Take your pick as UK Inflation rises via CPI and falls via RPI whilst staying the same via CPIH

The issue of UK inflation being above target is obviously troubling the UK establishment so much so that this morning HM Treasury has decided to tell us this.

Latest data from comes out today. Find out more about how the UK brought inflation under control:

There is a problem here as you see when we introduced inflation targeting in late 1992 the targeted measure called RPIX was below 4% and around 3.7% if the chart they use is any guide. It is currently 4% after 4.2% last month which is of course higher and not lower! So this is not the best time to herald the triumph of inflation targeting to say the least! Even worse if you look at the longer-term inflation charts in the release it is clear that the main fall in inflation happened before inflation targeting began. I will leave readers to mull whether the better phase was in fact the end of an economic mistake which was exchange-rate targeting.

The Forties problem

There will be a burst of inflationary pressure when we get the December inflation data from this issue. From the Financial Times.

The North Sea’s key Forties Pipeline System, which delivers the main crude oil underpinning the Brent benchmark, is likely to be shut for “weeks” to carry out repairs to an onshore section of the line, a spokesman for operator Ineos said on Monday. The move follows the worsening of a hairline crack in the 450,000 barrel-a-day pipe near Red Moss in Aberdeenshire over the weekend……..The FPS transports almost 40 per cent of the UK North Sea’s oil and gas production by connecting 85 fields to the British mainland.

If I was Ineos I would be crawling over the contract to buy the pipeline as they only did so in October and may have been sold something of a pup by BP. But in terms of the impact we have seen Brent Crude Oil move above US $65 per barrel in response to this. Also a cold snap in the UK is not the best time for gas supplies to be reduced as we wait to see how prices will respond. No doubt some of the production will get ashore in other ways but far from all. Also other news is not currently helping as this from @mhewson_CMC points out.

U.K. GAS FUTURES SURGE ON BAUMGARTEN EXPLOSION, NORWAY OUTAGE………front month futures jump about 20%.

Today’s data

This will have received a particularly frosty reception at the Bank of England this morning.

CPI inflation edged above 3% for the first time in nearly six years, with the price of computer games rising and airfares falling more slowly than this time last year. These upward pressures were partly offset by falling costs of computer equipment.

The annual reading of 3.1% means that Governor Mark Carney will have to write a letter to the Chancellor of Exchequer Phillip Hammond to explain why it is more than 1% over its target. I have sent via social media a suggested template.

Of course the official version could have been written by Shaggy.

I had tried to keep her from what
She was about to see
Why should she believe me
When I told her it wasn’t me?

We will not find out precisely until February as one of the improvements to the UK inflation targeting regime was to delay the publication of such a letter until it was likely to be no longer relevant.

How can we keep the recorded rate of inflation down?

This will have troubled the UK establishment and they came up with the idea of making a number up based on rents which are never paid. They rushed a proposal in last year as they noted that it was likely to be a downwards influence on inflation in 2017. How is that going? I have highlighted the relevant number.

The CPI rate is higher than the CPIH equivalent principally because the CPI excludes owner occupiers’ housing costs. These rose by 1.5% in the year to November 2017, less than the CPI rate of 3.1% and, as a result, they pulled the CPI rate down slightly, to CPIH.

That number which is a fiction as the Imputed Rents are never actually paid has a strong influence on CPIH.

Given that OOH accounts for around 17% of CPIH, it is the main driver for differences between the CPIH and CPI inflation rates.

This is like something straight out of Yes Prime Minister where a number which is never paid is used to reduce the answer. Just for clarity rents should be in the data for those who pay them but not for those who own their home and do not. Those who own their homes will be wondering why actual real numbers like the ones below are not used.

Average house prices in the UK have increased by 4.5% in the year to October 2017 (down from 4.8% in September 2017). The annual growth rate has slowed since mid-2016 but has remained broadly around 5% during 2017.

What do you think it is about a real number that would INCREASE the recorded inflation rate that led it to be rejected for a fake news one which DECREASES the recorded inflation rate?

House Prices

Tucked away in the release was this which may be a sign of a turn.

The average UK house price was £224,000 in October 2017. This is £10,000 higher than in October 2016 and £1,000 lower than last month.

A 0.5% monthly fall. As the series is erratic we will have to wait for further updates.

What is coming over the hill?

We are being affected by the higher oil price.

The one-month rate for materials and fuels rose 1.8% in November 2017 (Table 3), which is a 0.8 percentage points increase from 1.0% in October 2017, driven by inputs of crude oil, which was up 7.6% on the month.

This meant that producer price inflation rose on the month.

The headline rate of inflation for goods leaving the factory gate (output prices) rose 3.0% on the year to November 2017, up from 2.8% in October 2017. Prices for materials and fuels (input prices) rose 7.3% on the year to November 2017, up from 4.8% in October 2017.

This is more than a UK issue as this from Sweden Statistics earlier indicates.

The rise in the CPI from October to November 2017 was mainly due to a price increase of vehicle fuels and lubricants (4.5 percent),

Comment

There is a lot to consider here as headlines will be generated by the fact that Bank of England Governor Mark Carney will have to write an explanatory letter about the way CPI inflation has risen to more than 1% above its annual target. He might briefly wish that the old target of RPIX was still in use.

The annual rate for RPIX, the all items RPI excluding mortgage interest payments (MIPs), is 4.0%, down from 4.2% last month.

Although actually he would soon realise that he would have had to have written a formal letter a while ago for it. For the thoughtful there is interest in one measure rising as another falls and here are the main reasons.

Other differences including weights, which decreased the RPI 12-month rate relative to the CPI 12-month rate by 0.15 percentage points between October and November 2017.

Ironically putting house prices into the inflation measure would have reduced it last month.

Other housing components excluded from the CPI, which decreased the RPI 12-month rate relative to the CPI 12-month rate by 0.06 percentage points between October and
November 2017. The effect came mainly from house depreciation.

Will the UK establishment do another u-turn and suddenly decide that house prices are fit for use ( now they may be falling) in the same way they abandoned aligning us with Europe by not using them or the way they dropped RPIJ?

The trend now sees two forces at play. The trend towards higher inflation from the lower UK Pound £ is not far off over. However we are seeing a higher oil price offset that for the time being and I am including the likely data for December in this. So we will have to wait for 2018 for clearer signs of a turn although the Retail Price Index may already be signalling it.

Meanwhile the “most comprehensive measure of inflation” and the Office for National Statistics favourite CPIH continues to be pretty much ignored. The punch may need fortifying for this years Christmas party.

Meanwhile I guess it could be (much) worse.

The Financial Times said Avondale Pharmaceuticals bought the rights to Niacor from Upsher Smith, a division of Japan’s Sawai Pharmaceutical, earlier this year. The company also bought the rights to a drug used to treat respiratory ailments, known as SSKI, and increased the price by 2,469 per cent, raising the cost of a 30ml bottle from $11.48 to $295.

 

 

Advertisements

The UK Student Loan problem is going from bad to worse

Sometimes developments flow naturally together and we see a clear example of this today. It was only yesterday that I pointed out that the Bank of England puts its telescope to its blind eye on the subject of student loans.

 In addition students will be wondering why what are likely to appear large debt burdens to them are ignored for these purposes?

Excluding student debt, the aggregate household debt to income ratio is 18 percentage points below its 2008
peak.

This is particularly material as we know that student debt has been growing quickly in the UK due to factors such as the rises in tuition fees.

Losses mount

I am often critical of the Financial Times but this time Thomas Hale deserves praise for this investigation.

The UK government is set to book a loss of almost £1bn from its largest privatisation of student loans, raising questions over the valuation of tens of billions of pounds of remaining graduate debt.

The most obvious question is why are we privatising these loans at a loss? It was of course the banking sector which saw privatisation of profits and socialisation of losses as fears will no doubt rise that this could be the other way around in terms of timing.

As we look at the detail the news gets even more troubling.

The controversial sale of a batch of student loans this week is expected to raise around £1.7bn, according to a Financial Times analysis of deal documentation. The loans, which had a face value of £3.7bn last year, are part of a total of £43bn in loans made to students up to 2012, which are currently on government books valued at just under £30bn, according to the Department of Education’s latest published accounts, as of the end of March this year.

As you can see not only are those loans not alone but they are being sold at a level below previous mark downs in value. The £3.7 billion face value had already been marked down to £2.5 billion and now we see this.

The deal will raise around £1.7bn in cash through the securitisation process, where assets are packaged together and sold off as bonds to investors. The process is a common feature of financing for student borrowing in the US but has rarely been used in the UK.

This seems odd as why would the UK taxpayer want to capitalise his/her losses?

The government’s loan book sale is dependent on passing a “value for money” test, which is designed to ensure that public assets are not sold too cheaply. The details of the test will not be made public but it is expected to provide a different, lower valuation for the loans compared to those on the DfE accounts.

The sale of the loans is part of a wider government effort to sell public assets “in a way that secures good value for money for taxpayers”, according to a statement on the student loans company website. The government aims to raise a total of £12bn through selling an unspecified amount of pre-2012 student loans over the next five years.

This brings us to a combination of Yes Prime Minister and George Orwell. Whilst it is possible that selling something at half its original value is sensible it needs to be checked carefully especially if it is public money . Also if it is a good deal for the new investors why not keep it?

What has happened to these loans?

Essentially these are loans from the previous decade which only have a rump left and guess which rump?

The transaction is made up of loans issued between 2002 and 2006, on which repayments are linked to income. Around half of students who borrowed during that period had already paid off their loans by the end of the 2015-16 financial year, meaning the pool of debt included in the deal is likely to be of a lower credit quality. Of those graduates with outstanding loans, only 60 per cent made a repayment in the same financial year.

So 40% of the remaining loans are seeing no repayments at present and the pricing here suggests that this will continue. One fear is that the buyers of the loans may try to pressurise students to repay even if they cannot afford to. Also there is the issue of what looks like around 20% of the students from over a decade ago still do not earn more than the £17,775 threshold ( confusingly more recent students seem to have a £21,000 threshold).

The rationale

Carly Simon poses the apposite question

Why?…. Don’t know why?

This is what it is all about. Yet again a wheeze for the national debt numbers.

Part of the motive for the sale is to reduce public debt. The cash generated from the transaction will go towards reducing public sector net debt, which was £1.79tn at the end of October. Unlike cash, student loan assets do not count towards the calculation of public sector net debt.

Comment

This is in my opinion a disaster on a national scale. Let me open with an issue which regular readers will be aware of but newer ones may not. This is the cost or interest on these loans and you may like to note that the most the UK would pay on issuing government debt is ~1.5%. From MoneySavingExpert (MSE ).

The rate used is the previous March’s RPI inflation rate. March 2017’s RPI inflation rate was 3.1% meaning interest charged on student loans for the 2017/18 academic year is between 3.1% and 6.1% depending on whether you’re studying or graduated, and how much you earn.

So at least double and maybe quadruple the alternative which speaks for itself. On this subject I both agree and disagree with MSE. He thinks for some it does not matter than much of this will never be repaid and is in that sense “free.” But you see along the way it matters as there is not only the psychological effect of say a £50k debt but it is also it affects mortgage calculations now. Recently reports have arisen of younger people not joining the NHS pension scheme and I wonder if that is linked to the fact that nurses now have student debts and feel burdened.

Back on the first of August 2016 I explained the problem like this.

We move onto the next problem which is that ever more of this debt will never be repaid which poses the question of what is the point of it? It feels ever more like a rentier society where someone collects all the interest and the takes the loan capital but we then forget that. Another type of borrowing from the future.

It would be much simpler I think to abandon the whole system and go back to providing tuition fees and grants. Also as this reply to the FT from safeside implies perhaps some of the weaker universities should be trimmed.

It would be interesting to see which universities produce graduates who are sub inv grade

It is tempting to suggest we should also write the whole lot off as let’s face it we are writing most of it off along the way anyway. The only major issue I think is how to treat fairly those who have already repaid their loans either in part or in full. It would also end the shambolic way the loans are collected. We seem to have replaced a system which worked with one based on more than few fantasies and if we continue to follow the American way then as I pointed out in August 2016 students can presumable expect this.

It’s 9 p.m. and your phone chimes. You’re among the one in eight Americans carrying a student loan—debts that collectively total nearly $1.4 trillion—and you’ve started to fall behind on your payments.

You know the drill: round-the-clock robocalls demanding immediate payment. You wince and pick up.

 

The UK Public finances have sometimes believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.

As we await the UK Budget which of course is showing all the signs of being a leaky vessel if not a sieve a lot is going on in the background. What I mean by this is that the goal posts are moving back and forth so much that the grounds(wo)man must be grateful they have wheels on them these days. Let me give you the first example which I mentioned last week. From the Financial Times.

Chancellor Philip Hammond is planning to shift the goalposts on the government’s borrowing limits in a move that will flatter the public finances and provide up to £5bn a year in additional public spending in the Budget on Wednesday. He will use a technical change in the accounting status of housing associations to reduce headline borrowing figures but will not make a corresponding change to his deficit targets in the Budget.

What the FT omitted to point out was the full-scale of the mess here. You see it was only a couple of years ago the housing associations were included in the national debt and now they are not. So overall we have not really gained anything it just looks like we have! Along the way the credibility of the numbers has been reduced again.

The danger for a Chancellor with an apparent windfall is that somebody spends it before he can and marathon man Mark Carney sprinted to the front of the queue to help his banking friends.

Consistent with this, I am requesting that you authorise an increase in the total size of the APF of £25bn to £585bn, in order to accommodate expected usage of the TFS by the end of the drawdown period.

What is happening here is that the Bank of England has got permission to increase the size of its bank subsidy called the Term Funding Scheme by another £25 billion to £140 billion. This is where banks get the ability to borrow from the Bank of England at or close to Bank Rate which is bad news for depositors as it means the banks are less interested in them. This has three consequences, Firstly as we are looking at the public finances today if this £25 billion is used then it raises the national debt by the same amount. Then there is an odd link because if things are going well why do we need to add an extra £40 billion ( there was an extra £15 billion in August) to this?

With the stronger economy and lending growth, TFS drawings reached a total of £91 bn at mid-November 2017.

We are in a pretty pickle if banks need subsidies in the good times. Sadly the mostly supine media are unlikely to ask this question or to wonder how all the downbeat forecasts and Brexit worries have suddenly morphed into a “stronger economy”. The next issue is where will the money turn up? It could be funds to give the car loans sector one last hurrah but as housing appears to be top of the list right now it seems more likely that the Chancellor would prefer another £25 billion to subsidise mortgage rates even further.

Rates on new and existing loans fell after the TFS was launched and have remained low by historical standards

If we move to Bank of England policy it has raised interest-rates on the wider economy but now plans to expand its subsidies to “the precious”. Frankly its opus operandi could not be much more transparent.

Number Crunching

Part one

Firstly there is the FT on the Office for Budget Responsibility or OBR.

But the mood has improved since then after the OBR made clear it would offset some of the “significant” productivity downgrade with more optimistic employment forecasts.

So much for being “independent” and please remember tomorrow when the media are treating its pronouncements with respect and grandeur which is that the first rule of OBR club is that it is always wrong. Unless of course wage growth and gilt yields actually are 5% right now.

Part two

Then there is the possible/probable Brexit bill which is being reported as rising from £20 billion to £40 billion by places which told us it would be either £60 billion or £100 billion. So is that up or down? You choose.

Part three

I am sad that what was once a proud national broadcaster has sunk to this but this is finance from the BBC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42059439/loadsamoney-norman-smith-on-the-brexit-divorce-bill

Today’s data

The news did not give any great reasons to be cheerful.

Public sector net borrowing (excluding public sector banks) increased by £0.5 billion to £8.0 billion in October 2017, compared with October 2016.

The driver here was increased debt costs as the interest bill rose from £4.8 billion last October to £6 billion this. As conventional Gilt yields are broadly similar then most if not all of this has been caused by higher inflation as measured by the Retail Prices Index. The actual amount varies as they pay on a lagged inflation basis which is not always the same but as a rule of thumb the measure has been ~2% per annum higher this year.

Looking beyond that there is a little more optimism to be seen as revenues are not to bad if we switch to the fiscal year to date numbers.

In the current financial year-to-date, central government received £394.3 billion in income, including £292.7 billion in taxes. This was around 4% more than in the same period in the previous financial year.

This means that we are doing a little better than last year.

Public sector net borrowing (excluding public sector banks) decreased by £4.1 billion to £38.5 billion in the current financial year-to-date (April 2017 to October 2017), compared with the same period in 2016; this is the lowest year-to-date net borrowing since 2007.

There has been a trend for a while for the numbers to be revised favourably as time passes so even including the debt interest rises we are edging forwards. As the inflation peak passes that will be less of an influence. The next major factor will be the self-assessment season in January and February when we will find out how much last years numbers were flattered by efforts to avoid the rise in dividend taxation.

National Debt

On the theme of moving goal posts we produce quite a lot of numbers on this front and here is the headline.

Public sector net debt (excluding public sector banks) was £1,790.4 billion at the end of October 2017, equivalent to 87.2% of gross domestic product (GDP), an increase of £147.8 billion (or 4.5 percentage points as a ratio of GDP) on October 2016.

Most of the rise in the last year can be attributed to Mark Carney and his colleagues at the Bank of England.

Of this £147.8 billion, £101.7 billion is attributable to debt accumulated within the Bank of England. Nearly all of it is in the Asset Purchase Facility, including £89.9 billion from the Term Funding Scheme (TFS).

By chance our headline number is quite close to international standards as Eurostat has our national debt at this.

general government gross debt was £1,720.0 billion at the end of March 2017, equivalent to 86.8% of gross domestic product (GDP); an increase of £68.1 billion on March 2016.

Comment

The accident of timing that brings our public finance data up to date a bit over 24 hours before the Budget gives us some perspective. Firstly if you recall some of the numbers from yesterday how wrong the OBR has been which never seems to bother the media along the lines of Alice through the looking-glass.

‘I could tell you my adventures–beginning from this morning,’ said Alice a little timidly: ‘but it’s no use going back to yesterday, because I was a different person then.’

Let me offer a policy prescription for the OBR

The mad Queen said, “Off with his head! Off with his head! Off with his head!” Well… that’s too bad… no more heads to cut.”

As to the Budget it would seem it is arriving with a housing obsession. Even the Governor of the Bank of England has got in on the act with yet another banking subsidy to reduce mortgage rates. The way we are told that was ending but in fact is being expanded feels like something out of Alice In Wonderland. Perhaps we will seem some more bribes in addition to the cheap railcards for millenials also.

As to the public finances if we skip the incompetent blunderings of the Bank of England which surely could have designed a scheme which did not raise the national debt we see a situation which is slowly improving. It is not impossible once the inflation peak passes that our debt to GDP ratio could fall but care is needed as you see the only question in the number crunching here is are there only 6?

Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.

 

 

 

 

 

Has UK inflation peaked?

Yesterday we heard from Bank of England Chief Economist Andy Haldane.

On 3 November, I visited Greater Manchester on the latest of my Townhall tours.

He makes himself sound like a rock band doesn’t he? It is good to see him get out and about after years and indeed decades of being stuck in a bunker in the depths of the Bank of England. Although sadly for him the hopes of becoming Governor via a “man of the people” approach seem to be just hopes. I do hope that he takes the message below back to his colleagues as not only would some humility be welcome but the reality encapsulated in it would be too.

For most of the people I spoke with, small adjustments in the cost of borrowing were unlikely to have a significant impact on their daily lives.  The borrowing costs they faced for access to consumer credit were largely unaffected by changes in Bank Rate

The latter point was one of my earliest themes when I started this website which had its 7th anniversary over the weekend so you can see that our Andy is not the quickest to pick things up.

Moving to today’s theme of inflation Andy did have some thoughts for us.

It is well-known that increases in the cost of living hit hardest those on lowest incomes.  Rising inflation worsens the well-known “poverty premium” the poorest in society already face in the higher costs they pay for the everyday goods and services they buy.

I hope that Andy thought hard about the role his “Sledgehammer QE” and “muscular” monetary easing in August 2016 had in making the lot of these people worse by contributing to the fall of the UK Pound and raising UK inflation prospects. Speaking of inflation prospects what does he think now?

 Price rises across the whole economy are currently running well above the 2% inflation target and are expected to remain above-target for the next few years.

That is not cheerful stuff from Andy but there are several problems with it. Firstly you cannot forecast inflation ahead like that in the credit crunch era as for example you would have been left with egg on your face when oil prices dropped a couple of years ago. In addition Andy’s own record on forecasting or if you like Forward Guidance is poor as in his role of Chief Economist he forecasts an increase in wage inflation every year and has yet to be correct. Of course when you take out a lottery ticket like that you will eventually be correct but that ignores the years of failure.

International Trends

This mornings data set seems to indicate a clear trend although there is a lack of detail as to why Swedish inflation fell so much.

The inflation rate according to the Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices (HICP) was 1.7 percent in October 2017, down from 2.2 percent in September.

Germany saw a smaller decline but a decline nonetheless.

Consumer prices in Germany were 1.6% higher in October 2017 than in October 2016. The unflation rate, as measured by the consumer price index, was +1.8% in both September and August 2017.

Today’s data

This will be received in mixed fashion at the Bank of England.

The all items CPI annual rate is 3.0%, unchanged from last month.

The Governor Mark Carney will be pleased that his quill pen and foolscap paper will not be required for an explanatory letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer whereas Andy Haldane will mull that his Forward Guidance has not started well as a rise was forecast this month.

The MPC still expects inflation to peak above 3.0% in October, as the past depreciation of sterling and recent increases in energy prices continue to pass through to consumer prices.

The factors keeping inflation up were as shown below/

In October 2017, the food category, which grew by 4.2% since October 2016, contributed 0.3 percentage points to the overall 12-month growth rate……Recreation and culture, with prices rising by 0.5% between September and October 2017, compared with a smaller rise of 0.2% a year earlier.

There was also a rise in electricity prices. On the other side of the coin we saw transport and furniture and household services pulling in a downwards fashion on the annual inflation rate.

CPIH

The additional factor in CPIH which is the addition of rents which are never paid to the owner occupied housing sector did its planed job one more time in October.

Housing and household services, where owner occupiers’ housing costs had the largest downward effect, with prices remaining unchanged between September 2017 and October 2017, having seen a particularly large increase of 0.4% in the same period a year ago.

This is essentially driven by this.

Private rental prices paid by tenants in Great Britain rose by 1.5% in the 12 months to October 2017; this is down from 1.6% in September 2017.

I would be interested to know if those who rent are seeing lower inflation but also you can see how this pulls down the annual inflation rate. Fair enough ( if accurate as our statisticians have had problems here) for those who rent but the  impact is magnified by the use of Imputed Rent for those who own their property so the measure of inflation is pulled down even more.

The OOH component annual rate is 1.6%, down from 1.9% last month.

This means that what our official statisticians call our “most comprehensive” measure tells us this.

The all items CPIH annual rate is 2.8%, unchanged from last month.

Now let me take you to a place “far,far away” where instead of fictitious prices you use real ones like those below. What do you think the effect would be?

Average house prices in the UK have increased by 5.4% in the year to September 2017 (up from 4.8% in August 2017). The annual growth rate has slowed since mid-2016 but has remained broadly around 5% during 2017.

Thus the inflation measure would be higher with the only caveat being the numbers are a month behind the others. As owner occupied housing costs are 17.4% of the measure you can see that it would have a big effect. Up is the new down that sort of thing.

The whole episode here has reflected badly on the UK statistics establishment as this new measure is mostly being ignored and CPI is used instead as this from the BBC demonstrates.

The UK’s key inflation rate remained steady at a five-and-a-half-year high of 3% in October, according to official figures.

The use of the word “key” is a dagger to the heart of the plans of the Office for National Statistics.

The trend

This mornings producer price dataset suggested that the inflation peak has passed.

The input Producer Prices Index (input PPI) grew by 4.6% in the 12 months to October 2017, down from 8.1% in the 12 months to September 2017. The output Producer Prices Index (output PPI) grew by 2.8% in the 12 months to October 2017, down from 3.3% in the 12 months to September 2017.

So there is good news there for us although awkward again for Andy Haldane. On the other side of the coin there has been around an US $5 rise in the price of Brent Crude Oil since October so that will impact the November data if it stays there. Also more political crises could weaken the Pound like they did only on Monday.

Comment

We find ourselves in the peak zone for UK inflation as we may get a nudge higher but the bulk effect of the fall in the UK Pound £ has pretty much completed now. Back in late summer 2016 I suggested that its impact would be over 1% and if we look at the numbers for Germany and Sweden today that looks to be confirmed. Last year saw monthly CPI rise by 0.2% in November and 0.5% in December as inflation rose so the threshold is higher.

However we remain in a mess as to how we calculate inflation as the Retail Price Index measure has it at 4% as opposed to 3% and of course the newer effort CPIH is at 2.8%. So a few more goes and they may record it at 0% and we could have an “unflation rate”!

I have argued against CPIH for five years now for the reasons explained today and warned the National Statistician John Pullinger of the dangers of using it earlier this year. Meanwhile former supporters such as the economics editor of the Financial Times Chris Giles ( who was on the committee which proposed CPIH) now longer seem to be keeping the faith as this indicates.

CPIH is (probably) better since it has a big proxy for housing services of owner occupiers, but with hindsight I worry occasionally that it doesn’t proxy security of tenure well. And security of tenure is a big service you acquire when buying not renting.

 

 

 

 

 

Imputed Rent is doing its job of reducing UK consumer inflation

Today is inflation day in the UK where we receive numbers for consumer, producer and house price inflation. As there were quite a few new readers yesterday let me open today in that spirit and explain the rotten heart of the UK inflation infrastructure. It comes via the issue of the housing sector and in particular people who own their own house or flat. What this involves is paying a large sum if you are lucky enough to be able to do so or taking a mortgage and paying it off in monthly instalments over years and indeed decades or some combination of the two. This presents us with two actual numbers which can be used in the inflation process which is house prices and mortgage payments.

Instead the UK authorities have chosen to make up their own number based on what are called imputed rents. They choose to assume that someone who lives in their own property rents it out ( of course they do not) and put that rental number in the inflation figures for the index which is called CPIH. There is an obvious issue in this which is the making up of the number when you have real ones to use! Even worse they have had a lot of trouble with the rental series based on those who do rent and in fact scrapped their first effort as it went so badly. So their number series has proven unreliable but they have ploughed on anyway and if you take the case to the National Statistician I am sorry to have to tell you that the response is much more like propaganda that reasoned argument. Why do they do it? Well I doubt it is a coincidence that it leads to a lower inflation number.

The trends

We know that there was some building producer price pressure last month although September itself saw some amelioration of that as the UK Pound £ had a better month against the US Dollar ( the currency in which most commodities are priced). So it will depend on which day they did the survey. But the price of crude oil was rising and has continued to do so since September ended with Brent crude oil above US $58 per barrel as I type this so that there is some inflationary pressure again from this source.

The producer price data today indicated a sort of steady as she goes position with a hint of a dip.

The headline rate of inflation for goods leaving the factory gate (output prices) rose 3.3% on the year to September 2017, from 3.4% in August 2017…….Prices for materials and fuels (input prices) rose 8.4% on the year to September 2017, which is unchanged from August 2017.

 

What about the impact of inflation?

This sadly tends to hit the poorest the hardest as this from the BBC indicates.

Benefit freezes combined with the predicted rise in inflation could set some low-income households back £300 next year, a think tank has warned.

September’s inflation data will be released on Tuesday, and some analysts predict the Consumer Price Index (CPI) will be 2.9%……….The Resolution Foundation’s analysis found that a single unemployed person would be £115 worse off, a single parent in work with one child would be £225 worse off, and a single earner couple with two children would be £305 worse off.

You may note that the analysis concentrates on our previous inflation measure and not the new CPIH version in yet another embarrassment for the Office for National Statistics.

Today’s numbers

The headline number will capture the er headlines.

The all items CPI annual rate is 3.0%, up from 2.9% in August.

Actually it was a very marginal shift as if we look into the detail the rate was in fact 2.9593%. Also I did point out above that the CPI was what everyone still concentrates on as this from the Financial Times whose economics editor Chris Giles was one of those who argued strongly for the CPIH inflation measure shows.

How times change! Back in the day he and I were taking opposite sides at the Royal Statistical Society and it is nice to see the implied view that he now agrees with me. This leaves the Office for National Statistics somewhat short of friends for its propaganda on the subject of CPIH.

The Consumer Prices Index including owner occupiers’ housing costs (CPIH) is the most comprehensive measure of inflation.

The CPIH number gets so few mentions our statistics authority sends out its staff to get the numbers up.

You might think that after the problems with the UK trade figures I highlighted yesterday the staff there might be too busy to be on social media plugging the new inflation measure but apparently not. James has contacted me to say he is working in the prices division at the moment which gives a partial answer although if he is tweeting official information he might want to use a more accurate title.

The housing problem

Let me explain with the relevant numbers why this is an issue. Firstly let me bring the house price numbers up to date.

Average house prices in the UK have increased by 5.0% in the year to August 2017 (up from 4.5% in July 2017). The annual growth rate has slowed since mid-2016 but has remained broadly under 5% during 2017.

Now let us look at the data on which the Imputed Rental numbers for owner-occupied housing is based.

Private rental prices paid by tenants in Great Britain rose by 1.6% in the 12 months to September 2017; this is unchanged from August 2017.

Which leads to this.

The OOH component annual rate is 1.9%, unchanged from last month.

So the machinations of the UK statisticians do the following. Firstly they are using a method which reduces the annual rate of inflation from 3% to 2.8% if we use their favoured CPI series. Even worse a previous change meant that the Retail Price Index was abandoned and it is at 3.9%. Those buying a house may reasonably wonder how annual price inflation which has been circa 5% ends up reducing the inflation rate!

If you wish to follow the timing of this there was a rush late last year from the Office for National Statistics to bring CPIH ignoring some of its own guidelines as it was “not a national statistic” at that point. I did tell the National Statistician John Pullinger that doing this at a time inflation was higher but rental inflation was likely to fall ( based on wages growth) was playing with fire as regards both his personal and the body’s overall credibility in my opinion.

Comment

So we have headlines of 3% consumer inflation in the UK in spite of the official machinations to keep it below by changing the measure. The latter may strengthen in influence if London continues its pattern of being a leading indicator in this regard.

London private rental prices grew by 0.9% in the 12 months to August 2017, which is 0.7 percentage points below the Great Britain 12-month growth rate.

Those of you who pointed out that owner occupied housing would only go into UK inflation when it lowered the numbers have been proven correct so well-played.

An impact of all of this is to widen the intergenerational issue as the basic state pension will rise next year by 3% which is higher than the wage growth we have seen. Of course Bank of England pensioners will do even better as theirs are linked to the higher Retail Price Index. If we stay with the Bank of England Governor Mark Carney does not have to get out his fountain pen and headed notepaper as the remit was eased and he only has to write if it exceeds 3% on the CPI measure.

Moving onto the detail we see that there has been a strong impact from the rising price of butter we have previously looked at as the oils and fats section has risen by 14.9% on a year ago. Will we now get Imputed Butter prices?

Meanwhile our old inflation target of RPIX is at 4.1% which poses a question for the “improved” measures.

Expensive times are ahead for UK railway travellers and commuters

Before we even get to the latest UK inflation data some worrying data has emerged. What I mean by this is that Sweden has announced its inflation data which makes its monetary policy even more mind-boggling.

The inflation rate according to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) was 2.2 percent in July 2017, up from 1.7 percent in June. The Swedish Consumer Price Index (CPI) rose by 0.5 percent from June to July 2017

If we look back to the July Minutes we see that the forecasting skills of the Riksbank are unchanged.

several board members emphasised that it was not sufficient for inflation to temporarily touch the 2 per cent mark.

Actually they are considering a switch of target but in fact that poses even more of a problem.

The inflation rate according to the CPI with a fixed interest rate (CPIF) was 2.4 percent in July, up from 1.9 percent in June. The CPIF rose by 0.6 percent from June to July 2017.

So let us leave the Riksbank to explain why it has an interest-rate of -0.5% and is adding to its QE bond purchases with inflation as above and the economy growing at an annual rate of 4%? This inflation rise added to the rise in India yesterday and in terms of detail was driven by package holiday (0.3%) and air fare ( 0.2%) price rises. Transport costs rises are a little ominous on the day that we find out how much UK rail fares will rise next January.

CPIH

This is the new UK inflation measure and is described thus.

CPIH is our lead measure of inflation and offers the most comprehensive picture of how prices are changing in the economy.

As it uses imputed rents for the housing sector I have challenged them on the use of “comprehensive” so far without much success but you may note the use of “lead” where I have had more success. Efforts to call it “headline” or “preferred” have been extinguished. Meanwhile this happened at the end of July.

On behalf of the Board of the Statistics Authority, I am pleased to confirm the re-designation of CPIH as a National Statistics.

I wish to challenge this by concentrating on the issue of rents. There are two issues here the first is the fantasy economics  that owner-occupiers rent out their homes and the second is the measurement of rents has problems.

  1. There is an issue over the spilt between new lets and existing ones which matters as new let prices tend to rise more quickly.
  2. There is an issue over lags in the data which has been kept under wraps but is suspected to be as long as 18 months so today’s data for July is actually last year’s.
  3. There is the issue that we are being reassured about numbers they confess to not actually knowing.

    “. I acknowledge the efforts by ONS staff to provide reassurance around the quality of the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) private rents microdata, which are currently unavailable to ONS. “

There are alternatives which dissidents like me are pressing such as Household Costs Index designed originally by John Astin and Jill Leyland under the auspices of the Royal Statistical Society. This aims to measure what households experience in terms of inflation and thereby includes both house prices and interest-rates rather than fantasy calculations such as imputed rents. Officially it is in progress whereas in practice an effort is underway to neuter this such as the suggestion from the Office for National Statistics ( ONS) it would only be produced annually.

Why does this matter? Well look at the numbers and below is the housing section from CPIH.

The OOH component annual rate is 2.0%, unchanged from last month.  ( OOH = Owner Occupied Housing costs)

Now here are the ONS house price numbers also released today.

Average house prices in the UK have increased by 4.9% in the year to June 2017 (down from 5.0% in the year to May 2017). The annual growth rate has slowed since mid-2016 but has remained broadly around 5% during 2017.

As you can see they are quite different in spite of the slow down in house price rises. Also we took the CPI numbers to align ourselves with Europe which is using house prices in its own plans for a new measure. This is a familiar theme where rationales are pressed and pressed but then dropped when inconvenient a bit like the RPIJ inflation measure.

Today’s data

We learnt something today I think.

The all items CPI annual rate is 2.6%, unchanged from last month…….The all items CPIH annual rate is 2.6%, unchanged from last month.

Firstly we have detached a little from the recent international trend which may well be because we have been seeing higher inflation here. Also you may note that the fanfare of CPIH is currently rather pointless as it is giving the same result! Added to this there is a completely different picture to Sweden.

Transport, in particular motor fuels. Fuel prices fell by 1.3% between June and July 2017, the fifth successive month of price decreases. This contrasts with the same period last year, when fuel prices rose by 0.7%.

I checked air fares too and they fell.

Looking Ahead

There was a continuation of the good news on this front from the producer price indices.

The annual rate of inflation for goods leaving the factory gate slowed for the third time this year, mainly as a result of 2016 price movements dropping out of the annual comparison.

Much of the effect here comes from the change in the exchange rate where the post EU leave vote is beginning now to drop out of the annual data comparisons. Below are the latest numbers.

Factory gate prices (output prices) rose 3.2% on the year to July 2017, from 3.3% in June 2017, which is a 0.5 percentage points decline from their recent peak of 3.7% in February and March 2017……Prices for materials and fuels (input prices) rose 6.5% on the year to July 2017, from 10% in June 2017; as per factory gate prices, the drop in July’s rate is due to 2016 price movements dropping out of the annual comparison.

In the detail there is something which will only be welcomed by farmers and central bankers ( who for newer readers consider food and energy inflation to be non-core)

Food production continued to be the main source of upward contributions to input and output price inflation fuelled by rising prices for home food materials and food products respectively.

We get a little more detail but not much.

Within home food materials the largest upward contribution came from crop and animal production, with prices rising 12.3% on the year to July 2017.

Comment

We see a welcome development in that the pressure for UK inflation rises has faded a bit. But commuters and rail travellers will be noting that my theme that the UK is a country with administered inflation is in play here.

The all items RPI annual rate is 3.6%, up from 3.5% last month.

You see the “Not a National Statistic” Retail Prices Index is suddenly useful when setting things like rail fares or mobile phone contracts. A rough summary is that the ordinary person pays using the higher RPI but only receives ( pensions, tax allowances indexation) the lower CPI. This reminds me that the gap is 1% which gets little publicity. Indeed the gap between our old inflation measure and the new one continues to be much wider than the change in the target.

The annual rate for RPIX, the all items RPI excluding mortgage interest payments (MIPs) index, is 3.9%, up from 3.8% last month.

As a final note UK new car prices edged higher as used car prices nudged lower. I mention this because there are falling prices in the US leading to worries about the car loans situation.

 

Welcome relief for UK real wages from lower inflation numbers

Today is inflation day in the UK as we get the official data for consumer, producer and house price inflation. In case you were wondering why they all come out on one day  meaning that some details get ignored in the melee ( mostly producer price inflation) well that is the point! Previously when the data were released separately there were potentially three days of embarrassment for the government and establishment which they have reduced to just one. Job done in a way.

However even before we get today’s numbers the subject is in the news in several ways. From the BBC.

Motorists are being saddled with the fastest year-on-year rise in insurance premiums since records began five years ago, the industry has warned. Average car insurance premiums have gone up by 11% in the past year, according to the Association of British Insurers (ABI). The typical bill for an annual policy is now £484, it said.

One of my themes which is institutionalised inflation is on the march here.

The ABI says the change in the discount rate is the main reason behind the rise, but also blames the latest increase in insurance premium tax which went up from 10% to 12% on 1 June…….That is why the government reduced the discount rate to -0.75%.

I have included the discount rate as it is a consequence of the way Bank of England QE has driven real bond yields into negative territory. Oh what a tangled web, and that is before we get to the plague of false claims and deliberate accidents which mar this area and drive up premiums.

Buttering us up

An odd feature of the current phase is high butter prices which stretch well beyond the UK as this from @Welt indicates.

price has risen this week in Germany by another 30 Cent or 20% to 1.79€, highest price ever after WWII.

In France there are worries about rises in croissant prices and maybe even a shortage of them. The causes are in essence the farming boom/bust cycle combined with a rise in demand as the Financial Times explains.

 

The combination of falling milk output in key producing countries and adverse weather sent the international butter price to a record high in June, according to the UN Food and Agricultural Organization…..

 

Raphael Moreau, a food analyst at Euromonitor, says that butter consumption has been lifted by demand for “natural” products among shoppers as they move away from spreads such as margarine. “In the UK, butter consumption has also been supported by the home-baking boom,” he says.

So far this has yet to be fully reflected in consumer prices but as supply is inelastic or inflexible in the short-term this could carry on for the rest of 2017.

The other side of the coin

On the 13th of June I pointed out this about the trend for producer prices.

Fortunately we see that the main push is beginning to fade.

Also adding to this is that the UK Pound has been improving against the US Dollar. Friday’s surge that took it to US $1.31 is of course after today’s numbers were calculated but the lower UK Pound will be a decreasing effect as we go forwards.

Today’s Numbers

There was a very welcome change today.

The Consumer Prices Index (CPI) 12-month rate was 2.6% in June 2017, down from 2.9% in May 2017.

The drivers of this were as follows.

Fuel prices fell by 1.1% between May and June 2017, the fourth successive month of price decreases. This contrasts with the same period last year, when fuel prices rose by 2.2%. Taken together, these movements resulted in prices for motor fuels making a large downward contribution to the change in the rate………Recreational and cultural goods and services, with prices overall falling by 0.1% between May and June 2017, compared with a rise of 0.6% a year ago.

If we look at the pattern actually there was no inflation in the month itself.

The all items CPI is 103.3, unchanged from last month.

Oh and the period where the oil price drove goods prices lower is over as we see that goods and services inflation are now pretty much the same.

The CPI all goods index annual rate is 2.6%, down from 2.9% last month. ……..The CPI all services index annual rate is 2.7%, down from 2.8% last month.

Looking Ahead

As we noted last month the pressure coming from higher producer price inflation is looking like it is fading.

Factory gate prices (output prices) rose 3.3% on the year to June 2017 from 3.6% in May 2017, which is the slowest rate prices have increased since December 2016…….Input prices rose 9.9% on the year to June 2017 from 12.1% in May 2017, meaning the annual rate has fallen 10 percentage points since January 2017.

This is mostly about one thing.

Inputs of crude oil is the main driver of the recent slowing of input price inflation as annual price growth for crude oil fell from 88.9% in February 2017 to 9.1% in June 2017.

Two factors are at play here as we see the impact of the oil price no longer falling and the UK Pound/Dollar exchange rate which has risen from its lows of January.

Housing Inflation

We have an official measure that includes imputed rents as a way of measuring housing costs for owner-occupiers. As you can see they are in fact reducing the level of inflation measured.

The all items CPIH annual rate is 2.6%, down from 2.7% in May. …….The OOH component annual rate is 2.0%, down from 2.1% last month( OOH= Owner Occupied Housing Costs)……..Private rental prices paid by tenants in Great Britain rose by 1.8% in the 12 months to June 2017;

The problem for our official statisticians is that few people have bothered much with the change in its headline measure as this from Adam Parsons the Sky News business correspondent indicates.

CPIH – the stat that nobody wants, and nobody quotes

Oh and it is still not a national statistic which were the grounds for demoting RPI but seem to be ignored in the case of CPIH.

Meanwhile house price inflation is rather different to rental inflation.

Average house prices in the UK have increased by 4.7% in the year to May 2017.

This is why they put imputed rents into the new headline inflation measure! It was always likely to give a lower number because house prices can and indeed have been inflated by the way that mortgage costs have been driven lower by the Bank of England. As to troubles here we saw another sign last week. From whatmortgage.co.uk.

The Bank of England has warned mortgage lenders of the possible risks posed by the recent trend of longer loan terms………Woods highlighted the recent trend of mortgage terms rising from 25 years to 35 years or “even longer”.

Comment

First let me welcome the better inflation data which will help with the economic issue of the day which is real wage growth. Or to be more specific it is seems set to be less poor than it might have been. Good.

In terms of inflation I would like to draw your attention to a problem which the UK establishment does its best to try to sweep under the carpet. This is that the old inflation target called RPIX is at 3.8% but the newer CPI is at 2.6% with the gap now being 1.2% which is very significant. Also there is the issue that we pay things at RPI ( Retail Price Index) currently at 3.5% but only receive CPI currently at 2.6% which is quite an establishment scam. This particularly affects students who find that costs in their loans are escalating into the stratosphere with implications for matters such as mortgage affordability if not final repayment as so many of these will never be repaid.

Looking ahead we are certainly not out of the inflation woods as there are still dangers of higher numbers in the autumn as we note the butter and insurance effects discussed earlier. We do not know what the Pound £ and the oil price will do. As to comparisons with Euro area inflation at 1.3% we get a guide to how much the lower Pound £ has affected our inflation rate which has turned out to be pretty much along the lines I suggested back on the 19th of July last year.

I expect a larger impact on the annual rate of inflation than the Draghi Rule implies and estimate one of say 1%.