11/07/2011: Industrial production for May 2011

Industrial Production data for May was published earlier today by CSO, so here are updated charts and some core results:

Per CSO: "Production for Manufacturing Industries for May 2011 was 0.3% higher than in May 2010. The seasonally adjusted volume of industrial production for Manufacturing Industries for the three month period March 2011 to May 2011 was 1.4% lower than in the preceding three month period." Let's add some more analysis to that:

• May level of production in Manufacturing stood at 110.9, down 0.18% on 3 months ago and up 0.54% yoy.
  
• There was zero change mom from April.
  
• May 2011 index stood 2.43% above the comparable period in 2007. Last 3mo simple average of industrial production was 1.28% below the same figure for 3 mo before and 1.75
• % above the same period yoy.
  
• So on the net, there is roughly no improvement since Q2 2010.

All industries high level data:

• May index for volumes in All Industries stood at 109.6, up from 109.1 in April (+0.46% mom) and up 0.27% on 3 mo ago. Index is up just 0.09% on May 2010.
• Index is now up 1.56% on May 2007
  
• 3mo average to May 2011 fell 1.24 compared to 3 mo period before but rose 1.27% yoy.
• So just as with volume index for Manufacturing, All Industries volumes remain relatively flat since Q2 2010.
  

Again, per CSO: "The “Modern” Sector, comprising a number of high-technology and chemical
sectors, showed an annual decrease in production for May 2011 of 1.5% while an increase of 4.4% was recorded in the “Traditional” Sector." Some more details:

• Modern Sectors volume of production fell 0.88% mom from 124.8 in April to 123.7 in May, relative to 3mo ago index is down 0.72% and yoy index is down 1.12%. Index is now 13.51% above the reading in may 2007 - an impressive cumulated performance.
• However, the current 3mo average declined 1.93% on previous 3mo average, though March-May 2011 stands 0.79% above the same period average year ago.
• So again, moderately flat trend along 123.8 since Q2 2010.
• Traditional sectors reversed 3 consecutive months of relatively shallow declines in May to show a 5.83% mom improvement - a strong monthly gain. Index is now 4.04% up on 3mo ago and 4.16% up yoy. However, index remains 12.78% down on May 2007 levels.
• Traditional sectors volume index average for 3mo to May is 0.26% above 3mo average for the period before March and 2.25% above same reading for 2010.
• On the net, strong showing in Traditional Sectors in terms of volumes.
  

What about the Turnover indices:

• Turnover index for Manufacturing Industries rose to 99.6 in May from 98.2 in April (and increase of 0.91% yoy and 1.43% mom). This seems to contradict recent PMIs showing compressing profit margins in recent months, though PMIs are leading indicators while the reported indices reflect activity at the time. Turnover in Manufacturing is now 7.06% below the same reading for 2007. 3mo average through May 2011 is 2.79% below that for the 3mo period through February 2011 and 2.48% above the comparable period in 2010. The change during 2011 so far is not enough to attain the 12mo high of 102.1 achieved in January 2011, though we are moving in the right direction.
  
• Turnover index for Transportable Goods industries also rose from 97.8 in April to 99.2 in May, registering a mom increase of 1.43%, a 3mo rise of 0.61% and a yoy increase of 1.02%. Relative to may 2007, index now stands at -8.18%. 3mo average has moved down 2.67% relative to 3mo through February 2011 and is up 2.34% yoy.
• Finally, New Orders Index rose strongly from 98.4 in April to 100 in May, up 0.20 on 3mo ago, +2.35% yoy and +1.63% mom. Index is now down 7.42% compared to same period in 2007. 3mo average through May fell 3.58% compared to 3mo average through February, but is up 2.47% on a year ago.

To sum, up, slower growth rates in Turnover Indices and New Orders index, as well as contracting indices in volumes for Manufacturing and and Modern Sectors, plus slower growth in Volume index for All Industries suggest that overall PMI signals of slower growth through May are holding. Traditional industries bucked the trend here, but we can expect further small slowdowns in June and July. Growth, to put it briefly, is flattening out in the sector.

10/07/2011: Irish Tax Rates in International Perspective

Some interesting international comparisons for tax revenues across the EU27, plus Israel, Norway and Switzerland (no Iceland, sadly), courtesy of the OECD dataset - last updated April 27, 2011. I added Ireland's tax ratios relative to GNP based on CSO data for all the years 1999-2009.

