A private actor takes on the title of "federal instrumentality" when acting in furtherance of the applicable federal function. Union Joint Stock Land Bank of Detroit v Kissane, 277 Mich 668, 670; 270 NW 178 (1936); Mount Olivet Cemetery Ass'n v Salt Lake City, 164 F3d 480, 486 (CA 10, 1998); Fed Land Bank of Wichita v Kiowa Co Bd of Comm'rs, 368 US 146, 149, 151; 82 S Ct 282; 7 L Ed 2d 199 (1961). Thus, federal instrumentality status can be limited to apply only when the private actor is acting in furtherance of the federal purpose that made it a federal instrumentality.

See Hancock v.Train, 426 U.S. 167, 178-179, 96 S.Ct. 2006, 48 L.Ed.2d 555 (1976) , citing Johnson v. Maryland, 254 U.S. 51, 57, 41 S.Ct. 16, 65 L.Ed. 126 (1920) . A private actor takes on the title of “federal instrumentality" when acting in furtherance of the applicable federal function. Union Joint Stock LandBank of Detroit v. Kissane, 277 Mich. 668, 670, 270 N.W. 178 (1936) ; Mount Olivet Cemetery Ass'nv. Salt Lake City, 164 F.3d 480, 486 (C.A.10, 1998) ; Fed. Land Bank of Wichita v. Kiowa Co. Bd.of Comm'rs, 368 U.S. 146, 149, 151, 82 S.Ct. 282, 7 L.Ed.2d 199 (1961) . Thus, federal instrumentality status can be limited to apply only when the private actor is acting in furtherance of the federal purpose that made it a federal instrumentality.

It is also significant that during the 1930s Federal pre-emption arguments made on behalf of institutions governed by the Federal Farm Loan Act of 1916 concerning State moratorium laws and other similar statutes were uniformly rejected by State courts. See First-Trust Joint Stock Land Bank v. Lehman, 225 Iowa 1309, 283 N.W. 96 (1938); Union Joint Stock Land Bank of Detroit v. Baker, 56 Ohio App. 520, 11 N.E.2d 269 (1937); Union Joint Stock Land Bank of Detroit v. Kissane, 277 Mich. 668, 270 N.W. 178 (1936); Rose v. Union Joint Stock Land Bank of Detroit, 278 Mich. 188, 270 N.W. 180 (1936). By expressly allowing the Farm Credit Administration to ban a particular State from the benefits of the Farm Credit System if the laws of the State provide insufficient protection or inadequate safeguards against loss in the event of default, Congress has clearly evidenced its intention that State law govern Federal land banks in mortgage foreclosure proceedings.

Federal land banks, although concededly Federal instrumentalities, possess also some of the characteristics of private corporations. Federal Land Bank v. Priddy, 295 U.S. 229, 79 L. ed. 1408, 55 S. Ct. 705; Federal Land Bank v. Gaines, 290 U.S. 247, 78 L. ed. 301, 54 S. Ct. 168; Union Joint Stock Land Bank v. Kissane, 277 Mich. 668, 270 N.W. 178; Rose v. Union Joint Stock Land Bank, 278 Mich. 188, 270 N.W. 180. A corporation cannot escape state taxation merely because it was created by the Federal Government, unless it is really an agency or instrumentality for the exercise of the constitutional powers of the United States.

These findings lead to the conclusion that there was no substantial or direct interference, by reason of Senate File 15, with the accomplishment of the purposes for which Congress created land banks such as is plaintiff. A like conclusion was reached with respect to a Michigan moratorium act, in the case of Union Joint Stock Land Bank of Detroit v. Kissane, 277 Mich. 668, 270 N.W. 178. [3] We think the reasonableness of our conclusion becomes more apparent as we take into consideration that "Immunity of corporate government agencies from suit and judicial process, and their incidents, is less readily implied than immunity from taxation."

The remaining ground urged in support of this appeal is that defendant, because it is "a Federal instrumentality" is not subject to the Michigan moratorium statutory provisions. This question was decided adversely to appellant in Union Joint Stock Land Bank of Detroit v. Kissane, 277 Mich. 668. See 12 USCA, § 811 et seq. — REPORTER.