Haver Analytics
Haver Analytics

Introducing

Charles Steindel

Charles Steindel has been editor of Business Economics, the journal of the National Association for Business Economics, since 2016. From 2014 to 2021 he was Resident Scholar at the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey. From 2010 to 2014 he was the first Chief Economist of the New Jersey Department of the Treasury, with responsibilities for economic and revenue projections and analysis of state economic policy. He came to the Treasury after a long career at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, where he played a major role in forecasting and policy advice and rose to the rank of Senior Vice-President. He has served in leadership positions in a number of professional organizations. In 2011 he received the William F. Butler Award from the New York Association for Business Economics, is a fellow of NABE and of the Money Marketeers of New York University, and has received several awards for articles published in Business Economics. In 2017 he delivered Ramapo College's Sebastian J. Raciti Memorial Lecture. He is a member of the panel for the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia's Survey of Professional Forecasters and of the Committee on Research in Income and Wealth. He has published papers in a range of areas, and is the author of Economic Indicators for Professionals: Putting the Statistics into Perspective. He received his bachelor's degree from Emory University, his Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and is a National Association for Business Economics Certified Business EconomistTM.

Publications by Charles Steindel

  • State labor markets were again soft in December. No state had a statistically significant change in payroll employment; the largest absolute gain was a 19,700 increase in Texas, which was barely .1 percent.

    Six states saw statistically significant increases in their unemployment rates (Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Minnesota, Oklahoma, and Washington)—Delaware’s was up .3 percentage points. The highest unemployment rates were in DC (6.7%), California (5.5%), New Jersey (5.4%), Delaware (5.2%), Nevada (5.2%), Oregon (5.2%), and Michigan (5.0%). Alabama, Hawaii, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Vermont had unemployment rates below 3.0%, with Hawaii and South Dakota’s the lowest, both at 2.2%.

    Puerto Rico’s unemployment rate was again unchanged at 5.7% and the island’s job count rose by 3,600.

  • State real GDP growth rates in 2025:3 ranged from 0.4% in North Dakota to 6.5% in Kansas. North Dakota’s performance was a major outlier (Minnesota was the next weakest state, with a 2.7% real growth rate) and appears largely attributable to a major, but localized, contraction in agricultural output. The vast majority of states had growth rates above 3.3% (in Massachusetts). Among larger states, Pennsylvania and North Carolina stood out with 5.6% growth rates (Michigan and Ohio were also above 5%0, while Florida’s rate was 3.5%. Manufacturing and finance were major contributors to growth, and states in the Midwest, as well as New York, benefitted from those.

    Personal income growth rates ranged from 6.3% in Kansas to 0.1% in Louisiana. The weakness in Louisiana was due to an aberrant sharp contraction in transfer payments following very strong growth in the second quarter. On the flip side, gains in transfers played an outside role in New York’s 4.2% . Earnings growth was unusually high in Iowa and South Dakota; unusually low in Oklahoma.

  • The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia’s state coincident indexes in November continued to be generally soft. In the one-month changes, Hawaii, Missouri, and Nevada had increases above .50 percent, but 12 were down, with West Virginia off by more than one percent. Over the three months ending in November, four states (Hawaii, Missouri, Iowa, and Alabama) had increases of 1.00 percent or more, while eight fell, with Montana and West Virginia seeing declines of more than one percent. Over the last twelve months, three states were down (Delaware by nearly 1 ½ percent), and seven others saw increases of less than one percent. Nine states saw increases of 3 percent or more, with Alabama’s 3.89 percent at the top.

    The independently estimated national estimates of growth over the last three and twelve months were, respectively, .44 and 2.15 percent. The three=month reading seems to be in line with what the state numbers would have suggested, while the twelve-month one appears to be a bit lower.

    Due to the absence of state unemployment rates for October, the indexes were computed using a modified method.

