Tom Moeller

<html>
<head>
<style>
.odd{
 background-color:#edf5ff;
}
.even{
 background-color:#dde5ef;
}
.grey1{
	background-color:#f0f0f0;
}
.grey2{
	background-color:#e2e2e2;
}
.grey3{
	background-color:#d4d4d4;
}
.grey4{
	background-color:#c6c6c6;
}
.grey5{
	background-color:#b8b8b8;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
 



<img align="left" border="0" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090415e.jpg">
In March, the year-to-year decline in U.S. industrial output of 12.7% was the result of reduced U.S. demand, inventory cutbacks and recessions abroad. To emphasize the size of that decline, it was the largest since the factory sector&#39;s wind-down following World War II.
It&#39;s the same story as earlier for the U.S. industrial sector. Output fell 1.5% last month, the same as an unrevised 1.5% drop during February. For 2008 and 2007, however, production was revised weaker. Consensus expectations had been for a 0.9% decline in March output.
And the rate of decline has picked up steam. During the last three months, the rate of decline of 18.5% (AR) about matches the quickest of the last few months. Factory sector output alone is off at an 18.7% annual rate during the last three months versus a full-year drop of 3.2% during 2008.<img align="right" border="0" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090415f.jpg">
The downturn in the housing market continued to lower output of construction supplies which fell 2.7% last month and at a 30.0% annual rate during the last three. Output of consumer goods overall fell 0.4% last month and at a 12.5% rate since so far this year. Production of autos fell at a 37.3% rate while furniture output fell at a 21.9% rate so far this year after the 10.5% drop during all of 2008. Apparel output actually posted a modest March increase but it&#39;s off at a 16.5% rate so far in 2009. Production of business equipment continued lower last month by 2.4% and at a 27.6% rate for the year.
Pain has come to an area which previously was immune. Industrial production in the high-tech sector fell another 3.1% last month and at a 23.8% rate during the last three. That follows a downwardly revised 11.4% increase during all of last year. Less high tech, overall industrial production fell 1.5% during March and the annual rate of change of -18.5% was near the weakest since 1975.
Outside of the both the auto and the high tech sectors, total factory production fell 1.5% last month and the three-month annual rate of decline remained more than firm at -16.8%.
Excess capacity grew even further last month. Capacity utilization fell to 69.3%, a record low for the series which dates to 1966. Utilization in the factory sector dropped even harder to 65.8% from a peak near 80% back in 2007. The latest rate was a record low since WW II. Growth in the total productive capacity of the factory sector has slowed to 0.5% (y/y) and the growth during the last two years was revised down.
The industrial production data are available in Haver&#39;s USECON database.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead>
<tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION (SA, %)</th>
<th scope="col">March</th>
<th scope="col">February</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2008</th>
<th scope="col">2007</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total Output </td>
<td>-1.5</td>
<td>-1.5</td>
<td>-12.7</td>
<td>-2.2</td>
<td>1.5</td>
<td>2.3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp; Manufacturing</td>
<td>-1.7</td>
<td>-0.6</td>
<td>-15.0</td>
<td>-3.2</td>
<td>1.4</td>
<td>2.5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Consumer Goods</td>
<td>-0.4</td>
<td>-0.7</td>
<td>-7.8</td>
<td>-2.6</td>
<td>0.9</td>
<td>0.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Business Equipment</td>
<td>-2.4</td>
<td>-1.5</td>
<td>-14.4</td>
<td>-1.1</td>
<td>2.7</td>
<td>9.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Construction Supplies</td>
<td>-2.7</td>
<td>-2.0</td>
<td>-21.0</td>
<td>-6.3</td>
<td>-2.0</td>
<td>2.3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Utilities</td>
<td>1.9</td>
<td>-7.8</td>
<td>-2.8</td>
<td>0.3</td>
<td>3.4</td>
<td>-0.6</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Capacity Utilization</td>
<td>69.3</td>
<td>70.3</td>
<td>79.8 (March &#39;08)</td>
<td>77.6</td>
<td>80.6</td>
<td>80.9</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

In March, the year-to-year decline in U.S. industrial output of 12.7% was the result of reduced U.S. demand, inventory cutbacks and recessions abroad. To emphasize the size of that decline, it was the largest since the factory [...]

U.S. Factory Output Decline Is The Sharpest Since The Deindustrialization After WWII

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/090415d.jpg" align="left" border="0">
Japans economy continues to show the strains it is under as
retail spending fell again in February. The 0.2% drop is a step-up from
the 0.1% drop in January which comes on the heels of December&#8217;s 1.7%
sales collapse. As a result of this sequence of sales results, Japan&#8217;s
retail sales in 2009-Q1 are falling at a 6.6% nominal rate. Nominal
sales are off by only about 2.5% Yr/Yr (seasonally adjusted) since
retail sales in Japan only began falling consistently starting in
October of last year. Over three months sales are off at a 7.8% annual
rate; over six months the decline is at a 5.5% annual rate. 
 

In addition industrial output in Japan fell by 9.4% in
February after a sharper drop of 10.1% in January. These ARE
month-to-month drops in overall industrial output. Japan&#8217;s industrial
sector is being gutted by the sharp contraction in global trade. Japan
remains an economy under a great deal of pressure. 



<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup>
<thead><tr><th colspan="9" scope="col">Japan Retail Sales Trends</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td>Feb-09</td>
<td>Jan-09</td>
<td>Dec-08</td>
<td>3-mo</td>
<td>6-mo</td>
<td>12-mo</td>
<td>Yr-Ago</td>
<td>Q-to-Date</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total SA</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
<td>-7.8%</td>
<td>-5.5%</td>
<td>-2.5%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>-6.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="9" class="firstcol">Not seasonally adjusted</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total: Nominal</td>
<td>-1.2%</td>
<td>0.9%</td>
<td>-2.5%</td>
<td>-10.9%</td>
<td>-7.3%</td>
<td>-5.7%</td>
<td>13.0%</td>
<td>-6.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Motor Vehicles</td>
<td>-6.1%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>4.3%</td>
<td>6.1%</td>
<td>-7.7%</td>
<td>-5.4%</td>
<td>13.1%</td>
<td>6.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Food&amp;
Beverage</td>
<td>-1.5%</td>
<td>-0.5%</td>
<td>-1.4%</td>
<td>-12.9%</td>
<td>-3.1%</td>
<td>-0.6%</td>
<td>8.9%</td>
<td>-9.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Fabric apparel
&amp; access</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>-6.3%</td>
<td>-17.6%</td>
<td>-6.9%</td>
<td>-7.2%</td>
<td>8.3%</td>
<td>-5.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Rest of Retail</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>-4.0%</td>
<td>-11.8%</td>
<td>-9.8%</td>
<td>-8.5%</td>
<td>16.2%</td>
<td>-7.5%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body></html>

Japans economy continues to show the strains it is under as retail spending fell again in February. The 0.2% drop is a step-up from the 0.1% drop in January which comes on the heels of December’s 1.7% sales collapse. As a result of [...]

