Saturday, October 26, 2019

Increasing Valuations of Risk Financial Assets, United States Industrial Production Underperforming Below Trend, Squeeze of Economic Activity by Carry Trades Induced by Zero Interest Rates, United States Housing, United States House Prices, Collapse of United States Dynamism of Income Growth and Employment Creation in the Lost Economic Cycle of the Global Recession with Economic Growth Underperforming Below Trend Worldwide, World Cyclical Slow Growth, Government Intervention in Globalization, and Global Recession Risk: Part II


Increasing Valuations of Risk Financial Assets, United States Industrial Production Underperforming Below Trend, Squeeze of Economic Activity by Carry Trades Induced by Zero Interest Rates, United States Housing, United States House Prices, Collapse of United States Dynamism of Income Growth and Employment Creation in the Lost Economic Cycle of the Global Recession with Economic Growth Underperforming Below Trend Worldwide, World Cyclical Slow Growth, Government Intervention in Globalization, and Global Recession Risk

Carlos M. Pelaez

© Carlos M. Pelaez, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019.

I United States Industrial Production

IIB Squeeze of Economic Activity by Carry Trades Induced by Zero Interest Rates

IIA United States Housing Collapse

IIA1 Sales of New Houses

IIA2 United States House Prices

II IB Collapse of United States Dynamism of Income Growth and Employment Creation in the Lost Economic Cycle of the Global Recession with Economic Growth Underperforming Below Trend Worldwide

III World Financial Turbulence

IV Global Inflation

V World Economic Slowdown

VA United States

VB Japan

VC China

VD Euro Area

VE Germany

VF France

VG Italy

VH United Kingdom

VI Valuation of Risk Financial Assets

VII Economic Indicators

VIII Interest Rates

IX Conclusion

References

Appendixes

Appendix I The Great Inflation

IIIB Appendix on Safe Haven Currencies

IIIC Appendix on Fiscal Compact

IIID Appendix on European Central Bank Large Scale Lender of Last Resort

IIIG Appendix on Deficit Financing of Growth and the Debt Crisis

IIB Squeeze of Economic Activity by Carry Trades Induced by Zero Interest Rates. Long-term economic growth in Japan significantly improved by increasing competitiveness in world markets. Net trade of exports and imports is an important component of the GDP accounts of Japan. Table VB-3 provides quarterly data for net trade, exports and imports of Japan. Net trade had strong positive contributions to GDP growth in Japan in all quarters from IQ2007 to IIQ2009 with exception of IVQ2008, IIIQ2008 and IQ2009. The US recession is dated by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) as beginning in IVQ2007 (Dec) and ending in IIQ2009 (Jun) (http://www.nber.org/cycles/cyclesmain.html). Net trade contributions helped to cushion the economy of Japan from the global recession. Net trade deducted from GDP growth in six of the nine quarters from IVQ2010 to IQ2012. The only strong contribution of net trade was 3.6 percent in IIIQ2011. Net trade added 0.8 percent in IQ2012, deducting 1.9 percent in IIQ2012. Net trade deducted 1.9 percent in IIIQ2012. Net traded deducted 0.4 percent in IVQ2012. Net trade added 1.5 percentage points to GDP growth in IQ2013 but deducted 0.1 percentage points in IIQ2013, deducting 1.4 percentage points in IIIQ2013 and 2.2 percentage points in IVQ2013. Net trade deducted 0.7 percentage points from GDP growth in IQ2014. Net trade added 4.0 percentage points to GDP growth in IIQ2014 and deducted 0.3 percentage points in IIIQ2014. Net trade added 1.5 percentage points to GDP growth in IVQ2014. Net trade contributed 0.2 percentage points to GDP growth in IQ2015 and deducted 0.5-percentage points in IIQ2015. Net trade deducted 0.6 percentage points from GDP growth in IIIQ2015. Net trade contributed 0.0 percentage points to GDP growth in IVQ2015 and added 1.4 percentage points in IQ2016. Net trade contributed 0.5 percentage points to GDP growth in IIQ2016. Net trade added 1.3 percentage points to GDP growth in IIIQ2016 and contributed 1.4 percentage points in IVQ2016.  Net trade contributed 0.4 percentage points to GDP growth in IQ2017 and deducted 1.0 percentage points in IIQ2017. Net trade contributed 2.1 percentage points to GDP growth in IIIQ2017 and deducted 0.2 percentage-point in IVQ2017. Net trade contributed 0.4 percentage points to GDP growth in IQ2018 and contributed 0.0 percentage points in IIQ2018. Net trade deducted 0.7 percentage points from GDP growth in IIIQ2018 and deducted 1.6 percentage points in IVQ2018. Net trade contributed 1.7 percentage points to GDP growth in IQ2019 with export contraction deducting 1.4 percent and import contraction contributing 3.2 percent. Net trade deducted 1.2 percentage points from GDP growth in IIQ2019. Private consumption assumed the role of driver of Japan’s economic growth but should moderate as in most mature economies.

Table VB-3, Japan, Contributions to Changes in Real GDP, Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rates (SAAR), %

Net Trade

Exports

Imports

2019

I

1.7

-1.4

3.2

II

-1.2

0.0

-1.2

2018

I

0.4

0.7

-0.4

II

0.0

0.6

-0.6

III

-0.7

-1.5

0.8

IV

-1.6

0.9

-2.5

2017

I

0.4

1.4

-1.0

II

-1.0

0.1

-1.0

III

2.1

1.5

0.6

IV

-0.2

1.3

-1.6

2016

I

1.4

0.4

1.0

II

0.5

-0.3

0.8

III

1.3

1.6

-0.3

IV

1.4

1.8

-0.4

2015

I

0.2

0.8

-0.7

II

-0.5

-2.4

1.9

III

-0.6

1.7

-2.3

IV

0.0

-0.7

0.7

2014

I

-0.7

3.8

-4.5

II

4.0

0.9

3.1

III

-0.3

1.0

-1.3

IV

1.5

2.1

-0.6

2013

I

1.5

1.7

-0.3

II

-0.1

2.0

-2.1

III

-1.4

0.0

-1.3

IV

-2.2

-0.2

-2.0

2012

I

0.8

1.8

-1.0

II

-1.9

-0.6

-1.4

III

-1.9

-2.2

0.2

IV

-0.4

-2.0

1.6

2011

I

-1.3

-0.6

-0.7

II

-4.3

-4.6

0.4

III

3.6

5.4

-1.9

IV

-2.8

-1.7

-1.1

2010

I

2.0

3.3

-1.3

II

0.3

2.8

-2.5

III

0.6

1.7

-1.0

IV

-0.2

0.2

-0.4

2009

I

-4.7

-16.2

11.5

II

7.5

4.7

2.9

III

2.1

5.3

-3.1

IV

2.8

4.2

-1.4

2008

I

0.9

1.8

-0.9

II

0.5

-1.4

1.9

III

-0.1

0.1

-0.2

IV

-10.4

-9.2

-1.2

2007

I

1.1

1.6

-0.5

II

0.7

1.6

-0.8

III

2.2

1.7

0.5

IV

1.2

2.0

-0.8

Source: Japan Economic and Social Research Institute, Cabinet Office

http://www.esri.cao.go.jp/index-e.html

http://www.esri.cao.go.jp/en/sna/sokuhou/sokuhou_top.html

There was milder increase in Japan’s export corporate goods price index during the global recession in 2008 but similar sharp decline during the bank balance sheets effect in late 2008, as shown in Chart IV-5 of the Bank of Japan. Japan exports industrial goods whose prices have been less dynamic than those of commodities and raw materials. As a result, the export CGPI on the yen basis in Chart IV-5 trends down with oscillations after a brief rise in the final part of the recession in 2009. The export corporate goods price index on the yen basis fell from 93.9 in Jun 2009 to 84.1 in Jan 2012 or minus 10.4 percent and increased to 91.6 in Sep 2019 for gain of 8.9 percent relative to Jan 2012 and decrease of 2.4 percent relative to Jun 2009. The choice of Jun 2009 is designed to capture the reversal of risk aversion beginning in Sep 2008 with the announcement of toxic assets in banks that would be withdrawn with the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) (Cochrane and Zingales 2009). Reversal of risk aversion in the form of flight to the USD and obligations of the US government opened the way to renewed carry trades from zero interest rates to exposures in risk financial assets such as commodities. Japan exports industrial products and imports commodities and raw materials. The recovery from the global recession began in the third quarter of 2009.

clip_image001

Chart IV-5, Japan, Export Corporate Goods Price Index, Monthly, Yen Basis, 2008-2019

Source: Bank of Japan

http://www.stat-search.boj.or.jp/index_en.html

Chart IV-5A provides the export corporate goods price index on the basis of the contract currency. The export corporate goods price index on the basis of the contract currency increased from 105.9 in Jun 2009 to 111.5 in Apr 2012 or 5.3 percent but dropped to 98.9 in Sep 2019 or minus 11.3 percent relative to Apr 2012 and fell 6.6 percent to 98.9 in Sep 2019 relative to Jun 2009.

clip_image002

Chart IV-5A, Japan, Export Corporate Goods Price Index, Monthly, Contract Currency Basis, 2008-2019

Source: Bank of Japan

http://www.stat-search.boj.or.jp/index_en.html

Japan imports primary commodities and raw materials. As a result, the import corporate goods price index on the yen basis in Chart IV-6 shows an upward trend after declining from the increase during the global recession in 2008 driven by carry trades from fed funds rates. The index increases with carry trades from zero interest rates into commodity futures and declines during risk aversion from late 2008 into beginning of 2008 originating in doubts about soundness of US bank balance sheets. Measurement that is more careful should show that the terms of trade of Japan, export prices relative to import prices, declined during the commodity shocks originating in unconventional monetary policy. The decline of the terms of trade restricted potential growth of income in Japan (for the relation of terms of trade and growth see Pelaez 1979, 1976a). The import corporate goods price index on the yen basis increased from 82.4 in Jun 2009 to 99.6 in Apr 2012 or 20.9 percent and to 92.3 in Sep 2019 or decrease of 7.3 percent relative to Apr 2012 and increase of 12.0 percent relative to Jun 2009.

clip_image003

Chart IV-6A, Japan, Import Corporate Goods Price Index, Monthly, Contract Currency Basis, 2008-2019

Source: Bank of Japan

http://www.stat-search.boj.or.jp/index_en.html

Chart IV-6A provides the import corporate goods price index on the contract currency basis. The import corporate goods price index on the basis of the contract currency increased from 95.0 in Jun 2009 to 131.6 in Apr 2012 or 38.5 percent and to 101.1 in Sep 2019 or minus 23.2 percent relative to Apr 2012 and increase of 6.4 percent relative to Jun 2009. There is evident deterioration of the terms of trade of Japan: the export corporate goods price index on the basis of the contract currency decreased 6.6 percent from Jun 2009 to Sep 2019 while the import corporate goods price index increased 6.4 percent. Prices of Japan’s exports of corporate goods, mostly industrial products, increased only 5.3 percent from Jun 2009 to Apr 2012, while imports of corporate goods, mostly commodities and raw materials increased 38.5 percent. Unconventional monetary policy induces carry trades from zero interest rates to exposures in commodities that squeeze economic activity of industrial countries by increases in prices of imported commodities and raw materials during periods without risk aversion. Reversals of carry trades during periods of risk aversion decrease prices of exported commodities and raw materials that squeeze economic activity in economies exporting commodities and raw materials. Devaluation of the dollar by unconventional monetary policy could increase US competitiveness in world markets but economic activity is squeezed by increases in prices of imported commodities and raw materials. Unconventional monetary policy causes instability worldwide instead of the mission of central banks of promoting financial and economic stability.

clip_image004

Chart IV-6A, Japan, Import Corporate Goods Price Index, Monthly, Contract Currency Basis, 2008-2019

Source: Bank of Japan

http://www.stat-search.boj.or.jp/index_en.html

Table IV-6B provides the Bank of Japan’s Corporate Goods Price indexes of exports and imports on the yen and contract bases from Jan 2008 to Sep 2019. There are oscillations of the indexes that are shown vividly in the four charts above. For the entire period from Jan 2008 to Sep 2019, the export index on the contract currency basis decreased 7.8 percent and decreased 11.3 percent on the yen basis. For the entire period from Jan 2008 to Sep 2019, the import price index decreased 8.8 percent on the contract currency basis and decreased 11.9 percent on the yen basis. During significant part of the expansion period, prices of Japan’s exports of corporate goods on the contract currency, mostly industrial products, increased only 5.3 percent from Jun 2009 to Apr 2012, while prices of imports of corporate goods on the contract currency, mostly commodities and raw materials, increased 38.5 percent. The charts show sharp deteriorations in relative prices of exports to prices of imports during multiple periods. Price margins of Japan’s producers are subject to periodic squeezes resulting from carry trades from zero interest rates of monetary policy to exposures in commodities.

Table IV-6B, Japan, Exports and Imports Corporate Goods Price Index, Contract Currency Basis and Yen Basis

X-CC

X-Y

M-CC

M-Y

2008/01

107.3

103.3

110.9

104.8

2008/02

107.9

103.9

112.8

106.2

2008/03

108.7

100.7

115.1

103.4

2008/04

109.9

103.2

121.3

110.3

2008/05

110.7

105

124.9

114.9

2008/06

111.9

108

131.6

123.6

2008/07

113.2

109.2

135

126.8

2008/08

112.1

109.2

135.6

129.5

2008/09

111

105.8

129

120.8

2008/10

108.3

98.1

120.2

107

2008/11

106.6

93.5

107.7

93.2

2008/12

105.9

90

98.4

81.9

2009/01

106

89

94.3

77.9

2009/02

105.4

89.6

94.4

79

2009/03

105.2

93.2

93.8

81.9

2009/04

105.5

94.5

93

81.9

2009/05

105.4

92.9

92.5

80

2009/06

105.9

93.9

95

82.4

2009/07

105.4

92.2

98.3

83.7

2009/08

106.3

93.4

98.7

84.4

2009/09

106.3

91.4

100.2

83.4

2009/10

106

90.5

100.2

82.8

2009/11

106.4

90.2

102.2

83.5

2009/12

106.3

90.1

105.1

85.9

2010/01

107.5

91.4

106.8

88.1

2010/02

107.8

90.9

107.5

87.9

2010/03

107.8

91.1

106.8

87.4

2010/04

108.7

93.6

110

92.1

2010/05

108.9

92.1

112

92.4

2010/06

108.2

90.9

110.2

90.1

2010/07

107.5

88.6

110

87.9

2010/08

107.2

87.1

109.6

85.9

2010/09

107.5

86.8

110.2

85.6

2010/10

108.2

86.3

110.7

84.4

2010/11

108.9

87.1

113

86.5

2010/12

109.4

88

115

88.6

2011/01

110.4

88.2

118.1

90.4

2011/02

111.3

89

120.1

91.9

2011/03

111.9

89.1

123.2

93.6

2011/04

112.6

91

127.7

98.6

2011/05

112.3

89.4

130.9

99

2011/06

112.2

88.8

129.4

97.3

2011/07

112

88

130.3

97.1

2011/08

112

86.4

130.6

95.2

2011/09

112.1

86

128.9

93.6

2011/10

111.4

85.2

128.4

93

2011/11

110.2

84.8

127.1

92.8

2011/12

109.7

84.6

127.9

93.6

2012/01

110.1

84.1

126.7

91.8

2012/02

110.7

85.7

127.6

93.7

2012/03

111.3

88.8

130.3

99.5

2012/04

111.5

88.3

131.6

99.6

2012/05

110.6

86.2

130.1

96.7

2012/06

109.6

85

126.9

94

2012/07

108.8

84.1

123.4

91.2

2012/08

109.1

84.2

123.8

91.3

2012/09

109.2

84.2

126.3

92.7

2012/10

109.3

84.7

125.4

92.7

2012/11

109.1

85.8

124.7

93.8

2012/12

108.9

87.7

124.9

96.5

2013/01

109.2

91.6

125.4

101.7

2013/02

109.7

94.8

126.5

105.9

2013/03

109.5

95.4

126.8

107.5

2013/04

108.3

96.2

125.7

109.1

2013/05

107.7

97.6

124

110.4

2013/06

107.3

94.9

123.4

106.8

2013/07

107.2

96.2

122.9

108.2

2013/08

107

94.9

123.2

106.9

2013/09

107

95.9

124.5

109.2

2013/10

107.3

95.5

124.6

108.3

2013/11

107.2

96.6

124.6

110

2013/12

107.2

98.8

125.4

113.6

2014/01

107.3

99

126

114.6

2014/02

106.9

97.7

125.4

112.5

2014/03

106.6

97.6

124.9

112.2

2014/04

106.3

97.5

124.1

111.8

2014/05

106.2

96.8

123.8

110.9

2014/06

105.9

96.7

123.9

111.2

2014/07

106

96.5

123.9

110.9

2014/08

106.1

97.3

123.7

111.6

2014/09

105.9

99.3

122.8

114

2014/10

105.2

99.1

120.7

112.7

2014/11

104.8

103.4

117.8

115.9

2014/12

103.8

104.1

113.8

114

2015/01

102.2

101.2

108.2

106.6

2015/02

101.2

100.1

102.1

100.7

2015/03

101.3

100.9

103.1

102.6

2015/04

101.1

100.2

102

101

2015/05

101.4

101.4

101.6

101.5

2015/06

101.3

102.9

102.5

104.3

2015/07

100.6

101.7

101.5

102.9

2015/08

99.8

100.9

99

100.4

2015/09

98.6

98.2

96.6

96.2

2015/10

97.9

97.3

95.5

95

2015/11

97.5

98

94.9

95.7

2015/12

97.1

97.3

92.9

93.2

2016/01

96.4

94.7

89.9

88.3

2016/02

95.9

92.7

87.5

84.4

2016/03

96.1

92

87.3

83.2

2016/04

96.4

91

88.2

82.4

2016/05

96.5

90.6

88.6

82.4

2016/06

96.5

88.8

89.9

81.6

2016/07

96.9

88.2

90.8

81.5

2016/08

96.9

87.1

90.7

79.9

2016/09

97

87.5

91.1

80.7

2016/10

97.4

88.6

91.1

81.6

2016/11

98.1

91.2

93.8

86.3

2016/12

98.7

95.5

93.7

90.5

2017/01

99.4

95.6

96.1

92.1

2017/02

99.8

95.3

97.6

92.5

2017/03

100.3

95.7

98.4

93.3

2017/04

99.8

93.7

98.3

91.4

2017/05

99.4

94.6

98.1

92.6

2017/06

99.2

93.9

97.1

91

2017/07

99.3

94.9

96.3

91.2

2017/08

99.9

94.4

96.5

90.1

2017/09

100.5

95.5

97.8

91.8

2017/10

101.2

97.2

99.2

94.3

2017/11

101.5

97.4

100.3

95.4

2017/12

101.7

97.7

102.1

97.1

2018/01

101.9

97.1

102.9

96.7

2018/02

102.4

96.1

104.9

96.6

2018/03

102.6

95.2

104.4

94.9

2018/04

102.2

95.5

104.7

96.1

2018/05

102.7

96.9

106.3

98.8

2018/06

102.7

97

108.3

100.8

2018/07

102.4

97.4

108.3

101.8

2018/08

102.3

97

108

101.2

2018/09

102.2

97.4

108

101.8

2018/10

102.4

98

109.2

103.5

2018/11

102.1

97.9

109.7

104.3

2018/12

100.8

96.2

105.8

100.1

2019/01

100

93.7

102.6

94.8

2019/02

100.2

94.6

102.7

95.9

2019/03

100.4

95.3

103.7

97.2

2019/04

100.7

95.7

103.7

97.6

2019/05

100.5

94.4

104.4

96.9

2019/06

99.8

93

103.5

95

2019/07

99.4

92.6

101.4

93.2

2019/08

99.4

91.5

102.3

92.7

2019/09

98.9

91.6

101.1

92.3

Note: X-CC: Exports Contract Currency; X-Y: Exports Yen; M-CC: Imports Contract; M-Y: Imports Yen

Source: Bank of Japan

http://www.boj.or.jp/en/statistics/index.htm/

Japan also experienced sharp increase in inflation during the 1970s as in the episode of the Great Inflation in the US. Monetary policy focused on accommodating higher inflation, with emphasis solely on the mandate of promoting employment, has been blamed as deliberate or because of model error or imperfect measurement for creating the Great Inflation (http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2011/05/slowing-growth-global-inflation-great.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2011/04/new-economics-of-rose-garden-turned.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/is-there-second-act-of-us-great.html  and Appendix I The Great Inflation; see Taylor 1993, 1997, 1998LB, 1999, 2012FP, 2012Mar27, 2012Mar28, 2012JMCB and http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/01/rules-versus-discretionary-authorities.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/rules-versus-discretionary-authorities.html). A remarkable similarity with US experience is the sharp rise of the CGPI of Japan in 2008 driven by carry trades from policy interest rates rapidly falling to zero to exposures in commodity futures during a global recession. Japan had the same sharp waves of consumer price inflation during the 1970s as in the US (see Chart IV-5A and associated table at: 9/22/19 https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/09/uncertain-fomc-outlook-of-monetary.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/08/contraction-of-valuations-of-risk.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/global-manufacturing-stress-world.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/06/fomc-outlook-uncertainty-central-bank.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/05/contraction-of-risk-financial-assets.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/04/high-levels-of-valuations-of-risk.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/03/inverted-yield-curve-of-treasury.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/02/revaluation-of-yuanus-dollar-exchange.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/01/delays-in-updating-united-states.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/12/increase-of-interest-rates-by-monetary.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/11/weaker-world-economic-growth-with.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/10/contraction-of-valuations-of-risk.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/09/world-inflation-waves-united-states.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/08/revision-of-united-states-national.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/07/continuing-gradual-increases-in-fed.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/06/world-inflation-waves-united-states.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/05/dollar-strengthening-world-inflation.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/04/dollar-appreciation-mediocre-cyclical.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/03/mediocre-cyclical-united-states_31.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/03/mediocre-cyclical-united-states.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/02/twenty-four-million-unemployed-or.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/12/dollar-devaluation-cyclically.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/12/twenty-one-million-unemployed-or.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/10/dollar-revaluation-and-increase-of.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/10/destruction-of-household-nonfinancial.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/dollar-devaluation-and-interest-rate.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/07/data-dependent-monetary-policy-with_30.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/07/dollar-devaluation-and-rising-yields.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/05/mediocre-cyclical-united-states.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/04/dollar-devaluation-mediocre-cyclical.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/04/mediocre-cyclical-economic-growth-with.html https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/03/rising-valuations-of-risk-financial.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/01/rising-valuations-of-risk-financial.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/01/rules-versus-discretionary-authorities.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/11/dollar-revaluation-rising-yields-and.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/mediocre-cyclical-united-states_30.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/mediocre-cyclical-united-states.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/08/and-as-ever-economic-outlook-is.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/07/business-fixed-investment-has-been-soft.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/07/financial-asset-values-rebound-from.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/05/appropriate-for-fed-to-increase.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/03/contraction-of-united-states-corporate.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/02/mediocre-cyclical-united-states.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/01/closely-monitoring-global-economic-and.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/12/dollar-revaluation-and-decreasing.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/11/dollar-revaluation-constraining.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/11/interest-rate-increase-considered.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/11/interest-rate-increase-considered.htmlhttp://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/09/monetary-policy-designed-on-measurable.html

http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/08/fluctuations-of-global-financial.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/08/turbulence-of-valuations-of-financial_77.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/06/international-valuations-of-financial_29.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/06/dollar-revaluation-squeezing-corporate_97.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/dollar-devaluation-and-carry-trade.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/03/dollar-revaluation-and-financial-risk.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/03/irrational-exuberance-mediocre-cyclical.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/02/financial-and-international.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2014/12/valuations-of-risk-financial-assets.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2014/09/financial-volatility-mediocre-cyclical.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2014/09/geopolitical-and-financial-risks_71.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2014/03/financial-uncertainty-mediocre-cyclical_8145.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2014/03/financial-risks-slow-cyclical-united.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2014/02/mediocre-cyclical-united-states.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/collapse-of-united-states-dynamism-of.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/exit-risks-of-zero-interest-rates-world_1.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2013/10/twenty-eight-million-unemployed-or_561.html and at http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2013/09/increasing-interest-rate-risk_1.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2012/07/recovery-without-jobs-stagnating-real_09.html).

clip_image005

Chart IV-7, Japan, Domestic Corporate Goods Price Index, Monthly, 1960-2019

Source: Bank of Japan

http://www.stat-search.boj.or.jp/index_en.html

The producer price index of the US from 1960 to 2019 in Chart IV-8 shows various periods of more rapid or less rapid inflation but no bumps. The major event is the decline in 2008 when risk aversion because of the global recession caused the collapse of oil prices from $148/barrel to less than $80/barrel with most other commodity prices also collapsing. The event had nothing in common with explanations of deflation but rather with the concentration of risk exposures in commodities after the decline of stock market indexes. Eventually, there was a flight to government securities because of the fears of insolvency of banks caused by statements supporting proposals for withdrawal of toxic assets from bank balance sheets in the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), as explained by Cochrane and Zingales (2009). The bump in 2008 with decline in 2009 is consistent with the view that zero interest rates with subdued risk aversion induce carry trades into commodity futures.

clip_image006

Chart IV-8, US, Producer Price Index Finished Goods, Monthly, 1960-2019

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

http://www.bls.gov/ppi/

Further insight into inflation of the corporate goods price index (CGPI) of Japan is in Table IV-7. The increase in the tax on value added of consumption caused sharp increases in prices across all segments. Petroleum and coal with weight of 6.0 percent decreased 0.1 percent in Sep 2019 and decreased 11.9 percent in 12 months. Japan exports manufactured products and imports raw materials and commodities such that the country’s terms of trade, or export prices relative to import prices, deteriorate during commodity price increases. In contrast, prices of production machinery, with weight of 4.1 percent, decreased 0.1 percent in Sep 2019 and increased 1.3 percent in 12 months. In general, most manufactured products had been experiencing negative or low increases in prices while inflation rates have been high in 12 months for products originating in raw materials and commodities. The reversal of carry trades in commodity futures caused decrease in prices of commodities and raw materials while prices of manufactures stabilized. Ironically, unconventional monetary policy of zero interest rates and quantitative easing that intended to increase aggregate demand and GDP growth deteriorated the terms of trade of advanced economies with adverse effects on real income (for analysis of terms of trade and growth see Pelaez (1979, 1976a). There are now inflation effects of the intentional policy of devaluing the yen and recent collapse of commodity prices followed by increases.

Table IV-7, Japan, Corporate Goods Prices and Selected Components, % Weights, Month and 12 Months ∆%

Sep 2019

Weight

Month ∆%

12 Month ∆%

Total

1000.0

0.0

-1.1

Food, Beverages

141.6

0.0

0.7

Petroleum & Coal

59.5

-0.1

-11.9

Production Machinery

41.1

-0.1

1.3

Electronic Components

24.5

0.2

-0.1

Electric Power, Gas & Water

67.1

-0.7

0.3

Iron & Steel

51.7

0.0

1.2

Chemicals

89.2

0.0

-4.8

Transport
Equipment

140.7

-0.1

-0.5

Source: Bank of Japan

http://www.boj.or.jp/en/statistics/index.htm/

Percentage point contributions to change of the corporate goods price index (CGPI) in Sep 2019 are in Table IV-8, divided into domestic, export and import segments. In the domestic CGPI, changing 0.0 percent in Sep 2019, the energy shock is evident in the deduction of 0.05 percentage points by electric power, gas and water products in reversal carry trades of exposures in commodity futures. The exports CGPI decreased 0.5 percent on the basis of the contract currency with deduction of 0.05 percentage points by electric and electronic products. The imports CGPI decreased 1.2 percent on the contract currency basis. Petroleum, coal and natural gas deducted 1.23 percentage points. Shocks of risk aversion cause unwinding carry trades that result in declining commodity prices with resulting downward pressure on price indexes. The volatility of inflation adversely affects financial and economic decisions worldwide.

Table IV-8, Japan, Percentage Point Contributions to Change of Corporate Goods Price Index

Groups Sep 2019

Contribution to Change Percentage Points

A. Domestic Corporate Goods Price Index

Monthly Change: 
0.0%

Agriculture, Forestry & Fishery Products

0.04

Metal Products

0.02

Electric Power, Gas & Water

-0.05

Scrap & Waste

-0.03

Information & Communications Equipment

-0.01

B. Export Price Index

Monthly Change:   
-0.5 % contract currency

Chemicals & Related Products

-0.15

Metals & Related Products

-0.14

Other Primary Products & Manufactured Goods

-0.11

Electric & Electronic Products

-0.05

General Purpose, Production & Business Oriented Machinery

-0.03

C. Import Price Index

Monthly Change: -1.2% contract currency basis

Petroleum, Coal & Natural Gas

-1.23

Chemicals & Related Products

-0.06

Other Primary Products & Manufactured Goods

-0.04

Electric & Electronic Products

-0.03

Metals & Related Products

0.11

Beverages & Foods and Agriculture Products for Food

0.04

Transportation Equipment

0.02

Source: Bank of Japan

http://www.boj.or.jp/en/statistics/index.htm/

There are two categories of responses in the Empire State Manufacturing Survey of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (https://www.newyorkfed.org/survey/empire/empiresurvey_overview.html): current conditions and expectations for the next six months. There are responses in the survey for two types of prices: prices received or inputs of production and prices paid or sales prices of products. Table IV-5 provides indexes for the two categories and within them for the two types of prices from Dec 2010 to Oct 2019. The index of current prices paid or costs of inputs moved from 16.1 in Dec 2012 to 23.1 in Oct 2019 while the index of current prices received or sales prices moved from 1.1 in Dec 2012 to 6.3 in Oct 2019. The farther the index is from the area of no change at zero, the faster the rate of change. Prices paid or costs of inputs at 23.1 in Oct 2019 are expanding at faster pace than prices received or of sales of products at 6.3. The index of future prices paid or expectations of costs of inputs in the next six months moved from 51.6 in Dec 2012 to 42.5 in Oct 2019 while the index of future prices received or expectation of sales prices in the next six months moved from 25.8 in Dec 2012 to 21.3 in Oct 2019. Prices paid or of inputs at 42.5 in Oct 2019 are expected to increase at a faster pace in the next six months than prices received or prices of sales products at 21.3 in Oct 2019. Prices of sales of finished products are less dynamic than prices of costs of inputs during waves of increases. Prices of costs of costs of inputs fall less rapidly than prices of sales of finished products during waves of price decreases. As a result, margins of prices of sales less costs of inputs oscillate with typical deterioration against producers, forcing companies to manage tightly costs and labor inputs. Instability of sales/costs margins discourages investment and hiring.