Let's run some comparisons:

• In 1999, total tax revenues in Ireland were 33.2% of GDP and 38.9 GNP which compares to 37.% of GDP for the simple average of 30 countries in the sample and 37.2 median. There was a slight (0.3) skew in the data. With a standard deviation of 7.0 that year, Irish tax/GNP ratio was well within the average, which is confirmed by the rank attained by Ireland as 12th highest tax economy in the group.
• In 2003, total tax revenues in Ireland were 30.3% of GDP, which of course would be consistent with FF/PDs 'low tax' policies the Left is keen of accusing them of. Alas same year total tax revenue in Ireland stood at 35.9% GNP which compares to 36.7% of GDP for the simple average of 30 countries in the sample and 36 median. So as Irish tax revenue as a share of economy declined, so did the sample average. The new skew was 0.2 lower than in 1999. Hence, with a standard deviation of 6.5 that year, Irish tax/GNP ratio was again well within the average - actually even closer to the average - which is confirmed by the rank attained by Ireland as 16th highest tax economy in the group.
• Now, note that within both of the above years, in terms of GDP comparative, Irish taxes were ranked 22nd and 26th highest in the sample.
• Zoom on to 2007 when Irish tax revenues accounted for 32.0% of GDP and 38.8% of GNP against the sample average of 38% of GDP and a standard deviation of 5.8. There was zero skewness that year. Once again, there was no statistical difference between Irish tax rates and the average. Ireland ranked 25th highest tax economy in comparison against GDP and 14th in comparison to GNP.
• 2009 is the latest year we have comparatives for and in that year, Irish Government tax revenue accounted for 29.6% of GDP and 35.9% of GNP, which (GNP figure) again was statistically indistinguishable from the mean which was 36.7% (with standard deviation of 6.1 and skew of 0.2).

So now, let's map the above data:
Notice the following features of the above chart:

• Irish tax returns as a function GDP are more volatile than in terms of GNP - in fact historical standard deviation for Irish tax revenues in terms of GDP is 1.406 against that for GNP of 1.210. The median standard deviation for the sample of 30 countries is 0.736.
• Irish tax returns as a function of GDP are always statistically significantly different from the average, but our tax returns as a function of GNP are never once outside the average. In other words, folks, our tax burdens are average. Not low, not high - average.
• Only within the period of 2001-2003 did our tax returns as measured in relation to GNP fall statistically significantly below those for Euro area (EA17).

Let's put our tax revenues against some comparable countries. I divided the following two charts into Small Open Economies that are members of the Euro area and those that are not:
Interestingly, for the Euro are countries, Sweden, Belgium, Austria and Finland have tax burdens in excess of the average (note they are above the 1/2 STDEV band relating to the mean. Notice that all of the countries in that group, with exception of debt-ridden Belgium, are experiencing declines in their tax burden since 1999. Apparently, to the chagrin of our friends in the Trade Unions, Tasc and Irish Times - the ones so keen on shouting about the FF/PD coalition tax policies - the Nordics too were run by right-wing free-marketeers.

Next, notice the countries within the trace band around the mean - these are the Netherlands, Lux, Slovenia, Ireland (GNP), Portugal and Czech. Greece has dropped below the average range around 2004. It's an interesting neighborhood we are in, which includes highly aggressive tax competitor such as the Netherlands.

Lastly, we have a truly aggressively competitive Slovakia.

So again, there is no evidence in sight that Ireland is or was a low tax haven.

Now, for non-Euro countries:
Speaks for itself, but let me cover one little point. Switzerland has ranked within lowest 5 tax economies in 10 out of 11 years between 1999 and 2009. The country with functional public services and great public infrastructure has managed its affairs on the average tax revenues of just 29.3% of its GDP against the average of 31.7% of GDP and 37.5% of GNP for Ireland. So, really, folks, cut this crap about 'low taxes have ruined Irish economy/society'. The Swiss do it on less than us, better than us and achieve great social cohesion, civility and cultural development while using three languages where we can't master two. It's not in how much you spend, it's how you spend it.

10/07/2011: Irish Trade Stats: some interesting points

Here are some interesting end-of-year numbers for 2010 in terms of our external trade. Note - these are from OECD stats via ST Louis Federal Reserve database, so slightly off compared to CSO data. All are reported in Euro, unless otherwise specified.

First, consider the flows of trade and trade balance:
There is a clear regime shift in the data since 2009 with a rise in trade surplus. This confirms that Irish net external trade has entered a recovery stage post-crisis in 2009, not in late 2010-early 2011 as the IMF officials claimed recently. The second thing the chart highlights is the dramatic rise in trade balance in 2009-2010, even compared to the strong performance pre-2002. In fact, we reached beyond our trend (for 1997-2010 period) back in 2009.

This might suggest validity to the 'exports-led recovery' thesis, except for two issues:

1. Two years are hardly a trend, especially if coincident with extremely robust global trade recovery post-crisis, and
2. The trade balance is only relevant to Irish economy as a whole if we actually get to keep it here - in other words, if it accrues to companies with really sizeable investment and employment activities here. Note that in the chart above, the last two years have actually seen a negative relationship between growth in the economy and growth in the trade balance.
   

The latter issue is easy to see if we net out of the trade balance the remittances of profits and payments abroad, as done in the chart below:
Notice the decline in Net Factor Income from Abroad (NFIAF) in 2009-2010 period. This is linked directly (more closely than in the case of GDP and GNP changes) to our trade balance:
In other words, what gets produced here in terms of trade surplus gets remitted out of here. As we become more open to trade - as shown below - by any metric possible, we get more open to exporting profits and surpluses accumulated in the economy.
This is similar to an analogy of draining water out of a sinking boat with a coal bucket - when you scoop up water, the bucket is full, by the time you turn it overboard, the bucket is empty...

Some interesting correlations to that effect - all for data from 1997 through 2010, so small sample bias obviously is there:

• Trade balance correlations with GDP and GNP are 0.613 and 0.543, but with NFIFA it is -0.866
• NFIFA itself is correlated with GDP and GNP at -0.904 and -0.861.

So NFIFA has more sgnifcant links to GDP and GNP than our trade balance. In other words, the propensity of our MNCs to take out profits from Ireland has more effect on our GDP and GNP than the trade balance. The recovery, therefore, if it were to be driven by external trade, has less to do with our Exports and Imports, than with profits expatriation decisions by MNCs.

09/07/2011: Construction Activity : Ireland 1980-2010

Rummaging through the Federal Reserve database, I came across a fascinating set of numbers on the number of construction permits issued in Ireland. These are based on index with 100=2005 level of activity.

• By the end of 2010, new dwelling construction activity has fallen from the high of 102.4 attained in 2004 to the low of 15.3.
• Year on year, 2010 activity was down 56.8%. 2010 marks a decline of 80.7% on 5 years ago, 80.6% decline on 10 years ago, 56.4% decline on 15 years ago, 26.1% decline on 20 years ago, 8.5% rise on 25 years ago and 58% decline on 30 years ago.
• The only sustained decline period - other than current - was 1983-1996 period, when activity dropped from 35.2 in 1983 to the trough of 12.8 in 1988 - 4 years of decline and the cumulative drop of 63.6% (much more benign that the current drop of 85.1% to the end of 2010). The recovery in that contraction took over 13 years.
  

So we had a cycle of over 17 years and if one were to count 1981 as a peak with 1982-1983 as a temporary bounce, then the last cycle took 19 years to unwind. Good luck to anyone still hoping for a return to "normal" unless your normal is pre-boom average activity at 51-52 or roughly a half of the construction activity in 2004-2005.

Here's the chart:

08/07/2011: Effects of the spending stimulus on unemployment

An interesting study on the effectiveness of fiscal spending on unemployment was recently published in the CESifo working paper series. The full study can accessed here: Steinar Holden and Victoria Sparrman, "Do Government Purchases Affect Unemployment?" CESifo Working Paper No 3482, May 2011.

The study presents estimated effects of 1% increase in Government purchasing of goods and services on unemployment in 20 OECD countries for the period 1960-2007, controlling for a number of factors, including the size and the openness of the economy, the exchange rate regime and the economy position in the business cycle.

To summarize relevant results (found in Table 7) in the case of small open economies within the currency union, the effect of 1% increase in government purchases of goods and services translates into 0.37 decrease in unemployment rate. The effect can be as high as 0.47% decrease. Year after there is no net effect of jobs creation from the purchasing.

So what does this mean in the case of Ireland? Per latest QNA, Irish GDP in current market prices was €155,992 million in 2010. 1% of that spent on new purchases of goods and services amounts to €1,559,920,000. Q1 2011 unemployment, per QNHS, amounted to 295,700 and the unemployment rate stood at 14.1%. These are our inputs into the estimate.

Now, let's make an assumption concerning jobs created - suppose these pay €35,000 per annum in wages. Suppose that they pay €7,067 in income-related taxes (inclusive of USC etc), as consistent with single tax filer with no deductions. Suppose the social welfare benefits savings amount to €350 per week (note these are taken on purpose to be larger to account for other benefits that might be foregone) to the annual total of €18,200. Suppose that additional 30% is collected on income tax contributions due to higher consumption taxes contributions in employment - generating savings of additional €2,120 per annum.

So total savings per person moved off welfare into employment are roughly speaking €27,287. In other words, we assume that for each €35,000 job created, the Government get back almost €28,000 through various tax returns and savings.

Now on to the estimated impact of 1% increase in Government purchases of goods and services:

1. Case 1: maximum effect of 0.47% reduction in unemployment rate will result in 9,857 jobs created with the total cost of €158,260 per job created. Net of Government returns and savings, this means net cost per each job created of €130,873. Total impact is to generate a loss of 0.84% of GDP due to 'stimulus'. If we are to assume that all of the jobs created remain for ever after the 'stimulus' (a very tall assumption, but let's be generous), while the Government finances the stimulus at a constant interest rate of 6%, it will take almost 7 years for the economy to recover the costs of the 'stimulus' (if the rate of borrowing is zero - e.g. by using NPRF or some other 'free' funding, the period to recovery shrinks to 5.8 years).
2. Case 2: most likely effect of 0.37% reduction in unemployment rate will result in 7,760 jobs created with the total cost of €201,033 per job created. Net of Government returns and savings, this means net cost per each job created of €173,646. Total impact is to generate a loss of 0.88% of GDP due to 'stimulus'. If we are to assume that all of the jobs created remain for ever after the 'stimulus', while the Government finances the stimulus at a constant interest rate of 6%, it will take over 9 years for the economy to recover the costs of the 'stimulus' (if the rate of borrowing is zero, the period to recovery shrinks to 7.3 years).

07/07/2011: What's in the interest rates hikes

Working away on the data for PIIGS, I was interested in a question, what if the ECB were to go to the equilibrium repo rate consistent with the current inflation & growth environment?

In a recent post (here) I did analysis of the ECB historical rates in relation to eurocoin leading indicator of growth. This chart is reproduced here with suggested ranges for the repo rates consistent with current and with higher inflation.
So if the equilibrium rates are in the neighborhood of 2.25-2.75 percent, what would 1% increase in interest rates from June 2011 rate of 1.25% do to the cost of fiscal debts financing across the PIIGS?

Using IMF projections for debt levels for PIIGS through 2016 and assuming that all interest payments are financed out of deficits / borrowing, the chart below shows the extent of the increase in the cost of interest charges on government debt by 2016:
This translates into an increase in the annual cost per capita (2016 forecast) of:

• €560.48 in Greece
• €834.84 in Ireland
• €546.74 in Italy
• €309.24 in Portugal
• €319.02 in Spain

Overall, the increases in interest costs for PIIGS will amount to ca €47.06 billion per annum or 1.23% of the PIIGS GDP and 0.44% of the Euro area GDP. Oh, and by the way, this does not take into account the additional costs of financing banks lending by the ECB.

So that should put into perspective my view of today's hike in the ECB rate, expressed earlier here. So happy wrecking ball swinging, Mr Tri(pe)chet & Co.

06/07/2011: Profit Margins in Irish Services and Manufacturing

Based on latest Manufacturing and Services PMIs, let's update my index of profit margins in Irish economy.