Japan's Retail Sales Drop

<!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/090415a.jpg" align="right" border="0" height="265" width="353">
Last month,
the consumer price index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics
slipped 0.1%. The big news, however, was not the rare negative sign in
front of the monthly figure but the negative sign in front of the
twelve month change. It was the first time since August 1955 that the
figure was negative. (Negative prints a few months ago reflected the
effects of seasonal adjustment factors.) The latest slip in the CPI
contrasts with Consensus expectations for a 0.2% March rise. Leading that decline in prices was a reversal of earlier strength in
energy &amp; food costs. In contrast, "core" pricing recently
picked up a bit. The CPI less food &amp; energy rose 0.2% in each
of the last three months and these increases actually were stronger
than the -0.0% and 0.1% changes during the last four months of 2008.
That pickup was enough to stabilize the twelve month change near 1.8%
after its deceleration from a high of 2.9% back in September of
2006. Lower energy prices in March were
led by a 4.0% decline gasoline prices (-39.3% y/y) which reversed just
half of the February increase. Even weaker last month were fuel oil
prices which fell 7.7%. That was the eighth consecutive monthly drop
and it lowered prices by nearly one-third during the last twelve.
Similarly, prices for natural gas &amp; electricity have fallen in
all but one of the last eight months though they still were 2.6% higher
than last March. <img src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090415b.jpg" align="right" border="0" height="265" width="353">
Moderation of earlier gains in food &amp;
beverage prices also has played a role in the overall CPI deceleration.
Prices slipped another 0.1% last month and the annual gain of 4.3% is
down from a peak of 6.1% last fall. Recent weakness has been led by
lower dairy product prices (-3.1% y/y) as prices of other foods
continued higher. Core goods prices have been up
notably in recent months. The second consecutive 0.4% increase in March
reversed all of the weakness since 2006. Higher tobacco prices account
for much of that acceleration as they rose 18.1% year to year. But
there has been some modest firming of prices elsewhere. Prices for
household furnishings &amp; operations show a 1.8% y/y gain
following price deflation early last year. Prices of new &amp; used
motor vehicles also stopped declining during the last three months
though they still are down 0.8% y/y. Apparel prices are up 1.4% y/y
after modest deflation due to the weak Christmas. Gains in core
services prices continue to moderate. The 0.1% upticks
during five of the last six months pulled year-to-year change to 2.3%
which was its lowest since 1983. That moderation continues to owe
mostly to weakness in the housing market which caused March shelter
prices to be unchanged and up just 1.5% y/y. <img src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090415c.jpg" align="right" border="0" height="265" width="353">
Owners equivalent rent of
primary residence, a measure not equivalent to other house price
measures, rose 0.2% (2.1% y/y) The cost of travel fell and prices of
lodging away from home have also dropped, by 7.8% during the last year.
Other service prices rose. The increase in medical care services prices
fell back to 0.2% (3.1% y/y) while education costs rose 0.5% (5.6%
y/y).&nbsp; Public transportation prices fell hard as they did
during the prior month. The 1.0% decline was the seventh drop in a row
(-5.0% y/y). The chained CPI, which adjusts for shifts in consumption
patterns, eased to a gain of just 0.2%. The increase in chained prices
less food and energy continued firm at 0.4%. · The consumer price data
is available in Haver's USECON database while
detailed figures can be found in the CPIDATA
database.&nbsp;
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead><tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E8/@E801/@E80101/@E80101.HTM">Consumer
Price Index</a> (%)</th>
<th scope="col">March</th>
<th scope="col">February</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">2008</th>
<th scope="col">2007</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">Total&nbsp;</td>
<td>-0.1</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>-0.4</td>
<td>3.8</td>
<td>2.9</td>
<td>3.2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">Total less Food &amp; Energy</td>
<td>0.2</td>
<td>0.2</td>
<td>1.8</td>
<td>2.3</td>
<td>2.3</td>
<td>2.5</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Goods less Food
&amp; Energy</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>-0.4</td>
<td>0.2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Services less Energy</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>2.3</td>
<td>3.1</td>
<td>3.4</td>
<td>3.4</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Energy</td>
<td>-3.0</td>
<td>3.3</td>
<td>-23.1</td>
<td>13.5</td>
<td>5.7</td>
<td>11.0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Food &amp;
Beverages</td>
<td>-0.1</td>
<td>-0.1</td>
<td>4.3</td>
<td>5.4</td>
<td>3.9</td>
<td>2.3</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E8/@E801/@E80113/@E80113.HTM">Chained
CPI: Total (NSA)</a>&nbsp;</td>
<td>0.2</td>
<td>0.6</td>
<td>-0.8 </td>
<td>3.3</td>
<td>2.5</td>
<td>2.9 </td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;Total less Food
&amp; Energy&nbsp;</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>1.3</td>
<td>2.0</td>
<td>2.0</td>
<td>2.2</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body></html>

Last month, the consumer price index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics slipped 0.1%. The big news, however, was not the rare negative sign in front of the monthly figure but the negative sign in front of the twelve month [...]

