2008-04-30 US Economic Releases


[skip to the end]


2008-04-30 MBAVPRCH Index

MBAVPRCH Index (Apr 25)

Survey n/a
Actual 340.1
Prior 357.3
Revised n/a

Definately looking weak. Winter is over, and tax rebates are in the mail.


2008-04-30 MBAVREFI Index

MBAVREFI Index (Apr)

Survey n/a
Actual 1905.2
Prior 2286.3
Revised n/a

Settling down as well.


2008-04-30 ADP Employment Change

ADP Employment Change (Apr)

Survey -60K
Actual 10K
Prior 8K
Revised 3K

Employment growth continues to slow over time but not yet signaling recession.

Non-farm payrolls muddling through as well.


2008-04-30 GDP QoQ Annualized

GDP QoQ Annualized (1Q A)

Survey 0.5%
Actual 0.6%
Prior 0.6%
Revised n/a

Still in the black, and my guess is it’s likely to be revised up with the March trade numbers that are due in in a couple of weeks.


2008-04-30 Personal Consumption

Personal Consumption (1Q A)

Survey 0.7%
Actual 1.0%
Prior 2.3%
Revised n/a

Also holding up better than expected, and rebates are on the way.


2008-04-30 GDP Price Index

GDP Price Index (1Q A)

Survey 3.0%
Actual 2.6%
Prior 2.4%
Revised n/a

Better than expected, still high, and with crude continuing to move up it’s going up as well.


2008-04-30 Core PCE QoQ

Core PCE QoQ (1Q A)

Survey 2.2%
Actual 2.2%
Prior 2.5%
Revised n/a

The trend is up, and the Fed is monitoring it closely…


2008-04-30 Employment Cost Index

Employment Cost Index (1Q)

Survey 0.8%
Actual 0.7%
Prior 0.8%
Revised n/a

Looks under control, but not a brake on inflation.


2008-04-30 Chicago Purchasing Manager

Chicago Purchasing Manager (Apr)

Survey 47.5%
Actual 48.3%
Prior 48.2%
Revised n/a

A touch better than expected, but still trending lower.


2008-04-30 NAPM-Milwaukee

NAPM-Milwaukee (Apr)

Survey n/a
Actual 48.0
Prior 47.0
Revised n/a

Also not down to recession levels yet.


2008-04-30 FOMC Rate Decision

FOMC Rate Decision (Apr 30)

Survey 2.00%
Actual 2.0%
Prior 2.25%
Revised n/a

[comments]


[top]

2008-04-29 US Economic Releases


[skip to the end]


2008-04-29 S&P-CS Composite-20 YoY

S&P/CS Composite-20 YoY (Feb)

Survey -12.0%
Actual -12.7%
Prior -10.7%
Revised n/a

Was still heading down in February.


2008-04-29 S&P-CS Home Price Index

S&P/CaseShiller Home Price Index (Feb)

Survey n/a
Actual 175.9
Prior 180.7
Revised 180.8

Same.


2008-04-29 Consumer Confidence

Consumer Confidence (Apr)

Survey 61.0
Actual 62.3
Prior 64.5
Revised 65.9

Surveys show most everyone believes we are in recession, even though we aren’t
that’s how export economies feel.


2008-04-29 ABC Consumer Confidence

ABC Consumer Confidence (Apr 27)

Survey n/a
Actual -41
Prior -40
Revised n/a

Same.


[top]

Re: WSJ: Greg Ip’s Article

right, it’s a way to keep the ff rate from falling below target, but does nothing for ‘liquidity’ that’s not already being done.

seems fomc maybe still struggling with ‘monetary operations’


From: Adam
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 3:59 AM
To: a
Subject: CS: DEF WORTH A READ – GREG IP ARTICLE THAT PROPOSES ANOTHER FED INNOVATION – ALL EXPLAINED BELOW

 

Greg Ip’s piece in the WSJ received some attention today. The piece is titled “ Fed to Consider Paying Interest To Commercial Banks on Reserves” and states that the Fed will discuss this proposal at todays meeting. There is no suggestion that the Fed are about to immediately change the current standard policy of paying zero per-cent for reserve balances, but given that the press had a very good lead on the introduction of the TSLF and PDCF it’s prudent to pay attention. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120941973079950909.html?mod=economy_lead_story_lsc)

The reason for changing policy and paying interest on reserve balances is not at first obvious, but is in fact a simple way for the Fed to solve the problem of increasing cash liquidity in the banking system without driving down the Fed effective rate. As the Fed take illiquid asset-backed securities from banks they hand over cash in return. As banks get zero interest on reserve balances that are left with the Fed they quickly seek to place their newly raised cash out into the market, earning a coupon on their investment instead of earning nothing on a reserve balance. As the Fed pay nothing it is in every banks interest to lend any excess balances at rates greater than zero, and what typically happens is that the cash market rate falls dramatically as cash rich banks try and find bids, offering at lower and lower rates until we get close to zero. This is an unwelcome development from the Fed’s perspective as the effective Fed Funds rate that results is often significantly lower than the official Fed target rate. By injecting large amounts of cash liquidity into the system the Fed may actually undermine their own target rate.

