Proposed Rule2026-07903
Assessment and Apportionment of Administrative Expenses
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
April 23, 2026
Issuing agencies
Farm Credit Administration
Abstract
The Farm Credit Administration (FCA, we, or Agency) seeks comments on this proposed rule to amend the regulations that implement provisions of the Act relating to assessments. The Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended (Act) requires FCA to apportion the amount of the assessments among the System institutions on a basis that the agency determines to be equitable. We propose to revise the assessment formula to account for the size and structure of the System as it exists today and to bring the assessment formula closer to the degree of proportionality that existed when the rule became effective. The proposed changes would reapportion the total assessment among individual System banks and associations to further support cooperative and System principles. The proposed changes impact FCA's current assessment of System banks and associations and do not impact FCA's assessment of other System and non-System entities outlined in Part 607. The proposed changes also do not impact FCA's annual administrative expenses or budget.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 78 (Thursday, April 23, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 78 (Thursday, April 23, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21734-21738]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-07903]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION
12 CFR Part 607
RIN 3052-AD66
Assessment and Apportionment of Administrative Expenses
AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Farm Credit Administration (FCA, we, or Agency) seeks
comments on this proposed rule to amend the regulations that implement
provisions of the Act relating to assessments. The Farm Credit Act of
1971, as amended (Act) requires FCA to apportion the amount of the
assessments among the System institutions on a basis that the agency
determines to be equitable. We propose to revise the assessment formula
to account for the size and structure of the System as it exists today
and to bring the assessment formula closer to the degree of
proportionality that existed when the rule became effective. The
proposed changes would reapportion the total assessment among
individual System banks and associations to further support cooperative
and System principles. The proposed changes impact FCA's current
assessment of System banks and associations and do not impact FCA's
assessment of other System and non-System entities outlined in Part
607. The proposed changes also do not impact FCA's annual
administrative expenses or budget.
DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be submitted on or before
June 22, 2026.
ADDRESSES: For accuracy and efficiency, please submit comments by email
or through FCA's website. We do not accept comments submitted by fax
because faxes are difficult to process. Also, please do not submit
comments multiple times; submit your comment only once, using one of
the following methods:
<bullet> Send an email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#364453511b55595b5b7650555718515940"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a9dbccce84cac6c4c4e9cfcac887cec6df">[email protected]</span></a>.
<bullet> Use the public comment form on our website:
1. Go to <a href="https://www.fca.gov">https://www.fca.gov</a>.
2. Click inside the ``I want to . . .'' field near the top of the
page.
3. Select ``comment on a pending regulation'' from the dropdown
menu.
4. Click ``Go.'' This takes you to the comment form.
<bullet> Send the comment by mail to the following: Autumn R.
Agans, Deputy Director, Office of Regulatory Policy, Farm Credit
Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, VA 22102-5090.
We post all comments on the FCA website. We will show your comments
as submitted, including any supporting information; however, for
technical reasons, we may omit items such as logos and special
characters. Personal information that you provide, such as phone
numbers and addresses, will be publicly available. However, we will
attempt to remove email addresses to help reduce internet spam.
To review comments on our website, go to <a href="https://www.fca.gov">https://www.fca.gov</a> and
follow these steps:
1. Click inside the ``I want to . . .'' field near the top of the
page.
2. Select ``find comments on a pending regulation'' from the
dropdown menu.
3. Click ``Go.'' This will take you to a list of regulatory
projects.
4. Select the project in which you're interested. If we have
received comments on that project, you will see a list of links to the
individual comments.
You may also review comments at the FCA office in McLean, Virginia.
Please call us at (703) 883-4056 or email us at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#423027256f212d2f2f022421236c252d34"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5527303278363a3838153336347b323a23">[email protected]</span></a> to
make an appointment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Technical information: J. Dawn Johnson, Senior Policy Analyst,
Office of Regulatory Policy, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, VA
22102-5090, (720) 213-0919, TTY (703) 883-4056.