Year-to-Year Drop In U.S. CPI Is First Since '55 Thanks To Energy & Food Prices

<!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/090415a.jpg" align="right" border="0" height="265" width="353">Last month,
the consumer price index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics
slipped 0.1%. The big news, however, was not the rare negative sign in
front of the monthly figure but the negative sign in front of the
twelve month change. It was the first time since August 1955 that the
figure was negative. (Negative prints a few months ago reflected the
effects of seasonal adjustment factors.) The latest slip in the CPI
contrasts with Consensus expectations for a 0.2% March rise.
 Leading that decline in prices was a reversal of earlier
strength in
energy &amp; food costs. In contrast, "core" pricing recently
picked up a bit. The CPI less food &amp; energy rose 0.2% in each
of the last three months and these increases actually were stronger
than the -0.0% and 0.1% changes during the last four months of 2008.
That pickup was enough to stabilize the twelve month change near 1.8%
after its deceleration from a high of 2.9% back in September of
2006.
 Lower energy prices in March were
led by a 4.0% decline gasoline prices (-39.3% y/y) which reversed just
half of the February increase. Even weaker last month were fuel oil
prices which fell 7.7%. That was the eighth consecutive monthly drop
and it lowered prices by nearly one-third during the last twelve.
Similarly, prices for natural gas &amp; electricity have fallen in
all but one of the last eight months though they still were 2.6% higher
than last March.
 <img src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090415b.jpg" align="right" border="0" height="265" width="353">Moderation
of earlier gains in food &amp;
beverage prices also has played a role in the overall CPI deceleration.
Prices slipped another 0.1% last month and the annual gain of 4.3% is
down from a peak of 6.1% last fall. Recent weakness has been led by
lower dairy product prices (-3.1% y/y) as prices of other foods
continued higher.
 Core goods prices have been up
notably in recent months. The second consecutive 0.4% increase in March
reversed all of the weakness since 2006. Higher tobacco prices account
for much of that acceleration as they rose 18.1% year to year. But
there has been some modest firming of prices elsewhere. Prices for
household furnishings &amp; operations show a 1.8% y/y gain
following price deflation early last year. Prices of new &amp; used
motor vehicles also stopped declining during the last three months
though they still are down 0.8% y/y. Apparel prices are up 1.4% y/y
after modest deflation due to the weak Christmas. 
 Gains in core
services prices continue to moderate. The 0.1% upticks
during five of the last six months pulled year-to-year change to 2.3%
which was its lowest since 1983. That moderation continues to owe
mostly to weakness in the housing market which caused March shelter
prices to be unchanged and up just 1.5% y/y. <img src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090415c.jpg" align="right" border="0" height="265" width="353">
Owners equivalent rent of
primary residence, a measure not equivalent to other house price
measures, rose 0.2% (2.1% y/y) The cost of travel fell and prices of
lodging away from home have also dropped, by 7.8% during the last year.
Other service prices rose. The increase in medical care services prices
fell back to 0.2% (3.1% y/y) while education costs rose 0.5% (5.6%
y/y).&nbsp; Public transportation prices fell hard as they did
during the prior month. The 1.0% decline was the seventh drop in a row
(-5.0% y/y). 
 The chained CPI, which adjusts for shifts in consumption
patterns, eased to a gain of just 0.2%. The increase in chained prices
less food and energy continued firm at 0.4%. · The consumer price data
is available in Haver's USECON database while
detailed figures can be found in the CPIDATA
database.&nbsp;
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead><tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E8/@E801/@E80101/@E80101.HTM">Consumer
Price Index</a> (%)</th>
<th scope="col">March</th>
<th scope="col">February</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y&nbsp;</th>
<th scope="col">2008</th>
<th scope="col">2007</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">Total&nbsp;</td>
<td>-0.1</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>-0.4</td>
<td>3.8</td>
<td>2.9</td>
<td>3.2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">Total less Food &amp; Energy</td>
<td>0.2</td>
<td>0.2</td>
<td>1.8</td>
<td>2.3</td>
<td>2.3</td>
<td>2.5</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Goods less Food
&amp; Energy</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>-0.4</td>
<td>0.2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Services less Energy</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>2.3</td>
<td>3.1</td>
<td>3.4</td>
<td>3.4</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Energy</td>
<td>-3.0</td>
<td>3.3</td>
<td>-23.1</td>
<td>13.5</td>
<td>5.7</td>
<td>11.0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Food &amp;
Beverages</td>
<td>-0.1</td>
<td>-0.1</td>
<td>4.3</td>
<td>5.4</td>
<td>3.9</td>
<td>2.3</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol"><a href="http://www.haverselect.com/dlx/USECON/@E8/@E801/@E80113/@E80113.HTM">Chained
CPI: Total (NSA)</a>&nbsp;</td>
<td>0.2</td>
<td>0.6</td>
<td>-0.8 </td>
<td>3.3</td>
<td>2.5</td>
<td>2.9 </td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;Total less Food
&amp; Energy&nbsp;</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>1.3</td>
<td>2.0</td>
<td>2.0</td>
<td>2.2</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

Japan's Retail Sales Drop 
by <a href="/comment/Brusca.html">Robert
Brusca&nbsp;</a> April 15, 2009


<img src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090415d.jpg" align="left" border="0">
Japans economy continues to show the strains it is under as
retail spending fell again in February. The 0.2% drop is a step-up from
the 0.1% drop in January which comes on the heels of December&#8217;s 1.7%
sales collapse. As a result of this sequence of sales results, Japan&#8217;s
retail sales in 2009-Q1 are falling at a 6.6% nominal rate. Nominal
sales are off by only about 2.5% Yr/Yr (seasonally adjusted) since
retail sales in Japan only began falling consistently starting in
October of last year. Over three months sales are off at a 7.8% annual
rate; over six months the decline is at a 5.5% annual rate. 
 

In addition industrial output in Japan fell by 9.4% in
February after a sharper drop of 10.1% in January. These ARE
month-to-month drops in overall industrial output. Japan&#8217;s industrial
sector is being gutted by the sharp contraction in global trade. Japan
remains an economy under a great deal of pressure. 


<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup>
<thead><tr>
<th colspan="9" scope="col">Japan
Retail Sales Trends</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td>Feb-09</td>
<td>Jan-09</td>
<td>Dec-08</td>
<td>3-mo</td>
<td>6-mo</td>
<td>12-mo</td>
<td>Yr-Ago</td>
<td>Q-to-Date</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total SA</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>-1.7%</td>
<td>-7.8%</td>
<td>-5.5%</td>
<td>-2.5%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>-6.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="9" class="firstcol">Not
seasonally adjusted</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total: Nominal</td>
<td>-1.2%</td>
<td>0.9%</td>
<td>-2.5%</td>
<td>-10.9%</td>
<td>-7.3%</td>
<td>-5.7%</td>
<td>13.0%</td>
<td>-6.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Motor Vehicles</td>
<td>-6.1%</td>
<td>3.7%</td>
<td>4.3%</td>
<td>6.1%</td>
<td>-7.7%</td>
<td>-5.4%</td>
<td>13.1%</td>
<td>6.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Food&amp;
Beverage</td>
<td>-1.5%</td>
<td>-0.5%</td>
<td>-1.4%</td>
<td>-12.9%</td>
<td>-3.1%</td>
<td>-0.6%</td>
<td>8.9%</td>
<td>-9.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Fabric apparel
&amp; access</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
<td>1.7%</td>
<td>-6.3%</td>
<td>-17.6%</td>
<td>-6.9%</td>
<td>-7.2%</td>
<td>8.3%</td>
<td>-5.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Rest of Retail</td>
<td>-0.1%</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>-4.0%</td>
<td>-11.8%</td>
<td>-9.8%</td>
<td>-8.5%</td>
<td>16.2%</td>
<td>-7.5%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
U.S. Factory Output Decline Is The
Sharpest Since The Deindustrialization After WWII 
by <a href="/comment/Moeller.html">Tom
Moeller</a> April 15, 2009


<img src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090415e.jpg" align="left" border="0">
In March, the year-to-year decline in U.S. industrial
output of 12.7% was the result of reduced U.S. demand, inventory
cutbacks and recessions abroad. To emphasize the size of that decline,
it was the largest since the factory sector's wind-down following World
War II.
It's the same story as earlier for the U.S. industrial sector.
Output fell 1.5% last month, the same as an unrevised 1.5% drop during
February. For 2008 and 2007, however, production was revised weaker.
Consensus expectations had been for a 0.9% decline in March output.
And the rate of decline has picked up steam. During the last
three months, the rate of decline of 18.5% (AR) about matches the
quickest of the last few months. Factory sector output alone is off at
an 18.7% annual rate during the last three months versus a full-year
drop of 3.2% during 2008.<img src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090415f.jpg" align="right" border="0">
The downturn in the housing market continued to lower output
of construction supplies which fell 2.7% last month and at a 30.0%
annual rate during the last three. Output of consumer goods overall
fell 0.4% last month and at a 12.5% rate since so far this year.
Production of autos fell at a 37.3% rate while furniture output fell at
a 21.9% rate so far this year after the 10.5% drop during all of 2008.
Apparel output actually posted a modest March increase but it's off at
a 16.5% rate so far in 2009. Production of business equipment continued
lower last month by 2.4% and at a 27.6% rate for the year.
Pain has come to an area which previously was immune.
Industrial production in the high-tech sector fell another 3.1% last
month and at a 23.8% rate during the last three. That follows a
downwardly revised 11.4% increase during all of last year. Less high
tech, overall industrial production fell 1.5% during March and the
annual rate of change of -18.5% was near the weakest since 1975.
Outside of the both the auto and the high tech sectors, total
factory production fell 1.5% last month and the three-month annual rate
of decline remained more than firm at -16.8%.
Excess capacity grew even further last month. Capacity
utilization fell to 69.3%, a record low for the series which dates to
1966. Utilization in the factory sector dropped even harder
to 65.8% from a peak near 80% back in 2007. The latest rate was a
record low since WW II. Growth in the total productive
capacity of the factory sector has slowed to 0.5% (y/y) and the growth
during the last two years was revised down.
The industrial production data are available in Haver's USECON
database.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead><tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">INDUSTRIAL
PRODUCTION (SA, %)</th>
<th scope="col">March</th>
<th scope="col">February</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2008</th>
<th scope="col">2007</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total Output </td>
<td>-1.5</td>
<td>-1.5</td>
<td>-12.7</td>
<td>-2.2</td>
<td>1.5</td>
<td>2.3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp; Manufacturing</td>
<td>-1.7</td>
<td>-0.6</td>
<td>-15.0</td>
<td>-3.2</td>
<td>1.4</td>
<td>2.5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Consumer Goods</td>
<td>-0.4</td>
<td>-0.7</td>
<td>-7.8</td>
<td>-2.6</td>
<td>0.9</td>
<td>0.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Business Equipment</td>
<td>-2.4</td>
<td>-1.5</td>
<td>-14.4</td>
<td>-1.1</td>
<td>2.7</td>
<td>9.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Construction Supplies</td>
<td>-2.7</td>
<td>-2.0</td>
<td>-21.0</td>
<td>-6.3</td>
<td>-2.0</td>
<td>2.3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Utilities</td>
<td>1.9</td>
<td>-7.8</td>
<td>-2.8</td>
<td>0.3</td>
<td>3.4</td>
<td>-0.6</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Capacity Utilization</td>
<td>69.3</td>
<td>70.3</td>
<td>79.8 (March '08)</td>
<td>77.6</td>
<td>80.6</td>
<td>80.9</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body></html>

Year-to-Year Drop In U.S. CPI IsFirst Since '55 Thanks To Energy & Food Prices

Louise Curley

<!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/090414k.jpg" align="left" border="0" height="265" width="353">
The effect of the recession in the western industrial
countries on the export oriented countries in Asia becomes more
apparent every day. Today it is Singapore's turn. Advance estimates of
Singapore's first quarter Gross Domestic Product show a seasonally
adjusted annualrate of decline of 19.7% following a 16.4% rate of
decline in the fourth quarter of 2008. (The Advance estimates of GDP
for the first quarter of 2009 are computed largely from data for
January and February. They are intended to be an early indication of
changes in GDP and are subject to revision when more comprehensive data
become available.)
On a year over year basis, GDP declined 11.5% in the first
quarter, compared with a decline of 4.2% in the fourth quarter. The
manufacturing sector, depending heavily on foreign demand, is the worst
performing sector. It began to report year over year declines in the
second quarter of 2008, and is now reporting a year over year decline
of 29% for the first quarter of 2009. The Service industries have been
affected by the decline in tourism and in the first quarter of 2009
were 5.9% below the first quarter of 2008. Construction has been the
bright spot, showing large year over year increases as a result of a
substantial backlog of committed projects in housing and
infrastructure. The year to year changes in GDP, Manufacturing,
Construction and Services are shown in the attached chart.
The Economic Development Board of Singapore publishes data for
what they call "Production Clusters" that is, the output of firms
producing some of Singapore's more important exports. There are
clusters of Electronics, Chemicals, Biomedicals, Precision Engineering
and Transport firms. These data are produced monthly and are an
important part of the data on which the advance estimates of GDP are
based. The declines in the clusters shown below help explain the sharp
drop in manufacturing in the first quarter.
Given the sharp deterioration in Singapore's first quarter GDP
and the prospect for continued weak global demand, the Ministry of
Trade and Industry has reduced its estimate of GDP for the year 2009 to
a range of -6% to -9% from its January 21 estimate of -2% to -5%.

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup>
<thead><tr>
<th scope="col" class="firstcol">SINGAPORE</th>
<th scope="col">Q1 09</th>
<th scope="col">Q4 08</th>
<th scope="col">Q3 08</th>
<th scope="col">Q2 08</th>
<th scope="col">Q1 08</th>
<th scope="col">2008&nbsp;</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">GDP&nbsp;&nbsp;
(y/y % Chg)</td>
<td>-11.5</td>
<td>-4.2</td>
<td>0.0</td>
<td>2.5</td>
<td>6.7</td>
<td>1.1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Manufacturing</td>
<td>-29.0</td>
<td>-10.7</td>
<td>-16.0</td>
<td>-5.6</td>
<td>12.6</td>
<td>-4.1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Construction</td>
<td>25.6</td>
<td>18.5</td>
<td>26.0</td>
<td>23.7</td>
<td>13.1</td>
<td>20.3</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Services</td>
<td>-5.9</td>
<td>-1.3</td>
<td>5.5</td>
<td>7.5</td>
<td>7.5</td>
<td>4.7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">Production
Clusters&nbsp; (y/y % Chg)</td>
<td>Feb 09</td>
<td>Jan 09</td>
<td>Dec 08</td>
<td>Nov 08</td>
<td>Oct 08</td>
<td>Sep 08</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Electronics</td>
<td>-37.26</td>
<td>-43.43</td>
<td>-35.37</td>
<td>-19.92</td>
<td>-13.40</td>
<td>-14.49</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Chemicals</td>
<td>-22.13</td>
<td>-24.35</td>
<td>-23.19</td>
<td>-20.42</td>
<td>-7.09</td>
<td>3.01</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Biomedicals</td>
<td>-27.89</td>
<td>-30.22</td>
<td>21.49</td>
<td>18.43</td>
<td>-29.72</td>
<td>43.33</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Precision Engineering</td>
<td>-21.41</td>
<td>-36.83</td>
<td>-21.69</td>
<td>-18.53</td>
<td>-12.50</td>
<td>-3.46</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Transport</td>
<td>18.34</td>
<td>6.31</td>
<td>6.42</td>
<td>7.51</td>
<td>10.62</td>
<td>10.26</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body></html>

The effect of the recession in the western industrial countries on the export oriented countries in Asia becomes more apparent every day. Today it is Singapore's turn. Advance estimates of Singapore's first quarter Gross Domestic [...]

Singapore's GDP To Decline 6% To 9% In 2009 Says Ministry Of Trade And Industry

<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" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090414i.jpg">
Inventory decumulation remains a dominant trend behind the current economic downturn. Decumulation subtracted 0.3 percentage points from GDP growth last year after a 0.4 percentage point subtraction in 2007, even before the recession started. That degree of subtraction probably intensified early this year. Business inventories dropped 1.3% m/m during February. The decline followed a similar January shortfall and it was the sixth consecutive monthly dip. Over just the last three months, inventories have fallen at a 15.2% annual rate, a record for the series which dates back to 1980.<img align="right" border="0" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090414j.jpg">
Lower business sales (not to mention the weakness in pricing) continues to propel the inventory correction. Though sales rose 0.2% in February they are down at a 16.2% annual rate over the last three months. The only good news is that the recent rate of decline in sales eased to -16.2% from the peak -40.7% rate this past fall.
Retailers&#39; inventories fell another sharp 1.2% during February. The three-month rate of decline remained quite strong at 16.3% which was just off the record. The motor vehicle sector has led that decline, shedding inventories at a 32.1% rate over the last three months. Accentuating the downward trend, non-auto retail inventories fell at an 8.6% rate since the fall. Furniture inventories have been dropped at a 15.7% annual rate during the last three months while there&#39;s been a 13.5% rate of inventory reduction amongst general merchandise retailers. Rounding out the picture is a 6.2% rate of decline amongst apparel sellers. These cutbacks have been enough to drop the inventory-to-sales ratio amongst retailers to its lowest level since last September.
The inventory cutbacks overall, however, have done little to reduce the I/S ratio for total business. It remained in February near its highest level since 2001 due the wholesale and the factory sectors.
The Peopling of Macroeconomics: Microeconomics of Aggregate Consumer Expenditures from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia can be found <a href="http://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/publications/business-review/2009/q1/brq109_peopling-of-macroeconomics.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">Business Inventories (%)</th>
<th scope="col">February</th>
<th scope="col">January</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2008</th>
<th scope="col">2007</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Total</td>
<td>-1.3</td>
<td>-1.3</td>
<td>-3.5</td>
<td>0.6</td>
<td>4.1</td>
<td>6.5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Retail</td>
<td>-1.2</td>
<td>-1.8</td>
<td>-6.6</td>
<td>-3.2</td>
<td>2.9</td>
<td>3.5</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Retail excl. Auto</td>
<td>-0.4</td>
<td>-0.7</td>
<td>-3.2</td>
<td>-1.8</td>
<td>2.9</td>
<td>4.9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Wholesale</td>
<td>-1.5</td>
<td>-0.9</td>
<td>-1.7</td>
<td>3.1</td>
<td>6.2</td>
<td>8.2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Manufacturing</td>
<td>-1.2</td>
<td>-1.1</td>
<td>-2.0</td>
<td>2.1</td>
<td>3.7</td>
<td>8.2</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>


</html>

Inventory decumulation remains a dominant trend behind the current economic downturn. Decumulation subtracted 0.3 percentage points from GDP growth last year after a 0.4 percentage point subtraction in 2007, even before the recession [...]

U.S. Businesses Inventories Fall Further

<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" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090414f.jpg">
U.S. producer prices for finished goods fell last month for the first time this year. The 1.2% decrease followed the 0.1% February uptick and it contrasted with Consensus expectations for no change in last month&#39;s index level. The decline was led by finished energy prices which fell for the first time in three months. They posted a 12.1% (-25.5% y/y) drop. Finished gasoline prices fell 13.1% which was the first since December (-50.7% y/y) while home heating oil prices fell another 13.2% (-57.0% y/y). Natural gas prices dropped 2.4% (-8.2% y/y).<img align="right" border="0" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090414g.jpg">
Prices of core finished consumer goods rose just 0.1% (4.1% y/y) after the strong 0.4% February rise. Durable consumer goods prices were unchanged for the weakest reading since November (+3.0% y/y) while core nondurable goods prices increased another 0.3% (5.1% y/y). Finally, capital equipment prices fell for the first time since the end of 2007. A drop of 0.2% shaved its year-to-year gain to 3.4%, down from its high of 4.3% last October.
Prices for finished foods continued lower with a 0.7% decline (-1.0% y/y). The drop was led by lower meat (-11.1% y/y) and dairy product costs (-15.1% y/y).
Falling again were prices for intermediate goods which should foreshadow even lower finished goods prices. Intermediate goods prices nearly doubled their February decline with a 1.5% drop and the 9.0% y/y shortfall was a record. Excluding food &amp; energy, prices also remained weak as they posted a 0.3% drop, their sixth monthly decline. The 1.6% y/y decline remained the weakest change in prices since early 2002.<img align="left" border="0" src="https://haver-commentaries.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/comments/090414h.jpg">
The crude materials PPI dipped again as economic growth continued negative. Down 0.3%, the overall drop reflected a 1.6% decline in core pricing which pulled prices down by one-third from the year ago level. Copper prices are down by more than half from last year as are steel scrap and aluminum prices.
The Producer Price Index data is available in Haver&#39;s USECON database. More detailed data is in the PPI and in the PPIR databases.
Rethinking the Implications of Monetary Policy: How a Transactions Role for Money Transforms the Predictions of Our Leading Models from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia can be found <a href="http://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/publications/business-review/2009/q1/brq109_implications-of-monetary-policy.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/@E8/@E802/@E80201/@E80201.HTM">Producer Price Index</a> (%)</th>
<th scope="col">March</th>
<th scope="col">February</th>
<th scope="col">Y/Y</th>
<th scope="col">2008</th>
<th scope="col">2007</th>
<th scope="col">2006</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Finished Goods</td>
<td>-1.2</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>-3.6</td>
<td>6.4</td>
<td>3.9</td>
<td>2.9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Core</td>
<td>0.0</td>
<td>0.2</td>
<td>3.8</td>
<td>3.4</td>
<td>2.0</td>
<td>1.5</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Intermediate Goods</td>
<td>-1.5</td>
<td>-0.9</td>
<td>-9.0</td>
<td>10.5</td>
<td>4.0</td>
<td>6.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Core</td>
<td>-0.3</td>
<td>-0.6</td>
<td>-1.6</td>
<td>7.6</td>
<td>2.8</td>
<td>6.0</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="firstcol">Crude Goods</td>
<td>-0.3</td>
<td>-4.5</td>
<td>-38.9</td>
<td>21.2</td>
<td>11.9</td>
<td>1.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Core</td>
<td>-1.6</td>
<td>1.5</td>
<td>&nbsp;-33.1</td>
<td>15.0</td>
<td>15.6</td>
<td>20.8</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

U.S. producer prices for finished goods fell last month for the first time this year. The 1.2% decrease followed the 0.1% February uptick and it contrasted with Consensus expectations for no change in last month's index level. The [...]

U.S. Finished Goods PPI Falls Unexpectedly While Core Prices Remain Stable

<!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/090414e.jpg" align="left" border="0" height="265" width="353">
Export and import growth trends in France continue to wither
at very rapid rates. In February exports rose as imports fell by 0.2%.
Still both exports and imports are dropping at better than a 33% annual
rate over three months. The negative rates of growth are actually
accelerating even despite the smaller decline in imports this month and
the rise in exports. 
 

France&#8217;s economy continues be under a great deal of pressure.
Declining domestic activity lies behind the drop in French imports as
surely as weak foreign growth lies behind the poor performance of
French exports. French industrial output declined by 0.5% in February
and is off by 15.5% Yr/Yr. meanwhile for all of EMU IP fell by 3.2% in
January and was off by 17.5 Yr/Yr. French exports are facing hostile
international conditions both within the Zone and outside of it.
Despite the bounce in exports in February, it is too soon to be
expecting anything good out of export growth in the immediate future. 



<table border="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<colgroup></colgroup>
<thead><tr><th colspan="6" scope="col"> French Trade trends for goods</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="grey4">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td colspan="2">m/m%</td>
<td colspan="3">% Saar</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey3">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp;</td>
<td> Feb-09</td>
<td> Jan-09</td>
<td> 3M</td>
<td> 6M</td>
<td> 12M</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">Balance*</td>
<td>-&#8364;&#8364; 4,107.00</td>
<td>-&#8364;&#8364; 3,714.00</td>
<td>-&#8364;&#8364; 3,604.67</td>
<td>-&#8364;&#8364; 4,657.00</td>
<td>-&#8364;&#8364; 4,619.42</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey1">
<td colspan="6" class="firstcol">Exports</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; All Exp</td>
<td>1.0%</td>
<td>-11.9%</td>
<td>-34.3%</td>
<td>-33.5%</td>
<td>-23.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Motor Vehicles</td>
<td>11.5%</td>
<td>-29.4%</td>
<td> -31.8%</td>
<td>-39.8%</td>
<td>-27.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey1">
<td colspan="6" class="firstcol">IMPORTS</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; All IMP</td>
<td>-0.2%</td>
<td>-2.2%</td>
<td>-33.1%</td>
<td>-30.9%</td>
<td>-18.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey2">
<td class="firstcol">&nbsp; Motor Vehicles</td>
<td>7.5%</td>
<td>-1.5%</td>
<td> -18.0%</td>
<td>-25.0%</td>
<td>-16.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="grey1">
<td colspan="6" class="firstcol">*Eur mlns; mo or period average</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body></html>

Export and import growth trends in France continue to wither at very rapid rates. In February exports rose as imports fell by 0.2%. Still both exports and imports are dropping at better than a 33% annual rate over three months. The [...]

French Exports And Imports Drop

China's export growth rotating away from the US

More pronounced upward revisions in countries more exposed to AI investment

Stable job openings and hiring rates point to cautious hiring

Global freight costs are on the rise while supply chain pressures are contained

Accelerating positive economic surprises in the G10 are boosting the global economy

Considerably more monetary ease expected from US and UK as Japan tightens

Tighter US immigration enforcement adversely impacting labor force

Economic policy uncertainty, while still elevated, is declining

Gradual disinflation and easier monetary policies across advanced economies

Largest October layoffs since 2003, led by technology

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

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

Service Health

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

Featured Data Additions

Resources

Release Calendars

Training Center

Webinars

Newsletters

Download Software

For Clients

Live Updates

Sandy Batten

260121N4.jpg

260121O4.jpg

Total construction spending fell 0.6% m/m (-1.5% y/y) in September to $2,164.3 billion following a 0.4% monthly gain in August. However, it rebounded in October, rising 0.5% m/m (-1.0% y/y) to $2,175.2 billion (saar). This is the ninth consecutive month that construction spending has been lower than a year ago. A 0.1% m/m decline in September and an unchanged reading in October had been expected in the Action Economics Forecast Survey. Over the first ten months of this year, construction spending amounted to $1,825.3 billion, 1.4% below the $1,851.4 billion for the same period in 2024.

Spending on private construction was at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of $1,651.3 billion in October, 0.6% above the September estimate of $1,640.8 billion (-3.0% y/y), which fell 0.9% m/m from August. Private residential construction was at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of $913.9 billion in October, up 1.3% m/m from September, which declined 1.4% from August. Private nonresidential construction was at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of $737.4 billion in October, down 0.2% m/m from September, which also had declined 0.2% in September from August.

The October increase in private residential investment was due entirely to a 4.5% m/m increase in spending on improvements, its largest monthly gain since April 2024, following a 2.2% monthly decline in September. Single family construction fell 1.3% m/m in October, its eight consecutive monthly decline, while multi-family construction slipped 0.2% m/m, its first monthly decline in five months. The decline in private nonresidential construction was more than accounted for by a 0.9% m/m drop in manufacturing construction, its ninth consecutive monthly decline.

The value of public construction spending edged up 0.1% m/m in October to $524.0 billion after having risen 0.4% m/m in September. Of particular importance, educational construction was at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of $114.8 billion, up 0.7% m/m in October on top of a 1.1% m/m increase in September. Highway construction was at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of $141.6 billion, 0.1% m/m above the September estimate after a 0.4% monthly decline in September from August. Spending on highways and educational facilities are by far the two largest components of public construction spending. Spending on water supply construction at $35.2 billion was also important in October, up 1.2% m/m on top of a 1.5% monthly gain in September.

The construction figures can be found in Haver’s **USECON** database. The expectations figure is from the Action Economics Forecast Survey in **AS1REPNA**.

260121P4.jpg

260121Q4.jpg

- Total construction spending fell 0.6% m/m in September but rebounded 0.5% m/m in October.
- Private construction spending slumped 0.9% m/m in September but rose 0.6% m/m in October.
- Private nonresidential construction fell for the fourth consecutive month while private residential construction posted a 1.3% m/m gain.

U.S. Construction Spending Slipped in September but Rebounded in October

Winnie Tapasanun

260121F.jpg

260121G.jpg

The Pending Home Sales Index, a forward-looking measure of home sales based on contract signings, fell 9.3% m/m to 71.8 in December following unrevised increases of 3.3% in November and 2.4% in October, according to the National Association of Realtors (NAR). December marked the first m/m fall since July and the steepest since April 2020. The year-on-year rate was -3.0% in December, the first negative y/y reading since September, compared to +2.6% in November and -5.0% in December 2024. The index had fallen 42.6% since its October 2021 high of 125.1. In 2025, the PHSI declined 0.9% after drops of 3.0% in 2024 and 16.1% in 2023.

The m/m fall in December pending home sales occurred alongside a decline in the average 30-year mortgage rate to 6.20% in December, the lowest since September 2024, down from 6.24% in November and 6.25% in October. These rates, while below a peak of 7.62% in October 2023, had remained higher than a low of 5.22% in August 2022 and more than double a record-low 2.68% in December 2020.

Pending home sales decreased m/m in December across all four major regions. The Midwest recorded the sharpest drop, with sales plunging 14.9% (-9.8% y/y) in December—the first m/m decline since September and the deepest since April 2020—after a 1.3% increase in November. Sales in the West slumped 13.3% (-5.1% y/y), the third m/m decrease in four months, following a 9.2% November rebound. Sales in the Northeast slid 11.0% (-3.6% y/y), the first m/m slide since August, after a 1.8% November rise. Sales in the South fell 4.0% (+2.0% y/y), the first m/m fall since June, after a 2.5% November gain.

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.

- PHSI -9.3% m/m (-3.0% y/y) to 71.8 in Dec., lowest index level since July.
- Home sales m/m down in all four major regions, w/ the Midwest seeing the steepest drop (-14.9%).
- Home sales y/y down in the Northeast, Midwest, and West, but up in the South (+2.0%).

U.S. Pending Home Sales Drop in December Following Four Consecutive M/M Gains

Kathleen Stephansen, CBE

260121A2.jpg

260121B2.jpg

Mortgage applications rose 14.1% w/w (76.8% y/y) in the week ending January 16, after soaring 28.5% w/w (55.1% y/y) in the week ending January 9, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) Weekly Mortgage Applications Survey. Applications for loans to purchase a house rose 5.1% w/w (19.1% y/y) in the week ending January 16, after rising 15.9% w/w (14.0% y/y) in the week ending January 9.  Applications for loan refinancing jumped 20.4% w/w (182.9% y/y) in the latest week, following a surge of 40.1% w/w (128.1% y/y) in the January 9 week.

The effective interest rate on a 30-year fixed-rate loan fell 3bps to 6.32% in the week ending January 16 from 6.35% in the week ending January 9. The rate on 15-year fixed-rate mortgages dropped 4bps to 5.71% in the latest week from 5.75% in the prior week. The 30-year Jumbo rate also fell 4bps to 6.50% in the January 16 week from 6.54% in the January 9 week. The rate on a 5-year ARM rose 5bps to 5.65% in the latest week from 5.60% in the January 9 week.

The share of applications for refinancing an existing loan rose to 61.9% of total applications in the January 16 week from 60.2% in the week ending January 9. The adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) share of activity rose to 7.1% in the week ending January 16 from 7.0% in the week ending January 9.

The average size of a mortgage loan rose 2.9% w/w (11.1% y/y) to $415,300 in the week ending January 16, after rising 6.3% w/w (9.9% y/y) to $403,600 in the week ending January 9. The average size of a purchase loan edged down 0.7% w/w (+1.3% y/y) to $437,100 in the latest week after rising 7.7% w/w (4.9% y/y) to $440,300 in the January 9 week. The average size of a loan to refinance a mortgage rose 6.0% w/w (39.4% y/y) to $401,900 in the week ending January 16, after rising 6.0% w/w (27.8% y/y) to $379,200 in the week ending January 9.

The Mortgage Bankers Association Survey covers 75% of all U.S. retail residential mortgage applications and has been conducted weekly since 1990. Respondents include mortgage bankers, commercial banks and thrifts. The base period and value for all indexes is March 16, 1990=100. The figures for weekly mortgage applications and interest rates are available in Haver’s **SURVEYS** database.

- Purchase and refinancing loan applications posted healthy rises in the latest week.
- Effective interest rate on 30-year fixed loans fell to 6.32%.
- Average loan size rose.

U.S. Mortgage Applications Continue to Surge in the Week of January 16

260121E.jpg

The CBI (Confederation of British Industry) Industrial Trends Survey showed slight improvement in orders in January 2026 as the survey reading rose to -30 on a net basis from -32 in December and -37 in November. However, the 12-month average of the order series is -31 and so the improvement compared to conditions that prevailed over the last 12 months is not significant.