• Profit margins continued to decline in Services, with the rate of decline slowing down from -19.74 in May to -16.02 in June. Profit margins declines are still steeper than 12mo MA of -14.6, but are now more moderate than the Q2 2011 average of 20.1 and Q1 2011 average of 17.4. However, profit margins declines for Q1 2011 were more benign than in Q2 2011.
• Profit margins in Services are now on the declining trend for 24 months straight and have accelerated significantly since 2009 and 2010. 2010 H1 average was -6.9 and 2009 H1 average was -11.0.
  
• Profit margins volatility has risen steeply during the crisis. The standard deviation for profit margins in Services was 5.29 for the entire history of the series and 5.31 for the period from 2000 through today. However, volatility now reads 7.90 for the period from January 2008 through today - the period of the crisis.
  
• Profit margins in Manufacturing also continued to decline in June, with the rate of decline moderating even more than in Services from-21.19 in May to -16.22 in June. Profit margins rates of decline are now more moderate than 12mo MA of 20.6. Q1 2011 profit margins rate of decline was -20.8 with Q2 2011 declines steeper at -23.6.
• Profit margins in Manufacturing are now on the downward trend for 28 months in a row. 2010 H1 average decline was -19.3 and 2009 H1 average was -3.7, implying that 2011 deterioration in profit margins is steeper than in both previous years.
• Profit margins volatility also rose in manufacturing during the crisis. Historical standard deviation for profit margin indicator in manufacturing stands at 6.95, while since 2000 through today volatility is 6.98. However volatility since January 2008 is 8.92.

05/07/2011: Pre-ECB council meeting note

Here's my (cynical, but) concise summary of the pre-ECB call on rates this week:

We (Euro zone) have:

• Greece being kept alive pretty much for its 'spare parts' (privatizations)
  
• Porto just gone into coma with the latest downgrade of its bonds to junk,
  
• IRL in an ICU on an artificial respirator (see the bottom line on Irish Exchequer expenditure here)
  
• Spain feverish & fading out of consciousness on negative watch and with banks starting to implode (HT to Namawinelake, Spain is facing €660 billion of redemptions in 24 months ahead and with banks providing just 10% provisions cover on €450 billion worth of development loans)
  
• Italy getting the first symptoms of the deadly debt/banks spiral virus (negative watch for ratings and latest signs of banks starting to slip)
  
• Belgium on the trolly about to be wheeled into casualty department
  

In this environment, ECB raising rates this week will be equivalent to shutting off power supply to the entire hospital that is Euro zone.

05/07/2011: Irish Exchequer Expenditure: H1 2011

Previous posts on the H1 2011 Exchequer results covered Exchequer balance, Tax Burden composition, and Exchequer Receipts. This post will cover Exchequer Expenditure side of the balance sheet.

Please note: cross annual comparisons are distorted by the changes in departments compositions and remits. Nothing we can do about this.

Top level numbers for H1 2011.

Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (accounting for 1.8% of the total Net Voted Expenditure - NVE) spending stood at €388 million in H1 2011, down 28.9% on the same period for 2008 and down €79 million or 16% yoy, though all of the savings came from the capital side, with current spending up €87 million yoy (+44%).

Art, Heritage & Gaeltacht (0.5% of total NVE) managed to spend €108 million in H1 2011, down 67.3% on 2008. Spending here is down 68% yoy (saving €158 million) with most of savings coming from the current side, although in proportional terms capital savings are on par with current savings.

Communications, Energy & Natural Resources (0.4% of NVE) spending in H1 2011 was €98 million, up €13 million (+15%) on 2010. Increases in spending took place on current side (+€11 million or 28%) and capital side (+€2 million or 4%). Relative to H1 2008 spending is down 14.9% which is 7th lowest rate of savings amongst the departments.

Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs (0.5 of NVE) - no, don't ask me why is Gaeltacht having itself spread over 2 departments - spent €105 million, down €79 million (-43%) yoy. This time around, most of the savings in volume came from the current spending side, but in relative terms, capital spending is down 77% while current spending is down 36% yoy. Department spending has fallen 53.9% on comparable period in 2008.

Defence (1.9% of NVE) spent €419 million, which is down 13% on comparable period in 2008, making the department 6th lowest saver in the entire voted expenditure set. Department spending was up €4 million yoy with all of the increase accounted for by current spending.