  • November was another soft month for state labor markets. No state had a statistically significant change in payroll employment, though the raw increases in California (32,500). New York (17,100), as well as the decline in Illinois (9,700) look to be of some note. However, no state appears to have had a change as large as .2 percent. In the October numbers, the federal cuts were reflected in large, most likely statistically significant, drops in DC, Maryland, and Virginia.

    State unemployment rates in November were generally, though not universally, higher in November than in September (there are no unemployment figures for October, due to the federal government shutdown). Delaware and West Virginia’s unemployment rates were .4 percentage points higher in November than in September, and a number of other states saw increases of .3 percentage points. Hawaii’s rate dropped .3 percentage points. The highest unemployment rates were in DC (6.5%), California (5.5%), New Jersey (5.4%), Nevada (5.2%), New Jersey (5.2%), Oregon (5.2%), and Michigan (5.0%). Alabama, Hawaii, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Vermont had unemployment rates under 3.0%, while South Dakota’s 2.1% was the lowest in the nation.

    Puerto Rico’s unemployment rate was unchanged at 5.7% (remarkably, there is an October unemployment rate estimate for Puerto Rico) and the island’s job count rose by 1,700.

  • State real GDP growth rates in 2025:2 ranged from -1.1% in Arkansas (Mississippi fell at a 0.9% rate) to 7.3% in North Dakota. States in the Plains benefited from a turnaround in farm output after declines in the first quarter, and there were also increases in mining output in some of those. Arkansas and Mississippi were dragged down by losses in farm output. Strong increases in finance and information helped boost growth in states such as California, New York, and Massachusetts.

    Personal income growth rates ranged from 10.4% in Kansas to 0.9% in Arkansas. In the majority of states, perhaps most notably Massachusetts, increases in transfer payments significantly swelled the income gains related to state GDP growth. Much of the transfer growth reflected the recent retroactive payments to some Social Security beneficiaries.

    This release also included estimates of consumer spending by state for 2024. Given the marked lag in the release of these numbers, and their annual frequency, they are likely not of much interest in assessing current and perspective conditions, either for the nation as a whole or for individual states, though they may be of help in modeling state revenues.

  • The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia’s state coincident indexes in August were on the soft side, but a touch better than the initial July results. In the one-month changes, while four states (Kentucky, Rhode Island, Colorado and Alabama) had increases above .50 percent, seven were down. Over the three months ending in August, Alabama was on top, with two other states (Kentucky and Colorado) also seeing increases above one percent. Five states saw declines, with Maryland down .60 percent. Over the last twelve months, Iowa was down, and four others saw increases of less than one percent. Alabama was the only state with an increase higher than four percent (Idaho was up 3.62 percent), and eight others were at or higher than three percent.

    The independently estimated national estimates of growth over the last three and twelve months were, respectively, .38 and 2.25 percent. Both measures appear to be a bit lower than what the state numbers would have suggested.

  • State labor markets were little-changed in August. Utah saw a statistically significant increase in payrolls and DC saw a drop. No other state had a significant change.

    The unemployment rose a significant .2 percentage points in Delaware and Maryland, while increasing .1 percentage point in Minnesota. Colorado’s rate fell .3 percentage point, and Alabama was down .1.California. The highest unemployment rates were in DC (6.0%), California (5.5%), Nevada (5.4%), Michigan (5.2%), New Jersey, Ohio, and Oregon (all 5.0%). Alabama, Hawaii, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Vermont had unemployment rates under 3.0%, while South Dakota’s 1.9% was the lowest in the nation.

    Puerto Rico’s unemployment rate edged up to 5.6% and the island’s job count rose 3,100.

  • The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia’s state coincident indexes in July continued their recent mediocre performance. In the one-month changes, while Alabama was up .88 percent, no other state had an increase as large as .5 percent, and ten saw declines, with Minnesota off .49 percent. Over the three months ending in July, Alabama was again on top in economic performance, as well as alphabetically, with an increase of 1.39 percent. While seven other states had gains of at least 1 percent, eight were down, with, as was the case for the one-month changes, Minnesota at the bottom , with a loss of .49 percent. Over the last twelve months, Massachusetts and Iowa were down, and five others saw increases of less than one percent. South Carolina was again the only state with an increase higher than four percent (Idaho was up 3.62 percent), and five others were at or higher than three percent.

    The independently estimated national estimates of growth over the last three and twelve months were, respectively, .47 and 2.36 percent. Both measures appear to be a bit lower than what the state numbers would have suggested.

  • State labor markets again showed little change in July. Four states did report statistically significant increase in payrolls. However, the increases in New York and Missouri—both .6 percent--were heavily influenced by unusually sharp gains in government, probably reflecting some seasonal anomalies. Maryland’s .4 percent increase also owed a lot to government, though South Carolina’s comparable increase owed little to the public sector. The sum of job changes across the states was somewhat larger than the reported national increase of 73,000.

    The unemployment rate fell a significant .2 percentage points in Alabama and Colorado, while increasing .1 percentage point in California. The highest unemployment rates were in DC (6.0%), California (5.5%), Nevada (5.4%), and Michigan (5.3%). Hawaii, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Vermont had unemployment rates under 3.0%, while South Dakota’s 1.9% was yet again the lowest in the nation.

    Puerto Rico’s unemployment rate was unchanged at 5.5% and the island’s job count rose 2,600.

  • The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia’s state coincident indexes in June were again generally lackluster. In the one-month changes, no state had an increase as large as .5 percent (Illinois was up .49 percent). Six states saw declines. These were spread across the nation, with Massachusetts down .52 percent. Over the three months ending in June nine states were down, with Massachusetts on the bottom (down .84 percent) here as well. Indiana’s 1.48 percent was the largest gain, while only three other states had increases above 1 percent. Over the last twelve months, Massachusetts and Iowa were down, and five others saw increases of less than one percent. South Carolina was the only state with an increase higher than four percent (Idaho was up 3.62 percent), and six others were at or higher than three percent.

    The independently estimated national estimates of growth over the last three and twelve months were, respectively, .74 and 2.56 percent. Both measures appear to be roughly in line with what the state numbers would have suggested.

  • State labor markets were very little-changed to soft in June. Alaska reported a statistically significant increase in jobs (3,100, or .9 percent) while there was no statistically significant change anywhere else. However, many states reported declines, and the sum of job changes among the states was only 3,100, compared to the national increase of 147,000. No state reported a statistically significant change in jobs. The unemployment rate fell a significant .2 percentage points in Illinois, and one percentage point in Maine, while increasing .1 percentage point in Virginia. The highest unemployment rates were in DC (5.9%), Nevada (5.4%), California (5.4%), and Michigan (5.3%),and Kentucky (5.0%), though Kentucky’s rate is not deemed statistically different than the national average of 4.2%. Hawaii, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Vermont had unemployment rates under 3.0%, while South Dakota’s 1.8% was yet again the lowest in the nation.

    Puerto Rico’s unemployment rate was unchanged at 5.5% and the island’s job count edged down by 800.

  • The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia’s state coincident indexes in May were generally lackluster. In the one-month changes, Kentucky’s index did rise a reasonably hefty .71 percent, and Indiana, Idaho, New York, and South Carolina had increases above .5 percent. In contrast, 10 states saw declines. These were spread across the nation, with Massachusetts down .52 percent. Over the three months ending in May seven states were down, with Massachusetts on the bottom (down 1.0 percent) here as well. Indiana’s 1.71 percent was the largest gain, while 6 other states had increases above 1 percent. Over the last twelve months, Massachusetts, Michigan, and Iowa were down, and seven others saw increases of less than one percent. No state had an increase higher than four percent (Idaho was up 3.62 percent), and only four were at or higher than three percent.

    The independently estimated national estimates of growth over the last three and twelve months were, respectively, .62 and 2.40 percent. Both measures appear to be a bit weaker than the state numbers would have suggested.