Legal information: Jackie Baker, Attorney Advisor, Office of
General Counsel, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, VA 22102-5090,
(703) 967-9098, TTY (703) 883-4056.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Summary of Proposed Objectives and Amendments
The objective of this proposed rule (the ``Proposed Rule'') is to
address the apportionment of assessments among System banks and
associations to account for the size and structure of the System as it
exists today, including updating the example formula. Additionally, we
propose two technical
[[Page 21735]]
revisions to remove two references to entities that no longer exist.
The amendments in the Proposed Rule include changes to the
regulations set forth in 12 CFR part 607 that:
<bullet> Revise the definition in Sec. 607.2 for Non-System
entities to remove the reference to the National Cooperative Bank
Development Corporation from the regulation given this entity no longer
exists.
<bullet> Revise the definition in Sec. 607.2 for Other System
entities to remove the reference to the Farm Credit Finance Corporation
of Puerto Rico from the regulation given this entity no longer exists.
<bullet> In Sec. 607.3(b)(1), increase from thirty (30) percent to
seventy-five (75) percent the amount of the assessment apportioned to
each bank, association, and designated other System entities on the
basis of each institution's pro rata share of the total average risk-
adjusted asset base.
<bullet> In Sec. 607.3(b)(2):
[cir] Decrease from seventy (70) percent to twenty-five (25)
percent the amount of the assessment apportioned to each bank,
association, and designated other System entity based upon the amounts
of the institution's average risk-adjusted assets that fall within the
tiers contained in the table in Sec. 607.3(b)(2).
[cir] Adjust the average risk-adjusted asset size range (in
millions) set forth in the table:
[ssquf] from over ``0 to $25'' to over ``$0 to $900.''
[ssquf] from over ``$25 to $50'' to over ``$900 to $1,825.''
[ssquf] from over ``$50 to $100'' to over ``$1,825 to $4,050.''
[ssquf] from over ``$100 to $500'' to over ``$4,050 to $13,500.''
[ssquf] from over ``$500 to $1,000'' to over ``$13,500 to
$19,800.''
[ssquf] from over ``$1,000 to $7,000'' to over ``$19,800 to
$85,000.''
[ssquf] from over ``$7,000 to $10,000'' to over ``$85,000 to
$120,000.''
[ssquf] from over ``$10,000'' to over ``$120,000.''
[cir] Update the example set forth in Sec. 607.3(b)(2) to reflect
the proposed changes.
FCA does not propose any changes to the regulations set forth in 12
CFR 607.1, covering the purpose and scope of Part 607. Furthermore, FCA
does not propose any changes to the regulations set forth in 12 CFR
607.4 through 607.11, covering assessment of other System entities,
processes for notice and payment of assessments, late-payment charges,
reimbursements for services to non-System entities, reimbursable
billings, adjustments for overpayment or underpayment of assessments,
and report of assessments and expenses.
Background
A. Law and Regulation
FCA's original assessment regulation, which was located at 12 CFR
618.8230, was promulgated in 1972 before Congress enacted the
Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 (1987 Act). As explained in the 1993
preamble, the structural and regulatory changes brought about by the
1987 Act, which are described below, led FCA to evaluate its process to
determine whether the assessment regulation remained equitable.\1\
Based on this evaluation, FCA concluded the original assessment formula
should be revised.\2\ In 1992, FCA concluded that negotiated rulemaking
might provide a creative means to achieve an equitable assessment
formula. In 1993, based on the negotiated rulemaking committee's
consensus recommendations, FCA promulgated the current regulation, 12
CFR part 607 and rescinded the original regulation.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 58 FR 10942 (February 23, 1993).
\2\ 58 FR 10942 (February 23, 1993).
\3\ See 58 FR 10942. The negotiated rulemaking committee's
assessment formula included the concepts of risk and economies of
scale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 5.15(a)(2)(A) of the Act requires FCA to apportion the
amount of the assessments among the System institutions on a basis that
the agency determines to be equitable. This Proposed Rule, if adopted,
would update the regulation to address the current composition of
System banks and associations. Over time, the overall number of System
banks and associations has significantly decreased; however, the size
and complexity of the existing banks and associations has increased
since 1993. The changes outlined in this Proposed Rule do not impact
the overall total assessment to the System.\4\ The Proposed Rule would
reapportion assessments among the individual System banks and
associations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The total assessment to the System is based on FCA's annual
administrative expenses and budget for System oversight and
supervision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Definitions Used in the Preamble
Financial Institution Rating System. FIRS is the rating system
adopted by the FCA Board in 2011 and used by the FCA examiners for
evaluating and categorizing the safety and soundness of System
institutions on an ongoing, uniform and comprehensive basis.
Average risk-adjusted asset base. This term is defined in Sec.
607.2 (b). After the implementation of the revised capital framework in
2017, the original metric of risk-adjusted assets used in the
assessment apportionment was replaced with risk-weighted assets
(RWA).\5\ Within this preamble, we use the term ''risk-adjusted
assets'' for information presented prior to 2017 and the term ``risk-
weighted assets'' for information presented beginning 2017 and
thereafter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ On January 8, 2026, FCA approved a proposed rule that would
amend its capital regulations. The proposed rule, if finalized,
would amend Sec. Sec. 607.2(b) and 607.3(b) by replacing ``average
risk-adjusted asset base'' with ``average assets'' for consistency
with other proposed changes to the capital regulations. 91 FR 9760
(February 27, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
System institutions. This term is defined in Sec. 607.2(k). While
Part 607 defines assessment requirements for System and non-System
entities, this Proposed Rule would impact only System banks and
associations. Therefore, this preamble's references to System
institutions include only System banks and associations.
C. Change in the Composition of System Institutions Since 1993
Over thirty years ago, as of June 30, 1993, there were 259 System
institutions. The average risk-adjusted assets ranged from
approximately $137,000 to $8.8 billion.\6\ As of June 30, 2025, there
were 59 System institutions. The average risk-weighted assets for these
institutions ranged from $175 million to $103 billion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ As of June 30, 1993, average risk-adjusted assets were
approximated based upon the March 31, 1993, and June 30, 1993,
quarter-ends.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From June 30, 1993, to June 30, 2025, the number of institutions
declined from 259 to 59 and the average risk-adjusted assets of these
institutions increased. However, since 1993, not all institutions
experienced risk-adjusted asset growth at similar rates. As a result of
the changes to the System, the average risk-weighted assets are
assessed, in accordance with the methodology in the existing assessment
regulations, at different proportional rates than when the regulations
were enacted approximately 30 years ago. Our Proposed Rule would adjust
the proportionality based on the current levels of average risk-
weighted assets to bring the assessments closer to proportional levels
experienced when the rule became effective.
In our analysis as of June 30, 2025, we grouped institutions into
three primary groups by average risk-weighted asset size: (1) greater
than $10 billion, (2) $1 to $10 billion, and (3) less than $1 billion.
For group one, 13 institutions (including all four banks and nine
associations) reported average risk-weighted assets greater than $10
billion. This group of institutions held 81.7 percent of the total
average risk-weighted assets for all institutions.
[[Page 21736]]
However, despite holding over 80 percent of the overall total average
risk-weighted assets, this group of institutions was only assessed 68.6
percent of the total assessment for all institutions under the existing
regulation.
The second group included 32 institutions and included only
associations, which reported average risk-weighted assets between $1
and $10 billion. This group held 16.6 percent of total average risk-
weighted assets. However, this second group of institutions was
assessed 27.6 percent of the total assessment for all institutions.
The third group included 14 associations that reported average
risk-weighted assets of less than $1 billion. This third group held 1.7
percent of the total average risk-weighted assets However, these
institutions were assessed 3.8 percent of the total assessment for all
institutions.
The institutions reporting lower levels of average risk-adjusted
assets remain key institutions to the System in serving eligible farmer
and producer borrowers in their chartered territories. The boards and
management teams for these associations have indicated to FCA the
challenges facing their associations, including concerns of
experiencing an increased proportional assessment of the total
assessment for institutions.
In addition to reviewing System structural changes, we analyzed the
change in assessment apportionment ratios from June 30, 1993
(assessment year 1994), to June 30, 2025 (assessment year 2026). We
define the assessment apportionment ratio as the ratio of the
percentage of assessments for a System institution or group of
institutions to the percentage of total average risk-adjusted assets
reported by that same institution or group of institutions, where a
ratio of 1.0 indicates an institution or group of institutions is
assessed at the same exact percentage of its percentage of total
average risk-adjusted assets for institutions.
For example, for the group of institutions with less than $1
billion in average risk-adjusted assets, we identified an assessment
apportionment ratio of 1.26 in 1993. In 2025 for this group, we
identified an assessment apportionment ratio of 2.24, which indicated
this group of associations was assessed at over two times the
proportionality of their combined share of risk-weighted assets.
For the group of institutions with average risk-adjusted assets of
$1 to $10 billion, we identified a ratio of 0.80 in 1993, compared to a
ratio of 1.66 in 2025. This difference in assessment apportionment
ratio indicates this group of institutions was approximately assessed
at over two times the proportionality of their combined share of risk-
weighted assets in 2025 than in 1993.
In 2025, for the group of institutions reporting average risk-
weighted assets greater than $10 billion, we identified an assessment
apportionment ratio of 0.84 which indicates this group was assessed
less than their proportional share of combined risk-adjusted assets.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ In 1993, no System institutions reported average risk-
adjusted assets over $10 billion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our historical review of the regulation, we propose to
maintain the current assessment methodology while continuing to
recognize the importance of the economies of scale concept in FCA's
oversight and supervision of institutions. Additionally, FCA believes
it is important to retain the risk premium concept based on a composite
FIRS rating. Based on System changes since 1993 and our analysis of the
current assessment formula, we propose changes to two parts of the
assessment calculation. First, we propose to revise Sec. 607.3(b)(1)
and (2) to increase the portion of the assessment formula that is based
on each institution's pro rata share of the total average risk-adjusted
asset base. Second, we propose changes to the tier thresholds in the
table in Sec. 607.3(b)(2) to adjust the distribution of assessment
apportionment among institutions.
Our analysis indicates our Proposed Rule results in assessment
apportionment ratios of: 0.97 for the group of institutions that exceed
$10 billion in average risk-weighted assets (compared to 0.84 in 2025);
1.12 for those associations that report between $1 and $10 billion in
average risk-weighted assets (compared to 0.80 in 1993, and 1.66 in
2025); and 1.20 for the group of associations that report less than $1
billion in average risk-weighted assets (compared to 1.25 in 1993, and
2.24 in 2025). Our Proposed Rule adjusts proportionalities for all
institutions and retains the current principles of the formula
methodology.
We considered revising only the average risk-adjusted asset size
ranges outlined in Sec. 607.3(b)(2); however, the results from
revising only the tier ranges were insufficient to bring the
proportionality of individual assessments for associations with less
than $1 billion in average risk-weighted assets closer to levels of
proportionality in 1993. Additionally, although we also considered pro
rata amounts of less than 75 percent, these amounts were also
insufficient to bring proportionality ratios closer to 1993 levels.
Based on our analysis, we believe that a proposed increase to 75
percent for the pro rata calculation of the formula is the most
reasonable option.
We also considered a 100 percent pro rata approach, which would
result in an exact proportional ratio of 1.0 for each institution and
ensure each bank and association is assessed exactly as the percentage
of total System average risk-weighted assets held. However, a 100
percent pro rata formula that includes a FIRS risk premium adjustment
would allow anyone to determine an institution's assessment exceeds the
100 percent pro rata formula and included a premium based on an adverse
composite FIRS rating. Therefore, we determined this type of formula
would no longer maintain continued confidentiality in the composite
FIRS rating. Additionally, this approach is inconsistent with our
intent to continue to account for economies of scale. We believe the
proposed methodology provides the most equitable results and maintains
the intentions of the original negotiated rulemaking committee.
We specifically propose an increase, from 30 percent to 75 percent,
of the portion of the assessment formula that bases the assessment on
each institution's pro rata share of the total average risk-adjusted
asset base. This change would result in a corresponding decrease in the
apportionment calculation outlined in 607.3(b)(2) from 70 percent to 25
percent. We determined a proposed 75 percent pro rata minimum change is
necessary to sufficiently adjust the proportionality of assessments for
those associations with average risk-weighted assets of less than $1
billion in upholding cooperative principles. Within the calculation
outlined in 607.3(b)(2), we also propose an increase in the average
risk-adjusted asset tier thresholds to approximate the share of risk-
adjusted assets as distributed in each tier in 1993. We propose
amending the dollar thresholds to mirror the share of bank and
association risk-adjusted assets in each tier for 1993. As a result of
the above proposed changes, the ratio of the percentage of assessments
to the percentage of average risk-adjusted assets moves each group
closer to the proportionality of assessment amounts when the rule was
finalized in 1994.
FCA concluded any change in the apportionment of the assessment
methodology impacts each individual bank and association differently.
However, we strove to ensure any proposed changes to the formula
recognized the differences in all institutions, kept the spirit of the
1992 negotiated rulemaking committee's
[[Page 21737]]
consensus recommendations, and did not place any undue burden on some
institutions over others. We recognize these changes increase or
decrease the individual assessment for each System bank and
association. Based on average risk-weighted assets as of June 30, 2025,
if the proposed formula became effective, most institutions'
assessments decrease compared to their fiscal year 2026 assessments.
However, for institutions reporting average risk-weighted assets of
more than $25 billion as of June 30, 2025, assessments increase
compared to their fiscal year 2026 assessments.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Future calculations may differ because the formula is
dependent on the size and distribution of reported average risk-
weighted assets for individual institutions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, we considered adding a premium based on certain criteria
to address institutions with increased complexity; however, we
determined the criteria to support such a premium would be difficult to
quantify.
D. Improve the Equitability of the Assessment Across System
Institutions by Bringing the Proportionality of Assessments Closer to
Levels Experienced When the Rule Became Effective
FCA proposes revisions to significantly improve the assessment
equitability by adjusting the proportionality of assessments in
relation to the level of risk-adjusted assets across all institutions.
These revisions would:
[cir] Increase the pro rata percentage of assessment to 75 percent
allocated to each institution to account for the growth and the reduced
number of institutions and adjust the proportionality of an individual
institution's assessment in relation to the level of risk-adjusted
assets held.
[cir] Preserve the economies of scale concept by continuing to
apportion a minimum 25 percent of each individual institution's holding
of risk-adjusted assets assessment through a declining rate formula.
[cir] Revise the average risk-adjusted asset tier thresholds to
allocate the average risk-adjusted assets at System institutions in
tiers, consistent with the distribution of average risk-adjusted assets
across the tiers established when the rule was finalized in 1994.
[cir] Retain the risk concept through the composite FIRS rating
premium.
[cir] Keep the current formula to maintain the confidentiality of
the composite FIRS rating in the calculation of any risk premium for
those institutions assigned composite FIRS ratings of 3, 4, or 5.
III. Proposed Rule
A. Amendments to Sec. 607.2
FCA proposes amendments to Sec. 607.2 to update the calculation of
assessments on System banks, associations, and other System entities,
update the example calculation, and eliminate references to the
National Cooperative Bank Development Corporation and the Farm Credit
Finance Corporation of Puerto Rico that no longer in existence.
B. Amendments to Sec. 607.3
FCA proposes amendments to Sec. 607.3 (b)(1) and (2) to update the
formula and example for the calculation of assessments.
IV. Regulatory Matters
A. Determination Under Executive Order 12866 and Expected Determination
Under Executive Order 14192
The Office of Management and Budget's Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has determined that this proposed rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' as defined by Section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, made applicable to FCA by Executive Order 14215.
This action, if finalized as proposed, is expected to be neither an
Executive Order 14192 deregulatory action nor an Executive Order 14192
regulatory action.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to Sec. 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.), FCA hereby certifies that the Proposed Rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Each of the banks in the Farm Credit System, considered
together with its affiliated associations, has assets and annual income
in excess of the amounts that would qualify them as small entities.
Therefore, Farm Credit System institutions are not ``small entities''
as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
C. Providing Accountability Through Transparency Act of 2023
The Providing Accountability Through Transparency Act of 2023
requires a notice of proposed rulemaking to include the internet
address of a posted summary of the proposed rule, in plain language and
less than 100 words. Public commenters may access the summary for this
rulemaking under RIN 3052-AD66 at <a href="https://ww3.fca.gov/news/Lists/News%20Releases/Attachments/738/NR-26-03-3-12-26%20.pdf">https://ww3.fca.gov/news/Lists/News%20Releases/Attachments/738/NR-26-03-3-12-26%20.pdf</a>.
List of Subjects
12 CFR 607
Assessment and Apportionment of Administrative Expenses.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Farm Credit
Administration proposes to amend parts 607 of chapter VI, title 12 of
the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
Section 607 Assessment and Apportionment of Administrative Expenses.
0
1. The authority citation for part 607 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 5.15, 5.17 of the Farm Credit Act (12 U.S.C.
2250, 2252); and 12 U.S.C. 3025.
Section 607.2 [Amended]
0
2. Amend Sec. 607.2 by removing ``the National Cooperative Bank
Development Corporation'' in paragraph (h).
0
3. Amend Sec. 607.2 by removing ``the Farm Credit Finance Corporation
of Puerto Rico'' in paragraph (j).
0
4. Amend Sec. 607.3(b)(1) by replacing ``Thirty (30) percent'' with
``Seventy-five (75) percent''.
0
5. Amend Sec. 607.3(b)(2) by replacing ``Seventy (70) percent'' with
``Twenty-five percent''.
0
6. Amend the table in Sec. 607.3(b)(2) as follows:
From:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average risk-adjusted asset size range (in
millions)
---------------------------------------------- Assessment rate
Over To
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$0........................... $25 X1
25........................... 50 .85X1
50........................... 100 .75X1
100.......................... 500 .60X1
[[Page 21738]]
500.......................... 1,000 .50X1
1,000........................ 7,000 .35X1
7,000........................ 10,000 .20X1
10,000....................... .............. .10X1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average risk-adjusted asset size range (in
millions)
---------------------------------------------- Assessment rate
Over To
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$0........................... $900 X1
900.......................... 1,825 .85X1
1,825........................ 4,050 .75X1
4,050........................ 13,500 .60X1
13,500....................... 19,800 .50X1
19,800....................... 85,000 .35X1
85,000....................... 120,000 .20X1
120,000...................... .............. .10X1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
11. Amend the example set forth in Sec. 607.3(b)(2) from the existing
example to reflect the revisions detailed above as follows:
Example: XYZ association has a composite FIRS rating of 2 and
average risk-adjusted assets of $2 billion. The value of X<INF>1</INF>
has been determined to be .0000837, based on an FCA budget of $100.4
million.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
X1 = .0000837 therefore $900,000,000 x .00837%........... = $75,320
.85X1 = .0000711 therefore $925,000,000 x .00711%........ = 65,801
.75X1 = .0000628 therefore $175,000,000 x .00628%........ = 10,984
--------------
Total Assessment under Sec. 607.3(b)(2)............ = 152,105
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ashley Waldron,
Secretary to the Board, Farm Credit Administration.
[FR Doc. 2026-07903 Filed 4-22-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6705-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on April 23, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.