Education and Skills spent €4,066 million in H1 2011 which is €171 million above H1 2010. Capital side increased by €59 million (+58% yoy) and current side was up €113 million (+3%) yoy. The department is the third largest of all Government Departments, accounting for 18.6% of NVE. Overall austerity has resulted in a 4.8% decrease in Department spending through H1 2011 compared to H1 2008, making the level of savings achieved the fourth lowest of all departments.


Jobs, Enterprise, Trade & Innovation (1.5% NVE) spent €336 million in H1 2011, down 48% on H1 2008. Compared to H1 2010, department spending fell €219 million (39% drop yoy) with current spending falling €245 million (-62%), while capital spending rose €26 million (+16%). Much of the capital side increases across the departments is attributable to the timing of spending with previous Government actively delaying paying on capital projects until later in the year. At least, with the current Government, contractors might be getting paid more on-time for their work.

Environment, Community & Local Government (2.6% of NVE) spent €561 million in H1 2011, down 52.8% on H1 2008. Spending was down €200 million yoy (-26%) with capital savings of €119 million (-32%) and current savings of €81 million (-21%).

Finance (2.3% NVE) managed to spend €510 million in H1 2011, down 20.3% on 2008 and achieving savings of a miserly €4 million yoy, with €20 million saved on current spending side and a deficit on 2010 of €16 million on capital side.

Foreign Affairs and Trade (1.6% of NVE) spending of €342 million is down €61 million (-15%) yoy, with €59 million of the savings coming from the current side. Relative to H1 2008, current year performance is delivering savings of 29.7%.

Health (the largest of all departments, with 30.9% of NVE, although Social Protection is coming close second and is bound to overtake Health by year end) spent €6,757 million in H1 2011, up a massive €666 million yoy of which €662 million came from the current spending side. With all of this, Health spending is now down 0.8% on H1 2008. The figures are obviously distorted by the introduction of USC, but as of H1 2011, the department has achieved 3rd lowest rate of savings of all departments.

Another billionaire department: Justice & Equality (4.9% of NVE) had total spending of €1,081 million in H1 2011, up €32 million on H1 2010 (+3%), with deficit coming at €56 million on current side, offset by savings of €24 million on capital side. Department spending is down 12.2% on H1 2008 - 5th lowest rate of savings across all Departments.

Social Protection (soon to be the largest spending department in Ireland but in H1 2011 accounting for 29.8% of NVE) spent €6,517 million - up 10% or €589 million yoy, with €587 million of this increase coming from the current side. Compared to H1 2008, H1 2011 spending rose 49.5% making it the worst performing department when it comes to savings.

Taoiseach (0.5% NVE) came with a bill of €108 million in H1 2011, which was 23.1% above comparable period in 2008. More than that, the department managed to increase its spending on 2010 as well, with cost rising by €20 million (+29%) yoy all of which came from current spending increases.

Transport, Tourism & Sport spending of €593 million in H1 2011 was 187 million down on H1 2010 (-24%) with savings of €240 million achieved on capital side and current side yielding an overrun of €53 million on 2010. The department accounts for 2.9% of NVE and spending here is down 53.8% on H1 2008.

So the top of the line numbers are: in H1 2011 Total Net Cumulative Voted Spending stood at €21,898 million or which €20,547 million were accounted for by current spending and €1,351 million by capital spending. Overall expenditure is now €399 million above H1 2010 (no sign of austerity here, if anything, spending just rolls on at the aggregate) - an overspend of 1.9%. On Current expenditure side things are even more 'boomish' with overspend relative to 2010 at €892 million (+4.5%). Capital took another hit of real austerity with spending here coming €493 million below H1 2010 (-26.8%).
The above clearly shows that while austerity has caused some real pain in specific departments, it has not been successful in reducing total spending. This is even more worrisome, when one recognizes that by now, capital account has been drained with no sizable potential future savings to be achieved on this side. On the current expenditure side, austerity so far has meant taking spending on one side of the Exchequer shopping list and spending it on the other. One way or the other, this is not austerity, folks. It's reallocation of expenditure priorities.

Now, recall, in H1 2011 we spent total of €21,898 million. That is just €804.5 million in savings relative to H1 2008 (or 3.54% improvement) - after 3 austerity budgets!

So what do these figures look like in dynamic setting - month-to-month?
And where do we take money from and reallocate to?
No need for another comment here.

05/07/2011: Employment in Services and Manufacturing - June 2011

As promised earlier, analysis of employment data from Manufacturing and Services PMIs for June 2011.

• Headline on Services PMIs: After posting only marginal growth in the previous month at 50.5, Irish services activity rose at a faster pace in June to 52.4. However, overall Q2 2011 average at 51.0 signals lower rate of expansion than Q1 2011 at 53.4. Current index is above it's 12mo MA of 51.6.
• Headline on Manufacturing PMIs: June activity signals a slowdown at 49.8, down from expansionary May reading of 51.8. Q1 2011 expansion of 56.1 average has moderated through Q2 2011 to 52.5. 12mo MA is at 52.6.
• Employment sub-index in Manufacturing showed further acceleration in the rate of decline from 49.9 in May to 48.3 in June. The sub-index now stands below 12mo MA of 50.2. Q1 2011 average was expansionary 53.2 and despite two consecutive months of contractions, Q2 sub-index still reads 50.7. This compares favorably relative to Q3 2010 reading of 46.8 and Q4 2010 reading of 49.9. Employment in Manufacturing has now fallen for two months, breaking expansionary readings trends established over December 2010-April 2011.
  
• Employment sub-index in Services remained flat at 48.1, signaling continued contraction in May and marking a second consecutive month of contractions since an outlier expansion in April 2011 to 51.1. 12mo MA is now at 48.7, while Q1 2011 reading was 49.2, accelerating down to 49.1 in Q2 2011. In comparison, Q3 2010 reading was 48.9 and Q4 2010 reading was 47.6, so the rate of jobs attrition in the sector has declined in H1 2011 relative to H2 2010. With April 2011 out-of-line reading of expansion, this index remains in contractionary territory in 39 out of 40 last months

With both Manufacturing and Services signaling contractions in employment, we are now firmly into jobless recovery territory in Services and stepping into the recessionary territory for Manufacturing.

It is worth noting that volatility of employment sub-index has risen since the beginning of the crisis in Manufacturing, but declined in Services, most likely due to the persistent trends in domestic services. The same pattern is true for core PMIs.

05/07/2011: Services PMIs: June 2011

Services PMIs for Ireland are out today for June from NCB Stockbrokers. Last week, manufacturing PMIs came in disappointingly low, signaling renewed contraction in the sector (see details here). The headline numbers for services are:

• Core PMI reading for Service has risen to 52.4 in June from 50.5 in May - a reasonably strong increase. Controlling for volatility, last 3mo average stands at 51.0, down from the Q1 2011 average of 53.4, and below 12mo MA of 51.6, which means that the current reading is still short of Q1 2011 average, but ahead of it's own quarter average and historical average.
• Q2 2010 period average was 52.9, ahead of Q2 2011 average of 51.0. To compare to the dire conditions in 2009 - Q2 2009 average was 38.0. Now, remember, PMI is not an absolute measure of activity, but a relative one, which means that given a deep fall-off of 2009, we need strong growth - again, my benchmark would be to see PMIs in 60s+ - in 2010 and 2011 to compensate for the declines in 2009. This not happening. Still, it is good to see the index sticking above 50 for the 6th month in the row.

• New business index - my concern last month - has notched up on May, rising from 48.2 in May to a still contractionary 49.4 in June. Current reading is consistent with the Q2 2011 average and is down on both Q1 2011 average of 50.9 and 12mo average of 49.9. Q2 2010 reading was 52.6. Again, as with core PMI Q2 2009 reading was 37.5 - abysmally low, but there was no recovery since then, as new business index was stuck below 50 in all months except April-August 2010 and February-April 2011, furthermore, index never reached beyond 54.0 (June 2010), so no momentum in terms of new business orders recovery.
  

Note in the above chart, that we now are two consecutive months running with core PMI signaling weak expansion, while New Business Orders PMI stuck in contraction zone.