Table IV-5, US, FRBNY Empire State Manufacturing Survey, Diffusion Indexes, Prices Paid and Prices Received, SA

Current Prices Paid

Current Prices Received

Future Prices Paid

Future Prices Received

12/31/2010

28.4

3.4

58

38.6

1/31/2011

35.8

15.8

60

42.1

2/28/2011

45.8

16.9

55.4

27.7

3/31/2011

53.2

20.8

71.4

36.4

4/30/2011

57.7

26.9

56.4

38.5

5/31/2011

69.9

28

68.8

35.5

6/30/2011

56.1

11.2

55.1

19.4

7/31/2011

43.3

5.6

51.1

30

8/31/2011

28.3

2.2

42.4

15.2

9/30/2011

32.6

8.7

53.3

22.8

10/31/2011

22.5

4.5

40.4

18

11/30/2011

18.3

6.1

36.6

25.6

12/31/2011

24.4

3.5

57

36

1/31/2012

26.4

23.1

53.8

30.8

2/29/2012

25.9

15.3

62.4

34.1

3/31/2012

50.6

13.6

66.7

32.1

4/30/2012

45.8

19.3

50.6

22.9

5/31/2012

37.3

12

57.8

22.9

6/30/2012

19.6

1

34

17.5

7/31/2012

7.4

3.7

35.8

16

8/31/2012

16.5

2.4

31.8

14.1

9/30/2012

19.1

5.3

40.4

23.4

10/31/2012

17.2

4.3

44.1

24.7

11/30/2012

14.6

5.6

39.3

15.7

12/31/2012

16.1

1.1

51.6

25.8

1/31/2013

22.6

10.8

38.7

21.5

2/28/2013

26.3

8.1

44.4

13.1

3/31/2013

25.8

2.2

50.5

23.7

4/30/2013

28.4

5.7

44.3

14.8

5/31/2013

20.5

4.5

29.5

14.8

6/30/2013

21

11.3

45.2

17.7

7/31/2013

17.4

1.1

28.3

12

8/31/2013

20.5

3.6

41

19.3

9/30/2013

21.5

8.6

39.8

24.7

10/31/2013

21.7

2.4

45.8

25.3

11/30/2013

17.1

-3.9

42.1

17.1

12/31/2013

15.7

3.6

48.2

27.7

1/31/2014

36.6

13.4

45.1

23.2

2/28/2014

25

15

40

23.8

3/31/2014

21.2

2.4

43.5

25.9

4/30/2014

22.4

10.2

33.7

14.3

5/31/2014

19.8

6.6

31.9

14.3

6/30/2014

17.2

4.3

36.6

16.1

7/31/2014

25

6.8

37.5

18.2

8/31/2014

27.3

8

42

21.6

9/30/2014

23.9

17.4

43.5

32.6

10/31/2014

11.4

6.8

42

26.1

11/30/2014

10.6

0

41.5

25.5

12/31/2014

10.4

6.3

40.6

32.3

1/31/2015

12.6

12.6

33.7

15.8

2/28/2015

14.6

3.4

27

5.6

3/31/2015

12.4

8.2

32

12.4

4/30/2015

19.1

4.3

38.3

13.8

5/31/2015

9.4

1

26

7.3

6/30/2015

9.6

1

24

5.8

7/31/2015

7.4

5.3

27.7

6.4

8/31/2015

7.3

0.9

34.5

10.9

9/30/2015

4.1

-5.2

28.9

7.2

10/31/2015

0.9

-8.5

27.4

7.5

11/30/2015

4.5

-4.5

29.1

11.8

12/31/2015

4

-4

27.3

20.2

1/31/2016

16

4

31

12

2/29/2016

3

-5

14.9

4

3/31/2016

3

-5.9

19.8

7.9

4/30/2016

19.2

2.9

27.9

5.8

5/31/2016

16.7

-3.1

28.1

6.3

6/30/2016

18.4

-1

29.6

7.1

7/31/2016

18.7

1.1

26.4

7.7

8/31/2016

15.5

2.1

25.8

9.3

9/30/2016

17

1.8

41.1

20.5

10/31/2016

22.6

4.7

35.8

30.2

11/30/2016

15.5

2.7

39.1

20.9

12/31/2016

22.6

3.5

42.6

22.6

1/31/2017

36.1

17.6

50.4

27.7

2/28/2017

37.8

19.4

38.8

25.5

3/31/2017

31

8.8

41.6

19.5

4/30/2017

32.8

12.4

37.2

25.5

5/31/2017

20.9

4.5

38.1

22.4

6/30/2017

20

10.8

33.1

13.8

7/31/2017

21.3

11

30.7

15.7

8/31/2017

31

6.2

33.3

21.7

9/30/2017

35.8

13.8

42.3

18.7

10/31/2017

27.3

7

41.4

25

11/30/2017

24.6

9.2

48.5

23.8

12/31/2017

29.7

11.6

50

27.5

1/31/2018

36.2

21.7

52.9

31.2

2/28/2018

48.6

21.5

52.1

25.7

3/31/2018

50.3

22.4

55.9

28

4/30/2018

47.4

20.7

54.8

31.1

5/31/2018

54

23

54

29.5

6/30/2018

52.7

23.3

51.2

27.1

7/31/2018

42.7

22.2

48.7

28.2

8/31/2018

45.2

20

53.3

26.7

9/30/2018

46.3

16.3

56.1

30.9

10/31/2018

42

14.3

52.9

23.5

11/30/2018

44.5

13.1

59.1

31.4

12/31/2018

39.7

12.8

51.9

27.6

1/31/2019

35.9

13.1

47.6

28.3

2/28/2019

27.1

22.9

37.1

30.7

3/31/2019

34.1

18.1

40.6

23.9

4/30/2019

27.3

14

37.1

16.1

5/31/2019

26.2

12.4

33.1

17.2

6/30/2019

27.8

6.8

36.8

12.8

7/31/2019

25.5

5.8

39.4

18.2

8/31/2019

23.2

4.5

38.1

12.9

9/30/2019

29.4

9.2

42.5

17

10/31/2019

23.1

6.3

42.5

21.3

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of New York

http://www.ny.frb.org/survey/empire/empiresurvey_overview.html

Price indexes of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Outlook Survey are in Table IV-5A. As in inflation waves throughout the world (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/10/dollar-depreciation-fluctuating.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/09/uncertain-fomc-outlook-of-monetary.html) indexes of both current and expectations of future prices paid and received were quite high until May 2011. Prices paid, or inputs, were more dynamic, reflecting carry trades from zero interest rates to commodity futures. All indexes softened after May 2011 with even decline of prices received in Aug 2011 during the first round of risk aversion. Current and future price indexes have increased again but not back to the intensity in the beginning of 2011 because of risk aversion frustrating carry trades even induced by zero interest rates. The index of prices paid or prices of inputs moved from 21.1 in Dec 2012 to 16.8 in Oct 2019. The index of current prices received was minus 2.4 in Apr 2013, indicating decrease of prices received. The index of current prices received decreased from 9.1 in Dec 2012 to minus 4.8 in Sep 2015, decreasing to minus 3.4 in Feb 2016. The index of current prices received was 16.4 in Oct 2019. The farther the index is from the area of no change at zero, the faster the rate of change. The index of current prices paid or costs of inputs at 16.8 in Oct 2019 indicates faster expansion than the index of current prices received or sales prices of production in Oct 2019, showing 16.4. Prices paid indicate faster expansion than prices received during most of the history of the index. The index of future prices paid moved to 36.2 in Oct 2019 from 42.0 in Dec 2012 while the index of future prices received moved from 21.7 in Dec 2012 to 29.7 in Oct 2019. Expectations are incorporating faster increases in prices of inputs or costs of production, 36.2 in Oct 2019, than of sales prices of produced goods, 29.7 in Oct 2019, forcing companies to manage tightly costs and labor inputs. Volatility of margins of sales/costs discourages investment and hiring.

Table IV-5A, US, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey, Current and Future Prices Paid and Prices Received, SA

Current Prices Paid

Current Prices Received

Future Prices Paid

Future Prices Received

Dec-10

42.7

5.3

56.3

24.2

Jan-11

48.3

12.6

58.8

34.6

Feb-11

61.4

13.7

68.1

31.6

Mar-11

59.2

17.9

61.5

33.5

Apr-11

52.7

22.9

56.4

36.4

May-11

51.2

20.6

54.8

28.5

Jun-11

36

6.1

40.7

6.8

Jul-11

34.1

5.7

48.2

17.2

Aug-11

23.5

-3.2

42.7

22.8

Sep-11

30.1

6.4

38.4

20.5

Oct-11

22.8

1.7

41.4

27.6

Nov-11

21.8

5.2

34.5

26.2

Dec-11

25

5.6

42.8

21.1

Jan-12

26.1

9.3

47.9

21.8

Feb-12

33.4

10.4

50.9

26.4

Mar-12

17.4

6.9

38.7

24.8

Apr-12

21.8

9.6

37

25.2

May-12

10.1

1.1

40.4

9.2

Jun-12

1.1

-6.4

32.8

16.9

Jul-12

8.1

3.3

27.3

20.3

Aug-12

16.3

6.9

35

23.9

Sep-12

13

2.8

38.4

24.7

Oct-12

17.4

4.8

44.3

14.9

Nov-12

22.2

4.8

45.9

10.6

Dec-12

21.1

9.1

42

21.7

Jan-13

13

0.8

35.2

21.7

Feb-13

12.9

0.3

34.8

23.2

Mar-13

13.3

1.1

35.3

20.4

Apr-13

11.6

-2.4

31

16.8

May-13

12.5

0.4

35.4

19.4

Jun-13

16.7

11.2

29.6

24.2

Jul-13

18.9

5.6

40.2

24.7

Aug-13

17.8

12.8

34.2

23.1

Sep-13

22.3

11.8

37.4

27.1

Oct-13

18.1

9.3

41.8

34.1

Nov-13

23.5

6.7

41.1

36.1

Dec-13

17.6

9.2

40.2

28.1

Jan-14

20.1

8.4

37.7

13.7

Feb-14

16.3

10.2

28.6

19.8

Mar-14

21.1

6.8

33.7

20.6

Apr-14

20.9

10

37.8

21.4

May-14

26.5

17.2

39.2

29.6

Jun-14

25.7

9.3

42.3

30

Jul-14

30.4

14.1

36.6

21.7

Aug-14

21.8

6.1

45

27.7

Sep-14

21.9

7.9

39.3

25.7

Oct-14

24.7

17.4

31.3

21.2

Nov-14

14.5

8.8

32.9

18.1

Dec-14

16.2

12.4

25.5

19.7

Jan-15

12

2.2

31

20.9

Feb-15

6

3.3

34

22.6

Mar-15

1.1

-5.7

30.2

9.7

Apr-15

0.5

-3.4

18.8

14.2

May-15

-14.2

-7.4

24

20.4

Jun-15

9.1

-0.4

39

12.2

Jul-15

17.3

0.4

33.8

16.1

Aug-15

3.3

-3.4

35

8

Sep-15

-2.2

-4.8

26.3

5.1

Oct-15

0.1

-0.5

18

8.2

Nov-15

-6.7

-1.6

23.8

9.4

Dec-15

-7.2

-4.5

24.5

13.7

Jan-16

-1.2

-3.7

19.6

11.5

Feb-16

-3.3

-3.4

12.2

4.6

Mar-16

-1.8

1.3

23.7

14.3

Apr-16

11.5

4

33.7

22.2

May-16

13.6

10.6

25.7

14.6

Jun-16

20.4

1.6

35.8

17.6

Jul-16

12.5

1.3

28.4

22.6

Aug-16

19.4

6.8

31.8

12.7

Sep-16

21.8

10.7

42.7

32.8

Oct-16

11.2

-0.7

41.6

27

Nov-16

27.5

19.3

38.6

28.6

Dec-16

30.8

11.2

45.1

29.6

Jan-17

33.2

24.7

48.5

27.9

Feb-17

29.4

12.3

46.2

24.5

Mar-17

39.2

18.9

53.5

38.4

Apr-17

30.3

14

33

29

May-17

24.6

13.1

43.9

26.4

Jun-17

23.4

17.9

42.3

28.8

Jul-17

19.2

8.6

48.1

30.3

Aug-17

21.9

13.3

37.5

36.6

Sep-17

35.9

24.4

50.4

34

Oct-17

41.3

16.2

59.9

39.6

Nov-17

38.7

12.3

54.7

42

Dec-17

28.2

15

56.6

41.5

Jan-18

35

24.1

55

44.6

Feb-18

44.7

24.5

63.5

48.7

Mar-18

42.6

21.1

62

50.3

Apr-18

53.1

28.3

63.7

47

May-18

51

33.5

62.1

36.4

Jun-18

50.7

31.9

62.1

54.8

Jul-18

60

35

60.1

50.8

Aug-18

55.2

31.9

60.3

58

Sep-18

42.6

22.6

53.1

44.9

Oct-18

42

26.5

56.3

51.1

Nov-18

41.2

25.3

60.3

57.6

Dec-18

38.9

29

60.9

47.9

Jan-19

32.7

24.8

39.9

34.1

Feb-19

21.8

27.7

39.8

29.7

Mar-19

19.7

24.7

47.3

32.4

Apr-19

21.6

20

26

25.4

May-19

23.1

17.5

42.3

38.6

Jun-19

12.9

0.6

30.2

24.4

Jul-19

16.1

9.5

35.3

34.1

Aug-19

12.8

13

39

27.8

Sep-19

33

20.8

48.7

36.3

Oct-19

16.8

16.4

36.2

29.7

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-1 of the Business Outlook Survey of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Outlook Survey provides the diffusion index of current prices paid or prices of inputs from 2006 to 2019. Recession dates are in shaded areas. In the middle of deep global contraction after IVQ2007, input prices continued to increase in speculative carry trades from central bank policy rates falling toward zero into commodities futures. The index peaked above 70 in the second half of 2008. Inflation of inputs moderated significantly during the shock of risk aversion in late 2008, even falling briefly into contraction territory below zero during several months in 2009 in the flight away from risk financial assets into US government securities (Cochrane and Zingales 2009) that unwound carry trades. Return of risk appetite induced carry trade with significant increase until return of risk aversion in the first round of the European sovereign debt crisis in Apr 2010. Carry trades returned during risk appetite in expectation that the European sovereign debt crisis was resolved. The various inflation waves originating in carry trades induced by zero interest rates with alternating episodes of risk aversion are mirrored in the prices of inputs after 2011, in particular after Aug 2012 with the announcement of the Outright Monetary Transactions Program of the European Central Bank (http://www.ecb.int/press/pr/date/2012/html/pr120906_1.en.html). Subsequent risk aversion and flows of capital away from commodities into stocks and high-yield bonds caused sharp decline in the index of prices paid followed by another recent rebound with marginal decline and new increase. The index falls, rebounds and falls again in the final segment but there are no episodes of contraction after 2009 with exception of minus 14.2 in May 2015, minus 2.2 in Sep 2015, 0.1 in Oct 2015, minus 6.7 in Nov 2015 and minus 7.2 in Dec 2015. The reading for the index in Jan 2016 is minus 1.2 and minus 3.3 for Feb 2016. The index is minus 1.8 in Mar 2016 and 11.5 in Apr 2016, increasing at 13.6 in May 2016 and 20.4 in Jun 2016. The index reached 12.5 in Jul 2016, 19.4 in Aug 2016 and 21.8 in Sep 2016. The index was 11.2 in Oct 2016 and 16.8 in Oct 2019.

clip_image007

Chart IV-1, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2 of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Outlook Survey provides the diffusion index of current prices received from 2006 to 2019. The significant difference between the index of current prices paid in Chart IV-1 and the index of current prices received in Chart IV-2 is that increases in prices paid are significantly sharper than increases in prices received. There were several periods of negative readings of prices received from 2010 to 2016. Prices paid increased at 1.1 in Mar 2015 while prices received contracted at 5.7. There were several contractions of prices paid: 7.4 in May 2015 for prices received with faster contraction of 14.2 of prices paid; minus 2.2 for prices paid in Sep 2015 with minus 4.8 for prices received; and 0.1 for prices paid in Oct 2015 with minus 0.5 for prices received. The index of prices received fell to minus 1.6 in Nov 2015 with minus 6.7 for prices paid and to minus 4.5 in Dec 2015 with minus 7.2 for prices paid. The index of prices received fell to minus 3.4 in Feb 2016 with minus 3.3 for prices paid. The index of prices paid decreased at 1.8 in Mar 2016 with increase at 1.3 for prices received. Prices paid moved to 16.8 in Sep 2019 while prices received moved to 16.4. Prices received relative to prices paid deteriorate most of the time largely because of the carry trades from zero interest rates to commodity futures. Profit margins of business are compressed intermittently by fluctuations of commodity prices induced by unconventional monetary policy of zero interest rates, frustrating production, investment and hiring decisions of business, which is precisely the opposite outcome pursued by unconventional monetary policy.

clip_image008

Chart IV-2, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2A of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia shows current prices paid and current prices received from Jan 2007 to Mar 2017. Current prices paid jumped ahead of current prices received during the contraction from IVQ2007 to IIQ2009 through the carry trade from zero interest rates to exposures in commodity derivatives. There is the same behavior during most of the cyclical expansion after IIIQ2009. Rebalancing of financial investment portfolios away from commodities into equities explains the recent weakness of prices paid. There is a new ongoing carry trade into commodity futures.

clip_image009

Chart IV-2A, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Current Prices Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2B of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia shows Current and Future Prices Received of the Business Outlook Survey from 2007 to Jun 2017. There is correlation in the direction of the indexes. The six-month forecast is typically above current prices received. There is upward trend in both indexes in the final segment with wide fluctuations.

clip_image010

Chart IV-2B, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Received and Future Prices Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2C of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia shows Current and Future Prices Received of the Business Outlook Survey from 2007 to Jul 2017. There is correlation in the direction of the indexes. The six-month forecast is typically above current prices received. There is upward trend in both indexes in the final segment with wide fluctuations.

clip_image011

Chart IV-2c, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current and Future Prices Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2D of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia shows Current Prices Paid and Current Prices Received of the Business Outlook Survey from 2007 to Sep 2017. Current prices paid are typically above prices received.

clip_image013

Chart IV-2d, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Current Prices Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2DE of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia shows Current Prices Paid and Current Prices Received of the Business Outlook Survey from 2007 to Oct 2017. Current prices paid are typically above prices received.

clip_image015

Chart IV-2de, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2DEf of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia shows current prices paid and received of the Business Outlook Survey from 2007 to Dec 2017.Current prices paid are mostly above current prices received. There is upward trend in both indexes in the final segment with wide fluctuations.

clip_image017

Chart IV-2DEf, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices and Future Prices Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2Def1 of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia shows current prices paid and received of the Business Outlook Survey from 2007 to Jan 2018. There is correlation in the direction of the indexes. The six-month forecast is typically above current prices received. There is upward trend in both indexes in the final segment with wide fluctuations.

clip_image018

Chart IV-2dEf1, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices and Future Prices Paid Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2Def2 of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia shows current prices paid and received of the Business Outlook Survey from 2007 to Feb 2018. There is correlation in the direction of the indexes. Prices paid are typically above prices received.

clip_image020

Chart IV-2df2, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Piad and Future Prices Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2DEF3 of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook survey provides current prices paid and received from 2007 to Mar 2018 with prices paid typically above prices received. The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia states: “Price increases for purchased inputs were reported by 44 percent of the manufacturers this month. The prices paid diffusion index fell 2 points to 42.6 but remains near last month’s reading, which was the highest since 2011 (see Chart 2). The current prices received index, reflecting the manufacturers own prices, declined 3 points to a reading of 20.7” (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2018/bos0318).

clip_image022

Chart IV-2dEf3, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2DEF4 of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook survey provides current prices paid and received from 2007 to Apr 2018 with prices paid typically above prices received. The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia states: “Price increases for purchased inputs were reported by 59 percent of the manufacturers this month, up notably from 44 percent in March. The prices paid diffusion index increased 14 points to the highest reading since Mar 2011 (see Chart 2). The current prices received index, reflecting the manufacturers own prices, increased 9 points to a reading of 29.8, its highest reading since May 2008” (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2018/bos0418).

clip_image024

Chart IV-2dEf4, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2DEF5 of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook survey provides current prices paid and received from 2007 to May 2018 with prices paid typically above prices received. The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia states: “Price increases for purchased inputs were reported by 55 percent of the manufacturers this month, down slightly from 59 percent in April. The prices paid diffusion index fell 4 points but remains at an elevated level (see Chart 2). The current prices received index, reflecting the manufacturers’ own prices, increased 7 points to a reading of 36.4, its second consecutive month of increase and highest reading since February 1989.” (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2018/bos0518).

clip_image026

Chart IV-2dEf5, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2DEF5 of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook survey provides current prices paid and received from 2007 to Jun 2018 with prices paid typically above prices received. The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia states: “The firms continued to report higher prices for both purchased inputs and their own manufactured goods, although the survey’s price indicators fell modestly from their May readings. Price increases for purchased inputs were reported by 54 percent of the manufacturers this month, but the prices paid diffusion index edged 1 point lower (see Chart 2). The current prices received index, reflecting the manufacturers’ own prices, decreased 3 points but remains at a high reading of 33.2. Nearly 34 percent of the firms reported higher prices for their manufactured goods.” (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2018/bos0618).

clip_image028

Chart IV-2dEf5, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

Chart IV-2DEF5 of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook survey provides current prices paid and received from 2007 to Jul 2018 with prices paid typically above prices received. The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia states: “The manufacturers continued to report higher prices for both purchased inputs and their own manufactured goods. Price increases for purchased inputs were reported by 63 percent of the manufacturers this month, up from 54 percent last month. The index has now risen 30 points since January (see Chart 2). The current prices received index, reflecting the manufacturers’ own prices, increased 3 points. Over 36 percent of the firms reported higher prices for their manufactured goods this month.” (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2018/bos0718).

clip_image030

Chart IV-2dEf6, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Aug 2018 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2018/bos0818): “The survey’s current price measures moderated slightly but remain elevated, indicating that price increases for both purchased inputs and the firms’ own manufactured goods remain widespread. The prices paid index fell 8 points. Price increases for purchased inputs were reported by 63 percent of the manufacturers this month. Nearly 35 percent of the firms reported higher prices for their own manufactured goods this month, although the prices received index fell 3 points. In this month’s special questions, the firms were asked to forecast the changes in the prices of their own products and for U.S. consumers over the next four quarters. Regarding their own prices, the firms’ median forecast was for an increase of 3.0 percent, the same as when the same question was last asked in May. The firms expect their employee compensation costs (wages plus benefits on a per employee basis) to rise 3.0 percent over the next four quarters, the same as the previous forecast. When asked about the rate of inflation for U.S. consumers over the next year, the firms’ median forecast was 3.0 percent, slightly higher than the 2.5 percent projected in the previous survey. The firms’ forecast for the long-run (10-year average) inflation rate was also 3.0 percent.”

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Sep 2018 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2018/bos0918): “The survey’s diffusion indexes for prices remained positive but decreased from their readings in August (see Chart 2). On the cost side, 44 percent of the firms reported increases in the prices paid for inputs, down from 63 percent in August, and the prices paid index decreased 15 points to 39.6. With respect to prices received for firms’ own manufactured goods, 25 percent of the firms reported higher prices compared with 35 percent last month. The prices received index decreased 14 points.”

clip_image032

Chart IV-2dEf6, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Oct 2018 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2018/bos1018): “The survey’s diffusion indexes for prices remained positive but lower than their readings for most of this year (see Chart 2). On the cost side, 42 percent of the firms reported increases in the prices paid for inputs, and the prices paid index, which had fallen 15 points last month, decreased 1 point to 38.2. With respect to prices received for firms’ own manufactured goods, 27 percent of the firms reported higher prices compared with 3 percent that reported decreases. The prices received index increased 5 points.”

clip_image034

Chart IV-2Oct18, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Nov 2018 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2018/bos1118): “The survey’s diffusion indexes for prices remained positive but lower than their readings for most of this year (see Chart 2). With respect to prices received for firms’ own manufactured goods, 24 percent of the firms reported higher prices compared with 2 percent that reported decreases. The prices received index decreased 2 points. On the cost side, 41 percent of the firms reported increases in the prices paid for inputs. The prices paid index edged up 1 point but remains 24 points lower than its peak in July.”

clip_image036

Chart IV-2Nov18, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Dec 2018 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2018/bos1218): “The survey’s diffusion indexes for prices remained positive, suggesting continued increases in firms’ input prices and the prices for their own manufactured goods. On the cost side, 42 percent of the firms reported increases in the prices paid for inputs. The prices paid index edged down 1 point and remains 25 points below its peak in July (see Chart 2). The prices received index increased 4 points to 26.2, its highest reading in four months, but 10 points below its peak in May.”

clip_image038

Chart IV-2Dec18, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Jan 2019 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2019/bos0119): “The survey’s diffusion indexes for prices remained positive but decreased from their readings in December. On the cost side, the prices paid index decreased 6 points to 32.7. The index has been trending down since last July and is at its lowest reading in 13 months (see Chart 2). With respect to prices received for firms’ own manufactured goods, 29 percent of the firms reported higher prices, and 4 percent reported lower prices. The prices received index decreased 4 points to 24.8.”

clip_image040

Chart IV-2Jan19, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Feb 2019 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2019/bos0219): “Price pressures originating from purchased inputs continued to abate. The prices paid index decreased 11 points to 21.8. The index has been trending down since last July and is now at its lowest reading since July 2017 (see Chart 2). Over 28 percent of the firms reported higher input prices this month, down from 40 percent last month. With respect to prices received for firms’ own manufactured goods, almost 33 percent of the firms reported higher prices, and 5 percent reported lower prices. The prices received index increased 3 points to 27.7.”

clip_image042

Chart IV-2Feb19, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Mar 2019 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2019/bos0319): “Price pressures arising from purchased inputs continued to ease. The prices paid index decreased 2 points to 19.7. The prices paid index declined for the eighth consecutive month and is at its lowest reading since July 2017 (see Chart 2). Nearly 24 percent of the firms reported higher input prices this month, down from 28 percent last month. With respect to prices received for firms’ own manufactured goods, 26 percent of the firms reported higher prices, down from 33 percent last month. The prices received index decreased 3 points to 24.7.”

clip_image044

Chart IV-2Mar19, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Apr 2019 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2019/bos0419): “With respect to prices received for firms’ own manufactured goods, the prices received index decreased 5 points to 20.0, its lowest reading since December 2017. Nearly 23 percent of the firms reported higher prices, down from 26 percent last month. The prices paid index increased 2 points to 21.6, its first increase in 9 months (see Chart 2). Over 26 percent of the firms reported higher input prices this month, while 5 percent reported lower input prices.”

clip_image046

Chart IV-2Apr19, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for May 2019 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2019/bos0519): “In this month’s special questions, the firms were asked to forecast the changes in the prices of their own products and for U.S. consumers over the next four quarters. Regarding their own prices, the firms’ median forecast was for an increase of 2.8 percent, about the same as when the question was last asked in February. The firms expect their employee compensation costs (wages plus benefits on a per employee basis) to rise 3.0 percent over the next four quarters, the same as the previous forecast. When asked about the rate of inflation for U.S. consumers over the next year, the firms’ median forecast was 2.5 percent, an increase from 2.3 percent in the previous quarter. The firms’ median forecast for the long-run (10-year average) inflation rate remained steady at 2.5 percent.”

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Jun 2019 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2019/bos0619): “The current prices received index, reflecting the manufacturers’ own prices, declined nearly 17 points to a reading of 0.6, its lowest reading since October 2016 (see Chart 2). Price increases for manufacturers’ own goods were reported by 10 percent of the firms this month, down from 23 percent last month. Price increases for purchased inputs were reported by 28 percent of the manufacturers this month, and the prices paid diffusion index decreased 10 points to 12.9, also its lowest reading since October 2016.”

clip_image047

Chart IV-2Jun19, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Jul 2019 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2019/bos0719): “The prices paid and prices received indexes both increased this month but remained well below their readings over the past few years. The current prices received index, reflecting the manufacturers’ own prices, increased 9 points to a reading of 9.5. Price increases for manufacturers’ own goods were reported by 16 percent of the firms this month, up from 10 percent last month. Price increases for purchased inputs were reported by 29 percent of the manufacturers this month, but 13 percent reported price decreases. The prices paid diffusion index increased 3 points to 16.1.”

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Aug 2019 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2019/bos0819): “The firms continued to report increases in the prices paid for inputs. The percentage of firms reporting increases in input prices (25 percent) remained higher than the percentage reporting decreases (12 percent). The prices paid diffusion index decreased 3 points and remains well below readings over the past two and a half years. The current prices received index, reflecting the manufacturers’ own prices, increased 4 points to a reading of 13.0 but is also still well below readings of the past few years.”

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Sep 2019 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2019/bos0919): Price increases were more widespread this month. On the cost side, nearly 38 percent of the firms reported increases in the prices paid for inputs this month, up from 25 percent in August. The prices paid index increased 20 points to 33.0, its highest reading since December 2018 (see Chart 2). With respect to prices received for firms’ own manufactured goods, 26 percent of the firms reported higher prices, up from 16 percent in August. The diffusion index for prices received increased 8 points to 20.8, its highest reading since March.

clip_image049

Chart IV-2Sep19, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

The Business Outlook survey of the FRB of Philadelphia for Sep 2019 states (https://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2019/bos1019): “The firms continued to report overall increases in the prices paid for inputs, but the prices paid index fell 16 points to 16.8. Nearly 24 percent of the respondents reported higher input prices, down from 38 percent in September (see Chart 2). The current prices received index, reflecting the manufacturers’ own prices, decreased 4 points to a reading of 16.4.”

clip_image051

Chart IV-2Oct19, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Outlook Survey Current Prices Paid and Received Diffusion Index SA

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

https://www.philadelphiafed.org/

II I United States Housing Collapse. Data and other information continue to provide depressed conditions in the US housing market in a longer perspective, with recent improvement at the margin. Table IIB-1 shows sales of new houses in the US at seasonally adjusted annual equivalent rate (SAAR). The US Census Bureau revised all seasonally-adjusted new house sales from 2014 to 2019 with the report for Apr 2019 on May 23, 2019 (https://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/pdf/newressales.pdf). House sales fell in 45 of 105 months from Jan 2011 to Sep 2019 with monthly declines of 5 in 2011, 4 in 2012, 5 in 2013, 6 in 2014, 4 in 2015, 6 in 2016, 4 in 2017, 7 in 2018 and 4 in 2019. In Jan-Apr 2012, house sales increased at the annual equivalent rate of 11.8 percent and at 22.3 percent in May-Sep 2012. There was significant strength in Sep-Dec 2011 with annual equivalent rate of 48.4 percent. Sales of new houses fell at 7.0 percent in Oct 2012 with increase of 9.5 percent in Nov 2012. Sales of new houses rebounded 11.8 percent in Jan 2013 with annual equivalent rate of 55.7 percent from Oct 2012 to Jan 2013 because of the increase at 11.8 percent in Jan 2013. New house sales decreased at annual equivalent 3.0 percent in Feb-Mar 2013. New house sales weakened, decreasing at 3.1 percent in annual equivalent from Apr to Dec 2013 with significant volatility illustrated by decline of 20.2 percent in Jul 2013 and increase of 10.2 percent in Oct 2013. New house sales fell 2.9 percent in Dec 2013. New house sales increased 2.3 percent in Jan 2014 and fell 5.2 percent in Feb 2014, decreasing 3.6 percent in Mar 2014. New house sales decreased 0.5 percent in Apr 2014 and increased 11.9 percent in May 2014. New house sales fell 7.3 percent in Jun 2014 and decreased 3.8 percent in Jul 2014. New house sales increased at 8.0 percent in Jan-Aug 2014. New house sales jumped 13.4 percent in Aug 2014 and increased 3.1 percent in Sep 2014. New House sales increased 1.3 percent in Oct 2014 and fell 7.1 percent in Nov 2014. House sales fell at the annual equivalent rate of 11.4 percent in Sep-Nov 2014. New house sales increased 12.4 percent in Dec 2014 and increased 4.2 percent in Jan 2015. Sales of new houses increased 5.0 percent in Feb

2015 and fell 11.8 percent in Mar 2015. House sales increased 4.4 percent in Apr 2015. The annual equivalent rate in Dec 2014-Apr 2015 was 34.8 percent. New house sales decreased 0.2 percent in May 2015 and fell 4.0 percent in Jun 2015, increasing 4.0 percent in Jul 2015. New house sales fell at annual equivalent 1.4 percent in May-Jul 2015. New house sales increased 4.4 percent in Aug 2015 and fell 12.1 percent in Sep 2015. New house sales decreased at annual equivalent 40.3 percent in Aug-Sep 2015. New house sales increased 5.0 percent in Oct 2015 and increased 5.0 percent in Nov 2015, increasing 7.9 percent in Dec 2015. New house sales increased at the annual equivalent rate of 100.3 percent in Oct-Dec 2015. New house sales decreased 5.7 percent in Jan 2016 at the annual equivalent rate of minus 50.6 percent. New house sales increased 0.8 percent in Feb 2016 and increased 1.5 percent in Mar 2016. New house sales jumped at 7.2 percent in Apr 2016. New house sales increased at the annual equivalent rate of 44.7 percent in Feb-Apr 2016. New house sales decreased 1.4 percent in May 2016 and increased 1.3 percent in Jun 2016. New house sales jumped 12.1 percent in Jul 2016. New house sales increased at the annual equivalent rate of 57.2 percent in May-Jul 2016. New house sales fell 7.1 percent in Aug 2016 and decreased 2.9 percent in Sep 2016, increasing 1.9 percent in Oct 2016. New house sales fell at the annual equivalent rate of minus 28.6 percent in Aug-Oct 2016. New house sales decreased at 1.6 percent in Nov 2016 and fell at 1.9 percent in Dec 2016. New house sales fell at 19.1 percent annual equivalent in Nov-Dec 2016. New house sales increased at 5.5 percent in Jan 2017 and increased at 2.0 percent in Feb 2017. New house sales increased at 55.3 percent in Jan-Feb 2017. New house sales increased at 4.0 percent in Mar 2017 and fell at 6.5 percent in Apr 2017. New house sales decreased at annual equivalent 15.5 percent in Mar-Apr 2017. New house sales increased at 3.1 percent in May 2017 and increased at 3.3 percent in Jun 2017. New house sales increased at annual equivalent 45.9 percent in May-Jun 2017. New house sales decreased at 10.4 percent in Jul 2017 and increased at 1.1 percent in Aug 2017, increasing at 13.6 percent in Sep 2017. New house sales increased at annual equivalent 12.1 percent in Jul-Sep 2017. New house sales decreased at 1.7 percent in Oct 2017. New house sales increased at 13.3 percent in Nov 2017. New house sales increased at annual equivalent 90.9 percent in Oct-Nov 2017. New house sales decreased at 8.3 percent in Dec 2017 and decreased at 4.3 percent in Jan 2018. New house sales decreased at annual equivalent 54.3 percent in Dec 2017-Jan 2018. New house sales increased at 2.5 percent in Feb 2018, increasing at 1.6 percent in Mar 2018. New house sales increased at 27.6 percent in Feb-Mar 2018. New house sales decreased at 3.8 percent in Apr 2018 and increased at 3.3 percent in May 2018. New House sales decreased at annual equivalent 3.7 percent in Apr-May 2018. New house sales decreased at 4.9 percent in Jun 2018 and decreased at 1.5 percent in Jul 2018. New House sales decreased at annual equivalent 32.4 percent in Jun-Jul 2018. New house sales decreased at 0.8 percent in Aug 2018 and increased at 0.5 percent in Sep 2018. New house sales decreased at annual equivalent 1.8 percent in Aug-Sep 2018. New house sales fell at 8.2 percent in Oct 2018 and increased at 10.4 percent in Nov 2018. New house sales increased at annual equivalent 8.4 percent in Oct-Nov 2018. New house sales decreased at 8.3 percent in Dec 2018 and increased at 14.2 percent in Jan 2019. New House sales increased at annual equivalent 31.9 percent in Dec 2018-Jan 2019. New house sales increased at 3.9 percent in Feb 2019 and increased at 3.6 percent in Mar 2019. New house sales increased at annual equivalent 55.5 percent in Feb-Mar 2019. New house sales fell at 5.3 percent in Apr 2019 and fell at 8.8 percent in May 2019. New house sales decreased at annual equivalent 58.5 percent in Apr-May 2019. New house sales increased at 21.9 percent in Jun 2019 and decreased at 8.8 percent in Jul 2019. New house sales increased at annual equivalent 88.8 percent in Jun-Jul 2019. New house sales increased at 6.2 percent in Aug 2019 and decreased at 0.7 percent in Sep 2019. New house sales increased at annual equivalent 37.5 percent in Aug-Sep 2019. There are wide monthly oscillations. Robbie Whelan and Conor Dougherty, writing on “Builders fuel home sale rise,” on Feb 26, 2013, published in the Wall Street Journal (http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324338604578327982067761860.html), analyze how builders have provided financial assistance to home buyers, including those short of cash and with weaker credit background, explaining the rise in new home sales and the highest gap between prices of new and existing houses. The 30-year conventional mortgage rate increased from 3.40 on Apr 25, 2013 to 4.58 percent on Aug 22, 2013 (http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h15/data.htm), which could also be a factor in recent weakness with improvement after the rate fell to 4.26 in Nov 2013. The conventional mortgage rate rose to 4.48 percent on Dec 26, 2013 and fell to 4.32 percent on Jan 30, 2014. The conventional mortgage rate increased to 4.37 percent on Feb 26, 2014 and 4.40 percent on Mar 27, 2014. The conventional mortgage rate fell to 4.14 percent on Apr 22, 2014, stabilizing at 4.14 on Jun 26, 2014. The conventional mortgage rate stood at 3.93 percent on Aug 20, 2015 and at 3.91 percent on Sep 17, 2015. The conventional mortgage rate was at 3.79 percent on Oct 22, 2015. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.97 percent on Nov 20, 2015. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.97 percent on Dec 18, 2015, and 3.92 percent on Jan 14, 2016. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.65 percent on Feb 19, 2016. The commercial mortgage rate was 3.73 percent on Mar 17, 2016 and 3.59 percent on Apr 21, 2016. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.58 on May 19, 2016. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.54 percent on Jun 19, 2016 and 3.45 percent on Jul 21, 2016. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.43 percent on Aug 18, 2016 and 3.48 percent on Sep 22, 2016. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.94 on Nov 17, 2016 and 4.30 percent on Dec 22. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.19 percent on Jan 26, 2017 and 4.15 percent on Feb 17, 2017. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.1 percent on Mar 16, 2017. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.97 percent on Apr 20, 2017. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.05 percent on May 18, 2017. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.90 percent on Jun 22, 2017. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.96 percent on Jul 20, 2017. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.90 percent on Aug 18, 2017. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.83 percent on Sep 21, 2017. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.88 percent on Oct 20, 2017. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.92 percent on Nov 22, 2017 and 3.94 on Dec 21, 2017. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.04 percent on Jan 18, 2018. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.40 percent on Feb 22, 2018. The conventional rate was 4.43 percent on Mar 1, 2018. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.45 percent on Mar 22, 2018. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.47 on Apr 19, 2018. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.87 percent in May 31, 2018. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.57 percent on Jun 21, 2018. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.52 percent on Jul 19, 2018. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.53 percent on Aug 16, 2018. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.65 percent on Sep 20, 2018. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.85 percent on Oct 18, 2018. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.81 percent on Nov 21, 2018. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.35 percent in Feb 2019. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.41 percent on Mar 7, 2019. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.06 percent on Mar 28, 2019. The conventional mortgage rate was 4.12 percent on Apr 5, 2019. The conventional mortgage rate was at 4.06 percent on May 23, 2019. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.84 percent on Jun 20, 2019. The conventional mortgage rate was at 3.81 percent on Jul 18, 2019. The conventional mortgage rate was 3.60 on Aug 22, 2019. The conventional mortgage rate measured in a survey by Freddie Mac (http://www.freddiemac.com/pmms/ http://www.freddiemac.com/pmms/abtpmms.htm) is the “interest rate a lender would charge to lend mortgage money to a qualified borrower.

Table IIB-1, US, Sales of New Houses at Seasonally Adjusted (SA) Annual Equivalent Rate, Thousands and % 

SA Annual Rate
Thousands

∆%

Sep 2019

701

-0.7

Aug

706

6.2

AE ∆% Aug-Sep

37.5

Jul

665

-8.8

Jun

729

21.9

AE ∆% Jun-Jul

88.8

May

598

-8.8

Apr

656

-5.3

AE ∆% Apr-May

-58.5

Mar

693

3.6

Feb

669

3.9

AE ∆% Feb-Mar

55.5

Jan

644

14.2

Dec 2018

564

-8.3

AE ∆% Dec-Jan

31.9

Nov

615

10.4

Oct

557

-8.2

AE ∆% Oct-Nov

8.4

Sep

607

0.5

Aug

604

-0.8

AE ∆% Aug-Sep

-1.8

Jul

609

-1.5

Jun

618

-4.9

AE ∆% Jun-Jul

-32.4

May

650

3.3

Apr

629

-3.8

AE ∆% Apr-May

-3.7

Mar

654

1.6

Feb

644

2.5

AE ∆% Feb-Mar

27.6

Jan

628

-4.3

Dec 2017

656

-8.3

AE ∆% Dec-Jan

-54.3

Nov

715

13.3

Oct

631

-1.7

AE ∆% Oct-Nov

90.9

Sep

642

13.6

Aug

565

1.1

Jul

559

-10.4

AE ∆% Jul-Sep

12.1

Jun

624

3.3

May

604

3.1

AE ∆% May -Jun

45.9

Apr

586

-6.5

Mar

627

4.0

AE ∆% Mar-Apr

-15.5

Feb

603

2.0

Jan

591

5.5

AE ∆% Jan-Feb

55.3

Dec 2016

560

-1.9

Nov

571

-1.6

AE ∆% Nov-Dec

-19.1

Oct

580

1.9

Sep

569

-2.9

Aug

586

-7.1

AE ∆% Aug-Oct

-28.6

Jul

631

12.1

Jun

563

1.3

May

556

-1.4

AE ∆% May-Jul

57.2

Apr

564

7.2

Mar

526

1.5

Feb

518

0.8

AE ∆% Feb-Apr

44.7

Jan

514

-5.7

AE ∆% Jan

-50.6

Dec 2015

545

7.9

Nov

505

5.0

Oct

481

5.0

AE ∆% Oct-Dec

100.3

Sep

458

-12.1

Aug

521

4.4

AE ∆% Aug-Sep

-40.3

Jul

499

4.0

Jun

480

-4.0

May

500

-0.2

AE ∆% May-Jul

-1.4

Apr

501

4.4

Mar

480

-11.8

Feb

544

5.0

Jan

518

4.2

Dec 2014

497

12.4

AE ∆% Dec-Apr

34.8

Nov

442

-7.1

Oct

476

1.3

Sep

470

3.1

AE ∆% Sep-Nov

-11.4

Aug

456

13.4

Jul

402

-3.8

Jun

418

-7.3

May

451

11.9

Apr

403

-0.5

Mar

405

-3.6

Feb

420

-5.2

Jan

443

2.3

AE ∆% Jan-Aug

8.0

Dec 2013

433

-2.9

Nov

446

0.5

Oct

444

10.2

Sep

403

5.8

Aug

381

1.6

Jul

375

-20.2

Jun

470

9.8

May

428

-2.9

Apr

441

-0.7

AE ∆% Apr-Dec

-3.1

Mar

444

-0.7

Feb

447

0.2

AE ∆% Feb-Mar

-3.0

Jan

446

11.8

Dec 2012

399

1.8

Nov

392

9.5

Oct

358

-7.0

AE ∆% Oct-Jan

55.7

Sep

385

2.7

Aug

375

1.6

Jul

369

2.5

Jun

360

-2.7

May

370

4.5

AE ∆% May-Sep

22.3

Apr

354

0.0

Mar

354

-3.3

Feb

366

9.3

Jan

335

-1.8

AE ∆% Jan-Apr

11.8

Dec 2011

341

4.0

Nov

328

3.8

Oct

316

3.9

Sep

304

1.7

AE ∆% Sep-Dec

48.4

Aug

299

1.0

Jul

296

-1.7

Jun

301

-1.3

May

305

-1.6

AE ∆% May-Aug

-10.3

Apr

310

3.3

Mar

300

11.1

Feb

270

-12.1

Jan

307

-5.8

AE ∆% Jan-Apr

-14.2

Dec 2010

326

13.6

AE: Annual Equivalent

Source: US Census Bureau

http://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/

There is additional information of the report of new house sales in Table IIB-2. The stock of unsold houses fell from rates of 6 to 8 percent of sales in 2011 to 4 to 5 percent in 2013 and 5.5 percent in Sep 2019. Robbie Whelan and Conor Dougherty, writing on “Builders fuel home sale rise,” on Feb 26, 2013, published in the Wall Street Journal (http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324338604578327982067761860.html), find that inventories of houses have declined as investors acquire distressed houses of higher quality. Median and average house prices oscillate. In Sep 2019, median prices of new houses sold not seasonally adjusted (NSA) decreased 7.9 percent after increasing 5.7 percent in

Aug 2019. Average prices decreased 8.1 percent in Sep 2019 and increased 5.9 percent in Aug 2019. Between Dec 2010 and Sep 2019, median prices increased 24.1 percent, with increases of 6.0 percent in Feb 2016, 4.9 percent in Nov 2015, 2.2 percent in Sep 2015, 13.6 percent in Oct 2014, 4.0 percent in Aug 2014, 4.0 percent in May 2014 and 5.2 percent in Mar 2014. Average prices increased 24.3 percent between Dec 2010 and Sep 2019, with increases of 5.1 percent in Mar 2016, 4.0 percent in Sep 2015, 4.4 percent in Jul 2015 and 18.3 percent in Oct 2014. Between Dec 2010 and Dec 2012, median prices increased 7.1 percent and average prices increased 2.6 percent. Price increases concentrated in 2012 with increase of median prices of 18.2 percent from Dec 2011 to Dec 2012 and of average prices of 13.8 percent. Median prices increased 16.7 percent from Dec 2012 to Dec 2014, with increase of 13.6 percent in Oct 2014, while average prices increased 24.7 percent, with increase of 18.3 percent in Oct 2014. Median prices decreased 1.5 percent from Dec 2014 to Dec 2015 while average prices fell 5.5 percent. Median prices increased 10.1 percent from Dec 2015 to Dec 2016 while average prices increased 8.5 percent. Median prices increased 5.0 percent from Dec 2016 to Dec 2017 while average prices increased 5.3 percent. Median prices decreased 4.0 percent from Dec 2017 to Dec 2018 while average prices decreased 5.2 percent. Median prices decreased 8.8 percent from Sep 2018 to Sep 2019 while average prices decreased 6.1 percent. Robbie Whelan, writing on “New homes hit record as builders cap supply,” on May 24, 2013, published in the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323475304578500973445311276.html?mod=WSJ_economy_LeftTopHighlights), finds that homebuilders are continuing to restrict the number of new homes for sale. Restriction of available new homes for sale increases prices paid by buyers.

Table IIB-2, US, New House Stocks and Median and Average New Homes Sales Price

Unsold*
Stocks in Equiv.
Months
of Sales
SA %

Median
New House Sales Price USD
NSA

Month
∆%

Average New House Sales Price USD
NSA

Month
∆%

Sep 2019

5.5

299,400

-7.9

362,700

-8.1

Aug

5.5

325,200

5.7

394,800

5.9

Jul

5.9

307,600

-1.3

372,900

3.0

Jun

5.4

311,800

-0.3

361,900

-4.5

May

6.7

312,700

-7.8

379,100

-1.6

Apr

6.1

339,000

9.1

385,400

3.4

Mar

5.8

310,600

-3.2

372,700

-2.8

Feb

6.1

320,800

5.0

383,600

6.2

Jan

6.5

305,400

-7.4

361,100

-5.4

Dec 2018

7.4

329,700

6.9

381,800

4.0

Nov

6.5

308,500

-6.0

367,100

-7.0

Oct

7.2

328,300

0.0

394,900

2.2

Sep

6.4

328,300

2.1

386,400

1.4

Aug

6.3

321,400

-1.9

380,900

-2.9

Jul

6.2

327,500

5.5

392,300

6.0

Jun

6.0

310,500

-2.0

370,100

-0.7

May

5.6

316,700

0.7

372,600

-3.2

Apr

5.7

314,400

-6.3

385,100

4.3

Mar

5.4

335,400

2.5

369,200

-1.2

Feb

5.6

327,200

-0.7

373,600

-1.1

Jan

5.6

329,600

-4.0

377,800

-6.2

Dec 2017

5.3

343,300

0.0

402,900

3.7

Nov

4.8

343,400

7.5

388,500

-1.4

Oct

5.4

319,500

-3.6

394,000

3.9

Sep

5.3

331,500

5.5

379,300

2.7

Aug

6.0

314,200

-2.7

369,200

-0.9

Jul

6.0

322,900

2.4

372,400

0.5

Jun

5.3

315,200

-2.6

370,600

-2.1

May

5.4

323,600

4.0

378,400

3.4

Apr

5.5

311,100

-3.3

365,800

-4.8

Mar

5.1

321,700

8.0

384,400

3.8

Feb

5.2

298,000

-5.5

370,500

3.6

Jan

5.2

315,200

-3.6

357,700

-6.5

Dec 2016

5.4

327,000

3.8

382,500

5.3

Nov

5.2

315,000

4.0

363,400

3.2

Oct

5.1

302,800

-3.8

352,200

-3.8

Sep

5.1

314,800

5.3

366,100

3.1

Aug

4.9

298,900

0.5

355,100

0.6

Jul

4.5

297,400

-4.4

353,000

-1.3

Jun

5.2

311,200

5.4

357,800

2.3

May

5.2

295,200

-7.3

349,700

-5.3

Apr

5.2

318,300

5.0

369,300

2.9

Mar

5.5

303,200

-0.9

359,000

5.1

Feb

5.5

305,800

6.0

341,700

-5.4

Jan

5.5

288,400

-2.9

361,200

2.5

Dec 2015

5.1

297,100

-5.0

352,500

-5.5

Nov

5.4

312,600

4.9

373,200

1.2

Oct

5.6

298,000

-0.5

368,900

3.3

Sep

5.9

299,500

2.2

357,200

4.0

Aug

5.0

293,000

0.2

343,300

0.6

Jul

5.2

292,300

2.5

341,200

4.4

Jun

5.4

285,100

-0.8

326,900

-2.8

May

5.0

287,500

-2.4

336,200

-1.2

Apr

5.0

294,500

2.8

340,400

-2.5

Mar

5.1

286,600

0.0

349,300

0.9

Feb

4.5

286,600

-1.8

346,300

-0.6

Jan

4.8

292,000

-3.2

348,300

-6.7

Dec 2014

5.1

301,500

1.1

373,200

7.0

Nov

5.7

298,300

0.4

348,900

-7.6

Oct

5.3

297,000

13.6

377,500

18.3

Sep

5.4

261,500

-10.4

319,100

-10.4

Aug

5.4

291,700

4.0

356,200

3.2

Jul

6.2

280,400

-2.3

345,200

2.1

Jun

5.7

287,000

0.5

338,100

4.5

May

5.2

285,600

4.0

323,500

-0.5

Apr

5.7

274,500

-2.8

325,100

-1.9

Mar

5.6

282,300

5.2

331,500

1.7

Feb

5.3

268,400

-0.5

325,900

-3.4

Jan

5.1

269,800

-2.1

337,300

5.0

Dec 2013

5.2

275,500

-0.6

321,200

-4.3

Nov

5.0

277,100

4.8

335,600

0.0

Oct

4.9

264,300

-2.0

335,700

4.4

Sep

5.4

269,800

5.7

321,400

3.4

Aug

5.5

255,300

-2.6

310,800

-5.8

Jul

5.5

262,200

0.9

329,900

7.8

Jun

4.1

259,800

-1.5

306,100

-2.5

May

4.6

263,700

-5.6

314,000

-6.8

Apr

4.4

279,300

8.5

337,000

12.3

Mar

4.2

257,500

-2.9

300,200

-3.9

Feb

4.1

265,100

5.4

312,500

1.8

Jan

4.0

251,500

-2.6

306,900

2.6

Dec 2012

4.5

258,300

5.4

299,200

2.9

Nov

4.6

245,000

-0.9

290,700

1.9

Oct

4.9

247,200

-2.9

285,400

-4.1

Sep

4.5

254,600

0.6

297,700

-2.6

Aug

4.6

253,200

6.7

305,500

8.2

Jul

4.6

237,400

2.1

282,300

3.9

Jun

4.8

232,600

-2.8

271,800

-3.2

May

4.7

239,200

1.2

280,900

-2.4

Apr

4.9

236,400

-1.4

287,900

1.5

Mar

4.9

239,800

0.0

283,600

3.5

Feb

4.8

239,900

8.2

274,000

3.1

Jan

5.3

221,700

1.4

265,700

1.1

Dec 2011

5.3

218,600

2.0

262,900

5.2

Nov

5.7

214,300

-4.7

250,000

-3.2

Oct

6.0

224,800

3.6

258,300

1.1

Sep

6.3

217,000

-1.2

255,400

-1.5

Aug

6.5

219,600

-4.5

259,300

-4.1

Jul

6.7

229,900

-4.3

270,300

-1.0

Jun

6.6

240,200

8.2

273,100

4.0

May

6.6

222,000

-1.2

262,700

-2.3

Apr

6.7

224,700

1.9

268,900

3.1

Mar

7.2

220,500

0.2

260,800

-0.8

Feb

8.1

220,100

-8.3

262,800

-4.7

Jan

7.3

240,100

-0.5

275,700

-5.5

Dec 2010

7.0

241,200

9.8

291,700

3.5

*Percent of new houses for sale relative to houses sold

Source: US Census Bureau

http://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/

The depressed level of residential construction and new house sales in the US is evident in Table IIB-3 providing new house sales not seasonally adjusted in Jan-Sep of various years. New house sales increased 7.1 percent from Jan-Sep 2018 to Jan-Sep 2019. New house sales increased 12.4 percent from Jan-Sep 2017 to Jan-Sep 2019. Sales of new houses are higher in Jan-Sep 2019 relative to Jan-Sep 2016 with increase of 20.9 percent. Sales of new houses are higher in Jan-Sep 2019 relative to Jan-Sep 2015 with increase of 35.8 percent. Sales of new houses in Jan-Sep 2019 are substantially lower than in many years between 1971 and 2019 except for the years from 2008 to 2018. There are several other increases of 57.3 percent relative to 2014, 59.7 percent relative to Jan-Sep 2013, 85.6 percent relative to Jan-Sep 2012, 126.2 percent relative to Jan-Sep 2011, 105.9 percent relative to Jan-Sep 2010, and 81.1 percent relative to Jan-Sep 2009. New house sales in Jan-Sep 2019 are 31.8 percent higher than in Jan-Sep 2008. Sales of new houses in Jan-Sep 2019 are lower by 16.3 percent relative to Jan-Sep 2007, 37.0 percent relative to 2006, 47.6 percent relative to 2005 and 43.6 percent relative to 2004. The housing boom peaked in 2005 and 2006 when increases in fed funds rates to 5.25 percent in Jun 2006 from 1.0 percent in Jun 2004 affected subprime mortgages that were programmed for refinancing in two or three years on the expectation that price increases forever would raise home equity. Higher home equity would permit refinancing under feasible mortgages incorporating full payment of principal and interest (Gorton 2009EFM; see other references in http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/causes-of-2007-creditdollar-crisis.html). Sales of new houses in Jan-Sep 2019 relative to the same period in 2003 fell 37.9 percent and 29.9 percent relative to the same period in 2002. Similar percentage declines are also for 2019 relative to years from 2000 to 2004. Sales of new houses in Jan-Sep 2019 decreased 11.7 per cent relative to the same period in 1996. The population of the US was 179.3 million in 1960 and 281.4 million in 2000 (Hobbs and Stoops 2002, 16). Detailed historical census reports are available from the US Census Bureau at (http://www.census.gov/population/www/censusdata/hiscendata.html). The estimate of the US population is 418.8 million in 2015. The US population increased by 133.6 percent from 1960 to 2015. The final row of Table IIB-3 reveals catastrophic data: sales of new houses in Jan-Sep 2019 of 527 thousand units are lower by 5.0 percent relative to 555 thousand units of houses sold in Jan-Sep 1973, which is the tenth year when data become available in 1963. The civilian noninstitutional population increased from 122.416 million in 1963 to 257.791 million in 2018, or 110.6 percent (http://www.bls.gov/data/). The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) defines the civilian noninstitutional population (http://www.bls.gov/lau/rdscnp16.htm#cnp): “The civilian noninstitutional population consists of persons 16 years of age and older residing in the 50 States and the District of Columbia who are not inmates of institutions (for example, penal and mental facilities and homes for the aged) and who are not on active duty in the Armed Forces.”

Table IIB-3, US, Sales of New Houses Not Seasonally Adjusted, Thousands and %

Jan-Sep 2019

527

Jan-Sep 2018

492

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/Jan-Sep 2018

7.1

Jan-Sep 2017

469

Jan-Sep 2019/Jan-Sep 2017

12.4

Jan-Sep 2016

436

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/Jan-Sep 2016

20.9

Jan-Sep 2015

388

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/Jan-Sep 2015

35.8

Jan-Sep 2014

335

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/Jan-Sep 2014

57.3

Jan-Sep 2013

330

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/Jan-Sep 2013

59.7

Jan-Sep 2012

284

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/Jan-Sep 2012

85.6

Jan-Sep 2011

233

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/ 
Jan-Sep 2011

126.2

Jan-Sep 2010

256

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/ 
Jan-Sep 2010

105.9

Jan-Sep 2009

291

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/ 
Jan-Sep 2009

81.1

Jan-Sep 2008

400

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/
Jan-Sep 2008

31.8

Jan-Sep 2007

630

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/Jan-Sep 2007

-16.3

Jan-Sep 2006

836

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/Jan-Sep 2006

-37.0

Jan-Sep 2005

1005

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/Jan-Sep 2005

-47.6

Jan-Sep 2004

935

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/
Jan-Sep 2004

-43.6

Jan-Sep 2003

849

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/
Jan-Sep 2003

-37.9

Jan-Sep 2002

752

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/
Jan-Sep 2002

-29.9

Jan-Sep 2001

710

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/
Jan-Sep 2001

-25.8

Jan-Sep 2000

678

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/Jan-Sep 2000

-22.3

Jan-Sep 1996

597

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/
Jan-Sep 1996

-11.7

Jan-Sep 1972

555

∆% Jan-Sep 2019/
Jan-Sep 1973

-5.0

*Computed using unrounded data

Source: US Census Bureau

http://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/

The revised level of 306 thousand new houses sold in 2011 is the lowest since 560 thousand in 1963 in the 53 years of available data while the level of 368 thousand in 2012 is only higher than 323 thousand in 2010. The level of sales of new houses of 437 thousand in 2014 is the lowest from 1963 to 2009 with exception of 412 thousand in 1982 and 436 thousand in 1981. The population of the US increased 129.4 million from 179.3 million in 1960 to 308.7 million in 2010, or 72.2 percent. The estimate of the US population is 418.8 million in 2015. The US population increased 133.6 percent from 1960 to 2015. The civilian noninstitutional population increased from 122.416 million in 1963 to 257.791 million in 2018, or 110.6 percent (http://www.bls.gov/data/). The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) defines the civilian noninstitutional population (http://www.bls.gov/lau/rdscnp16.htm#cnp): “The civilian noninstitutional population consists of persons 16 years of age and older residing in the 50 States and the District of Columbia who are not inmates of institutions (for example, penal and mental facilities and homes for the aged) and who are not on active duty in the Armed Forces.”

Table IIB-4, US, New Houses Sold, NSA Thousands

Period

Sold During Period

1963

560

1964

565

1965

575

1966

461

1967

487

1968

490

1969

448

1970

485

1971

656

1972

718

1973

634

1974

519

1975

549

1976

646

1977

819

1978

817

1979

709

1980

545

1981

436

1982

412

1983

623

1984

639

1985

688

1986

750

1987

671

1988

676

1989

650

1990

534

1991

509

1992

610

1993

666

1994

670

1995

667

1996

757

1997

804

1998

886

1999

880

2000

877

2001

908

2002

973

2003

1,086

2004

1,203

2005

1,283

2006

1,051

2007

776

2008

485

2009

375

2010

323

2011

306

2012

368

2013

429

2014

437

2015

501

2016

561

2017

613

2018

617

Source: US Census Bureau http://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/

Chart IIB-1 of the US Bureau of the Census shows the sharp decline of sales of new houses in the US. Sales rose temporarily until about mid 2010 but then declined to a lower plateau followed by increase, stability and new oscillating increase. There is decrease in the final segment followed by marginal increase.

clip_image053

Chart IIB-1, US, New One-Family Houses Sold in the US, SAAR (Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rate) 

Source: US Census Bureau

https://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/img/c25_curr.gif

Between 1991 and 2001, sales of new houses rose 78.4 percent at the average yearly rate of 6.0 percent, as shown in Table IB-5. Between 1995 and 2005 sales of new houses increased 92.4 percent at the yearly rate of 6.8 percent. There are similar rates in all years from 2000 to 2005. The boom in housing construction and sales began in the 1980s and 1990s. The collapse of real estate culminated several decades of housing subsidies and policies to lower mortgage rates and borrowing terms (Pelaez and Pelaez, Financial Regulation after the Global Recession (2009b), 42-8). Sales of new houses sold in 2018 fell 7.5 percent relative to the same period in 1995 and 51.9 percent relative to 2005.

Table IIB-5, US, Percentage Change and Average Yearly Rate of Growth of Sales of New One-Family Houses

∆%

Average Yearly % Rate

1963-2018

10.2

0.2

1991-2001

78.4

6.0

1995-2005

92.4

6.8

2000-2005

46.3

7.9

1995-2018

-7.5

NA

2000-2018

-29.6

NA

2005-2018

-51.9

NA

NA: Not Applicable

Source: US Census Bureau

http://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/

Chart IIB-2 of the US Bureau of the Census provides the entire monthly sample of new houses sold in the US between Jan 1963 and Sep 2019 without seasonal adjustment. The series is almost stationary until the 1990s. There is sharp upward trend from the early 1990s to 2005-2006 after which new single-family houses sold collapse to levels below those in the beginning of the series.

clip_image055

Chart IIB-2, US, New Single-family Houses Sold, NSA, 1963-2019

Source: US Census Bureau

http://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/

The available historical annual data of median and average prices of new houses sold in the US between 1963 and 2018 is in Table IIB-6. On a yearly basis, median and average prices reached a peak in 2007 and then fell substantially. There is recovery in 2012-2018.

Table IIB-6, US, Median and Average Prices of New Houses Sold, Annual Data

Period

Median

Average

1963

$18,000

$19,300

1964

$18,900

$20,500

1965

$20,000

$21,500

1966

$21,400

$23,300

1967

$22,700

$24,600

1968

$24,700

$26,600

1969

$25,600

$27,900

1970

$23,400

$26,600

1971

$25,200

$28,300

1972

$27,600

$30,500

1973

$32,500

$35,500

1974

$35,900

$38,900

1975

$39,300

$42,600

1976

$44,200

$48,000

1977

$48,800

$54,200

1978

$55,700

$62,500

1979

$62,900

$71,800

1980

$64,600

$76,400

1981

$68,900

$83,000

1982

$69,300

$83,900

1983

$75,300

$89,800

1984

$79,900

$97,600

1985

$84,300

$100,800

1986

$92,000

$111,900

1987

$104,500

$127,200

1988

$112,500

$138,300

1989

$120,000

$148,800

1990

$122,900

$149,800

1991

$120,000

$147,200

1992

$121,500

$144,100

1993

$126,500

$147,700

1994

$130,000

$154,500

1995

$133,900

$158,700

1996

$140,000

$166,400

1997

$146,000

$176,200

1998

$152,500

$181,900

1999

$161,000

$195,600

2000

$169,000

$207,000

2001

$175,200

$213,200

2002

$187,600

$228,700

2003

$195,000

$246,300

2004

$221,000

$274,500

2005

$240,900

$297,000

2006

$246,500

$305,900

2007

$247,900

$313,600

2008

$232,100

$292,600

2009

$216,700

$270,900

2010

$221,800

$272,900

2011

$227,200

$267,900

2012

$245,200

$292,200

2013

$268,900

$324,500

2014

$288,500

$347,700

2015

$294,200

$352,700

2016

$307,800

$360,900

2017

$323,100

$384,900

2018

$326,400

$385,000

Source: US Census Bureau

http://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/

Prices rose sharply between 2000 and 2005 as shown in Table IIB-7. In fact, prices in 2018 are higher than in 2000. Between 2006 and 2018, median prices of new houses sold increased 32.4 percent and average prices increased 25.9 percent. Between 2017 and 2018, median prices increased 1.0 percent and average prices changed 0.0 percent.

Table IIB-7, US, Percentage Change of New Houses Median and Average Prices, NSA, ∆%

Median New 
Home Sales Prices ∆%

Average New Home Sales Prices ∆%

∆% 2000 to 2003

15.4

19.0

∆% 2000 to 2005

42.5

43.5

∆% 2000 to 2018

93.1

86.0

∆% 2005 to 2018

35.5

29.6

∆% 2000 to 2006

45.9

47.8

∆% 2006 to 2018

32.4

25.9

∆% 2009 to 2018

50.6

42.1

∆% 2010 to 2018

47.2

41.1

∆% 2011 to 2018

43.7

43.7

∆% 2012 to 2018

33.1

31.8

∆% 2013 to 2018

21.4

18.6

∆% 2014 to 2018

13.1

10.7

∆% 2015 to 2018

10.9

9.2

∆% 2016 to 2018

6.0

6.7

∆% 2017 to 2018

1.0

0.0

Source: US Census Bureau

http://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/

Chart IIB-3 of the US Census Bureau provides the entire series of new single-family sales median prices from Jan 1963 to Sep 2019. There is long-term sharp upward trend with few declines until the current collapse. Median prices increased sharply during the Great Inflation of the 1960s and 1970s and paused during the savings and loans crisis of the late 1980s and the recession of 1991. Housing subsidies throughout the 1990s caused sharp upward trend of median new house prices that accelerated after the fed funds rate of 1 percent from 2003 to 2004. There was sharp reduction of prices after 2006 with recovery recently above earlier prices.

clip_image057

Chart IIB-3, US, Median Sales Price of New Single-family Houses Sold, US Dollars, NSA, 1963-2019

Source: US Census Bureau

http://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/

Chart IIB-4 of the US Census Bureau provides average prices of new houses sold from the mid-1970s to Sep 2019. There is similar behavior as with median prices of new houses sold in Chart IIB-3. The only stress occurred in price pauses during the savings and loans crisis of the late 1980s and the collapse after 2006 with recent recovery.

clip_image059

Chart IIB-4, US, Average Sales Price of New Single-family Houses Sold, US Dollars, NSA, 1975-2019

Source: US Census Bureau

http://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/

Chart IIB-5 of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System provides the rate for the 30-year conventional mortgage, the yield of the 30-year Treasury bond and the rate of the overnight federal funds rate, monthly, from 1954 to 2016. All rates decline throughout the period from the Great Inflation of the 1970s through the following Great Moderation and until currently. In Apr 1971, the fed funds rate was 4.15 percent and the conventional mortgage rate 7.31 percent. In November 2012, the fed funds rate was 0.16 percent, the yield of the 30-year Treasury 2.80 percent and the conventional mortgage rate 3.35. The final segment shows an increase in the yield of the 30-year Treasury to 3.61 percent in July 2013 with the fed funds rate at 0.09 percent and the conventional mortgage at 4.37 percent. The final data point shows marginal decrease of the conventional mortgage rate to 3.60 percent in May 2016 with the yield of the 30-year Treasury bond at 2.63 percent and overnight rate on fed funds at 0.37 percent. The recent increase in interest rates if sustained could affect the US real estate market. Shayndi Raice and Nick Timiraos, writing on “Banks cut as mortgage boom ends,” on Jan 9, 2014, published in the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303754404579310940019239208), analyze the drop in mortgage applications to a 13-year low, as measured by the Mortgage Bankers Association. Nick Timiraos, writing on “Demand for home loans plunges,” on Apr 24, 2014, published in the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304788404579522051733228402?mg=reno64-wsj), analyzes data in Inside Mortgage Finance that mortgage lending of $235 billion in IQ2014 is 58 percent lower than a year earlier and 23 percent below IVQ2013. Mortgage lending collapsed to the lowest level in 14 years. In testimony before the Committee on the Budget of the US Senate on May 8, 2004, Chair Yellen provides analysis of the current economic situation and outlook (http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/testimony/yellen20140507a.htm): “One cautionary note, though, is that readings on housing activity--a sector that has been recovering since 2011--have remained disappointing so far this year and will bear watching.”

clip_image060

Chart IIB-5, US, Thirty-year Conventional Mortgage, Thirty-year Treasury Bond and Overnight Federal Funds Rate, Monthly, 1954-2016

Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/H15/default.htm

Chart IIB-5A of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System provides the yield of the 30-year Treasury bond and the rate of the overnight federal funds rate, monthly, from 1977 to 2019. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System discontinued the conventional mortgage rate in its data bank. The final data point is 2.04 percent for the fed funds rate in Sep 2019 and 2.16 percent for the thirty-year Treasury bond. The conventional mortgage rate stood at 3.61 percent in Sep 2019.

clip_image061

Chart IIB-5A, US, Thirty-year Treasury Bond and Overnight Federal Funds Rate, Monthly, 1977-2019

Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/H15/default.htm

Table IIB-8, US, Fed Funds Rate, Thirty Year Treasury Bond and Conventional Mortgage Rate, Monthly, Percent per Year, Dec 2012 to Sep 2019

Fed Funds Rate

Yield of Thirty Year Constant Maturity

Conventional Mortgage Rate

2012-12

0.16

2.88

3.35

2013-01

0.14

3.08

3.41

2013-02

0.15

3.17

3.53

2013-03

0.14

3.16

3.57

2013-04

0.15

2.93

3.45

2013-05

0.11

3.11

3.54

2013-06

0.09

3.40

4.07

2013-07

0.09

3.61

4.37

2013-08

0.08

3.76

4.46

2013-09

0.08

3.79

4.49

2013-10

0.09

3.68

4.19

2013-11

0.08

3.80

4.26

2013-12

0.09

3.89

4.46

2014-01

0.07

3.77

4.43

2014-02

0.07

3.66

4.30

2014-03

0.08

3.62

4.34

2014-04

0.09

3.52

4.34

2014-05

0.09

3.39

4.19

2014-06

0.10

3.42

4.16

2014-07

0.09

3.33

4.13

2014-08

0.09

3.2

4.12

2014-09

0.09

3.26

4.16

2014-10

0.09

3.04

4.04

2014-11

0.09

3.04

4.00

2014-12

0.12

2.83

3.86

2015-01

0.11

2.46

3.67

2015-02

0.11

2.57

3.71

2015-03

0.11

2.63

3.77

2015-04

0.12

2.59

3.67

2015-05

0.12

2.96

3.84

2015-06

0.13

3.11

3.98

2015-07

0.13

3.07

4.05

2015-08

0.14

2.86

3.91

2015-09

0.14

2.95

3.89

2015-10

0.12

2.89

3.80

2015-11

0.12

3.03

3.94

2015-12

0.24

2.97

3.96

2016-01

0.34

2.86

3.87

2016-02

0.38

2.62

3.66

2016-03

0.36

2.68

3.69

2016-04

0.37

2.62

3.61

2016-05

0.37

2.63

3.60

2016-06

0.38

2.45

3.57

2016-07

0.39

2.23

3.44

2016-08

0.40

2.26

3.44

2016-09

0.40

2.35

3.46

2016-10

0.40

2.50

3.47

2016-11

0.41

2.86

3.77

2016-12

0.54

3.11

4.20

2017-01

0.65

3.02

4.15

2017-02

0.66

3.03

4.17

2017-03

0.79

3.08

4.20

2017-04

0.90

2.94

4.05

2017-05

0.91

2.96

4.01

2017-06

1.04

2.80

3.90

2017-07

1.15

2.88

3.97

2017-08

1.16

2.80

3.88

2017-09

1.15

2.78

3.81

2017-10

1.15

2.88

3.90

2017-11

1.16

2.80

3.92

2017-12

1.30

2.77

3.95

2018-01

1.41

2.88

4.03

2018-02

1.42

3.13

4.33

2018-03

1.51

3.09

4.44

2018-04

1.69

3.07

4.47

2018-05

1.70

3.13

4.59

2018-06

1.82

3.05

4.57

2018-07

1.91

3.01

4.53

2018-08

1.91

3.04

4.55

2018-09

1.95

3.15

4.63

2018-10

2.19

3.34

4.83

2018-11

2.20

3.36

4.87

2018-12

2.27

3.10

4.64

2019-01

2.40

3.04

4.46

2019-02

2.40

3.02

4.37

2019-03

2.41

2.98

4.27

2019-04

2.42

2.94

4.14

2019-05

2.39

2.82

4.07

2019-06

2.38

2.57

3.80

2019-07

2.40

2.57

3.77

2019-08

2.13

2.12

3.62

2019-09

2.04

2.16

3.61

Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/H15/default.htm

http://www.freddiemac.com/pmms/pmms30.htm

IIB2 United States House Prices. The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), which regulates Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, provides the FHFA House Price Index (HPI) that “is calculated using home sales price information from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac-acquired mortgages” (http://fhfa.gov/webfiles/24216/q22012hpi.pdf 1). The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), which regulates Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, provides the FHFA House Price Index (HPI) that “is calculated using home sales price information from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac-acquired mortgages” (http://fhfa.gov/webfiles/24216/q22012hpi.pdf 1). Table IIA2-1 provides the FHFA HPI for purchases only, which shows behavior similar to that of the Case-Shiller index but with lower magnitudes. House prices catapulted from 2000 to 2003, 2005 and 2006. From IVQ2000 to IVQ2006, the index for the US as a whole rose 55.0 percent, with 62.1 percent for New England, 72.0 percent for Middle Atlantic, 71.2 percent for South Atlantic but only by 33.1 percent for East South Central. Prices fell relative to 2014 for the US and all regions from 2006 with exception of increase of 2.6 percent for East South Central. Prices for the US increased 4.9 percent in IVQ2014 relative to IVQ2013 and 12.9 percent from IVQ2012 to IVQ2014. From IVQ2000 to IVQ2014, prices rose for the US and the four regions in Table IIA2-1.

Table IIA2-1, US, FHFA House Price Index Purchases Only NSA ∆%

United States

New England

Middle Atlantic

South Atlantic

East South Central

IVQ2000
to
IVQ2003

24.0

40.6

35.8

25.9

11.0

IVQ2000
to
IVQ2005

50.5

65.0

67.6

62.9

25.4

IVQ2000 to
IVQ2006

55.0

62.1

72.0

71.2

33.1

IVQ2005 to
IVQ2014

-1.5

-8.7

-2.3

-7.4

8.9

IVQ2006
to
IVQ2014

-4.4

-7.1

-4.8

-11.9

2.6

IVQ2007 to
IVQ2014

-1.9

-5.1

-5.0

-8.6

0.7

IVQ2011 to
IVQ2014

18.9

7.3

6.9

19.9

11.8

IVQ2012 to
IVQ2014

12.9

6.8

5.7

13.8

8.6

IVQ2013 to IVQ2014

4.9

2.5

2.2

5.1

4.2

IVQ2000 to
IVQ2014

48.3

144.27

50.6

138.40

63.7

127.30

50.9

140.28

36.6

146.07

Source: Federal Housing Finance Agency

http://www.fhfa.gov/KeyTopics/Pages/House-Price-Index.aspx

Data of the FHFA HPI for the remaining US regions are in Table IIA2-2. Behavior is not very different from that in Table IIA2-1 with the exception of East North Central. House prices in the Pacific region doubled between 2000 and 2006. Although prices of houses declined sharply from 2005 and 2006 to 2014 with exception of West South Central and West North Central, there was still appreciation relative to 2000.

Table IIA2-2, US, FHFA House Price Index Purchases Only NSA ∆%

West South Central

West North Central

East North Central

Mountain

Pacific

IVQ2000
to
IVQ2003

11.1

18.3

14.7

18.9

44.6

IVQ2000
to
IVQ2005

23.9

31.0

23.8

58.0

107.7

IVQ2000 to IVQ2006

31.6

33.7

23.7

68.6

108.7

IVQ2005 to
IVQ2014

26.6

4.7

-5.4

-2.6

-14.7

IVQ2006
to
IVQ2014

19.1

2.6

-5.4

-8.7

-15.1

IVQ2007 to
IVQ2014

15.2

3.2

-2.1

-5.6

-6.0

IVQ2011 to
IVQ2014

18.1

13.5

14.2

32.9

37.6

IVQ2012 to
IVQ2014

12.1

8.9

11.1

17.9

24.4

IVQ2013 to IVQ2014

5.9

4.0

4.6

5.5

7.3

IVQ2000 to IVQ2014

56.8

145.53

37.1

158.59

17.1

155.13

53.9

172.46

77.1

132.21

Source: Federal Housing Finance Agency

http://www.fhfa.gov/KeyTopics/Pages/House-Price-Index.aspx

Monthly and 12-month percentage changes of the FHFA House Price Index are in Table IIA2-3. Percentage monthly increases of the FHFA index were positive from Apr to Jul 2011 with exception of declines in May and Aug 2011 while 12-month percentage changes improved steadily from around minus 6.0 percent in Mar to May 2011 to minus 4.5 percent in Jun 2011. The FHFA house price index fell 0.6 percent in Oct 2011 and fell 3.3 percent in the 12 months ending in Oct 2011. There was significant recovery in Nov 2011 with increase in the house price index of 0.5 percent and reduction of the 12-month rate of decline to 2.5 percent. The house price index rose 0.3 percent in Dec 2011 and the 12-month percentage change improved to minus 1.4 percent. There was further improvement with revised change of minus 0.3 percent in Jan 2012 and decline of the 12-month percentage change to minus 1.3 percent. The index improved to positive change of 0.1 percent in Feb 2012 and decrease of 0.2 percent in the 12 months ending in Feb 2012. There was strong improvement in Mar 2012 with gain in prices of 0.9 percent and 1.8 percent in 12 months. The house price index of FHFA increased 0.5 percent in Apr 2012 and 2.2 percent in 12 months and improvement continued with increase of 0.7 percent in May 2012 and 3.1 percent in the 12 months ending in May 2012. Improvement consolidated with increase of 0.4 percent in Jun 2012 and 3.2 percent in 12 months. In Jul 2012, the house price index increased 0.3 percent and 3.2 percent in 12 months. Strong increase of 0.6 percent in Aug 2012 pulled the 12-month change to 4.1 percent. There was another increase of 0.5 percent in Oct 2012 and 4.9 percent in 12 months followed by increase of 0.5 percent in Nov 2012 and 4.9 percent in 12 months. The FHFA house price index increased 0.8 percent in Jan 2013 and 6.2 percent in 12 months. Improvement continued with increase of 0.5 percent in Apr 2013 and 7.0 percent in 12 months. In May 2013, the house price indexed increased 0.9 percent and 7.2 percent in 12 months. The FHFA house price index increased 0.6 percent in Jun 2013 and 7.4 percent in 12 months. In Jul 2013, the FHFA house price index increased 0.6 percent and 7.8 percent in 12 months. Improvement continued with increase of 0.3 percent in Aug 2013 and 7.4 percent in 12 months. In Sep 2013, the house price index increased 0.6 percent and 7.6 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.3 percent in Oct 2013 and 7.2 percent in 12 months. In Nov 2013, the house price index increased 0.1 percent and increased 6.8 percent in 12 months. The house price index rose 0.5 percent in Dec 2013 and 6.8 percent in 12 months. Improvement continued with increase of 0.5 percent in Jan 2014 and 6.5 percent in 12 months. In Feb 2014, the house price index increased 0.5 percent and 6.4 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.3 percent in Mar 2014 and 5.8 percent in 12 months. In Apr 2014, the house price index increased 0.3 percent and increased 5.5 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.2 percent in May 2014 and 4.8 percent in 12 months. In Jun 2014, the house price index increased 0.5 percent and 4.7 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.4 percent in Jul 2014 and 4.4 percent in 12 months. In Sep 2014, the house price index increased 0.1 percent and increased 4.2 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.6 percent in Oct 2014 and 4.5 percent in 12 months. In Nov 2014, the house price index increased 0.4 percent and 4.8 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.7 percent in Dec 2014 and increased 5.1 percent in 12 months. In Mar 2015, the house price index increased 0.4 percent and increased 5.2 percent in 12 months. In Apr 2015, the house price index increased 0.3 percent and 5.2 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.6 percent in May 2015 and 5.5 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.4 percent in Jun 2015 and 5.4 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.4 percent in Jul 2015 and increased 5.4 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.2 percent in Aug 2015 and increased 5.1 percent in 12 months. In Sep 2015, the house price index increased 0.6 percent and increased 5.7 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.5 percent in Oct 2015 and increased 5.6 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.6 percent in Nov 2015 and increased 5.8 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.4 percent in Dec 2015 and increased 5.6 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.6 percent in Jan 2016 and increased 6.1 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.2 percent in Feb 2016 and increased 5.6 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.6 percent in Mar 2016 and increased 5.9 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.3 percent in Apr 2016 and increased 5.9 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.5 percent in May 2016 and increased 5.7 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.6 percent in Jun 2016 and increased 5.7 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.5 percent in Jul 2016 and increased 5.7 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.5 percent in Aug 2016 and increased 6.1 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.6 percent in Sep 2016 and increased 6.1 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.6 percent in Oct 2016 and increased 6.2 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.6 percent in Nov 2016 and increased 6.2 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.6 percent in Dec 2016 and increased 6.3 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.0 percent in Jan 2017 and increased 5.8 percent in 12 months. In Feb 2017, the house price index increased 0.9 percent and increased 6.5 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.5 percent in Mar 2017 and increased 6.4 percent in 12 months. In Apr 2017, the house price index increased 0.7 percent and increased 6.7 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.4 percent in May 2017 and increased 6.6 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.4 percent in Jun 2017 and increased 6.3 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.6 percent in Jul 2017 and increased 6.5 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.8 percent in Aug 2017 and increased 6.8 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.4 percent in Sep 2017 and increased 6.6 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.7 percent in Oct 2017 and increased 6.7 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.5 percent in Nov 2017 and increased 6.7 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.5 percent in Dec 2017 and increased 6.7 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.7 percent in Jan 2018 and increased 7.5 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.9 percent in Feb 2018 and increased 7.5 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.3 percent in Mar 2018 and increased 7.2 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.3 percent in Apr 2018 and increased 6.8 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.4 percent in May 2018 and increased 6.7 percent in 12 months ending in May 2018. House prices increased 0.5 percent in Jun 2016 and increased 6.8 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.3 percent in July 2018 and increased 6.6 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.6 percent in Aug 2018 and increased 6.4 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.3 percent in Sep 2018 and increased 6.3 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.5 percent in Oct 2018 and increased 6.2 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.4 percent in Nov 2018 and increased 6.0 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.5 percent in Dec 2018 and increased 6.0 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.6 percent in Jan 2019 and increased 5.8 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.4 percent in Feb 2019 and increased 5.4 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.2 percent in Mar 2019 and increased 5.3 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.4 percent in May 2019 and increased 5.5 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.3 percent in May 2019 and increased 5.3 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.2 percent in Jun 2019 and increased 5.0 percent in 12 months. The house price index increased 0.4 percent in Jul 2019 and increased 5.1 percent in 12 months. House prices increased 0.2 percent in Aug 2019 and increased 4.6 percent in 12 months.

Table IIA2-3, US, FHFA House Price Index Purchases Only SA. Month and NSA 12-Month ∆%

Month ∆% SA

12-Month ∆% NSA

8/1/2019

0.2

4.6

7/1/2019

0.4

5.1

6/1/2019

0.2

5.0

5/1/2019

0.3

5.3

4/1/2019

0.4

5.5

3/1/2019

0.2

5.3

2/1/2019

0.4

5.4

1/1/2019

0.6

5.8

12/1/2018

0.5

6.0

11/1/2018

0.4

6.0

10/1/2018

0.5

6.2

9/1/2018

0.3

6.3

8/1/2018

0.6

6.4

7/1/2018

0.3

6.6

6/1/2018

0.5

6.8

5/1/2018

0.4

6.7

4/1/2018

0.3

6.8

3/1/2018

0.3

7.2

2/1/2018

0.9

7.5

1/1/2018

0.7

7.5

12/1/2017

0.5

6.7

11/1/2017

0.5

6.7

10/1/2017

0.7

6.7

9/1/2017

0.4

6.6

8/1/2017

0.8

6.8

7/1/2017

0.6

6.5

6/1/2017

0.4

6.3

5/1/2017

0.4

6.6

4/1/2017

0.7

6.7

3/1/2017

0.5

6.4

2/1/2017

0.9

6.5

1/1/2017

0.0

5.8

12/1/2016

0.6

6.3

11/1/2016

0.6

6.2

10/1/2016

0.6

6.2

9/1/2016

0.6

6.1

8/1/2016

0.5

6.1

7/1/2016

0.5

5.7

6/1/2016

0.6

5.7

5/1/2016

0.5

5.7

4/1/2016

0.3

5.9

3/1/2016

0.6

5.9

2/1/2016

0.2

5.6

1/1/2016

0.6

6.1

12/1/2015

0.4

5.6

11/1/2015

0.6

5.8

10/1/2015

0.5

5.6

9/1/2015

0.6

5.7

8/1/2015

0.2

5.1

7/1/2015

0.4

5.4

6/1/2015

0.4

5.4

5/1/2015

0.6

5.5

4/1/2015

0.3

5.2

3/1/2015

0.4

5.3

2/1/2015

0.8

5.1

1/1/2015

0.1

4.8

12/1/2014

0.7

5.1

11/1/2014

0.4

4.8

10/1/2014

0.6

4.5

9/1/2014

0.1

4.2

8/1/2014

0.5

4.6

7/1/2014

0.4

4.4

6/1/2014

0.5

4.7

5/1/2014

0.2

4.8

4/1/2014

0.3

5.5

3/1/2014

0.3

5.8

2/1/2014

0.5

6.4

1/1/2014

0.5

6.5

12/1/2013

0.5

6.8

11/1/2013

0.1

6.8

10/1/2013

0.3

7.2

9/1/2013

0.6

7.6

8/1/2013

0.3

7.4

7/1/2013

0.6

7.8

6/1/2013

0.6

7.4

5/1/2013

0.9

7.2

4/1/2013

0.5

7.0

3/1/2013

1.0

7.1

2/1/2013

0.6

6.8

1/1/2013

0.8

6.2

12/1/2012

0.5

5.2

11/1/2012

0.5

4.9

10/1/2012

0.5

4.9

9/1/2012

0.4

3.8

8/1/2012

0.6

4.1

7/1/2012

0.3

3.2

6/1/2012

0.4

3.2

5/1/2012

0.7

3.1

4/1/2012

0.5

2.2

3/1/2012

0.9

1.8

2/1/2012

0.1

-0.2

1/1/2012

-0.3

-1.3

12/1/2011

0.3

-1.4

11/1/2011

0.5

-2.5

10/1/2011

-0.6

-3.3

9/1/2011

0.6

-2.5

8/1/2011

-0.3

-4.0

7/1/2011

0.3

-3.7

6/1/2011

0.4

-4.5

5/1/2011

-0.2

-5.9

4/1/2011

0.2

-5.8

3/1/2011

-1.0

-5.9

2/1/2011

-1.0

-5.2

1/1/2011

-0.4

-4.5

12/1/2010

-0.8

-3.9

12/1/2009

-1.0

-2.1

12/1/2008

-0.3

-10.4

12/1/2007

-0.5

-3.4

12/1/2006

0.1

2.4

12/1/2005

0.6

9.8

12/1/2004

0.9

10.2

12/1/2003

0.8

8.0

12/1/2002

0.7

7.8

12/1/2001

0.6

6.7

12/1/2000

0.6

7.1

12/1/1999

0.5

6.1

12/1/1998

0.4

5.9

12/1/1997

0.3

3.4

12/1/1996

0.2

2.7

12/1/1995

0.4

3.0

12/1/1994

0.0

2.5

12/1/1993

0.5

3.1

12/1/1992

-0.1

2.4

Source: Federal Housing Finance Agency

http://www.fhfa.gov/DataTools

The bottom part of Table IIA2-3 provides 12-month percentage changes of the FHFA house price index since 1992 when data become available for 1991. Table IIA2-4 provides percentage changes and average rates of percent change per year for various periods. Between 1992 and 2018, the FHFA house price index increased 157.5 percent at the yearly average rate of 3.7 percent. In the period 1992-2000, the FHFA house price index increased 39.2 percent at the average yearly rate of 4.2 percent. The average yearly rate of price increase accelerated to 7.5 percent in the period 2000-2003, 8.5 percent in 2000-2005 and 7.4 percent in 2000-2006. At the margin, the average rate jumped to 10.0 percent in 2003-2005 and 7.4 percent in 2003-2006. House prices measured by the FHFA house price index increased 20.3 percent at the average yearly rate of 1.6 percent between 2006 and 2018 and 23.1 percent between 2005 and 2018 at the average yearly rate of 1.6 percent.

Table IIA2-4, US, FHFA House Price Index, Percentage Change and Average Rate of Percentage Change per Year, Selected Dates 1992-2017

Dec

∆%

Average ∆% per Year

1992-2018

157.5

3.7

1992-2000

39.2

4.2

2000-2003

24.2

7.5

2000-2005

50.2

8.5

2003-2005

21.0

10.0

2005-2018

23.1

1.6

2000-2006

53.8

7.4

2003-2006

23.8

7.4

2006-2018

20.3

1.6

Source: Federal Housing Finance Agency

http://www.fhfa.gov/DataTools

© Carlos M. Pelaez, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019.

No comments:

Post a Comment