US economic data to be reviewed after Q1 dip revised
Higher consumer spending cited for improved figures, but concerns about methodology remain
The world's largest economy did not contract by as much as was feared in the first three months of 2015, revised data show, as debate continues over what some see as an inherent 'seasonal' weakness in the figures.
Back in March a first estimate of GDP, which tracks the broadest measure of economic growth and productivity, suggested the US economy had contracted by 0.7 per cent for the three months to March, The Guardian reports.
Those figures had raised fears for Britain's only fragile recovery. Caught between turmoil in the eurozone and apparent weakness in the US, the UK's sluggish growth had looked vulnerable.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
But a revised estimate from the Commercial Department yesterday put the number at a more palatable 0.2 per cent contraction, which the Wall Street Journal says brings it into line with the median projection of economists. The improvement is a result of better than forecast growth in consumer spending and spending on household improvements.
The change underlines an ongoing debate over a perceived seasonal bias in the data, which Bloomberg says could mean the first quarter artificially underperforms the rest of the year by up to 1.7 percentage points.
The opening of a year will often see lower levels of spending, coming as it does during the coldest winter months and in the wake of spending excesses leading up to Christmas. A survey of economist suggests that second quarter GDP growth will come in at 2.5 per cent and that the economy will expand by an average of 3 per cent in the second half of the year.
Writing in Forbes, Tim Worstall says the past two years have seen falls in US GDP in the first quarter even though most do not believe the economy has deteriorated, adding "we've probably not got our adjustments right".
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
The Bureau of Economic Analysis is publishing the final GDP figure for Q1 on 30 July, at which point it has said it will address the question of the so-called "residual seasonality" in the data. For its part the US central bank's board published a report in May which found no evidence of a problem with the data, blaming persistent first quarter declines on "a couple of outlier years" and "soft readings" caused by poor weather.
-
Pull over for these one-of-a-kind gas stationsThe Week Recommends Fill ’er up next to highland cows and a giant soda bottle
-
Trump tariff uncertainty casts a dark cloud over Black FridayIN THE SPOTLIGHT Retailers and shoppers alike are starting to reassess their seasonal prospects as the Trump administration’s efforts to upturn the global economy start hitting close to home
-
‘Chess’feature Imperial Theatre, New York City
-
Fast food is no longer affordable for low-income AmericansThe explainer Cheap meals are getting farther out of reach
-
How Tesla can make Elon Musk the world’s first trillionaireIn The Spotlight The package agreed by the Tesla board outlines several key milestones over a 10-year period
-
Is the job market frozen or faltering?Today's Big Question Layoffs raise alarms while young workers eye law school
-
Is the US in recession?Today's Big Question ‘Unofficial signals’ are flashing red
-
Is a financial market crash around the corner?Talking Points Observers see echoes of 1929
-
Gold tops $4K per ounce, signaling financial uneaseSpeed Read Investors are worried about President Donald Trump’s trade war
-
Gen Z is facing a credit score crisisIn the Spotlight The average Gen Z credit score has dropped three points in 2025
-
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac helped trigger the Great Recession. Would an IPO create new dangers?In the Spotlight It depends on the 'implicit guarantee'