Tom Moeller

The consumer price index (CPI-U) fell just slightly last month, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, after an unrevised 0.1% dip during August. Consensus expectations had been for a 0.1% uptick. The latest figure lowered the [...]

U.S. CPI Fell Again With Lower Gasoline Prices

Robert Brusca

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<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 src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/081015f.jpg" align="left" border="0" height="265" width="353">
What a shock to those that thought that decoupling was a
reality. The US slowdown clearly has spread to Japan and to Europe. The
August drop in output is just one of the visible signs. July&#8217;s 1.3%
rise in IP is sandwiched between drops of 3.5% in August and 2.2% in
June. The global slowdown is everywhere. The financial crisis, of
course, is going to deepen it. The developing world &#8216;demand
juggernauts&#8217; India and China will not escape the slowing either. 
 

The decline is hitting Japan especially hard in transportation
as high gas prices have adversely impacted consumer budgets in the US.
A key issue for Japan is that car sales have plummeted. Even makers of
fuel efficient cars have seen demand fall off. The most highly sought
after models have been in short supply. Thus, even fuel efficient auto
makers are having trouble &#8211; no one escapes the downturn. 
 

The outlook is for weakness to continue and probably to
deepen. The hit to industrial output in Japan, while relatively severe,
is not over. 


<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup>
<thead><tr class="even">
<th colspan="9" scope="col">Japan
Industrial Production Trends </th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td colspan="3">m/m %</td>
<td colspan="3">Saar %</td>
<td>Yr/Yr</td>
<td>Qtr-2-Date</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">seas adjusted</td>
<td>Aug-08</td>
<td>Jul-08</td>
<td>Jun-08</td>
<td>3-mo</td>
<td>6-mo</td>
<td>12-mo</td>
<td>Yr-Ago</td>
<td>% AR</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Mining &amp; mfg</td>
<td>-3.5%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>-2.2%</td>
<td>-16.4%</td>
<td>-10.1%</td>
<td>-4.7%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>-6.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Industry</td>
<td>-3.6%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>-2.2%</td>
<td>-16.1%</td>
<td>-10.2%</td>
<td>-4.7%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>-5.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">MFG</td>
<td>-3.5%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>-2.1%</td>
<td>-16.4%</td>
<td>-10.1%</td>
<td>-4.7%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>-6.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Textiles</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>-2.9%</td>
<td>-1.6%</td>
<td>-17.5%</td>
<td>-13.5%</td>
<td>-10.0%</td>
<td>-6.2%</td>
<td>-20.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">T-port</td>
<td>-9.8%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>-5.0%</td>
<td>-36.9%</td>
<td>-19.3%</td>
<td>-7.8%</td>
<td>9.7%</td>
<td>-9.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="9" class="firstcol">Product
Group</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Goods</td>
<td>-3.3%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>-3.1%</td>
<td>-11.3%</td>
<td>-8.0%</td>
<td>-3.2%</td>
<td>6.3%</td>
<td>7.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Intermediate Goods</td>
<td>-2.3%</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>-0.6%</td>
<td>-11.7%</td>
<td>-7.1%</td>
<td>-2.6%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>-7.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Investment Goods</td>
<td>-5.2%</td>
<td>-0.5%</td>
<td>-2.9%</td>
<td>-29.8%</td>
<td>-18.5%</td>
<td>-10.9%</td>
<td>2.8%</td>
<td>-22.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Mining</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>4.2%</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
<td>35.1%</td>
<td>15.3%</td>
<td>4.3%</td>
<td>-1.1%</td>
<td>28.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Electricity &amp; Gas</td>
<td>-7.6%</td>
<td>6.3%</td>
<td>-3.4%</td>
<td>-19.2%</td>
<td>-21.9%</td>
<td>-5.1%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body></html>

What a shock to those that thought that decoupling was a reality. The US slowdown clearly has spread to Japan and to Europe. The August drop in output is just one of the visible signs. July’s 1.3% rise in IP is sandwiched between [...]

Japanese IP Dives – Back on Trend to Lower Results

Carol Stone, CBE

<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/081015d.jpg" width="353">
The U.S. government&#39;s budget deficit for fiscal year 2008 widened sharply to $454.8B versus a deficit during FY 2007 of $161.5B. Reversing recent trends of strengthening revenues, the deficit spread resulted from an outright decline in revenues, while outlays picked up smartly.
As a percentage of GDP the budget deficit last year totaled roughly 3.2%, a contrast to FY07&#39;s marginal 1.2%. Receipts were 17.8% of GDP, down from 18.8% and outlays rose to 21.0%.
The Government&#39;s financial data are available in Haver&#39;s USECON database, with extensive detail available in the specialized GOVFIN. <img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/081015e.jpg" width="353">
Net revenues last fiscal year fell 1.7%, reversing FY07&#39;s 6.7% increase. Both individual income taxes and corporate taxes fell, the former by 1.5% and the latter, 17.8%. The &quot;stimulus&quot; rebates were the main factor in the lower individual taxes, as well as weaker capital gains and less growth in wages and salaries. Corporate taxes were lowered by weakening profits. Also, during the September hurricanes, impacted companies were able to postpone their September tax installments. In contrast, various unemployment and social insurance grew 3.6%, somewhat soft, but well within recent growth ranges.
U.S. government outlays grew just 9.1% during last fiscal year, a significant pickup from 2007&#39;s 2.8% rise. Defense spending (19% of total outlays) surged by 13.2%, with both war-related and standard uses contributing. Medicare expenditures (12% of outlays) slowed to &quot;just&quot; a 4.1% increase after the prior 13.8% increase. Social security spending (21% of outlays) also slowed, rising 5.3% from 6.9% in FY07. Net interest payments increased 4.6% in FY08, similar to the previous 5.0%.

<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/@E106/@E10602/@E106021.HTM">US Government Finance</a> &nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">September</th>
<th scope="col">August</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">FY 2008</th>
<th scope="col">FY 2007</th>
<th scope="col">FY 2006</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Budget Balance</td>
<td>+$45.7B</td>
<td>$-111.9B</td>
<td>+$112.9B (9/07)</td>
<td>-$454.8B</td>
<td>-$162.8B</td>
<td>-$248.2B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Net Revenues</td>
<td>$272.4B</td>
<td>$157.0B</td>
<td>-4.5%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
<td>6.7%</td>
<td>11.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Net Outlays</td>
<td>$226.7B</td>
<td>$268.9B</td>
<td>31.4%</td>
<td>9.1%</td>
<td>2.8%</td>
<td>7.4%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

The U.S. government's budget deficit for fiscal year 2008 widened sharply to $454.8B versus a deficit during FY 2007 of $161.5B. Reversing recent trends of strengthening revenues, the deficit spread resulted from an outright decline [...]

U.S. Budget Deficit Widens to Record in Fiscal 2008

<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/081015b.jpg" width="353">
Retail sales fell 1.2% last month, the Commerce Department reported this morning. Both August and July sales were revised lower, August to a 0.9% decrease from 0.7% reported last month, and July to a 0.1% increase from 0.3% in last month&#39;s data. This puts the entire Q3 down at a 4% annual rate from Q2. The Action Economics survey shown in Haver&#39;s AS1REPNA database looked for a 1.0% decline in September. All the retail sales data are contained in Haver&#39;s USECON database.
Not only were total sales down in September, but every major store group saw lower sales, except for stores and gas stations. Drug stores, more formally known as &quot;health &amp; personal care stores&quot;, were up 0.4%, and gas stations, 0.1%. [This latter seems odd, in view of falling gasoline prices, but it seems to be a seasonal phenomenon; sales not seasonally adjusted were down 7.8%, while September&#39;s seasonal factor falls 8.1%.]<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/081015c.jpg" width="353">
Among other major store groups, the biggest decline was at auto dealers, which saw a 3.8% plunge after their brief recovery in August, which itself was revised a bit lower. Furniture stores and electronics &amp; appliance stores continued their steep downtrends, losing 2.3% and 1.5%, respectively. Furniture sales were off 10.7% from a year ago, their 13th consecutive year-on-year decline.
Individual store reports made a week ago indicated that discounters had done better than full-price retailers. This was evident in today&#39;s data in the comparative performance of general merchandise stores as a whole, which were off 0.4%, and mainline department stores down 1.5%. The subcategory we might call &quot;discounters&quot;, that is, the whole general merchandise group less the department stores, rose 0.1% (see second graph). This isn&#39;t great, but it is in fact better than other segments.
Other noteworthy sectors include restaurants, down 0.5% in September, and nonstore retailers (mostly electronic shopping), down 0.8%. This latter group, as Tom Moeller has highlighted here before, has been weakening. A month ago, he reported it down 3.9% annualized from three months before; the comparable number this month is 10.7%! This category also includes fuel oil dealers, so falling oil prices could be pulling it down. This level of detail won&#39;t be published until next month&#39;s release.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">September</th>
<th scope="col">August</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2007</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/usecon/@ED/@ED04/@ED0401/@ED0401.HTM">Retail Sales &amp; Food Services</a> (%)</td>
<td>-1.2</td>
<td>-0.5</td>
<td>-0.6</td>
<td>-1.0</td>
<td>4.0</td>
<td>5.8</td>
<td>6.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Excluding Autos</td>
<td>-0.6</td>
<td>-0.9</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>3.6</td>
<td>4.4</td>
<td>6.8</td>
<td>7.5</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Less Gasoline</td>
<td>-0.7</td>
<td>-0.6</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>1.6</td>
<td>4.1</td>
<td>6.2</td>
<td>6.4</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Retail sales fell 1.2% last month, the Commerce Department reported this morning. Both August and July sales were revised lower, August to a 0.9% decrease from 0.7% reported last month, and July to a 0.1% increase from 0.3% in last [...]

U.S. Retail Sales Drop 1.2% in September

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<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 src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/081015a.jpg" align="left" border="0" height="265" width="353">
The PPI emitted mixed signals in September. The headline
finished goods PPI dropped a sharp 0.4% as energy prices fell. But the
core PPI for consumer goods rose by a sharp 0.5% an uncomfortable
harbinger for the CPI core that is due for release tomorrow. 
 

Wholesale food prices were tempered in September rising by
just 0.2%. Food in general has seen its inflation profile lowered as
its Yr/yr pace of 8.1% far exceed its three-month pace of 3.1%. 
 

Finished energy prices are off sharply, dropping by 2.9% in
the month. They are also off at a 16.7% annual rate in the quarter.
That is the constructive side of the inflation trend. But the Fed looks
harder at core inflation and there trends are still worsening. 
 

But for core consumer goods Yr/Yr inflation has gone from 4.4%
over 12 months to 5.1% over six months to 5.3% over three months. That
is an uncomfortable trend. 
 

However, the weakness in the economy and the ongoing financial
crisis will put this PPI on the back burner. The Fed is not giving up
on fighting inflation instead it knows that economic conditions such as
these will snuff out inflation without special action by the central
bank. Extreme economic weakness does that. 
 

For now the economy picture is mess. The economy is weakening
fast. The financial sector is in shambles and inflation is still
accelerating and moving out over the Fed's comfort zone. But we know
that is just a snap shot of an ever changing environment. In fact
inflation is about to be extinguished by the economic weakness that
appears to be getting worse. Meanwhile, the Fed and the Treasury have
made great strides in trying to contain the financial unraveling. Their
attempt at containment appears to be a success &#8211; so far. Aid for the
ailing economy has not yet moved up to the actionable stage but
Congress is making plans for a stimulus plan. This is one of those
times that you must look at the indicators with a broader perspective.
At another time this PPI report would be viewed as a bad PPI and as
trouble for the Fed. But in this environment the report will not gather
headlines &#8211; hardly even footnotes. 


<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup>
<thead><tr>
<th colspan="7" scope="col">Key Trends
In Producer Prices </th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td>Sep-08</td>
<td colspan="4">PPI Trends By Type Of Good</td>
<td>CHANGE</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey5">
<td class="firstcol">PPI</td>
<td>1Mo:M/M</td>
<td>3-Mo:ar</td>
<td>6-Mo:ar</td>
<td>1-Yr</td>
<td>Yr-Ago</td>
<td>Y/Y</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey4">
<td class="firstcol">Total PPI</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
<td>6.8%</td>
<td>8.7%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>4.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Finished Consumer Goods</td>
<td>-0.6%</td>
<td>-2.3%</td>
<td>7.5%</td>
<td>10.2%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
<td>5.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Foods</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>3.1%</td>
<td>6.1%</td>
<td>8.1%</td>
<td>5.8%</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Finished Consumer Goods Excl
Foods</td>
<td>-0.9%</td>
<td>-4.2%</td>
<td>8.0%</td>
<td>11.1%</td>
<td>5.0%</td>
<td>6.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Nondurables less Food</td>
<td>-1.3%</td>
<td>-6.8%</td>
<td>9.7%</td>
<td>14.1%</td>
<td>7.0%</td>
<td>7.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Nondurable Goods excl
Food &amp; Energy</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>6.8%</td>
<td>6.4%</td>
<td>5.8%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>2.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Durable Goods</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
<td>2.5%</td>
<td>0.8%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Finished Core Consumer
Goods</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>5.3%</td>
<td>5.1%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">Capital Goods</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>5.6%</td>
<td>4.8%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">MFG Industries</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>6.3%</td>
<td>5.8%</td>
<td>4.3%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>2.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">Non-MFG Industries</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>5.4%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey1">
<td class="firstcol">Core PPI</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>5.4%</td>
<td>4.9%</td>
<td>4.1%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey4">
<td class="firstcol">Memo: Finished Energy</td>
<td>-2.9%</td>
<td>-16.7%</td>
<td>12.4%</td>
<td>22.3%</td>
<td>10.3%</td>
<td>11.9%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body></html>

The PPI emitted mixed signals in September. The headline finished goods PPI dropped a sharp 0.4% as energy prices fell. But the core PPI for consumer goods rose by a sharp 0.5% an uncomfortable harbinger for the CPI core that is due [...]

PPI Still Troublesome

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<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 src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/081015b.jpg" align="left" border="0" height="265" width="353">
Retail sales fell 1.2% last month, the Commerce Department
reported this morning. Both August and July sales were revised lower,
August to a 0.9% decrease from 0.7% reported last month, and July to a
0.1% increase from 0.3% in last month's data. This puts the entire Q3
down at a 4% annual rate from Q2. The Action Economics survey shown in
Haver's AS1REPNA database looked for a 1.0% decline
in September. All the retail sales data are contained in Haver's USECON
database.
Not only were total sales down in September, but every major
store group saw lower sales, except for stores and gas stations. Drug
stores, more formally known as "health &amp; personal care stores",
were up 0.4%, and gas stations, 0.1%. [This latter seems odd, in view
of falling gasoline prices, but it seems to be a seasonal phenomenon;
sales not seasonally adjusted were down 7.8%, while September's
seasonal factor falls 8.1%.]<img src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/081015c.jpg" align="right" border="0" height="265" width="353">
Among other major store groups, the biggest decline was at
auto dealers, which saw a 3.8% plunge after their brief recovery in
August, which itself was revised a bit lower. Furniture stores and
electronics &amp; appliance stores continued their steep
downtrends, losing 2.3% and 1.5%, respectively. Furniture sales were
off 10.7% from a year ago, their 13th consecutive year-on-year decline.
Individual store reports made a week ago indicated that
discounters had done better than full-price retailers. This was evident
in today's data in the comparative performance of general merchandise
stores as a whole, which were off 0.4%, and mainline department stores
down 1.5%. The subcategory we might call "discounters", that is, the
whole general merchandise group less the department stores, rose 0.1%
(see second graph). This isn't great, but it is in fact better than
other segments.
Other noteworthy sectors include restaurants, down 0.5% in
September, and nonstore retailers (mostly electronic shopping), down
0.8%. This latter group, as Tom Moeller has highlighted here before,
has been weakening. A month ago, he reported it down 3.9% annualized
from three months before; the comparable number this month is 10.7%!
This category also includes fuel oil dealers, so falling oil prices
could be pulling it down. This level of detail won't be published until
next month's release.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead><tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">September</th>
<th scope="col">August</th>
<th scope="col">July</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2007</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/usecon/@ED/@ED04/@ED0401/@ED0401.HTM">Retail
Sales &amp; Food Services</a> (%)</td>
<td>-1.2</td>
<td>-0.5</td>
<td>-0.6</td>
<td>-1.0</td>
<td>4.0</td>
<td>5.8</td>
<td>6.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Excluding
Autos</td>
<td>-0.6</td>
<td>-0.9</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>3.6</td>
<td>4.4</td>
<td>6.8</td>
<td>7.5</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Less Gasoline</td>
<td>-0.7</td>
<td>-0.6</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>1.6</td>
<td>4.1</td>
<td>6.2</td>
<td>6.4</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
U.S. Budget Deficit Widens to
Record&nbsp;in Fiscal 2008 
by <a href="/comment/Stone.html">Carol
Stone</a> October 15, 2008


<img src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/081015d.jpg" align="left" border="0" height="265" width="353">
The U.S. government's budget deficit for fiscal year 2008
widened sharply to $454.8B versus a deficit during FY 2007 of $161.5B.
Reversing recent trends of strengthening revenues, the deficit spread
resulted from an outright decline in revenues, while outlays picked up
smartly.
As a percentage of GDP the budget deficit last year totaled
roughly 3.2%, a contrast to FY07's marginal 1.2%. Receipts were 17.8%
of GDP, down from 18.8% and outlays rose to 21.0%.
The Government's financial data are available in Haver's USECON
database, with extensive detail available in the specialized GOVFIN.
<img src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/081015e.jpg" align="right" border="0" height="265" width="353">
Net revenues last fiscal year fell 1.7%, reversing FY07's 6.7%
increase. Both individual income taxes and corporate taxes fell, the
former by 1.5% and the latter, 17.8%. The "stimulus" rebates were the
main factor in the lower individual taxes, as well as weaker capital
gains and less growth in wages and salaries. Corporate taxes were
lowered by weakening profits. Also, during the September hurricanes,
impacted companies were able to postpone their September tax
installments. In contrast, various unemployment and social insurance
grew 3.6%, somewhat soft, but well within recent growth ranges.
U.S. government outlays grew just 9.1% during last fiscal
year, a significant pickup from 2007's 2.8% rise. Defense spending (19%
of total outlays) surged by 13.2%, with both war-related and standard
uses contributing. Medicare expenditures (12% of outlays) slowed to
"just" a 4.1% increase after the prior 13.8% increase. Social security
spending (21% of outlays) also slowed, rising 5.3% from 6.9% in FY07.
Net interest payments increased 4.6% in FY08, similar to the previous
5.0%.

<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/@E106/@E10602/@E106021.HTM">US
Government Finance</a> &nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">September</th>
<th scope="col">August</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">FY 2008</th>
<th scope="col">FY 2007</th>
<th scope="col">FY 2006</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Budget Balance</td>
<td>+$45.7B</td>
<td>$-111.9B</td>
<td>+$112.9B 
(9/07)</td>
<td>-$454.8B</td>
<td>-$162.8B</td>
<td>-$248.2B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Net Revenues</td>
<td>$272.4B</td>
<td>$157.0B</td>
<td>-4.5%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
<td>6.7%</td>
<td>11.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Net Outlays</td>
<td>$226.7B</td>
<td>$268.9B</td>
<td>31.4%</td>
<td>9.1%</td>
<td>2.8%</td>
<td>7.4%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
PPI Still Troublesome 
by <a href="/comment/Brusca.html">Robert
Brusca</a> October 15, 2008


<img src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/081015a.jpg" align="left" border="0" height="265" width="353">
The PPI emitted mixed signals in September. The headline
finished goods PPI dropped a sharp 0.4% as energy prices fell. But the
core PPI for consumer goods rose by a sharp 0.5% an uncomfortable
harbinger for the CPI core that is due for release tomorrow. 
 

Wholesale food prices were tempered in September rising by
just 0.2%. Food in general has seen its inflation profile lowered as
its Yr/yr pace of 8.1% far exceed its three-month pace of 3.1%. 
 

Finished energy prices are off sharply, dropping by 2.9% in
the month. They are also off at a 16.7% annual rate in the quarter.
That is the constructive side of the inflation trend. But the Fed looks
harder at core inflation and there trends are still worsening. 
 

But for core consumer goods Yr/Yr inflation has gone from 4.4%
over 12 months to 5.1% over six months to 5.3% over three months. That
is an uncomfortable trend. 
 

However, the weakness in the economy and the ongoing financial
crisis will put this PPI on the back burner. The Fed is not giving up
on fighting inflation instead it knows that economic conditions such as
these will snuff out inflation without special action by the central
bank. Extreme economic weakness does that. 
 

For now the economy picture is mess. The economy is weakening
fast. The financial sector is in shambles and inflation is still
accelerating and moving out over the Fed's comfort zone. But we know
that is just a snap shot of an ever changing environment. In fact
inflation is about to be extinguished by the economic weakness that
appears to be getting worse. Meanwhile, the Fed and the Treasury have
made great strides in trying to contain the financial unraveling. Their
attempt at containment appears to be a success &#8211; so far. Aid for the
ailing economy has not yet moved up to the actionable stage but
Congress is making plans for a stimulus plan. This is one of those
times that you must look at the indicators with a broader perspective.
At another time this PPI report would be viewed as a bad PPI and as
trouble for the Fed. But in this environment the report will not gather
headlines &#8211; hardly even footnotes. 


<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup><thead><tr>
<th colspan="7" scope="col">Key Trends
In Producer Prices </th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td>Sep-08</td>
<td colspan="4">PPI Trends By Type Of Good</td>
<td>CHANGE</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey5">
<td class="firstcol">PPI</td>
<td>1Mo:M/M</td>
<td>3-Mo:ar</td>
<td>6-Mo:ar</td>
<td>1-Yr</td>
<td>Yr-Ago</td>
<td>Y/Y</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey4">
<td class="firstcol">Total PPI</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
<td>-0.4%</td>
<td>6.8%</td>
<td>8.7%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>4.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Finished Consumer Goods</td>
<td>-0.6%</td>
<td>-2.3%</td>
<td>7.5%</td>
<td>10.2%</td>
<td>5.2%</td>
<td>5.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Foods</td>
<td>0.2%</td>
<td>3.1%</td>
<td>6.1%</td>
<td>8.1%</td>
<td>5.8%</td>
<td>2.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Finished Consumer Goods Excl
Foods</td>
<td>-0.9%</td>
<td>-4.2%</td>
<td>8.0%</td>
<td>11.1%</td>
<td>5.0%</td>
<td>6.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Nondurables less Food</td>
<td>-1.3%</td>
<td>-6.8%</td>
<td>9.7%</td>
<td>14.1%</td>
<td>7.0%</td>
<td>7.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Nondurable Goods excl
Food &amp; Energy</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>6.8%</td>
<td>6.4%</td>
<td>5.8%</td>
<td>3.4%</td>
<td>2.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Durable Goods</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
<td>2.5%</td>
<td>0.8%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">Finished Core Consumer
Goods</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>5.3%</td>
<td>5.1%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
<td>2.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">Capital Goods</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>5.6%</td>
<td>4.8%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">MFG Industries</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>6.3%</td>
<td>5.8%</td>
<td>4.3%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
<td>2.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">Non-MFG Industries</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>5.4%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>3.5%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey1">
<td class="firstcol">Core PPI</td>
<td>0.4%</td>
<td>5.4%</td>
<td>4.9%</td>
<td>4.1%</td>
<td>2.0%</td>
<td>2.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey4">
<td class="firstcol">Memo: Finished Energy</td>
<td>-2.9%</td>
<td>-16.7%</td>
<td>12.4%</td>
<td>22.3%</td>
<td>10.3%</td>
<td>11.9%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Japanese IP Dives &#8211; Back on Trend
to Lower Results 
by <a href="/comment/Brusca.html">Robert
Brusca</a> October 15, 2008


<img src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/081015f.jpg" align="left" border="0" height="265" width="353">
What a shock to those that thought that decoupling was a
reality. The US slowdown clearly has spread to Japan and to Europe. The
August drop in output is just one of the visible signs. July&#8217;s 1.3%
rise in IP is sandwiched between drops of 3.5% in August and 2.2% in
June. The global slowdown is everywhere. The financial crisis, of
course, is going to deepen it. The developing world &#8216;demand
juggernauts&#8217; India and China will not escape the slowing either. 
 

The decline is hitting Japan especially hard in transportation
as high gas prices have adversely impacted consumer budgets in the US.
A key issue for Japan is that car sales have plummeted. Even makers of
fuel efficient cars have seen demand fall off. The most highly sought
after models have been in short supply. Thus, even fuel efficient auto
makers are having trouble &#8211; no one escapes the downturn. 
 

The outlook is for weakness to continue and probably to
deepen. The hit to industrial output in Japan, while relatively severe,
is not over.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <colgroup></colgroup>
<thead><tr class="even">
<th colspan="9" scope="col">Japan
Industrial Production Trends </th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td colspan="3">m/m %</td>
<td colspan="3">Saar %</td>
<td>Yr/Yr</td>
<td>Qtr-2-Date</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">seas adjusted</td>
<td>Aug-08</td>
<td>Jul-08</td>
<td>Jun-08</td>
<td>3-mo</td>
<td>6-mo</td>
<td>12-mo</td>
<td>Yr-Ago</td>
<td>% AR</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Mining &amp; mfg</td>
<td>-3.5%</td>
<td>1.3%</td>
<td>-2.2%</td>
<td>-16.4%</td>
<td>-10.1%</td>
<td>-4.7%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>-6.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Industry</td>
<td>-3.6%</td>
<td>1.5%</td>
<td>-2.2%</td>
<td>-16.1%</td>
<td>-10.2%</td>
<td>-4.7%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>-5.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">MFG</td>
<td>-3.5%</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>-2.1%</td>
<td>-16.4%</td>
<td>-10.1%</td>
<td>-4.7%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>-6.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Textiles</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>-2.9%</td>
<td>-1.6%</td>
<td>-17.5%</td>
<td>-13.5%</td>
<td>-10.0%</td>
<td>-6.2%</td>
<td>-20.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">T-port</td>
<td>-9.8%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>-5.0%</td>
<td>-36.9%</td>
<td>-19.3%</td>
<td>-7.8%</td>
<td>9.7%</td>
<td>-9.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="9" class="firstcol">Product
Group</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Consumer Goods</td>
<td>-3.3%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
<td>-3.1%</td>
<td>-11.3%</td>
<td>-8.0%</td>
<td>-3.2%</td>
<td>6.3%</td>
<td>7.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Intermediate Goods</td>
<td>-2.3%</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>-0.6%</td>
<td>-11.7%</td>
<td>-7.1%</td>
<td>-2.6%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>-7.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Investment Goods</td>
<td>-5.2%</td>
<td>-0.5%</td>
<td>-2.9%</td>
<td>-29.8%</td>
<td>-18.5%</td>
<td>-10.9%</td>
<td>2.8%</td>
<td>-22.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Mining</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
<td>4.2%</td>
<td>1.9%</td>
<td>35.1%</td>
<td>15.3%</td>
<td>4.3%</td>
<td>-1.1%</td>
<td>28.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Electricity &amp; Gas</td>
<td>-7.6%</td>
<td>6.3%</td>
<td>-3.4%</td>
<td>-19.2%</td>
<td>-21.9%</td>
<td>-5.1%</td>
<td>2.9%</td>
<td>1.4%</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>

 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/081014a.jpg" width="353">
According to the International Council of Shopping Centers chain store sales rose last week, but they still have been quite anemic. The 0.7% increase was the first of any magnitude since late July. Since then weekly sales have been either down, unchanged or up just 0.1%. The level of sales in early October was 0.6% below the September average which fell 1.9% from August.
The level of sales during the latest week was near the lowest since December of last year.
During the last ten years there has been a 45% correlation between the y/y change in chain store sales and the change in nonauto retail sales less gasoline.
The ICSC-UBS retail chain-store sales index is constructed using the same-store sales (stores open for one year) reported by 78 stores of seven retailers: Dayton Hudson, Federated, Kmart, May, J.C. Penney, Sears and Wal-Mart.
The chain store sales figures are available in Haver&#39;s SURVEYW database.
Credit Card Debt and Payment Use from the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston is available <a href="http://www.bos.frb.org/economic/wp/wp2008/wp0802.pdf">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/surveyw/@S2/@S2.HTM">ICSC-UBS (SA, 1977=100)</a></th>
<th scope="col">10/11/08</th>
<th scope="col">10/04/08</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2007</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Total Weekly Chain Store Sales</td>
<td>484.7</td>
<td>481.5</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>2.8%</td>
<td>3.3%</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>


</html>

According to the International Council of Shopping Centers chain store sales rose last week, but they still have been quite anemic. The 0.7% increase was the first of any magnitude since late July. Since then weekly sales have been [...]

U.S. Chain Store Sales 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/081014b.jpg" width="353">
According to the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), small business optimism rose another 2.0% during September to the highest level since February. The rise to an index level of 91.1 added to a gain of 3.3% during August.
During the last ten years there has been a 70% correlation between the level of the NFIB index and the two quarter change in real GDP.
The percent expecting the economy to improve rose again, last month to the highest level since late 2005.
The percentage planning to raise employment dipped slightly to 7%, still near the highest level since February. The percentage of respondents with one or more job openings improved to 18% which was the highest level since June. During the last ten years there has been a 71% correlation between the NFIB employment percentage and the y/y change in nonfarm payrolls.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/081014c.jpg" width="353">
The percentage of firms actually raising prices fell to 20%, the lowest level since April. During the last ten years there has been a 64% correlation between the y/y change in the producer price index and the level of the NFIB price index. The percentage of firms planning to raise prices also fell further to 24% which was the least since February.
The largest, single most important problems seen by business were poor sales (20%), inflation (16%), insurance cost and availability (10%) and taxes (17%). The latter, however, still was reduced from 27% in early 2007.
About 24 million businesses exist in the United States. Small business creates 80% of all new jobs in America.
The NFIB figures can be found in Haver&#39;s SURVEYS database.
The Federal Reserve and other central banks announce further measures to provide broad access to liquidity and funding to financial institutions. Visit the U.S. Federal Reserve site <a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20081013a.htm"> here</a> for more info.

<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/@S7/@S7.HTM">Nat&#39;l Federation of Independent Business</a></th>
<th scope="col">September</th>
<th scope="col">August</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2007</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
<th scope="col">2005</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Small Business Optimism Index (1986=100)</td>
<td>92.9</td>
<td>91.1</td>
<td>-4.5%</td>
<td>96.7</td>
<td>98.9</td>
<td>101.6</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

According to the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), small business optimism rose another 2.0% during September to the highest level since February. The rise to an index level of 91.1 added to a gain of 3.3% during [...]

U.S. Small Business Optimism Rose Further

Subdued global shipping costs not yet pointing to supply chain problems

PMIs show still-elevated but slowing US inflation

AI boosting US investment in data centers

US productivity growth has been significantly faster than in other major economies

Consumers' short-term US inflation expectations still elevated while longer-term expectations of financial markets are steady

US financial markets have gotten used to elevated policy uncertainty

FOMC now expects more rate cuts going forward than in June

China gaining ASEAN exports while US exports slump

Job openings less than the number unemployed in July for first time since 2021

Reaccelerating goods price inflation along with sticky services inflation clouds the outlook

Falling oil prices aren't pulling down inflation expectations, pointing to a boost from increased tariffs

Equity market exuberance outpacing macroeconomic data

Apart from Japan, Blue Chip forecasters expect further sizable monetary easing

US production rebounded in Q2, but demand continued to slow

US leader, Germany trailer for real GDP growth over past 3 years

Negative US inflation surprises leading G10 down

Deflation continues in China

Incoming data surprising on downside in US; positive surprises elsewhere

FOMC expects more inflation and less growth than in March

With escalation of Israel/Iran conflict, geopolitical risk has recently surged while US trade policy uncertainty has ebbed

Renewed supply chain pressures point to a rebound in global inflation ahead

Apart from Japan, Blue Chip forecasters look for further significant monetary policy easing

Apart from the US, productivity is moribund

Financial market concerns ebb even though policy uncertainty continues to soar

US tariff revenues nearly doubled in April

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. 

London

Singapore

Tokyo

New York

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

251103F4.jpg

251103G4.jpg

U.S. light vehicle sales dove 6.9% (-4.5% y/y) in October to 15.48 million units (SAAR) after holding steady at 16.62 million units in September. Sales fell broadly. 

Light truck sales slid 6.9% (-1.4% y/y) in October to 12.90 million units, after rising 0.9% in September. Purchases of domestically-made light trucks fell 7.9% (+1.4% y/y) to 10.10 million units, the lowest level since February, after rising 3.4% in September. Sales of imported light trucks fell 2.8% (-10.3% y/y) to 2.80 million units, following a 7.4% September decline.

Trucks’ 83.3% share of the light vehicle market last month was steady with September and compared to 82.6% in August, and to 80.7% in October of last year. The share has averaged 82.4% so far this year versus 56.5% ten years earlier.

Passenger car sales declined 6.9% (-17.6% y/y) last month to 2.58 million, after falling 4.8% in September. Purchases of domestically-produced cars fell 7.2% (-16.5% y/y) last month to 1.93 million units, after weakening 7.1% in September. Imported auto sales declined 4.5% (-22.0% y/y) to 0.64 million units after holding steady in September.

Imports' 22.2% share of the U.S. light vehicle market rose from 21.4% in September. These compared to a high of 26.3% in November of 2023. Imports' share of the passenger car market edged up to 24.8% last month from 24.2% in September. It reached a high of 38.1% in September 2021. Imports' share of the light truck market increased to 21.7% last month from 20.8% in September.

U.S. vehicle sales figures can be found in Haver's **USECON** database. Additional detail by manufacturer is in the **INDUSTRY** database.

251103H4.jpg

251103I4.jpg

- Light truck sales and auto purchases decline m/m.
- Total sales decline sharply y/y.
- Imports' market share declines.

U.S. Light Vehicle Sales Fall Sharply in October

251103J1.jpg

251103K1.jpg

Factory sector activity remains under pressure. The ISM U.S. manufacturing PMI declined to 48.7 in October after rising to 49.1 during September from 48.7 in August, according to the Institute for Supply Management. These figures are below the 50 expansion-contraction dividing line. As a result, they continue to indicate that the U.S. manufacturing sector weakened for the eighth consecutive month. The reading remained remain above, however, a low of 46.9 in October of last year. A November index of 49.4 had been expected in the Action Economics Forecast Survey.

The production component declined to 48.2 last month after rising to 51.0 in September. It remained increased from an April low of 44.0. A lessened 27.3% (NSA) of respondents reported higher production while an increased 22.0% reported lower output levels. The inventory reading fell to a 12-month low of 45.8 from 47.7 in September. A lessened 13.2% (NSA) of respondents raised inventories while a higher 21.7% shed them.

Working higher, the new orders index rose to 49.4 during October from 48.9 in September. An increased 20.4% (NSA) of respondents reported new orders improvement while 26.0% reported a decline. The employment index increased to a five-month high of 46.0 last month after rising to 45.3 in September. An increased 13.1% (NSA) of respondents more hiring while 22.3% reported less. The supplier delivery index rose to 54.2 in October from 52.6 in September. Twelve percent (NSA) of respondents reported slower product delivery speeds while 3.2% reported a quickening.

The prices index weakened to 58.0 (NSA) during October from 61.9 in September. It was below a high of 69.8 in April, and well above its low of 39.4 in December 2022. A lessened 27.3% of respondents reported higher prices, a nine month low, while an increased 8.7% reported lower.

In other series, the export orders index rose to a seasonally adjusted 44.5 in October after falling sharply to 43.0 in September. It remained up from 40.1 May low. The imports index edged up to 45.2 last month from 44.7 in September. The index is below a high of 52.6 in February.

The ISM figures are based on responses from over 400 purchasing and supply executives from 18 industries, which are weighted according to each industry’s contribution to GDP. These data are diffusion indexes where a reading above 50 indicates expansion; below 50 indicates contraction. The ISM Manufacturing PMI is a composite index based on the diffusion indexes of five of the indexes (seasonally adjusted) with equal weights: New Orders, Production, Employment, Supplier Deliveries, and Inventories. The figures from the Institute for Supply Management can be found in Haver’s **USECON** database; further detail is found in the **SURVEYS** database. The expectations number is available in Haver’s **AS1REPNA** database.

251103L1.jpg

251103M1.jpg

- Decline reverses all of September increase.					
- Lower production offsets new orders rise.
- Price index falls to nine-month low.

U.S. ISM Manufacturing PMI Eases in October; Price Index Declines Sharply

Tian Yong Woon

This week, we review a wave of key developments across Asia following US President Trump’s tour of the region last week. A central theme concerned countries courting closer ties with the US to avoid harsher actions, while also boosting regional cooperation amid trade barriers and scrutiny of China. This push for closer ties has manifested through new and updated trade agreements—ironically driven by ongoing uncertainty in global trade and supply chains, with US–China relations at the core. A major outcome of Trump’s trip was the new US–China trade agreement, which included the US halving tariffs on Chinese fentanyl-related products to 10%, while China suspended rare earth export controls and resumed soybean purchases vital to the US (chart 1). Perhaps more importantly, the deal signalled a small conciliatory shift and avoided a potentially worse outcome. Beyond the US–China agreement at the APEC Summit in South Korea, the US–South Korea trade deal also gained more clarity. Under the deal, US auto tariffs on South Korea has fallen to 15%, matching the rate applied to Japan and likely providing relief for South Korean automakers (chart 2).

Trump’s visit to Japan was another highlight. Relations with new Prime Minister Takaichi got off to a strong start, and further details emerged on Japan’s previously cited $550 billion investment commitment in the US—substantial even relative to Japan’s existing direct investment there (chart 3). However, specifics on the timing and implementation of the investment remain limited. Meanwhile, at the ASEAN Summit earlier in the week, aside from Trump’s engagements, the bloc officially welcomed its 11th member—Timor-Leste—the first new member in decades—granting it access to the bloc’s mechanisms and potentially supporting a catch-up in economic development (chart 5). Looking ahead, the focus on China and Japan is likely to continue, with China set to release its October trade (chart 6) and CPI data, and Japan scheduled to report employee wages and household spending.

**The APEC summit**
The US and China made a modest but meaningful step forward on trade following the Trump–Xi meeting at the APEC Summit in South Korea. The US lowered tariffs on Chinese fentanyl-related products to 10% from 20% and suspended enforcement of rules targeting subsidiaries of blacklisted firms—previous points of contention for Beijing. In return, China pledged stronger efforts to curb fentanyl flows, paused rare earth export controls for a year, and resumed purchases of US soybeans—significant given its historically large share of US export demand (chart 1). While not a comprehensive reset, these moves eased immediate tensions and helped avert more severe outcomes, including Trump’s previously threatened 100% tariff hike. The tone of the meeting also suggests a more conciliatory shift, though relations remain fragile and the risk of renewed escalation is still material.

251103T1.jpg

Beyond the headline-grabbing US–China trade deal, the APEC Summit in South Korea also saw the US reach a trade agreement with South Korea. Under the deal, US tariffs on South Korean autos and auto parts have fallen to 15% from 25%, matching the US tariff rate on Japanese autos and providing relief to South Korea’s sizable automotive export sector (chart 2). The agreement also clarified South Korea’s supposed $350 billion investment in the US: $200 billion in cash, capped at $20 billion per year to avoid currency market distortions, with the remaining $150 billion directed toward shipbuilding cooperation. While also not a major breakthrough, the deal represents incremental progress, addressing prior uncertainties and signalling steps toward a more favourable trade framework.

251103T2.jpg

**US President Trump’s Japan Visit**
Turning to US President Trump’s visit to Japan last week, new Prime Minister Takaichi appears to have gotten off to a strong start, with Trump hailing US–Japan relations as entering a “NEW GOLDEN AGE.” The two countries signed several agreements, including a Technology Prosperity Deal, and deepened cooperation on critical minerals and rare earths. Japan’s previously vague $550 billion investment commitment in the US is now somewhat clearer: up to $332 billion will support critical US infrastructure, $30 billion will target AI, and $15 billion will go toward electronics and supply chains, among other areas. While the headline figure is substantial—even relative to Japan’s already significant direct investment assets in the US (chart 3)—the open-ended nature of the commitment and the lack of a clear timeline leave its actual impact uncertain.

251103T3.jpg

**The ASEAN summits**
Whilst US President Trump’s attendance at the ASEAN–US Summit in Malaysia dominated headlines, there were also several other notable developments at last week’s ASEAN meetings in Kuala Lumpur. Most prominently, Timor-Leste was officially admitted as ASEAN’s eleventh member, following a two-decade accession process during which the country actively aligned its political and economic frameworks with ASEAN standards. Membership grants Timor-Leste access to the bloc’s broader security and economic mechanisms and could open further avenues for trade, investment, and development cooperation. Nonetheless, the country still has considerable ground to make up relative to its new ASEAN peers, particularly in terms of both GDP and GDP per capita (chart 4).

251103T4.jpg

The accession of Timor-Leste into ASEAN aside, last week’s summits also brought a number of economic developments for the bloc. More concretely, ASEAN and China signed an upgrade to their free trade agreement last week, bringing the deal to so-called version 3.0. The upgraded deal (ACFTA 3.0) introduces commitments in new areas such as Digital Economy, Green Economy, and Supply Chain Connectivity, among other themes. And notably, just as the US and ASEAN have found common ground to collaborate in fields such as those relating to rare earths, given how the US has seen vulnerabilities arising from this space given China’s dominance in the field, China has taken the year’s US-China frictions to foster closer ties with its neighbours in the region, including the collectively sizable ASEAN bloc. Just by the trade dimension alone, China-ASEAN-11 trade has growth significantly this year (chart 2), although the economies’ total trade with the US also rose, and at a more significant pace, despite tariff measures.

251103T5.jpg

Looking ahead, investors will focus on a series of China-related releases this week, notably the Caixin PMI readings, as well as October trade and CPI inflation data. These indicators will help gauge the economy’s performance under ongoing US tariffs and assess domestic demand and supply conditions, all in the broader context of recent US–China interactions during Trump’s Asia tour. In Japan, attention will turn to updated data on employee wages and household spending, which—together with developments in the external environment—will shape expectations for the Bank of Japan’s future policy stance. Elsewhere in the region, investors will watch interest rate decisions from Australia and Malaysia, where rates are expected to remain unchanged, as well as GDP readings from Indonesia and the Philippines.

251103T6.jpg

Asia

Economic Letter from Asia: Come Together

251031A2.jpg

251031D2.jpg

The Industrial Materials Price Index from the Foundation for International Business and Economic Research (FIBER) improved 0.3% during the four weeks ended October 31, 2025 after holding steady in the prior four week period. The index increased 0.8% y/y.

**Metals** group prices increased 4.3% (6.1% y/y) in the last four weeks as the cost of aluminum rose 7.0% (9.5% y/y). Copper scrap prices improved 6.5% (16.4% y/y) while zinc prices strengthened 6.8% in four weeks (3.0% y/y). Steel scrap prices rose 2.3% (-6.6% y/y) and tin prices increased 2.2% (16.1% y/y). Lead prices improved 1.1% (unchanged y/y) in four weeks.

Prices in the **Textile** group increased 1.2% during the last four weeks, and rose 2.4% y/y. The cost of burlap strengthened 14.5% in the last four weeks while surging 37.6% over the last year. Offsetting this rise, cotton prices fell 1.2% and declined 5.8% y/y.

**Miscellaneous** group prices weakened 3.0% in the last four weeks, unchanged y/y, as framing lumber prices fell 6.5% (+4.1% y/y). The cost of tallow, used for frying & baking, declined 13.1% (+11.2% y/y) in four weeks. Offsetting this weakness, natural rubber prices held steady (-10.1% y/y).

Prices in the **crude oil & benzene** group declined 1.7% (-9.3% y/y) in the last four weeks. The cost of West Texas Intermediate crude oil fell 3.1% in four weeks to $60.80 per barrel and declined 11.7% y/y. The price was increased from a low of $58.47 in the third week of the month. The price of the petro-chemical benzene fell 2.9% (-23.3% y/y) in four weeks.

**Excluding crude oil**, the industrial commodity price index rose 0.5% (1.6% y/y) over the last four weeks, the same as during the prior four weeks.

The Foundation for International Business and Economic Research (FIBER) develops economic measurement techniques as applied to business cycles and inflation in the U.S. and other market economies. The commodity price data can be found in Haver's **DAILY**, **WEEKLY**, **USECON** and **CMDTY** databases.

251031C2.jpg

251031B2.jpg

- Metals and textile prices strengthen.
- Framing lumber costs backpedal.
- Crude oil prices weaken.

FIBER: Industrial Commodity Price Index Edges Higher in Latest Four Weeks

Andrew Cates

**US monetary policy**
This first chart shows that Chair Powell’s cautious tone in the aftermath of this week’s FOMC meeting led markets to scale back expectations for further near-term easing. Fed funds futures for late 2025 through mid-2026 rose slightly, signalling that investors now expect a shallower and slower easing cycle than before. While the rate cut itself confirmed the Fed’s gradual pivot toward easier policy, markets interpreted Powell’s remarks as suggesting that a December move is not guaranteed and that the central bank remains wary of declaring victory on inflation too soon.

251030Z1.jpg

**The global business cycle**
The latest flash PMI surveys for October highlight a still-divergent global picture, with services-led resilience offsetting persistent manufacturing weakness. Activity remains strongest in India and the United States, both comfortably in expansion territory, while Germany has shown one of the clearest signs of improvement within the euro area after a long period of contraction. The broader euro area and UK readings point to modest but positive momentum, suggesting that growth is stabilising rather than accelerating. In contrast, France remains mired below the 50 threshold, signalling continued contraction, and Japan and Australia are treading water with only marginal gains.

251030Z2.jpg

**Consumer confidence in the US and Europe** 
Consumer confidence trends have diverged across major economies in 2025. In the UK, sentiment has improved gradually, supported by easing inflation and lower interest rates. In the euro area, confidence has stabilised after a prolonged downturn, though households remain wary. By contrast, US confidence has slipped further, probably reflecting a softening labour market, slowing wage growth, and heightened concern about job security. Overall, global consumer sentiment remains fragile and uneven, suggesting that household spending could stay subdued even if price pressures recede and monetary policy becomes more accommodative.

251030Z3.jpg

**Credit conditions in the euro area** 
The latest data on Euro Area M3 growth underline that monetary conditions remain mildly restrictive, even after the ECB’s recent rate reductions. Money growth has decelerated sharply over the past year, with only a limited contribution from private-sector credit and little net support from lending to government. The ECB’s Q4 Bank Lending Survey, released this week, suggests that while financing conditions are beginning to ease, credit dynamics remain weak. Banks reported a further net tightening of credit standards for firms, reflecting continued risk aversion, even as loan demand from businesses and households picked up modestly thanks to lower interest rates and improving sentiment.

251030Z4.jpg

**The UK manufacturing sector**
Turning to the UK, the latest CBI Industrial Trends Survey offers little sign of improvement in manufacturing conditions. The balance of firms reporting excess stocks of finished goods has fallen further into negative territory, consistent with efforts to run down inventories amid weak demand and high uncertainty. And on that score, the share of firms citing uncertainty about demand over the next year as a constraint on capital expenditure has shifted up, highlighting persistent caution in investment planning. Together, these indicators point to a sector still struggling to regain momentum after a protracted slowdown—one where firms are prioritising cost control and liquidity preservation over expansion, despite an easing in headline inflation and gradual monetary policy support.

251030Z5.jpg

**Traded goods price inflation**
The Drewry Container Index, which tracks global shipping costs for a standard 40-foot container, has fallen back in recent months from the elevated levels seen in 2024, reflecting softer global trade volumes and a partial unwinding of last year’s supply-chain pressures. Even so, concerns have re-emerged that new US tariff measures and associated logistical bottlenecks could push freight rates and producer price inflation (PPI) higher in the coming months. The final chart below illustrates how closely traded goods price inflation, represented by Haver’s aggregation of PPI inflation for advanced economies, has tended to move with swings in container shipping costs. While traded goods inflation remains subdued for now, any renewed disruptions to global shipping routes or tariff-driven frictions could quickly feed through to higher input costs—especially in manufacturing sectors reliant on long and complex supply chains.

251030Z6.jpg

Global equity markets are once again flirting with record highs, buoyed by renewed optimism that the global economy can achieve a soft landing—and by persistent enthusiasm over the potential productivity gains from AI-related investment. The Federal Reserve’s decision to cut rates by 25bps this week—its second this autumn—initially reinforced expectations that global monetary policy is shifting toward a more accommodative stance. However, Chair Powell’s reminder that a further cut in December was “not inevitable” tempered that optimism and was met with some disappointment in financial markets (chart 1). Even so, the broader tone remains constructive, though it contrasts with a still-fragile macro environment. Renewed conflict in Gaza, the ongoing US government shutdown, and intensifying trade tensions have kept risk sentiment uneven and underscored the fragility of the recovery. The latest flash PMIs (chart 2) show modest global expansion led by services, while manufacturing continues to struggle. Consumer confidence (chart 3) tells a similar story: sentiment has weakened in the US as the labour market softens, stabilised in the euro area, and improved slightly in the UK. In the euro area, sluggish money and credit growth (chart 4) and the ECB’s latest bank-lending survey confirm that financial conditions remain mildly restrictive despite recent rate cuts. The UK CBI Industrial Trends Survey (chart 5) points to manufacturers reducing inventories and deferring investment plans amid demand uncertainty. Externally, the Drewry Container Index (chart 6) has fallen back from 2024’s elevated levels, signalling easing supply-chain pressures and subdued traded-goods inflation—though tariff realignments remain a potential source of friction.

<iframe data-testid="embed-iframe" style="border-radius:12px" src="https://open.spotify.com/embed/episode/1qTfb8cqkuic21S0HPE4Wt?utm_source=generator" width="100%" height="152" frameBorder="0" allowfullscreen="" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; fullscreen; picture-in-picture" loading="lazy"></iframe>

Economy in Brief: 2008

Jump to:

U.S. CPI Fell Again With Lower Gasoline Prices

Japanese IP Dives – Back on Trend to Lower Results

U.S. Budget Deficit Widens to Record in Fiscal 2008

U.S. Retail Sales Drop 1.2% in September

PPI Still Troublesome

U.S. Retail Sales Drop 1.2% in September

U.S. Chain Store Sales Rose

U.S. Small Business Optimism Rose Further