and effectively manage our refinancing and interest rate risk, due in part to the multi-year contractual maturity structure of long-term debt. In addition to access to private debt facilities, we also issue debt in the public capital markets. Pursuant to Rule 405 of the Securities Act,, we are classified as a “well-known seasoned issuer.” Pursuant toUnder our effective shelf registration statements filed with the SEC,U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), we may offer and issue the following debt securities:
•an unlimited amount of collateral trust bonds until September 2019;
an unlimited amount ofand senior and subordinated debt securities, including medium-term notes, member capital securities and subordinated deferrable debt, until November 2020;October 2023; and
•daily liquidity fund notes up to $20,000 million in the aggregate—with a $3,000 million limit on the aggregate principal amount outstanding at any time—until March 2022.2025.
We intend to file a new registration statement registering an unlimited amount of collateral trust bonds prior to the expiration of the existing shelf registration statement in September 2019. Although we register member capital securities and the daily liquidity fund notes with the SEC, these securities are not available for sale to the general public. Medium-term notes are available for sale to both the general public and members. Notwithstanding the foregoing, we have contractual limitations with respect to the amount of senior indebtedness we may incur.
As discussed in “Consolidated Balance Sheet Analysis—Long-Term Debt” long-term and subordinated debt totaled $21,554 millionSubordinated Debt—Issuances and accounted for 86% of total debt outstanding as of May 31, 2019, compared with $20,837 million, or 85%, of total debt outstanding as of May 31, 2018. The increase in total debt outstanding, including long-term and subordinated debt, was primarily due to the issuance of debt to fund loan portfolio growth. Repayments
Table 3225 summarizes long-term and subordinated debt issuances and repayments during fiscal year 2019.2022.
Table 32: Issuances and Repayments of25: Long-Term and Subordinated Debt(1)—Issuances and Repayments
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, 2022 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Issuances | | | | Repayments (1) | | | |
Debt product type: | | | | | | | | | |
Collateral trust bonds | | $ | 500,000 | | | | | $ | 855,000 | | | | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 450,000 | | | | | 613,830 | | | | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 720,000 | | | | | 603,229 | | | | |
Medium-term notes sold to members | | 121,038 | | | | | 102,987 | | | | |
Medium-term notes sold to dealers | | 2,195,524 | | | | | 875,756 | | | | |
Other notes payable | | — | | | | | 3,564 | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,364 | | | | | 21,862 | | | | |
Total | | $ | 3,987,926 | | | | | $ | 3,076,228 | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, 2019 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Issuances | | Repayments (1) | | Change |
Long-term and subordinated debt activity:(2) | | | | | | |
Collateral trust bonds | | $ | 1,575,000 |
| | $ | 1,830,000 |
| | $ | (255,000 | ) |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 625,000 |
| | 70,867 |
| | 554,133 |
|
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 575,000 |
| | 311,583 |
| | 263,417 |
|
Medium-term notes sold to members | | 194,355 |
| | 192,664 |
| | 1,691 |
|
Medium-term notes sold to dealers | | 329,907 |
| | 394,004 |
| | (64,097 | ) |
Other notes payable | | — |
| | 7,522 |
| | (7,522 | ) |
Subordinated debt | | 250,000 |
| | — |
| | 250,000 |
|
Members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,986 |
| | 24,861 |
| | (22,875 | ) |
Total | | $ | 3,551,248 |
| | $ | 2,831,501 |
| | $ | 719,747 |
|
______________________________________________________
(1)Amounts exclude unamortized debt issuance costs and discounts
(2)Repayments include principal maturities, scheduled amortization payments, repurchases and redemptions.
We provide additional information on our financing activities under the above undersection “Consolidated Balance Sheet Analysis—Debt” and on the weighted-average interest rates on our long-term debt and subordinated certificates in “Note 7—Long-Term Debt,” “Note 8—Subordinated Deferrable Debt” and “Note 9—Members’ Subordinated Certificates.”Certificates” of this Report.
Investment Portfolio
In addition
Pledged Collateral
Under our secured borrowing agreements we are required to pledge loans, investment debt securities or other collateral and maintain certain pledged collateral ratios. Of our primary sourcestotal debt outstanding of liquidity discussed above, we have an investment portfolio, composed of equity securities and held-to-maturity debt securities. We intend for our investment portfolio, which totaled $653 million and $710$28,747 million as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, to remain adequately liquid to serve as a contingent supplemental source of liquidity for unanticipated liquidity needs.
On June 12, 2019, Farmer Mac redeemed its Series B non-cumulative preferred stock at a redemption price of $25.00 per share, plus any declared and unpaid dividends through and including the redemption date. The amortized cost2022, $16,051 million, or 56%, was secured by pledged loans totaling $19,062 million. In comparison, of our investment in the Farmer Mac Series B non-cumulative preferred stock was $25total debt outstanding of $27,426 million as of May 31, 2019, which equals the per share redemption price.
Pursuant to our2021, $16,644 million, or 61%, was secured by pledged loans totaling $19,153 million and pledged investment policy and guidelines, all fixed-income debt securities atwith an aggregate fair value of $211 million.
Secured Borrowing Agreements—Pledged Loan Requirements
We are required to pledge loans or other collateral in transactions under our collateral trust bond indentures, bond agreements under the time ofGuaranteed Underwriter Program and note purchase must be rated at least investment grade and on stable outlook based on external credit ratings from at least two of the leading global credit rating agencies, when available, or the corresponding equivalent, when not available. Securities rated investment grade, thatagreements with Farmer Mac. Total debt outstanding is those rated Baa3 or higher by Moody’s or BBB- or higher by S&P or BBB- or higher by Fitch, are generally considered
by the rating agencies to be of lower credit risk than non-investment grade securities. We have the positive intent and ability to hold these securities to maturity. As such, we have classified them as held to maturitypresented on our consolidated balance sheet.
sheets net of unamortized discounts and issuance costs. Our investment portfolio is unencumberedcollateral pledging requirements are based, however, on the face amount of secured outstanding debt, which excludes net unamortized discounts and structured so that securities have active secondary or resale markets under normal market conditions. The objectiveissuance costs. However, as discussed below, we typically maintain pledged collateral in excess of the portfoliorequired percentage. Under the provisions of our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements, the excess collateral that we are allowed to pledge cannot exceed 150% of the outstanding borrowings under our collateral trust bond indentures, the Guaranteed Underwriter Program or the Farmer Mac note purchase agreements.
Table 26 displays the collateral coverage ratios pursuant to these secured borrowing agreements as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 26: Collateral Pledged
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Requirement Coverage Ratios | | Actual Coverage Ratios(1) |
| | Minimum Debt Indentures | | Maximum Committed Bank Revolving Line of Credit Agreements | | May 31, |
| | | | 2022 | | 2021 |
Secured borrowing agreement type: | | | | | | | | |
Collateral trust bonds 1994 indenture | | 100 | % | | 150 | % | | 118 | % | | 116 | % |
Collateral trust bonds 2007 indenture | | 100 | | | 150 | | | 123 | | | 115 | |
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 100 | | | 150 | | | 113 | | | 114 | |
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 100 | | | 150 | | | 111 | | | 116 | |
Clean Renewable Energy Bonds Series 2009A(2) | | 100 | | | 150 | | | 128 | | | 120 | |
____________________________
(1)Calculated based on the amount of collateral pledged divided by the face amount of outstanding secured debt.
(2)Collateral includes cash pledged.
Table 27 displays the unpaid principal balance of loans pledged for secured debt, the excess collateral pledged and unencumbered loans as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
Table 27: Loans—Unencumbered Loans
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | $ | 30,051,354 | | $ | 28,415,107 |
Less: Loans required pledged under secured debt agreements(2) | | (16,300,618) | | (16,704,335) |
Loans pledged in excess of required amount(2)(3) | | (2,761,335) | | (2,448,424) |
Total pledged loans | | $ | (19,061,953) | | $ | (19,152,759) |
Unencumbered loans | | $ | 10,989,401 | | $ | 9,262,348 |
Unencumbered loans as a percentage of total loans outstanding | | 37 | % | | 33 | % |
____________________________
(1)Represents the unpaid principal balance of loans as of the end of each period. Excludes unamortized deferred loan origination costs of $12 million as of both May 31, 2022 and 2021.
(2)Reflects unpaid principal balance of pledged loans.
(3)Excludes cash collateral pledged to secure debt. If there is an event of default under most of our indentures, we can only withdraw the excess collateral
if we substitute cash or permitted investments of equal value.
As displayed above in Table 27, we had excess loans pledged as collateral totaling $2,761 million and $2,448 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. We typically pledge loans in excess of the required amount for the following reasons: (i) our distribution and power supply loans are typically amortizing loans that require scheduled principal payments over the life of the loan, whereas the debt securities issued under secured indentures and agreements typically have bullet maturities; (ii) distribution and power supply borrowers have the option to achieve returns commensurate with the levelprepay their loans; and (iii) individual loans may become ineligible for various reasons, some of risk assumed subject to CFC’s investment policy and guidelines and liquidity requirements.which may be temporary.
We provide additional information on our investment securitiesborrowings, including the maturity profile, below in “Liquidity Risk” and additional information on pledged loans in “Note 3—4—Loans” in this Report. For additional detail on each of our debt product types, refer to “Note 6—Short-Term Borrowings,” “Note 7—Long-Term Debt,” “Note 8—Subordinated Deferrable Debt” and “Note 9—Members’ Subordinated Certificates” in this Report.
Secured Borrowing Agreements—Pledged Investment Securities.”Securities
Projected Near-Term Sources and Uses of Liquidity
As discussed above in this section, we have master repurchase agreements with counterparties whereby we may sell investment-grade corporate debt securities from our primary sourcesinvestment securities portfolio subject to an obligation to repurchase the same or similar securities at an agreed-upon price and date. We had no borrowings under repurchase transactions outstanding as of liquidity include cash flows from operations, member loan repayments, committed bank revolving linesMay 31, 2022; therefore, we had no debt securities in our investment portfolio pledged as collateral as of credit, committed loan facilities,May 31, 2022. We had short-term borrowings under repurchase transactions of $200 million as of May 31, 2021. The debt securities underlying these transactions had an aggregate fair value of $211 million and funds fromwe repurchased the issuance of long-term and subordinated debt. Our primary uses of liquidity include loan advances to members, principal and interest paymentssecurities on borrowings, periodic settlement payments related to derivative contracts, and operating expenses.June 2, 2021.
Member Loan Repayments
Table 33 below28 displays our projected sourcesfuture scheduled loan principal payment amounts, by member class and uses of cash from debt and investment activity, by quarter, over the next six quarters through the quarter ended November 30, 2020. Our projected liquidity position reflects our current plan to expand our investment portfolio. Our assumptions also include the following: (i) the estimated issuance of long-term debt, including collateral trust bonds and private placement of term debt, is basedloan type, on maintaining a matched funding position within our loan portfolio with our bank revolving lines of credit serving as a backup liquidity facility for commercial paper and on maintaining outstanding dealer commercial paper at an amount below $1,250 million; (ii) long-term loan scheduled amortization payments represent the scheduled long-term loan payments for loans outstanding as of May 31, 2019, and our current estimate of long-term loan prepayments, which the amount and timing of are subject to change; (iii) other loan repayments and other loan advances primarily relate to line of credit repayments and advances; (iv) long-term debt maturities reflect scheduled maturities of outstanding term debt for the periods presented; and (v) long-term loan advances reflect our current estimate of member demand for loans, the amount and timing of which are subject to change.
Table 33: Projected Sources and Uses of Liquidity from Debt and Investment Activity(1)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Projected Sources of Liquidity | | Projected Uses of Liquidity | | |
(Dollars in millions) | | Long-Term Debt Issuance | | Anticipated Long-Term Loan Repayments(2) | | Other Loan Repayments(3) | | Total Projected Sources of Liquidity | | Long-Term Debt Maturities(4) | | Long-Term Loan Advances | | Other Loan Advances(5) | | Total Projected Uses of Liquidity | | Other Sources/ (Uses) of Liquidity(6) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1Q FY 2020 | | $ | 230 |
| | $ | 384 |
| | $ | 194 |
| | $ | 808 |
| | $ | 301 |
| | $ | 548 |
| | $ | 140 |
| | $ | 989 |
| | $ | 108 |
|
2Q FY 2020 | | 690 |
| | 299 |
| | 99 |
| | 1,088 |
| | 773 |
| | 393 |
| | 5 |
| | 1,171 |
| | 29 |
|
3Q FY 2020 | | 890 |
| | 307 |
| | 76 |
| | 1,273 |
| | 650 |
| | 468 |
| | — |
| | 1,118 |
| | (183 | ) |
4Q FY 2020 | | 90 |
| | 311 |
| | 9 |
| | 410 |
| | 161 |
| | 210 |
| | — |
| | 371 |
| | (129 | ) |
1Q FY 2021 | | 490 |
| | 312 |
| | — |
| | 802 |
| | 499 |
| | 316 |
| | — |
| | 815 |
| | 5 |
|
2Q FY 2021 | | 740 |
| | 309 |
| | — |
| | 1,049 |
| | 491 |
| | 302 |
| | — |
| | 793 |
| | (275 | ) |
Total | | $ | 3,130 |
| | $ | 1,922 |
| | $ | 378 |
| | $ | 5,430 |
| | $ | 2,875 |
| | $ | 2,237 |
| | $ | 145 |
| | $ | 5,257 |
| | $ | (445 | ) |
____________________________
(1)The dates presented represent the end of each quarterly period through the quarter ended November 30, 2020.
(2) Anticipated long-term loan repayments include scheduled long-term loan amortizations, anticipated cash repayments at repricing date and sales.
(3)Other loan repayments include anticipated short-term loan repayments.
(4)Long-term debt maturities also include medium-term notes with an original maturity of2022, disaggregated by amounts due (i) in one year or lessless; (ii) after one year up to five years; (iii) after five years up to 15 years; and expected early redemptions(iv) after 15 years.
Table 28: Loans—Maturities of debt.Scheduled Principal Payments
(5) Other loan advances include anticipated short-term loan advances. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2022 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Due ≤ 1 Year | | Due > 1 Year Up to 5 Years | | Due > 5 Years Up to 15 Years | | Due After 15 Years | | Total |
Member class: | | | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 2,197,517 | | | $ | 4,837,933 | | | $ | 9,667,194 | | | $ | 7,141,598 | | | $ | 23,844,242 | |
Power supply | | 465,457 | | | 1,183,547 | | | 1,844,234 | | | 1,408,532 | | | 4,901,770 | |
Statewide and associate | | 26,984 | | | 67,549 | | | 15,632 | | | 16,698 | | | 126,863 | |
Total CFC | | 2,689,958 | | | 6,089,029 | | | 11,527,060 | | | 8,566,828 | | | 28,872,875 | |
NCSC | | 89,058 | | | 266,286 | | | 273,871 | | | 81,663 | | | 710,878 | |
RTFC | | 54,682 | | | 219,239 | | | 193,680 | | | — | | | 467,601 | |
Total loans outstanding | | $ | 2,833,698 | | | $ | 6,574,554 | | | $ | 11,994,611 | | | $ | 8,648,491 | | | $ | 30,051,354 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | | | |
Fixed rate | | $ | 1,461,284 | | | $ | 5,441,363 | | | $ | 11,720,034 | | | $ | 8,329,691 | | | $ | 26,952,372 | |
Variable rate | | 1,372,414 | | | 1,133,191 | | | 274,577 | | | 318,800 | | | 3,098,982 | |
Total loans outstanding | | $ | 2,833,698 | | | $ | 6,574,554 | | | $ | 11,994,611 | | | $ | 8,648,491 | | | $ | 30,051,354 | |
(6) Includes net increase or decrease to dealer commercial paper, and purchases and maturity of investments.
As displayed in Table 33, we currently project long-term advances of $1,619 million over the next 12 months, which we anticipate will exceed anticipated loan repayments over the same period of $1,301 million by approximately $318 million. The estimates presented above are developed at a particular point in time based on our expected future business growth and funding. Our actual results and future estimates may vary, perhaps significantly, from the current projections, as a result of changes in market conditions, management actions or other factors.75
Contractual Obligations
Our contractual obligations affect both our short- and long-term liquidity needs. Table 34 displays aggregated information about the listed categories of ourOur most significant contractual obligations as of May 31, 2019. The table provides informationinclude scheduled payments on the contractual maturity profile of our debt securities basedobligations. Table 29 displays scheduled amounts due on our debt obligations in each of the next five fiscal years and thereafter. The amounts presented reflect undiscounted future cash payment amounts due pursuant to these obligations, aggregated by the type of contractual obligation. The table excludes certain obligations where the obligation is short-term, such as trade payables, or where the amount is not fixed and determinable, such as derivatives subject to valuation based on market factors. The timing of actual future payments may differ from those presented due to a number of factors, such as discretionary debt redemptions or changes in interest rates that may impact our expected future cash interest payments.
Table 34:29: Contractual Obligations(1) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Fiscal Year Ended May 31, | |
(Dollars in millions) | | 2020 | | 2021 | | 2022 | | 2023 | | 2024 | | Thereafter | | Total | (Dollars in millions) | | 2023 | | 2024 | | 2025 | | 2026 | | 2027 | | Thereafter | | Total |
Short-term borrowings | | $ | 3,608 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 3,608 |
| Short-term borrowings | | $ | 4,981 | | | $ | — | | | $ | — | | | $ | — | | | $ | — | | | $ | — | | | $ | 4,981 | |
Long-term debt | | 1,638 |
| | 1,827 |
| | 1,925 |
| | 1,171 |
| | 1,076 |
| | 11,574 |
| | 19,211 |
| Long-term debt | | 1,896 | | | 2,144 | | | 2,212 | | | 2,420 | | | 1,602 | | | 11,543 | | | 21,817 | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 986 |
| | 986 |
| Subordinated deferrable debt | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | 1,000 | | | 1,000 | |
Members’ subordinated certificates(2) | | 9 |
|
| 42 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 16 |
|
| 1,251 |
| | 1,357 |
| Members’ subordinated certificates(2) | | 17 | | | 8 | | | 8 | | | 54 | | | 9 | | | 1,138 | | | 1,234 | |
Total long-term and subordinated debt | | 1,647 |
| | 1,869 |
| | 1,940 |
| | 1,195 |
| | 1,092 |
| | 13,811 |
| | 21,554 |
| Total long-term and subordinated debt | | 1,913 | | | 2,152 | | | 2,220 | | | 2,474 | | | 1,611 | | | 13,681 | | | 24,051 | |
Contractual interest on long-term debt(3) | | 703 |
| | 657 |
| | 606 |
| | 558 |
| | 530 |
| | 6,415 |
| | 9,469 |
| Contractual interest on long-term debt(3) | | 674 | | | 638 | | | 601 | | | 540 | | | 486 | | | 5,312 | | | 8,251 | |
Total specified contractual obligations | | $ | 5,958 |
|
| $ | 2,526 |
|
| $ | 2,546 |
|
| $ | 1,753 |
|
| $ | 1,622 |
|
| $ | 20,226 |
|
| $ | 34,631 |
| |
Total | | Total | | $ | 7,568 | | | $ | 2,790 | | | $ | 2,821 | | | $ | 3,014 | | | $ | 2,097 | | | $ | 18,993 | | | $ | 37,283 | |
____________________________
(1)Callable debt is included in this table at its contractual maturity.
(2)Excludes $0.05 million in subscribed and unissued member subordinated certificates for which a payment has been received, but no certificate has been issued. Amortizing member(2 Member loan subordinated certificates totaling $254$175 million are amortizing annually based on the unpaid principal balance of the related loan. Amortization payments on these certificates totaled $17$12 million in fiscal year 20192022 and represented 7% of amortizing loan subordinated certificates outstanding.
(3) Represents the amounts of future interest payments on long-term and subordinated debt outstanding as of May 31, 2019,2022, based on the contractual terms of the securities. These amounts were determined based on certain assumptions, including that variable-rate debt continues to accrue interest at the contractual rates in effect as of May 31, 20192022 until maturity, and redeemable debt continues to accrue interest until its contractual maturity.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
In the ordinary course of business, we engage in financial transactions that are not presented on our consolidated balance sheets, or may be recorded on our consolidated balance sheets in amounts that are different from the full contract or notional amount of the transaction. Our off-balance sheet arrangements consist primarily of unadvanced loan commitments intended to meet the financial needs of our members and guarantees of member obligations, which may affect our liquidity and funding requirements based on the likelihood that borrowers will advance funds under the loan commitments or we will be required to perform under the guarantee obligations. We provide information on our unadvanced loan commitments in “Note 4—Loans” and information on our guarantee obligations in “Note 13—Guarantees.”
Projected Near-Term Sources and Uses of Funds
Table 30 below displays a projection of our primary sources and uses of funds, by quarter, over each of the next six fiscal quarters through the quarter ending November 30, 2023. Our projection is based on the following, which includes several assumptions: (i) the estimated issuance of long-term debt, including collateral trust bonds and private placement of term debt, is based on our market-risk management goal of minimizing the mismatch between the cash flows from our financial assets and our financial liabilities; (ii) amounts available under our committed bank revolving lines of credit are intended to serve as a backup source of liquidity; (iii) long-term loan scheduled amortization repayment amounts represent scheduled loan principal payments for long-term loans outstanding as of May 31, 2022, plus estimated prepayment amounts on long-term loans; (iv) amounts reported in Table30 as “other loan repayments” and “other loan advances” are primarily attributable to expected repayments and advances under lines of credit; (v) long-term and subordinated debt maturities consist of both scheduled principal maturity and amortization amounts and projected principal maturity and amortization
amounts on term debt outstanding in each period presented; and (vi) long-term loan advances are based on our current projection of member demand for loans.
Table 30: Liquidity—Projected Sources and Uses of Funds(1)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Projected Sources of Funds | | Projected Uses of Funds | | |
(Dollars in millions) | | Long-Term Debt Issuance | | Anticipated Long-Term Loan Repayments(2) | | Other Loan Repayments(3) | | Total Projected Sources of Funds | | Long-Term and Subordinated Debt Maturities(4) | | Long-Term Loan Advances | | Other Loan Advances(5) | | Total Projected Uses of Funds | | Other Sources/ (Uses) of Funds(6) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1Q FY 2023 | | $ | 499 | | | $ | 383 | | | $ | 126 | | | $ | 1,008 | | | $ | 509 | | | $ | 822 | | | $ | 34 | | | $ | 1,365 | | | $ | 307 | |
2Q FY 2023 | | 794 | | | 363 | | | 15 | | | 1,172 | | | 807 | | | 623 | | | 39 | | | 1,469 | | | 230 | |
3Q FY 2023 | | 1,423 | | | 364 | | | 29 | | | 1,816 | | | 870 | | | 712 | | | 21 | | | 1,603 | | | (262) | |
4Q FY 2023 | | 76 | | | 369 | | | 14 | | | 459 | | | 270 | | | 472 | | | 17 | | | 759 | | | 229 | |
1Q FY 2024 | | 488 | | | 368 | | | — | | | 856 | | | 606 | | | 618 | | | — | | | 1,224 | | | 370 | |
2Q FY 2024 | | 644 | | | 356 | | | — | | | 1,000 | | | 731 | | | 605 | | | — | | | 1,336 | | | 266 | |
Total | | $ | 3,924 | | | $ | 2,203 | | | $ | 184 | | | $ | 6,311 | | | $ | 3,793 | | | $ | 3,852 | | | $ | 111 | | | $ | 7,756 | | | $ | 1,140 | |
____________________________
(1) The dates presented represent the end of each quarterly period through the quarter ended November 30, 2023.
(2) Anticipated long-term loan repayments include scheduled long-term loan amortizations, anticipated cash repayments at repricing date and loan sales.
(3)Other loan repayments include anticipated short-term loan repayments.
(4)Long-term debt maturities also include medium-term notes with an original maturity of one year or less and expected early redemptions of debt.
(5)Other loan advances include anticipated short-term loan advances.
(6) Includes net increase or decrease to dealer commercial paper, member commercial paper and select notes, and purchases and maturity of investments.
As displayed in Table 30, we currently project long-term advances of $2,629 million over the next 12 months, which we project will exceed anticipated long-term loan repayments over the same period of $1,479 million, resulting in net loan growth of approximately $1,150 million over the next 12 months.
The estimates presented above are developed at a particular point in time based on our expected future business growth and funding. Our actual results and future estimates may vary, perhaps significantly, from the current projections, as a result of changes in market conditions, management actions or other factors.
Credit Ratings
Our funding and liquidity, borrowing capacity, ability to access capital markets and other sources of funds and the cost of these funds are partially dependent on our credit ratings. Rating agencies base their
On December 13, 2021, S&P affirmed CFC’s credit ratings and stable outlook under its revised criteria and updated methodology for rating financial institutions published on numerous factors, including liquidity, capital adequacy, industry position, member support, management, asset quality, qualityDecember 9, 2021. On December 16, 2021, Moody’s affirmed CFC’s credit ratings and stable outlook.On February 4, 2022, Fitch issued a credit ratings report review of earningsCFC in which Fitch affirmed CFC’s credit ratings and the probability of systemic support. Significant changes in these factors could result in different ratings. stable outlook.
Table 3531 displays our credit ratings as of May 31, 2019. Moody's, S&P and Fitch affirmed our ratings and outlook during the third quarter of fiscal year 2019. Our credit ratings as of May 31, 2019 are2022, which remain unchanged from May 31, 2018, and as of the date of the filing of this Report.
Table 35:31: Credit Ratings
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 20192022 |
CFC debt product type and outlook: | | Moody’s | | S&P | | Fitch |
Long-term issuer credit rating(1) | | A2 | | AA- | | A |
Senior secured debt(2) | | A1 | | AA- | | A+ |
Senior unsecured debt(3) | | A2 | | AA- | | A |
Subordinated debt | | A3 | | BBB+BBB | | BBB+ |
Commercial paper | | P-1 | | A-1A-2 | | F1 |
Outlook | | Stable | | Stable | | Stable |
___________________________
(1)Based on our senior unsecured debt rating.
(2)Applies to our collateral trust bonds.
(3)Applies to our medium-term notes.
In order to access the commercial paper markets at attractive rates, we believe we need to maintain our current commercial paper credit ratings of P-1 by Moody’s, A-1 by S&P and F1 by Fitch. In addition, the notes payable to the Federal Financing Bank and guaranteed by RUS under the Guaranteed Underwriter Program contain a provision that if during any portion of the fiscal year, our senior secured credit ratings do not have at least two of the following ratings: (i) A3 or higher from Moody’s, (ii) A- or higher from S&P, (iii) A- or higher from Fitch, or (iv) an equivalent rating from a successor rating agency to any of the above rating agencies, we may not make cash patronage capital distributions in excess of 5% of total patronage capital. See “Credit Risk—Counterparty Credit Risk—Credit Risk-Related Contingent Features” above for information on credit rating provisions related to our derivative contracts.
Financial Ratios
Our debt-to-equity ratio increaseddecreased to 19.80-to-113.59 as of May 31, 2019,2022, from 16.72-to-120.17 as of May 31, 2018,2021, primarily due to an increase in equity from our reported net income of $799 million for fiscal year 2022, which was partially offset by a decrease in equity attributable to the CFC Board of Directors’ authorized patronage capital retirement in July 2021 of $58 million.
While our goal is to maintain an adjusted debt-to-equity ratio of approximately 6.00-to-1, the adjusted debt-to-equity ratio of 6.24 and 6.15 as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, was above our targeted goal due to increased borrowings to fund the loan growth in our loan portfolio and a decrease in equity resulting from our reported net loss of $151 million for fiscal year 2019 and the patronage capital retirement of $48 million in August 2018.portfolio.
Our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio decreased to 5.73-to-1 as of May 31, 2019, from 6.18-to-1 as of May 31, 2018, primarily attributable to an increase in adjusted equity resulting from the issuance of $250 million of subordinated deferrable debt in the forth quarter of fiscal year 2019.
We provide a reconciliation of our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio to the most comparable GAAP measure and an explanation of the adjustments below in “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
Debt Covenants
As part of our short-term and long-term borrowing arrangements, we are subject to various financial and operational covenants. If we fail to maintain specified financial ratios, such failure could constitute a default by CFC of certain debt covenants under our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements and senior debt indentures. We were in compliance with all covenants and conditions under our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements and senior debt indentures as of May 31, 2019.2022.
As discussed above in “Introduction” and “Item 6—“Summary of Selected Financial Data,” the financial covenants set forth in our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements and senior debt indentures are based on adjusted financial measures, including adjusted TIER. We provide a reconciliation of adjusted TIER and other non-GAAP measures disclosed in this Report to the most comparable U.S. GAAP measures and an explanation of the adjustments below in “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
Covenants—Committed Bank Revolving Line of Credit Agreements
Table 36 presents the required and actual financial ratios under our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements as of or for the years ended May 31, 2019 and 2018. We were required to meet the minimum adjusted TIER ratio of 1.05 in fiscal year 2019 in order to retire patronage capital to our members.
Table 36: Financial Covenant Ratios Under Committed Bank Revolving Lines of Credit Agreements(1)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | Actual |
| | | | May 31, |
| | Requirement | | 2019 | | 2018 |
Financial covenant ratios: | | | | | | |
Minimum average adjusted TIER over the six most recent fiscal quarters(1) | | 1.025 |
| | 1.19 | | 1.17 |
Minimum adjusted TIER for the most recent fiscal year | | 1.05 |
| | 1.19 | | 1.17 |
Maximum ratio of adjusted senior debt to total equity | | 10.00 |
| | 5.52 | | 5.92 |
____________________________
(1)Adjusted TIER is calculated based on adjusted net income (loss) plus adjusted interest expense for the period, divided by adjusted interest expense for the period. In addition to the adjustments made to the leverage ratio set forth under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures,” adjusted senior debt excludes guarantees to member systems that have certain investment-grade credit ratings from Moody’s and S&P.
In addition to the financial covenants, our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements generally prohibit liens on loans to members except for liens pursuant to the following:
under terms of our indentures;
related to taxes that are being contested or are not delinquent;
stemming from certain legal proceedings that are being contested in good faith;
created by CFC to secure guarantees by CFC of indebtedness, the interest on which is excludable from the gross income of the recipient for federal income tax purposes;
granted by any subsidiary to CFC; and
to secure other indebtedness of CFC of up to $10,000 million plus an amount equal to the incremental increase in CFC’s allocated Guaranteed Underwriter Program obligations, provided that the aggregate amount of such indebtedness may not exceed $12,500 million. The amount of our secured indebtedness under this provision for all of our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements was $8,475 million as of May 31, 2019.
Covenants—Debt Indentures
Table 37 presents the required and actual financial ratios as defined under our 1994 collateral trust bonds indenture and our medium-term notes indentures in the U.S. markets as of May 31, 2019 and 2018.
Table 37: Financial Ratios Under Debt Indentures
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | Actual |
| | | | May 31, |
| | Requirement | | 2019 | | 2018 |
Maximum ratio of adjusted senior debt to total equity (1) | | 20.00 | | 6.62 | | 6.53 |
____________________________
(1) The ratio calculation includes the adjustments made to the leverage ratio under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures,” with the exception of the adjustments to exclude the noncash impact of derivative financial instruments and adjustments from total liabilities and total equity.
In addition to the above financial covenant requirement, we are required to pledge collateral pursuant to the provisions of certain of our borrowing agreements. We provide information on collateral pledged or on deposit above under “Consolidated Balance Sheet Analysis—Debt—Collateral Pledged.”
Interest rate risk represents our primary source of market risk. Interestrisk, as interest rate-volatility can have a significant impact on the earnings and overall financial condition of a financial institution. We are exposed to interest rate risk is the risk to current or anticipated earnings or equity arising primarily from movementsthe differences in interest rates. This risk results from differencesthe timing between the timingmaturity or repricing of cash flows on our assetsloans and the liabilities funding those assets. The timing of cash flows of our assets is impacted by re-pricing characteristics, prepaymentsloans. Below we discuss how we manage and contractual maturities. measure interest rate risk.
We discuss thealso provide a status update on actions taken to identify, assess, monitor and mitigate risks related to the uncertainty as to the nature of potential changes or other reforms associated with the expected discontinuance or unavailability of LIBOR and facilitate an orderly transition away from and expected replacement of LIBOR as a benchmark interest reference rate in “Item 1A. Risk Factors.”to an alternative benchmark rate.
Interest Rate Risk Management
Our interest rate risk exposurerisk-management objective is primarily related to prudently manage the fundingtiming of the fixed-rate loan portfolio. Our Asset Liability Committee provides oversight for maintaining our interest rate position within a prescribed policy range using approved strategies. The Asset Liability Committee reviews a completecash flows between interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities in order to mitigate interest rate risk analysis, reviews proposed modifications, if any, to our interest ratein accordance with CFC’s board policy and risk management strategylimits and considers adopting strategy changes. Our Asset Liability Committee monitors interest rate risk and meets quarterly to review and discuss information such as national economic forecasts, federal funds and interest rate forecasts, interest rate gap analysis, our liquidity position, loan and debt maturities, short-term
and long-term funding needs, anticipated loan demands, credit concentration risk, derivative counterparty exposure and financial forecasts. The Asset Liability Committee also discusses the composition of fixed-rate versus variable-rate loans, new funding opportunities, changes to the nature and mix of assets and liabilities for structural mismatches, and interest rate swap transactions.
Matched Funding Objective
Our funding objective is to manage the matched funding of asset and liability repricing terms within a range of adjusted total assets (calculated by excluding derivative assets from total assets) deemed appropriateguidelines established by the Asset Liability Committee based on the current environment and extended outlook for interest rates. We refer(“ALCO”). The ALCO provides oversight of our exposure to the difference between fixed-rate loans scheduled for amortization or repricing and the fixed-rate liabilities and equity funding those loans as our interest rate gap. risk and ensures that our exposure is compliant with established risk limits and guidelines. We seek to generate stable adjusted net interest income on a sustained and long-term basis by minimizing the mismatch between the cash flows from our interest-rate sensitive financial assets and our financial liabilities. We use derivatives as a tool in matching the duration and repricing characteristics of our assets and liabilities, which we discuss above in “Consolidated Results of Operations—Non-Interest Income—Derivative Gains (Losses) and “Note 10—Derivatives and Hedging Activities.”
Interest Rate Risk Assessment
Our primary strategies for managingAsset Liability Management (“ALM”) framework includes the use of analytic tools and capabilities, enabling CFC to generate a comprehensive profile of our interest rate risk includeexposure. We routinely measure and assess our interest rate risk exposure using various methodologies through the use of derivativesALM models that enable us to more accurately measure and limitingmonitor our interest rate risk exposure under multiple interest rate scenarios using several different techniques. Below we present two measures used to assess our interest rate risk exposure: (i) the amountinterest rate sensitivity of fixed-rate assets that can be funded by variable-rate debt to a specified percentage ofprojected net interest income and adjusted total assets based on market conditions.net interest income; and (ii) duration gap.
Interest Rate Sensitivity Analysis
We provideregularly evaluate the sensitivity of our members with many options on loans with regard tointerest-earning assets and the interest-bearing liabilities funding those assets and our net interest rates, the term for which the selectedincome and adjusted net interest income projections under multiple interest rate isscenarios. Each month we update our ALM models to reflect our existing balance sheet position and incorporate different assumptions about forecasted changes in effectour current balance sheet position over the next 12 months. Based on the forecasted balance sheet changes, we generate various projections of net interest income and adjusted net interest income over the abilitynext 12 months. Management reviews and assesses these projections and underlying assumptions to convert or prepayidentify a baseline scenario of projected net interest income and adjusted net interest income over the loan. Long-term loans generally have maturities of up to 35 years. Borrowers may select fixed interest rates for periods of one year through the life of the loan. We do not match fund the majority of our fixed-rate loans with a specific debt issuancenext 12 months, which reflects what management considers, at the time, as the loans are advanced. We fundmost likely scenario. As discussed under “Summary of Selected Financial Data,” we derive adjusted net interest income by adjusting our reported interest expense and net interest income to include the amountimpact of fixed-rate assets that exceed fixed-rate debt and members’ equity with short-term debt, primarily commercial paper.net derivative cash settlements amounts.
Interest Rate Gap Analysis
As part of our asset-liability management, we perform a monthlyOur interest rate gap analysissensitivity analyses take into consideration existing interest rate-sensitive assets and liabilities as of the reported balance sheet date and forecasted changes to the balance sheet over the next 12 months under management’s baseline projection. As discussed in the “Executive Summary—Outlook” section, we currently anticipate net long-term loan growth of $1,150 million over the next 12 months. The yield curve has flattened throughout 2022 and was inverted in late March 2022, as shorter-term rates rose above longer-term rates, attributable to the increase in the target range for the federal funds rate by the FOMC due to increased inflation projections. The consensus market outlook for interest rates as of the second half of June 2022 pointed to rising interest rates across the yield curve, with the yield curve remaining flat or inverted over the remainder of 2022. Based on this yield curve forecast, we anticipate a decrease in our reported net interest income, reported net interest yield and adjusted net interest yield over the next 12 months relative to the prior 12-month period ended May 31, 2022. However, we believe we will experience a slight increase in our adjusted net interest income over the next 12 months relative to the prior 12-month period ended May 31, 2022 based on the yield curve forecast, which we anticipate will reduce our derivative net periodic cash settlements expense and thereby reduce our adjusted cost of borrowings.
Table 32 presents the estimated percentage impact that provides a comparison between the timinghypothetical instantaneous parallel shift of cash flows, by year, for fixed-rate assets scheduled for amortization and repricing and for fixed-rate liabilities and members’ equity maturing. This gap analysis is a useful toolplus or minus 100 basis points in measuring, monitoring and mitigating the interest rate risk inherent in the funding of fixed-rate assets with variable-rate debtyield curve, relative to our base case forecast yield curve, would have on our projected baseline 12-month net interest income and also helpful in assessing liquidity risk.
Table 38 displays the scheduled amortization and repricing of fixed-rate assets and outstanding fixed-rate liabilities and equityadjusted net interest income as of May 31, 2019.2022 and 2021. We exclude variable-rate loans from ourassumed an interest rate gap analysis as we do not consider the interestfloor rate risk on these loans to be significant because they are subject to repricing at least monthly. Loans with variable interest rates accounted for 11% and 10% of our total loan portfolio0% as of May 31, 20192022 and 2018, respectively. Fixed-rate liabilities include debt issued2021, if the hypothetical instantaneous interest rate shift of minus 100 basis points resulted in a negative interest rate. We also present the estimated percentage impact on our projected baseline 12-month net interest income and adjusted net interest income assuming a hypothetical inverted yield curve under which shorter-term rates increase by an instantaneous 150 basis points.
Table 32: Interest Rate Sensitivity Analysis(1)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2022 | | May 31, 2021 |
Estimated Impact(1) | | + 100 Basis Points | | – 100 Basis Points(2) | | +150 Basis Points Inverted | | + 100 Basis Points | | – 100 Basis Points(2) | | +150 Basis Points Inverted |
Net interest income | | (9.76)% | | 9.68% | | (14.25)% | | (6.13)% | | (3.34)% | | (10.67)% |
Derivative cash settlements interest expense | | 10.49% | | (10.49)% | | 7.95% | | 8.12% | | (3.01)% | | 0.38% |
Adjusted net interest income(3) | | 0.74% | | (0.81)% | | (6.31)% | | 1.99% | | (6.35)% | | (10.29)% |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
____________________________
(1)The actual impact on our reported and adjusted net interest income may differ significantly from the sensitivity analysis presented.
(2)Floored at a fixed rate,zero percent interest rate.
(3)We include net periodic derivative cash settlement interest expense amounts as well as variable-rate debt swapped to a fixed rate usingcomponent of interest rate swaps. Fixed-rate debt swapped to a variable rate usingexpense in deriving adjusted net interest rate swaps is excluded fromincome. See the analysis because it is used to match fund our variable-rate loans. With the exception of members’ subordinated certificates, which are generally issued with extended maturities, and commercial paper, our liabilities have average maturities that closely match the repricing terms (but not the maturities) of our fixed-rate loans.
Table 38: Interest Rate Gap Analysis |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(Dollars in millions) | | Prior to 5/31/20 | | Two Years 6/1/20 to 5/31/22 | | Two Years 6/1/22 to 5/31/24 | | Five Years 6/1/24 to 5/31/29 | | 10 Years 6/1/29 to 5/31/39 | | 6/1/39 and Thereafter | | Total |
Asset amortization and repricing | | $ | 1,767 |
| | $ | 3,243 |
| | $ | 2,770 |
| | $ | 5,627 |
| | $ | 7,051 |
| | $ | 3,059 |
| | $ | 23,517 |
|
Liabilities and members’ equity: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Long-term debt (1)(2) | | $ | 1,825 |
| | $ | 3,584 |
| | $ | 2,448 |
| | $ | 6,184 |
| | $ | 4,911 |
| | $ | 1,994 |
| | $ | 20,946 |
|
Subordinated deferrable debt and subordinated certificates(2)(3) | | 14 |
| | 39 |
| | 408 |
| | 604 |
| | 153 |
| | 773 |
| | 1,991 |
|
Members’ equity (4) | | — |
| | 22 |
| | 23 |
| | 102 |
| | 283 |
| | 948 |
| | 1,378 |
|
Total liabilities and members’ equity | | $ | 1,839 |
| | $ | 3,645 |
| | $ | 2,879 |
| | $ | 6,890 |
| | $ | 5,347 |
| | $ | 3,715 |
| | $ | 24,315 |
|
Gap (5) | | $ | (72 | ) | | $ | (402 | ) | | $ | (109 | ) | | $ | (1,263 | ) | | $ | 1,704 |
| | $ | (656 | ) | | $ | (798 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cumulative gap | | (72 | ) | | (474 | ) | | (583 | ) | | (1,846 | ) | | (142 | ) | | (798 | ) | | |
Cumulative gap as a % of total assets | | (0.27 | )% | | (1.75 | )% | | (2.15 | )% | | (6.81 | )% | | (0.52 | )% | | (2.94 | )% | | |
Cumulative gap as a % of adjusted total assets(6) | | (0.27 | ) | | (1.75 | ) | | (2.15 | ) | | (6.82 | ) | | (0.52 | ) | | (2.95 | ) | | |
____________________________
(1)Includes long-term fixed-rate debt and the net impact of our interest rate swaps.
(2)The maturity presented for debt is based on the call date.
(3)Represents the amount of subordinated deferrable debt and subordinated certificates allocated to fund fixed-rate assets.
(4)Represents the portion of members’ equity and loan loss allowance allocated to fund fixed-rate assets. See Table 45: Members’ Equity below undersection “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for a reconciliation of total CFC equitythe non-GAAP measures presented in this Report to members’ equity.the most comparable U.S. GAAP measure.
(5)Calculated based
The changes in the sensitivity measures between May 31, 2022 and 2021 are primarily attributable to changes in the timing, size, and composition of our forecasted balance sheet, as well as changes in current interest rates and forecasted interest rates. As the interest rate sensitivity simulations displayed in Table 32 indicate, we would expect an unfavorable impact on our projected adjusted net interest income over a 12-month horizon as of May 31, 2022, under the amounthypothetical scenario of an instantaneous parallel shift of minus 100 basis points in the interest rate yield curve. We also would expect an unfavorable impact on both our projected net interest income and our adjusted net interest income over a 12-month horizon as of May 31, 2022, under the hypothetical scenario of a further inverted yield curve where shorter-term interest rates increase by an instantaneous 150 basis points.
Duration Gap
The duration gap, which represents the difference between the estimated duration of our interest-earning assets scheduledand the estimated duration of our interest-bearing liabilities, summarizes the extent to which the cashflows for amortizationassets and liabilities are matched over time. We use derivatives in managing the differences in timing between the maturities or repricing of our loans and the debt funding our loans. A positive duration gap indicates that the duration of our interest-earning assets is greater than the duration of our debt and derivatives, and therefore an increased exposure to rising interest rates over the long term. Conversely, a negative duration gap indicates that the duration of our interest-earning assets is less total liabilitiesthan the duration of our debt and members’ equity funding those assets.
(6)Adjusted total assets represents total assets reportedderivatives, and therefore an increased exposure to declining interest rates over the long term. While the duration gap provides a relatively concise and simple measure of the interest rate risk inherent in our consolidated balance sheets less derivative assets.
When the amountsheet as of the cash flows relatedreported date, it does not incorporate projected changes in our consolidated balance sheet.
The duration gap widened to fixed-rate assets scheduled for amortization and repricing exceeds the amountplus 5.29 months as of cash flows related to the fixed-rate debt and equity funding those assets, we refer to the difference, or gap,May 31, 2022, from plus 1.69 months as “warehousing.” When the amountof May 31, 2021. The widening of the cash flows relatedduration gap reflected the funding of long-term fixed-rate loan advances of $2,911 million during the current fiscal year primarily with shorter-duration borrowings. The duration gap of 5.29 months as of May 31, 2022, was within the risk limits and guidelines established by ALCO.
Limitations of Interest Rate Risk Measures
While we believe that the interest income sensitivities and duration gap measures provided are useful tools in assessing our interest rate risk exposure, there are inherent limitations in any methodology used to fixed-rate assets scheduled for amortizationestimate the exposure to changes in market interest rates. These measures should be understood as estimates rather than as precise measurements. The interest rate sensitivity analyses only contemplate certain hypothetical movements in interest rates and repricing is less thanare performed at a particular point in time based on the amount ofexisting balance sheet and, in some cases, expected future business growth and funding mix assumptions. The strategic actions that management may take to manage our balance sheet may differ significantly from our projections, which could cause our actual interest income to differ substantially from the cash flows relatedabove sensitivity analysis. Moreover, as discussed above, we use various other methodologies to the fixed-rate debtmeasure and equity funding those assets, we refer to the gap as “prefunding.” The amount of the gap is an indicationmonitor our interest rate risk under multiple interest rate scenarios, which, together, provide a comprehensive profile of our interest rate risk.
LIBOR Transition
In July 2017, the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”), which regulates the LIBOR index, announced that it intended to stop compelling banks to submit the rates required to calculate LIBOR after December 31, 2021. Following this announcement, the Federal Reserve Board and liquidity risk exposure. Our goalthe Federal Reserve Bank of New York established the Alternative Reference Rates Committee (“ARRC”) which is comprised of private-market participants and ex-officio members representing banking and financial sector regulators. The ARRC has recommended SOFR as the alternative reference rate.
In March 2021, the FCA and the Intercontinental Exchange (“ICE”) Benchmark Administration, the administrator for LIBOR, concurrently confirmed the intention to maintain an unmatched positionstop requiring banks to submit the rates required to calculate LIBOR after December 31, 2021 for one-week and two-month LIBOR and June 30, 2023 for all remaining LIBOR tenors. Pursuant to the announcement, one-week and two-month LIBOR ceased to be published immediately after December 31, 2021, and all remaining USD LIBOR tenors will cease to be published or lose representativeness immediately after June 30, 2023.
We established a cross-functional LIBOR working group that identified CFC’s exposure, assessed the potential risks related to the cash flows for fixed-rate financial assets withintransition from LIBOR to a targeted range of adjusted total assets.
Because the substantial majoritynew index and developed a strategic transition plan. Our transition effort is focused on two objectives: (i) remediation of our existing LIBOR exposures and (ii) transitioning ongoing activities away from LIBOR. The LIBOR working group has been closely monitoring and assessing developments with respect to the LIBOR transition and providing regular reports to our senior management team and the CFC Board of Directors. We have identified all of CFC’s LIBOR-based contracts and financial assets are fixed-rate, amortizing loansinstruments, evaluated the impact of the LIBOR transition on our existing systems, models and these loans are primarily funded with bullet debtprocesses and equity, our interest rate gap analysis typically reflectsupdated all internal systems to accommodate SOFR as a warehouse position. When we are in a warehouse position, we utilize some short-term borrowings to fund the scheduled amortization and repricing of our financial assets. However, we limit the extent to which we fund our long-term, fixed-rate loans with short-term, variable-rate debt because it exposes us to higher interest rate and liquidity risk.new index.
As indicated above in Table 38, we were in a prefunded position of $798 million as of May 31, 2019, rather than our typical warehouse position. The primary factors that resulted in this prefunded position included a reduced level of member investments and our expectation that the yield curve will remain inverted or flat in the near term, which provided an opportunity for us to issue longer-term debt at an attractive coupon rate. We do not expect to maintain a prefunded position as we expect to continue to fund long-term fixed rate loans in the future.
Financial Instruments
Table 39 provides information about33 summarizes our financial instruments, other than derivatives, that are sensitive to changes in interest rates. We provide additional information on our use of derivatives and exposure in “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—Derivative Instruments” and “Note 10—Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities.” All of ouroutstanding LIBOR-indexed financial instruments as of May 31, 2019 were entered into or contracted for purposes other than trading. For debt obligations,2022 that have a contractual maturity date after June 30, 2023. These financial instruments are included in amounts reported on our consolidated balance sheets.
Table 33: LIBOR-Indexed Financial Instruments
| | | | | | | | |
(Dollars in millions) | | May 31, 2022 |
Loans to members, performing | | $ | 402 | |
Investment securities | | 62 | |
Debt | | 1,663 | |
| | |
In addition to the table presents principal cash flowsfinancial instruments presented in Table 33, we have outstanding LIBOR-indexed interest rate swaps and related averageunadvanced loan commitments that have a contractual maturity date after June 30, 2023. The aggregate notional amount of these interest rates by expected maturity datesrate swaps was $7,201 million as of May 31, 2019.
Table 39: Financial Instruments
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | Principal Amortization and Maturities |
| | Outstanding Balance | | Fair Value | | | | Remaining Years |
(Dollars in millions) | | | | 2020 | | 2021 | | 2022 | | 2023 | | 2024 | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Equity securities | | $ | 88 |
| | $ | 88 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 88 |
|
Investment securities, held to maturity | | $ | 565 |
| | $ | 571 |
| | $ | 65 |
| | $ | 103 |
| | $ | 126 |
| | $ | 153 |
| | $ | 93 |
| | $ | 25 |
|
Average rate | | 2.98 | % | | | | 2.08 | % | | 2.87 | % | | 3.00 | % | | 3.01 | % | | 3.61 | % | | 3.10 | % |
Long-term fixed-rate loans (1) | | $ | 23,094 |
| | $ | 22,949 |
| | $ | 1,182 |
| | $ | 1,179 |
| | $ | 1,180 |
| | $ | 1,177 |
| | $ | 1,136 |
| | $ | 17,240 |
|
Average rate | | 4.62 | % | |
|
| | 4.42 | % | | 4.46 | % | | 4.50 | % | | 4.52 | % | | 4.59 | % | | 4.67 | % |
Long-term variable-rate loans | | $ | 1,067 |
| | $ | 1,067 |
| | $ | 72 |
| | $ | 50 |
| | $ | 51 |
| | $ | 43 |
| | $ | 48 |
| | $ | 803 |
|
Average rate | | 4.01 | % | |
|
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Line of credit loans | | $ | 1,745 |
| | $ | 1,745 |
| | $ | 1,745 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
|
Average rate | | 3.78 | % | |
|
| | 3.78 | % | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Liabilities and equity: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Short-term borrowings (2) | | $ | 3,608 |
| | $ | 3,608 |
| | $ | 3,608 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
|
Average rate | | 2.56 | % | |
| | 2.56 | % | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Long-term debt | | $ | 19,211 |
| | $ | 20,147 |
| | $ | 1,638 |
|
| $ | 1,827 |
|
| $ | 1,925 |
|
| $ | 1,171 |
|
| $ | 1,076 |
|
| $ | 11,574 |
|
Average rate | | 3.20 | % | |
|
| | 2.36 | % | | 2.73 | % | | 2.93 | % | | 2.75 | % | | 3.18 | % | | 3.49 | % |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | $ | 986 |
| | $ | 1,005 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 986 |
|
Average rate | | 5.11 | % | |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 5.11 | % |
Members’ subordinated certificates (3) | | $ | 1,357 |
| | $ | 1,357 |
| | $ | 9 |
| | $ | 42 |
| | $ | 15 |
| | $ | 24 |
| | $ | 16 |
| | $ | 1,251 |
|
Average rate | | 4.21 | % | |
| | 2.61 | % | | 3.73 | % | | 2.91 | % | | 3.53 | % | | 2.32 | % | | 4.29 | % |
____________________________
(1)The principal2022, which represented 89% of the total notional amount of fixed-rate loans is the totalour outstanding interest rate swaps of scheduled principal amortizations without consideration for loans that reprice. Includes $12$8,062 million in TDR loans that were on accrual status as of May 31, 2019.
(2) Short-term borrowings consists of commercial paper, select notes, daily liquidity fund notes, bank bid notes and medium-term notes issued with an original maturity of one year or less.
(3) Excludes $0.05 million in subscribed and unissued member subordinated certificates for which a payment has been received, but no certificate has been issued. Amortizing member loan subordinated certificates totaling $254 million are amortizing annually based on the unpaid principal balance2022. The aggregate amount of the related loan. The amortization payments on these certificates totaled $17unadvanced loan commitments was $2,690 million in fiscal year 2019, which represented 7% of amortizing loan subordinated certificates outstanding.
Loan Repricing
Table 40 shows long-term fixed-rate loans outstanding as of May 31, 2019,2022, which will be subjectrepresented 19% of the total unadvanced loan commitments of $14,111 million as of May 31, 2022.
We ceased originating new LIBOR-based loans effective December 31, 2021. We have confirmed CFC’s adherence to the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. 2020 LIBOR Fallbacks Protocol for our derivative instruments. We are also closely monitoring the development of alternative credit-sensitive rates in addition to SOFR such as the Bloomberg Short-Term Bank Yield-Index.
We discuss the risks related to the uncertainty as to the nature of potential changes and other reforms associated with the transition away from and expected replacement of LIBOR as a benchmark interest rate repricing during the next five fiscal years and thereafter (due to principal repayments, amounts subject to interest rate repricing may be lower at the actual time of interest rate repricing).under “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in this Report.
Table 40: Loan Repricing
|
| | | | | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Repricing Amount | | Weighted-Average Interest Rate |
2020 | | $ | 486,294 |
| | 4.48 | % |
2021 | | 422,839 |
| | 4.40 |
|
2022 | | 393,571 |
| | 4.63 |
|
2023 | | 271,478 |
| | 4.83 |
|
2024 | | 218,968 |
| | 4.83 |
|
Thereafter | | 1,284,828 |
| | 5.06 |
|
Total | | $ | 3,077,978 |
| | 4.79 |
|
Operational risk represents the risk of loss resulting from conducting our operations, including, but not limited to, the execution of unauthorized transactions by employees; errors relating to loan documentation, transaction processing and technology; the inability to perfect liens on collateral; breaches of internal control and information systems; and the risk of fraud by employees or persons outside the company. This risk of loss also includes potentialPotential legal actions that could arise as a result of operational deficiencies, noncompliance with covenants in our revolving credit agreements and indentures, employee misconduct or adverse business decisions.decisions are also considered part of operational risk. In the event of a breakdown in internal controls, improper access to or operation of systems or improper employee actions, we could incur financial loss. Operational/businessOperational risk may also includeincludes breaches of our technology and information systems resulting from unauthorized access to confidential information or from internal or external threats, such as cyberattacks. In addition, as we rely on our employees’ depth of knowledge of CFC and its related industries to run our business operations successfully, operational risk includes talent management; thereby, failure to attract, motivate and retain sufficient number of highly skilled and specialized employees could adversely affect our business.
Operational risk is inherent in all business activities. The measurement, assessment and effective management of such risk is important to the achievement of our objectives. Operational risk is a core component of CFC’s Enterprise Risk Management framework and is governed by CFC’s Board of Directors while management oversight of the risk is the responsibility of the Chief Risk Officer. We maintain related risk guidelines and limits, business policies and procedures, employee training, an internal control framework, and a comprehensive business continuity and disaster recovery plan that are intended to provide a sound operational environment. Our business policies and controls have been designed to manage operational risk at appropriate levels given our financial strength, the business environment and markets in which we operate, the nature of our businesses, andwhile also considering factors such as competition and regulation. CorporateCorporate Compliance monitors compliance with established procedures and applicable lawlaws that are designed to ensure adherence to generally accepted conduct, ethics and business practices defined in our corporate policies. We provide employee compliance training programs, including information protection, suspicious activity reportingRegulation FD (“Fair Disclosure”) compliance and operational risk. Internal Audit examines the design and operating effectiveness of our operational, compliance and financial reporting internal controls on an ongoing basis.
Our business continuity and disaster recovery plan is monitored by our Business Technology Services Group and establishes the basic principles and framework necessary to ensure emergency response, resumption, restoration and permanent recovery of CFC’s operations and business activities during a business interruption event. This plan includes a duplication of our operating systems at an offsite facility coupled with an extensive business continuity and recovery process to leverage those remote systems. Each of our departmentsdepartments is requiredrequired to develop, exercise, test and maintain business resumption plans for the recovery of business functions and processing resources to minimize disruption for our members and other parties with whom we do business. We conduct disaster recovery exercises periodically that include both the information technology groupBusiness Technology Services Group and business areas. The business resumption plans are based on a risk assessment that considers potential losses due to unavailability of service versus the cost of resumption. These plans anticipate a variety of probable scenarios ranging from local to regional crises.
As cyber-relatedWe continue to enhance our crisis management framework to provide additional corporate guidance on the management of and response to significant crises that may have an adverse disruptive impact on our business. The crises identified include, but are not limited to, man-made and natural disasters including infectious disease pandemics, technology disruption and workforce issues. The objectives of the enhancements are to ensure, in the event of an identified crisis, we have well-documented plans in place to protect our employees and the work environment, safeguard CFC’s operations, protect CFC’s brand and reputation and minimize the impact of business disruptions. We conducted a business impact analysis for each identified crisis to assess the potential impact on our business operations, financial performance, technology and staff. The results of the business impact analysis have been utilized to develop management action plans that align business priorities, clarify responsibilities and establish processes and procedures that enable us to respond in a timely, proactive manner and take appropriate actions to manage and mitigate the potential disruptive impact of specified crises.
Our cybersecurity risk management efforts are a core component of our overall enterprise risk management framework and CFC’s operational risk oversight. In fiscal year 2022, we continued to add specialized resources dedicated to cybersecurity, which has further strengthened our ability to measure, analyze and action potential risks effectively. CFC’s cybersecurity efforts are an important element of our Business Technology Services Group. Efforts to further develop CFC’s cybersecurity risk management are benchmarked against industry best practice notwithstanding an environment that continues to evolve as new potentials risks emerge. Cyber-related attacks pose a risk to the security of our members’ strategic business information
and the confidentiality and integrity of our data, which includes strategic and proprietary information. Because such an attack could materially affecthave a material adverse impact on our operations, our boardthe CFC Board of directors places particular emphasis onDirectors is actively engaged in the oversight of our continuous efforts in monitoring and managing the risks associated with the ever-evolving nature of cybersecurity risks.threats. Each quarter, or more frequently as requested by the board of directors, management provides reports on CFC’s security operations, including any cybersecurity incidents, management’s efforts to manage any incidents, promptly respond to and resolve such incidents, and any other related information requested from management. On at least an annual basis, the board of directors reviews management reports concerning the disclosure controls and procedures in place to enable CFC to make accurate and timely disclosures about any material cybersecurity events. Additionally, upon the occurrence of a material cybersecurity incident, the board of directors will be notified of the event so it may properly evaluate such incident, including management’s remediation plan.
|
| |
NON-GAAPSELECTED QUARTERLY FINANCIAL MEASURESDATA |
Table 34 provides a summary of condensed quarterly financial information for fiscal years 2022 and 2021.
Table 34: Selected Quarterly Financial Data
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, 2022 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Aug 31, 2021 | | Nov 30, 2021 | | Feb 28, 2022 | | May 31, 2022 | | Total |
Interest income | | $ | 283,268 | | | $ | 283,152 | | | $ | 285,206 | | | $ | 289,617 | | | $ | 1,141,243 | |
Interest expense | | (174,777) | | | (173,596) | | | (173,654) | | | (183,507) | | | (705,534) | |
Net interest income | | 108,491 | | | 109,556 | | | 111,552 | | | 106,110 | | | 435,709 | |
Benefit (provision) for credit losses | | (4,003) | | | 3,400 | | | 12,749 | | | 5,826 | | | 17,972 | |
Net interest income after benefit (provision) for credit losses | | 104,488 | | | 112,956 | | | 124,301 | | | 111,936 | | | 453,681 | |
Non-interest income: | | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative gains (losses) | | (172,163) | | | 46,086 | | | 169,280 | | | 413,279 | | | 456,482 | |
Other non-interest income | | 1,716 | | | 487 | | | (7,351) | | | (7,838) | | | (12,986) | |
Total non-interest income | | (170,447) | | | 46,573 | | | 161,929 | | | 405,441 | | | 443,496 | |
Non-interest expense | | (24,466) | | | (23,526) | | | (23,922) | | | (25,578) | | | (97,492) | |
Income (loss) before income taxes | | (90,425) | | | 136,003 | | | 262,308 | | | 491,799 | | | 799,685 | |
Income tax benefit (provision) | | 93 | | | (274) | | | (343) | | | (624) | | | (1,148) | |
Net income (loss) | | (90,332) | | | 135,729 | | | 261,965 | | | 491,175 | | | 798,537 | |
Less: Net (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests | | 438 | | | (631) | | | (888) | | | (1,611) | | | (2,692) | |
Net income (loss) attributable to CFC | | $ | (89,894) | | | $ | 135,098 | | | $ | 261,077 | | | $ | 489,564 | | | $ | 795,845 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, 2021 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Aug 31, 2020 | | Nov 30, 2020 | | Feb 28, 2021 | | May 31, 2021 | | Total |
Interest income | | $ | 279,584 | | | $ | 276,499 | | | $ | 278,172 | | | $ | 282,346 | | | $ | 1,116,601 | |
Interest expense | | (179,976) | | | (174,422) | | | (173,040) | | | (174,625) | | | (702,063) | |
Net interest income | | 99,608 | | | 102,077 | | | 105,132 | | | 107,721 | | | 414,538 | |
Benefit (provision) for credit losses | | (326) | | | (1,638) | | | (33,023) | | | 6,480 | | | (28,507) | |
Net interest income after benefit (provision) for credit losses | | 99,282 | | | 100,439 | | | 72,109 | | | 114,201 | | | 386,031 | |
Non-interest income: | | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative gains | | 60,276 | | | 81,287 | | | 330,196 | | | 34,542 | | | 506,301 | |
Other non-interest income | | 8,175 | | | 4,971 | | | 1,012 | | | 6,266 | | | 20,424 | |
Total non-interest income | | 68,451 | | | 86,258 | | | 331,208 | | | 40,808 | | | 526,725 | |
Non-interest expense | | (22,995) | | | (25,914) | | | (23,863) | | | (25,008) | | | (97,780) | |
Income before income taxes | | 144,738 | | | 160,783 | | | 379,454 | | | 130,001 | | | 814,976 | |
Income tax provision | | (151) | | | (262) | | | (507) | | | (78) | | | (998) | |
Net income | | 144,587 | | | 160,521 | | | 378,947 | | | 129,923 | | | 813,978 | |
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests | | (171) | | | (505) | | | (1,213) | | | (422) | | | (2,311) | |
Net income attributable to CFC | | $ | 144,416 | | | $ | 160,016 | | | $ | 377,734 | | | $ | 129,501 | | | $ | 811,667 | |
The increase in our reported net income of $361 million to $491 million for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022 from $130 million for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2021, was primarily driven by an increase in derivative gains of $379 million. We recorded derivative gains of $413 million in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022, attributable to increases in interest rates across the entire swap curve during the period. In contrast, we recorded derivative gains of $35 million in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2021, attributable to increases in medium- and longer-term swap interest rates during the period.
In addition, net interest income decreased $2 million, or 1%, to financial measures determined$106 million in accordance with GAAP, management evaluates performance basedthe fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022, attributable to a decrease in the net interest yield. We also experienced an unfavorable shift in other non-interest income of $14 million in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022, primarily attributable to the unfavorable shift in gains and losses recorded on certain non-GAAP measures, which we refer toour investment securities, as “adjusted” measures. a result of period-to-period market fluctuations in fair value.
| | |
NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES |
Below we provide a discussion ofdiscuss each of thesethe non-GAAP adjusted measures and provide a reconciliation of our adjusted measures to the most comparable U.S. GAAP measures in this section.measures. We believe our non-GAAP adjusted metrics,measures, which are not a substitute for U.S. GAAP and may not be consistent with similarly titled non-GAAP measures used by other companies, provide meaningful information and are useful to investors because management usesevaluates performance based on these metrics to comparefor purposes of (i) establishing performance goals; (ii) budgeting and forecasting; (iii) comparing period-to-period operating results, across financial reporting periods, for internal budgetinganalyzing changes in results and forecasting purposes, foridentifying potential trends; and (iv) making compensation decisions and for short- and long-term strategic planning decisions. In addition, certain of the financial covenants in our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements and debt indentures are based on ournon-GAAP adjusted measures.
Statements of Operations Non-GAAP Adjustments
OurOne of our primary performance measures is TIER, which is a measure is TIER.indicating our ability to cover the interest expense requirements on our debt. TIER is calculated by adding the interest expense to net income prior to the cumulative effect of change in accounting principle and dividing that total by the interest expense. TIER is a measure of our ability to cover interest expense requirements on our debt. We adjust the TIER calculation to add the derivative cash settlements expense to the interest expense and to remove the derivative forward value gains (losses) and foreign currency adjustments from total net income. Adding the cash settlements expense back to interest expense also has a corresponding effect on our adjusted net interest income.
We use derivatives to manage interest rate risk on our funding of the loan portfolio. The derivative cash settlements expense represents the amount that we receive from or pay to our counterparties based on the interest rate indexes in our derivatives that do not qualify for hedge accounting. We adjust the reported interest expense to include the derivative cash settlements expense. We use the adjusted cost of funding to set interest rates on loans to our members and believe that the interest expense adjusted to include derivative cash settlements expense represents our total cost of funding for the period. TIER calculated by adding the derivative cash settlements expense to the interest expense reflects management’s perspective on our operations and, therefore, we believe that it represents a useful financial measure for investors.
The derivative forward value gains (losses) and foreign currency adjustments do not represent our cash inflows or outflows during the current period and, therefore, do not affect our current ability to cover our debt service obligations. The derivative forward value gains (losses) included in the derivative gains (losses) line of the statement of operations represents a present value estimate of the future cash inflows or outflows that will be recognized as net cash settlements expense for all periods through the maturity of our derivatives that do not qualify for hedge accounting. We have not issued foreign-denominated debt since 2007, and as of May 31, 20192022 and 2018,2021, there were no foreign currency derivative instruments outstanding.
For operational management and decision-making purposes, we subtract derivative forward value gains (losses) and foreign currency adjustments from our net income when calculating TIER and for other net income presentation purposes. In addition, since the derivative forward value gains (losses) and foreign currency adjustments do not represent current periodcurrent-period cash flows, we do not allocate such funds to our members and, therefore, exclude the derivative forward value gains (losses) and foreign currency adjustments from net income in calculating the amount of net income to be allocated to our members. TIER calculated by excluding the derivative forward value gains (losses) and foreign currency adjustments from net income reflects management’s perspective on our operations and, therefore, we believe that it represents a useful financial measure for investors.
Total equity includes the noncash impact of derivative forward value gains (losses) and foreign currency adjustments recorded in net income. It also includes as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income the impact of changes in the fair value of derivatives designated as cash flow hedges as well as the remaining transition adjustment recorded when we adopted the accounting guidance that required all derivatives be recorded on the balance sheet at fair value. In evaluating our debt-to-equity ratio discussed further below, we make adjustments to equity similar to the adjustments made in calculating TIER. We exclude from total equity the cumulative impact of changes in derivative forward value gains (losses) and foreign currency adjustments and amounts included in accumulated other comprehensive income related to derivatives designated for cash flow hedge accounting and the remaining derivative transition adjustment to derive non-GAAP adjusted equity.
Net Income and Adjusted Net Income
Table 4135 provides a reconciliation of adjusted interest expense, adjusted net interest income, adjusted total revenue and adjusted net income to the comparable U.S. GAAP measures. TheThese adjusted amountsmeasures are used in the calculation of our adjusted net interest yield and adjusted TIER for each fiscal year in the five-year period ended May 31, 2019.2022.
Table 41: Adjusted Financial Measures — Income Statement85
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 | | 2015 |
Interest expense | | $ | (836,209 | ) | | $ | (792,735 | ) | | $ | (741,738 | ) | | $ | (681,850 | ) | | $ | (635,684 | ) |
Include: Derivative cash settlements expense | | (43,611 | ) | | (74,281 | ) | | (84,478 | ) | | (88,758 | ) | | (82,906 | ) |
Adjusted interest expense | | $ | (879,820 | ) | | $ | (867,016 | ) | | $ | (826,216 | ) | | $ | (770,608 | ) | | $ | (718,590 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Net interest income | | $ | 299,461 |
| | $ | 284,622 |
| | $ | 294,896 |
| | $ | 330,786 |
| | $ | 317,292 |
|
Include: Derivative cash settlements expense | | (43,611 | ) | | (74,281 | ) | | (84,478 | ) | | (88,758 | ) | | (82,906 | ) |
Adjusted net interest income | | $ | 255,850 |
| | $ | 210,341 |
| | $ | 210,418 |
| | $ | 242,028 |
| | $ | 234,386 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Net income (loss) | | $ | (151,210 | ) | | $ | 457,364 |
| | $ | 312,099 |
| | $ | (51,516 | ) | | $ | (18,927 | ) |
Exclude: Derivative forward value gains (losses) | | (319,730 | ) | | 306,002 |
| | 179,381 |
| | (221,083 | ) | | (114,093 | ) |
Adjusted net income | | $ | 168,520 |
| | $ | 151,362 |
| | $ | 132,718 |
| | $ | 169,567 |
| | $ | 95,166 |
|
Table 35: Adjusted Net Income | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 | | 2019 | | 2018 |
Adjusted net interest income: | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | $ | 1,141,243 | | | $ | 1,116,601 | | | $ | 1,151,286 | | | $ | 1,135,670 | | | $ | 1,077,357 | |
Interest expense | | (705,534) | | | (702,063) | | | (821,089) | | | (836,209) | | | (792,735) | |
Include: Derivative cash settlements interest expense(1) | | (101,385) | | | (115,645) | | | (55,873) | | | (43,611) | | | (74,281) | |
Adjusted interest expense | | (806,919) | | | (817,708) | | | (876,962) | | | (879,820) | | | (867,016) | |
Adjusted net interest income | | $ | 334,324 | | | $ | 298,893 | | | $ | 274,324 | | | $ | 255,850 | | | $ | 210,341 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted total revenue: | | | | | | | | | | |
Net interest income | | $ | 435,709 | | | $ | 414,538 | | | $ | 330,197 | | | $ | 299,461 | | | $ | 284,622 | |
Fee and other income | | 17,193 | | | 18,929 | | | 22,961 | | | 15,355 | | | 17,578 | |
Total revenue | | 452,902 | | | 433,467 | | | 353,158 | | | 314,816 | | | 302,200 | |
Include: Derivative cash settlements interest expense(1) | | (101,385) | | | (115,645) | | | (55,873) | | | (43,611) | | | (74,281) | |
Adjusted total revenue | | $ | 351,517 | | | $ | 317,822 | | | $ | 297,285 | | | $ | 271,205 | | | $ | 227,919 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted net income: | | | | | | | | | | |
Net income (loss) | | $ | 798,537 | | | $ | 813,978 | | | $ | (589,430) | | | $ | (151,210) | | | $ | 457,364 | |
Exclude: Derivative forward value gains (losses)(2) | | 557,867 | | | 621,946 | | | (734,278) | | | (319,730) | | | 306,002 | |
Adjusted net income | | $ | 240,670 | | | $ | 192,032 | | | $ | 144,848 | | | $ | 168,520 | | | $ | 151,362 | |
____________________________
(1)Represents the net periodic contractual interest expense amount on our interest rate swaps during the reporting period.
(2)Represents the change in fair value of our interest rate swaps during the reporting period due to changes in expected future interest rates over the remaining life of our derivative contracts.
We primarily fund our loan portfolio through the issuance of debt. However, we use derivatives as economic hedges as part of our strategy to manage the interest rate risk associated with funding our loan portfolio. We therefore consider the cost ofinterest expense incurred on our derivatives to be an inherentpart of our funding cost of funding and hedging our loan portfolio and, therefore, economically similarin addition to the interest expense thaton our debt. As such, we recognize on debt issued for funding. We therefore includeadd net periodic derivative cash settlements interest expense inamounts to our reported interest expense to derive our adjusted interest expense and adjusted net interest income. We exclude the unrealized derivative forward value of derivativesgains and losses from our adjusted total revenue and adjusted net income.
TIER and Adjusted TIER
Table 42 presents36 displays the calculation of our TIER and adjusted TIER for each fiscal year in the five-year period ended May 31, 2019.2022.
Table 42:36: TIER and Adjusted TIER | | | | Year Ended May 31, | | Year Ended May 31, |
| | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 | | 2019 | | 2018 |
TIER (1) | | 0.82 |
|
| 1.58 |
|
| 1.42 |
|
| 0.92 |
|
| 0.97 |
| TIER (1) | | 2.13 | | | 2.16 | | | 0.28 | | | 0.82 | | | 1.58 | |
Adjusted TIER (2) | | 1.19 |
|
| 1.17 |
|
| 1.16 |
|
| 1.22 |
|
| 1.13 |
| Adjusted TIER (2) | | 1.30 | | | 1.23 | | | 1.17 | | | 1.19 | | | 1.17 | |
____________________________
(1) TIER is calculated based on our net income (loss) plus interest expense for the period divided by interest expense for the period.
(2) Adjusted TIER is calculated based on adjusted net income (loss) plus adjusted interest expense for the period divided by adjusted interest expense for the period.
Debt-to-Equity
Liabilities and Equity and Adjusted Debt-to-EquityLiabilities and Equity
Management relies on the adjusted debt-to-equity ratio as a key measure in managing our business. We therefore believe that this adjusted measure, in combination with the comparable U.S. GAAP measure, is useful to investors in evaluating performance.our financial condition. We adjust the comparable U.S. GAAP measure to:
•exclude debt used to fund loans that are guaranteed by RUS from total liabilities;
•exclude from total liabilities, and add to total equity, debt with equity characteristics issued to our members and in the capital markets; and
•exclude the noncash impact of derivative financial instruments and foreign currency adjustments from total liabilities and total equity.
We are an eligible lender under aan RUS loan guarantee program. Loans issued under this program carry the U.S. government’s guarantee of all interest and principal payments. We have little or no risk associated with the collection of principal and interest payments on these loans. Therefore, we believe there is little or no risk related to the repayment of the
liabilities used to fund RUS-guaranteed loans and we subtract such liabilities from total liabilities to calculate our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio.
Members may be required to purchase subordinated certificates as a condition of membership and as a condition to obtaining a loan or guarantee. The subordinated certificates are accounted for as debt under U.S. GAAP. The subordinated certificates have long-dated maturities and pay no interest or pay interest that is below market, and under certain conditions we are prohibited from making interest payments to members on the subordinated certificates. For computing our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio we subtract members’ subordinated certificates from total liabilities and add members’ subordinated certificates to total equity.
We also sell subordinated deferrable debt in the capital markets with maturities of up to 30 years and the option to defer interest payments. The characteristics of subordination, deferrable interest and long-dated maturity are all equity characteristics. In calculating our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio, we subtract subordinated deferrable debt from total liabilities and add it to total equity.
We record derivative instruments at fair value on our consolidated balance sheets. For computing our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio we exclude the noncash impact of our derivative accounting from liabilities and equity. Also, for computing our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio we exclude the impact of foreign currency valuation adjustments from liabilities and equity. The debt-to-equity ratio adjusted to exclude the effect of foreign currency translation reflect management’s perspective on our operations and, therefore, we believe is a useful financial measure for investors.
Table 4337 provides a reconciliation between theour total liabilities and total equity used to calculate the debt-to-equity ratio and the adjusted amounts used in the calculation of our adjusted debt-to-equity ratio as of the end of each fiscal year in the five-year period ended May 31, 2019.2022. As indicated in the following table,Table 37, subordinated debt is treated in the same manner as equity in calculating our adjusted-debt-to-equityadjusted debt-to-equity ratio.
Table 43: Adjusted Financial Measures — Balance Sheet
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 | | 2015 |
Total liabilities | | $ | 25,820,490 |
| | $ | 25,184,351 |
| | $ | 24,106,887 |
| | $ | 23,452,822 |
| | $ | 21,934,273 |
|
Exclude: | | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative liabilities | | 391,724 |
| | 275,932 |
| | 385,337 |
| | 594,820 |
| | 408,382 |
|
Debt used to fund loans guaranteed by RUS | | 153,991 |
| | 160,865 |
| | 167,395 |
| | 173,514 |
| | 179,241 |
|
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,020 |
| | 742,410 |
| | 742,274 |
| | 742,212 |
| | 395,699 |
|
Subordinated certificates | | 1,357,129 |
| | 1,379,982 |
| | 1,419,025 |
| | 1,443,810 |
| | 1,505,420 |
|
Adjusted total liabilities | | $ | 22,931,626 |
| | $ | 22,625,162 |
| | $ | 21,392,856 |
| | $ | 20,498,466 |
| | $ | 19,445,531 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total equity | | $ | 1,303,882 |
| | $ | 1,505,853 |
| | $ | 1,098,805 |
| | $ | 817,378 |
| | $ | 911,786 |
|
Exclude: | | | | | | | | | | |
Prior-year cumulative derivative forward value losses | | (34,974 | ) | | (340,976 | ) | | (520,357 | ) | | (299,274 | ) | | (185,181 | ) |
Current-year derivative forward value gains (losses) | | (319,730 | ) | | 306,002 |
| | 179,381 |
| | (221,083 | ) | | (114,093 | ) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income (1) | | 2,571 |
| | 1,980 |
| | 3,702 |
| | 4,487 |
| | 5,371 |
|
Include: | |
| | | | | | | | |
Subordinated certificates | | 1,357,129 |
| | 1,379,982 |
| | 1,419,025 |
| | 1,443,810 |
| | 1,505,420 |
|
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,020 |
| | 742,410 |
| | 742,274 |
| | 742,212 |
| | 395,699 |
|
Adjusted total equity | | $ | 3,999,164 |
| | $ | 3,661,239 |
| | $ | 3,597,378 |
| | $ | 3,519,270 |
| | $ | 3,106,808 |
|
Table 37: Adjusted Liabilities and Equity____________________________ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 | | 2019 | | 2018 |
Adjusted total liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | |
Total liabilities | | $ | 29,109,413 | | | $ | 28,238,484 | | | $ | 27,508,783 | | | $ | 25,820,490 | | | $ | 25,184,351 | |
Exclude: | | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative liabilities | | 128,282 | | | 584,989 | | | 1,258,459 | | | 391,724 | | | 275,932 | |
Debt used to fund loans guaranteed by RUS | | 131,128 | | | 139,136 | | | 146,764 | | | 153,991 | | | 160,865 | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,518 | | | 986,315 | | | 986,119 | | | 986,020 | | | 742,410 | |
Subordinated certificates | | 1,234,161 | | | 1,254,660 | | | 1,339,618 | | | 1,357,129 | | | 1,379,982 | |
Adjusted total liabilities | | $ | 26,629,324 | | | $ | 25,273,384 | | | $ | 23,777,823 | | | $ | 22,931,626 | | | $ | 22,625,162 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted total equity: | | | | | | | | | | |
Total equity | | $ | 2,141,969 | | | $ | 1,399,879 | | | $ | 648,822 | | | $ | 1,303,882 | | | $ | 1,505,853 | |
Exclude: | | | | | | | | | | |
Prior fiscal year-end cumulative derivative forward value losses(1) | | (467,036) | | | (1,088,982) | | | (354,704) | | | (34,974) | | | (340,976) | |
Year-to-date derivative forward value gains (losses)(1) | | 557,867 | | | 621,946 | | | (734,278) | | | (319,730) | | | 306,002 | |
Period-end cumulative derivative forward value gains (losses)(1) | | 90,831 | | | (467,036) | | | (1,088,982) | | | (354,704) | | | (34,974) | |
AOCI attributable to derivatives(2) | | 1,341 | | | 1,718 | | | 2,130 | | | 2,571 | | | 1,980 | |
Subtotal | | 92,172 | | | (465,318) | | | (1,086,852) | | | (352,133) | | | (32,994) | |
Include: | | | | | | | | | | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,518 | | | 986,315 | | | 986,119 | | | 986,020 | | | 742,410 | |
Subordinated certificates | | 1,234,161 | | | 1,254,660 | | | 1,339,618 | | | 1,357,129 | | | 1,379,982 | |
Subtotal | | 2,220,679 | | | 2,240,975 | | | 2,325,737 | | | 2,343,149 | | | 2,122,392 | |
Adjusted total equity | | $ | 4,270,476 | | | $ | 4,106,172 | | | $ | 4,061,411 | | | $ | 3,999,164 | | | $ | 3,661,239 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
____________________________
(1) Represents consolidated total derivative forward value gains (losses).
(2) Represents the AOCI amount related to derivatives. See “Note 11—Equity” for the additional components of AOCI.
Debt-to-Equity and Adjusted Debt-to-Equity Ratios
Table 4438 displays the calculations of our debt-to-equity and adjusted debt-to-equity ratios as of the end of each fiscal year during the five-year period ended May 31, 2019.2022.
Table 44:38: Debt-to-Equity Ratio and Adjusted Debt-to-Equity Ratio
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 | | 2019 | | 2018 |
Debt-to-equity ratio: | | | | | | | | | | |
Total liabilities | | $ | 29,109,413 | | | $ | 28,238,484 | | | $ | 27,508,783 | | | $ | 25,820,490 | | | $ | 25,184,351 | |
Total equity | | 2,141,969 | | | 1,399,879 | | | 648,822 | | | 1,303,882 | | | 1,505,853 | |
Debt-to-equity ratio (1) | | 13.59 | | | 20.17 | | | 42.40 | | | 19.80 | | | 16.72 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted debt-to-equity ratio: | | | | | | | | | | |
Adjusted total liabilities(2) | | $ | 26,629,324 | | | $ | 25,273,384 | | | $ | 23,777,823 | | | $ | 22,931,626 | | | $ | 22,625,162 | |
Adjusted total equity(2) | | 4,270,476 | | | 4,106,172 | | | 4,061,411 | | | 3,999,164 | | | 3,661,239 | |
Adjusted debt-to-equity ratio (3) | | 6.24 | | | 6.15 | | | 5.85 | | | 5.73 | | | 6.18 | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 | | 2015 |
Debt-to-equity ratio (1) | | 19.80 |
| | 16.72 |
| | 21.94 |
| | 28.69 |
| | 24.06 |
|
Adjusted debt-to-equity ratio (2) | | 5.73 |
| | 6.18 |
| | 5.95 |
| | 5.82 |
| | 6.26 |
|
________________________________________________________
(1) Calculated based on total liabilities as of the end of the periodat period-end divided by total equity asat period-end.
(2)See Table 37 above for details on the calculation of these non-GAAP adjusted measures and the end ofreconciliation to the period.most comparable U.S. GAAP measures.
(2) (3) Calculated based on adjusted total liabilities at period endperiod-end divided by adjusted total equity as of the end of the period.at period-end.
Members’ Equity
Total CFC Equity and Members’ Equity
Members’ equity includesexcludes the noncash impact of derivative forward value gains (losses) and foreign currency adjustments recorded in net income. It also includesincome and amounts recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income. We provide the components of accumulated other comprehensive income in “Note 11—Equity.” Because these amounts generally have not been realized, they are not available to members and are excluded by CFC’sthe CFC Board of Directors in determining the annual allocation of adjusted net income to patronage capital, to the members’ capital reserve and to other member funds.
Table 4539 provides a reconciliation of members’ equity to total CFC equity as of May 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021. We present the components of accumulated other comprehensive income in “Note 11—Equity.”
Table 45:39: Members’ Equity
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 |
Members’ equity: | | | | |
Total CFC equity | | $ | 2,114,573 | | | $ | 1,374,948 | |
Exclude: | | | | |
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | | 2,258 | | | (25) | |
Period-end cumulative derivative forward value gains (losses) attributable to CFC(1) | | 92,363 | | | (461,162) | |
Subtotal | | 94,621 | | | (461,187) | |
Members’ equity | | $ | 2,019,952 | | | $ | 1,836,135 | |
____________________________
(1)Represents period-end cumulative derivative forward value losses for CFC only, as total CFC equity does not include the noncontrolling interests of the variable interest entities NCSC and RTFC, which we are required to consolidate. We report the separate results of operations for CFC in “Note 16—Business Segments.” The period-end cumulative derivative forward value total loss amounts as of May 31, 2022 and 2021 are presented above in Table 37.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 |
Total CFC equity | | $ | 1,276,735 |
| | $ | 1,474,333 |
|
Excludes: | | | | |
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | | (147 | ) | | 8,544 |
|
Current period-end cumulative derivative forward value losses | | (348,965 | ) | | (30,831 | ) |
Subtotal | | (349,112 | ) | | (22,287 | ) |
Members’ equity | | $ | 1,625,847 |
| | $ | 1,496,620 |
|
| |
Item 7A. | Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk |
For quantitative and qualitative disclosures about market risk, see “Item 7. MD&A—Market Risk” and “MD&A—Consolidated Results of Operations—Non-Interest Income—Derivatives Gains (Losses)” and also “Note 10—Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities.”Activities” in this Report.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
| |
Item 8. | Financial Statements and Supplementary Data |
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Directors and Members
National Rural Utilities Cooperative Finance Corporation:
Opinion on the Consolidated Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of National Rural Utilities Cooperative Finance Corporation and subsidiaries (the Company) as of May 31, 20192022 and 2018,2021, the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), changes in equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three‑yearthree-year period ended May 31, 2019,2022, and the related notes (collectively, the consolidated financial statements). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of May 31, 20192022 and 2018,2021, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the years in the three‑yearthree-year period ended May 31, 2019,2022, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
Basis for Opinion
These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on thesethese consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.
Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
Critical Audit Matter
The critical audit matter communicated below is a matter arising from the current period audit of the consolidated financial statements that was communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that: (1) relates to accounts or disclosures that are material to the consolidated financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matter does not alter in any way our opinion on the consolidated financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matter below, providing a separate opinion on the critical audit matter or on the accounts or disclosures to which they relate.
Assessment of the allowance for credit losses of loans evaluated on a collective basis
As discussed in Notes 1 and 5 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company’s allowance for credit losses for loans evaluated on a collective basis (the collective ACL) was $28.9 million as of May 31, 2022. The collective ACL includes the measure of expected credit losses on a collective (pool) basis for those loans that share similar risk characteristics. The Company estimates the collective ACL using a probability of default (PD) and loss given default (LGD) methodology. The Company segments its loan portfolio into pools based on member borrower type, which is based on the utility sector of the borrower, and further by internal borrower risk ratings. The Company then applies
loss factors, consisting of the PD and LGD, to the scheduled loan-level amortization amounts over the life of the loans. Due to a limited history of defaults in the portfolio, the Company utilizes third-party default data tables for the utility sector as a proxy to estimate default rates for each of the pools. Based on the mapping of internal borrower risk rating to equivalent credit rating provided in the third party utility default tables, the Company applies corresponding cumulative default rates to the scheduled loan amortization amounts over the remaining life of loan in each of the pools. For estimation of an LGD the Company utilizes its lifetime historical loss experience for each of the portfolio segments. The Company estimates that, based on historical experience, expected credit losses will not be affected by changes in economic factors and therefore, the Company has not made adjustments to the historical rates for any economic forecasts. The Company considers the need to adjust the historical loss information for differences in the specific characteristics of its existing loan portfolio based on an evaluation of relevant qualitative factors, such as differences in the composition of the loan portfolio, underwriting standards, problem loan trends, the quality of the Company’s credit review functions, the regulatory environment and other pertinent external factors.
We identified the assessment of the collective ACL as a critical audit matter. A high degree of audit effort, including specialized skills and knowledge, and subjective and complex auditor judgment was involved in the assessment of the collective ACL due to significant measurement uncertainty. Specifically, the assessment encompassed the evaluation of the collective ACL methodology, portfolio segmentation, and the method used to estimate the PD and LGD and their significant assumptions, including third-party proxy default data for the utility sector, and borrower risk ratings. The assessment also included an evaluation of the conceptual soundness of the collective ACL methodology. In addition, auditor judgment was required to evaluate the sufficiency of audit evidence obtained.
The following are the primary procedures we performed to address this critical audit matter. We evaluated the design of certain internal controls related to the Company’s measurement of the collective ACL estimate, including controls over the:
•development of the collective ACL methodology
•continued use and appropriateness of the method and significant assumptions used to develop the PD and LGD
•analysis of credit quality trends and ratios.
We evaluated the Company’s process to develop the collective ACL estimate by testing certain sources of data, factors, and assumptions that the Company used, and considered the relevance and reliability of such data, factors, and assumptions. In addition, we involved credit risk professionals with specialized skills and knowledge, who assisted in:
•evaluating the Company’s collective ACL methodology for compliance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
•evaluating the conceptual soundness and the judgments made by the Company relative to the assessment of the PD and LGD by comparing them to relevant Company-specific metrics and trends and the applicable industry and regulatory practices
•determining whether the loan portfolio is segmented by similar risk characteristics by comparing to the Company’s business environment and relevant industry practices
•testing individual borrower risk ratings for a selection of borrowers by evaluating the financial performance of the borrower, sources of repayment, and any relevant guarantees or underlying collateral
•evaluating the appropriateness of mapping an alignment of internal borrower risk ratings to equivalent credit ratings provided in the third-party utility default table.
We also assessed sufficiency of the audit evidence obtained related to the collective ACL estimate by evaluating the:
•cumulative results of the audit procedures
•qualitative aspects of the Company’s accounting practices
•potential bias in the accounting estimates.
/s/ KPMG LLP
We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2013.
McLean, Virginia
July 31, 2019August 8, 2022
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Interest income | | $ | 1,141,243 | | | $ | 1,116,601 | | | $ | 1,151,286 | |
Interest expense | | (705,534) | | | (702,063) | | | (821,089) | |
Net interest income | | 435,709 | | | 414,538 | | | 330,197 | |
Benefit (provision) for credit losses | | 17,972 | | | (28,507) | | | (35,590) | |
Net interest income after benefit (provision) for credit losses | | 453,681 | | | 386,031 | | | 294,607 | |
Non-interest income: | | | | | | |
Fee and other income | | 17,193 | | | 18,929 | | | 22,961 | |
Derivative gains (losses) | | 456,482 | | | 506,301 | | | (790,151) | |
| | | | | | |
Investment securities gains (losses) | | (30,179) | | | 1,495 | | | 9,431 | |
Total non-interest income | | 443,496 | | | 526,725 | | | (757,759) | |
Non-interest expense: | | | | | | |
Salaries and employee benefits | | (51,863) | | | (55,258) | | | (54,522) | |
Other general and administrative expenses | | (43,323) | | | (39,447) | | | (46,645) | |
Losses on early extinguishment of debt | | (754) | | | (1,456) | | | (683) | |
Other non-interest expense | | (1,552) | | | (1,619) | | | (25,588) | |
Total non-interest expense | | (97,492) | | | (97,780) | | | (127,438) | |
Income (loss) before income taxes | | 799,685 | | | 814,976 | | | (590,590) | |
Income tax benefit (provision) | | (1,148) | | | (998) | | | 1,160 | |
Net income (loss) | | 798,537 | | | 813,978 | | | (589,430) | |
Less: Net (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests | | (2,692) | | | (2,311) | | | 4,190 | |
Net income (loss) attributable to CFC | | $ | 795,845 | | | $ | 811,667 | | | $ | (585,240) | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
The accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) |
| 2019 |
| 2018 |
| 2017 |
Interest income | | $ | 1,135,670 |
| | $ | 1,077,357 |
| | $ | 1,036,634 |
|
Interest expense | | (836,209 | ) | | (792,735 | ) | | (741,738 | ) |
Net interest income | | 299,461 |
| | 284,622 |
| | 294,896 |
|
Benefit (provision) for loan losses | | 1,266 |
| | 18,575 |
| | (5,978 | ) |
Net interest income after benefit (provision) for loan losses | | 300,727 |
| | 303,197 |
| | 288,918 |
|
Non-interest income (loss): |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
Fee and other income |
| 15,355 |
|
| 17,578 |
|
| 19,713 |
|
Derivative gains (losses) |
| (363,341 | ) |
| 231,721 |
|
| 94,903 |
|
Results of operations of foreclosed assets |
| — |
|
| — |
|
| (1,749 | ) |
Unrealized losses on equity securities | | (1,799 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
Total non-interest income (loss) |
| (349,785 | ) |
| 249,299 |
|
| 112,867 |
|
Non-interest expense: |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
Salaries and employee benefits |
| (49,824 | ) |
| (51,422 | ) |
| (47,769 | ) |
Other general and administrative expenses |
| (43,342 | ) |
| (39,462 | ) |
| (38,457 | ) |
Gains (losses) on early extinguishment of debt |
| (7,100 | ) |
| — |
|
| 192 |
|
Other non-interest expense |
| (1,675 | ) |
| (1,943 | ) |
| (1,948 | ) |
Total non-interest expense |
| (101,941 | ) |
| (92,827 | ) |
| (87,982 | ) |
Income (loss) before income taxes | | (150,999 | ) | | 459,669 |
| | 313,803 |
|
Income tax expense | | (211 | ) | | (2,305 | ) | | (1,704 | ) |
Net income (loss) | | (151,210 | ) | | 457,364 |
| | 312,099 |
|
Less: Net (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests | | 1,979 |
| | (2,178 | ) | | (2,193 | ) |
Net income (loss) attributable to CFC | | $ | (149,231 | ) | | $ | 455,186 |
| | $ | 309,906 |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements. |
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Net income (loss) | | $ | 798,537 | | | $ | 813,978 | | | $ | (589,430) | |
Other comprehensive income (loss): | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Changes in unrealized gains on derivative cash flow hedges | | 4,028 | | | — | | | — | |
| | | | | | |
Reclassification to earnings of realized gains on derivatives | | (623) | | | (412) | | | (441) | |
Defined benefit plan adjustments | | (1,122) | | | 2,297 | | | (1,322) | |
Other comprehensive income (loss) | | 2,283 | | | 1,885 | | | (1,763) | |
Total comprehensive income (loss) | | 800,820 | | | 815,863 | | | (591,193) | |
Less: Total comprehensive (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests | | (2,692) | | | (2,311) | | | 4,190 | |
Total comprehensive income (loss) attributable to CFC | | $ | 798,128 | | | $ | 813,552 | | | $ | (587,003) | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
The accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 |
Net income (loss) | | $ | (151,210 | ) | | $ | 457,364 |
| | $ | 312,099 |
|
Other comprehensive income (loss): | | |
| | |
| | |
|
Unrealized gains (losses) on equity securities | | — |
| | (3,222 | ) | | 4,614 |
|
Unrealized gains (losses) on cash flow hedges | | 1,059 |
| | (1,059 | ) | | — |
|
Reclassification of losses on foreclosed assets to net income | | — |
| | — |
| | 9,823 |
|
Reclassification of derivative gains to net income | | (468 | ) | | (663 | ) | | (785 | ) |
Defined benefit plan adjustments | | (488 | ) | | 313 |
| | (1,535 | ) |
Other comprehensive income (loss) | | 103 |
| | (4,631 | ) | | 12,117 |
|
Total comprehensive income (loss) | | (151,107 | ) | | 452,733 |
| | 324,216 |
|
Less: Total comprehensive (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests | | 1,979 |
| | (2,178 | ) | | (2,193 | ) |
Total comprehensive income (loss) attributable to CFC | | $ | (149,128 | ) | | $ | 450,555 |
| | $ | 322,023 |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements. |
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 |
Assets: | | | | |
Cash and cash equivalents | | $ | 153,551 | | | $ | 295,063 | |
Restricted cash | | 7,563 | | | 8,298 | |
Total cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash | | 161,114 | | | 303,361 | |
| | | | |
Investment securities: | | | | |
Debt securities trading, at fair value ($— and $210,894 pledged as collateral as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively) | | 566,146 | | | 576,175 | |
Equity securities, at fair value | | 33,758 | | | 35,102 | |
| | | | |
Total investment securities, at fair value | | 599,904 | | | 611,277 | |
Loans to members | | 30,063,386 | | | 28,426,961 | |
Less: Allowance for credit losses | | (67,560) | | | (85,532) | |
Loans to members, net | | 29,995,826 | | | 28,341,429 | |
Accrued interest receivable | | 111,418 | | | 107,856 | |
Other receivables | | 35,431 | | | 37,197 | |
Fixed assets, net | | 101,762 | | | 91,882 | |
Derivative assets | | 222,042 | | | 121,259 | |
Other assets | | 23,885 | | | 24,102 | |
Total assets | | $ | 31,251,382 | | | $ | 29,638,363 | |
| | | | |
Liabilities: | | | | |
Accrued interest payable | | $ | 131,950 | | | $ | 123,672 | |
Debt outstanding: | | | | |
Short-term borrowings | | 4,981,167 | | | 4,582,096 | |
Long-term debt | | 21,545,440 | | | 20,603,123 | |
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,518 | | | 986,315 | |
Members’ subordinated certificates: | | | | |
Membership subordinated certificates | | 628,603 | | | 628,594 | |
Loan and guarantee subordinated certificates | | 365,388 | | | 386,896 | |
Member capital securities | | 240,170 | | | 239,170 | |
Total members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,234,161 | | | 1,254,660 | |
Total debt outstanding | | 28,747,286 | | | 27,426,194 | |
Deferred income | | 44,332 | | | 51,198 | |
Derivative liabilities | | 128,282 | | | 584,989 | |
Other liabilities | | 57,563 | | | 52,431 | |
Total liabilities | | 29,109,413 | | | 28,238,484 | |
| | | | |
Equity: | | | | |
CFC equity: | | | | |
Retained equity | | 2,112,315 | | | 1,374,973 | |
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | | 2,258 | | | (25) | |
Total CFC equity | | 2,114,573 | | | 1,374,948 | |
Noncontrolling interests | | 27,396 | | | 24,931 | |
Total equity | | 2,141,969 | | | 1,399,879 | |
Total liabilities and equity | | $ | 31,251,382 | | | $ | 29,638,363 | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
The accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. |
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 |
Assets: | | | | |
Cash and cash equivalents | | $ | 177,922 |
| | $ | 230,999 |
|
Restricted cash | | 8,282 |
| | 7,825 |
|
Total cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash | | 186,204 |
| | 238,824 |
|
Time deposits | | — |
| | 100,000 |
|
Investment securities: | | | | |
Equity securities | | 87,533 |
| | 89,332 |
|
Debt securities held to maturity, at amortized cost | | 565,444 |
| | 520,519 |
|
Total investment securities | | 652,977 |
| | 609,851 |
|
Loans to members | | 25,916,904 |
| | 25,178,608 |
|
Less: Allowance for loan losses | | (17,535 | ) | | (18,801 | ) |
Loans to members, net | | 25,899,369 |
| | 25,159,807 |
|
Accrued interest receivable | | 133,605 |
| | 127,442 |
|
Other receivables | | 36,712 |
| | 39,220 |
|
Fixed assets, net | | 120,627 |
| | 116,031 |
|
Derivative assets | | 41,179 |
| | 244,526 |
|
Other assets | | 53,699 |
| | 54,503 |
|
Total assets | | $ | 27,124,372 |
| | $ | 26,690,204 |
|
| | | | |
Liabilities: | | | | |
Accrued interest payable | | $ | 158,997 |
| | $ | 149,284 |
|
Debt outstanding: | | | | |
Short-term borrowings | | 3,607,726 |
| | 3,795,910 |
|
Long-term debt | | 19,210,793 |
| | 18,714,960 |
|
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 986,020 |
| | 742,410 |
|
Members’ subordinated certificates: | | |
| | |
|
Membership subordinated certificates | | 630,474 |
| | 630,448 |
|
Loan and guarantee subordinated certificates | | 505,485 |
| | 528,386 |
|
Member capital securities | | 221,170 |
| | 221,148 |
|
Total members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,357,129 |
| | 1,379,982 |
|
Total debt outstanding | | 25,161,668 |
| | 24,633,262 |
|
Deferred income | | 57,989 |
| | 65,922 |
|
Derivative liabilities | | 391,724 |
| | 275,932 |
|
Other liabilities | | 50,112 |
| | 59,951 |
|
Total liabilities | | 25,820,490 |
| | 25,184,351 |
|
| | | | |
Equity: | | | | |
CFC equity: | | |
| | |
|
Retained equity | | 1,276,882 |
| | 1,465,789 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income | | (147 | ) | | 8,544 |
|
Total CFC equity | | 1,276,735 |
| | 1,474,333 |
|
Noncontrolling interests | | 27,147 |
| | 31,520 |
|
Total equity | | 1,303,882 |
| | 1,505,853 |
|
Total liabilities and equity | | $ | 27,124,372 |
| | $ | 26,690,204 |
|
| | | | |
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements. |
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITY
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Membership Fees and Educational Fund | | Patronage Capital Allocated | | Members’ Capital Reserve | | Unallocated Net Income (Loss) | | CFC Retained Equity | | Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) | | Total CFC Equity | | Non-controlling Interests | | Total Equity |
Balance as of May 31, 2019 | | $ | 2,982 | | | $ | 860,578 | | | $ | 759,097 | | | $ | (345,775) | | | $ | 1,276,882 | | | $ | (147) | | | $ | 1,276,735 | | | $ | 27,147 | | | $ | 1,303,882 | |
Net income (loss) | | 1,000 | | | 96,310 | | | 48,223 | | | (730,773) | | | (585,240) | | | — | | | (585,240) | | | (4,190) | | | (589,430) | |
Other comprehensive loss | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | (1,763) | | | (1,763) | | | — | | | (1,763) | |
Patronage capital retirement | | — | | | (62,822) | | | — | | | — | | | (62,822) | | | — | | | (62,822) | | | (1,933) | | | (64,755) | |
Other | | (789) | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | (789) | | | — | | | (789) | | | 1,677 | | | 888 | |
Balance as of May 31, 2020 | | $ | 3,193 | | | $ | 894,066 | | | $ | 807,320 | | | $ | (1,076,548) | | | $ | 628,031 | | | $ | (1,910) | | | $ | 626,121 | | | $ | 22,701 | | | $ | 648,822 | |
Cumulative effect from adoption of new accounting standard | | — | | | — | | | — | | | (3,900) | | | (3,900) | | | — | | | (3,900) | | | — | | | (3,900) | |
Balance as of June 1, 2020 | | 3,193 | | | 894,066 | | | 807,320 | | | (1,080,448) | | | 624,131 | | | (1,910) | | | 622,221 | | | 22,701 | | | 644,922 | |
Net income | | 900 | | | 89,761 | | | 102,429 | | | 618,577 | | | 811,667 | | | — | | | 811,667 | | | 2,311 | | | 813,978 | |
Other comprehensive income | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | 1,885 | | | 1,885 | | | — | | | 1,885 | |
Patronage capital retirement | | — | | | (59,857) | | | — | | | — | | | (59,857) | | | — | | | (59,857) | | | (2,054) | | | (61,911) | |
Other | | (968) | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | (968) | | | — | | | (968) | | | 1,973 | | | 1,005 | |
Balance as of May 31, 2021 | | $ | 3,125 | | | $ | 923,970 | | | $ | 909,749 | | | $ | (461,871) | | | $ | 1,374,973 | | | $ | (25) | | | $ | 1,374,948 | | | $ | 24,931 | | | $ | 1,399,879 | |
Net income | | 1,200 | | | 88,583 | | | 152,537 | | | 553,525 | | | 795,845 | | | — | | | 795,845 | | | 2,692 | | | 798,537 | |
Other comprehensive income | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | 2,283 | | | 2,283 | | | — | | | 2,283 | |
Patronage capital retirement | | — | | | (57,565) | | | — | | | — | | | (57,565) | | | — | | | (57,565) | | | (2,414) | | | (59,979) | |
Other | | (938) | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | (938) | | | — | | | (938) | | | 2,187 | | | 1,249 | |
Balance as of May 31, 2022 | | $ | 3,387 | | | $ | 954,988 | | | $ | 1,062,286 | | | $ | 91,654 | | | $ | 2,112,315 | | | $ | 2,258 | | | $ | 2,114,573 | | | $ | 27,396 | | | $ | 2,141,969 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
The accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Membership Fees and Educational Fund | | Patronage Capital Allocated | | Members’ Capital Reserve | | Unallocated Net Income (Loss) | | CFC Retained Equity | | Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income | | Total CFC Equity | | Non-controlling Interests | | Total Equity |
Balance as of May 31, 2016 | | $ | 2,772 |
| | $ | 713,853 |
| | $ | 587,219 |
| | $ | (513,610 | ) | | $ | 790,234 |
| | $ | 1,058 |
| | $ | 791,292 |
| | $ | 26,086 |
| | $ | 817,378 |
|
Net income | | 1,000 |
| | 90,441 |
| | 43,086 |
| | 175,379 |
| | 309,906 |
| | — |
| | 309,906 |
| | 2,193 |
| | 312,099 |
|
Other comprehensive income | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 12,117 |
| | 12,117 |
| | — |
| | 12,117 |
|
Patronage capital retirement | | — |
| | (42,593 | ) | | — |
| | 103 |
| | (42,490 | ) | | — |
| | (42,490 | ) | | — |
| | (42,490 | ) |
Other | | (872 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (872 | ) | | — |
| | (872 | ) | | 573 |
| | (299 | ) |
Balance as of May 31, 2017 | | $ | 2,900 |
| | $ | 761,701 |
| | $ | 630,305 |
| | $ | (338,128 | ) | | $ | 1,056,778 |
| | $ | 13,175 |
| | $ | 1,069,953 |
| | $ | 28,852 |
| | $ | 1,098,805 |
|
Net income | | 1,000 |
| | 95,012 |
| | 57,480 |
| | 301,694 |
| | 455,186 |
| | — |
| | 455,186 |
| | 2,178 |
| | 457,364 |
|
Other comprehensive loss | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (4,631 | ) | | (4,631 | ) | | — |
| | (4,631 | ) |
Patronage capital retirement | | — |
| | (45,220 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (45,220 | ) | | — |
| | (45,220 | ) | | — |
| | (45,220 | ) |
Other | | (955 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (955 | ) | | — |
| | (955 | ) | | 490 |
| | (465 | ) |
Balance as of May 31, 2018 | | $ | 2,945 |
| | $ | 811,493 |
| | $ | 687,785 |
| | $ | (36,434 | ) | | $ | 1,465,789 |
| | $ | 8,544 |
| | $ | 1,474,333 |
| | $ | 31,520 |
| | $ | 1,505,853 |
|
Cumulative effect from adoption of new accounting standard | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 8,794 |
| | 8,794 |
| | (8,794 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Balance as of June 1, 2018 | | 2,945 |
| | 811,493 |
| | 687,785 |
| | (27,640 | ) | | 1,474,583 |
| | (250 | ) | | 1,474,333 |
| | 31,520 |
| | 1,505,853 |
|
Net income (loss) | | 1,000 |
| | 96,592 |
| | 71,312 |
| | (318,135 | ) | | (149,231 | ) | | — |
| | (149,231 | ) | | (1,979 | ) | | (151,210 | ) |
Other comprehensive income | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 103 |
| | 103 |
| | — |
| | 103 |
|
Patronage capital retirement | | — |
| | (47,507 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (47,507 | ) | | — |
| | (47,507 | ) | | (2,908 | ) | | (50,415 | ) |
Other | | (963 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (963 | ) | | — |
| | (963 | ) | | 514 |
| | (449 | ) |
Balance as of May 31, 2019 | | $ | 2,982 |
| | $ | 860,578 |
| | $ | 759,097 |
| | $ | (345,775 | ) | | $ | 1,276,882 |
| | $ | (147 | ) | | $ | 1,276,735 |
| | $ | 27,147 |
| | $ | 1,303,882 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements. |
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Cash flows from operating activities: | | | | | | |
Net income (loss) | | $ | 798,537 | | | $ | 813,978 | | | $ | (589,430) | |
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: | | | | | | |
Amortization of deferred loan fees | | (8,211) | | | (9,390) | | | (9,309) | |
Amortization of debt issuance costs and discount | | 27,417 | | | 26,967 | | | 24,963 | |
Amortization of guarantee fee | | 18,763 | | | 18,687 | | | 16,927 | |
Depreciation and amortization | | 7,553 | | | 7,959 | | | 9,238 | |
Provision (benefit) for credit losses | | (17,972) | | | 28,507 | | | 35,590 | |
| | | | | | |
Loss on early extinguishment of debt | | 754 | | | 1,456 | | | 683 | |
Fixed assets impairment | | — | | | — | | | 31,284 | |
Gain on sale of land | | — | | | — | | | (7,713) | |
Unrealized (gains) losses on equity and debt securities | | 28,742 | | | (1,015) | | | (5,975) | |
Derivative forward value (gains) losses | | (557,867) | | | (621,946) | | | 734,278 | |
Advances on loans held for sale | | (214,486) | | | (125,500) | | | (151,110) | |
Proceeds from sales of loans held for sale | | 170,686 | | | 125,500 | | | 151,110 | |
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: | | | | | | |
Accrued interest receivable | | (3,562) | | | 9,282 | | | 16,467 | |
Accrued interest payable | | 8,278 | | | (15,947) | | | (19,378) | |
Deferred income | | 1,345 | | | 1,285 | | | 10,973 | |
Other | | (9,184) | | | (19,868) | | | (29,383) | |
Net cash provided by operating activities | | 250,793 | | | 239,955 | | | 219,215 | |
Cash flows from investing activities: | | | | | | |
Advances on loans held for investment, net | | (1,592,447) | | | (1,724,253) | | | (785,190) | |
| | | | | | |
Investments in fixed assets, net | | (17,727) | | | (9,862) | | | (9,565) | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Proceeds from sale of land | | — | | | — | | | 21,268 | |
| | | | | | |
Purchase of trading securities | | (181,545) | | | (397,522) | | | (3,883) | |
Proceeds from sales and maturities of trading securities | | 162,739 | | | 127,875 | | | 277,687 | |
Proceeds from redemption of equity securities | | — | | | 30,000 | | | 25,000 | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Purchases of held-to-maturity debt securities | | — | | | — | | | (76,339) | |
Proceeds from maturities of held-to-maturity debt securities | | — | | | — | | | 69,726 | |
Net cash used in investing activities | | (1,628,980) | | | (1,973,762) | | | (481,296) | |
Cash flows from financing activities: | | | | | | |
Proceeds from (repayments of) short-term borrowings ≤ 90 days, net | | 270,405 | | | 808,252 | | | (208,340) | |
Proceeds from short-term borrowings with original maturity > 90 days | | 2,693,256 | | | 3,081,069 | | | 3,022,910 | |
Repayments of short-term borrowings with original maturity > 90 days | | (2,564,590) | | | (3,269,210) | | | (2,460,311) | |
Payments for issuance costs for revolving bank lines of credit | | (3,563) | | | — | | | (1,025) | |
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt, net of discount and issuance costs | | 3,973,810 | | | 3,055,220 | | | 2,156,711 | |
Payments for retirement of long-term debt | | (3,054,366) | | | (2,186,458) | | | (1,675,288) | |
Payments made for early extinguishment of debt | | (754) | | | (1,456) | | | (683) | |
Payments for issuance costs for subordinated deferrable debt | | — | | | — | | | (84) | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Proceeds from issuance of members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,364 | | | 14,292 | | | 9,621 | |
Payments for retirement of members’ subordinated certificates | | (21,863) | | | (84,659) | | | (24,572) | |
Payments for retirement of patronage capital | | (57,761) | | | (59,889) | | | (63,035) | |
Additions (repayments) for membership fees, net | | 2 | | | (12) | | | (8) | |
| | | | | | |
Net cash provided by financing activities | | 1,235,940 | | | 1,357,149 | | | 755,896 | |
Net increase (decrease) in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash | | (142,247) | | | (376,658) | | | 493,815 | |
Beginning cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash | | 303,361 | | | 680,019 | | | 186,204 | |
Ending cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash | | $ | 161,114 | | | $ | 303,361 | | | $ | 680,019 | |
| | | | | | |
The accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) |
| 2019 |
| 2018 |
| 2017 |
Cash flows from operating activities: |
| |
| |
| |
Net income (loss) | | $ | (151,210 | ) | | $ | 457,364 |
| | $ | 312,099 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: | | | | | | |
Amortization of deferred loan fees | | (10,009 | ) | | (11,296 | ) | | (14,072 | ) |
Amortization of debt issuance costs and deferred charges | | 10,439 |
| | 10,456 |
| | 9,484 |
|
Amortization of discount on long-term debt | | 10,605 |
| | 10,164 |
| | 9,501 |
|
Amortization of issuance costs for bank revolving lines of credit | | 5,324 |
| | 5,346 |
| | 5,531 |
|
Depreciation and amortization | | 9,305 |
| | 7,931 |
| | 7,173 |
|
Provision (benefit) for loan losses | | (1,266 | ) | | (18,575 | ) | | 5,978 |
|
Results of operations of foreclosed assets | | — |
| | — |
| | 1,749 |
|
Loss on early extinguishment of debt | | 7,100 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Unrealized losses on equity securities | | 1,799 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Derivative forward value (gains) losses | | 319,730 |
| | (306,002 | ) | | (179,381 | ) |
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: | | | | | | |
Accrued interest receivable | | (6,163 | ) | | (15,949 | ) | | 1,778 |
|
Accrued interest payable | | 9,713 |
| | 11,808 |
| | 4,480 |
|
Deferred income | | 2,077 |
| | 3,246 |
| | 9,393 |
|
Other | | (10,401 | ) | | 741 |
| | 5,855 |
|
Net cash provided by operating activities | | 197,043 |
| | 155,234 |
| | 179,568 |
|
Cash flows from investing activities: | | | | | | |
Advances on loans, net | | (738,171 | ) | | (811,164 | ) | | (1,145,673 | ) |
Investment in fixed assets | | (14,725 | ) | | (15,194 | ) | | (17,793 | ) |
Net cash proceeds from sale of foreclosed assets | | — |
| | — |
| | 51,042 |
|
Net proceeds from time deposits | | 100,000 |
| | 125,000 |
| | 114,000 |
|
Purchases of held-to-maturity investments | | (80,123 | ) | | (510,598 | ) | | — |
|
Proceeds from maturities of held-to-maturity investments | | 35,340 |
| | 1,394 |
| | — |
|
Net cash used in investing activities | | (697,679 | ) | | (1,210,562 | ) | | (998,424 | ) |
Cash flows from financing activities: | | | | | | |
Proceeds from (repayments of) short-term borrowings, net | | (452,618 | ) | | 126,211 |
| | 409,871 |
|
Proceeds from short-term borrowings with original maturity greater than 90 days | | 1,652,005 |
| | 1,331,910 |
| | 1,003,185 |
|
Repayments of short term-debt with original maturity greater than 90 days | | (1,387,571 | ) | | (1,005,111 | ) | | (1,009,004 | ) |
Payments for issuance costs for revolving bank lines of credit | | (2,382 | ) | | (2,441 | ) | | (2,548 | ) |
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt, net of discount and issuance costs | | 3,281,595 |
| | 2,349,885 |
| | 2,923,868 |
|
Payments for retirement of long-term debt | | (2,806,639 | ) | | (1,611,002 | ) | | (2,460,730 | ) |
Payments made for early extinguishment of debt | | (7,100 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
Payments for issuance costs for subordinated deferrable debt | | (6,535 | ) | | — |
| | (68 | ) |
Proceeds from issuance of subordinated debt | | 250,000 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Proceeds from issuance of members’ subordinated certificates | | 1,986 |
| | 6,136 |
| | 3,626 |
|
Payments for retirement of members’ subordinated certificates | | (24,861 | ) | | (45,180 | ) | | (28,220 | ) |
Payments for retirement of patronage capital | | (49,860 | ) | | (44,667 | ) | | (41,871 | ) |
Repayments for membership fees, net | | (4 | ) | | (10 | ) | | — |
|
Net cash provided by financing activities | | 448,016 |
| | 1,105,731 |
| | 798,109 |
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash | | (52,620 | ) | | 50,403 |
| | (20,747 | ) |
Beginning cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash | | 238,824 |
| | 188,421 |
| | 209,168 |
|
Ending cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash | | $ | 186,204 |
| | $ | 238,824 |
| | $ | 188,421 |
|
| | | | | | |
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements. |
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: | | | | | | |
Cash paid for interest | | $ | 668,276 | | | $ | 687,145 | | | $ | 805,086 | |
Cash paid for income taxes | | 3 | | | 219 | | | 20 | |
| | | | | | |
Noncash financing and investing activities: | | | | | | |
Net decrease in debt service reserve funds/debt service reserve certificates | | $ | — | | | $ | — | | | $ | 2,560 | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
The accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 |
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: | | | | | | |
Cash paid for interest | | $ | 801,966 |
| | $ | 766,059 |
| | $ | 712,742 |
|
Cash paid for income taxes | | 112 |
| | 321 |
| | 407 |
|
Noncash financing and investing activities: | | | | | | |
Loan provided in connection with the sale of foreclosed assets | | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 60,000 |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements. |
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
| |
NOTE 1—SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES |
The Company
National Rural Utilities Cooperative Finance Corporation (“CFC”) is a tax-exempt member-owned cooperative association incorporated under the laws of the District of Columbia in April 1969. CFC’s principal purpose is to provide its members with financing to supplement the loan programs of the Rural Utilities Service (“RUS”) of the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”). CFC makes loans to its rural electric members so they can acquire, construct and operate electric distribution systems, electric generation and transmission (“power supply”) systems and related facilities. CFC also provides its members with credit enhancements in the form of letters of credit and guarantees of debt obligations. As a cooperative, CFC is owned by and exclusively serves its membership, which consists of not-for-profit entities or subsidiaries or affiliates of not-for-profit entities. CFC is exempt from federal income taxes.
National Cooperative Services Corporation (“NCSC”) is a taxable cooperative incorporated in 1981 in the District of Columbia as a member-owned cooperative association. NCSC’s principal purpose is to provide financing to members of CFC, entities eligible to be members of CFC and the for-profit and nonprofit entities that are owned, operated or controlled by or provide significant benefit to certain members of CFC. NCSC’s membership consists of distribution systems, power supply systems and statewide and regional associations that are members of CFC. CFC is the primary source of funding for NCSC and manages NCSC’s business operations under a management agreement that is automatically renewable on an annual basis unless terminated by either party. NCSC pays CFC a fee and, in exchange, CFC reimburses NCSC for loan losses under a guarantee agreement. As a taxable cooperative, NCSC pays income tax based on its reported taxable income and deductions. NCSC is headquartered with CFC in Dulles, Virginia.
Rural Telephone Finance Cooperative (“RTFC”) is a taxable Subchapter T cooperative association originally incorporated in South Dakota in 1987 and reincorporated as a member-owned cooperative association in the District of Columbia in 2005. RTFC’s principal purpose is to provide financing for its rural telecommunications members and their affiliates. RTFC’s membership consists of a combination of not-for-profit and for-profit entities. CFC is the sole lender to and manages the business operations of RTFC through a management agreement that is automatically renewable on an annual basis unless terminated by either party. RTFC pays CFC a fee and, in exchange, CFC reimburses RTFC for loan losses under a guarantee agreement. As permitted under Subchapter T of the Internal Revenue Code, RTFC pays income tax based on its net income, excluding patronage-sourced earnings allocated to its patrons. RTFC is headquartered with CFC in Dulles, Virginia.
Basis of Presentation and Use of Estimates
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordanceconformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”). The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts and related disclosures during the period. Management's most significant estimates and assumptions involve determining the allowance for loan losses andcredit losses. These estimates are based on information available as of the fair valuedate of the consolidated financial assets and liabilities. Actualstatements. While management makes its best judgments, actual amounts or results could differ from these estimates. Certain reclassifications haveand updates have been made to the presentation of information in prior periods to conform to the current period presentation. These reclassifications had no effect on prior years’ net income (loss) or equity.
Other Matters
For the years ended May 31, 2021 and 2020, we made corrections to the consolidated statements of cash flows to present the gross amount of advances on and proceeds from sales of loans held for sale. We concluded that the corrections were not material.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
COVID-19
Although most health and safety restrictions in response to COVID-19 have been lifted, we cannot predict the potential future impact that the COVID-19 pandemic may have on our operations and financial performance, or the specific ways the pandemic may uniquely impact our members. We continue to closely monitor developments, all of which continue to involve significant uncertainties that depend on future developments, which include, among others, the severity and duration of the current COVID-19 resurgence and its impact on the overall economy and other industry sectors; vaccination rates; the longer-term efficacy of vaccinations; and the potential emergence of new, more transmissible or severe variants.
Principles of Consolidation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of CFC, variable interest entities (“VIEs”) where CFC is the primary beneficiary and subsidiary entities created and controlled by CFC to hold foreclosed assets. CFC didhas not have anyhad entities that held foreclosed assets as of May 31, 2019 or May 31, 2018.since fiscal year 2017. All intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated. NCSC and RTFC are VIEs that are required to be consolidated by CFC. Unless stated otherwise, references to “we, “our” or “us” relate to CFC and its consolidated entities.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Variable Interest Entities
A VIE is an entity that has a total equity investment at risk that is not sufficient to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support provided by another party, or where the group of equity holders does not have:have (i) the ability to make decisions about the entity’s activities that most significantly impact its economic performance; (ii) the obligation to absorb the entity’s expected losses; or (iii) the right to receive the entity’s expected residual returns.
NCSC and RTFC meet the definition of variable interest entitiesVIEs because they do not have sufficient equity investment at risk to finance their activities without additional financial support. When evaluating an entity for possible consolidation, we must determine whether or not we have a variable interest in the entity. If it is determined that we do not have a variable interest in the entity, no further analysis is required and we do not consolidate the entity. If we have a variable interest in the entity, we must evaluate whether we are the primary beneficiary based on an assessment of quantitative and qualitative factors. We are considered the primary beneficiary holder if we have a controlling financial interest in the VIE that provides (i) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses of the VIE or the right to receive benefits from the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE. We consolidate the results of NCSC and RTFC with CFC because CFC is the primary beneficiary holder.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash, certificates of deposit due from banks and other investments with original maturities of less than 90 days are classified as cash and cash equivalents.
Restricted Cash
Restricted cash, which consists primarily of member funds held in escrow for certain specifically designed cooperative programs, totaled $8 million as of both May 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021.
Time Deposits
Time deposits are deposits that we make with financial institutions in interest-bearing accounts. These deposits have a maturity of less than one year as of the reporting date and are valued at carrying value, which approximates fair value.
Investment Securities
We currently hold investments inOur investment securities portfolio consists of equity and debt securities. We record purchases and sales of securities on a trade-date basis. The accounting and measurement framework for investment securities differs depending on the security type and the classification.
Our equity securities consist of investments in Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation (“Farmer Mac”) Series A common stock and Farmer Mac Series A, Series B and Series C non-cumulative preferred stock. We previously had investments in equity securities that were classified as available for sale as of May 31, 2018. The unrealized gains and losses on these securities were recorded in other comprehensive income. Effective with our June 1, 2018 adoption of the financial instrument accounting standard on the recognition and measurement of financial assets and financial liabilities, unrealized gains and losses on equity securities are required to be recorded in earnings. Equity securities are carriedreported at fair value on our consolidated balance sheets with unrealized gains and losses recorded as a component of other non-interest income.
Our investment All of our debt securities were classified as HTM consisttrading as of investments in certificates of deposit with maturities greater than 90 days, commercial paper, corporateMay 31, 2022 and 2021. Accordingly, we also report our debt securities commercial mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”) and other asset-backed securities (“ABS”). We currently classify and account forat fair value on our investments in debt securities as held to maturity (“HTM”) because we have the positive intent and ability to hold these securities to maturity. If we acquire debt securities that we may sell prior to maturity in response to changes in our investment strategy, liquidity needs, credit risk mitigating considerations,consolidated balance
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
market risk profile or for other reasons, we would classify such securitiessheets and record unrealized gains and losses as available for sale. We report debt securities classified as HTM on our consolidated balance sheets at amortized cost.a component of non-interest income. Interest income including amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts, is generally recognized over the contractual life of the securities based on the effective yield method.
We regularly evaluate our investment securities whose fair value has declined below the amortized cost to assess whether the decline in fair value is other than temporary. We recognize any other-than-temporary impairment amounts in earnings.
Loans to Members
Loans that management has theWe originate loans to members and classify loans as held for investment or held for sale based on management’s intent and ability to sell or hold the loan for the foreseeable future or until maturity or payoffpayoff. Loans that we have the ability and intent to hold for the foreseeable future are consideredclassified as held for investment. Loans held for investment and are carried atreported based on the outstanding unpaid principal balance, net of unamortizedprincipal charge-offs, and deferred loan origination costs. We classify and account for loans to members as held for investment. Deferred loan origination costs are amortized using the straight-line method, which approximates the effective interest method, into interest income over the life of the loan. Loans that we intend to sell or for which we do not have the ability and intent to hold for the foreseeable future are classified as held for sale and are recorded at the lower of cost or fair value. These loan sales are made at par value, concurrently or within a short period of time with the closing of the loan or participation agreement.
Nonperforming LoansAccrued Interest Receivable
As permitted by the Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 326, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses, the current expected credit loss (“CECL”) model, we elected to continue reporting accrued interest on loans separately on our consolidated balance sheets as a component of the line item accrued interest receivable rather than as a component of loans to members. Accrued interest receivable amounts generally represent three months or less of accrued interest on loans outstanding. Because our policy is to write off past-due accrued interest receivable in a timely manner, we elected not to measure an allowance for credit losses for accrued interest receivable on loans outstanding, which totaled $94 million and $93 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. We also elected to exclude accrued interest receivable from the credit quality disclosures required under CECL.
Interest Income
Interest income on performing loans is accrued and recognized as interest income based on the contractual rate of interest. Loan origination costs and nonrefundable loan fees that meet the definition of loan origination fees are deferred and generally recognized in interest income as yield adjustments over the period to maturity of the loan using the effective interest method.
Troubled Debt Restructurings
A loan modification is considered past duea troubled debt restructuring (“TDR”) if the borrower is experiencing financial difficulties and a fullconcession is granted to the borrower that we would not otherwise consider. Under CECL, we are required to estimate an allowance for lifetime expected credit losses for the loans in our portfolio, including TDR loans. As discussed below under “Allowance for Credit Losses—Loan Portfolio—Asset-Specific Allowance,” TDR loans are evaluated on an individual basis in estimating expected credit losses. Credit losses for anticipated TDRs are accounted for similarly to TDRs and are identified when there is a reasonable expectation that a TDR will be executed with the borrower and when we expect the modification to affect the timing or amount of payments and/or the payment of interest and principal is not received within 30 days of its due date. Loans are classifiedterm.
We generally classify TDR loans as nonperforming when the collection of interest and principal has become 90 days past due; court proceedings indicate that collection of interest and principal in accordance with the contractual terms is unlikely; or the full and timely collection of interest or principal becomes otherwise due.
Once a loan is classified as nonperforming, we typically place the loan on nonaccrual status, and reverse any accrued and unpaid interest recorded during the periodalthough in which the loan ismany cases such loans were already classified as nonperforming. We generally apply all cash received during the nonaccrual periodnonperforming prior to the reduction of principal, thereby foregoing interest income recognition. The decisionmodification. These loans may be returned to return a loan to accrualperforming status is determined on a case-by-case basis.
We fully charge off or write down loans to the estimated net realizable value in the period that it becomes evident that collectability of the full contractual amount is highly unlikely; however, our efforts to recover all charged-off amounts may continue. The determination to write off all or a portion of a loan balance is made based on various factors on a case-by-case basis including, but not limited to, cash flow analysis and the fair valueaccrual of collateral securinginterest resumed if the borrower’s loans.
Impaired Loans
A loan is considered impaired when, based on current informationborrower performs under the modified terms for an extended period of time, and events, we determine that it is probable that we will be unableexpect the borrower to collect all interest and principal amounts due as scheduledcontinue to perform in accordance with the contractual terms ofmodified terms. In certain limited circumstances in which a TDR loan is current at the modification date, the loan agreement, other than an insignificant delay in payment or insignificant shortfall in payment amount. Factors considered in determining impairment may include, but are not limited to:remain on accrual status at the time of modification.
the review of the borrower’s audited financial statements and interim financial statements if available,
the borrower’s payment history,
communication with the borrower,
economic conditions in the borrower’s service territory,
pending legal action involving the borrower,
restructure agreements between us and the borrower, and
estimates of the value of the borrower’s assets that have been pledged as collateral to secure our loans.
We recognize interest income on impaired loans on a case-by-case basis. An impaired loan to a borrower that is nonperforming will typically be placed on nonaccrual status and we will reverse all accrued and unpaid interest. We generally apply all cash received during the nonaccrual period to the reduction of principal, thereby foregoing interest
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Nonperforming Loans
income recognition.
We classify loans as nonperforming when contractual principal or interest is 90 days past due or when we believe the collection of principal and interest in full is not reasonably assured. When a loan is classified as nonperforming, we generally place the loan on nonaccrual status. Interest accrued but not collected at the date a loan is placed on nonaccrual status is reversed against current-period interest income. Interest income may beon nonaccrual loans is subsequently recognized on anonly upon the receipt of cash payments. However, if we believe the ultimate collectability of the loan principal is in doubt, cash received is applied against the principal balance of the loan. Nonaccrual loans generally are returned to accrual basisstatus when principal and interest becomes and remains current for restructured impaired loans wherea specified period and repayment of the borrowerremaining contractual principal and interest is performing and is expected to continue to perform based on agreed-upon terms.reasonably assured.
Charge-Offs
We may modify the termscharge off loans or a portion of a loan to maximizewhen we determine that the collectionloan is uncollectible. The charge-off of uncollectible principal amounts due when a borrower is experiencing financial difficulties. Concessionary modifications are classified as troubled debt restructurings (“TDRs”) unless the modification results in onlya reduction to the allowance for credit losses for our loan portfolio. Recoveries of previously charged off principal amounts result in an insignificant delay in paymentsincrease to be received. All of our restructured loans are considered TDRs.the allowance.
Allowance for Credit Losses—Loan LossesPortfolio
TheCurrent Allowance Methodology
Beginning June 1, 2020, the allowance for loancredit losses representsis determined based on management’s current estimate of probableexpected credit losses inherentover the remaining contractual term, adjusted as appropriate for estimated prepayments, of loans in our loan portfolio which consistsas of CFC, NCSC and RTFCeach balance sheet date. The allowance for credit losses for our loan portfolio segments.is reported on our consolidated balance sheet as a valuation account that is deducted from loans to members to present the net amount we expect to collect over the life of our loans. We immediately recognize an allowance for expected credit losses upon origination of a loan. Adjustments to the allowance each period for changes in our estimate of lifetime expected credit losses are recognized in earnings through the provision for credit losses presented on our consolidated statements of operations.
We estimate our allowance for lifetime expected credit losses for our loan portfolio using a probability of default/loss given default methodology. Our allowance for loancredit losses for our portfolio segments consists of a collective allowance and an asset-specific allowance. The collective allowance is established for loans in our portfolio that share similar risk characteristics and are not individually impaired andtherefore evaluated on a specificcollective, or pool, basis in measuring expected credit losses. The asset-specific allowance is established for loans identifiedin our portfolio that do not share similar risk characteristics with other loans in our portfolio and are therefore evaluated on an individual basis in measuring expected credit losses. Expected credit losses are estimated based on historical experience, current conditions and forecasts, if applicable, that affect the collectibility of the reported amount.
Since inception in 1969, CFC has experienced limited defaults and losses as individually impaired. We increase or decrease the allowance for loan losses by recording a provision or benefit for loan lossesutility sector generally tends to be less sensitive to changes in the statement of operations. We record charge-offs against the allowance for loan losses when management determines that any portion of a loan is uncollectible. We add subsequent recoveries, if any,economy than other sectors largely due to the allowanceessential nature of the service provided. The losses we have incurred were not tied to economic factors, but rather to distinct operating issues related to each borrower. Given that our borrowers’ creditworthiness, and accordingly our loss experience, has not correlated to specific underlying macroeconomic variables, such as U.S. unemployment rates or gross domestic product (“GDP”) growth, we have not made adjustments to our historical loss rates for any economic forecast. We consider the need, however, to adjust our historical loss information for differences in the specific characteristics of our existing loan portfolio based on an evaluation of relative qualitative factors, such as differences in the composition of our loan portfolio, our underwriting standards, problem loan trends, the quality of our credit review function, as well as changes in the regulatory environment and other pertinent external factors that may impact the amount of future credit losses.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Collective Allowance
We employ a quantitative methodology and a qualitative framework to measure the collective component of our allowance for expected credit losses. The collective allowance is established, by loan portfolio segment, using an internal model to estimate probable incurred losses asfirst element in our quantitative methodology involves the segmentation of each balance sheet date. We further stratify our loan portfolio segments and group loans into loan pools based on member borrower type—distribution, power supply, telecommunications, and statewide and associates—as we consider our members with the same operations tothat share similar risk characteristics. We delineatedisaggregate our loan portfolio into segments that reflect the member borrower type, which is based on the utility sector of the borrower because the key operational, infrastructure, regulatory, environmental, customer and financial risks of each sector are similar in nature. Our primary member borrower types consist of CFC electric distribution, CFC electric power supply, CFC statewide and associate, NCSC and RTFC telecommunications. Our portfolio segments align with the sectors generally seen in the utilities industry. We further stratify each portfolio into loan pools based on our internal borrower risk ratings, as our borrower risk ratings provide important information on the collectibility of each of our loan pools by borrower risk rating andportfolio segments. We then apply loss factors, toconsisting of the outstanding principal balance at the end of each reporting period to determine the collective allowance for loan losses. The loss factors consist of a probability of default orand loss given default, rate,to the scheduled loan-level amortization amounts over the life of the loans for each of our loan pools. Below we discuss the source and basis for the key inputs, which include borrower risk ratings and the loss given default, or loss severity or recovery,factors, in measuring expected credit losses for eachour loan pool. We derive the total collective loss estimate by applying the default rate, based on a five-year loss emergence period, and recovery rate, based on our historical experience, to each loan pool. Following is additional information on the key inputs and assumptions used in determining our collective allowance for loan losses.portfolio.
Internal•Borrower Risk Ratings: As part of our credit risk-management process, we regularlyWe evaluate each borrower and loan facility in our loan portfolio and assign an internal borrower and loan facility risk rating. Our borrowerratings based on consideration of a number of quantitative and qualitative factors. Each risk rating is reassessed annually following the receipt of the borrower’s audited financial statements; however, interim risk-rating adjustments may occur as a result of updated information affecting a borrower’s ability to fulfill its obligations or other significant developments and trends. Our internally assigned borrower risk ratings are intended to reflectassess the general creditworthiness of the borrower and probability of default. We engage an independent third partyuse our internal borrower risk ratings, which we map to perform an annual reviewthe equivalent credit ratings by external rating agencies, to differentiate risk within each of a sample of borrowersour portfolio segments and loan facilities to corroboratepools. We provide additional information on our internally assigned risk ratings. Theborrower risk ratings are based on quantitative and qualitative factors, including the general financial conditionbelow in “Note 4—Loans.”
•Probability of the borrower; our judgment of the quality of the borrower’s management; our judgment of the borrower’s competitive position within its service territory and industry; our estimate of the potential impact of proposed regulation and litigation; and other factors specific to individual borrowers or classes of borrowers.
Loss Emergence PeriodDefault: The loss emergence period represents the average time between when a loss-triggering event, such as a successful new investment or expansion of services, a severe weather event or deterioration in operations, occurs and the problem loan is charged-off, restructured or otherwise resolved. Our loss emergence period of five years is based on CFC’s historical average loss emergence period.
Default Rates: Because we have a limited history of defaults to develop reasonable and supportable estimated probability of default, rates foror default rate, represents the likelihood that a borrower will default over a particular time horizon. Because of our existing loan portfolio,limited default history, we utilize third-party default data for the utility sector as a proxy to estimate probability of default rates for each of our loan portfolio segments.pools. The third-party default data providesprovide historical expected default rates, based on credit ratings and remaining maturities of outstanding bonds, for the utility sector. We alignBased on the mapping and alignment of our internal borrower risk ratings to theequivalent credit ratings provided in the third-party utility default rate table, andwe apply the corresponding cumulative default rates for our estimated average loss emergence periodto the scheduled amortization amounts over the remaining term of five years tothe loans in each of our loan pools.
Recovery Rates•Loss Given Default: WeThe loss given default, or loss severity, represents the estimated loss, net of recoveries, on a loan that would be realized in the event of a borrower default. While we utilize third-party default data, we utilize our internallifetime historical loss experience to estimate loss given default, or the recovery rate, for each of our loan portfolio segments, as wesegments. We believe it providesour internal historical loss severity rates provide a more reliable estimate than third-party loss severity data due to the organizational structure and operating environment of rural utility cooperatives, our lending practice of generally requiring a senior security position on the assets and revenue of borrowers for long-term loans, the investment our member borrowers have in CFC and therefore the collaborative approach we generally take in working with members in the event that a default occurs.
In addition to the quantitative methodology used in our collective measurement of expected credit losses, management performs a qualitative evaluation and analyses of relevant factors, such as changes in risk-management practices, current and past underwriting standards, specific industry issues and trends and other subjective factors. Based on our assessment, we did not make a qualitative adjustment to the collective allowance for credit losses measured under our quantitative methodology as of May 31, 2022 or May 31, 2021.
Asset-Specific Allowance
We generally consider nonperforming loans as well as loans that have been or are anticipated to be modified under a troubled debt restructuring for individual evaluation given the risk characteristics of such loans. Factors we consider in
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
measuring the extent of expected credit loss include the payment status, the collateral value, the borrower’s financial condition, guarantor support, the probability of collecting scheduled principal and interest payments when due, anticipated modifications of payment structure or term for troubled borrowers, and recoveries if they can be reasonably estimated. We generally requiring a senior security position onmeasure the assets and revenues of borrowers for long-term loans, and the approach we take in working with borrowers that may be experiencing operational or financial issues. The historical recovery rates for each portfolio segment may be adjusted based on management’s consideration and assessment of current conditions and relevant factors, suchexpected credit loss as recent trends in credit performance, historical variability of recovery rates and additional analysis of long-term loss severity experience, changes in risk management practices, current and past underwriting standards, specific industry issues and trends and general economic conditions.
Specific Allowance
The specific allowance for individually impaired loans that are not collateral dependent is calculated based on the difference between the recorded investmentamortized cost basis in the loan and the present value of the expected future cash flows from the borrower, which is generally discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate. Ifrate, or the loan is collateral dependent, we measure the impairment based on the current fair value of the collateral, less estimated selling costs. Loans are considered to be collateral dependent if repayment of the loan is collateral dependent.
Prior Allowance Methodology
Prior to June 1, 2020, the allowance for credit losses was determined based the incurred loss model under which management estimated probable losses inherent in our loan portfolio as of each balance sheet date. We used a probability of default/loss given default methodology in estimating probable losses based on a loss emergence period of five years. We utilized the same portfolio segments, borrower risk-rating framework, third-party default data and internal historical recovery rates under the incurred loss model that we use in determining the allowance based on the current expected to be provided solely by the underlying collateral and there are no other available and reliable sources of repayment.credit loss model.
Unadvanced Loan Commitments
Unadvanced commitments represent amounts for which we have approved and executed loan contracts, but the funds have not been advanced. The majority of the unadvanced commitments reported represent amounts that are subject to material adverse change clauses at the time of the loan advance. Prior to making an advance on these facilities, we would confirm that there has been no material adverse change in the business or condition, financial or otherwise, of the borrower since the time the loan was approved and confirm that the borrower is currently in compliance with loan terms and conditions. The remaining unadvanced commitments relate to line of credit loans that are not subject to a material adverse change clause at the time of each loan advance. As such, we would be required to advance amounts on these committed facilities as long as the borrower is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the loan commitment.
Unadvanced loan commitments related to line of credit loans are typically for periods not to exceed five years and are generally revolving facilities used for working capital and backup liquidity purposes. Historically, we have experienced a very low utilization rate on line of credit loan facilities, whether or not there is a material adverse change clause. Since we generally do not charge a fee on the unadvanced portion of the majority of our loan facilities, our borrowers will typically request long-term facilities to fund construction work plans and other capital expenditures for periods of up to five years and draw down on the facility over that time. In addition, borrowers will typically request an amount in excess of their immediate estimated loan requirements to avoid the expense related to seeking additional loan funding for unexpected items. These factors contribute to our expectation that the majority of the unadvanced line of credit loan commitments will expire without being fully drawn upon and that the total unadvanced amount does not necessarily represent future cash funding
requirements.
Reserve for Unadvanced Loan CommitmentsCredit Losses—Off-Balance Sheet Credit Exposures
We also maintain a reserve for credit losses for our off-balance sheet credit exposures related to unadvanced loan commitments and committed linesfinancial guarantees. Because our business processes and credit risks associated with our off-balance sheet credit exposures are essentially the same as for our loans, we measure expected credit losses for our off-balance sheet exposures, after adjusting for the probability of credit. Thisfunding these exposures, consistent with the methodology used for our funded outstanding exposures. We include the reserve is includedfor expected credit losses for our off-balance sheet credit exposures as a component of other liabilities on our consolidated balance sheets, and changes in the reserve are included in other non-interest expense on our consolidated statements of operations. Our estimate of the reserve for potential losses on these commitments takes into consideration various factors, including the existence of a material adverse change clause, the historical utilization of the committed lines of credit, the probability of funding, historical loss experience on unadvanced loan commitments and other inputs along with management judgment consistent with the methodology used to determine our allowance for loan losses.sheets.
Fixed Assets
Fixed assets are recorded at cost less accumulated depreciation. We recognize depreciation expense for each category of our depreciable fixed assets on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful life, which ranges from three to 40 years. We recognized depreciation expense of $8 million, $8 million and $9 million in fiscal years 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively. We perform a fixed assets impairment assessment annually or more frequently, whenever events or circumstances indicate
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
that the carrying amount of the assets may not be recoverable. Based on our annual impairment assessment for fiscal years 2022 and 2021, management determined that there were no indicators of impairment of our fixed assets as of May 31, 2022 and 2021.
recognized depreciation expense of $9 million, $8 million and $7 million in fiscal year 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively.
The following table displays the components of our fixed assets. Our headquarters facility in Loudoun County, Virginia, which is owned by CFC, is included as a component of building and building equipment.
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 |
Building and building equipment | | $ | 50,167 |
| | $ | 50,210 |
|
Furniture and fixtures | | 6,012 |
| | 6,080 |
|
Computer software and hardware | | 71,915 |
| | 45,389 |
|
Other | | 1,069 |
| | 1,006 |
|
Depreciable fixed assets | | 129,163 |
| | 102,685 |
|
Less: Accumulated depreciation | | (53,695 | ) | | (47,705 | ) |
Net depreciable fixed assets | | 75,468 |
| | 54,980 |
|
Land | | 23,796 |
| | 23,796 |
|
Software development in progress | | 21,363 |
| | 37,255 |
|
Fixed assets, net | | $ | 120,627 |
| | $ | 116,031 |
|
Table 1.1: Fixed Assets | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 |
Building and building equipment | | $ | 50,177 | | | $ | 50,090 | |
Furniture and fixtures | | 6,254 | | | 6,039 | |
Computer software and hardware | | 55,101 | | | 54,582 | |
Other | | 1,024 | | | 1,048 | |
Depreciable fixed assets | | 112,556 | | | 111,759 | |
Less: Accumulated depreciation | | (73,258) | | | (66,777) | |
Net depreciable fixed assets | | 39,298 | | | 44,982 | |
Land | | 23,796 | | | 23,796 | |
Software development in progress | | 38,668 | | | 23,104 | |
Fixed assets, net | | $ | 101,762 | | | $ | 91,882 | |
Assets Held for Sale
An asset is classified as held for sale when (i) management commits to a plan to sell the asset or business; (ii) the asset or business is available for sale in its present condition; (iii) the asset or business is actively marketed for sale at a reasonable price; (iv) the sale is expected to be completed within one year; and (v) it is unlikely significant changes to the plan will be made or that the plan will be withdrawn. Long-lived assets classified as held for sale are initially measured at the lower of their carrying amount or fair value less cost to sell. If the carrying value exceeds the estimated fair value less cost to sell in the period the held for sale criteria are met, an impairment charge is recorded equal to the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the fair value less cost to sell. Subsequent changes in the long-lived asset’s fair value less cost to sell is reported as an adjustment to the carrying amount to the extent that the adjusted carrying amount does not exceed the carrying amount of the long-lived asset at the time it was initially classified as held for sale.
On March 14, 2018, CFC entered into a purchase and sale agreement (“the agreement”), which was subsequently amended, for the sale of a parcel of land, consisting of approximately 28 acres, located in Loudoun County, Virginia. We designated the property, which has a carrying value of $14 million, as held for sale and reclassified it from fixed assets, net to other assets on our consolidated balance sheet. On July 22, 2019, we closed on the sale of the land and received net proceeds of $22 million, resulting in a gain of $8 million on the sale of this property.
Foreclosed Assets
Foreclosed assets acquired through our lending activities in satisfaction of indebtedness may be held in operating entities created and controlled by CFC and presented separately in our consolidated balance sheets under foreclosed assets, net. These assets are initially recorded at estimated fair value as of the date of acquisition. Subsequent to acquisition, foreclosed assets not classified as held for sale are evaluated for impairment, and the results of operations and any impairment are reported on our consolidated statements of operations under results of operations of foreclosed assets. When foreclosed assets meet the accounting criteria to be classified as held for sale, they are recorded at the lower of cost or fair value less estimated cost to sell at the date of transfer, with the amount at the date of transfer representing the new cost basis. Subsequent changes are recognized in our consolidated statements of operations under results of operations of foreclosed assets. We also review foreclosed assets classified as held for sale each reporting period to determine whether the existing carrying amounts are fully recoverable in comparison to estimated fair values. We did not carry any foreclosed assets on our consolidated balance sheet as of May 31, 20192022 or May 31, 2018.2021.
Securities Sold Under Repurchase Agreements
We enter into repurchase agreements to sell investment securities. These transactions are accounted for as collateralized financing transactions and are recorded on our consolidated balance sheets as part of short-term borrowings at the amounts at which the securities were sold.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Debt
We report debt at cost net of unamortized issuance costs and discounts or premiums. Issuance costs, discounts and premiums are deferred and amortized into interest expense using the effective interest method or a method approximating the effective interest method over the legal maturity of each bond issue. Short-term borrowings consist of borrowings with an original
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
contractual maturity of one year or less and do not include the current portion of long-term debt. Borrowings with an original contractual maturity of greater than one year are classified as long-term debt.
Derivative Instruments
We are an end user of derivative financial instruments and do not engage in derivative trading. We use derivatives, primarily interest rate swaps and treasuryTreasury rate locks, to manage interest rate risk. Derivatives may be privately negotiated contracts, which are often referred to as over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivatives, or they may be listed and traded on an exchange. We generally engage in OTC derivative transactions.
In accordance with the accounting standards for derivatives and hedging activities, we record derivative instruments at fair value as either a derivative asset or derivative liability on our consolidated balance sheets. We report derivative asset and liability amounts on a gross basis based on individual contracts, which does not take into consideration the effects of master netting agreements or collateral netting. Derivatives in a gain position are reported as derivative assets on our consolidated balance sheets, while derivatives in a loss position are reported as derivative liabilities. Accrued interest related to derivatives is reported on our consolidated balance sheets as a component of either accrued interest receivable or accrued interest payable.
If we do not elect hedge accounting treatment, changes in the fair value of derivative instruments, which consist of net accrued periodic derivative cash settlements expense and derivative forward value amounts, are recognized in our consolidated statements of operations under derivative gains (losses). If we elect hedge accounting treatment for derivatives, we formally document, designate and assess the effectiveness of the hedge relationship. Changes in the fair value of derivatives designated as qualifying fair value hedges are recorded in earnings together with offsetting changes in the fair value of the hedged item and any related ineffectiveness. Changes in the fair value of derivatives designated as qualifying cash flow hedges are recorded as a component of other comprehensive income (“OCI”), to the extent that the hedge relationships are effective, and reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) to earnings using the effective interest method over the term of the forecasted transaction. Any ineffectiveness in the hedging relationship is recognized as a component of derivative gains (losses) in our consolidated statement of operations.
We generally do not designate interest rate swaps, which represent the substantial majority of our derivatives, for hedge accounting. Accordingly, changes in the fair value of interest rate swaps are reported in our consolidated statements of operations under derivative gains (losses). Net periodic cash settlements expense related to interest rate swaps are classified as an operating activity in our consolidated statements of cash flows.
We typically designate treasuryTreasury rate locks as cash flow hedges of forecasted debt issuances or repricings. Changes in the fair value of treasury locks designated as cash flow hedges are recorded as a component of OCI and reclassified from AOCI into interest expense when the forecasted transaction occurs using the effective interest method. Any ineffectiveness is recognized as a component of derivative gains (losses) in our consolidated statements of operations.
Guarantee Liability
We maintain a guarantee liability that represents our contingent and noncontingent exposure related to guarantees and standby liquidity obligations associated with our members’ debt. The guarantee liability is included in the other liabilities line item on the consolidated balance sheet, and the provision for guarantee liability is reported in non-interest expense as a separate line item on the consolidated statement of operations.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The contingent portion of the guarantee liability represents management’s estimate of our exposure to losses within the guarantee portfolio. The methodology used to estimate the contingent guarantee liability is consistent with the methodology used to determine the allowance for loan losses.credit losses under the CECL model.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
We have recorded a noncontingent guarantee liability for all new or modified guarantees since January 1, 2003. Our noncontingent guarantee liability represents our obligation to stand ready to perform over the term of our guarantees and liquidity obligations that we have entered into or modified since January 1, 2003. Our noncontingent obligation is estimated based on guarantee and liquidity fees charged for guarantees issued, which represents management’s estimate of the fair value of our obligation to stand ready to perform. The fees are deferred and amortized using the straight-line method into interest income over the term of the guarantee.
Fair Value Valuation Processes
We present certain financial instruments at fair value, including equity and debt securities, and derivatives. Fair value is defined as the price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date (also referred to as an exit price). We have various processes and controls in place to ensure that fair value is reasonably estimated. We consider observable prices in the principal market in our valuations where possible. Fair value estimates were developed at the reporting date and may not necessarily be indicative of amounts that could ultimately be realized in a market transaction at a future date. With the exception of redeeming debt under early redemption provisions, terminating derivative instruments under early-termination provisions and allowing borrowers to prepay their loans, we held and intend to hold all financial instruments to maturity excluding common stock and preferred stock investments that have no stated maturity.maturity and our trading debt securities.
Fair Value Hierarchy
The fair value accounting guidance provides a three-level fair value hierarchy for classifying financial instruments. This hierarchy is based on the markets in which the assets or liabilities trade and whether the inputs to the valuation techniques used to measure fair value are observable or unobservable. Fair value measurement of a financial asset or liability is assigned a level based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are summarized below:
Level 1: Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities
Level 2: Observable market-based inputs, other than quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities
Level 3: Unobservable inputs
The degree of management judgment involved in determining the fair value of a financial instrument is dependent upon the availability of quoted prices in active markets or observable market parameters. When quoted prices and observable data in active markets are not fully available, management’s judgment is necessary to estimate fair value. Changes in market conditions, such as reduced liquidity in the capital markets or changes in secondary market activities, may reduce the availability and reliability of quoted prices or observable data used to determine fair value.
Membership Fees
Members are charged a one-time membership fee based on member class. CFC distribution system members, power supply system members and national associations of cooperatives pay a $1,000 membership fee. CFC service organization members pay a $200 membership fee and CFC associates pay a $1,000 fee. RTFC voting members pay a $1,000 membership fee and RTFC associates pay a $100 fee. NCSC members pay a $100 membership fee. Membership fees are accounted for as members’ equity.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Financial Instruments with Off-Balance Sheet Risk
In the normal course of business, we are a party to financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk to meet the financing needs of our member borrowers. These financial instruments include committed lines of credit, standby letters of credit and guarantees of members’ obligations.
Interest Income
Interest income on loans and investments is recognized using the effective interest method. The following table presents interest income, by interest-earning asset category, for fiscal years 2019, 2018 and 2017.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 |
Interest income by interest-earning asset type: | | | | | | |
Long-term fixed-rate loans(1) | | $ | 1,012,277 |
| | $ | 1,000,492 |
| | $ | 980,173 |
|
Long-term variable-rate loans | | 41,219 |
| | 27,152 |
| | 19,902 |
|
Line of credit loans | | 57,847 |
| | 38,195 |
| | 25,389 |
|
TDR loans(2) | | 846 |
| | 889 |
| | 905 |
|
Other income, net(3) | | (1,128 | ) | | (1,185 | ) | | (1,082 | ) |
Total loans | | 1,111,061 |
| | 1,065,543 |
| | 1,025,287 |
|
Cash, time deposits and investment securities | | 24,609 |
| | 11,814 |
| | 11,347 |
|
Total interest income | | $ | 1,135,670 |
| | $ | 1,077,357 |
| | $ | 1,036,634 |
|
____________________________
(1) Includes loan conversion fees, which are generally deferred and recognized as interest income using the effective interest method.
(2) Troubled debt restructured (“TDR”) loans.
(3) Consists of late payment fees, commitment fees and net amortization of deferred loan fees and loan origination costs.
Deferred income of $58 million and $66 million as of May 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, consists primarily of deferred loan conversion fees totaling $52 million and $60 million, respectively. Deferred loan conversion fees are recognized in interest income using the effective interest method.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Interest Expense
The following table presents interest expense, by debt product type, for fiscal years 2019, 2018 and 2017.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 |
Interest expense by debt product type:(1)(2) | | | | | | |
Short-term borrowings | | $ | 92,854 |
| | $ | 50,616 |
| | $ | 26,684 |
|
Medium-term notes | | 133,797 |
| | 111,814 |
| | 99,022 |
|
Collateral trust bonds | | 273,413 |
| | 336,079 |
| | 340,854 |
|
Guaranteed Underwriter Program notes payable | | 147,895 |
| | 140,551 |
| | 142,661 |
|
Farmer Mac notes payable | | 90,942 |
| | 56,004 |
| | 33,488 |
|
Other notes payable | | 1,237 |
| | 1,509 |
| | 1,780 |
|
Subordinated deferrable debt | | 38,628 |
| | 37,661 |
| | 37,657 |
|
Subordinated certificates | | 57,443 |
| | 58,501 |
| | 59,592 |
|
Total interest expense | | $ | 836,209 |
| | $ | 792,735 |
| | $ | 741,738 |
|
____________________________
(1) Includes amortization of debt discounts and debt issuance costs, which are generally deferred and recognized as interest expense using the effective interest method. Issuance costs related to dealer commercial paper, however, are recognized as interest expense immediately as incurred.
(2) Includes fees related to funding arrangements, such as up-front fees paid to banks participating in our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements. Depending on the nature of the fee, amounts may be deferred and recognized as interest expense ratably over the term of the arrangement or recognized immediately as incurred.
Early Extinguishment of Debt
We redeem outstanding debt early from time to time to manage liquidity and interest rate risk. When we redeem outstanding debt early, we recognize a gain or loss related to the difference between the amount paid to redeem the debt and the net book value of the extinguished debt as a component of non-interest expense in the gain (loss) on early extinguishment of debt line item..
Income Taxes
While CFC is exempt under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code, it is subject to tax on unrelated business taxable income. NCSC is a taxable cooperative that pays income tax on the full amount of its reportable taxable income and allowable deductions. RTFC is a taxable cooperative under Subchapter T of the Internal Revenue Code and is not subject to income taxes on income from patronage sources that is allocated to its borrowers, as long as the allocation is properly noticed and at least 20% of the amount allocated is retired in cash prior to filing the applicable tax return.
The income tax benefit (expense) recorded in the consolidated statement of operations represents the income tax benefit (expense) at the applicable combined federalfederal and state income tax rates resulting infrom a statutory tax rate. The federal statutory tax rate for both NCSC and RTFC was 21% for fiscal year 2019. The federal statutory tax rate for NCSCeach of fiscal years 2022, 2021 and RTFC was 29% and 12%, respectively, for fiscal year 2018 and the federal statutory tax rate for NCSC and RTFC was 34% and 20%, respectively, for fiscal year 2017.2020. Substantially all ofof the income tax expense recorded in our consolidated statements of operations relates to NCSC. NCSC had a deferred tax asset of $1 million and $2 million as of both May 31, 20192022 and 2018, primarily2021, respectively, primarily arising from differences in the accounting and tax treatment for derivatives. We believe that it is more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will be realized through taxable earnings.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Recent Accounting Changes and Other Developments
New Accounting Standards Adopted in Fiscal Year 2019
Statement of Cash Flows—Restricted CashFinancial Instruments—Credit Losses, Troubled Debt Restructurings and Vintage Disclosures
In November 2016,March 2022, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2016-18, Statement of Cash Flows—Restricted Cash, 2022-02, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326): Troubled Debt Restructurings and Vintage Disclosures, which addresses the presentation of restricted cash in the statement of cash flows. The guidance requires that the statement of cash flows explain the change in the beginning-of-period and end-of period total of cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash. Under previous guidance, we were required to explain the total change in cash and cash equivalents during the period. We adopted this guidance on June 1, 2018, on a retrospective basis. We made corresponding changes on our consolidated balance sheet to present a total for cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash.
Financial Instruments—Overall: Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities
In January 2016,amends areas identified by the FASB issued ASU 2016-01, Financial Instruments-Overall: Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities, which amends certain aspects of the recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure of certain financial instruments, including equity investments and liabilities measured at fair value under the fair value option. Under this guidance, investments in equity securities must be measured at fair value through earnings, with certain exceptions, and entities can no longer classify investments in equity securities as available for sale or trading. We adopted this guidance on June 1, 2018 on a modified retrospective basis and recorded a cumulative-effect adjustment that increased retained earnings by $9 million as a result of the transition adjustment to reclassify unrealized gains related to our equity securities from AOCI to retained earnings. As a result of adopting this guidance, our investments in equity securities are no longer classified as available for sale and unrealized holding gains and losses are recorded in earnings. Previously, our equity securities were classified as available for sale and unrealized holding gains and losses were recorded in other comprehensive income.
Revenue from Contracts with Customers
In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, which modifies the guidance used to recognize revenue from contracts with customers for transfers of goods or services and transfers of nonfinancial assets. This guidance applies to all contracts with customers to provide goods or services in the ordinary course of business, except for certain contracts specifically excluded from the scope, including financial instruments, guarantees, insurance contracts and leases. As a financial institution, substantially all of our revenue is in the form of interest income derived from financial instruments, primarily our investments in loans and securities. We adopted this guidance on June 1, 2018. Given the scope exception for financial instruments, the adoption of the guidance did not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements or cash flows.
Accounting Standards Issued But Not Yet Adopted
Fair Value Measurement—Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement
In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-13, Fair Value Measurement—Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement, which eliminates, adds and modifies certain disclosure requirements for fair value measurements as part of its post-implementation review of the accounting standard that introduced the CECL model. The amendments eliminate the accounting guidance for TDRs by creditors that have adopted the CECL model and enhance the disclosure framework project. The guidancerequirements for loan refinancings and restructurings made with borrowers experiencing financial difficulty. In addition, the amendments require disclosure of current-period gross writeoffs for financing receivables and net investment in leases by year of origination in the vintage disclosures. ASU 2022-02 is effective for public entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019,2022, including interim periods within those years.fiscal years for entities, such as CFC, that have adopted the CECL accounting standard. Early adoption, however, is permitted in any interim period orif an entity has adopted the CECL accounting standard. We expect to adopt the guidance for our fiscal year before the effective date. The guidance is effective for usyear beginning June 1, 2020. We2023. While the guidance will result in expanded disclosures, we do not expect an impact on our consolidated results of operation, financial condition or liquidity from adoption of this accounting standard.
Amendments of Certain U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Disclosure Guidance
In August 2021, the FASB issued ASU 2021-06, Presentation of Financial Statements (Topic 205), Financial Services—Depository and Lending (Topic 942), and Financial Services—Investment Companies (Topic 946), Amendments to SEC Paragraphs Pursuant to SEC Final Rule Releases No. 33-10786, Amendments to Financial Disclosures About Acquired and Disposed Businesses, and No.33-10835, Update of Statistical Disclosures for Bank and Savings and Loan Registrants. This update amends certain SEC disclosure guidance that is included in the accounting standards codification to reflect the SEC’s recent issuance of rules intended to modernize and streamline disclosure requirements. We adopted the SEC’s guidance on the presentation of financial statements and update of statistical disclosures for bank and savings and loan registrants in conjunction with the completion of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 (“2021 Form 10-K”), which we filed with the SEC on July 30, 2021. The adoption of this disclosure guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Reference Rate Reform
In March 2020, the FASB issued ASU 2020-04, Reference Rate Reform(Topic 848): Facilitation of the Effects of Reference Rate Reform on Financial Reporting, which provides temporary optional expedients and exceptions for applying U.S. GAAP on contracts, hedging relationships and other transactions subject to modification due to the expected discontinuance of the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) and other reference rate reform changes to ease the potential accounting and financial burdens related to the expected transition in market reference rates. This guidance permits entities to elect not to apply certain modification accounting requirements to contracts affected by reference rate transition, if certain criteria are met. An entity that makes this election would not be required to remeasure modified contracts at the modification date or reassess a previous accounting determination. The guidance was effective upon issuance on March 12, 2020, and can generally be applied through December 31, 2022. We expect to apply certain of the practical expedients and are in the process of evaluating the timing and application of those elections. Based on our current assessment, we do not believe that the adoptionapplication of this guidance will have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
| | |
NOTE 2—INTEREST INCOME AND INTEREST EXPENSE |
The following table displays the components of interest income, by interest-earning asset type, and interest expense, by debt product type, presented on our consolidated statements of operations for fiscal years 2022, 2021 and 2020.
Table 2.1: Interest Income and Interest Expense
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 | | 2020 |
Interest income: | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Loans(1) | | $ | 1,125,292 | | | $ | 1,101,505 | | | $ | 1,129,883 | |
Investment securities | | 15,951 | | | 15,096 | | | 21,403 | |
Total interest income | | 1,141,243 | | | 1,116,601 | | | 1,151,286 | |
| | | | | | |
Interest expense:(2)(3) | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Short-term borrowings | | 18,265 | | | 14,730 | | | 77,995 | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Long-term debt | | 581,748 | | | 581,292 | | | 634,567 | |
Subordinated debt | | 105,521 | | | 106,041 | | | 108,527 | |
| | | | | | |
Total interest expense | | 705,534 | | | 702,063 | | | 821,089 | |
| | | | | | |
Net interest income | | $ | 435,709 | | | $ | 414,538 | | | $ | 330,197 | |
____________________________
(1)Includes loan conversion fees, which are generally deferred and recognized in interest income over the period to maturity using the effective interest method, late payment fees, commitment fees and net amortization of deferred loan fees and loan origination costs.
(2)Includes amortization of debt discounts and debt issuance costs, which are generally deferred and recognized as interest expense over the period to maturity using the effective interest method. Issuance costs related to dealer commercial paper, however, are recognized in interest expense immediately as incurred.
(3)Includes fees related to funding arrangements, such as up-front fees paid to banks participating in our committed bank revolving line of credit agreements. Based on the nature of the fees, the amount is either recognized immediately as incurred or cash flows.deferred and recognized in interest expense ratably over the term of the arrangement.
Deferred income reported on our consolidated balance sheets of $44 million and $51 million as of May 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively, consists primarily of deferred loan conversion fees that totaled $37 million and $45 million as of each respective date.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Derivatives and Hedging—Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities
In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-12, Derivatives and Hedging—Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities, which expands the types of risk management strategies that qualify for hedge accounting treatment to more closely align the results of hedge accounting with the economics of certain risk management activities and simplifies certain hedge documentation and assessment requirement. It also eliminates the concept of separately recording hedge ineffectiveness and expands disclosure requirements. The guidance is effective for public entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those years. Early adoption is permitted in any interim period or fiscal year before the effective date. The guidance is effective for us beginning June 1, 2019. Hedge accounting is elective, and we currently apply hedge accounting on a limited basis, specifically when we enter into treasury rate lock agreements. The adoption of this guidance did not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements or cash flows. If we continue to elect not to apply hedge accounting to our interest rate swaps, the guidance will not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements or cash flows.
Receivables—Nonrefundable Fees and Other Cost
In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-08, Receivables—Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs, which shortens the amortization period for the premium on certain callable debt securities to the earliest call date rather the maturity date. The guidance is applicable to any individual debt security, purchased at a premium, with an explicit and noncontingent call feature with a fixed price on a preset date. The guidance does not impact the accounting for purchased callable debt securities held at a discount; the discount will continue to amortize to the maturity date. The guidance is effective for public entities in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. This update is effective for us on June 1, 2019. Adoption of the guidance requires modified retrospection transition as of the beginning of the period of adoption through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements or cash flows.
Financial Instruments—Credit Losses: Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments
In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses: Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments, which replaces the existing incurred credit loss model and establishes a single credit loss framework based on a current expected credit loss model for financial assets carried at amortized cost, including loans and held-to maturity debt securities. The current expected loss model requires an entity to estimate credit losses expected over the life of the credit exposure upon initial recognition of that exposure when the financial asset is originated or acquired, which will generally result in earlier recognition of credit losses. The guidance also amends the other-than-temporary model for available-for-sale debt securities by requiring the use of an allowance, rather than directly reducing the carrying value of the security. The new guidance also requires expanded credit quality disclosures. The new guidance is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2019. This guidance is effective for us on June 1, 2020. While early adoption is permitted, we do not expect to elect that option. We are continuing to evaluate the impact of the guidance on our consolidated financial statements, including assessing and evaluating assumptions and models to estimate losses. Upon adoption of the guidance on June 1, 2020, we will be required to record a cumulative effect adjustment to retained earnings for the impact as of the date of adoption. The impact will depend on our portfolio composition and credit quality at the date of adoption, as well as forecasts at that time.
Leases
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases, which provides new guidance that is intended to improve financial reporting about leasing transactions. The new guidance requires the recognition of a right-of use asset and lease liability on the consolidated balance sheet by lessees for those leases classified as operating leases under previous guidance. It also requires new disclosures to help investors and other financial statement users better understand the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. The guidance is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. This guidance is effective for us on June 1, 2019. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements or cash flows.
|
| |
NOTE 2—VARIABLE INTEREST ENTITIES3—INVESTMENT SECURITIES |
NCSCOur investment securities portfolio consists of debt securities classified as trading and RTFC meetequity securities with readily determinable fair values. We therefore record changes in the definitionfair value of our debt and equity securities in earnings and report these unrealized changes together with realized gains and losses from the sale of securities as a VIE because they do not have sufficient equity investment at riskcomponent of non-interest income in our consolidated statements of operations. For additional information on our investments in debt securities, see “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.”
Debt Securities
Our debt securities portfolio, which is intended to finance their activities without financial support. CFC is the primaryserve as a supplemental source of funding for NCSCliquidity, consists of certificates of deposit with maturities greater than 90 days, commercial paper, corporate debt securities, municipality debt securities, commercial mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”), foreign government debt securities and other asset-backed securities (“ABS”). Pursuant to our investment policy guidelines, all fixed-income debt securities, at the sole sourcetime of funding for RTFC. Under the terms of management agreements with each company, CFC manages the business operations of NCSC and RTFC. CFC also unconditionally guarantees full indemnification for any loan losses of NCSC and RTFC pursuant to guarantee agreements with each company. CFC earns management and guarantee fees from its agreements with NCSC and RTFC.
All loans that require NCSC board approval also require CFC board approval. CFC is not a member of NCSC and does not elect directors to the NCSC board. If CFC becomes a member of NCSC, it would control the nomination process for one NCSC director. NCSC members elect directors to the NCSC boardpurchase, must be rated at least investment grade based on one vote for each member. NCSCexternal credit ratings from at least two of the leading global credit rating agencies, when available, or the corresponding equivalent, when not available. Securities rated investment grade, that is a Class C memberthose rated Baa3 or higher by Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”) or BBB- or higher by S&P Global Inc. (“S&P”) or BBB- or higher by Fitch Ratings Inc. (“Fitch”), are generally considered by the rating agencies to be of CFC. All loans that require RTFC board approval also require approval by CFC for funding under RTFC’slower credit facilities with CFC. CFC is not a member of RTFC and does not elect directors to the RTFC board. RTFC is a non-voting associate of CFC. RTFC members elect directors to the RTFC board based on one vote for each member.risk than non-investment grade securities.
NCSC and RTFC creditors have no recourse against CFC in the event of a default by NCSC and RTFC, unless there is a guarantee agreement under which CFC has guaranteed NCSC or RTFC debt obligations to a third party. The following table provides information on incremental consolidated assetspresents the composition of our investment debt securities portfolio and liabilities of VIEs included in CFC’s consolidated financial statements, after intercompany eliminations,the fair value as of May 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021.
Table 3.1: Investments in Debt Securities, at Fair Value |
| | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 |
| 2018 |
Total loans outstanding | | $ | 1,087,988 |
| | $ | 1,149,574 |
|
Other assets | | 10,963 |
| | 10,280 |
|
Total assets | | $ | 1,098,951 |
| | $ | 1,159,854 |
|
| | | | |
Long-term debt | | $ | 6,000 |
| | $ | 8,000 |
|
Other liabilities | | 33,385 |
| | 33,923 |
|
Total liabilities | | $ | 39,385 |
| | $ | 41,923 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2022 | | 2021 |
Debt securities, at fair value: | | | | |
Certificates of deposit | | $ | — | | | $ | 1,501 | |
Commercial paper | | 9,985 | | | 12,365 | |
| | | | |
Corporate debt securities | | 487,172 | | | 497,944 | |
| | | | |
Commercial Agency MBS(1) | | 7,815 | | | 8,683 | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
U.S. state and municipality debt securities | | 27,778 | | | 11,840 | |
Foreign government debt securities | | 967 | | | 999 | |
Other ABS(2) | | 32,429 | | | 42,843 | |
Total debt securities trading, at fair value | | $ | 566,146 | | | $ | 576,175 | |
____________________________
The following table provides information(1)Consists of securities backed by the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”).
