Louise Curley

<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/040831f.jpg" width="353">
The pause in GDP growth in many countries in the second quarter was not apparent in Canada. Real GDP in Canada rose 4.3% after a revised 3.0% in the first quarter. The consensus expectation was for a 5% rise, but that was before the upward revision of the first quarter from 2.4%. Canada&#39;s growth rate in the second quarter compares with 2.8% for the U. S. 1.67% for Japan and 2.06% for Euro Zone.
Increases in business capital spending and exports outweighed the declines in the rates of spending on personal and government consumption and an actual decline in government spending on plant and equipment. Business reduced inventories at an annual rate of C$3,544 million after having reduced them at an annual rate of C$44,672 million in the first quarter. The business reduction in inventories in the second quarter was offset by a C$1,325 annual rate of accumulation by the government sector.
The increase in activity has begun to put pressure on prices as can be seen in the widening gap between real and nominal GDP in the attached chart. The Deputy Governor of the Bank of Canada, David Longworth, has only last week commented on the Bank&#39;s commitment to raise rates to check inflation. The overnight funding rate, which is currently 2%, is the rate policy targets. It was last changed on April 13, 2004 when is was lowered by 25 basis points. The next meeting of the monetary authorities is on September 8, 2004.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">Seasonally adjusted annual rates of change</th>
<th scope="col">Q2 04 %</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp; Q1 04 %</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;Q4 03 %</th>
<th scope="col">Q3 03 %</th>
<th scope="col">2003 %</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp; 2002 %</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp; 2001 %</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Gross Domestic Product nominal</td>
<td>10.19</td>
<td>7.63</td>
<td>4.76</td>
<td>4.18</td>
<td>5.25</td>
<td>4.45</td>
<td>2.94</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Gross Domestic Product real</td>
<td>4.29</td>
<td>&nbsp;3.01</td>
<td>2.20</td>
<td>1.36</td>
<td>2.02&nbsp;</td>
<td>3.44</td>
<td>1.80</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Personal consumption</td>
<td>1.30</td>
<td>&nbsp;6.44</td>
<td>0.67</td>
<td>4.37</td>
<td>3.13</td>
<td>3.39</td>
<td>2.68</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Government consumption</td>
<td>1.24</td>
<td>&nbsp;3.18</td>
<td>3.86</td>
<td>0.41</td>
<td>3.80</td>
<td>2.80</td>
<td>3.70</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Business fixed investment</td>
<td>&nbsp; 4.71</td>
<td>&nbsp;7.42</td>
<td>5.22</td>
<td>14.87</td>
<td>4.61</td>
<td>1.41</td>
<td>3.33</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Exports of goods and services</td>
<td>21.57</td>
<td>&nbsp;6.09</td>
<td>9.44</td>
<td>-1.94</td>
<td>-2.39&nbsp;</td>
<td>1.12</td>
<td>-2.83</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Imports of goods and services</td>
<td>13.34</td>
<td>&nbsp;3.77</td>
<td>17.77</td>
<td>-3.02</td>
<td>3.81</td>
<td>1.45</td>
<td>-4.98</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Difference at annual rate</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Business inventory change</td>
<td>-3,544</td>
<td>-44,672</td>
<td>35,000</td>
<td>-44,988</td>
<td>&nbsp;9,753</td>
<td>6,466</td>
<td>-17,696</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Government inventory change</td>
<td>1,328</td>
<td>-336</td>
<td>-112</td>
<td>-64</td>
<td>54</td>
<td>-53</td>
<td>-10</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The pause in GDP growth in many countries in the second quarter was not apparent in Canada. Real GDP in Canada rose 4.3% after a revised 3.0% in the first quarter. The consensus expectation was for a 5% rise, but that was before the [...]

Second Quarter GDP Growth in Canada Accelerates

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/040831d.jpg" width="353">
The Chicago Purchasing Managers Business Barometer for August fell hard to 57.3. The 11.4% m/m decline reversed nearly all of the 14.7% increase in July and left the index well off the May high of 68.0. Consensus expectations had been for a lesser decline to 60.0.
During the last ten years there has been a 73% correlation between the level of the Chicago Business Barometer and the three month change in factory sector industrial output. That correlation has risen to 85% during the last five years.
The new orders index slumped to 58.0 following the July advance to 68.7 from 56.8 in June. Production gave back half of its July gain with a drop to 61.8.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/040831e.jpg" width="353">
Bucking the other components, the employment index rose 5.5 points to 51.1. During the last twenty years there has been an 81% correlation between the level of this employment index and the three month change in factory sector employment.
The index of prices paid surged to 86.6, the highest level since 1988.

<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"> Aug.</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">Aug.&nbsp;&#39;03</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Business Barometer</td>
<td>57.3</td>
<td>64.7</td>
<td>57.9</td>
<td>54.7</td>
<td>52.7</td>
<td>41.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; New Orders</td>
<td>58.0</td>
<td>68.7</td>
<td>61.8</td>
<td>58.0</td>
<td>56.2</td>
<td>42.3</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Prices Paid</td>
<td>86.6</td>
<td>77.6</td>
<td>51.7</td>
<td>55.8</td>
<td>56.9</td>
<td>50.4</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The Chicago Purchasing Managers Business Barometer for August fell hard to 57.3. The 11.4% m/m decline reversed nearly all of the 14.7% increase in July and left the index well off the May high of 68.0. Consensus expectations had been [...]

Chicago Purchasing Agents' Index Down

<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/040831c.jpg" width="353">
Chain store sales slipped 0.2% last week and gave back all of the paltry 0.1% rise the week prior according to the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)-UBS.
For all of August, sales are even with the July average but are down 0.4% from the high in May.
During the last ten years there has been a 60% correlation between y/y change in chain store sales and the change in non-auto retail sales less gasoline.
The ICSC-UBS retail chain-store sales index is constructed using the same-store sales reported by 78 stores of seven retailers: Dayton Hudson, Federated, Kmart, May, J.C. Penney, Sears and Wal-Mart. 

<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"> ICSC-UBS (SA, 1977=100)</a></th>
<th scope="col">08/28/04</th>
<th scope="col">08/21/04</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Weekly Retail Chain Store Sales</td>
<td>438.4</td>
<td>439.3</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Chain store sales slipped 0.2% last week and gave back all of the paltry 0.1% rise the week prior according to the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)-UBS. For all of August, sales are even with the July average but are [...]

U.S. Chain Store Sales Slip

<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/040831a.jpg" width="353">
The average price for unleaded regular gasoline fell to $1.87 per gallon last week, down 9.6% from the May peak of $2.06.
Spot crude oil prices also fell. The price of West Texas Intermediate crude fell to $42.28 yesterday versus the mid-August high of $48.70 per barrel.
&quot;A Crude Crude Oil Calculation&quot; from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis is available <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/mt/20040801/cover.pdf"> here</a>.
Wholesale natural gas prices also eased to $5.05/mmbtu (+7.5% y/y) versus the May high of $6.68.
For the latest Short Term Energy Outlook from the US Department of Energy click <a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/contents.html">here</a>.

<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/@D306.HTM">Energy Prices</a></th>
<th scope="col">08/30/04</th>
<th scope="col">12/31/03</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">US Retail Gasoline, Regular ($/Gal.)</td>
<td>$1.87</td>
<td>$1.48</td>
<td>6.9%</td>
<td>$1.56</td>
<td>$1.35</td>
<td>$1.42</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Domestic Spot Market Price: West Texas Intermediate ($/Barrel)</td>
<td>$42.28</td>
<td>$32.55</td>
<td>35.9%</td>
<td>$32.78</td>
<td>$31.23</td>
<td>$19.38</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The average price for unleaded regular gasoline fell to $1.87 per gallon last week, down 9.6% from the May peak of $2.06. Spot crude oil prices also fell. The price of West Texas Intermediate crude fell to $42.28 yesterday versus the [...]

Gasoline, Crude Oil & Natural Gas Prices Down

<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/040831b.jpg" width="353">
The Conference Board&#146;s August Index of Consumer Confidence tumbled 7.1% to 98.2 following a downwardly revised 2.8% July gain. Consensus expectations had been for a more moderate decline to 103.0.
During the last twenty years there has been a 50% correlation between consumer confidence and the y/y change in real consumer spending.
The index of consumer expectations fell 8.3% (+1.8% y/y), reversing nearly all of the prior two months&#39; strong gains. The present situation index also fell a sharp 5.4% (+62.4% y/y).
Jobs were viewed as hard to get by 25.8% of respondents versus 25.7% in July. The percentage of respondents expecting more jobs in six months fell to 16.2%, below 16.8% last year and 18.3% in 2002.
The Conference Board&#146;s survey isconducted 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"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Confidence</td>
<td>98.2</td>
<td>105.6</td>
<td>20.2%</td>
<td>79.8</td>
<td>96.6</td>
<td>106.6</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The Conference Boards August Index of Consumer Confidence tumbled 7.1% to 98.2 following a downwardly revised 2.8% July gain. Consensus expectations had been for a more moderate decline to 103.0. During the last twenty years there [...]

Consumer Confidence Fell Sharply

<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/040831d.jpg" width="353">
The Chicago Purchasing Managers Business Barometer for August fell hard to 57.3. The 11.4% m/m decline reversed nearly all of the 14.7% increase in July and left the index well off the May high of 68.0. Consensus expectations had been for a lesser decline to 60.0.
During the last ten years there has been a 73% correlation between the level of the Chicago Business Barometer and the three month change in factory sector industrial output. That correlation has risen to 85% during the last five years.
The new orders index slumped to 58.0 following the July advance to 68.7 from 56.8 in June. Production gave back half of its July gain with a drop to 61.8.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/040831e.jpg" width="353">
Bucking the other components, the employment index rose 5.5 points to 51.1. During the last twenty years there has been an 81% correlation between the level of this employment index and the three month change in factory sector employment.
The index of prices paid surged to 86.6, the highest level since 1988.

<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"> Aug.</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">Aug.&nbsp;&#39;03</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Business Barometer</td>
<td>57.3</td>
<td>64.7</td>
<td>57.9</td>
<td>54.7</td>
<td>52.7</td>
<td>41.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; New Orders</td>
<td>58.0</td>
<td>68.7</td>
<td>61.8</td>
<td>58.0</td>
<td>56.2</td>
<td>42.3</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Prices Paid</td>
<td>86.6</td>
<td>77.6</td>
<td>51.7</td>
<td>55.8</td>
<td>56.9</td>
<td>50.4</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Consumer Confidence Fell Sharply 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> August 31, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/040831b.jpg" width="353">
The Conference Board&#146;s August Index of Consumer Confidence tumbled 7.1% to 98.2 following a downwardly revised 2.8% July gain. Consensus expectations had been for a more moderate decline to 103.0.
During the last twenty years there has been a 50% correlation between consumer confidence and the y/y change in real consumer spending.
The index of consumer expectations fell 8.3% (+1.8% y/y), reversing nearly all of the prior two months&#39; strong gains. The present situation index also fell a sharp 5.4% (+62.4% y/y).
Jobs were viewed as hard to get by 25.8% of respondents versus 25.7% in July. The percentage of respondents expecting more jobs in six months fell to 16.2%, below 16.8% last year and 18.3% in 2002.
The Conference Board&#146;s survey isconducted 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"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Confidence</td>
<td>98.2</td>
<td>105.6</td>
<td>20.2%</td>
<td>79.8</td>
<td>96.6</td>
<td>106.6</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Gasoline, Crude Oil & Natural Gas Prices Down 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> August 31, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/040831a.jpg" width="353">
The average price for unleaded regular gasoline fell to $1.87 per gallon last week, down 9.6% from the May peak of $2.06.
Spot crude oil prices also fell. The price of West Texas Intermediate crude fell to $42.28 yesterday versus the mid-August high of $48.70 per barrel.
&quot;A Crude Crude Oil Calculation&quot; from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis is available <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/mt/20040801/cover.pdf"> here</a>.
Wholesale natural gas prices also eased to $5.05/mmbtu (+7.5% y/y) versus the May high of $6.68.
For the latest Short Term Energy Outlook from the US Department of Energy click <a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/contents.html">here</a>.

<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/@D306.HTM">Energy Prices</a></th>
<th scope="col">08/30/04</th>
<th scope="col">12/31/03</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">US Retail Gasoline, Regular ($/Gal.)</td>
<td>$1.87</td>
<td>$1.48</td>
<td>6.9%</td>
<td>$1.56</td>
<td>$1.35</td>
<td>$1.42</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Domestic Spot Market Price: West Texas Intermediate ($/Barrel)</td>
<td>$42.28</td>
<td>$32.55</td>
<td>35.9%</td>
<td>$32.78</td>
<td>$31.23</td>
<td>$19.38</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
U.S. Chain Store Sales Slip 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> August 31, 2004


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/040831c.jpg" width="353">
Chain store sales slipped 0.2% last week and gave back all of the paltry 0.1% rise the week prior according to the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC)-UBS.
For all of August, sales are even with the July average but are down 0.4% from the high in May.
During the last ten years there has been a 60% correlation between y/y change in chain store sales and the change in non-auto retail sales less gasoline.
The ICSC-UBS retail chain-store sales index is constructed using the same-store sales reported by 78 stores of seven retailers: Dayton Hudson, Federated, Kmart, May, J.C. Penney, Sears and Wal-Mart. 

<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"> ICSC-UBS (SA, 1977=100)</a></th>
<th scope="col">08/28/04</th>
<th scope="col">08/21/04</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Weekly Retail Chain Store Sales</td>
<td>438.4</td>
<td>439.3</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

<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/040830b.jpg" width="353">
The Australian current account deficit increased to $12, 061 million Australian dollars in the second quarter from $10,293 million A$ in the first quarter. The deficit thus continues to run at close to 6% of GDP.
In spite of the high current account deficit, the exchange rate has begun to strengthen again after a brief decline from February to July of this year. The exchange rate had increased 63% from its low point of $.4900 US$ on September 24, 2001 to $.7979 on February 17th of this year. As of last Friday it was$.7040, up from $6980 on July 28th.
The current account has been offset by an almost equal capital inflow. <img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/040830c.jpg" width="353"> Other factors--errors and omissions and changes in reserves--have played a minor role in balancing the international accounts. As the two charts show, it is the capital account which currently appears to have the greater impact on the exchange rate. With the free flow of capital, a country can, for a time, experience a rising exchange rate in the face of a worsening current account. In the long run, however, continued current account deficits may lead to conditions that will discourage capital inflows and necessitate structural changes in the economy.
In the attached charts exchange rates, from the Haver data base, Daily, are plotted along with the quarterly current and capital and financial account. In the table below exchange rates from the Haver data base Australia are shown as of the end of the period.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">

</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">Q2 04</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp; Q1 04</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp; Q4 03</th>
<th scope="col">Q3&nbsp;03</th>
<th scope="col">2003&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp; 2002&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp; 2001&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">&nbsp;2000</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Balance of Payments (mil A$)</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Current Account</td>
<td>-12016</td>
<td>-10293</td>
<td>-12186</td>
<td>-12932</td>
<td>-46046</td>
<td>-300517</td>
<td>-16099</td>
<td>-26225</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Capital and Financial Account</td>
<td>12047</td>
<td>10667</td>
<td>12670</td>
<td>12879</td>
<td>46601</td>
<td>31674</td>
<td>16615</td>
<td>25419</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Exchange Rate US$/A$ (EOP)</td>
<td>0.6889</td>
<td>0.7589</td>
<td>0.7360</td>
<td>0.6801</td>
<td>0.7500</td>
<td>0.5662</td>
<td>0.5106</td>
<td>0.5540</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The Australian current account deficit increased to $12, 061 million Australian dollars in the second quarter from $10,293 million A$ in the first quarter. The deficit thus continues to run at close to 6% of GDP. In spite of the high [...]

Australia's Capital Inflows Continue to Support the Australian Dollar

<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/040830a.jpg" width="353">
Personal income grew much less than expected last month. The 0.1% July gain was the weakest in nearly two years, followed a slim 0.2% rise in June and fell short of Consensus expectations for a 0.5% increase.
A 0.5% decline (+6.6% y/y) in proprietors&#39; income was the source of much of last month&#39;s disappointment and that was driven by a 5.4% drop in farmers&#39; income. Wages &amp; salaries rebounded 0.4% (+4.4% y/y) from the slight decline in June. The rebound was paced by a 0.6% (2.7% y/y) increase in manufacturing wages.
Personal disposable income rose a slight 0.1% (4.3% y/y). After accounting for a 2.4% y/y rise in prices, real disposable income rose a much reduced 1.8% y/y.
Consumer spending jumped 0.8% following an upwardly revised 0.2% June decline. Higher light vehicle sales pulled durables up 4.1%. Non-durable goods sales rose a slight 0.2%, held back by lower gasoline prices, and services spending rose 0.4% (5.1% y/y). 
The PCE chain price index fell slightly. Prices less food &amp; energy also were weak, unchanged m/m (1.5% y/y) due to another decline in durables prices (-0.4% m/m, -1.9% y/y). Services prices rose a moderate 0.2% (2.5% y/y). &quot;A Crude Crude Oil Calculation&quot; from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis is available <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/mt/20040801/cover.pdf"> here</a>.
The savings rate fell to 0.6% and prior months&#39; figures were 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/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"> 2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
<th scope="col">2001</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Personal Income</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>4.9%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Personal Consumption</td>
<td>0.8%</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>5.9%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
<td>4.6%</td>
<td>4.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Savings Rate</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">PCE Chain Price Index</td>
<td>-0.0%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>2.4%</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Personal income grew much less than expected last month. The 0.1% July gain was the weakest in nearly two years, followed a slim 0.2% rise in June and fell short of Consensus expectations for a 0.5% increase. A 0.5% decline (+6.6% [...]

U.S. Personal Income Sluggish. Farmers' Income Fell, Wages OK

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

250430N1.jpg

250430O1.jpg

Real GDP eased 0.3% SAAR (+2.1% y/y) during the first quarter of 2025 after increasing 2.4% in Q4’24 and 3.1% in Q3’24. A 0.4% increase had been expected in the Action Economics Forecast Survey. It was the first decline since Q1 2022.

Foreign trade subtracted 4.83 percentage points from growth last quarter as imports surged 41.3% (13.4% y/y) ahead of tariffs, which began to come into effect in the first quarter. The rise followed a 1.9% decline in Q4’24. Exports rose 1.8% (3.0% y/y) after easing 0.2% in Q4. Inventories added 2.25 percentage points to growth after subtracting 0.84 percentage point from Q4 growth.

Real final sales to domestic purchasers grew 2.3% (2.9% y/y) in Q1 after rising 3.0% in Q4. Personal consumption expenditures rose 1.8% (3.1% y/y) following a 4.0% gain. Durable goods spending fell 3.4% (+5.3% y/y) after surging 12.4% in Q4. Motor vehicle purchases declined 11.1% (+5.5% y/y) after strengthening 19.7% in Q4. Spending on home furnishings & appliances gained 1.5% (6.1% y/y) following a 5.4% rise. Recreational goods & vehicle outlays rose 2.5% (7.0% y/y) last quarter after a 13.9% Q4 increase.

Nondurable goods outlays rose 2.7% (3.0% y/y) following 3.1% growth in Q4. Apparel spending increased 6.7% (2.5% y/y) following a 5.0% rise. Food & beverage buying gained 2.5% (2.3% y/y) after a 1.8% increase. Gasoline & fuel oil purchases increased 4.6% (3.4% y/y) after falling 2.0% in Q4.

Spending on services increased 2.4% last quarter (2.7% y/y) after a 3.0% gain. Outlays on housing & utilities increased 3.4% (1.8% y/y) after rising 1.1% in Q4. Health care expenditures rose 4.0% (4.8% y/y) following a 4.7% strengthening. Transportation outlays increased 5.3% (4.6% y/y) after a 3.7% rise while recreation spending rose 4.7% (2.8% y/y) following a 4.5% rise. Restaurant & hotel expenditures declined 2.1% (+0.5% y/y) following a 2.8% rise. Financial services expenditures rose 1.9% (2.0% y/y) after a 3.1% Q4 increase.

Business fixed investment increased 9.8% (3.6% y/y) following a 3.0% decline in Q4. Expenditures on structures rose 0.4% (-0.4% y/y) after a 2.9% increase. Expenditures on producers’ durable equipment jumped 22.5% (8.0% y/y) after falling 8.7%.  Outlays on information processing equipment soared 69.3% (18.9% y/y) following a 7.3% decline. Industrial equipment investment fell 1.4% (-0.3% y/y) after easing 0.9%. Intellectual property product spending rose 4.1% (1.8% y/y) following a 0.5% decline. 

Residential structures investment increased 1.3% (-0.1% y/y) in Q1 after a 5.5% Q4 rise.

250430P1.jpg

250430Q1.jpg

Government spending fell 1.5% (+2.4% y/y) after a 3.1% Q4 rise. Federal government expenditures declined 5.1% (+2.9% y/y) after rising 4.0% in Q4. National defense expenditures declined 8.0% (+4.0% y/y) after increasing 4.8% in Q4. State & local government spending rose 0.8% (2.1% y/y) following a 2.5% rise.

The GDP price index rose 3.7% (2.6% y/y) after increasing 2.3% in Q4. It was the largest increase since Q4’22. A 2.4% increase had been expected. The PCE chain price index increased 3.6% (2.5% y/y) following a 2.4% rise. The PCE price index excluding food and energy rose 3.5% (2.8% y/y) after increasing 2.6% in Q4. The business fixed investment price index rose 0.4% (1.8% y/y) after 1.5% rise. The residential price index strengthened 3.9% (3.2% y/y) after a 1.9% rise while the government price index increased 4.7% (2.8% y/y) following a 2.1% rise.

The GDP data can be found in Haver’s **USECON** and **USNA** databases. **USNA** contains virtually all of the Bureau of Economic Analysis detail in the national accounts. The Action Economics consensus estimates can be found in **AS1REPNA**.

250430R1.jpg

250430S1.jpg

- Decline in GDP is first in three years.
- Foreign trade subtracts substantially ahead of tariffs.
- Domestic final demand growth weakens.
- Price index strengthens with higher core PCE prices.

U.S. GDP Unexpectedly Declines in Q1’25; Prices Strengthen

Michael J. Moran

250430A.jpg

250430B.jpg

High-side readings on the price indexes for personal consumption expenditures in January and February caused some concern about emerging price pressure, especially with some policies of the Trump administration possibly adding to the upward force. However, March brought notable relief, with the headline price index falling slightly (-0.04%). A marked decline in energy prices was helpful (-2.7%), but core prices also were subdued, increasing less than 0.1%.  Year-over-year changes were still above the Fed’s target of 2%, but only barely so for the headline measure (2.3%). The core index backed away from the reading of 3.0% in February, but the latest reading of 2.7% was in line with observations in the past year, and still uncomfortably above target.

Consumers roused from a winter slumber in March, with nominal outlays increasing 0.7%. With inflation restrained, real outlays also posted a gain of 0.7%. Spending on durable gods stood out, with real outlays advancing 3.2%. Real outlays for both nondurable goods and services rose 0.4%, a solid pace. Signs of life were certainly welcome after an average decline of 0.1% in January and February. The March rebound left growth of 1.8% (annual rate) in the first quarter.

The brisk increase in spending in March was supported by a solid gain in personal income (0.5% in both nominal and real terms). Growth in wage income was firm at 0.5%, while proprietors’ income was robust with a gain of 1.8% (not annualized!). The farm sector led the advance in proprietors’ income, but the nonfarm sector also was strong (0.6%).

The personal income and consumption figures are available in Haver’s **USECON** database with detail in the **USNA** database. The Action Economics forecasts are in **AS1REPNA**.

250430C.jpg

250430D.jpg

- Price pressure eases.
- Spending rebounds after two soft months.

Personal Income, Consumption, and Prices in March

250430F20.jpg

250430G20.jpg

The Pending Home Sales Index, a forward-looking home sales measure based on contract signings, from the National Association of Realtors rose 6.1% to 76.5 (-0.6% y/y) during March after rising a little-revised 2.1% in February. These changes followed a 4.6% January decline.

The rise in March sales occurred as the rate on a 30-year mortgage eased to an average 6.65% from 6.84% in February. This rate was well above a low of 2.68% averaged in December 2020.

Pending home sales were up in most regions of the country. Sales in the Midwest rose 4.9% (1.4% y/y) last month after rising 1.8% in February. Sales in the South increased 9.8% (-0.4% y/y) following a 5.8% February rise. Sales in the West improved 4.8% (-2.0% y/y) after falling 3.0% in February. Sales in the Northeast were off 0.5% (-3.0% y/y) in March after falling 0.9% in February.

The pending home sales index measures sales at the time the contract for the purchase of an existing home is signed, similar to the Census Bureau's new home sales data. In contrast, the National Association of Realtors' existing home sales data are recorded when the sale is closed, which is usually a couple of months after the sales contract has been signed. In developing the pending home sales index, the NAR found that the level of monthly sales contract activity leads the level of closed existing home sales by about two months.

The series dates back to 2001 and are available in Haver's **PREALTOR** database. Weekly mortgage interest rates from the Mortgage Bankers Association can be found in the **WEEKLY** database.

- Sales rise to highest level in four months.
- Strength is evident throughout most of country.

U.S. Pending Home Sales Surge in March

Sandy Batten

250430F5.jpg

250430G5.jpg

The employment cost index (ECI) for civilian workers, arguably the most accurate measure of labor compensation in the United States, rose 0.9% q/q (3.6% y/y) in Q1, the same quarterly increase as in last year’s Q4, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The quarterly gains have fluctuated between 0.8% and 1.0% for the past six quarters. The Action Economics Forecast Survey had expected a 0.9% q/q increase and a 3.5% y/y gain.

Wages and salaries for civilian workers rose 0.8% q/q (3.5% y/y) in Q1, down from 1.0% q/q in Q4. This tied the Q3 2024 quarterly rise as the smallest increase since Q2 2021. It was also the smallest y/y increase since Q2 2021. Benefits increased by an outsized 1.2% q/q (3.9% y/y) in Q1 versus 0.8% q/q in Q4. This is the largest quarterly gain since Q2 2022. In general, employment cost gains remain above the pace observed prior to the pandemic but are slowing gradually.

Private industry workers’ compensation rose 0.8% q/q (3.4% y/y) in Q1, down from 0.9% q/q (3.6% y/y) in Q4. Wages and salaries for private industry workers increased 0.8% q/q (3.4% y/y) in Q1 versus 0.8% q/q (3.7% y/y) in Q4. The quarterly gain in Q1 tied that in Q3 2024 as the smallest increase since Q4 2020. Benefits for private industry workers jumped 1.2% q/q (3.6% y/y). the largest quarterly gain since Q2 2022. The acceleration in benefits in Q1 was primarily in service-producing industries.

Compensation in private goods-producing industries increased 1.0% q/q (3.2% y/y) in Q1, the largest quarterly gain in five quarters, versus a 0.7% q/q increase in Q4. Compensation in construction jumped 1.3% q/q, its largest quarterly increase since Q2 2022, up from a 0.6% q/q gain in Q4. Manufacturing compensation growth slowed to 0.7% q/q, its slowest quarterly advance since Q4 2020, from 0.8% q/q in Q4. Compensation in private service-producing industries increased 0.8% q/q (3.5% y/y), down slightly from a 0.9% q/q gain in Q4. Compensation in education and health services jumped 1.3% q/q, its largest quarterly gain since Q3 2023. In contrast, compensation in other services edged up 0.1% q/q in Q1, its smallest quarterly advance since before the pandemic.

The employment cost index measures the change in the cost of labor, free from the influence of employment shifts across occupations and industries. It is provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and is available in Haver’s **USECON** database. Consensus estimates from the Action Economics Forecast Survey are in Haver’s **AS1REPNA** database.

250430H5.jpg

250430I5.jpg

- Compensation grew 0.9 q/q in Q1, the same pace as in Q4.
- Wage growth slowed to 0.8% q/q while benefits surged 1.2% q/q, their largest quarterly increase since Q2 2022.

Employment Cost Growth Steady in Q1 2025

Kathleen Stephansen, CBE

250430J4.jpg

250430K4.jpg

The ADP National Employment Report indicated that nonfarm private sector payrolls rose 62,000 (1.4% y/y) during April after increasing 147,000 (1.4% y/y) during March, revised from 155,000. A 124,000 April rise in ADP employment had been expected in the Action Economics Forecast Survey.

Growth in median annual pay for "job stayers" eased to 4.5% y/y during April, from 4.6% y/y in March and from 4.7% y/y in the prior two months. Manufacturing sector pay grew 4.6% y/y during April, down from 4.8% y/y in March. Construction sector pay was unchanged at 4.7% y/y. Natural resource & mining sector pay grew 4.4% y/y. Financial sector pay rose 5.1% y/y, while education & health services pay rose 4.7% y/y. Leisure & hospitality pay also increased 4.7% y/y. Professional & business service sector pay increased 4.3% y/y as did trade, transportation & utilities pay. Information pay rose 4.1% y/y. Median annual pay for “job changers” rose 6.9% y/y after 6.7% y/y in March.

Small business hiring (less than 50 employees) rose 11,000 (0.6% y/y) after rising 18,000 (0.6% y/y) in March, revised down from 52,000. Employment at medium-sized firms (50-499,000 employees) rose 40,000 (1.1% y/y) after rising 43,000 (1.1% y/y). Large business hiring (500+ employees) rose 12,000 (3.4% y/y) in April, after rising 61,000 (3.6% y/y) in March, revised from 59,000.

Goods-producing employment rose 26,000 (1.3% y/y) in April, after rising 16,000 (1.3% y/y) during March, revised from 24,000. Manufacturing jobs rose 4,000 (-0.2% y/y) after rising 17,000 (-0.3% y/y) in March. The number of construction sector jobs rose 16,000 (3.4% y/y) in April, following a 2,000 (3.6% y/y) March increase, revised from 6,000. Natural resources & mining jobs rose 6,000 (2.8% y/y) in April after falling 3,000 (+1.9% y/y) in March.

The number of service-producing jobs rose 34,000 (1.4% y/y) during April, following a rise of 131,000 (1.4% y/y) in March. Professional & business services employment fell 2,000 (0.6% y/y) after rising 46,000 (0.7% y/y) in the prior month, revised from 57,000. Employment in the financial industry rose 20,000 (2.1% y/y) in April, after rising 38,000 (2.0% y/y) in March. Leisure and hospitality employment increased 27,000 (3.0% y/y), following a 23,000 (2.9% y/y) March increase, revised from 17,000. The number of education & health care jobs fell 23,000 (1.6% y/y) in April, following a 15,000 (1.8% y/y) rise in March, revised from 12,000. Information sector employment fell 8,000 (-0.1% y/y) after a rise of 3,000 (0.2% y/y) in March. The number of jobs in trade, transportation & utilities rose 21,000 (0.4% y/y) in April, after falling 4,000 (+0.4% y/y) in March, revised from a 6,000 fall. Employment in “other” services rose fell 1,000 (+3.2% y/y) following a 10,000 (3.4% y/y) rise in March, revised from 11,000.

By region, employment in the Northeast increased 10,000 (1.9% y/y) in April, following an increase of 95,000 (2.0% y/y) in March, revised from 89,000. Employment in the Midwest rose 42,000 (1.5% y/y) after a gain of 84,000 (1.4% y/y) in March, revised from 81,000. In the South, employment rose 3,000 (1.3% y/y) during April, after rising 10,000 (1.4% y/y) in March, revised from 27,000. In the West, employment rose 9,000 (0.6% y/y) after declining 43,000 (+0.6% y/y), revised from a 41,000 decline in March.

The ADP National Employment Report and Pay Insights data can be found in Haver's **USECON** database. Historical figures date back to January 2010 for private employment. Pay data date back to October 2020. The expectation figure is available in Haver's **AS1REPNA** database.

250430L4.jpg

250430M4.jpg

- Employment increase is modest in both services & factory sectors.
- Wage growth for “job stayers” moderates.
- Small and medium-sized business employment slows.

Economy in Brief: August 2004

Jump to:

Second Quarter GDP Growth in Canada Accelerates

Chicago Purchasing Agents' Index Down

U.S. Chain Store Sales Slip

Gasoline, Crude Oil & Natural Gas Prices Down

Consumer Confidence Fell Sharply

Chicago Purchasing Agents' Index Down

Australia's Capital Inflows Continue to Support the Australian Dollar

U.S. Personal Income Sluggish. Farmers' Income Fell, Wages OK