Paying a coupon on reserve balances would allow the Fed to inject as much cash via asset-backed repo as they like without needing to worry about driving down the Fed effective cash rate. The Fed would effectively sterilize their own cash injection by placing a guaranteed fixed rate floor on reserve funds, and ensuring that something close to the Fed Funds target rate was achieved. This would mean that the Fed could continue to increase the amount of repo’s that they are willing to undertake and to upsize the auctions without concerns about the effects of huge amounts of excess cash

sloshing around in the system.

Some thoughts to go along with this:

  • Great care needs to be taken in setting guaranteed cash levels. Sometimes unexpected consequences result. Central banks like the RBA and RBNZ  have long operated a cash system which guarantees a floor on overnight rates at a margin below the target rate. This ensures that cash generally trades close to the target rate, or slightly rich to it. Generally local market participants prefer to hold an excess of long balances in the knowledge that cash shortages often occur, but they have a defined downside guarantee. In New Zealand’s case the RBNZ found that banks were hoarding cash to such an extent that the short dated market traded significantly above the OCR target because the banks had a 25bp downside guarantee. It wasn’t until the RBNZ reduced the guaranteed floor substantially that rates traded much closer to target.

 

Banks that get cash from the Fed via the PDCF currently seek to off-load that cash to the street, effectively spreading liquidity to all elements of the banking system, and discouraging the holding of very short term balances which will end of earning 0% if they are not on-lent. If the Fed’s guaranteed rate is not far enough below the FF target rate Banks will simply recycle any excess back to the Fed rather than taking unsecured interbank credit risk. This may leave the smaller regional Banks without direct Fed access short of cash, forcing them to pay a premium instead of getting funds at a discount. The challenge of course is that if the rate is set too far below the Fed Fund’s Target rate the Fed will have the same problem of the effective daily rate printing substantially beneath target. An appropriate margin that the Fed should pay on reserves is likely to be around 50bp below the target rate. This will prevent the Fed effective rate from collapsing, but the 50bp penalty will also incentivise banks to find alternative borrowers wherever possible

Chicago fed report for march

CORRECTION – CHICAGO – RPT-Chicago Fed Midwest factory activity lower in March

by Ros Krasny
Editing by Dan Grebler

(Reuters) The Chicago Federal Reserve Bank said on Monday its Midwest manufacturing index was lower in March, hurt by a slump in auto output.

The index fell 0.7 percent to a seasonally adjusted 107.6 from an upwardly revised 108.4 in February. The February reading was originally reported at 101.0.

Pretty good upward revision.

Compared with a year earlier, Midwest output was up 0.6 percent, trailing the 1.4 percent national increase.

Midwest auto sector production slumped by 5.3 percent in March after falling 1.5 percent in February. Compared with a year earlier, the region’s automotive output was down 7.6 percent.

Other sectors did not duplicate the marked weakness in autos.

Regional steel output fell by a small 0.2 percent after rising by 0.4 percent in February.

Machinery sector output rose by 0.6 percent in March after falling 0.3 percent in February, while resource sector output was up 1.5 percent on the month.

All five segments of the resource sector — food, paper, minerals, chemical and wood production — rose in March.

Compared with a year earlier, the region’s resource output was up 3.0 percent, above the 1.3 percent national increase.

The Chicago Fed Midwest Manufacturing Index is a monthly estimate of manufacturing output in the region by major industries. The survey covers the five states that make up the seventh Federal Reserve district: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan and Wisconsin.

Following is a breakdown of the index components and percentage changes compared with previous months:

Mar Feb Mar 08/07
CFMMI -0.7 -0.8 0.6
Auto -5.3 -1.5 -7.6
Steel -0.2 0.4 1.8
Machinery +0.6 -0.3 2.9
Resources +1.5 -0.8 3.0

Index (2002=100)

Mar Feb
CFMMI 107.6 108.4
Auto 79.6 84.1
Steel 110.8 111.0
Machinery 131.4 130.6
Resources 115.8 114.1