(2)Consists primarily of securities backed by auto lease loans, equipment-backed loans, auto loans and credit card loans.
We recognized net unrealized losses on CFC’s credit commitments to NCSCour debt securities of $27 million and RTFC, and its potential exposure to loss as of$3 million for the years ended May 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021, respectively, and net unrealized gains of $8 million for the year ended May 31, 2020.
We sold $5 million of debt securities at fair value during the year ended May 31, 2022, and recorded realized gains related to the sale of these securities of less than $1 million for the year ended May 31, 2022. We sold $6 million of debt securities at fair value during the year ended May 31, 2021, and recorded realized losses related to the sale of these securities of less than $1 million for the year ended May 31, 2021. We sold $239 million of debt securities at fair value during the year ended
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 |
CFC credit commitments | | $ | 5,500,000 |
| | $ | 5,500,000 |
|
Outstanding commitments: | | | | |
Borrowings payable to CFC(1) | | 1,059,629 |
| | 1,116,465 |
|
Credit enhancements: | | | | |
CFC third-party guarantees | | 11,318 |
| | 12,005 |
|
Other credit enhancements | | 14,251 |
| | 14,655 |
|
Total credit enhancements(2) | | 25,569 |
| | 26,660 |
|
Total outstanding commitments | | 1,085,198 |
| | 1,143,125 |
|
CFC available credit commitments | | $ | 4,414,802 |
| | $ | 4,356,875 |
|
May 31, 2020, and recorded realized gains related to the sale of these securities of $3 million during the year ended May 31, 2020.____________________________
(1) Borrowings payablePledged Collateral—Debt securities
Under master repurchase agreements with counterparties, we can obtain short-term funding by selling investment-grade corporate debt securities from our investment portfolio subject to CFCan obligation to repurchase the same or similar securities at an agreed-upon price and date. Because we retain effective control over the transferred securities, transactions under these repurchase agreements are eliminated in consolidation.accounted for as collateralized financing agreements (i.e., secured borrowings) and not as a sale and subsequent repurchase of securities. The obligation to repurchase the securities is reflected as a component of our short-term borrowings on our consolidated balance sheets. The aggregate fair value of debt securities underlying repurchase transactions is parenthetically disclosed on our consolidated balance sheets.
(2) Excludes interest due on these instruments.
CFC loans to NCSC and RTFC are secured by all assets and revenue of NCSC and RTFC. CFC’s maximum potential exposure, including interest due, for the credit enhancements totaled $27 million. The maturities for obligations guaranteed by CFC extend through 2031.
|
|
NOTE 3—INVESTMENT SECURITIES |
We currently hold investmentshad no borrowings under repurchase transactions outstanding as of May 31, 2022; therefore, we had no debt securities in equity and debt securities. We record purchases and sales of our investment portfolio pledged as collateral as of May 31, 2022. We had short-term borrowings under repurchase transactions of $200 million as of May 31, 2021. The debt securities underlying these transactions had an aggregate fair value of $211 million as of this date, and we repurchased the securities on a trade-date basis. Investments are denominated in US dollars exclusively. The accounting and measurement framework for investment securities differs depending on the security type and the classification. See “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” for additional information on our investment securitiesJune 2, 2021.
Equity Securities
The following table presents the fair valuecomposition of our equity securities, all of which had readily determinablesecurity holdings and the fair values,value as of May 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021.
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2019 | | 2018 |
Equity securities at fair value: | | | | |
Farmer Mac—Series A, B and C non-cumulative preferred stock | | $ | 82,445 |
| | $ | 82,352 |
|
Farmer Mac—class A common stock | | 5,088 |
| | 6,980 |
|
Total equity securities at fair value | | $ | 87,533 |
| | $ | 89,332 |
|
Table 3.2: Investments in Equity Securities, at Fair Value | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | May 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | | | | | | | 2022 | | 2021 |
Equity securities, at fair value: | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Farmer Mac—Series C non-cumulative preferred stock | | | | | | | | $ | 25,520 | | | $ | 27,450 | |
Farmer Mac—Class A common stock | | | | | | | | 8,238 | | | 7,652 | |
Total equity securities, at fair value | | | | | | | | $ | 33,758 | | | $ | 35,102 | |
We recognized net unrealized losses on our investments in equity securities of $1 million for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2022, net unrealized gains of $4 million for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 and net unrealized losses of $2 million for thefiscal year ended May 31, 2019.2020. These unrealized amounts are reported as a component of non-interest income on our consolidated statements of operations.
We recorded unrealized losses on our investments in equity securities of $3 million in other comprehensive income during the year ended May 31, 2018. For additional information on our investments in equity securities, see “Note 1—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” and “Note 11—Equity—Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income.”
On June 12, 2019, Farmer Mac redeemed its Series B non-cumulative preferred stock at a redemption price of $25.00 per share, plus any declared and unpaid dividends through and including the redemption date. The amortized cost of our
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
investment in the Farmer Mac Series B non-cumulative preferred stock was $25 million as of May 31, 2019, which equals the per share redemption price.
Debt Securities
Pursuant to our investment policy guidelines, all fixed-income debt securities, at the time of purchase, must be rated at least investment grade and on stable outlook based on external credit ratings from at least two of the leading global credit rating agencies, when available, or the corresponding equivalent, when not available. Securities rated investment grade, that is those rated Baa3 or higher by Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”) or BBB- or higher by S&P or BBB- or higher by Fitch Ratings Inc. (“Fitch”), are generally considered by the rating agencies to be of lower credit risk than non-investment grade securities.
Amortized Cost and Fair Value of Debt Securities
The following tables present the amortized cost and fair value of our debt securities and the corresponding gross unrealized gains and losses, by classification category and major security type, as of May 31, 2019 and 2018.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2019 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amortized Cost | | Gross Unrealized Gains | | Gross Unrealized Losses | | Fair Value |
Debt securities held to maturity: | | | | | | | | |
Certificates of deposit | | $ | 1,000 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 1,000 |
|
Commercial paper | | 12,395 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 12,395 |
|
U.S. agency debt securities | | 3,207 |
| | 108 |
| | — |
| | 3,315 |
|
Corporate debt securities | | 478,578 |
| | 4,989 |
| | (912 | ) | | 482,655 |
|
Commercial MBS: | | | | | | | | |
Agency | | 7,255 |
| | 291 |
| | — |
| | 7,546 |
|
Non-agency | | 3,453 |
| | — |
| | (7 | ) | | 3,446 |
|
Total commercial MBS | | 10,708 |
| | 291 |
| | (7 | ) | | 10,992 |
|
U.S. state and municipality debt securities | | 9,608 |
| | 352 |
| | — |
| | 9,960 |
|
Foreign government debt securities | | 1,254 |
| | 42 |
| | — |
| | 1,296 |
|
Other ABS(1) | | 48,694 |
| | 290 |
| | (48 | ) | | 48,936 |
|
Total debt securities, held to maturity | | $ | 565,444 |
| | $ | 6,072 |
| | $ | (967 | ) | | $ | 570,549 |
|
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2018 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amortized Cost | | Gross Unrealized Gains | | Gross Unrealized Losses | | Fair Value |
Debt securities held to maturity: | | | | | | | | |
Certificates of deposit | | $ | 5,148 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 5,148 |
|
Commercial paper | | 9,134 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 9,134 |
|
U.S. agency debt securities | | 2,000 |
| | 16 |
| | — |
| | 2,016 |
|
Corporate debt securities | | 455,721 |
| | 714 |
| | (4,595 | ) | | 451,840 |
|
Commercial MBS: | | | | | | | |
|
Agency | | 7,024 |
| | 63 |
| | — |
| | 7,087 |
|
Non-agency | | 3,453 |
| | 3 |
| | (3 | ) | | 3,453 |
|
Total commercial MBS | | 10,477 |
| | 66 |
| | (3 | ) | | 10,540 |
|
U.S. state and municipality debt securities | | 2,147 |
| | 24 |
| | — |
| | 2,171 |
|
Foreign government debt securities | | 1,241 |
| | 9 |
| | — |
| | 1,250 |
|
Other ABS(1) | | 34,651 |
| | 11 |
| | (215 | ) | | 34,447 |
|
Total debt securities, held to maturity | | $ | 520,519 |
| | $ | 840 |
| | $ | (4,813 | ) | | $ | 516,546 |
|
____________________________
(1)Consists primarily of securities backed by auto lease loans, equipment-backed loans, auto loans and credit card loans.
Debt Securities in Gross Unrealized Loss Position
An unrealized loss exists when the fair value of an individual security is less than its amortized cost basis. The following table presents the fair value and gross unrealized losses for debt securities in a gross loss position, aggregated by security type, and the length of time the securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position as of May 31, 2019 and 2018. The securities are segregated between investments that have been in a continuous unrealized loss position for less than 12 months and 12 months or more based on the point in time that the fair value declined below the amortized cost basis.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2019 |
| | Unrealized Loss Position Less than 12 Months | | Unrealized Loss Position 12 Months or Longer | | Total |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Fair Value | | Gross Unrealized Losses | | Fair Value | | Gross Unrealized Losses | | Fair Value | | Gross Unrealized Losses |
Debt securities held to maturity: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial paper(1) | | $ | 2,688 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,688 |
| | $ | — |
|
Corporate debt securities | | 45,999 |
| | (198 | ) | | 164,086 |
| | (714 | ) | | 210,085 |
| | (912 | ) |
Commercial MBS, non-agency | | 1,996 |
| | (4 | ) | | 1,448 |
| | (3 | ) | | 3,444 |
| | (7 | ) |
Other ABS(2) | | 1,982 |
| | (4 | ) | | 13,840 |
| | (44 | ) | | 15,822 |
| | (48 | ) |
Total debt securities held to maturity | | $ | 52,665 |
| | $ | (206 | ) | | $ | 179,374 |
| | $ | (761 | ) | | $ | 232,039 |
| | $ | (967 | ) |
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2018 |
| | Unrealized Loss Position Less than 12 Months | | Unrealized Loss Position 12 Months or Longer | | Total |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Fair Value | | Gross Unrealized Losses | | Fair Value | | Gross Unrealized Losses | | Fair Value | | Gross Unrealized Losses |
Debt securities held to maturity: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Corporate debt securities | | $ | 280,139 |
| | $ | (4,595 | ) | | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 280,139 |
| | $ | (4,595 | ) |
Commercial MBS, non-agency | | 1,451 |
| | (3 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | 1,451 |
| | (3 | ) |
Other ABS(2) | | 27,012 |
| | (215 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | 27,012 |
| | (215 | ) |
Total debt securities held to maturity | | $ | 308,602 |
| | $ | (4,813 | ) | | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 308,602 |
| | $ | (4,813 | ) |
____________________________
(1)Unrealized losses on the commercial paper investments are less than $1,000.
(2)Consists primarily of securities backed by auto lease loans, equipment-backed loans, auto loans and credit card loans.
Other-Than-Temporary Impairment
We conduct periodic reviews of all securities with unrealized losses to evaluate whether the impairment is other than temporary. The number of individual securities in an unrealized loss position was 187 as of May 31, 2019. We have assessed each security with gross unrealized losses included in the above table for credit impairment. As part of that assessment, we concluded that the unrealized losses are driven by changes in market interest rates rather than by adverse changes in the credit quality of these securities. Based on our assessment, we expect to recover the entire amortized cost basis of these securities, as we do not intend to sell any of the securities and have concluded that it is more likely than not that we will not be required to sell prior to recovery of the amortized cost basis. Accordingly, we currently consider the impairment of these securities to be temporary.
Contractual Maturity and Yield
The following table presents, by major security type, the remaining contractual maturity based on amortized cost and fair value of our HTM investment securities as of May 31, 2019 and 2018. Because borrowers may have the right to call or prepay certain obligations, the expected maturities of our investments may differ from the scheduled contractual maturities presented below.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2019 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Due in 1 Year or Less | | Due >1 Year through 5 Years | | Due >5 Years through 10 Years | | Due >10 Years | | Total |
Amortized cost: | | | | | | | | | | |
Certificates of deposit | | $ | — |
| | $ | 1,000 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 1,000 |
|
Commercial paper | | 12,395 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 12,395 |
|
U.S. agency debt securities | | — |
| | 2,678 |
| | 529 |
| | — |
| | 3,207 |
|
Corporate debt securities | | 51,923 |
| | 414,788 |
| | 11,867 |
| | — |
| | 478,578 |
|
Commercial MBS: | | | | | | | | | | |
Agency | | — |
| | 310 |
| | 6,945 |
| | — |
| | 7,255 |
|
Non-agency | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,453 |
| | 3,453 |
|
Total commercial MBS | | — |
| | 310 |
| | 6,945 |
| | 3,453 |
| | 10,708 |
|
U.S. state and municipality debt securities | | — |
| | 9,608 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 9,608 |
|
Foreign government debt securities | | — |
| | 1,254 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,254 |
|
Other ABS(1) | | 510 |
| | 45,730 |
| | 2,454 |
| | — |
| | 48,694 |
|
Total | | $ | 64,828 |
| | $ | 475,368 |
| | $ | 21,795 |
| | $ | 3,453 |
| | $ | 565,444 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Fair value: | | | | | | | | | | |
Certificates of deposit | | $ | — |
| | $ | 1,000 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 1,000 |
|
Commercial paper | | 12,395 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 12,395 |
|
U.S. agency debt securities | | — |
| | 2,769 |
| | 546 |
| | — |
| | 3,315 |
|
Corporate debt securities | | 51,818 |
| | 418,606 |
| | 12,231 |
| | — |
| | 482,655 |
|
Commercial MBS: | | | | | | | | | | |
Agency | | — |
| | 317 |
| | 7,229 |
| | — |
| | 7,546 |
|
Non-agency | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,446 |
| | 3,446 |
|
Total Commercial MBS | | — |
| | 317 |
| | 7,229 |
| | 3,446 |
| | 10,992 |
|
U.S. State and Municipality Debt Securities | | — |
| | 9,960 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 9,960 |
|
Foreign Government Debt Securities | | — |
| | 1,296 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,296 |
|
Other ABS(1) | | 509 |
| | 45,916 |
| | 2,511 |
| | — |
| | 48,936 |
|
Total | | $ | 64,722 |
| | $ | 479,864 |
| | $ | 22,517 |
| | $ | 3,446 |
| | $ | 570,549 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Weighted-average coupon(2) | | 2.08 | % | | 3.10 | % | | 3.07 | % | | 3.26 | % | | 2.98 | % |
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, 2018 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Due in 1 Year or Less | | Due > 1 Year through 5 Years | | Due > 5 Years through 10 Years | | Due >10 Years | | Total |
Amortized cost: | | | | | | | | | | |
Certificates of deposit | | $ | 5,148 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 5,148 |
|
Commercial paper | | 9,134 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 9,134 |
|
U.S. agency debt securities | | — |
| | 2,000 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2,000 |
|
Corporate debt securities | | 9,111 |
| | 377,384 |
| | 69,226 |
| | — |
| | 455,721 |
|
Commercial MBS: | | | | | | | | | | |
Agency | | — |
| | — |
| | 7,024 |
| | — |
| | 7,024 |
|
Non-Agency | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,453 |
| | 3,453 |
|
Total Commercial MBS | | — |
| | — |
| | 7,024 |
| | 3,453 |
| | 10,477 |
|
U.S. State and Municipality Debt Securities | | — |
| | — |
| | 2,147 |
| | — |
| | 2,147 |
|
Foreign Government Debt Securities | | — |
| | 1,241 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,241 |
|
Other ABS(1) | | — |
| | 33,357 |
| | 1,294 |
| | — |
| | 34,651 |
|
Total | | $ | 23,393 |
| | $ | 413,982 |
| | $ | 79,691 |
| | $ | 3,453 |
| | $ | 520,519 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Fair value: | | | | | | | | | | |
Certificates of deposit | | $ | 5,148 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 5,148 |
|
Commercial paper | | 9,134 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 9,134 |
|
U.S. agency debt securities | | — |
| | 2,016 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2,016 |
|
Corporate debt securities | | 9,056 |
| | 373,284 |
| | 69,500 |
| | — |
| | 451,840 |
|
Commercial MBS: | | | | | | | | | | |
Agency | | — |
| | — |
| | 7,087 |
| | — |
| | 7,087 |
|
Non-Agency | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,453 |
| | 3,453 |
|
Total Commercial MBS | | — |
| | — |
| | 7,087 |
| | 3,453 |
| | 10,540 |
|
U.S. State and Municipality Debt Securities | | — |
| | — |
| | 2,171 |
| | — |
| | 2,171 |
|
Foreign Government Debt Securities | | — |
| | 1,250 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,250 |
|
Other ABS(1) | | — |
| | 33,157 |
| | 1,290 |
| | — |
| | 34,447 |
|
Total | | $ | 23,338 |
| | $ | 409,707 |
| | $ | 80,048 |
| | $ | 3,453 |
| | $ | 516,546 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Weighted average coupon(2) | | 1.81 | % | | 2.84 | % | | 3.60 | % | | 2.74 | % | | 2.91 | % |
____________________________
(1)Consists primarily of securities backed by auto lease loans, equipment-backed loans, auto loans and credit card loans.
(2)Calculated based on the weighted-average coupon rate, which excludes the impact of amortization of premium and accretion of discount.
The average contractual maturity and weighted-average coupon of our HTM investment securities was three years and 2.98%, respectively, as of May 31, 2019. The average credit rating of these securities, based on the equivalent lowest credit rating by Moody’s, S&P and Fitch was A2, A and A, respectively, as of May 31, 2019.
Realized Gains and Losses
We did not sell any of our investment securities during either of the years ended May 31, 2019 and May 31, 2018, and therefore have not recorded any realized gains or losses.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
We segregate our loan portfolio into segments, by legal entity, based on the borrower member class, which consists of CFC distribution, CFC power supply, CFC statewide and associate, NCSC and RTFC. We offer both long-term and line of credit loans to our borrowers. Under our long-term loan facilities, a borrower may select a fixed interest rate or a variable interest rate at the time of each loan advance. Line of credit loans are revolving loan facilities and generally have a variable interest rate.
We offer loans under secured long-term facilities with terms up to 35 years and line of credit loans. Under secured long-term facilities, borrowers have the option of selecting a fixed-fixed or variable-ratevariable rate for a period of one to 35 years for each long-term loan advance. When a selected fixed interest rate term expires, the borrower may select another fixed-rate term or a variable rate. Line of credit loans are revolving loan facilities that typically variable-rate revolving facilitieshave a variable interest rate and are generally unsecured.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Collateral and security requirements for advances on loan commitments are identical to those required at the time of the initial loan approval.
Loans to Members
Loans to members consist of loans held for investment and loans held for sale. The outstanding amount of loans held for investment is recorded based on the unpaid principal balance, net of charge-offs and recoveries, of loans and deferred loan origination costs. The outstanding amount of loans held for sale is recorded based on the lower of cost or fair value. The following table presents the outstanding principal balance of loans to members including deferredby legal entity, member class and loan origination costs, and unadvanced loan commitments by loan type, and member class, as of May 31, 20192022 and 2018.2021.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2019 | | 2018 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Loans Outstanding | | Unadvanced Commitments (1) | | Loans Outstanding | | Unadvanced Commitments (1) |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | |
Fixed rate | | $ | 23,094,253 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 22,696,185 |
| | $ | — |
|
Variable rate | | 1,066,880 |
| | 5,448,636 |
| | 1,039,491 |
| | 4,952,834 |
|
Total long-term loans | | 24,161,133 |
| | 5,448,636 |
| | 23,735,676 |
| | 4,952,834 |
|
Lines of credit | | 1,744,531 |
| | 7,788,922 |
| | 1,431,818 |
| | 7,692,784 |
|
Total loans outstanding | | 25,905,664 |
| | 13,237,558 |
| | 25,167,494 |
| | 12,645,618 |
|
Deferred loan origination costs | | 11,240 |
| | — |
| | 11,114 |
| | — |
|
Loans to members | | $ | 25,916,904 |
| | $ | 13,237,558 |
| | $ | 25,178,608 |
| | $ | 12,645,618 |
|
| | | | | | �� | | |
Member class: | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 20,155,266 |
| | $ | 8,773,018 |
| | $ | 19,551,511 |
| | $ | 8,188,376 |
|
Power supply | | 4,578,841 |
| | 3,466,680 |
| | 4,397,353 |
| | 3,407,095 |
|
Statewide and associate | | 83,569 |
| | 165,687 |
| | 69,055 |
| | 128,025 |
|
Total CFC | | 24,817,676 |
| | 12,405,385 |
| | 24,017,919 |
| | 11,723,496 |
|
NCSC | | 742,888 |
| | 552,840 |
| | 786,457 |
| | 624,663 |
|
RTFC | | 345,100 |
| | 279,333 |
| | 363,118 |
| | 297,459 |
|
Total loans outstanding | | 25,905,664 |
| | 13,237,558 |
| | 25,167,494 |
| | 12,645,618 |
|
Deferred loan origination costs | | 11,240 |
| | — |
| | 11,114 |
| | — |
|
Loans to members | | $ | 25,916,904 |
| | $ | 13,237,558 |
| | $ | 25,178,608 |
| | $ | 12,645,618 |
|
Table 4.1: Loans to Members by Member Class and Loan Type____________________________ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | May 31, |
| | 2022 | | 2021 |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | % of Total | | Amount | | % of Total |
Member class: | | | | | | | | |
CFC: | | | | | | | | |
Distribution | | $ | 23,844,242 | | | 79 | % | | $ | 22,027,423 | | | 78 | % |
Power supply | | 4,901,770 | | | 17 | | | 5,154,312 | | | 18 | |
Statewide and associate | | 126,863 | | | — | | | 106,121 | | | — | |
Total CFC | | 28,872,875 | | | 96 | | | 27,287,856 | | | 96 | |
NCSC | | 710,878 | | | 2 | | | 706,868 | | | 3 | |
RTFC | | 467,601 | | | 2 | | | 420,383 | | | 1 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | 30,051,354 | | | 100 | | | 28,415,107 | | | 100 | |
Deferred loan origination costs—CFC(2) | | 12,032 | | | — | | | 11,854 | | | — | |
Loans to members | | $ | 30,063,386 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 28,426,961 | | | 100 | % |
| | | | | | | | |
Loan type: | | | | | | | | |
Long-term loans: | | | | | | | | |
Fixed rate | | $ | 26,952,372 | | | 90 | % | | $ | 25,514,766 | | | 90 | % |
Variable rate | | 820,201 | | | 2 | | | 658,579 | | | 2 | |
Total long-term loans | | 27,772,573 | | | 92 | | | 26,173,345 | | | 92 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Lines of credit | | 2,278,781 | | | 8 | | | 2,241,762 | | | 8 | |
Total loans outstanding(1) | | 30,051,354 | | | 100 | | | 28,415,107 | | | 100 | |
Deferred loan origination costs—CFC(2) | | 12,032 | | | — | | | 11,854 | | | — | |
Loans to members | | $ | 30,063,386 | | | 100 | % | | $ | 28,426,961 | | | 100 | % |
____________________________
(1)The interest rate on unadvanced loan commitments is not set until an advance is made; therefore, all long-term unadvanced loan commitments are reported as variable-rate. However, Represents the borrower may select either a fixed or a variable rate when an advance on a commitment is made.
Unadvanced Loan Commitments
Unadvanced loan commitments represent approvedunpaid principal balance, net of charge-offs and executed loan contracts for which funds have not been advanced to borrowers. The following table summarizes the available balance under unadvanced loan commitmentsrecoveries, of loans as of May 31, 2019 and the related maturities, by fiscal year and thereafter, byend of each period.
(2)Deferred loan type:
origination costs are recorded on the books of CFC.
NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Because we lend primarily to our rural electric utility cooperative members, we have had a loan portfolio subject to single-industry and single-obligor concentration risks.
Assessing the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio and measuring our credit risk is an ongoing process that involves tracking payment status, charge-offs, troubled debt restructurings,TDRs, nonperforming and impaired loans, charge-offs, the internal risk ratings of our borrowers and other indicators of credit risk. We monitor and subject each borrower and loan facility in our loan portfolio to an individual risk assessment based on quantitative and qualitative factors. InternalPayment status trends and internal risk ratings and payment status trends are indicators, among others, of the probability of borrower default and leveloverall credit quality of credit risk in our loan portfolio.