In terms of other components - note, I will be covering employment in a separate post for both Services and Manufacturing PMIs:

• Backlogs of work have declined again in June - from 44.9 in May to 44.5 in June, implying that service providers shifted more resources to complete unfinished work. Q2 2011 average stands at a contractionary 45.3, down from Q1 2011 average of 48.0 and 2010 Q2 average of 48.8. 12mo average reads 45.6.
• Employment index remained flat at contractionary 48.1, down from expansionary 51.1 in April. With April 2011 out-of-line reading of expansion, this index remains in contractionary territory in 39 out of 40 last months. More on this later.
• Output Prices/Charges index has fallen further into contraction (deflation) territory, declining from 43.9 in May to 43.5 in June and marking 35th consecutive month of declines (in a separate post I will be covering the issues of profit margins, so stay tuned for more on output/input prices divergence).
• Input prices have remained in expansion territory, although the pace of inflation has moderated further from 54.7 in May to 51.8 in June, with June marking 3 consecutive month of moderating input prices growth.
• Confidence / Business Expectations index has shown lower rate of growth, with June reading of 60.3 coming in behind May index reading of 62.3. Overall, Q2 2011 average was 63.1 and Q1 2011 average was 65.8, while 12mo average stands at 64.0, so clearly confidence is getting stronger slower. This is largely irrelevant in my view, as the index reading was averaging 50.7 (growing confidence) during the abysmal Q2 2009, just as other components were showing massive fall-off the cliff for services activities in Ireland. In addition, I have previously shown that over the entire life-span of the series data, confidence failed to act as a predictor of any real future activity (core PMIs, New Orders, New Export Orders or Employment) in the sector.
  
• New Export Business index continued to signal expansion, albeit at lower rates with June index standing at 53.1 down from 54.4 in May. Q2 2011 average now stands at 54.0 against Q1 2011 average of 54.8. 12mo average is 53.6, while Q2 2010 was 56.5. So data suggests a clear slowdown in the rate of exports growth. This, of course, is an important indicator as CSO does not report monthly series for services exports.
  
• Finally, profitability index has moderated the fall recorded in May, rising from contractionary May reading of 41.4 to still contractionary 44.8 in June. June reading is now ahead of Q2 average of 43.7, and Q1 2011 average of 43.5, but behind Q2 2010 average of 48.0 and behind 12mo average of 45.5. Again, more on profitability in a separate post

04/07/2011: Exchequer balance: H1 2011

Exchequer results are in for June and in the previous two posts I discussed tax receipts (here) and overall distribution of taxation burden across various tax heads (here). In this post, I will be quickly covering Exchequer balance/deficit for H1 2011.

Overall tax and non-tax revenues came in at €16,744.6 million against €15,298 million in H1 2010 with both tax revenues and non-tax receipts on current side coming upside. However, total voted current account expenditure came in at €20,547 million in H1 2011, up on €19,655 million. This hardly amounts to 'austerity' working (more on expenditure analysis in the later blogpost).

Non-voted current expenditure came in at €3,375 billion, similar expenditures for 2010 over the same period were €3,071 million. Banking measures in H1 2011 accounted for €3,085 million against comparable period 2010 official (see below) figure of zero.

Overall, Exchequer deficit for H1 2011 stood at €10,828.5 million against 2010 figure of €8,887 million. Excluding banking measures H1 2011 deficit stood at €7,743, while excluding banking measures accumulated over 2010 and backed-out to June 2010, the ex-banks deficit for H1 2010 was around €7,590. Note - this imperfectly takes into account variable timing for deficit increases due to banks measures.

Here's the chart:
Again, I am not seeing any dramatic improvements here on 2010 performance.

It is worth noting - remember that department expenditure will be covered in the later post - that national debt interest and management expenses through H1 2011 have risen to €2,501 million from €2,231 million in H1 2010. Thus interest and debt management cost are currently running at 16.36% of total tax receipts.

Through H1 2011 we have borrowed €11,370 million from EFS, €7,178.5 million from IMF and €3,659.6 from EFSF, so total borrowings rose from €7,589.6 million in H1 2010 to €16,653 million in H1 2011. Of the money we borrowed (at more than 5.8% pa), €10,277.5 million is still held in deposits with Irish banks at, oh, maximum rate of ca 1.4-1.5% (see here) implying an annualized cost of this shambolic support for Irish banks to the Exchequer of ca €450 million - oh, about the amount of money the Government is clawing out of the pensions levy?..