UK Real Wages have fallen by over 2% as the unemployment rate looks to have passed 5%

On Friday we got some insight into the state of play of UK output and GDP in April with the caveats I pointed out at the time. This morning has seen us receive the official figures on employment, unemployment and wages which shed with caveats further insight as to where we are. So let us take a look at the opening line.

Early indicators for May 2020 suggest that the number of employees in the UK on payrolls is down over 600,000 compared with March 2020. The Claimant Count has continued to rise, enhancements to Universal Credit as part of the UK government’s response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) mean an increase in the number of people eligible.

There is quite a bit going on in that paragraph and it is hard to avoid a wry smile at us being directed towards the Claimant Count that was first regarded as unreliable and manipulated back in the 1980s in the Yes Minister TV series,

Sir Humphrey: We didn’t raise it to enable them to learn more! We raised it to keep teenagers off the job market and hold down the unemployment figures.

There is also an episode where Jim Hacker tells us nobody actually believes the unemployment ( Claimant Count) numbers. The tweek to the Universal Credit system is welcome in helping people in trouble but does also add more smoke to the view.

Employment

We can dig deeper and let us start with a little more precision.

Experimental data of the number of payroll employees using HM Revenue and Customs’ (HMRC’s) Pay As You Earn Real Time Information figures show a fall in payroll employees in recent months. Early estimates for May 2020 from PAYE RTI indicate that the number of payroll employees fell by 2.1% (612,000) compared with March 2020.

Let me give our statisticians credit for looking at other sources of data to glean more information. But in this area there is an elephant in the room and it is a large one.

The International Labour Organization (ILO) definition of employment includes those who worked in a job for at least one hour and those temporarily absent from a job.

Regular readers of my work will be aware of this issue but there is more.

Workers furloughed under the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS), or who are self-employed but temporarily not in work, have a reasonable expectation of returning to their jobs after a temporary period of absence. Therefore, they are classified as employed under the ILO definition.

As the estimate for them is of the order of 6 million we find that our employment fall estimate could be out by a factor of ten! Breaking it down there are all sorts of categories from those who will be unemployed as soon as the scheme ends to those who have been working as well ( sometimes for the same employer) who may be getting an official knock on the door. Also the numbers keep rising as HM Treasury has pointed out today.

By midnight on 14 June there’s been a total of: 9.1m jobs furloughed £20.8bn claimed in total

So the best guide we have comes from this in my opinion.

Between February to April 2019 and February to April 2020, total actual weekly hours worked in the UK decreased by 94.2 million, or 8.9%, to 959.9 million hours. A decrease of 91.2 million or 8.7% was also seen on the quarter.

In terms of a graph we have quite a lurch.

I doubt many of you will be surprised to learn this bit.

The “accommodation and food service activities” industrial sector saw the biggest fall in average actual hours; down 6.9 hours to 21.2 hours per week.

With hotels shut and restaurants doing take out at best I am in fact surprised the numbers have not fallen further.

Unemployment

The conventional measures are simply not cutting it.

For February to April 2020: the estimated UK unemployment rate for all people was 3.9%; 0.1 percentage points higher than a year earlier but unchanged on the previous quarter.

We can apply the methodology I used for Italy on the 3rd of this month where we discovered that a flaw  meant that we found what we would regard as unemployed in the inactivity data.

The single-month estimate for the economic inactivity rate, for people aged 16 to 64 years in the UK, for April 2020, was 20.9%, the highest since August 2019. This represents an increase of 0.7 percentage points on the previous month (March 2020) and a record increase of 0.8 percentage points compared with three months ago (January 2020).

If we count the extra inactivity as unemployed we have some 349,000 more or if you prefer an unemployment rate of 5.1%. This begins to bring the numbers closer to reality although we are not allowing for those who will be unemployed as soon as the furlough scheme ends. Also we are not allowing for the scale of underemployment revealed by the hours worked figures.

Wages and Real Wages

I doubt anyone is going to be too surprised by the fall here.

Estimated annual growth in average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in the three months to April 2020 was 1.0% for total pay (including bonuses) and 1.7% for regular pay (excluding bonuses).

It is quite a drop on what we had before.

Annual growth has slowed sharply for both total and regular pay compared with the period prior to introduction of the corona virus lockdown measures (December to February 2020), when it was 2.9%.

We see that bonuses plunged if we throw a veil over the double negative below.

The difference between the two measures is because of subdued bonuses, which fell by an average negative 6.8% (in nominal terms) in the three months February to April 2020.

If we look at April alone we get an even grimmer picture.

Single month growth in average weekly earnings for April 2020 was negative 0.9% for total pay and 0% for regular pay.

Already real wages were in trouble.

The 1.0% growth in total pay in February to April 2020 translates to a fall of negative 0.4% in real terms (that is, total pay grew slower than inflation); in comparison, regular pay grew in real terms, by 0.4%, the difference being driven by subdued bonuses in recent months.

So even using the woeful official measure driven by Imputed Rents we see a real wages decline of 1.8% in April. A much more realistic measure is of course the Retail Prices Index or RPI which shows a 2.4% fall for real wages in April.

On this subject there has been some research from my alma mater the LSE giving more power to the RPI’s elbow.

Aggregate month-to-month inflation was 2.4% in the first month of lockdown, a rate over 10 times higher than in preceding months.

I will look at this more when we come to the UK inflation data but it is another nail on the coffin for official claims and if I may be so bold a slap on the back for my arguments.

 

Comment

Today’s journey shows that with a little thought and application we can do better than the official data. Our estimate of the unemployment rate of 5.1% is more realistic than the official 3.9% although the weakness is an inability to allow for what must be underemployment on a grand scale. Shifting to real wages we fear that they may have fallen by over 3% in April as opposed to the official headline of a 0.4% fall. So we get closer to reality even when it is an unattractive one.

Staying with wages the numbers are being influenced by this.

Pay estimates are based on all employees on company payrolls, including those who have been furloughed under the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS).

Also Is it rude to point out that we are guided towards the monthly GDP statistics but told that the monthly wages ones ( a much longer running series) are less reliable?. Someone at the UK Statistics Authority needs to get a grip and preferably soon .

 

 

 

 

The problems posed by mass unemployment

A sad consequence of the lock downs and the effective closure of some parts of the economy is lower employment and higher unemployment. That type of theme was in evidence very early today as we learnt that even the land “down under” looks like it is in recession after recording a 0.3% decline in the opening quarter of 2020. The first for nearly 30 years as even the commodities boom seen has been unable to resist the effects of the pandemic. This brings me to what Australia Statistics told us last month.

Employment decreased by 594,300 people (-4.6%) between March and April 2020, with full-time employment decreasing by 220,500 people and part-time employment decreasing by 373,800 people.Compared to a year ago, there were 123,000 less people employed full-time and 272,000 less people employed part-time. Thischange led to a decrease in the part-time share of employment over the past 12 months, from 31.5% to 30.3%.

I have opened with the employment data as we get a better guide from it in such times although to be fair it seems to be making a fist of the unemployment position.

The unemployment rate increased 1.0 points to 6.2%and was 1.0 points higher than in April 2019. The number of unemployed people increased by 104,500 in April 2020 to 823,300 people, and increased by 117,700 people from April 2019.

The underemployment rate increased by 4.9 pts to 13.7%, the highest on record, and was 5.2 pts higher than in April 2019.The number of underemployed people increased by 603,300 in April 2020 to 1,816,100 people, an increase of almost 50% (49.7%), and increased by 666,100 people since April 2019.

As you can see they have picked up a fair bit of the changes and it is nice to see an underemployment measure albeit not nice to see it rise so much. The signal for the Australian economy in the quarter just gone is rather grim though especially if we note this.

Monthly hours worked in all jobs decreased by 163.9 million hours (-9.2%) to 1,625.8 million hours in April 2020, larger than the decrease in employed people.

Italy

In line with our “Girlfriend in a coma” theme one fears the worst for Italy now especially as we note how hard it was hit by the virus pandemic. Even worse a mere headline perusal is actively misleading as I note this from Istat, and the emphasis is mine.

In April 2020, in comparison with the previous month, employment significantly decreased and unemployment sharply fell together with a relevant increase of inactivity.

The full detail is below.

In the last month, also the remarkable fall of the unemployed people (-23.9%, -484 thousand) was recorded for both men (-17.4%, -179 thousand) and women (-30.6%, -305 thousand). The unemployment rate dropped to 6.3% (-1.7 percentage points) and the youth rate fell to 20.3% (-6.2 p.p.).

Yes a number which ordinarily would be perceived as a triumph after all the struggles Italy has had with its economy and elevated unemployment is at best a mirage and at worst a complete fail for the methodology below.

Unemployed persons: comprise persons aged 15-74 who:
were actively seeking work, i.e. had carried out activities in the four week period ending with the reference week
to seek paid employment or self-employment and were available to start working before the end of the two
weeks following the reference week;

Some would not have bothered to look for work thinking it was hopeless and many of course would simply have been unable to. We do find them elsewhere in the data set.

In April the considerable growth of inactive people aged 15-64 (+5.4%, +746 thousand) was registered for
both men (+6.0%, +307 thousand) and women (+5.0%, +438 thousand), leading the inactivity rate to
38.1% (+2.0 percentage points).

If we look back we see that there was a similar issue with the March numbers so a published unemployment rate of 6.3% looks like one of over 11% if we make some sort of correction for the April and March issues.

We get a better guide to the state of play from the employment position which as we observe from time to time has become something of a leafing indicator.

On a monthly basis, the decline of employment (-1.2%, -274 thousand) concerned both men (-1.0%, -131 thousand) and women (-1.5%, -143 thousand), and brought the employment rate to 57.9% (-0.7 p. p.)…….With respect to the previous quarter, in the period February – April 2020, employment considerably decreased (-1.0%, -226 thousand) for both genders…….Compared to March 2019, employment showed a decrease in terms of figures (-2.1%, -497 thousand) and rate (-1.1 percentage points).

Oh and in the last sentence they mean April rather than March. But looking ahead we see a 1.2% fall for employment in April alone which has implications for GDP and of course it is before the furlough scheme.

 Italy has furloughed 7.2 million workers, equivalent to 31% of employment at end-2019; ( FitchRatings )

Germany

This morning has also brought news about the state of play in Germany.

WIESBADEN – Roughly 44.8 million persons resident in Germany (national concept) were in employment in April 2020 according to provisional calculations of the Federal Statistical Office (Destatis). Compared with April 2019, the number of persons in employment decreased by 0.5% (-210,000). This means that for the first time since March 2010 the number of persons in employment decreased year on year (-92,000; -0.2%). In March 2020, the year-on-year change rate had been +0.2%.

For our purposes we get a signal from this.

According to provisional results of the employment accounts, the number of persons in employment fell by 161,000 in April 2020 on the previous month. Normally, employment rises strongly in April as a result of the usual spring upturn, that is, by 143,000 in April on an average of the last five years.

Perhaps the headline read a lot better in German.

No spring upturn

Switching to unemployment the system seems less flawed than in Italy.

Results of the labour force survey show that 1.89 million people were unemployed in April 2020. That was an increase of 220,000, or 13.2%, on March 2020. Compared with April 2019, the number of unemployed persons increased by 515,000 or +38.0%. The unemployment rate was 4.3% in April 2020.

There is a clear conceptual issue here if we return to Fitch Ratings.

Germany has enrolled more than 10 million workers on its scheme, representing 22% of employment at the end-2019. This number ultimately may be lower because some firms that have registered employees as a precaution may decide not to participate.

Germany employed the Kurzarbeit to great effect during the global financial crisis when its implementation prevented the mass lay-offs that were seen elsewhere in Europe. While unemployment in Germany remained broadly unchanged in 2008-2009, other countries reported significant increases.

Comment

There are deep sociological and psychological impacts from these numbers and let me give my sympathies to those affected. Hopefully we can avoid what happened in the 1930s. Returning to the statistics there are a litany of issues some of which we have already looked at. Let me point out another via the German employment data.

After seasonal adjustment, that is, after the elimination of the usual seasonal fluctuations, the number of persons in employment decreased by 271,000 (-0.6%) in April 2020 compared with March 2020.

The usual pattern for seasonal fluctuations will be no guide this year and may even be worse than useless but it will still be used in the headline data. But there is more if we switch to Eurostat.

In April 2020, the second month after COVID-19 containment measures were implemented by most Member
States, the euro area seasonally-adjusted unemployment rate was 7.3%, up from 7.1% in March 2020. The EU
unemployment rate was 6.6% in April 2020, up from 6.4% in March 2020.

We have the issue of Italy recording a large rise as a fall but even in Germany there is an issue as I note an unemployment rate of 4.3%. Well after applying the usual rules Eurostat has published it at 3.5%. There is no great conspiracy here as the statisticians apply rules which are supposed to make things clearer but some extra thought is requited as we note they are in fact making the numbers pretty meaningless right now, or the opposite of their role.

The Investing Channel

 

 

 

 

What has happened to the UK consumer?

One of the apparent certainties of economic life is that the British consumer will take the advice of the Pools winner from many years ago and “Spend! Spend! Spend!”. This has led to another feature of our economic life because it seems to have been forgotten by many economists but before the credit crunch there were calculations that out marginal propensity to import from this was of the order of 40%. So there was a clear link to the trade deficit as well. Oh and for millennials reading this the Pools was gambling before there was a lottery, mostly in my experience by older people as for example my grandfather did but my father did not.

However last month provided a counterpoint to such certainty as the slowing in growth that we saw in the latter part of 2019 turned into something more.

In the three months to December 2019, the quantity bought in retail sales decreased by 1.0% when compared with the previous three months……..The quantity bought in December 2019 fell by 0.6% when compared with the previous month; the fifth consecutive month of no growth.

There was still some annual growth just not much of it ( 0.9%). This led to some sill headlines across the media as they used the British Retail Consortium claim that we had seen the worst year since 1995 for retail sales as click bait. That ignored the fact that its numbers are invariably much weaker than the official ones suggesting it id wedded to the bricks and mortar style retail sales which we know is troubled and not enough of the online world. Indeed there was far less reporting of this month’s effort from the BRC as the equivalent of tourists saw fewer easy pickings.

On a Total basis, sales increased by 0.4% in January, against an increase of 2.2% in January 2019. This is above both the 3-month and 12-month average declines of 0.4% and 0.2% respectively.

So weaker than last year but up and should it continue would end the decline in the averages. Actually we now know that the BRC was confused in this area as the inflation numbers did not pick this up.

We have to remember, this semi-positive performance will also be the result of aggressive discounts and consumers’ preoccupation with bagging a bargain.

Labour Market

This brings a contrasting theme as it should be supporting retail sales just as growth has faded away.

Between October to December 2018 and October to December 2019, the level of employment increased by 336,000 (or 1.0%) to a record high of 32.93 million.

There was also some real wage growth over the year just not as much as reported.

In the year to December 2019, nominal total pay (not adjusted for change in prices) grew by 2.9% to £544. Nominal regular pay grew by 3.2% to £512 over the same period. The recorded growth rates show that wage growth is decelerating.

Sadly many places fell for the real regular wages are back to the pre crisis peak spinning of our official statisticians as they cherry-picked from the very top of the tree. But even using more realistic inflation measures than the official imputed rent driven CPIH we still had some real wage growth.

Payment Protection Insurance

I have long argued this has been like a form of QE for the consumer and retail sales so this caught my eye earlier.

The bill for PPI claims in 2019 would be about £2.5bn, but Lloyds said no further provisions were needed as it had already set aside enough money.

It brings the total paid out by Lloyds over the mis-selling saga to £21.9bn. ( BBC )

Today’s Data

As suggested above we had a better month in January.

Retail volumes increased by 0.9% in January 2020, recovering from the falls in the previous two months; the increase was mainly because of moderate growth in both food stores (1.7%) and non-food stores (1.3%).

Actually if we look into the detail the underlying position is stronger and I am pleased to report that my main theme in this area was clearly in play.

Fuel saw a large fall of 5.7% in the quantity bought in January 2020 when compared with December 2019, which coincides with a rise in fuel prices of 2.3 pence per litre between December and January.

For newer readers I first wrote on the 29th of January 2015 that lower inflation boosted retail sales growth which you may note is not only true but the opposite of what central bankers keep telling us. I was involved in a debate with Danske Bank yesterday on this subject and in the end they agreed with me although that last sentence!

Higher than expected inflation makes people worse off, as it means people’s real wage growth is not as high as expected. That is why stable and predictable inflation is so important. Whether the target is 0%, 1% or 2% is less important.

Anyway returning to the data we see a corollary of my theme which is that higher prices should led to lower consumption which seems to be in play. It is probably also true that we are seeing the impact of the switch towards electric vehicles.

Perspective

The better number for January although it may not initially look like it helped the three month average.

In the three months to January 2020, both the amount spent and the quantity bought in the retail industry fell by 0.5% and 0.8% respectively when compared with the previous three months.

This is because November and December were so weak that even a better January was unlikely to fix it. The Underlying index was 108.5 in October then went 107.7 and 107.1 before now rising to 108.1. The index was set at 100 in 2016 so we see this area has seen more growth than others.

On an annual basis we have some growth just not very much of it.

When compared with a year earlier, both measures reported growth at 2.1% for the amount spent and 0.8% for the quantity bought.

Comment

Today gives an opportunity to look at how economics applies in real world events. Having just lost all readers from the Ivory Towers let me apologise to anyone who was disturbed by any screaming from them! They may have just have been able to laugh off the idea that higher inflation is bad but the next bit is too much. You see we have a favourable employment situation especially with real wage growth being added to employment growth but we are losing two factors.

The first is the impact of the PPI claim repayment money which looks as though much of it went straight to the retail sales bottom line. Next there is this from the Bank of England.

The annual growth rate of consumer credit rose to 6.1% in December, having ticked down to 5.9% in November. The growth rate for consumer credit has been close to this level since May 2019. Prior to this it had fallen steadily from an average of 10.3% in 2017.

Whilst it is still the fastest growing area of the economy I can think of my point is that growth has slowed and that seems to be affecting retail sales. A particular area must be what is going on with car sales and a few months back the Bank of England said that but since then it has decided that silence is golden on this subject. For fans of official denials there was of course this from Governor Carney back in the day.

This is not a debt fuelled expansion

 

UK Real Wages have not regained their previous peak

As we switch out focus to the UK labour market we see two contrasting forces being applied to it. The first comes from the better news being reported for the UK economy recently.

Financial wellbeing expectations hit survey-record high in
February ( IHS Markit )

That came only yesterday and according to it the outlook is brightening.

Looking ahead, UK households signalled positive expectations towards their financial health. The Future Household Finance Index – which measures expected change in financial health over the next 12 months – rose to 52.7 in February, from 49.6 in January. The level of optimism was at its highest since the data were first collected in February 2009, exceeding the previous
peak seen in January 2015.

This led according to the survey to a better labour market situation.

UK households recorded a lessened degree of pessimism
towards their job security during February, with the respective index rising (but remaining below 50.0) to a seven-month high. Meanwhile, the rate of growth in both workplace activity and income from employment accelerated from January.

This survey is a curious beast because the headline index which went from 44.6 to 47.6 in this report has never been in positive territory. Whilst in some ways that does cover out experience ( real wages for example) it does not cover the employment situation which has been pretty good.

This backed up the survey of the wider UK economy conducted by IHS Markit earlier this month.

At 53.3 in January, up from 49.3 in December, the seasonally adjusted IHS Markit/CIPS UK Composite Output Index posted above the neutral 50.0 mark for the first time since last August. The latest reading signalled a faster pace of growth than the earlier ‘flash’ estimate (52.4 in January) and was the highest for 16 months.

This too came with positive news for the labour market.

This uplift in success also created some business pressures
as the rush to increase staffing levels resulted in demands
for higher salaries.

Apple and HSBC

Last night, however, brought a reminder that on a world wide scale there is an ongoing economic impact from the Corona Virus.

Apple Inc become the latest company to flag lower revenue as a result of the epidemic, saying it would not meet its revenue guidance for the March quarter because of slower iPhone production and weaker demand in China. ( Reuters)

The main Apple market is not yet open due to yesterday being Presidents Day but more minor markets have suggested it will open more than 4% lower. I note that Reuters is also reporting this for the Chinese economy.

Analysts at Nomura again downgraded their China first-quarter economic growth forecast, to 3%, half the pace in the fourth quarter, and said there was a risk it could be even weaker.

This morning we have seen another consequence of the era of treating banks as The Precious.

HSBC posted plummeting profits for 2019 today as it outlined plans to get rid of $100bn (£77bn) of assets and dramatically downsize its investment banking arm in a restructure that will cost 35,000 jobs over the next three years. ( City-AM )

We know that the situation is really poor because the chief executive has deployed the word “resilient” which we have learnt means anything but.

Today’s Data

Employment

The long sequence of good news in this area continues.

The UK employment rate was estimated at a record high of 76.5%, 0.6 percentage points higher than a year earlier and 0.4 percentage points up on the previous quarter.

If we look further we see that such numbers are based on this.

There was a 180,000 increase in employment on the quarter. This was, again, mainly driven by quarterly increases for full-time workers (up 203,000 – the largest increase since March to May 2014), and for women (up 150,000 – the largest increase since February to April 2014). The quarterly increase for women working full-time (also up 150,000) was the largest since November 2012 to January 2013.

Actually this continues to be a remarkable performance and is a clear gain in the credit crunch era. However we do need context because there is for example an element of subjectivity in the definition of full-time work. Those completing the survey are guided towards 16 hours per week which is a bit low in itself but they can also ignore that. Also the rise in female employment is no doubt influenced by the rise in the retirement age for them.

The overall position is that on this measure things turned for the UK economy in 2012 a year earlier that GDP picked up. Regular readers will recall that back then we were worried about it being part-time but that has changed. Overall though there has been a pick-up in self-employment with ebbs and flows which is currently flowing.

Whilst there is an implicit rather than explicit link to unemployment ( as there is also the inactivity category) the good employment news has driven this.

the estimated UK unemployment rate for all people was 3.8%; this is 0.2 percentage points lower than a year earlier and 0.1 percentage points lower than the previous quarter…..For October to December 2019, an estimated 1.29 million people were unemployed. This is 73,000 fewer than a year earlier and 580,000 fewer than five years earlier.

Wages

Here the news has been less good. Let me explain using today’s release.

Estimated annual growth in average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain slowed to 2.9% from 3.2% last month for total pay (including bonuses), and to 3.2% from 3.4% for regular pay (excluding bonuses).

This gives us two contexts. We have been in a better phase for wages growth but it has been slowing recently and that has continued. Things get more complex as we look at real wages as there are serious problems with the official representation of them.

In real terms (after adjusting for inflation), annual growth in total pay is estimated to be 1.4%, and annual growth in regular pay is estimated to be 1.8%.

The problem is that a simply woeful inflation measure is being used, via the use of fantasy imputed rents in the official CPIH inflation measure. This ensures that housing inflation is under-recorded and thus real wages are over recorded. A much better context is provided by this from Rupert Seggins.

UK real regular pay is now above its pre-crisis peak! If you like the CPIH measure of consumer prices. For CPI enthusiasts, it’s -1.8% below. For the RPI crew, it’s -7% below, for the RPIX hardcore, it’s -10.4%. If the household deflator’s your thing, then it happened in 2016 Q1.

Can anybody think why Her Majesty’s Treasury is trying to replace house prices in the RPI with Imputed Rents?! Actually trying to measure housing inflation stops the establishment claiming house prices are a Wealth Effect rather than the more accurate gains for existing owners but inflation for present and future buyers. Returning to real wages as you can see it makes a very large difference.

Having established that I have been disappointed to see so many news sources copy and paste this part of the release.

In real terms, regular pay is now at its highest level since the series began in 2000, whereas total pay is still 3.7% below its peak in February 2008.

As The Zombies pointed out.

And if she should tell you “come closer”
And if she tempts you with her charms
Tell her no no no no no-no-no-no
No no no no no-no-no-no
No no no no no

If we look into the monthly data we see that the UK chemicals sector is doing well and wage growth has picked up to 8.9%. Care is needed with such detail but it has been around 7% for over 6 months. However other areas of manufacturing are more troubled with the clothing and textiles sector seeing no increase at all. Whilst I am all for higher wages I have to confess that fact that the real estate sector is seeing consistent rises above 6% has a worrying kicker.

Comment

We find ourselves in broadly familiar territory where the quantity news for the UK economy is again very good but the quality news is not as good. At least these days the real wages position is improving a little. But to claim we are back to the previous peak is frankly a case of people embarrassing themselves.

The numbers themselves always need a splash of salt. For example I have pointed out already the growth of the self-employed, so their omission from the wages data is increasingly significant. Also whilst we are employing more people this time around hours worked was not as strong.

Between October to December 2018 and October to December 2019, total actual weekly hours worked in the UK increased by 0.8% (to 1.05 billion hours), while average actual weekly hours decreased by 0.2% (to 31.9 hours).

I look at such numbers because out official statisticians have yet to cover the concept of underemployment adequately. There is an irony here in that productivity will be boosted by a shorter working week. Maybe even by this.

In October to December 2019, it was estimated that there were a record 974,000 people in employment on a “zero-hour contract” in their main job, representing a record 3.0% of all people in employment. This was 130,000 more than for the same period a year earlier.

The UK Labour Market continues to look strong

This week has already seen a fair flurry of new information on the UK economy, so let us start with what will have caught the eye of Mark Carney and the Bank of England.

LONDON (Reuters) – Asking prices for British houses put on sale in the five weeks to Jan. 11 rose by a record amount for the time of year, property website Rightmove said on Monday, adding to signs of a post-election bounce in consumer and business confidence…….Rightmove said average asking prices of property marketed between Dec. 8 and Jan. 11 jumped 2.3% in monthly terms, the biggest increase for that period since the survey started in 2002.

The cautionary note is that it is asking prices ( you can ask what you want…) and not sold or traded prices but those looking for a post election bounce will add it to the Halifax numbers.

Yesterday also brought positive news on UK household finances as well.

“Latest survey data certainly show some post-election
bounce for UK households, with the headline index up
to a one-year high and house price expectations at their
strongest since October 2018. That said, cooling inflation
was most likely the real driving force, propping up real
earnings and disposable incomes” ( Markit )

So there are various surveys suggesting optimism for house prices and one saying something similar for household finances. This is really rather awkward for a Bank of England not only warming up for a Bank Rate cut with Gertjan Vlieghe explicitly saying he will look at sentiment measures. Of course Friday’s Retail Sales showed weakness but they can be unreliable and erratic.

Employment

This morning has brought both good and not so good news on the employment situation. So let us start with the positive.

Facebook says it is to create 1,000 new jobs in the UK this year, delivering a vote of confidence in the UK economy ahead of Brexit.

The tech firm issued a long-term commitment to the country as it made the announcement, in the run-up to a speech to be made in London later on Tuesday by its chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg.

Facebook said the new roles would take its UK workforce beyond 4,000 people. ( Sky News)

Meanwhile the Financial Times is doing some scaremongering about HS2.

Hundreds of employees could face job cuts, while companies working on HS2 have been told to slow down work as uncertainty mounts over the fate of Britain’s most ambitious infrastructure project

I do not wish for people to lose their jobs but in this instance we have the issue of what are they actually producing?

UK Labour Market Release

We saw another in a long-running series where there was strong employment growth.

There was a 208,000 increase in employment on the quarter. This was, again, mainly driven by quarterly increases for full-time workers (up 197,000; the largest increase since September to November 2015) and for women (up 148,000; the largest increase since February to April 2014). The quarterly increase in women working full-time (up 126,000) was the largest since November 2012 to January 2013.

The tilt towards female employment was also to be found in the annual comparison where of an increase of 349,000 full-time jobs some 317,000 were for women.

This meant that there was another record.

The UK employment rate was estimated at a record high of 76.3%, 0.6 percentage points higher than a year earlier and 0.5 percentage points up on the previous quarter.

I will look at the broader consequences of this later but for the moment let us stay in the labour market and note the influence of what with apologies to those in it is something of a residual category.

The UK economic inactivity rate was estimated at a record low of 20.6%, 0.4 percentage points lower than the previous year and the previous quarter.

Okay so what is going on here?

Estimates for September to November 2019 show 8.51 million people aged between 16 and 64 years not in the labour force (economically inactive). This was 145,000 fewer than a year earlier and 587,000 fewer than five years earlier. The annual decrease was driven by women, with the level down 157,000 to reach a record low of 5.18 million.

So it is another case of let’s hear it for the girls where women have stopped being recorded as inactive and are now employed instead. There is a combination of good news and the influence of the raising of the state pension age at play here. As an aside the broad sweep has been women moving from inactivity to employment since these records began in 1971. The timing of the recent move also suggests that there was an influence from students as well.

There were fears of a rise in unemployment but as you can see below they were unfounded.

For September to November 2019, an estimated 1.31 million people were unemployed. This is 64,000 fewer than a year earlier and 618,000 fewer than five years earlier……The UK unemployment rate was estimated at 3.8%, 0.2 percentage points lower than a year earlier but largely unchanged on the previous quarter.

Wages

The previous release had seen a fall but this was not repeated.

Estimated annual growth in average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain remained unchanged at 3.2% for total pay (including bonuses), and slowed to 3.4% from 3.5% for regular pay (excluding bonuses).

There was a switch towards bonus payments although slightly confusingly less than last year!

The annual growth in total pay was weakened by unusually high bonus payments paid in October 2018 compared with more typical average bonus payments paid in October 2019.

Let me now switch to the official view on real pay.

In real terms, annual pay growth has been positive since December 2017 to February 2018, and is now 1.6% for total pay (compared with 1.5% last month) and 1.8% for regular pay (unchanged from last month).

Sadly this relies on the woeful CPIH inflation measure and if we now switch from good news ( real wage growth) to the overall picture we get some bad news.

The equivalent figures for total pay in real terms are £503 per week in November 2019 and £525 in February 2008, a 4.1% difference.

Regular readers will be aware of my views on the inflation measure so let me present the issue another way today. The offiicial release points us towards the numbers for real regular pay. Can you guess which of the lines below that one is and no cheating?!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EOy_EsTXsAEsM8G?format=jpg&name=900×900

The chart was provided by Rupert Seggins and as you can see rather changes both the narrative and the perspective.

Comment

We find that if we look back the sequence of strong UK employment data started in 2012 and it is ongoing. There is a particular context to this though and let me illustrate with a tweet from Chris Dillow of the Investors Chronicle.

ONS also says hours worked rose 0.5% in Sep-Nov. With GDP rising only 0.1%, this means productivity fell. Might be partly a Brexit effect (uncertainty cut output but encouraged labour hoarding). But it reinforces the picture of long-term stagnation.

The issue here is that with the numbers we have productivity fell. But it is also true that last time the UK labour market and GDP diverged like we are seeing now it was the ( more positive) labour market which was correct as GDP later rose. It is another problem for the economics 101 view that the labour market responds in a lagged fashion as back then it led and GDP followed. More specifically we often see these days that employment is a driver of the economy rather than a follower.

Moving to wages we see that finally the employment growth gave us real wage growth but it took so long we have a bit of a mountain to climb. That is really quite a devastating critique of the Ivory Tower “output gap” thinking that has as many holes in it as I am hoping Arsenal’s defence will have tonight. Yet only last week Bank of England policymakers were repeating their output gap mantra. On that subject they have something of a problem again because they have got us ready for an interest-rate cut just in time for most of the data to be good. The bad bit was the retail sales numbers from Friday which now look out of phase with the employment numbers making me wonder if their seasonality algorithm has had a HAL-9000 moment? Whilst there is an intra-market shift in their favour as well maybe Aldi thinks do if this is any guide.

Aldi plans to increase pay for its staff by just over 3%, making it one of the best-paying supermarkets in the UK.

The discounter said its minimum hourly pay rates will rise from £9.10 an hour to £9.40, with workers inside the M25 getting £10.90 an hour instead of £10.55…….Aldi, Britain’s fifth-largest supermarket, also said it would be hiring 3,800 new employees for store level positions.

 

Will UK real wages and its banks ever escape the depression they seem trapped in?

Today brings the UK labour market into focus and in particular the situation regarding both real and nominal wage growth. Before we get to that there was news yesterday evening from the Bank of England on one of the highest paid categories.

The 2019 stress test shows the UK banking system is resilient to deep simultaneous recessions in the UK and global economies that are more severe overall than the global financial crisis, combined with large falls in asset prices and a separate stress of misconduct costs. It would therefore be able to withstand the stress and continue to meet credit demand from UK households and businesses.

Yes it is time for the results of the annual banking stress tests which of course are designed to look rigorous but for no-one to fail. So far the Bank of England has avoided the embarrassment of its Euro area peers who have seen a collapse quite soon after. In terms of the detail there is this.

Losses on corporate exposures are higher than in previous tests, reflecting some deterioration in asset quality and a more severe global scenario. Despite this, and weakness in banks’ underlying profitability (which reduces their ability to offset losses with earnings), all seven participating banks and building societies remain above their hurdle rates. The major UK banks’ aggregate CET1 capital ratio after the 2019 stress scenario would still be more than twice its level before the crisis.

As you can see the Bank of England is happy to slap itself on the back here as it notes capital ratios. Although of course higher capital ratios have posed their own problems abroad as we have seen in the US Repo crisis.

Major UK banks’ capital ratios have remained stable since year end 2018, the starting point of the 2019 stress test. At the end of 2019 Q3, their CET1 ratios were over three times higher than at the start of the global financial crisis. Major UK banks also continue to hold sizeable liquid asset buffers.

Actually the latter bit is also an explanation as to why banks struggle to make profits these days and why many think that their business model is broken.

Also I note that their view is that the highest rate of annual house price growth in the period 1987-2006 was 6.6% and the average 1.7%. I can see how they kept the average low by starting at a time that then saw the 1990-92 drop but only 6.6% as a maximum? Odd therefore if prices have risen so little that house prices to income seem now to have become house prices versus household disposable income and thereby often two incomes rather than one.

In terms of share prices this does not seem to have gone down that well with Lloyds more than 4% lower at 64 pence, Royal Bank of Scotland more than 3% lower at 252.5 pence and Barclays over 3% lower at 186 pence. Meanwhile it is hard not to have a wry smile at the fact that the UK bank which you might think needs a stress test which is Metro Bank was not included in the test. Although it has not avoided a share price fall today as it has fallen over 3% to 198 pence. Indeed, this confirms that it is the one which most needs a test as we note it was £22 as recently as January.

Labour Market

Let us start with what are a couple of pieces of good news.

The UK employment rate was estimated at 76.2%, 0.4 percentage points higher than a year earlier but little changed on the previous quarter; despite just reaching a new record high, the employment rate has been broadly flat over the last few quarters.

They get themselves into a little bit of a mess there so let me zero in on the good bit which is tucked away elsewhere.

There was a 24,000 increase in employment on the quarter.

There was also a favourable shift towards full-time work.

This was driven by a quarterly increase for men (up 54,000) and full-time employees (up 50,000 to a record high of 20.71 million), but partly offset by a 30,000 decrease for women and a 61,000 decrease for part-time employees.

I do not know why there was some sexism at play and suspect it is just part of the ebb and flow unless one of you have a better suggestion.

The next good bit was this.

the estimated UK unemployment rate for all people was 3.8%, 0.3 percentage points lower than a year earlier but largely unchanged on the previous quarter…….For August to October 2019, an estimated 1.28 million people were unemployed. This is 93,000 fewer than a year earlier and 673,000 fewer than five years earlier.

There were fears that the unemployment rate might rise. But the reality has been reported by the BBC like this.

UK unemployment fell to its lowest level since January 1975 in the three months to October this year. The number of people out of work fell  by 13,000 to 1.281 million.

Wages

This area more problematic and complex so let me start my explanation with the data.

Estimated annual growth in average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain slowed to 3.2% for total pay (including bonuses) and 3.5% for regular pay (excluding bonuses).

The first impact is simply of lower numbers than we have become used to especially for total pay. Let us move to the explanation provided.

The annual growth in total pay was weakened by unusually high bonus payments paid in October 2018 compared with more typical average bonus payments paid in October 2019.

I have looked at the detail and this seems to have been in the finance and construction sectors where bonus pay was £12 per week and £6 per week lower than a year before. I have to confess I am struggling to think why October 2018 was so good as the numbers now are in line with the others? Anyway this should wash out so to speak in the next 2 months as October 2018 really stood out. Otherwise I would be rather troubled about a monthly increase this year that is only 2.4% above a year before.

So if we now switch to regular pay then 3.5% is a bit lower than we had become used to but in some ways is more troubling. This is because the spot figure for October was 3.2% and it looks as if it might be sustained.

This public sector pay growth pattern is affected by the timing of NHS pay rises which saw some April 2018 pay increases not being paid until summer 2018. As a result, public sector pay estimates for the months April to July 2019 include two NHS pay rises for 2018 and 2019 when compared with 2018. In addition, the single month of April 2019 included a one-off payment to some NHS staff.

Thus public-sector pay growth has faded away and is also now 3.2% on a spot monthly basis.

Anyway the peaks and troughs are as follows.

construction saw the highest estimated growth at 5.0% for total pay and 5.4% for regular pay…….retail, wholesale, hotels and restaurants saw the lowest growth, estimated at 2.3% for total pay and 2.5% for regular pay; this is the sector with the lowest average weekly pay (£339 regular pay compared with £510 across the whole economy)

Comment

There are elements here with which we have become familiar. The quantity numbers remain good with employment rising and unemployment falling although the rate of change of both has fallen. Where we have an issue is in the area of wage growth. The context here is that it did improve just not as much as we previously thought it did. However we still have this.

In real terms (after adjusting for inflation), annual growth in total pay is estimated to be 1.5%, and annual growth in regular pay is estimated to be 1.8%.

That is calculated using the woeful CPIH inflation measure but by chance it at CPI are pretty similar right now, so I will simply point out it would be lower but still positive using RPI.

Thus we see that wage growth and inflation seem both set to fall over the next few months as we wait to see how that balances out. But the underlying issue is that we have an area which in spite of the recent improvements is still stuck in a depression.

For October 2019, average regular pay, before tax and other deductions, for employees in Great Britain was estimated at £510 per week in nominal terms. The figure in real terms (constant 2015 prices) is £472 per week, which is still £1 (0.2%) lower than the pre-recession peak of £473 per week for April 2008.

The equivalent figures for total pay in real terms are £502 per week in October 2019 and £525 in February 2008, a 4.3% difference.

Fingers crossed that we can escape it…..

 

Sweden has a growing unemployment problem

Today is one for some humility and no I am not referring to the UK election. It relates to Sweden and developments there in economic policy and its measurement which have turned out to be extraordinary even for these times. Let me start by taking you back to the 22nd of August when I noted this.

I am less concerned by the contraction than the annual rate. There had been a good first quarter so the best perspective was shown by an annual rate of 1.4%. You see in recent years Sweden has seen annual economic growth peak at 4.5% and at the opening of 2018 it was 3.6%.

We now know that this broad trend continued into the third quarter.

Calendar adjusted and compared with the third quarter of 2018, GDP grew by 1.6 percent.

What was really odd about the situation is that after years of negative interest-rates the Riksbank raised interest-rates at the end of last year to -0.25% and plans this month to get back to 0%. So it has kept interest-rates negative in a boom and waited for a slow down to raise them. But there is more.

The Unemployment Debacle

If we step forwards to October 24th there was another development.

As economic activity has entered a phase of lower growth in
2019, the labour market has also cooled down. Unemployment is deemed to have increased slightly during the year. ( Riksbank)

Actually it looked a bit more than slightly if we switch to Sweden Statistics.

In September 2019, there were 391 000 unemployed persons aged 15─74, not seasonally adjusted, an increase of 62 000 compared with September 2018.

The Riksbank at this point was suggesting it would raise to 0% but gave Forward Guidance which was lower! Make of that what you will.

But in late October Sweden Statistics dropped something of a bombshell.

STOCKHOLM (Reuters) – Recent Swedish jobless figures – which that have shown a sharp rise in unemployment and led to calls for the central bank to postpone planned interest rate hikes – are suspect, the country’s Statistics Office said on Thursday………….The problems also led to the unemployment rate being underestimated at the start of the year and then overestimated in more recent months.

The smoothed unemployment rate was lowered from 7.3% to 6.8% in response to this and changed the narrative, assuming of course that they had got it right this time. The headline rate went from 7.1% to 6%.

This morning we got the latest update and here it is.

In November 2019, there were 378 000 unemployed persons aged 15─74, not seasonally adjusted, which is an increase of 63 000 persons compared with the same period a year ago. The unemployment rate increased by 1.0 percentage points and amounted to 6.8 percent.

As you can see eyes will have turned to the headline rate having gone from 6% to 6.8% making us wonder if the new methodology has now started to give similar results to the old one. It had been expected to rise but to say 6.3% not 6.8%. We get some more insight from this.

Among persons aged 15–74, smoothed and seasonally adjusted data shows an increase in both the number of unemployed persons and the unemployment rate, compared with nearby months. There were 384 000 unemployed persons in November 2019, which corresponds to an unemployment rate of 6.9 percent.

A much smaller move but again higher and because it is smoothed we also start to think we are back to where we were as this from Danske Bank makes clear.

Ooops! The very unreliable revised new #LFS data showed a significant bounce back up to 7.3 % seasonally adjusted! This is very close to what our model suggested. Ironically, this is just as bad as the old figures suggested. But perhaps these are wrong too? ( Michael Grahn )

So the new supposedly better data is now giving a similar answer to the old. Just for clarity they are taking out the smoothing or averaging effect and looking to give us a spot answer for November unemployment.

The Wider Economy

One way of looking at the work situation is to look at hours worked.

On average, the number of hours worked amounted to 154.3 million per week in November 2019.

But that is lower than under the old system.

On average, the number of hours worked amounted to 156.5 million per week in September 2019…..On average, the number of hours worked amounted to 156.2 million per week in August 2019.

This is really awkward as under the new system Sweden has just under an extra half a million employees but the total number of house worked has fallen. Make of that what you will.

If switch to production we saw a by now familiar beat hammered out earlier this month.

Production in the industry sector decreased by 3.0 percent in October in calendar adjusted figures compared with the same period of the previous year. The industry for machinery and equipment n.e.c. decreased by 6.8 percent in fixed prices and accounted for the largest contribution, -0.2* percentage points, to the development in total private sector production.

Monthly output was up by 0.2% seasonally adjusted but as you can see was well below last year’s. This means Sweden is relying on services for any growth.

Production in the service sector increased by 1.1 percent in October in calendar adjusted figures compared with the same period of the previous year. Trade activities increased by 3.6 percent in fixed prices and contributed the most, 0.5 percentage points, to the development in total private sector production.

So Sweden has maybe some growth which will get a boost from construction.

Production in the construction sector increased by 2.1 percent in October in calendar adjusted figures compared with the same period of the previous year. This sector increased by 2.1 percent in fixed prices, not calendar-adjusted.

If we switch to private-sector surveys then Swedbank tells us this.

The purchasing managers’ index for the private service sector (Services PMI) dropped in November for the third month in a row to 47.9 from 49.4 in October. The
decrease in the index means that service sector activity is continuing to decline in the fourth quarter to levels that have not been seen in six years and that are
contributing to lower hiring needs in service companies,

So maybe the service sector growth has gone as well. The overall measure speaks for itself.

Silf/Swedbank’s PMI Composite index dropped for the third straight month to 47.2 in November from 48.5 in October, reinforcing the view that private sector activity is
slowing in the fourth quarter. Since November of last year the composite index has fallen 7.6 points

Comment

There are two clear issues in this. Of which the first is the insane way in which the Riksbank kept interest-rates negative in a boom and now is raising them in a slowing.

Updated GDP tracker after Nov LFS dropped to a new low since 2012, just 0.26% yoy. ( Michael Grahn of Danske )

Some signals suggest that this may now be a decline or contraction. But whatever the detail the Swedish economy has slowed and will not be helped much by the slower Euro area and UK economies. An interest-rate rise could be at the worst moment and fail the Bananarama critique.

It ain’t what you do it’s the way that you do it
It ain’t what you do it’s the way that you do it
It ain’t what you do it’s the way that you do it
And that’s what gets results

Next is the issue of lies, damned lies and statistics. I am sure Sweden’s statisticians are doing their best but making mistakes like they have about unemployment is a pretty basic fail. It reminds us that these are surveys and not actual counts and adds to the mess Japan made of wages growth. So we know a lot less than we think we do and this poses yet another problem for the central bankers who seem to want to control everything these days.

Let me end with the thought that UK readers should vote and Rest In Peace to Marie Fredriksson of Roxette.

She’s got the look (She’s got the look) She’s got the look (She’s got the look)
What in the world can make a brown-eyed girl turn blue
When everything I’ll ever do I’ll do for you
And I go la la la la la she’s got the look

 

 

 

 

Greece GDP growth is a tactical success but a strategic disaster

Yesterday the Eurogroup made a statement lauding the economic progress made by Greece.

We welcome the confirmation by the institutions that Greece is projected to comfortably meet the primary surplus target of 3,5% of GDP for 2019. We also welcome the adoption of a budget for 2020, which is projected to ensure the achievement of the primary surplus target and which includes a package of growth-friendly measures aimed at reducing the tax burden on capital and labour. Greece has also made significant progress with broader structural reforms, notably in the area of the labour market, digital governance, investment licensing and the business environment.

Actually of course this is another form of punishment beating as we note that the depression ravaged Greek economy will find 3.5% of GDP subtracted from it each year. It is hard not to then laugh at the mention of “growth-friendly” measures. Moving to reform well this all started in the spring of 2010 so why is reform still needed? Indeed the next bit seems to suggest not much has been done at all.

 It will be crucial for Greece to maintain, and where necessary accelerate, reform momentum going forward, including through determined implementation of reforms on all levels. Against this background, we welcome that the Greek authorities reiterated their general commitment to continue the implementation of all key reforms adopted under the ESM programme, especially as regards the reduction of arrears to zero, recruitments in the public sector and privatisations.

Anyway they are going to give Greece some of the interest and profits they have taken off it back.

Subject to the completion of national procedures, the EWG and the EFSF Board of Directors are expected to approve the transfer of SMP-ANFA income equivalent amounts and the reduction to zero of the step-up interest margin on certain EFSF loans worth EUR 767 million in total.

What about the economy?

We have reached the stage I have long feared where any improvement is presented as a triumph. This ignores two things which is how bad matters got and how long it has taken to get here. Or to put it another way Christine Lagarde was right to describe it as “shock and awe” when she was French finance minister but in the opposite way to what she intended.

Manufacturing

This week’s PMI survey from Markit was quite upbeat.

November PMI® survey data signalled a quicker improvement in operating conditions across the Greek manufacturing sector. Overall growth was supported by sharper expansions in output and new orders. Stronger domestic and foreign client demand led to a faster rise in workforce numbers and a greater degree of business confidence.

The reading of 54.1 is really rather good at a time when many other countries are reporting declines although of course the bit below compares to a simply dreadful period.

The rate of overall growth was solid and among the sharpest seen over the last decade.

However there was some good news in a welcome area too.

In response to greater new order volumes, Greek
manufacturers expanded their workforce numbers at a steep pace that was the quickest for seven months.

Also there was some optimism for next year.

Our current forecasts point towards a faster expansion in industrial production in 2020, with the rate of growth expected to pick-up to 1.1% year-on-year.

Sadly though if we look at the previous declines even at such a rate before Maxine Nightingale would be happy.

We gotta get right back to where we started from

Retail Trade

If we switch to the official data we see that the recent news looks good.

The Overall Volume Index in retail trade (i.e. turnover in retail trade at constant prices) in September 2019, increased by 5.1%, compared with the corresponding index of September 2018, while, compared with the corresponding index of August 2019, decreased by 3.9%

So in annual terms strong growth which should be welcomed. But having followed the situation in Greece for some time I know that the retail sector collapsed in the crisis. So we need to look back and if we stay with September we see that the index ( 2015=100) was 144.5 in 2009 and 129.3 in 2010 whereas this year it was 107.3. In fact looking back the peak in September was in 2006 at 167.1 so as you can see here is an extraordinary depression which brings the recent growth into perspective.

Indeed the retail sector was one of the worst affected areas.

Trade

This is one way of measuring the competitiveness of an economy and of course is the area the International Monetary Fund used to prioritise before various French leaders thought they knew better. After such a long depression you might think the situation would be fixed but no.

The deficit of the Trade Balance, for the 9-month period from January to September 2019 amounted to 16,500.5 million euros (18,313.6 million dollars) in comparison with 15,390.6 million euros (18,139.7 million dollars) for the corresponding period of the year 2018, recording an increase, in euros, of 7.2%.

However there is a bright spot which we find by switching to the Bank of Greece.

A rise in the surplus of the services balance is due to an improvement primarily in the travel balance and secondarily in the transport and other services balance. Travel receipts and non-residents’ arrivals increased by 14% and 3.8% year-on-year respectively. In addition, transport (mainly sea transport) receipts rose by 5.5%.

Shipping and tourism are traditional Greek businesses and the impact of the services sector improves the situation quite a bit.

In the January-September 2019 period, the current account was almost balanced, while a €1.4 billion deficit was recorded in the same period of 2018. This development reflects mainly a rise in the services surplus and also an improvement in the primary and the secondary income accounts, which more than offset an increase in the deficit of the balance of goods.

In fact tourism has played an absolute blinder for both the trade position and the economy.

In January-September 2019, the balance of travel services showed a surplus of €14,032 million, up from a surplus of €12,507 million in the same period of 2018. This development is attributed to an increase, by 14.0% or €1,976 million, in travel receipts, which were only partly offset by travel payments, up by 28.0% or €450 million.

GDP

Today has brought the latest GDP data from Greek statistics.

The available seasonally adjusted data indicate that in the 3rd quarter of 2019 the Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) in volume terms increased by 0.6% in comparison with the 2nd quarter of 2019, while
in comparison with the 3rd quarter of 2018, it increased by 2.3%.

The story here is of export driven growth which provides some hope. The domestic economy shrank with consumption 0.4% lower and investment 5% lower on a quarterly basis whereas there was this on the external side.

Exports of goods and services increased by 4.5% in comparison with the 2nd quarter of 2019……….Imports of goods and services increased by 0.6% in comparison with the 2nd quarter of 2019.

Comment

At first it looks extraordinary that the Greek domestic economy could shrink on a quarterly basis but then of course we need to remind ourselves that the fiscal policy described at the beginning of this article is extraordinarily contractionary. So in essence the recovery seems to be depending rather a lot on the tourism industry. I also note that if we look at the Euro area data there is an unwelcome mention in the employment section.

The largest decreases were observed in Lithuania (-1.2%), Romania (-1.1%), Finland (-0.5%) and Greece (-0.3%).

Not what you would hope for in a recovery period.

Switching to an idea of the scale of the depression we see that in the latest quarter GDP was 49 billion Euros, compared to the previous peak in the spring of 2007 of 63.3 billion Euros ( 2010 prices). So more than 12 years later still nearly 23% lower. That is what you call a great depression and at the current rate of growth it will be quite some time before we get right back where Greece started from.

 

Italy faces yet more economic hard times

This morning has brought more signs of the economic malaise that is affecting Italy, a subject which just goes on and on and on. Here is the statistics office.

In 2019, GDP is expected to increase by 0.2 percent in real terms. The domestic demand will provide a contribution of 0.8 percentage points while foreign demand will account for a positive 0.2 percentage point and inventories will provide a negative contribution (-0.8 percentage points).

That is a reduction of 0.1% on the previous forecast. In one way I doubt their forecasts are accurate to 0.1% but then in another way counting 0.1% growth is their job in Italy. The breakdown is odd though. As the net foreign demand may be small but any growth is welcome at a time of a time war but with domestic demand growing why are inventories being chopped?

So annual economic growth has gone 1.7% in 2017 and 0.8% last year and will now be 0.2% if they are correct. They do manage a little optimism for next year.

In 2020, GDP is estimated to increase by 0.6 percent in real terms driven by the contribution of domestic demand (+0.7
percentage points) associated to a positive contribution of the foreign demand (+0.1 p.p.) and a negative contribution of inventories (-0.2 p.p.).

So the main change here is that the decline in inventories slows. If we switch to a positive we are reminded that Italy’s trade position looks pretty good for these times.

In 2019, exports will increase by 1.7 percent and imports will grow by 1.3 percent, both are expected
to slighty accelerate in 2020 (+1.8% and +1.7% respectively)

Looking at domestic demand it will be supported by wages growth and by this.

Labour market conditions will improve over the forecasting period but at moderate pace. Employment
growth is expected to stabilise at 0,7 percent in 2019 and in 2020. At the same time, the rate of
unemployment will decrease at 10.0 percent in the current year and at 9.9 percent in 2020.

They mean 10% this year and 9.9% next although there is a catch with that.

The number of unemployed persons declined (-1.7%, -44 thousand in the last month); the decrease was the result of a remarkable drop among men and a light increase for women, and involved all age groups, with the exception of over 50 aged people. The unemployment rate dropped to 9.7% (-0.2 percentage points), the youth rate decreased to 27.8% (-0.7 percentage points).

As you can see the unemployment rate was already below what it is supposed to be next year so I struggle to see how that is going to boost domestic demand. Perhaps they are hoping that employment will continue to rise.

In October 2019 the estimate of employed people increased (+0.2%, +46 thousand); the employment rate rose at 59.2% (+0.1 percentage points).

The Markit PMIs

There was very little cheer to be found in the latest private-sector business survey published earlier.

The Composite Output Index* posted at 49.6 in November,
down from 50.8 in October and signalling the first decline in Italian private sector output since May. Despite this, the rate of contraction was marginal.
Underpinning the latest downturn was a marked slowdown
in service sector activity growth during November, whilst
manufacturing output recorded its sixteenth consecutive
month of contraction. The latest decrease was sharp but
eased slightly from October.

I doubt anyone is surprised by the state of play in Italian manufacturing so the issue here is the apparent downturn in the service sector. This leads to fears about December and for the current quarter as a whole. Also the official trade optimism is not found here.

Meanwhile, export sales continue to fall.

Sadly there is little solace to be found if we look at the wider Euro area.

The final eurozone PMI for November came in
slightly ahead of the earlier flash estimate but still
indicates a near-stagnant economy. The survey
data are indicating GDP growth of just 0.1% in the
fourth quarter, with manufacturing continuing to act
as a major drag. Worryingly, the service sector is
also on course for its weakest quarterly expansion
for five years, hinting strongly that the slowdown
continues to spread.

Unicredit

We have looked regularly at the Italian banking sector and its tale of woe. But this is from what is often considered its strongest bank.

After cutting a fifth of its staff and shutting a quarter of its branches in mature markets in recent years, UniCredit said it would make a further 8,000 job cuts and close 500 branches under a new plan to 2023………UniCredit’s announcement triggered anger among unions in Italy, where 5,500 layoffs and up to 450 branch closures are expected given the relative size of the network compared with franchises in Germany, Austria and central and eastern Europe.

Back in January 2012 I described Unicredit as a zombie bank on the business programme on Sky News. It has spent much if not all of the intervening period proving me right. That is in spite of the fact that ECB QE has given it large profits on its holdings of Italian government bonds. Yet someone will apparently gain.

UniCredit promised 8 billion euros ($9 billion) in dividends and share buybacks on Tuesday in a bid to revive its sickly share price, although profit at Italy’s top bank will barely grow despite plans to shed 9% of its staff.

This is quite a mess as there are all sorts of issues with the share buyback era in my opinion.  In the unlikely event of me coming to power I might rule them ultra vires as I think the ordinary shareholder is being manipulated. Beneath this is a deeper point about lack of reform in the Italian banking sector and hence its inability to support the economy. This is of course a chicken and egg situation where a weak economy faces off with a weak banking sector.

Mind you this morning Moodys have taken the opposite view.

The outlook for Italy’s banking system has changed to stable from negative as problem loans will continue to fall, while banks’ funding conditions improve and their capital holds steady, Moody’s Investors Service said in a report published today.

“We expect Italian banks’ problem loans to fall in 2020 for a fifth consecutive year,” said Fabio Iannò, VP-Senior Credit Officer at Moody’s. “However, their problem loan ratio of around 8% remains more than double the European Union average of 3%, according to European Banking Authority data. We also take into account our forecast for weak yet positive Italian GDP growth, and our stable outlook on Italy’s sovereign rating.”

What could go wrong?

Comment

There is a familiar drumbeat and indeed bass line to all of this. In the midst of it I find it really rather amazing that Moodys can take UK banks from stable to negative whilst doing the reverse for Italian ones! As we look for perspective we see that the “Euro boom” and monetary easing by the ECB saw annual economic growth of a mere 1.7% in 2017 which has faded to more or less zero now. We are back once again to the “girlfriend in a coma” theme.

Italy has strengths in that it has a solid trade position and is a net saver yet somehow this never seems to reach the GDP data. Maybe the grey economy provides an answer but year after year it fails to be measured. Of course if politico are correct there is always plenty of trade and turnover here.

Italy’s new coalition government might not last the winter, with tensions reaching a peak this week over EU bailout reform……The 5Stars oppose the planned ESM reform because they say it would make it harder for highly indebted countries, like Italy, to access bailout funds without painful public-debt restructuring.

That reminds me about fiscal policy which is the new go to in the Euro area according to ECB President Christine Lagarde, well except for Italy and Greece.

 

 

 

Where next for US house prices?

Yesterday brought us up to date in the state of play in the US housing market. So without further ado let us take a look.

The S&P CoreLogic Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price NSA Index, covering all nine U.S. census divisions, reported a 3.2% annual gain in September, up from 3.1% in the previous month. The 10-City Composite annual increase came in at 1.5%, no change from the previous month. The 20-City Composite posted a 2.1% year-over-year gain, up from 2.0% in the previous month.

The first impression is that by the standards we have got used to that is a low number providing us with another context for the interest-rate cuts we have seen in 2019 from the US Federal Reserve. Of course it is not only the Fed that likes higher asset prices.

“DOW, NASDAQ, S&P 500 CLOSE AT RECORD HIGHS”

Another new Stock Market Record. Enjoy!

Those are 2 separate tweets from Monday from President Trump who not only loves a stock market rally but enjoys claiming it is all down to him. I do not recall him specifically noting house prices but it seems in the same asset price pumping spirit to me.

In my opinion the crucial part of the analysis provided by S&P comes right at the beginning.

After a long period of decelerating price increases, it’s notable that in September both the national and
20-city composite indices rose at a higher rate than in August, while the 10-city index’s September rise
matched its August performance. It is, of course, too soon to say whether this month marks an end to
the deceleration or is merely a pause in the longer-term trend.

If we look at the situation we see that things are very different from the 10% per annum rate reached in 2014 and indeed the 7% per annum seen in the early part of last year.That will concern the Fed which went to an extreme amount of effort to get house prices rising again. From a peak of 184.62 in July of 2006 the national index fell to 134.62 in February of 2012 and has now rallied to 212.2 or 58% up from the low and 15% up from the previous peak.

As ever there are regional differences.

Phoenix, Charlotte and Tampa reported the highest year-over-year gains among the 20 cities. In
September, Phoenix led the way with a 6.0% year-over-year price increase, followed by Charlotte with
a 4.6% increase and Tampa with a 4.5% increase. Ten of the 20 cities reported greater price increases
in the year ending September 2019 versus the year ending August 2019…….. Of the 20 cities in the composite, only one (San Francisco) saw a year-over-year price
decline in September

Mortgage Rates

If we look for an influence here we see a contributor to the end of the 7% per annum house price rise in 2018 as they rose back then. But since then things have been rather different as those who have followed my updates on the US bond market will be expecting. Indeed Mortgage News Daily put it like this.

2019 has been the best year for mortgage rates since 2011.  Big, long-lasting improvements such as this one are increasingly susceptible to bounces/corrections……Fed policy and the US/China trade war have been key players.

But we see that so far a move that began in bond markets around last November has yet to have a major influence on house prices. If you wish to know what US house buyers are paying for a mortgage here is the state of play.

Today’s Most Prevalent Rates For Top Tier Scenarios

  • 30YR FIXED -3.75%
  • FHA/VA – 3.375%
  • 15 YEAR FIXED – 3.375%
  • 5 YEAR ARMS –  3.25-3.75% depending on the lender

More recently bonds seem to be rallying again so we may see another dip in mortgage rates but we will have to see and with Thanksgiving Day on the horizon things may be well be quiet for the rest of this week.

The economy

This has been less helpful for house prices.There may be a minor revision later but as we stand the third quarter did this.

Real gross domestic product (GDP) increased 1.9 percent in the third quarter of 2019, according to the “advance” estimate released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the second quarter, real GDP increased 2.0 percent. ( US BEA ).

Each quarter in 2019 has seen lower growth and that trend seems set to continue.

The New York Fed Staff Nowcast stands at 0.7% for 2019:Q4.

News from this week’s data releases increased the nowcast for 2019:Q4 by 0.3 percentage point.

Positive surprises from housing data drove most of the increase.

Something of a mixture there as the number rallied due to housing data from building permits and housing starts.Mind you more supply into the same demand could push future prices lower! But returning to the wider economy back in late September the NY Fed was expecting economic growth in line with the previous 5 months of around 2% in annualised terms.But now even with a rally it is a mere 0.7%.

Employment and Wages

The situation here has continued to improve.

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 128,000 in October, and the unemployment rate was little
changed at 3.6 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Notable job gains occurred in
food services and drinking places, social assistance, and financial activities……..In October, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 6 cents to $28.18. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased by 3.0 percent.

But the real issue here is the last number. Yes the US has wage gains and they are real wage gains with CPI being as shown below in October.

Over the last 12 months, the all items index increased 1.8 percent before seasonal adjustment.

So this should be helping although it is a slow burner at just over 1% per annum and of course we are reminded that according to the Ivory Towers the employment situation should mean that wage growth is a fair bit higher and certainly over 4% per annum.

Moving back to looking at house prices then wage growth is pretty much the same so houses are not getting more affordable on this criteria.

Comment

As we review the situation it is hard not to laugh at this from Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell on Monday.

While events of the year have not much changed the outlook,

You can take this one of two ways.Firstly his interest-rate cuts are not especially relevant or you can wonder why he did them? Looking at the trend for GDP growth does few favours to his statement nor for this bit.

Fortunately, the outlook for further progress is good

Indeed he seemed to keep contradicting himself.

 The preview indicated that job gains over that period were about half a million lower than previously reported. On a monthly basis, job gains were likely about 170,000 per month, rather than 210,000.

But I do note that house prices did get an implicit reference.

But the wealth of middle-income families—savings, home equity, and other assets—has only recently surpassed levels seen before the Great Recession, and the wealth of people with lower incomes, while growing, has yet to fully recover.

As to other signals we get told pretty much every day that the trade war is fixed so there is not a little fatigue and ennui on this subject. Looking at the money supply then it should be supportive but the most recent number for narrow money M1 at 6.8% shows a bit of fading too.

So whilst we may see a boost for the economy from around the spring of next year we seem set for more of the same for house prices.Unless of course the US Federal Reserve has to act again which with the ongoing Repo numbers is a possibility. The background is this though which brings me back to why central bankers are so keen on keeping on keeping house prices out of consumer inflation measures.Can you guess which of the lines below goes into the official CPI?

https://www.bourbonfm.com/blog/house-price-index-vs-owners-equivalent-rent-residences-1990

Whilst it is not sadly up to date it does establish a principle….