Export orders, on the other hand, deteriorated to -30 in January from -27 in December although that reading was slightly better than the -31 print in November. Once again, the -30 reading for January is only slightly better than the 12-month average of -32.

Stock-building slowed in January at +3 compared to +8 in December and +16 in November. That, actually, could be good news suggesting that industries are getting control of their inventories at a time when sales have been weak.

Looking ahead for output volume over the next three months improved to -14 in January from -17 in December and -30 in November, a substantial pick up over this period. But the reading for January at -14 is still slightly more negative than the 12-month average of -11.

The unequivocally stronger reading in the table, unfortunately, is for prices with average prices over the next three months at a +29 net reading, up from +19 in December and up from +7 in November. The reading of +29 in January compares to a 12-month average of +18 indicating a significant pickup compared to conditions that prevailed over the last 12 months.

Evaluating these readings by ranking the queue standings of the net values and data back to 1992 shows total orders have a 20th percentile standing, export orders have a 28.4 percentile standing, while the stocks of finished goods have a 9.8 percentile standing, and expected output - despite its recent improvement - is quite weak with an 8.3 percentile standing.  Average prices, on the other hand, are quite strong with a 91.7 percentile standing, indicating that the forces of inflation looking ahead are quite strong despite relatively weak demand and output conditions that are expected.

CBI data compared to annual growth rates in manufacturing and to the manufacturing PMI show rankings actually much better than the CBI survey. The manufacturing PMI has a 53.7 percentile standing that's only on data back over the last four years. The manufacturing production data have a 48.3 percentile standing, which is still very close to its 50-percentile standing, which would be its historic median. So, we have another case here of the accounting data being stronger than the survey data from the CBI. The strength in manufacturing industrial output does not compare favorably with the weakness portrayed in the CBI survey even though the manufacturing data are only up-to-date through November. The CBI data are up-to-date through January. And since CBI data generally show some stability or improvement from November to January, that data time mismatch with industrial production doesn't seem to be the reason for these readings being so vastly different. We’re going to have to keep an eye on other metrics for manufacturing to see which one of these surveys is giving us the best information.

For now, we don't know which of these series is the best and what we're looking at is a CBI series that is touting a great deal of economic weakness and portraying significant increases in prices over the next three months.

260121.jpg

United Kingdom

U.K. CBI Industrial Survey Flags Trouble Ahead

260120E.jpg

The ZEW survey for January showed improvement all around with both economic expectations and macroeconomic conditions showing improvements in the United States, Germany, and the euro area.

The economic situation in January in the euro area improved to a reading of -18.1 from -28.5 in December. In Germany, the reading improved to -72.7 from -81 in December, while in the United States the reading improved to +17.7 from -0.6 in December. The message here clearly is the month-to-month improvement. Still, the January readings leave the assessments of conditions in these three areas as quite different. The percentile-queue standings place each one of these topical readings in their queue of data back to December 1992, expressing the standing in percentile terms. Viewed in this way, the euro area has a 57.2 percentile standing, the U.S. has nearly a 45-percentile standing, while Germany has a 22.6 percentile standing, leaving each of these areas in their own distinctive positions relative to their historic norms. The euro area has a firm and above-median ranking since the reading is above the 50th percentile (where the median is located). The U.S. is slightly weaker than that, with a reading that's marginally below its median. Germany has a reading between the lower quartile and the one-fifth mark of its historic data, branding it as weak.

Macroeconomic expectations find that Germany in January moved up to a positive reading of 59.6 from 45.8 in December. The U.S. also improved, moving up to -3 from -12 in December. The macro-expectations find Germany and the U.S. in very different places with German expectations in an 80.4 percentile of their queue, placing them in the top 20% while the U.S. has a 45-percentile standing, below its historic median and essentially the same relative position as its current situation ranking. In contrast, Germany has a weak current economic assessment versus a stronger expectations assessment.

Inflation expectations weaken across the board in January, with the euro area falling to -7.6 from -4.6 in December, Germany falling to -6.0 from -1.7 and the U.S. falling to 44.2 from 54.9. The ZEW experts see a disinflationary environment, and they see that despite the pickup in current conditions and improved macroeconomic expectations. Expectations in the U.S. have a 61.1 percentile standing; the German and the euro area readings are much weaker and closer together, with the German standing at its 31.2 percentile and the euro area at its 25.8 percentile.

On the back of these expectations, short-term interest rates in the euro area are less weak, with the January reading at -7.7, up from -10.8 in December. The U.S. has a -65.6 reading, stronger than Decembers -73.9. On a ranking basis, the euro area’s short-term rates have a 37.4 percentile standing The U.S. has a 9.3 percentile standing. The interest rate assessment is that short-term rates are going to be modest to lower over the outlook.

Long-term interest rates in Germany and the U.S. weaken slightly in January from December to 44.5 in January for Germany, compared to 49.2 in December, and in the U.S., there is a very modest ‘decimal point’ change to 44.1 in January from 44.9 in December. German long-term rates have a 58.8 percentile standing while the U.S. has rates at about a 50-percentile standing, placing them just about on top of their historic median. Neither one of these expectations has long-term expectations different from historic norms.

Stock market expectations from December to January, however, are little changed and mostly weaker, with the euro area gauge falling to 35.2 from 41.3 in December. The German gauge slips to 35.9 from 36.3 in December. The January gauge for the U.S. is ticking slightly higher to 31.5 January from 30.2 in December. The rankings for the January gauges show the U.S. above its median at a 59.3 percentile mark, the euro area slightly below its median with a 44.9 percentile reading; the German stock market still scores as the weakest at a 39.7 percentile standing.

260120.jpg

On balance, there are improvements expected in the macroeconomic realm as well as improvements detected in the current economic situation. Inflation is expected to remain tame; short-term interest rates are expected to continue declining, while long-term interest rates are going to be showing some pressure or in the case of the U.S. will continue to oscillate around current levels or firm slightly. Stock market conditions in the U.S. are modestly higher than their historic norms; however, the euro area stocks are in for modest weakness; German stocks weakened and are historically weak. Looking ahead, the thing to do is to watch the market metrics in particular to see how the recent U.S.-European rift over Greenland is going to play out in markets and how much it's going to affect expectations. That's the newest trend in play. How quickly they forget drug running boat sinkings, Maduro’s capture, threats on Iran, and cage rattling the Fed Chair. It’s all about Greenland now- at least for now, don’t blink!

Economy in Brief: 2009

Jump to: