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/020918a.jpg" width="353">
Consumer prices (CPI-U) rose 0.3% last month. Consensus expectations were for a 0.2% gain. Excluding food and energy, prices also rose a more than expected 0.3%.
Pricing strength centered on higher tobacco prices, up 2.4%. Nevertheless, the core CPI less tobacco rose 0.3%. Apparel prices rose 1.1% following four consecutive months of decline. Shelter prices rose 0.4%, the strongest gain since April. Public transportation prices rose 0.8%, the first rise in three months. Education prices rose a strong 0.7% for the second consecutive month.
Home furnishings prices fell 0.3%, the seventh month of negative or zero change this year. New vehicle prices also were down 0.1% and have fallen or been unchanged in each month of this year. Medical care prices rose only 0.2% following a 0.7% July gain.
The August chained CPI as well as the core chained CPI rose the same as the official figures.

<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/@E8/@E801/@E80101/@E80101.HTM">Consumer Price Index</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&nbsp;</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>2.8%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;Total less Food &amp; Energy</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>2.4%</td>
<td>2.7%</td>
<td>2.4%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Goods less Food &amp; Energy</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>-0.8%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Services less Energy</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>2.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;Energy</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>-3.0%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>16.9%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;Food &amp; Beverages</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>3.1%</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol"></td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E8/@E801/@E80113/@E80113.HTM">Chained CPI: Total (NSA)l</a></td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>NA</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;Total less Food &amp; Energy</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
<td>&nbsp;1.4%</td>
<td>NA</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
U.S. Trade Deficit Improved Again in July 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 18, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020918b.jpg" width="353">
The U.S. foreign trade deficit improved notably in July. The improvement follows improvement in June. June&#39;s deficit was lessened from $37.8B reported last month. Consensus expectations were for a July deficit of $37.0B
Exports rose strongly for the fourth month in five. Capital goods exports rose for the third consecutive month (13.3% AR, YTD) and nonauto consumer goods (3.0% AR, YTD) were quite strong for the third month in four.
Imports fell due to declines in capital goods (11.4% AR, YTD) and nonauto consumer goods (27.1% AR, YTD). Imports of industrial supplies and materials rose modestly but are up 44.9% (AR) this year on higher oil prices.
The refiner&#39;s acquisition cost of imported crude oil rose to $24.41 in July versus $15.95 in December. Crude oil prices rose further August and September.

<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/@EE/@EE03/@EE03.HTM">Foreign Trade</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">Trade Deficit</td>
<td>$34.6B</td>
<td>$36.8B</td>
<td>$30.8B(7/01)</td>
<td>$358.3B</td>
<td>$378.7B</td>
<td>$262.2B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Exports - Goods &amp; Services</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>-6.2%</td>
<td>11.2%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Imports - Goods &amp; Services</td>
<td>-1.0%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>4.2%</td>
<td>-6.0%</td>
<td>18.3%</td>
<td>10.9%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Consumer prices (CPI-U) rose 0.3% last month. Consensus expectations were for a 0.2% gain. Excluding food and energy, prices also rose a more than expected 0.3%. Pricing strength centered on higher tobacco prices, up 2.4%. [...]

CPI Rose More Than Expected

<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/020917a.jpg" width="353">
Industrial production fell 0.3% (4.2% AR, YTD) in August versus Consensus expectations for a 0.2% rise. July figures were revised up from a 0.2% gain reported last month.
Output in the manufacturing sector fell 0.1% (3.9% AR, YTD). The July gain was revised to 0.3% from 0.1% reported previously. It was the first monthly decline this year.
A 1.5% decline motor vehicles and parts output (16.2% AR, YTD), furniture &amp; fixtures and most nondurable goods was responsible for the decline in factory output. 
Output of business equipment fell (-1.1% AR, YTD) for the second consecutive month led by lower output of transit and information processing equipment. 
Capacity utilization fell. Capacity again rose 0.1%(1.0% AR, YTD) as it has since early last year.

<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/@EA/@EA.HTM">Production &amp; Capacity</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">Industrial Production</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>-3.7%</td>
<td>4.5%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Capacity Utilization</td>
<td>76.0%</td>
<td>76.2%</td>
<td>76.4%(8/01)</td>
<td>76.8%</td>
<td>81.8%</td>
<td>81.4%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Weekly Chain Store Sales Unchanged 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 17, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020917b.jpg" width="353">
Chain store sales were unchanged last week according to the BTM-UBSW survey. Sales during the prior week, which contained Labor Day, had posted only a modest gain.
Sales so far in September were 0.1% below the August average. August sales fell 0.9% versus July.
During the last five years there has been a 56% correlation between the year-to-year percent change in chain store sales as reported by BTM-UBSW and the change in same store sales as reported by Redbook Instinet Research.

<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">9/14/02</th>
<th scope="col">9/7/02</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>411.2</td>
<td>411.2</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>6.7%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Industrial production fell 0.3% (4.2% AR, YTD) in August versus Consensus expectations for a 0.2% rise. July figures were revised up from a 0.2% gain reported last month. Output in the manufacturing sector fell 0.1% (3.9% AR, YTD). [...]

Industrial Production Fell Unexpectedly

<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/020916a.jpg" width="353">
Total business inventories rose strongly in July versus consensus expectations for only a slight gain. It was the third consecutive month of accumulation following over a year during which inventories were shed.
Retail inventories, reported for the first time, rose (4.2% YTD) for the sixth month this year. Nonauto retail inventories also rose (1.2% YTD). For the second month in three the gain was strong. 
Inventory gains at auto dealers and at furniture &amp; home furnishings stores has been notable.
Overall business sales surged 1.2%% (3.6% YTD) on the strength of higher retail and factory sales.
The inventory-to-sales ratio fell to 1.35, near the record low.

<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/@ED06/@ED0601/@ED0601.HTM">Business 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 class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>-3.7%</td>
<td>-6.3%</td>
<td>5.6%</td>
<td>5.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Retail</td>
<td>0.9%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>0.7%</td>
<td>-5.0%</td>
<td>6.1%</td>
<td>7.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Retail excl. Autos</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>-2.0%</td>
<td>4.1%</td>
<td>5.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Wholesale</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>-4.7%</td>
<td>-5.5%</td>
<td>6.6%</td>
<td>6.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Manufacturing</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>

Total business inventories rose strongly in July versus consensus expectations for only a slight gain. It was the third consecutive month of accumulation following over a year during which inventories were shed. Retail inventories, [...]

Business Inventory Accumulation Strong

<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/020913a.jpg" width="353">
Retail sales rose more than expected in August. It was the fourth firm rise in the last five months. Year to date sales are up at a 5.6% annual rate. July sales were little revised.
Sales of motor vehicle and parts dealers again were strong, rising 1.9% (7.3% AR, YTD) as zero percent financing plans were extended by automakers.
Sales excluding motor vehicles and parts dealers rose 0.4% (5.1% AR, YTD), twice the consensus expectation.
Sales at furniture and home furnishing stores rose 0.7%, though sketchy results of late left August sales down versus December. Clothing and accessories store sales fell for the fifth month this year. The YTD comparison also is negative. General merchandise store sales rose 0.6% (4.8% AR, YTD).
Sales at gasoline stations fell 0.8% (17.6% AR, YTD). Nonauto retail sales less gasoline rose 0.5% (4.0% AR, YTD)

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">&nbsp;</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"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/usecon/@ED/@ED04/@ED0401/@ED0401.HTM">Retail Sales &amp; Food Services</a></td>
<td>0.8%</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
<td>3.8%</td>
<td>6.7%</td>
<td>8.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Excluding Autos</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>7.3%</td>
<td>7.4%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">

</table>
Producer Prices Again Weak 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 13, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020913b.jpg" width="353">
Finished producer prices were weaker than expected last month. Prices were unchanged rather than up 0.2% as the Consensus expected. Excluding food and energy prices also were weaker than expectations for a 0.1% rise. Core producer prices fell for the second consecutive month (-0.5% AR, YTD).
Energy prices rose 1.0% (10.8% AR, YTD) following three months when prices fell or were little changed.
Food prices fell for the fourth month in five.
Core finished consumer goods prices fell for the second month in a row (-0.2% AR, YTD). Core nondurable goods prices rose modestly (1.0% AR, YTD). Consumer durables prices fell for the fifth month this year (-1.6% AR, YTD). Capital goods prices fell for the fifth month this year (-1.0% AR, YTD). 
Intermediate goods prices posted the strongest rise since April (2.9% AR, YTD). Core intermediate prices were firm (2.0% YTD, AR). 
Crude goods prices also were firm (20.1% AR, YTD) reflecting higher prices for energy and other commodities. Core crude prices were up 17.5% (AR) year to date.

<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/@E8/@E802/@E80201/@E80201.HTM">Producer Price Index</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">Finished Goods</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>-1.5%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Core</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Intermediate Goods</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>-0.7%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>4.9%</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Core</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>-0.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Crude Goods</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>-4.1%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>22.8%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Core</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>9.0%</td>
<td>-9.9%</td>
<td>7.3%</td>
<td>-4.7%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Consumer Sentiment Down Further 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 13, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020913c.jpg" width="353">
The mid-September reading of Consumer Sentiment from the University of Michigan was weaker than expectations for a slight rise. Sentiment fell 1.6% (m/m) signaling the sixth monthly decline this year.
Both the indexes of consumer expectations and current conditions fell. The current index fell sharply. 
The University of Michigan survey is not seasonally adjusted.
For a discussion of consumer confidence and sentiment in the aftermath of September 11th click <a href="http://www.kc.frb.org/Publicat/econrev/er02q2.htm#consumer">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/USECON/@EF/@EF14/@EF1402/@EF1402.HTM">University of Michigan</a></th>
<th scope="col">Mid-Sept.</th>
<th scope="col">Aug</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>86.2</td>
<td>87.6</td>
<td>5.4%</td>
<td>89.2</td>
<td>107.6</td>
<td>105.8</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Retail sales rose more than expected in August. It was the fourth firm rise in the last five months. Year to date sales are up at a 5.6% annual rate. July sales were little revised. Sales of motor vehicle and parts dealers again were [...]

August Retail 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/020912b.jpg" width="353">
Prices for imported commodities rose moderately last month. The rise was right on Consensus expectations. July figures were little revised.
Petroleum import prices rose for the seventh month this year. Petroleum prices have risen 51.8% since December. In September, the price of Arab Light crude oil is up to $25.52/bbl versus $23.22 in August.
Nonpetroleum import prices rose 0.1% (0.2% YTD) after being unchanged in July.
Prices for imported capital goods rose 0.2% (-1.1% YTD) after falling 0.2% in July. Nonauto consumer goods prices were unchanged (-0.5% YTD) and auto prices were unchanged for the second consecutive month (0.1% YTD).
Export prices rose just 0.1% (0.8% YTD). Food and industrial supplies prices (5.6% YTD) were strong for the third consecutive month but other export prices were weak or fell.

<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/@E8/@E807/@E807.HTM">Import/Export Prices (NSA)</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">Import - All Commodities</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>-1.3%</td>
<td>-3.5%</td>
<td>6.5%</td>
<td>0.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Petroleum</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>4.3%</td>
<td>5.6%</td>
<td>-17.2%</td>
<td>66.5%</td>
<td>34.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Nonpetroleum</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>-1.1%</td>
<td>-1.5%</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>-1.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Export - All Commodities</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
<td>-0.8%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>-1.3%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
2Q Current Account Deficit Another Record 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 12, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020912c.jpg" width="353">
The US current account deficit deepened more than expected last quarter to another record level. 
A record deficit in goods, services and income trade was driven by another sharp deterioration in goods and services trade. The newly formed deficit in the income balance deteriorated further.
Exports of goods and services rose for the second consecutive quarter, up 4.5%, and income receipts rose 4.3%, the first quarterly gain since 2000.

<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/@EE/@EE01/@EE01.HTM">US Int&#39;l Balance of Payments</a></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">Current Account Deficit</td>
<td>$130.0B</td>
<td>$112.5B</td>
<td>$99.2B</td>
<td>$393.4B</td>
<td>$410.3B</td>
<td>$292.9B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; % of GDP</td>
<td>5.0%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>3.8%</td>
<td>4.5%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Deficit on Gds, Serv &amp; Income</td>
<td>$116.9B</td>
<td>$96.4B</td>
<td>$87.3B</td>
<td>$343.9B</td>
<td>$356.9B</td>
<td>$244.1B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Exports</td>
<td>4.5%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>-8.2%</td>
<td>-9.6%</td>
<td>13.6%</td>
<td>4.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Imports</td>
<td>8.6%</td>
<td>3.9%</td>
<td>0.6%</td>
<td>-8.4%</td>
<td>18.9%</td>
<td>10.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Unilateral Transfers Deficit</td>
<td>$13.1B</td>
<td>$16.0B</td>
<td>$11.9B</td>
<td>$49.5B</td>
<td>$53.4B</td>
<td>$48.8B</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Initial Jobless Insurance Claims Highest Since April 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 12, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020912a.jpg" width="353">
Initial claims for unemployment insurance were again higher than expected in the latest week.Claims rose 19,000 versus the prior week which was revised up slightly.
Claims have been above the 400,000 threshold for three consecutive weeks for the first time since May.
The four-week moving average rose to 409,500.
Continuing claims for unemployment insurance rose 1.1% but the prior week&#39;s level which was revised down by a like amount.
The weekly insured rate of unemployment was stable at 2.8% for the third consecutive week.

<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">9/7/02</th>
<th scope="col">8/31/02</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>426.0</td>
<td>407.0</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>405.8</td>
<td>299.8</td>
<td>297.7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Continuing Claims</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>3,569</td>
<td>11.2%</td>
<td>3,021</td>
<td>2,114</td>
<td>2,186</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Prices for imported commodities rose moderately last month. The rise was right on Consensus expectations. July figures were little revised. Petroleum import prices rose for the seventh month this year. Petroleum prices have risen [...]

Import Prices Rose As Expected

<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/020911a.jpg" width="353">
The Future Inflation Gauge (FIG) published by the Economic Cycle Research Institute (ECRI) rose for the fifth consecutive month in August.
The indicator&#39;s six-month growth rate of 18.8% was the strongest growth rate in the record of the index which dates back to 1994.
The monthly FIG has a mean lead of 11 months and a median lead of 9 months at inflation cycle turns .
The eight components of the FIG are commodity prices, employment measures, capacity measures, import prices, the yield spread, real estate and debt.
For more on ECRI visit <a href="http://www.businesscycle.com/">http://www.businesscycle.com</a>.

<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/@EF/@EF12/@EF12.HTM">ECRI</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">Future Inflation Gauge</td>
<td>109.0</td>
<td>107.0</td>
<td>8.8%</td>
<td>-14.2%</td>
<td>6.5%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The Future Inflation Gauge (FIG) published by the Economic Cycle Research Institute (ECRI) rose for the fifth consecutive month in August. The indicator's six-month growth rate of 18.8% was the strongest growth rate in the record of [...]

ECRI Future Inflation Gauge Rose

<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/020910a.jpg" width="353">
Chain store sales rose 0.1% during the first week of September according to the BTM-UBSW survey. Sales during Labor Day week posted the second rise versus the prior period following three consecutive down weeks.
Sales began the month of September 0.1% below the August average. August sales fell 0.9% versus July.
During the last five years there has been a 56% correlation between the year-to-year percent change in chain store sales as reported by BTM-UBSW and the change in same store sales as reported by Redbook Instinet Research.

<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">9/07/02</th>
<th scope="col">8/31/02</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>411.2</td>
<td>410.7</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>6.7%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
The Dollar & Commodity Prices Meander 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 10, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020910b.jpg" width="353">
The trade weighted value of the US dollar recently has recouped some of the losses suffered early last week.
Nevertheless, the dollar&#39;s trade weighted value has been volatile in a range of plus or minus 1.5% since the lows set early in July. Since then, sentiment regarding near term Fed ease has waxed and waned.
Commodity prices also have meandered recently. Oil prices have fallen 13% from the daily highs set in June but very recently have moved sideways. Metals prices also are down versus June highs but lately have stabilized.

</body>
</html>

Chain store sales rose 0.1% during the first week of September according to the BTM-UBSW survey. Sales during Labor Day week posted the second rise versus the prior period following three consecutive down weeks. Sales began the month [...]

Chain Store Sales Up 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/020909b.jpg" width="353">
Consumer credit outstanding rose $10.8B (0.6%) in July, a bit more than expected. June figures were revised up slightly. So far this year, consumer credit outstanding has risen at a 5.9% annual rate. 
Revolving credit grew more strongly (0.9%) than in any month since November. That surge raised year to date revolving credit growth to 5.6% (AR).
Not seasonally adjusted revolving credit issuance was quite strong from finance companies. The 12.8% month to month surge was the strongest on record.
Nonrevolving credit was moderate at 0.4%, 6.1% (AR) YTD.

<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/@E1/@E103/@E10308/@E10308.HTM">Consumer Credit Outstanding</a></th>
<th scope="col">July m/m</th>
<th scope="col">June m/m</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>$10.8B</td>
<td>$8.9B</td>
<td>6.4%</td>
<td>6.8%</td>
<td>10.2%</td>
<td>7.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Revolving</td>
<td>$6.5B</td>
<td>$3.5B</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>4.9%</td>
<td>11.5%</td>
<td>6.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Nonrevolving</td>
<td>$4.4B</td>
<td>$5.3B</td>
<td>8.7%</td>
<td>8.3%</td>
<td>9.2%</td>
<td>8.4%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Chicago Fed National Activity Index Down in July 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> September 9, 2002


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/020909a.jpg" width="353">
The Chicago Fed National Activity Index (CFNAI) fell in July. The decline left the three-month moving average near zero.
The index level measures deviations from zero. A zero value indicates that the economy is expanding at its historical trend rate of growth.
The CFNAI is a weighted average of 85 indicators of economic activity. The indicators reflect activity in the following categories: production &amp; income, the labor market, personal consumption &amp; housing, mfg. &amp; trade sales, and inventories &amp; orders.
During the last ten years there has been a 70% correlation between the level of the National Activity Index and quarterly growth in real GDP.
For a complete discussion of the Chicago Fed&#39;s National Activity Index visit: <a href="http://www.chicagofed.org/economicresearchanddata/national/pdffiles/CFNAI_july2002.pdf">http://www.chicagofed.org/economicresearchanddata/national/pdffiles/CFNAI_july2002.pdf</a>

<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/SURVEYS/@S5/@S503/@S503.HTM">Chicago Fed</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">CFNAI</td>
<td>-0.25</td>
<td>0.20</td>
<td>-0.35</td>
<td>-1.10</td>
<td>-0.18</td>
<td>0.27</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Consumer credit outstanding rose $10.8B (0.6%) in July, a bit more than expected. June figures were revised up slightly. So far this year, consumer credit outstanding has risen at a 5.9% annual rate. Revolving credit grew more [...]

Consumer Credit Growth Strong

Latest PMIs show US losing momentum while RoW is gaining momentum

Sticky services prices behind sticky overall PCE inflation

Flash April PMIs point to slower growth in the US but a pickup in Europe and Japan

Outlook strengthens for US while it weakens for other major economies

Crude petroleum prices are having a big impact on inflation expectations

Inflation surprising to upside in the US; by contrast to the downside in the euro area

 Gross Domestic Income is catching up with GDP

FOMC expects GDP growth above trend over the next three years

US core CPI inflation has begun to reaccelerate

Fiscal-policy aided factory building in the U.S. provided an unusually large boost to growth last year

US consumers much more optimistic than those in the Euro area and the UK

  Job openings take a step down in 2024

Fed's super core services inflation measure pushing up core rate

Blue Chip forecasters expect significant monetary easing this year except in Japan

Euro area economy stagnating while US grows above trend

Chinese and Japanese equity markets are diverging markedly

Chinese population declines in 2023 for second consecutive year

Outlook for US GDP growth on the rise; declining in euro area, Japan and China

There are still 1.4 job openings for every unemployed person in the US

US PCE inflation over the past six months has slowed to the Fed's 2% target

FOMC think rate hikes are done and looks for 75bps of decline in 2024

Weaker economic data surprises pushing down US interest rates

Recent disinflation has been widespread across Europe and North America

Recent decline in US inflation expectations helping to lower interest rates

China is losing its luster as foreign direct investment heads out

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

240517f5.jpg

240517g5.jpg

The U.S. Leading Economic Index fell 0.6% (-5.4% y/y) during April following an unrevised 0.3% March decline, according to a report by The Conference Board. These two changes followed a 0.2% February improvement. A 0.3% April shortfall had been expected in the Action Economics Forecast Survey.

Five of ten components contributed negatively to the overall index in April including the ISM new orders index, building permits, stock prices, the spread between the 10-year Treasury and the Fed funds rate, as well as consumer expectations for business/economic conditions. Initial claims for unemployment insurance and the leading credit index contributed positively. New orders for capital goods and new orders for consumer goods made minimal positive contributions to the index change while the length of the average workweek had no effect on the leading index change.

A 0.2% April increase in the Coincident Economic Index followed a 0.2% March gain, revised from 0.3%. These gains came after a 0.3% February rise. Three of the four components made positive contributions to the coincident index in April, including the changes in personal income less transfers, nonagricultural payroll employment and real manufacturing & trade sales. The change in industrial production had no effect on the coincident indicators.

The Lagging Economic Index rose 0.4% (1.4% y/y) after unrevised stability in March and a 0.2% February increase. Three of the index’s seven components made positive contributions last month including the average duration of unemployment, commercial & industrial loans outstanding and the ratio of consumer credit to income. The six-month change in unit labor costs made a minimally negative contribution while the six-month change in the services CPI, banks’ prime rate and the ratio of business inventories-to-sales were unchanged.

The ratio of the coincident index to the lagging index is also viewed as a leading indicator of economic activity. This measure fell 0.2% in April, following two straight monthly increases. It was 0.8% below its most recent peak in December of last year.

The Conference Board figures are available in Haver's **BCI** database; the components are available there, and most are also in **USECON**. The expectations are in the **AS1REPNA** database. Visit the Conference Board's [website](https://www.conference-board.org/us/) for coverage of leading indicator series from around the world.



240517h5.jpg

240517i5.jpg

- Leading index decline is largest in six months.
- Coincident Indicators continue to increase moderately.
- Lagging index strengthens after holding steady.


U.S. Leading Economic Indicators Fall Sharply in April

Robert Brusca

240517e.jpg

**EMU Inflation Trends Offer Hope and Hype**- Inflation in the European Monetary Union rose by 0.2% month-to-month in April, the same as in March. Core inflation, however, picked up, rising by 0.4% but that was after being flat in March. The sequential growth rates from 12-months to six-months to three-months show the headline inflation rate at 2.4% over 12-months falling to 2% over 6-months, then rising to a 3% annual rate over three-months. The core rate for the monetary union rose 2.9% over 12-months at a 2.7% annual rate over six-months, it steps up to a 2.8% annual rate over three-months. Headline inflation is resisting moving down to the 2% level consistently while core inflation appears to be stuck just short of 3%. Whether these trends are good enough depends on whether the ECB sees itself implementing precision-guided policy or playing horseshoes and hand grenades.

**Headline Inflation: four largest EMU members**
Statistics for the largest four members of the monetary union show inflation worse in April on balance than for the monetary union as a whole. German inflation rose by 0.8% in April, in France it rose by 0.7%, in Spain at rose by 0.5%, while in Italy it rose by 0.3%. These are month-to-month gains. However, these figures followed either flat or declining inflation (price-) performance in March for each of these four countries. The progression of inflation for Germany, France, Italy, and Spain, however, still shows inflation resisting a consistent move down to 2%. German inflation runs at 2.6% over 12-months steps up to 2.7% over 6-months and reaches a 2.9% annual rate over 3-months. France’s 12-month inflation of 2.4% steps down to 2.2% over 6-months, then rises to a 3.2% annual rate over 3-months. In Italy, headline inflation is 1.1% over 12-months, similarly at a 1% annual rate over 6-months, then rises to a 1.7% annual rate over 3-months. Spain's inflation falls from 3.6% over 12-months to 3.2% over 6-months to 2.3% over 3-months- finally a European Monetary Union large country member with persistently decelerating inflation! On balance Italian inflation over 3-months is under the target that the ECB has for the monetary union as a whole, Spain’s inflation is transitioning from 12-months to 6-months to 3-months down close to the 2% mark, while Germany and France continue to show stubbornly too-high results for their headline inflation rates. All-in-all, that is not a great background to support a rate cut.

**Core inflation and its trends offer hope**
Core inflation rates produce much more beneficial results. Still, in April month-to-month core inflation increases are generally excessive for these four members. But that follows declining inflation – falling prices- for core rates in March. Germany is an exception to this pattern, but it still follows the rule of improvement because its inflation progress is flipped between the two months. Looking at sequential growth rates for core inflation or ex-energy inflation for these large country members, we find that inflation is persistently decelerating from 12-months to 6-months to 3-months for all of them except for France. France shows a pickup in inflation over 3-months compared to 6-months as core inflation rises to a 3-month rate of 2.9% after posting a 2.1% pace over 6-months. The 3-month pace for inflation x-energy for Germany is 2.1%, the core for Italy is at 1.7%, and the core for Spain is at 1.8%. All three-monthly core rates are at the doorstep or within the ECB's target range for headline EMU inflation. France is the exception. The 12-month core inflation rates are all above target but show signs of coming into line; German and French year-over-year inflation rates decline in April compared to March the Italian rate is unchanged year-over-year at 2.3% on the monthly comparison, while only Spain has an acceleration compared to a month ago and that's to a 3.3% rise from 3.1% in March.

**Is it good enough?**
The speed of inflation’s drop- Core inflation rates would seem to build a good enough base for the ECB to move ahead with rate cuts if it decides it wants to go that way. If it wants to be surer and clearer about reducing inflation it will pay more attention to the headline rates that are excessive- especially since no inflation metric is falling particularly fast anymore. The risk over ‘overshooting’ on the downside seems remote. Oil prices as measured by Brent in euros rose by 4.3% month-to-month in April after rising 1.6% in March. However, year-over-year Brent prices are down by 3.3%, so the impulse from oil is mixed across tenors. 

ECB credibility- A different view of reality looks at ECB inflation performance over five-years and finds all the metrics quite unacceptable. Over the last five years the compounded inflation rate for the monetary union is 3.7% and for the core it's 2.8%. For Germany it's 4.1%, for France it's 3.3%, and for Italy and Spain it's 3.4%. The core or X energy inflation rates do not behave much better, Germany is at 3.3% over five years on its core measure, France at 2.7%, Spain at 3%, and Italy at 2.5%. If the ECB is concerned about its credibility, then it's going to want to make sure that it gets inflation down inside of its target soon because the five-year compound inflation rates are so far over their target that clearly a central bank that claims to target 2% inflation cannot look at that five-year record and consider policies to have been a success. 

**Driving the road ahead**- Looking ahead it's very possible that inflation is on a downtrend and that policy is moving inflation in the right direction; the question remains concerns the certainty of that conclusion and the question ‘is inflation moving down fast enough?’  The ECB is going to have to measure the impact on its credibility against its desire to hit its inflation target in the short run and pay some attention to the effect that policy has on economic growth rates in the monetary union. On that score, unemployment rates throughout the European Monetary Union are still extremely low in historic comparisons… but, there has been a new sensitivity across central banks globally as they try to reduce their inflation rates ‘to target levels’ without having much impact on the unemployment rates at all - even though unemployment rates are in many places near some version of historic lows. Time will tell whether this sort of prevarication in inflation fighting that coddles the unemployment rate that is already so low is wise or has turned out to be foolhardy. 


240517.jpg

Europe

EMU Inflation Trends Offer Hope and Hype- Inflation in the European Monetary Union rose by 0.2% month-to-month in April, the same as in March. Core inflation, however, picked up, rising by 0.4% but that was after being flat in March. The sequential growth rates from 12-months to six-months to three-months show the headline inflation rate at 2.4% over 12-months falling to 2% over 6-months, then rising to a 3% annual rate over three-months. The core rate for the monetary union rose 2.9% over 12-months at a 2.7% annual rate over six-months, it steps up to a 2.8% annual rate over three-months. Headline inflation is resisting moving down to the 2% level consistently while core inflation appears to be stuck just short of 3%. Whether these trends are good enough depends on whether the ECB sees itself implementing precision-guided policy or playing horseshoes and hand grenades.

EMU Inflation Holds the line 2% Beckons

240516f4.jpg

240516g4.jpg

Total housing starts increased 5.7% (-0.6% y/y) during April to 1.360 million units (SAAR) after falling 16.8% in March to 1.287 million units, revised from 1.321 million. Starts in February rose a little-revised 12.4% to 1.546 million units. Starts remained 24.6% below the most recent peak of 1.803 million in April 2022. The Action Economics Forecast Survey expected 1.420 million starts in April.

Housing starts by type were mixed last month. Starts of single-family units eased 0.4% (+17.7% y/y) to 1.031 million after declining 8.7% in March to 1.035 million, revised from 1.022 million. They reached a high of 1.286 units in December 2020. Multi-family starts increased 30.6% (-33.1% y/y) in April to 329,000 after falling 38.8% to 252,000 in March, revised from 299,000. They reached a high of 624,000 units in November 2022.

Regional activity was mixed in April. In the Northeast, the level of starts fell 22.6% (-43.8% y/y) to 72,000 units after declining 21.8% in March and 10.5% in February. Starts in the Midwest rose 19.1% (3.4% y/y) to 181,000 following a 36.4% March decline. Starts in the South improved 10.1% (4.9% y/y) to 799,000 after a 15.9% March decline. In the West, starts fell 2.5% (+1.7% y/y) to 308,000 after declining in each of the prior three months.

Building permits declined 3.0% (-2.0% y/y) in April 1.440 million units after falling 5.0% to 1.485 million in March, revised from 1.458 million. It was the lowest level of permits since December 2022. Single-family permits eased 0.8% (+11.4% y/y) to 976,000 in April following a 4.2% March decline and a 0.4% February slip. Multi-family permits weakened 7.4% (-21.9% y/y) to 464,000, after falling 6.5% in March.

The housing starts and permits figures can be found in Haver's **USECON** database. The expectations figure is contained in the **AS1REPNA** database.



240516h4.jpg

240516i4.jpg

- Single-family starts decline but multi-family surge.
- Starts are mixed throughout the country.
- Building permits fall to lowest level in over one year.


U.S. Housing Starts Rise Modestly in April; Building Permits Fall

Sandy Batten

240516r2.jpg

240516s2.jpg

Total industrial production was unchanged in April from March and 0.4% lower than a year ago. The previously released 0.4% rise in March was revised down to a meager 0.1% monthly gain. The Action Economics Forecast Survey expected a 0.1% increase in production last month. Manufacturing production slumped 0.3% m/m (-0.5% y/y) after a downwardly revised 0.2% monthly gain in March (initially reported as 0.5%). 

Mining activity declined for the third time in the past four months, falling 0.6% (-1.3% /y) following an upwardly revised 1.1% m/m decline in March (previously -1.4% m/m). Utilities output was the only positive part of industrial activity in April, rising 2.8% m/m (+2.3% y/y) on top of a downwardly revised 1.6% monthly gain in March (previously 2.0% m/m).

Amid the monthly volatility, manufacturing output has been relatively flat over the past nine months. In fact, the index level in April was 99.4, exactly the same as in August 2023. The manufacturing sector has been one of the most adversely affected by the Fed’s interest rate hikes. Since April 2022 (just after the Fed initiated it rate hikes in March 2022), manufacturing output has fallen 1.4%. Within the manufacturing sector in April, durable goods production fell 0.5% m/m, its first monthly decline in three months, led by a 2.0% m/m decline in motor vehicle production and a 1.9% m/m drop in the production of electrical equipment and appliances. Production of nondurable goods edged down 0.1% m/m in April following a 0.2% monthly increase in March. Production of selected high-technology industries increased 1.0% m/m. By contrast, petroleum and coal products output slumped 4.4%m/m, the first monthly decline in three months.

Manufacturing output excluding motor vehicles slipped 01% m/m in April after being unchanged in March. Manufacturing excluding selected high-tech industries fell 0.3% m/m in April versus a 0.1% monthly gain in March. Manufacturing output excluding both selected high-tech industries and motor vehicles decreased 0.2% m/m, its sixth monthly decline in the past seven months. Production of consumer goods inched up 0.1% m/m in April following a 0.5% monthly gain in March. Output of business equipment fell 0.5% m/m on top of a 0.2% monthly decline in March. 

Production of construction supplies fell 1.0% m/m in April, the sixth monthly decline in the past seven months. Materials output edged up 0.1% m/m in April, just offsetting a 0.1% m/m decline in March.

Total capacity utilization slipped to 78.4% in April from a slightly upward revised 78.5% in March (previously 78.4%). The April reading was exactly as expected by the Actions Economics Forecast Survey. The capacity utilization rate for manufacturing fell significantly to 76.9% from 77.2%. By contrast, the capacity rate for utilities rose to 71.0 from 69.2.

Industrial production and capacity data are in Haver’s **USECON** database. Additional detail on production and capacity utilization can be found in the **IP** database. The expectations figures come from the **AS1REPNA** database.



240516t2.jpg

240516u2.jpg

- IP was unchanged in April with manufacturing falling 0.3% m/m
- Manufacturing decline led by 2.0% m/m drop in motor vehicle output
- Mining fell for the third month of the past four
- Capacity utilization slipped to 78.4%


U.S. Industrial Production Unchanged in April

240516j5.jpg

240516k5.jpg

Import prices for all goods rose 0.9% (NSA) in April after a 0.6% March gain, revised from 0.4%, and a 0.2% February increase, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. A 0.2% April rise had been expected in the Action Economics Forecast Survey. The y/y change of 1.1% followed 12-month price declines all through 2023. 

Export prices increased 0.5% in April following a 0.1% March uptick, revised from 0.3%, and a minimally revised 0.7% February rise. A 0.2% price gain had been expected. These gains also followed a 0.7% January increase. The 1.0% y/y decline compared to an 11.8% y/y drop in June of last year. 

The monthly rise in April import prices was led by a 2.9% increase (5.2% y/y) in imported petroleum prices after they surged 6.7% in March. The April increase was the fourth consecutive monthly gain. The increase in imported petroleum costs was accompanied by a 9.2% decline in natural gas prices, off 42.5% y/y. Nonfuel import prices rose 0.7% (0.9% y/y) after a 0.2% March increase. Import prices for foods, feeds & beverages strengthened 1.7% (6.8% y/y), up for the fourth consecutive month. Motor vehicle & parts prices increased 0.3% (2.6% y/y) after a 0.2% rise. Capital goods prices edged 0.1% higher (-0.1% y/y) after a 0.2% decline while nonauto consumer goods prices also rose 0.1% (0.5% y/y) after falling 0.3% in March. 

The increase in April export prices included a 0.9% decline (-10.2% y/y) in agricultural export prices, which added to a 1.3% March drop . Nonagricultural export prices rose 0.7% (0.1% y/y), the fourth straight monthly gain. Export prices of industrial supplies & materials rose 1.0% (-1.7% y/y), the fourth straight month of firm gain. Automotive vehicles & parts export prices strengthened 0.8% (4.0% y/y) after easing 0.1% in March. Capital goods prices rose 0.4% (1.8% y/y) after edging 0.1% higher. A 0.1% uptick (-1.3% y/y) in nonauto consumer goods prices followed a 0.4% March rise. Foods, feeds & beverage prices were off 0.7% last month (-10.6% y/y) after falling 1.6% in March. 

The import and export price series can be found in Haver’s **USECON** database. Detailed figures are available in the **USINT** database. The expectations figure from the Action Economics Forecast Survey is in the **AS1REPNA** database. 


240516l5.jpg

240516m5.jpg

- Import prices rise for fourth consecutive month.
- Excluding fuels, import prices edge up for sixth straight month.
- Export price gain improves. 


Economy in Brief: September 2002

Jump to: