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>
 



Liquidity growth in the US has slowed markedly this year versus the charged growth rates during the prior three years. Growth during the last three months in the adjusted monetary base fell to 1.2% versus 5.3% growth last year and 8.6% growth during 2002.
Contributing to this slowdown, if not causing it, has been the increase in the targeted interest rate for Fed funds to 3.0% from 1.0%.
Growth in MZM also has slowed to 0.8% during the last three months versus 3.9% during 2004 and 13.0% growth during 2002. The pickup in the most recent MZM growth rate from below zero may indicate continued life for consumer spending.
A Neutral Federal Funds Rate? from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis can be found <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/mt/20041201/cover.pdf"> here</a>.<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050627a.jpg" width="353"><img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050627c.jpg" width="353">

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/WEEKLY/@W3/@W301/@W301.HTM">Money Supply</a></th>
<th scope="col">6/22/05 (13 Week %, AR)</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Adjusted Monetary Base</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>5.3%</td>
<td>6.3%</td>
<td>8.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">MZM</td>
<td>0.8%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>3.9%</td>
<td>7.4%</td>
<td>13.0%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Liquidity growth in the US has slowed markedly this year versus the charged growth rates during the prior three years. Growth during the last three months in the adjusted monetary base fell to 1.2% versus 5.3% growth last year and [...]

U.S. Liquidity Growth Down

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050627b.jpg" width="353">
At 0.10 in May, the National Activity Index (CFNAI) compiled by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago continued to suggest that US economic growth has slowed.The slowdown, however, would be from the heady rates of growth during 2004 near 4%.
The May figure left the three-month moving average of the CFNAI at -0.01.
A zero value of the CFNAI 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 and income, the labor market, personal consumption and housing, manufacturing and trade sales, and inventories &amp; orders.
During the last twenty years there has been a 74% correlation between the level of the CFNAI and q/q growth in real GDP.
The latest CFNAI report is available <a href="http://www.chicagofed.org/economic_research_and_data/files/cfnai_June2005.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/SURVEYS/@S5/@S503/@S503.HTM">Chicago Fed</a></th>
<th scope="col">May</th>
<th scope="col">April</th>
<th scope="col">May &#39;04</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">CFNAI</td>
<td>0.10</td>
<td>0.05</td>
<td>0.57</td>
<td>0.39</td>
<td>-0.11</td>
<td>-0.40</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

At 0.10 in May, the National Activity Index (CFNAI) compiled by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago continued to suggest that US economic growth has slowed.The slowdown, however, would be from the heady rates of growth during 2004 [...]

Chicago Fed Nat'l Activity Index Indicates Trend US GDP Growth

<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/050627b.jpg" width="353">
At 0.10 in May, the National Activity Index (CFNAI) compiled by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago continued to suggest that US economic growth has slowed.The slowdown, however, would be from the heady rates of growth during 2004 near 4%.
The May figure left the three-month moving average of the CFNAI at -0.01.
A zero value of the CFNAI 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 and income, the labor market, personal consumption and housing, manufacturing and trade sales, and inventories &amp; orders.
During the last twenty years there has been a 74% correlation between the level of the CFNAI and q/q growth in real GDP.
The latest CFNAI report is available <a href="http://www.chicagofed.org/economic_research_and_data/files/cfnai_June2005.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/SURVEYS/@S5/@S503/@S503.HTM">Chicago Fed</a></th>
<th scope="col">May</th>
<th scope="col">April</th>
<th scope="col">May &#39;04</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">CFNAI</td>
<td>0.10</td>
<td>0.05</td>
<td>0.57</td>
<td>0.39</td>
<td>-0.11</td>
<td>-0.40</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
U.S. Liquidity Growth Down 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> June 27, 2005


Liquidity growth in the US has slowed markedly this year versus the charged growth rates during the prior three years. Growth during the last three months in the adjusted monetary base fell to 1.2% versus 5.3% growth last year and 8.6% growth during 2002.
Contributing to this slowdown, if not causing it, has been the increase in the targeted interest rate for Fed funds to 3.0% from 1.0%.
Growth in MZM also has slowed to 0.8% during the last three months versus 3.9% during 2004 and 13.0% growth during 2002. The pickup in the most recent MZM growth rate from below zero may indicate continued life for consumer spending.
A Neutral Federal Funds Rate? from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis can be found <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/mt/20041201/cover.pdf"> here</a>.<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050627a.jpg" width="353"><img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050627c.jpg" width="353">

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/WEEKLY/@W3/@W301/@W301.HTM">Money Supply</a></th>
<th scope="col">6/22/05 (13 Week %, AR)</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Adjusted Monetary Base</td>
<td>1.2%</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>5.3%</td>
<td>6.3%</td>
<td>8.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">MZM</td>
<td>0.8%</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>3.9%</td>
<td>7.4%</td>
<td>13.0%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

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/050624d.jpg" width="353">
Are you aware that Mexico runs a trade deficit? In May, this was $434.6 million; in 2004, it averaged $726.7 million a month. Over the past year, exports, not seasonally adjusted, have grown 13.3%; while higher petroleum exports are part of this growth, nonpetroleum exports have risen 12.4%.
So Mexico is yet another instance in which conventional wisdom would suggest that a specific nation must surely have a huge trade surplus: don&#39;t &quot;we&quot; import a lot from Mexico, as &quot;we&quot; do from China and India? But contrary to popular belief, those are both countries which have near balances in their trade accounts, not big surpluses.
Mexico does run a substantial surplus with the US, recently around $5 billion monthly. US purchases account for about 87% of Mexican exports, a substantial part of which involves the &quot;maquiladora&quot; trade, the plants near the US border which import parts and components for products that they assemble and re-export.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050624e.jpg" width="353">
While the shares of Mexican trade connected to the US and/or to the maquiladora operations are large, Mexico does engage other countries and purposes. Particularly in the past couple of years, Mexican imports from non-US countries have grown rapidly: In March (the latest available), they were $8.2 billion, almost half of that month&#39;s total goods imports. In 2002, these imports averaged just $5.1 billion monthly, 36.5% of imports. In the more recent periods, Brazil, China and the EU have accounted for notable parts of the Mexico&#39;s import business. Further, consumer goods imports have been expanding. Over the last 12 months, they have grown by 17.4%, compared with an increase of 14.3% for total imports. Capital goods imports have also strengthened. These upturns coincide with the run-up in oil prices and the consequent surge in Mexico&#39;s petroleum exports. Quite possibly, these additional oil revenues are being recycled into the world economy, perhaps into countries other than the ones who bought the oil.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">MexicoSeas Adj, Mil.$</th>
<th scope="col">May 2005</th>
<th scope="col">Apr 2005</th>
<th scope="col">Mar 2005</th>
Monthly Averages
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">2004</td>
<td>2003</td>
<td>2002</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Trade Balance</td>
<td>-434.6</td>
<td>-587.9</td>
<td>-734.2</td>
<td>-726.7</td>
<td>-475.0</td>
<td>-627.6</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Exports</td>
<td>17476.7</td>
<td>17039.4</td>
<td>16836.7</td>
<td>15620.2</td>
<td>13738.0</td>
<td>13407.1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; To US</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>14690.7</td>
<td>13732.8</td>
<td>12046.1</td>
<td>11846.0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; All Other</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>2146.0</td>
<td>1897.4</td>
<td>1691.9</td>
<td>1561.1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Imports</td>
<td>17896.2</td>
<td>17651.6</td>
<td>17574.0</td>
<td>16318.1</td>
<td>14213.8</td>
<td>14040.5</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; From US</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>9354.7</td>
<td>9272.0</td>
<td>8810.3</td>
<td>8910.2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; All Other</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>8219.3</td>
<td>7046.1</td>
<td>5403.5</td>
<td>5130.3</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Are you aware that Mexico runs a trade deficit? In May, this was $434.6 million; in 2004, it averaged $726.7 million a month. Over the past year, exports, not seasonally adjusted, have grown 13.3%; while higher petroleum exports are [...]

Despite Strong Oil Revenues and Big US Exports, Mexican Trade Runs Overall Deficit

<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/050624c.jpg" width="353">
New single-family home sales in May rose 2.1% m/m to 1.298M. The figure was slightly below the record level reached last October but sales during prior months were revised lower. Consensus estimates had been for sales of 1.32M.
Sales in the Northeast in May gave back all of the prior month&#39;s spurt (-28.2% y/y) and sales in the South fell 0.8% (+3.8% y/y), down for the fourth month this year. Sales in the Midwest rose 22.9% (28.2% y/y) to a record high and sales out West rose 1.7% (0.8% y/y).
The median price of a new single family home fell 6.5% to $217,000 (+2.5% y/y), the lowest level since last September.
The figures from the Census Department reflect homes sold.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E9/@E904/@E90401/@E90401.HTM">Homes Sales (000s, AR)</a></th>
<th scope="col">May</th>
<th scope="col">April</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">New Single-Family</td>
<td>1,298</td>
<td>1,271</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>1,200</td>
<td>1,091</td>
<td>976</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

New single-family home sales in May rose 2.1% m/m to 1.298M. The figure was slightly below the record level reached last October but sales during prior months were revised lower. Consensus estimates had been for sales of 1.32M. Sales [...]

New Home Sales Up, Prices Down

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050624a.jpg" width="353">
New orders for durable goods soared 5.5% in May, lifted by aircraft &amp; parts orders which more than doubled m/m. Consensus expectations had been for a 1.5% rise.
The 125% surge in orders for aircraft raised transportation equipment orders by 21.2%. A 0.2% (-1.6%) gain in motor vehicles &amp; parts also contributed.
Less transportation durable orders fell 0.2% (+6.6% y/y) for the third slight decline in the last four months. Computer &amp; electronic equipment orders fell 1.2% (+5.2% y/y), the second consecutive monthly decline, and machinery orders fell 1.9% (+8.7% y/y). Electrical equipment orders rose 0.3% (4.2% y/y) and &quot;other&quot; orders rose 1.8% (6.3% y/y).
Orders for non-defense capital goods rose 14.5% on the strength of the orders received by Boeing. Less aircraft capital goods orders fell 2.3% and shipments rose just 0.2% (12.2% y/y). During the last four months shipments have fallen 1.1%.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050624b.jpg" width="353">
Durable inventories rose 0.3% (8.7% y/y) following no change in April. Less transportation inventories also rose 0.3% (9.8% y/y).
Unfilled orders jumped 1.9% (7.6% y/y) but outside of the transportation sector backlogs fell slightly (+7.7% y/y). The ratio of backlogs to shipments outside of transportation has been moving erratically sideways since early last year.
How Long Is Long Term Investment? from the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City is available <a href="http://www.kansascityfed.org/publicat/econrev/Pdf/1Q05shen.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/USECON/@ED/@ED01/@ED0101/@ED0101.HTM">NAICS Classification</a></th>
<th scope="col">May</th>
<th scope="col">April</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Durable Goods Orders</td>
<td>5.5%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>10.7%</td>
<td>10.8%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Excluding Transportation</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>-0.7%</td>
<td>6.6%</td>
<td>13.1%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>-4.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Nondefense Capital Goods</td>
<td>14.5%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>28.2%</td>
<td>13.7%</td>
<td>5.6%</td>
<td>-7.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;Excluding Aircraft</td>
<td>-2.3%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>8.9%</td>
<td>11.7%</td>
<td>6.6%</td>
<td>-7.1%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

New orders for durable goods soared 5.5% in May, lifted by aircraft & parts orders which more than doubled m/m. Consensus expectations had been for a 1.5% rise. The 125% surge in orders for aircraft raised transportation equipment [...]

U.S. Durable Goods Orders Soar

<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/050624a.jpg" width="353">
New orders for durable goods soared 5.5% in May, lifted by aircraft &amp; parts orders which more than doubled m/m. Consensus expectations had been for a 1.5% rise.
The 125% surge in orders for aircraft raised transportation equipment orders by 21.2%. A 0.2% (-1.6%) gain in motor vehicles &amp; parts also contributed.
Less transportation durable orders fell 0.2% (+6.6% y/y) for the third slight decline in the last four months. Computer &amp; electronic equipment orders fell 1.2% (+5.2% y/y), the second consecutive monthly decline, and machinery orders fell 1.9% (+8.7% y/y). Electrical equipment orders rose 0.3% (4.2% y/y) and &quot;other&quot; orders rose 1.8% (6.3% y/y).
Orders for non-defense capital goods rose 14.5% on the strength of the orders received by Boeing. Less aircraft capital goods orders fell 2.3% and shipments rose just 0.2% (12.2% y/y). During the last four months shipments have fallen 1.1%.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050624b.jpg" width="353">
Durable inventories rose 0.3% (8.7% y/y) following no change in April. Less transportation inventories also rose 0.3% (9.8% y/y).
Unfilled orders jumped 1.9% (7.6% y/y) but outside of the transportation sector backlogs fell slightly (+7.7% y/y). The ratio of backlogs to shipments outside of transportation has been moving erratically sideways since early last year.
How Long Is Long Term Investment? from the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City is available <a href="http://www.kansascityfed.org/publicat/econrev/Pdf/1Q05shen.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/USECON/@ED/@ED01/@ED0101/@ED0101.HTM">NAICS Classification</a></th>
<th scope="col">May</th>
<th scope="col">April</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Durable Goods Orders</td>
<td>5.5%</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
<td>10.7%</td>
<td>10.8%</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Excluding Transportation</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>-0.7%</td>
<td>6.6%</td>
<td>13.1%</td>
<td>3.2%</td>
<td>-4.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Nondefense Capital Goods</td>
<td>14.5%</td>
<td>4.0%</td>
<td>28.2%</td>
<td>13.7%</td>
<td>5.6%</td>
<td>-7.2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;Excluding Aircraft</td>
<td>-2.3%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>8.9%</td>
<td>11.7%</td>
<td>6.6%</td>
<td>-7.1%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
New Home Sales Up, Prices Down 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom Moeller</a> June 24, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050624c.jpg" width="353">
New single-family home sales in May rose 2.1% m/m to 1.298M. The figure was slightly below the record level reached last October but sales during prior months were revised lower. Consensus estimates had been for sales of 1.32M.
Sales in the Northeast in May gave back all of the prior month&#39;s spurt (-28.2% y/y) and sales in the South fell 0.8% (+3.8% y/y), down for the fourth month this year. Sales in the Midwest rose 22.9% (28.2% y/y) to a record high and sales out West rose 1.7% (0.8% y/y).
The median price of a new single family home fell 6.5% to $217,000 (+2.5% y/y), the lowest level since last September.
The figures from the Census Department reflect homes sold.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E9/@E904/@E90401/@E90401.HTM">Homes Sales (000s, AR)</a></th>
<th scope="col">May</th>
<th scope="col">April</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">New Single-Family</td>
<td>1,298</td>
<td>1,271</td>
<td>4.4%</td>
<td>1,200</td>
<td>1,091</td>
<td>976</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Despite Strong Oil Revenues and Big US Exports, Mexican Trade Runs Overall Deficit 
by <a href="/comment/Stone.html">Carol Stone</a> June 24, 2005


<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050624d.jpg" width="353">
Are you aware that Mexico runs a trade deficit? In May, this was $434.6 million; in 2004, it averaged $726.7 million a month. Over the past year, exports, not seasonally adjusted, have grown 13.3%; while higher petroleum exports are part of this growth, nonpetroleum exports have risen 12.4%.
So Mexico is yet another instance in which conventional wisdom would suggest that a specific nation must surely have a huge trade surplus: don&#39;t &quot;we&quot; import a lot from Mexico, as &quot;we&quot; do from China and India? But contrary to popular belief, those are both countries which have near balances in their trade accounts, not big surpluses.
Mexico does run a substantial surplus with the US, recently around $5 billion monthly. US purchases account for about 87% of Mexican exports, a substantial part of which involves the &quot;maquiladora&quot; trade, the plants near the US border which import parts and components for products that they assemble and re-export.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050624e.jpg" width="353">
While the shares of Mexican trade connected to the US and/or to the maquiladora operations are large, Mexico does engage other countries and purposes. Particularly in the past couple of years, Mexican imports from non-US countries have grown rapidly: In March (the latest available), they were $8.2 billion, almost half of that month&#39;s total goods imports. In 2002, these imports averaged just $5.1 billion monthly, 36.5% of imports. In the more recent periods, Brazil, China and the EU have accounted for notable parts of the Mexico&#39;s import business. Further, consumer goods imports have been expanding. Over the last 12 months, they have grown by 17.4%, compared with an increase of 14.3% for total imports. Capital goods imports have also strengthened. These upturns coincide with the run-up in oil prices and the consequent surge in Mexico&#39;s petroleum exports. Quite possibly, these additional oil revenues are being recycled into the world economy, perhaps into countries other than the ones who bought the oil.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">MexicoSeas Adj, Mil.$</th>
<th scope="col">May 2005</th>
<th scope="col">Apr 2005</th>
<th scope="col">Mar 2005</th>
Monthly Averages
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">2004</td>
<td>2003</td>
<td>2002</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Trade Balance</td>
<td>-434.6</td>
<td>-587.9</td>
<td>-734.2</td>
<td>-726.7</td>
<td>-475.0</td>
<td>-627.6</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Exports</td>
<td>17476.7</td>
<td>17039.4</td>
<td>16836.7</td>
<td>15620.2</td>
<td>13738.0</td>
<td>13407.1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; To US</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>14690.7</td>
<td>13732.8</td>
<td>12046.1</td>
<td>11846.0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; All Other</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>2146.0</td>
<td>1897.4</td>
<td>1691.9</td>
<td>1561.1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Imports</td>
<td>17896.2</td>
<td>17651.6</td>
<td>17574.0</td>
<td>16318.1</td>
<td>14213.8</td>
<td>14040.5</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; From US</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>9354.7</td>
<td>9272.0</td>
<td>8810.3</td>
<td>8910.2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; All Other</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>--</td>
<td>8219.3</td>
<td>7046.1</td>
<td>5403.5</td>
<td>5130.3</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050623c.jpg" width="353">
Consumer confidence has eroded in Italy this month, with a decline of 1.4 percentage points in the ISAE indicator to 102.9 from 104.3 in May (seasonally adjusted, 1980=100). Concern over the overall economic situation is the broad source of discomfort, as people&#39;s assessment of the &quot;general economic situation&quot; dropped to 76.0 from 83.9 last month. While total confidence remains stronger than 2004 levels, the &quot;general&quot; indicator has fallen below last year&#39;s range.
At the same time, people see their own economic situations as holding up -- or at least not worsening as severely. The &quot;personal situation&quot; gauge climbed 1.8 points to 117.1, the highest level since September 2002. Associated survey items, such as household finances and financial expectations are moving in a narrow range, and buying attitudes toward major purchases and ability to save are actually improving. Attitudes about job prospects are mixed. This survey sees unemployment going higher, but new regulations give employers more flexibility about using temporary and part-time workers, so there is uncertainty about their implication for the number of jobs and the financial implications.<img align="right" border="0" height="265" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/050623d.jpg" width="353">
These considerations accompany the uncertainty over the EU constitution and the rise in energy costs. Perhaps the surprising thing about this survey is that its final outcome wasn&#39;t lower.
In the Netherlands, consumer confidence did drop more sharply, to -26 this month from -22 in May and -16 in April. The components here show the same pattern as in Italy, however, as the macro indicator, &quot;economic climate&quot; plunged to -30 from -22 in May and -8 in April. The &quot;willingness to buy&quot; indicator has been fairly stable, with -23 this month after -22 in May and -20 in April. The deterioration in these data break an improving trend that had run from mid-2003 to this spring, just before the vote over the EU constitution. This too suggests that consumers&#39; worries are more over political uncertainties that about their own economic situation. Not though, please note, that they are optimistic about that, but just that their distress is less intense.

<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/ITALY/ITALY.HTM">Italy</a>(Index, 1980=100)</th>
<th scope="col">June 2005</th>
<th scope="col">May 2005</th>
<th scope="col">June 2004</th>
<th scope="col">2004</th>
<th scope="col">2003</th>
<th scope="col">2002</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Consumer Confidence Indicator</td>
<td>102.9</td>
<td>104.3</td>
<td>100.1</td>
<td>101.4</td>
<td>106.1</td>
<td>115.8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; General Economic Situation</td>
<td>76.0</td>
<td>83.9</td>
<td>89.0</td>
<td>88.6</td>
<td>91.4</td>
<td>105.2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Personal Economic Situation</td>
<td>117.1</td>
<td>115.3</td>
<td>106.5</td>
<td>107.9</td>
<td>113.5</td>
<td>121.1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/BENELUX/@B2/@B2.HTM">Netherlands</a> &nbsp; Consumer Confidence Survey&nbsp; &nbsp; (% balance)</td>
<td>-26</td>
<td>-22</td>
<td>-25</td>
<td>-25</td>
<td>-35</td>
<td>-25</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Consumer confidence has eroded in Italy this month, with a decline of 1.4 percentage points in the ISAE indicator to 102.9 from 104.3 in May (seasonally adjusted, 1980=100). Concern over the overall economic situation is the broad [...]

Consumers Fret Over Economic Situation in Italy & Netherlands

USD/EUR exchange rate uncoupling from interest rate differential

Widespread downgrading of 2025 GDP outlook

Trade and fiscal policy uncertainty has exploded with the new administration

Much lower US electricity costs gives it a competitive advantage

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

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

US policy gyrations boosting policy uncertainty worldwide

Expected tariff hikes have boosted inflation expectations

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

US economy expected to outperform other major economies in 2025

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

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

Heavy US manufacturing states underperforming while Sun Belt states outperforming

Rising long-term yields a global phenomenon

US financial market concerns shifting from growth to inflation

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

Policy uncertainty has surged since the US national elections.

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

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

Headline US PCE inflation elevated by sticky services prices

US and global equity prices have recently diverged

US leading global upturn in economic surprises

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

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

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

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

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


Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Contact us

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

New York

London

Singapore

Tokyo

Economy in Brief

Viewpoints

Contact Us

Our Data

Our Products

What We Do

Our Authors

About Us

Data News

Resources

Release Calendars

Training Center

Webinars

Newsletters

Download Software

For Clients

Live Updates

250430N1.jpg

250430O1.jpg

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

250430P1.jpg

250430Q1.jpg

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

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

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

250430R1.jpg

250430S1.jpg

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

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

Michael J. Moran

250430A.jpg

250430B.jpg

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

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

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

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

250430C.jpg

250430D.jpg

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

Personal Income, Consumption, and Prices in March

250430F20.jpg

250430G20.jpg

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

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

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

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

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

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

U.S. Pending Home Sales Surge in March

Sandy Batten

250430F5.jpg

250430G5.jpg

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

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

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

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

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

250430H5.jpg

250430I5.jpg

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

Employment Cost Growth Steady in Q1 2025

Kathleen Stephansen, CBE

250430J4.jpg

250430K4.jpg

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

250430L4.jpg

250430M4.jpg

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

Economy in Brief: June 2005

Jump to:

U.S. Liquidity Growth Down

Chicago Fed Nat'l Activity Index Indicates Trend US GDP Growth

Chicago Fed Nat'l Activity Index Indicates Trend US GDP Growth

Despite Strong Oil Revenues and Big US Exports, Mexican Trade Runs Overall Deficit

New Home Sales Up, Prices Down

U.S. Durable Goods Orders Soar

U.S. Durable Goods Orders Soar

Consumers Fret Over Economic Situation in Italy & Netherlands