Tom Moeller

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020906a.jpg" width="353">
Payrolls rose about as expected last month, up 39,000. July&#39;s gain in payrolls was revised up to 67,000 from just 6,000 reported last month, but June&#39;s gain was lowered to 34,000 from 66,000. Payrolls are about unchanged YTD.
The length of the workweek recovered slightly following a steep July plunge. As a result, the index of aggregate hours worked (employment times hours worked) rose 0.3%, but the average for 3Q so far is 0.4% below the 2Q average.
Amongst industries, factory sector jobs fell by 0.4%, the largest one month decline since February. The one-month diffusion index of 39.7 was the weakest breadth-of-gain in factory payrolls since February. Construction jobs rose 34,000, more than reversing the July slide. Jobs in service producing industries rose 72,000 but that was dominated by a 41,000 rise in government employment. Private service producing jobs are up 0.3% YTD.
The one-month diffusion index for nonfarm payrolls remained below the 50% level, at 46.7, down for the third consecutive month. The level suggests little or no employment growth near term. The three month diffusion index was 47.1. 
Average hourly earnings rose as expected and the July gain was revised down slightly.
The unemployment rate fell as a result of a huge 429,000 (0.3% YTD) rise in employment but only a 226,000 (0.2% YTD) rise in the labor force.
The employment figures for nonfarm payrolls are based on reports provided to the US Labor Department by businesses, while the figures from which the unemployment rate is derived are based on a survey of US households.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">

</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EB/@EB01/@EB01.HTM">Employment</a></th>
<th scope="col">Aug</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Payroll Employment</td>
<td>39,000</td>
<td>67,000</td>
<td>-0.9%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
<td>2.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Manufacturing</td>
<td>-68,000</td>
<td>-7,000</td>
<td>-4.8%</td>
<td>-4.2%</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
<td>-1.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Average Weekly Hours</td>
<td>34.1</td>
<td>34.0</td>
<td>34.1</td>
<td>34.2</td>
<td>34.4</td>
<td>34.5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Average Hourly Earnings</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>3.1%</td>
<td>4.1%</td>
<td>3.9%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Unemployment Rate</td>
<td>5.7%</td>
<td>5.9%</td>
<td>4.9%</td>
<td>4.8%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>4.2%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Payrolls rose about as expected last month, up 39,000. July's gain in payrolls was revised up to 67,000 from just 6,000 reported last month, but June's gain was lowered to 34,000 from 66,000. Payrolls are about unchanged YTD. The [...]

August Payrolls Rose Modestly

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020905c.jpg" width="353">
Unit sales of light vehicles were stronger than expected last month as 0% financing plans continued to spur buying. Vehicle sales rose 3.2% versus July and were up 13.1% YTD. Total vehicle sales were the highest since October of last year.
Sales of domestically built vehicles rose 5.1% m/m following an 11.8% surge in July. Auto sales rose 0.6% m/m but light truck sales surged 8.7%.
Imported vehicle sales fell 5.2% vs. July. Auto sales fell 3.1% and truck sales dropped 9.4%.
Imports&#39; share of the US light vehicle market dropped to 17.0%, the lowest percentage since October of last year.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@ED/@ED09/@ED0901/@ED0901.HTM">Light Vehicle Sales (SAAR, Mil.Units)</a></th>
<th scope="col">Aug</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total</td>
<td>18.68</td>
<td>18.10</td>
<td>13.8%</td>
<td>17.25</td>
<td>17.40</td>
<td>16.95</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Domestic</td>
<td>15.50</td>
<td>14.75</td>
<td>15.4%</td>
<td>14.18</td>
<td>14.58</td>
<td>14.47</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Imported</td>
<td>3.17</td>
<td>3.35</td>
<td>6.5%</td>
<td>3.06</td>
<td>2.82</td>
<td>2.48</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Initial Claims for Jobless Insurance Fell 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 5, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020905b.jpg" width="353">
Initial claims for unemployment insurance were higher than expected in the latest week. Claims fell 8,000 versus the prior week (revised up) but a larger decline had been expected.
For the full month of August claims averaged 396,400, the highest level since May.
The four-week moving average rose to 400,000.
Continuing claims for unemployment insurance rose for the fourth week in five versus the prior week&#39;s level which was revised down.
The weekly insured rate of unemployment was stable at 2.8%, still down versus the high of 3.0% in May.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/WEEKLY/@W5/@W507/@W507.HTM">Unemployment Insurance (000s)</a></th>
<th scope="col">8/31/02</th>
<th scope="col">8/24/02</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Initial Claims</td>
<td>403.0</td>
<td>411.0</td>
<td>-2.4%</td>
<td>405.8</td>
<td>299.8</td>
<td>297.7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Continuing Claims</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>3,578</td>
<td>13.0%</td>
<td>3,021</td>
<td>2,114</td>
<td>2,186</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Nonfarm Productivity Growth Revised Up 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 5, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020905a.jpg" width="353">
Nonfarm labor productivity grew more than expected last quarter. Consensus estimates were for no change in the 2Q growth rate of 1.1% reported last month.
Output in the nonfarm business sector rose 0.8% versus a 0.5% preliminary estimate. Hours worked fell 0.7%, unchanged from last month&#39;s estimate.
Unit Labor costs rose less than originally estimated. Compensation growth was little changed.
Productivity in the nonfinancial business sector, a figure derived from the income side of the National Income Accounts, rose 5.0% following a 5.1% rise in 1Q. Unit labor costs here fell for the fifth consecutive quarter.
Manufacturing sector productivity growth was revised down to 4.4% (5.2% y/y) versus 4.9% estimated last month. Unit labor costs fell 1.2%.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EC/@EC02/@EC02.HTM">Nonfarm Business Sector</a> (SAAR)</th>
<th scope="col">2Q &#39;02 (Revised)</th>
<th scope="col">2Q &#39;02</th>
<th scope="col">1Q &#39;02</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Output per Hour</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
<td>8.6%</td>
<td>4.8%</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>2.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Compensation</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>2.4%</td>
<td>2.7%</td>
<td>7.0%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Unit Labor Costs</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>2.4%</td>
<td>-4.6%</td>
<td>-2.3%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>3.9%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
ISM Nonmanufacturing Index Weak 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 5, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020905d.jpg" width="353">
The Institute for Supply Management business activity index of the nonmanufacturing sector was weaker than expected last month, a slight rise versus July had been expected. 
The overall index has been above 50, the dividing line for expansion and contraction, since February.
Of the seasonally adjusted subgroups, new orders and imports fell. Employment rose for the second month. 
The not seasonally adjusted index of prices fell to the lowest level since March. 
During the last five years, there has been a 51% correlation between the level of the NAPM nonmanufacturing index and quarterly growth in real GDP in the service sector.
Business activity for the nonmanufacturing sector is a question separate from the subgroups mentioned above. In contrast, the NAPM manufacturing sector composite index weights the components.
ISM surveys more than 370 purchasing managers in more than 62 industries including construction, law firms, hospitals, government and retailers. The nonmanufacturing survey dates only to July 1997, therefore its seasonal adjustment should be viewed tentatively.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EF/@EF03/@EF03.HTM">ISM Nonmanufacturing Survey</a></th>
<th scope="col">Aug</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Business Activity Index</td>
<td>50.9</td>
<td>53.1</td>
<td>46.7</td>
<td>49.0</td>
<td>59.2</td>
<td>59.1</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Slow Factory Inventory Decumulation Continued 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 5, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020905e.jpg" width="353">
Manufacturing inventories continued to run off in July, but decumulation clearly has slowed. June&#39;s decline was unrevised.
Excluding the transportation sector, inventories rose 0.1%, the first monthly gain since January 2001. Inventory accumulation of communications and audio &amp; video equipment was notable, but elsewhere durable goods inventories continued to run off or were up just slightly. Nondurable goods inventories rose 0.4% following a like gain in June. Accumulation of nondurable goods was not broad based, and strongest for petroleum products for the second month. 
Shipments recovered 1.6% following a 0.9% June decline (0.0% y/y).

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@ED/@ED01/@ED0101/@ED01016/@ED01016.HTM">Inventories</a></th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">June</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Mfg Inventories</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>-7.1%</td>
<td>-8.0%</td>
<td>4.5%</td>
<td>3.1%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Unit sales of light vehicles were stronger than expected last month as 0% financing plans continued to spur buying. Vehicle sales rose 3.2% versus July and were up 13.1% YTD. Total vehicle sales were the highest since October of last [...]

U.S. Light Vehicle Sales Firm

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020904b.jpg" width="353">
The value of construction put in place was about as expected in July, unchanged from June which was revised up. The revision to June was slight and due to a lessened decline in nonresidential construction. May&#39;s sharp decline was halved due to sharply higher residential figures.
Residential building fell for the third month in four. Single family building rose during the period but multi-family has fallen in five of the last seven months. 
Nonresidential building activity again fell sharply and was down 12.1% YTD. Industrial and office building fell sharply, the seventh down month this year (-32.6% YTD).
Spending by governments rose slightly due to broad based increases amongst categories.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E9/@E907/@E90701/@E90701.HTM">Construction Put-in-place</a></th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">June</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
<td>-1.1%</td>
<td>2.5%</td>
<td>7.3%</td>
<td>8.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Residential</td>
<td>-0.7%</td>
<td>-0.7%</td>
<td>5.9%</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>7.4%</td>
<td>11.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Nonresidential</td>
<td>-2.2%</td>
<td>-2.9%</td>
<td>-20.2%</td>
<td>-3.1%</td>
<td>7.1%</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Public</td>
<td>0.9%</td>
<td>-3.7%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>7.4%</td>
<td>5.4%</td>
<td>10.6%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Chain Store Sales Recover Some 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 4, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020904a.jpg" width="353">
Chain store sales rose for the first week in four according to the BTM-UBSW survey. Sales rose 0.5% in the final week of August following declines ranging from 0.3% to 0.8% in the three prior weeks.
Sales for the full month of August fell 0.9% versus the average for July which rose only 0.3% from June.
During the last five years there has been a 61% correlation between the year-to-year percent change in monthly chain store sales and the change in GAF retail sales.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/surveyw/@S2/@S2.HTM">BTM-UBSW (SA, 1977=100)</a></th>
<th scope="col">8/31/02</th>
<th scope="col">8/24/02</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Weekly Retail Chain Store Sales</td>
<td>410.7</td>
<td>408.7</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>6.7%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The value of construction put in place was about as expected in July, unchanged from June which was revised up. The revision to June was slight and due to a lessened decline in nonresidential construction. May's sharp decline was [...]

Construction Spending Unchanged in July

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020903a.jpg" width="353">
The ISM Composite Index of manufacturing sector activity was slightly weaker than expected last month, unchanged from July at 50.5. Consensus expectations were for a modest rise to 51.7. 
New orders, production and the vendor performance indexes all fell. Employment and inventories rose.
Inflation pressure fell for the first month since February. The percentage (NSA) of companies reporting higher prices fell to the lowest level since March.
Over the last twenty years there has been a 76% correlation between the ISM Composite Index and the three month change in industrial production.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EF/@EF02/@EF02.HTM">ISM Manufacturing Survey</a></th>
<th scope="col">Aug</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Composite Index</td>
<td>50.5</td>
<td>50.5</td>
<td>47.9</td>
<td>43.9</td>
<td>51.6</td>
<td>54.6</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Prices Paid Index</td>
<td>61.5</td>
<td>68.3</td>
<td>35.0</td>
<td>43.0</td>
<td>64.8</td>
<td>54.2</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Challenger Survey Indicates Layoffs Rose Sharply 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 3, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020903b.jpg" width="353">
According to Challenger, Gray &amp; Christmas, announced job cuts surged in August to the highest level since February.
Announced job cuts were widespread amongst industries.
During the last eight years there has been a 72% correlation between the y/y change in announced job cuts and the change in initial claims for jobless insurance.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/SURVEYS/@S3/@S301/@S301.HTM">Challenger, Gray &amp; Christmas</a></th>
<th scope="col">Aug</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Announced Job Cuts</td>
<td>118,067</td>
<td>80,966</td>
<td>-15.7</td>
<td>1,956,876</td>
<td>613,980</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The ISM Composite Index of manufacturing sector activity was slightly weaker than expected last month, unchanged from July at 50.5. Consensus expectations were for a modest rise to 51.7. New orders, production and the vendor [...]

ISM Index Unchanged in August

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020830a.jpg" width="353">
Personal income rose less than expected last month. June&#39;s gain was revised slightly higher. Consensus expectations were for a 0.3% gain.
A decline in wage and salary disbursements (2.6% AR, YTD), the second this year, was broadly based amongst industries.
Personal consumption expenditures rose more than expected, reflecting a 3.7% surge in durable goods purchases and 0.6% gains in purchases of nondurables and services.
Disposable income rose 0.2% (10.1% AR, YTD). Personal tax payments fell a sharp 0.8%, the sixth monthly decline this year. 
The PCE price deflator rose 0.2% following a 0.1% rise in June. Prices were up 2.1% (AR) year to date. Less food and energy the price deflator rose 0.1% (1.6% AR, YTD) for the third consecutive month.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E7/@E711/@E71102/@E71102.HTM">Disposition of Personal Income</a></th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">June</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Personal Income</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>3.0%</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>8.0%</td>
<td>4.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Personal Consumption</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>5.0%</td>
<td>4.5%</td>
<td>7.0%</td>
<td>6.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Savings Rate</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>4.2%</td>
<td>3.0%</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>2.8%</td>
<td>2.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">PCE Price Deflator</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>2.5%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Chicago Purchasing Agents' Index Firmed 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> August 30, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020830c.jpg" width="353">
The Chicago Purchasing Manager&#146;s Index of Business activity rose in August. Consensus estimates were for little change or a slight decline. 
The indexes of new orders, production, order backlogs and delivery speeds rose. Employment and inventories fell. 
The prices paid index fell slightly following a surge in July. 

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EF/@EF05/@EF05.HTM">Chicago Purchasing Managers Index, SA</a></th>
<th scope="col">August</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Business Barometer</td>
<td>54.9</td>
<td>51.5</td>
<td>43.6</td>
<td>41.4</td>
<td>51.8</td>
<td>56.5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Prices Paid</td>
<td>63.6</td>
<td>64.5</td>
<td>41.7</td>
<td>50.5</td>
<td>65.6</td>
<td>57.6</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Consumer Sentiment Fell Again 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> August 30, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020830b.jpg" width="353">
The full month August reading of Consumer Sentiment from the University of Michigan was about as expected, down 0.6% for the third consecutive monthly decline. 
Sentiment declined somewhat less month to month than the Conference Board&#39;s measure of Consumer Confidence which also fell for the third consecutive month in August.
Both the indexes of consumer expectations and current conditions fell slightly. 
The University of Michigan survey is not seasonally adjusted.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EF/@EF14/@EF1402/@EF1402.HTM">University of Michigan</a></th>
<th scope="col">August</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Sentiment</td>
<td>87.6</td>
<td>88.1</td>
<td>-4.3%</td>
<td>89.2</td>
<td>107.6</td>
<td>105.8</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Personal income rose less than expected last month. June's gain was revised slightly higher. Consensus expectations were for a 0.3% gain. A decline in wage and salary disbursements (2.6% AR, YTD), the second this year, was broadly [...]

Personal Income Weak, Spending Up

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020829a.jpg" width="353">
Initial claims for unemployment insurance were higher than expected in the latest week, rising above 400,000 for only the second week since May. Claims rose 8,000 (2.0%) versus the prior week which was revised up.
The Consensus forecast was for a rise in claims to 385,000. It was the third consecutive rise in weekly claims.
The four-week moving average rose for the third consecutive week to 392,750.
Continuing claims for unemployment insurance jumped 2.6% from the prior week&#39;s level which was revised down.
The weekly insured rate of unemployment rose slightly to 2.8% but the prior week&#39;s level was revised down.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/WEEKLY/@W5/@W507/@W507.HTM">Unemployment Insurance (000s)</a></th>
<th scope="col">8/24/02</th>
<th scope="col">8/17/02</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Initial Claims</td>
<td>403.0</td>
<td>395.0</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>405.8</td>
<td>299.8</td>
<td>297.7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Continuing Claims</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>3,588</td>
<td>14.5%</td>
<td>3,021</td>
<td>2,114</td>
<td>2,186</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Weak 2Q GDP Growth of 1.1% Unchanged 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> August 29, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020829b.jpg" width="353">
GDP growth last quarter was left unrevised, as expected. A slight upward revision to inventories offset a downward revision to domestic demand.
Domestic final demand growth of 1.3% was the weakest since two quarters during the middle of last year when demand was virtually unchanged. Higher consumer spending (1.9%, AR) and business spending on equipment (3.1%) offset a sharp decline in business spending on structures (-17.8%) which fell hard for the third consecutive quarter.
Trade sector deterioration was little revised and lowered GDP growth by 1.7 percentage points. Exports grew 12.3% (AR) and imports surged 22.8%. Both figures were little changed.
Production increases to slow the rate of inventory decumulation added slightly more to GDP growth than was initially estimated. 
Corporate profits with IVA and CCA adjustments fell 6.6% (AR). It was the second consecutive quarterly decline at that rate.
Estimated inflation was little changed at roughly half last year&#39;s pace.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E7/@E701/@E701.HTM">Chained &#39;96 $, % AR</a></th>
<th scope="col">2Q&#39;02 (Prelim.)</th>
<th scope="col">2Q&#39;02 (Advance)</th>
<th scope="col">1Q&#39;02</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">GDP</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
<td>5.0%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>3.8%</td>
<td>4.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Inventory Effect</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>-1.2%</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Final Sales</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>2.4%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>4.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Trade Effect</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
<td>-1.8%</td>
<td>-0.8%</td>
<td>-0.7%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>-0.6%</td>
<td>-0.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Domestic Final Demand</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>3.0%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>4.3%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Chained GDP Price Deflator</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>2.4%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Help Wanted Advertising Down 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> August 29, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020829c.jpg" width="353">
The Conference Board&#39;s National Index of Help-Wanted Advertising in July reversed all of the prior month&#39;s rebound.
The proportion of labor markets with rising want-ad volume fell to the lowest level (22%) since October.
During the last five years there has been a 78% correlation between the level of help-wanted advertising and the monthly change in nonfarm payrolls. 
Job opportunities deteriorated broadly across regions of the country.
The figures are seasonally adjusted.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/CBDB/@C3/@C3.HTM">Conference Board</a></th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">June</th>
<th scope="col">July &#39;01</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">National Help Wanted Index</td>
<td>44</td>
<td>47</td>
<td>57</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Initial claims for unemployment insurance were higher than expected in the latest week, rising above 400,000 for only the second week since May. Claims rose 8,000 (2.0%) versus the prior week which was revised up. The Consensus [...]

Initial Claims for Jobless Insurance Rose Again

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020828a.jpg" width="353">
Crude oil prices fell slightly during the past week, but concerns over supply disruptions have raised the spot market price of West Texas Intermediate crude more than 60% since the lows set early this year.
Wholesale gasoline prices have been similarly strong up 56% during the period, and fuel oil prices are up 43%.
Through July the CPI for energy had risen 8.2% YTD, held back by a 1% decline in piped gas and electricity costs.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/daily/@D3/@D306/@D30604/@D30604.HTM">Daily Crude Oil Prices</a></th>
<th scope="col">8/27/02</th>
<th scope="col">7/26/02</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">West Texas Intermediate Crude Oil</td>
<td>$28.85</td>
<td>$26.58</td>
<td>6.1%</td>
<td>$25.97</td>
<td>$30.34</td>
<td>$19.34</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
U.S. Budget Surpluses Gone 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> August 28, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020828b.jpg" width="353">
The US Congressional Budget Office issued an update of its outlook for the Federal Budget for the next ten years. For the complete report, go to the website below. <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=3735&amp;sequence=0">http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=3735&amp;sequence=0</a>
The budget in 2002 is now expected to run a deficit of $157B. That&#39;s versus a March estimate of a $46B deficit and a January estimate of a $313B surplus. The budget is expected to return to surplus in 2006.
For the ten years ended 2012, surpluses are expected to total $1,015 trillion. That&#39;s versus a March estimate of $2,380 trillion. Lowered revenue estimates account for roughly half of the revision, and most fall in the &quot;technical&quot; category. Nearly half of the raised spending total is accounted for by a higher estimate of &quot;debt service.&quot;

</body>
</html>

Crude oil prices fell slightly during the past week, but concerns over supply disruptions have raised the spot market price of West Texas Intermediate crude more than 60% since the lows set early this year. Wholesale gasoline prices [...]

Crude Oil Prices Up

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020827a.jpg" width="353">
Durable goods orders recovered much more than expected last month after June&#39;s collapse which was revised deeper. July&#39;s jump was the largest one month rise since last October and raised orders 7.5% year to date.
Orders for nondefense capital goods surged as aircraft orders more than doubled. Excluding aircraft, nondefense capital goods orders also were strong rising 8.1% following a 6.3% decline in June. Nondefense capital goods orders less aircraft were up 5.5% in July versus December.
Orders for computers and electronic products rose 3.9% (-0.1% YTD) following a 4.6% June decline which was deeper than originally reported. Machinery orders jumped 11.8% after a sharp 8.3% June drop. Orders for electrical equipment fell hard for the third consecutive month (0.7% YTD).
Orders for defense goods fell for the third month in four (-13.0% YTD). Durable orders rose 7.3% (5.7% YTD) excluding defense.
Durable shipments rose 3.1% for the first rise in three months.
Durable inventories fell 0.4% (-3.9% YTD), the eighteenth consecutive monthly decline.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@ED/@ED01/@ED0101/@ED0101.HTM">NAICS Classification</a></th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">June</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Durable Goods Orders</td>
<td>8.7%</td>
<td>-4.5%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
<td>-11.4%</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>5.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Nondefense Capital Goods</td>
<td>13.5%</td>
<td>-9.6%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>-16.5%</td>
<td>7.9%</td>
<td>3.9%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Consumer Confidence Fell Sharply, Again 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> August 27, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020827b.jpg" width="353">
The Conference Board&#146;s Index of Consumer Confidence fell more than expected in August. July&#39;s level was little revised. Confidence was down 35.4% versus the peak in 2000.
The decline reflected lower readings of the present situation as well as expectations.
The decline in Consumer Confidence was deeper than the decline in the Consumer Sentiment reading from the University of Michigan. 
During the last five years there has been a 76% correlation between the level of Consumer Confidence and the y/y percent change in real PCE. 
The Conference Board&#39;s survey is conducted by a mailed questionnaire to 5,000 households and about 3,500 typically respond.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@EF/@EF14/@EF1401/@EF1401.HTM">Conference Board</a></th>
<th scope="col">August</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Confidence</td>
<td>93.5</td>
<td>97.4</td>
<td>-18.0%</td>
<td>106.6</td>
<td>139.0</td>
<td>135.3</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Chain Store Sales Down for Third Week 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> August 27, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020827c.jpg" width="353">
Chain store sales fell for the third consecutive week according to the BTM-UBSW survey.
Sales so far in August are down 0.8% versus the average for July which rose only 0.3% from June.
During the last five years there has been a 61% correlation between the year-to-year percent change in monthly chain store sales and the change in GAF retail sales.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/surveyw/@S2/@S2.HTM">BTM-UBSW (SA, 1977=100)</a></th>
<th scope="col">8/24/02</th>
<th scope="col">8/17/02</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
<th scope="col">2000</th>
<th scope="col">1999</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Weekly Retail Chain Store Sales</td>
<td>408.7</td>
<td>410.0</td>
<td>1.%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>6.7%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Durable goods orders recovered much more than expected last month after June's collapse which was revised deeper. July's jump was the largest one month rise since last October and raised orders 7.5% year to date. Orders for nondefense [...]

Durable Goods Orders Recover

USD/EUR exchange rate uncoupling from interest rate differential

Widespread downgrading of 2025 GDP outlook

Trade and fiscal policy uncertainty has exploded with the new administration

Much lower US electricity costs gives it a competitive advantage

Wage growth slowing in the US and Euro area; elevated and sticky in the UK

Stagflation-lite: Blue Chip forecasts below-trend growth and elevated inflation

US policy gyrations boosting policy uncertainty worldwide

Expected tariff hikes have boosted inflation expectations

US and Japan ended 2024 on solid ground in contrast to Europe

US economy expected to outperform other major economies in 2025

Only modest evidence of AI-related surge in US productivity growth

Previous Trump tariffs fading. A boost from new tariffs ahead?

Heavy US manufacturing states underperforming while Sun Belt states outperforming

Rising long-term yields a global phenomenon

US financial market concerns shifting from growth to inflation

Economic activity is picking up in the US but remains lackluster abroad

Policy uncertainty has surged since the US national elections.

Recent turnaround in US economic surprises leading to increases in rate-cut expectations

The outlook has brightened in the US, while it has dimmed for other major economies

Headline US PCE inflation elevated by sticky services prices

US and global equity prices have recently diverged

US leading global upturn in economic surprises

Blue Chip forecasters look for further significant monetary easing apart from Japan

Recent rise in global supply chain pressures could augur a pickup in global inflation pressures

Underperforming German economy generating increased policy uncertainty relative to Europe and the US

Our global data offering is unparalleled in terms of coverage, quality, and organization. We offer 290+ databases from 2500 government and private sources, a wealth of key survey and forecast data covering the world’s economies, and a robust offering of archive databases that drive machine learning for big data applications.

Optimized for precision analytics, our data is seamlessly integrated with Microsoft Office and all leading statistical packages through our DLX® software and platform independent HaverView™ website. We further offer direct database feeds, client server or cloud-based delivery, and RESTful API.


Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Contact us

A premier time series data platform for the global strategy, research, and quant communities. 

New York

London

Singapore

Tokyo

Economy in Brief

Viewpoints

Contact Us

Our Data

Our Products

What We Do

Our Authors

About Us

Data News

Resources

Release Calendars

Training Center

Webinars

Newsletters

Download Software

For Clients

Live Updates

250506J8.jpg

250506K8.jpg

The U.S. trade deficit in goods and services (BOP basis) in March grew to $140.5 billion after narrowing slightly to $123.2 billion in February, revised from $122.7 billion, after widening to $130.7 billion in January according to the U.S. Census Bureau. A $136.7 billion deficit was expected by the Action Economics Forecast Survey. Exports rose 0.2% (6.7% y/y) in March after increasing 2.8% in February. This was accompanied by a 4.4% rise (27.1% y/y) rise in imports which came after m/m stability in February. In Q1’25, the deficit grew to an average $131.4 billion, after rising to an average $83.3 billion in Q4’24.

The trade deficit in goods (BOP basis) widened to a record $163.2 billion in March from $147.9	 billion in February, revised from $147.0 billion. Goods exports (customs value) rose 1.4% (7.0% y/y) in March, after increasing 3.6% in February. The latest increase reflected an 8.2% (8.4% y/y) surge in auto exports which came after a 12.7% strengthening. A 3.5% (4.0% y/y) gain occurred in industrial supplies & materials exports which followed a 5.1% rise. Foods, feeds & beverage exports rose 6.6% (1.4% y/y) after declining in four of the prior five month. Working lower, capital goods exports fell 2.5% (+13.9% y/y) in March after a 4.	8% increase and nonauto consumer goods exports were off 1.1% (+3.4% y/y) in March after a 2.4% gain.

Imports of goods increased 5.5% (31.4% y/y) in March after a 0.2% February easing. Imports of nonauto consumer goods imports surged 27.9% (56.0% y/y) following a 3.1% February gain. Auto imports rose 6.6% (8.7% y/y) after a 1.2% rise. Capital goods imports rose 4.2% (22.5% y/y) following a 1.1% rise. Foods, feeds & beverage imports eased 0.4% (+11.1% y/y) following a 2.0% weakening. Industrial supplies & materials imports declined 12.4% (+39.5% y/y) after weakening 4.6% in February. Petroleum imports by end-use fell 4.1% (-10.2% y/y) after a 2.9% decline. Nonpetroleum imports increased 6.0% (34.8% y/y) after holding steady in February.

The inflation-adjusted goods trade deficit (customs value) deepened to $150.9 billion in March from $136.9 billion in February. Real exports rose 1.6% (5.3% y/y) after a 3.0% February increase, while real imports rose 5.8% (29.8% y/y) in March following a 0.5% February slip.

The services trade surplus narrowed to $23.0 billion in March after decreasing to $23.8 billion in February. It reached a peak of $25.7 billion in November of last year. Service exports fell 0.9% (+5.7% y/y) after a 0.8% decline in February. Construction services exports rose 1.0% (37.7% y/y) after increasing 2.6% in February. Travel services exports fell 7.1% (-3.7% y/y) and financial exports increased 0.9% (7.3% y/y). Transport exports rose 3.1% (2.4% y/y). Service imports eased 0.1% (+10.8% y/y) in March following a 0.8% gain. Maintenance & repair services declined 1.5% (+32.1% y/y) while imported transport services increased 1.2% (1.7% y/y). Imported travel services fell 2.2% (5.3% y/y) while charges for use of intellectual property rose 1.0% (13.6 y/y).

The U.S. goods trade deficit with China narrowed to a seasonally adjusted $24.8 billion in March from $26.6 billion in February. Exports to China declined 8.2% (-10.5% y/y) while imports weakened 7.2% (-2.7% y/y). The deficit with the European Union deepened to a record $48.3 billion in March from $30.9 billion in February. Exports rose 10.9% (14.5% y/y) while imports soared 34.0% (65.4% y/y). The deficit with Japan deepened to $5.8 billion from $5.2 billion in February. Exports rose 1.8% (8.8% y/y) and imports rose 6.4% (9.9% y/y).

The international trade data, including relevant data on oil prices, can be found in Haver’s **USECON** database. Detailed figures on international trade are available in the **USINT** and **USTRADE** databases. The expectations figures are from the Action Economics Forecast Survey in **AS1REPNA**.

250506L8.jpg

250506M8.jpg

- Goods deficit grows as imports surge ahead of tariff imposition.
- Exports edge higher, led by autos.
- Petroleum product imports fall as crude oil prices decline.

U.S. Trade Deficit Deepens to Record in March

250506C2.jpg

250506D2.jpg

Retail gasoline prices for all grades improved to an average $3.27 per gallon (-13.1% y/y) in the week ended May 5 and reversed the prior week’s easing to $3.26. Prices were $3.37 per gallon to begin the month but remained above their low of $3.13 in the week of December 9. An earlier high was $3.79 in the week ending April 22, 2024. The all-time high of $5.11 occurred in the week ending June 13, 2022. The retail price for on-highway diesel fuel eaed to $3.50 per gallon (-10.2% y/y) in the week of May 5 from $3.51 in the prior week. The latest diesel price stood well below a high of $4.63 in the week ending September 18, 2023 and a peak of $5.81 in the week ending June 20, 2022.

The price of West Texas Intermediate crude oil declined to $59.64 per barrel (-26.4% y/y) in the week ended May 2, after rising to $63.09 per barrel in the prior week. Prices remained below a high of $91.45 in the week of September 29, 2023. The cost of crude oil peaked at $120.46 in the week of June 10, 2022. Yesterday, the price was $57.13 per barrel. The price of European Brent crude oil declined to $63.50 per barrel (-25.9% y/y) in the week of May 2 from $67.92 in the previous week. Prices remained well below a recent high of $95.61 in the week of September 29, 2023 and compared to a peak of $127.40 in the week of June 10, 2022.

Natural gas prices improved to an average $3.09 per mmbtu (+88.4% y/y) in the week ended May 2, after falling to $3.00/mmbtu in the prior week. Prices remained well above a low of $1.40/mmbtu in the week of March 15, 2024 but below their peak of $9.56 in the week of August 26, 2022. Yesterday’s price was $3.26/mmbtu.

Gasoline demand rose 3.2% y/y in the four weeks ending April 25 following a 0.4% y/y decline in the prior four weeks. Demand for all petroleum products improved 0.3% y/y in the four weeks ending April 25 after a 0.4% y/y rise in the previous four-week period. Crude oil input to refineries eased 0.1% y/y in the four weeks ending April 25 after a 1.3% y/y decline in the prior four weeks.

Gasoline inventories slipped 0.7% y/y in the week ending April 25 after a 1.2% y/y rise in the week ending April 18. Residual fuel oil inventories fell 18.7% y/y in the week of April 25, after a 19.0% y/y fall in the prior week. Crude oil inventories rose 1.4% y/y in the week of April 25 after a 2.6% y/y rise in the previous week.

Measured in days’ supply, gasoline inventories fell w/w to 25.5 days in the week of April 25 from 26.4 days in the prior. The recent low was 22.9 days in the week of November 8. The supply of crude oil eased w/w to 27.9 days in the week of April 25 after three weeks at 28.3 days, and remained below a high of 31.9 days in the week of March 3, 2023.

These data are reported by the Energy Information Administration of the U.S. Department of Energy. The price and supply/demand data can be found in Haver’s **WEEKLY** & **USENERGY** database.

- Gasoline prices edge higher.
- Crude oil prices decline.
- Natural gas costs rise.

U.S. Energy Prices Remain Mixed in Latest Week

Robert Brusca

250506E.jpg

Not many respondents are showing absolute slowing. Only five this month. Only six over the last three months on average. The median total PMI score fell to 49.7 showing contraction in April from 51.1 in March. The average fared slightly better. The 12-months to 6-months to 3-months show a moderate but consistent slowing. The breadth of slowing is wide with 60.9% of survey respondents slowing over three months compared to six months.

The percentile standings show the most strength for the BRIC group with reading above 50% (that marks the median). All other groupings have standings below the 50% mark indicating that they are below their respective medians of the last four-plus years.

Over every horizon from 12-months to 6-months to 3-months, more than 50% of the respondents show a weakening (slowing) in their PMI responses.

Among the largest economies, only Italy has a composite PMI standing above its median (above 50%).

Only 9 of 24 respondents have PMI ranked percentile standings above the 50% mark. That underlines the weakness in composite conditions and the breadth of the weakness.
 
Services sectors no longer are providing the lift to offset ongoing weakness in manufacturing. The differences among countries are narrowing.

Economic conditions across countries may be narrowing for several reasons, one being that the COVID period and then the shock reaction to Russia's invasion from Ukraine put all countries on the same timeline as central banks have been leaning against the shockwaves from those 2 events. As a result of those events, inflation flared but has more recently been falling. Still, inflation continues to be over the top of targets with the European Monetary Union right now making the most progress and Japan facing more late cycle weakness with excessive inflation than other countries in the mix. More recently aggressive tariff policy the United States has put all countries on their back foot and puts everyone on notice that the future has become a lot more uncertain. Central banks that were progressing toward rate cuts now are worried about the possibility of more inflation from tariffs or from the possibility of recession from tariffs - tariffs up the ante on uncertainty as well as on risk. What we see in this month's PMI statistics is a gradual continued erosion as the perceived risk here is that things get steadily but slowly worse as firms, investors, and consumers began to pull in their horns and prepare for something bad to happen not knowing what that might be.

250506.jpg

Global Composite PMIs Erode

Tian Yong Woon

This week, we focus on trade developments between the US and major Asian economies. Early indications coming out of US-India trade talks seem encouraging, with terms such as “forward most-favoured-nation” for the US and “zero-for-zero” tariffs appearing in news reports — terms which, if enacted, would represent a significant win for the US. India stands to benefit greatly as well if key exports to the US, such as pharmaceuticals (chart 1), receive substantial tariff relief. The benefits could be strongly mutual if a deal also grants the US greater access to India’s large auto consumer market, particularly for major US electric vehicle (EV) producers, given that EV adoption in India remains at a very early stage (chart 2).

Turning to South Korea, discussions also appear to be progressing at a healthy pace, although details remain limited and ongoing domestic political challenges continue to hinder substantive breakthroughs. Nonetheless, the South Korean won has shown signs of stabilisation, while local equity markets have remained buoyant (chart 3). Recent trade data for April has also provided some investor relief, as weak exports to the US were more than offset by a strong performance in semiconductor shipments (chart 4).

In Japan, the race to secure a trade deal with the US is well underway, with automotive exports expected to be a key focal point given their significance to Japan’s economy and the US being a major export destination (chart 5). China, however, remains a notable outlier, with formal trade talks with the US not yet underway. Still, the US-China trade relationship continues to be the most closely watched, given its scale and potential impact on global growth and trade dynamics. While markets await China’s official April trade data, early indicators such as port activity already suggest a decline in bilateral trade flows (chart 6).

**US-India trade talks**
US-India trade discussions have reportedly been progressing rapidly, with both sides having already finalized in April the terms of reference for talks, setting the stage for formal negotiations. One early sign of favourable momentum is India’s possible offering of a “forward most-favoured-nation” clause to the US. This would ensure the US always receives the most favourable tariff terms, ahead of any other trade partner. If enacted, this would be a significant win for the US and a major leap forward in the US-India trade relationship. Another reported breakthrough involves India’s reported proposal of “zero-for-zero” tariffs on steel, auto components, and pharmaceuticals—offered on a reciprocal basis up to a certain quantity. If agreed, this would be mutually beneficial, especially as pharmaceuticals remain one of the US economy’s key imports from India, as shown in chart 1. On a separate note, and more recently, India’s phone exports to the US have reportedly gained prominence. With steep US tariffs on China, firms like Apple are increasingly incentivised to accelerate production shifts to India.

250506T1.jpg

Additionally, India’s proposed “zero-for-zero” tariff plan for auto parts may galvanise US access to India’s large domestic auto market, which has remained comparatively insulated due to high import tariffs. Another area to watch in the trade talks is electric vehicle (EV) imports, especially given US EV giant Tesla’s continued interest in expanding into the Indian market. That said, EV adoption in India remains in its early stages by many measures. While India has an immense middle class with future sales potential, EVs accounted for only about 2% of new cars sold in 2023, as shown in chart 2. This is well below levels seen in other Asian economies like China, or leaders in this space like Norway, where nearly all new cars sold are EVs. Challenges remain in unlocking the domestic Indian market—particularly around affordability and the underdeveloped state of EV infrastructure.

250506T2.jpg

**US-South Korea trade talks**
Discussions on the US-South Korea trade front also appear to be progressing at a steady pace, with technical talks reportedly having concluded in Washington last week. However, details remain limited, and full-scale negotiations have not yet begun. Complicating matters is South Korea’s domestic political landscape. With the country heading into a snap presidential election on June 3, Vice Industry Minister Park has said there is no chance of a comprehensive deal being reached before then. Still, both sides have committed to working toward an agreement before the expiration of Trump’s 90-day reciprocal tariff pause on July 8. In financial markets, the won continues to swing but remains above its year-to-date lows (chart 3). Meanwhile, South Korean equities have been lifted by a softening in trade rhetoric from both the US and China, as well as optimism around the US-South Korea talks.

250506T3.jpg

Turning to the hard trade data, South Korea’s more complete April numbers offered some initial relief to investors. The economy still managed to post moderate export growth, surprising many, despite a nearly 7% y/y decline in exports to the US, as shown in chart 4. One of the key drivers was semiconductors, which recorded double-digit y/y growth for the second consecutive month. However, these figures likely do not yet reflect the full initial impact of the steep mutual tariffs between the US and China. Firmer indications may emerge in the coming months. By then, though, attention will likely have shifted toward the outcome of US trade talks with key partners, as the end of its 90-day reciprocal tariff pause draws near.

250506T4.jpg

**US-Japan trade talks**
Turning to Japan, there is a sense of cautious optimism, with Japan’s chief trade negotiator Akazawa expressing hope for a US-Japan trade deal by June, following the second and most recent round of talks held in Washington last week. A key point of interest is whether Japan can negotiate an exemption from the current 25% automotive tariffs imposed by the US. This is especially significant given the importance of the US as a destination for Japanese auto exports, as shown in chart 5, and the central role the sector plays in Japan’s broader manufacturing economy. Also worth noting is a recent clarification by Japan’s Finance Minister Kato, who walked back earlier remarks and stated that Japan will not use the sale of US Treasuries as a bargaining tool. The clarification may help defuse a potential point of friction between the two sides as trade discussions continue.

250506T5.jpg

**US-China trade developments**
Turning to US-China trade developments — while progress here has lagged, this relationship remains the most closely watched, given its potentially large impact if meaningful movement occurs. Recent messaging from both sides has softened, stepping back from the fiery exchanges and tariff escalations seen earlier in April, offering some interim relief for investors. China has reportedly exempted certain US imports from tariffs, including specific pharmaceutical and industrial chemical products. However, on US-China trade talks, they remain at a very early stage, with China merely “evaluating” the prospect of negotiations with the US. This suggests we are still far from anything resembling a formal deal. Investors are now closely watching for first-round effects of US tariffs, which are expected to appear in China’s April trade numbers due later this week. Early signs point to a slowdown. For example, vessel traffic at the Los Angeles–Long Beach port remains at range lows, hinting at reduced shipments from China.

250506T6.jpg

Asia

Economic Letter from Asia: Art of the Deal

250505N12.jpg

250505O12.jpg

The U.S. ISM Services PMI rose to 51.6 during April, after falling sharply to 50.8 in March from 53.5 in February, according to today’s report by the Institute for Supply Management. The reading indicated service sector expansion for the tenth consecutive month, although the rate of expansion has slowed significantly. The index hit a recent high of 55.8 in October of last year and remains below the all-time high of 67.5 in November 2021. The Action Economics Forecast Survey expected 50.2 for April.

Haver Analytics constructs a composite index combining the services index and the manufacturing index released on Thursday. This index rose to 51.2 in Apri from 50.6 in March. The latest figure remains above its June low of 49.1.

Amongst the services component series, the employment index led last month’s improvement in the overall index. It rose to 49.0 after falling sharply to 46.2 in March. Higher employment was reported by a slightly improved 14.6% (NSA) of respondents while a lessened 16.4% reported a decline. The new orders index rose to 52.3 after falling to 50.4 in March. A higher 22.4% (NSA) of respondents reported a rise in orders while a lessened 15.3% reported a decline. Reporting slower delivery speeds, the supplier delivery series edged up to 51.3 in April after falling to 50.6 in March. Working lower, the business activity series declined to 53.7 after rising to 55.9 in March. A higher 26.2% (NSA) of respondents reported improved activity while a lessened 14.0% reported deterioration.

On the inflation front, the prices index surged to 68.9 in April after easing to 62.8 in March. A greatly increased 39.6% (NSA) of respondents reported higher prices while a lessened 1.9% reported lower prices. The index was increased from its December 2022 low 53.1 and stood at its highest level since October 2022.

Additionally, the new export orders index increased to 48.6 (NSA) in April following a decline to 45.8 in March from 52.1 in February. Just 14.8% of survey respondents reported higher exports while an increased 17.7% reported a decline. The imports index plummeted to 44.3 last month from 52.6 in March. A greatly lessened 4.7% of respondents reported higher imports while a doubled 16.2% reported a decline. The inventory change index jumped to 53.4, a six-month high. The order backlog index edged up to 48.0 in April after falling sharply to 47.4 in March. A lessened 12.2% of respondents reported higher backlogs while a fewer 16.2% reported a decline. These series are not seasonally adjusted and not included in the ISM Services PMI total.

The ISM Services PMI is a composite index consisting of four equally weighted diffusion indexes: Business Activity, New Orders, Employment, and Supplier Deliveries. A reading above 50 indicates expansion in the services sector, while below 50 suggests	 contraction. Supplier Deliveries is the only ISM index that is inversed; a reading above 50 indicates slower deliveries. The ISM figures are available in Haver's **USECON** database, with additional detail in the **SURVEYS** database. The expectations figure from Action Economics is in the **AS1REPNA** database.

250505P12.jpg

250505Q12.jpg

- Total index remains near nine-month low.
- Employment, new orders & supplier deliveries edge up. Business activity weakens. 
- Prices Index strengthens to roughly two-year high.

Economy in Brief: 2002

Jump to: