For most people, buying a new car is a luxury and in times of hardship it is a luxury that many cannot afford. Sales of new cars did grow during 2010 by 1.8% compared to the previous year, although the end of the car scrappage scheme in March 2010 did see a fall in sales. Sales went from being 19.9 per cent up on 2009 in the first half of the year, to being 13.8 per cent down for the remainder of 2010. On top of this, they are predicted to fall by some 5% over the coming 12 months.
Part of the explanation of this trend is the VAT rise. While an extra 2.5% is hardly noticeable on many every day items (as we saw when VAT was reduced to 15%), it will have a much larger effect on more expensive items, such as cars.
It was expected that people thinking of buying a new car would try to beat the VAT rise and so car firms hoped for a surge in sales during December. However, this did not occur and with VAT at 20% during 2011, car prices will rise: a £15,000 car will cost an extra £320. Another contributing factor to the lower than expected sales in December was the snow. Retail sales in December collapsed by 37.5%, where as fleet sales, which are less likely to be affected by the adverse weather rose by 5.1%. Similar patterns were seen in Spain, Italy and France, but in Germany sales were up by 7% on the year from December 2009.
The good news for the UK car industry is that the second half of 2011 is expected to see growth, so there may be some recovery. Furthermore, UK-built cars have seen a rise in sales – up by 17%. Finally, as petrol prices continue to rise, it is hoped that this might encourage people to trade in their less efficient old cars for more fuel-efficient new cars. This will certainly be an industry to watch over the next few months.
Snow hits new car sales Telegraph, Graham Ruddick (8/1/11)
UK new car sales to fall in 2011, says industry BBC News (7/1/11)
Mixed end to the year for European car sales Independent (7/1/11)
Car sales set to stall? Daily Mirror, Clinton Manning (8/1/11)
UK new car sales rose 1.8pc in 2010 despite end of scrappage scheme Telegraph, Amy Wilson (7/1/11)
New car sales increased in 2010 Telegraph, Chris Knapman (7/1/11)
Car registrations fall 18% from year ago Financial Times, Norma Cohen (7/1/11)
Questions
- What type of tax is VAT? Illustrate the effect of such a tax on a diagram and explain why the higher the price of the good, the bigger the impact of the VAT rise. How might this impact inflation?
- Why are car sales expected to fall in the UK over the coming year? Given this expected trend, what might we expect to see in terms of car prices?
- What impact might rising petrol prices have on new car purchases? What figure would you expect to see for cross elasticity of demand?
- How might the expected decline in car sales affect the UK economy over the next 12 months?
- What type of market structure is the car industry? (Think about the characteristics of monopolistic competition and oligopoly.)
- How did the car scrappage scheme help car sales?
- What might explain the different trend seen in the German car industry?
Just how large is the UK’s Gross Domestic Product and how quickly is it growing? Well, the latest Quarterly National Accounts from the Office for National Statistics show that the value of our economy’s output in Q3 2010 was £365.9 million. When measured across the latest four quarters, i.e. from the start of Q4 2009 to the end of Q3 2010, the total value of our economy’s output was £1.440 trillion. Across calendar year 2009 the UK’s GDP is estimated to have been £1.394 trillion.
When analysed in terms of the expenditure on the goods and services produced in the latest four quarters, household final consumption contributed £910.4 billion towards Gross Domestic Product. In other words, household expenditure over these four quarters was equivalent to 63% of GDP, exactly in line with its average since 1948. This only serves to demonstrate just how important the spending by households is for our short-term economic prospects.
Another important expenditure-component of GDP is gross capital formation. This is capital expenditure by the private and public sector and is estimated to have been £202.9 billion over the latest four quarters, equivalent to 14% of GDP. This is an important component because as well as affecting current levels of GDP, it also affects our economy’s potential output. This points to changes in capital expenditure having both a demand-side and a supply-side impact. Interestingly, the long-term average share for gross capital formation in GDP is around 18% and so about 4 percentage points higher than is currently the case.
So we now have a number which reflects the size of our economy: a little over £1.4 trillion. But, what about the rate at which the economy is growing? This time we have to be a little careful as to which GDP numbers we are using. The numbers we have so far considered have been measured at current prices and so at prevailing prices. When analysing the rate of economic growth, rather than analyse GDP at current prices, economists look at GDP at constant prices. By doing this we can immediately see whether the volume of output has increased. This is important because in the presence of price rises, an increase in the value of output could occur even if the volume of output remained unchanged or actually fell. For instance, in 1974 the volume of output or real GDP fell by 1.3%, but because the average price of our domestic output (known as the GDP deflator) rose by 14.8%, GDP measured at current prices rose by nearly 13½%.
The latest ONS figures show that real GDP grew by 0.7% in the third quarter 2010. For the record, GDP at current prices (nominal GDP) grew by 0.9%. The 0.7% increase in GDP in volume terms is down on the 1.1% figure for Q2. While this appears to constitute a reasonable rate of economic growth we can see from the articles below the concern amongst commentators that this third estimate of growth for Q3 had seen a downward revision from the previous estimates of 0.8%. Nonetheless, when compared with Q3 2009, the output of the UK economy in Q3 2010 is estimated to have grown by 2.7%. This is the strongest annual rate of economic growth since the third quarter of 2007.
Despite its relatively low historic share of GDP, gross capital formation was the most rapidly growing expenditure component in Q3, increasing by 5.2% over the quarter and by 16.6% over the latest four quarters. Household spending grew by 0.3% over the quarter and by 2% over the latest four quarters. Meanwhile, government final consumption, i.e. those government purchases not classified as capital expenditures, fell by 0.4% over the quarter and by 1.3% over the latest four quarters. Finally, the volume of exports rose by 1.5% over the quarter and by 7.5% over the latest four quarters, but the volume of imports increased more rapidly rising by 1.7% over the quarter and by 10.3% over the latest four quarters. This has contributed to a UK trade deficit from the start of Q4 2009 to the end of Q3 2010 of a little over £40.5 billion.
Articles
UK recovery weaker than first thought, official data shows Telegraph, Emma Rowley and Philip Aldrick (23/12/10)
Service sector output dips Financial Times, Chris Giles (23/12/10)
UK’s official economic growth estimates revised down Guardian, Graeme Wearden (22/12/10)
UK economic growth revised down BBC News (22/12/10)
Economic growth weaker than thought Press Association (22/12/10)
UK economic growth in 3rd quarter revised downward Bloomberg, Robert Barr (22/10/12)
Economic growth ‘is lower than we thought’ admits ONS Scotsman, Natalie Thomas (23/12/10)
UK GDP growth: analysts view of the revised data Telegraph (22/12/10)
Data
Latest on GDP growth Office for National Statistics (22/12/10)
Quarterly National Accounts, 3rd Quarter 2010 Office for National Statistics (22/12/10)
UK Economic Accounts, Time Series Data Office for National Statistics
For macroeconomic data for EU countries and other OECD countries, such as the USA, Canada, Japan, Australia and Korea, see:
AMECO online European Commission
Questions
- What do you understand by the terms nominal GDP and real GDP?
- Can you think of any other contexts in which we might wish to distinguish between nominal and real changes?
- The following are the estimates of GDP at constant 2006 prices:
Q3 2009= £322.655bn, Q2 2010= £328.881bn, Q3 2010= £331.222bn Show how you would calculate both the quarterly rate of change and the annual rate of change for Q3 2010.
- What would happen to our estimates of the level of constant–price GDP in (3) if the base year for prices was 1986 rather than 2006? What would happen to the quarterly and annual growth rates you calculated? Explain your answer.
- Explain how gross capital formation could have both demand-side and supply-side effects on the economy? How significant do you think such supply-side effects can be?
- How important for short-term economic growth do you think household spending is? What factors do you think will be important in affecting household spending in the months ahead?
The government’s plan for the UK economy is well known. Reduce the public-sector deficit to restore confidence and get the economy going again. The deficit will be reduced mainly by government spending cuts but also by tax increases, including a rise in VAT from 17.5% to 20% on 1 January 2011. Reductions in public-sector demand will be more than offset by a rise in private-sector demand.
But what if private-sector demand does not increase sufficiently? With a fall in government expenditure, reduced public-sector employment and higher taxes, the danger is that demand for private-sector output may actually fall. And this is not helped by a decline in both consumer and business confidence (see, for example, Nationwide Consumer Confidence Index). What is more, consumer borrowing has been falling (see Consumer borrowing falls again) as people seek to reduce their debt, fearing an uncertain future.
So does the government have a ‘Plan B’ to stimulate the economy if it seems to be moving back into recession? Or will it be ‘cuts, come what may’? The Financial Times (see link below) has revealed that senior civil servants have indeed been considering possible stimulus measures if a return to recession seems likely.
Over in Threadneedle Street, there has been a debate in the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee over whether an additional round of quantitative easing may be necessary. So far, the MPC has rejected this approach, but one member, Adam Posen, has strongly advocated stimulating demand (see The UK inflation outlook if this time isn’t different, arguing that the current high inflation is the result of temporary cost-push factors and is not indicative of excessively strong demand.
So should there be a Plan B? And if so, what should it look like?
Articles
Gus O’Donnell’s economic ‘Plan B’ emerges BBC News, Nick Robinson (14/12/10)
Sir Gus O’Donnell asks ministers to consider possible stimulus measures Financial Times, Jim Pickard (14/12/10) (includes link to article by Philip Stephens)
Gus O’Donnell urges Treasury to prepare ‘Plan B’ for economy Guardian, Patrick Wintour and Nicholas Watt (14/12/10)
Unemployment, and that ‘Plan B’ BBC News blogs, Stephanomics, Stephanie Flanders (15/12/10)
Inflation wars (cont’d) BBC News blogs, Stephanomics, Stephanie Flanders (16/12/10)
Don’t overreact to UK inflation – Bank’s Posen Reuters, Patrick Graham (16/12/10)
Bank of England’s Adam Posen calls for more quantitative easing The Telegraph, Philip Aldrick and Emma Rowley (29/9/10)
Don’t overreact to above-target UK inflation rate, cautions Posen Herald Scotland, Ian McConnell (17/12/10)
Posen calls for calm as inflation fears rise Independent, Sean O’Grady (17/12/10)
Data
OECD Economic Outlook OECD (see, in particular, Tables 1, 18, 27, 28 and 32)
Forecasts for the UK economy HM Treasury
UK Economic Outlook PricewaterhouseCoopers
Employment and Unemployment ONS
Inflation Report Bank of England
Questions
- What are likely to be the most important factors in determining the level of aggregate demand in the coming months?
- What are the dangers of (a) not having a Plan B and (b) having and publishing a Plan B?
- Why is inflation currently above target? What is likely to happen to inflation over the coming months?
- What are the arguments for and against having another round of quantitative easing?
- What else could the Bank of England do to stimulate a flagging economy?
We have covered the issue of bank bonuses in previous blogs. See for example: Banking on bonuses? Not for much longer (November 2009); “We want our money back and we’re going to get it” (President Obama) (January 2010); and Payback time (Updated April 2010). But the issue has not been resolved. Despite public outrage around the world over the behaviour of banks that caused the credit crunch and about banks having to be bailed out with ‘taxpayers money’ and, as a result, people facing tax rises and cuts in public-sector services and jobs, bankers’ pay and bonuses are soaring once more. The individuals who caused the global economic crisis seem immune to the effects of their actions. But are things about to change?
The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) has confirmed tough new guidelines on bank bonuses applying to all banks operating in the EU. The CEBS’s prime purpose in recommending restricting bonuses is to reduce the incentive for excessive and dangerous risk taking. As it states in paragraph 1 of the Guidelines on Remuneration Policies and Practices:
Whilst institutions’ remuneration policies were not the direct cause of this crisis, their drawbacks, nonetheless, contributed to its gravity and scale. It was generally recognized that excessive remuneration in the financial sector fuelled a risk appetite that was disproportionate to the loss-absorption capacity of institutions and of the financial sector as a whole.
The guidelines include deferring 40–60% of bonuses for three to five years; paying a maximum of 50% of bonuses in cash (the remainder having to be in shares); setting a maximum bonus level as a percentage of an individual’s basic pay; appointing remuneration committees that are truly independent; publishing the pay and bonuses of all senior managers and ‘risk takers’. Although they are only recommendations, it is expected that bank regulators across the EU will implement them in full.
So will they be effective in curbing the pay and bonuses of top bank staff? Will they curb excessive risk taking? Or will banks simply find ways around the regulations? The following articles discuss these issues
Articles
Bankers’ bonuses to face strict limits in Europe BBC News, Hugh Pym (10/12/10)
Bankers’ bonuses to face strict limits in Europe BBC News (10/12/10)
Europe set to link banking bonuses to basic salaries The Telegraph, Louise Armitstead (10/12/10)
Some bankers may escape EU cash bonus limit moneycontrol.com (India) (11/12/10)
Banks to sidestep bonus crackdown by raising salaries Guardian, Jill Treanor (10/12/10)
Bonuses: When bank jobs pay Guardian (11/12/10)
Bank bonuses (portal page) Financial Times
Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS)
CEBS home page
CEBS has today published its Guidelines on Remuneration Policies and Practices (CP42) CEBS news release (10/12/10)
Guidelines on Remuneration Policies and Practices (10/12/10)
Questions
- What are main objectives of the CEBS guidelines?
- Assess the arguments used by the banking industry in criticising the guidelines.
- In what ways can the banks get around these new regulations (assuming the guidelines are accepted by EU banking regulators)?
- What conditions would have to met for a remuneration committee to be truly independent?
- How likely is it that countries outside the EU will adopt similar regulations? How could they be persuaded to do so?
Happiness and unhappiness are central to economists’ analysis of consumer behaviour. If we define ‘utility’ as perceived happiness, standard consumer theory assumes that rational people will seek to maximise the excess of happiness over the costs of achieving it: i.e. will seek to maximise consumer surplus. In fact, this analysis can be traced back to the work of the utilitarians, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Bentham reffered to it as hedonic or felicific calculus (see also and also).
Now, of course, whether people actually behave in this way is an empirical question: one that behavioural and experimental economists have been investigating over a number of years. Nevertheless, it remains central to neoclassical analysis of ‘rational behaviour’.
But if happiness is central to a large part of economic analysis, how is happiness to be measured? At a micro level, this has proved problematic as it is virtually impossible to have inter-personal comparisons of utility. As a result, consumer theory uses indifference analysis, characteristics analysis, revealed preference and other approaches to analyse consumer demand.
But what about at the macro level? How is a nation’s happiness or well-being to be measured? There is general acceptance that GDP is a relatively poor proxy for national well-being and is more a measure of production. There have been various indices developed over the years (see, for example, Box 14.7 on ISEW in Economics, 7th edition) as alternatives to GDP. None has been adopted by governments, however, with the exception of a Gross National Happiness index in Bhutan.
Recently, however, there has been renewed interest in developing an index of well-being. In France, President Sarkozy commissioned two Nobel economists, Joseph Stiglitz and Amartya Sen, to examine the issues in developing such a measure. In the light of the Stiglitz/Sen report, David Cameron has asked the Office of National Statistics to measure the UK’s general well-being. The articles below look at the difficulties that could arise in producing an index of well-being, of meauring the elements and in using it for policy.
Articles
UK Prime Minister Cameron Moves on UK Happiness Index Triple Pundit, Kristina Robinson (17/11/10)
David Cameron’s happiness index finds support despite impending decade of austerity Daily Record, Magnus Gardham (16/11/10)
How can we measure happiness? Telegraph, Philip Johnston (16/11/10)
David Cameron aims to make happiness the new GDP Guardian, Allegra Stratton (14/11/10)
An unhappiness index is more David Cameron’s style Guardian, Polly Toynbee (16/11/10)
Happiness is a warm baguette? The Economist (13/1/08)
‘Stiglitz-Sen Moving in the Right Direction, but Slowly’ IPS, Hazel Henderson (18/9/09)
The Rise and Fall of the G.D.P. New York Times Magazine (13/5/10)
Happiness doesn’t increase with growing wealth of nations, finds study Guardian, Alok Jha (13/12/10)
Should governments pursue happiness rather than economic growth? The Economist (25/11/10)
M&S’s Sir Stuart Rose among UK’s expert happiness panel BBC News (27/1/11)
The Stiglitz/Sen/Fitoussi report
Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, Joseph Stiglitz, Amartya Sen, Jean-Paul Fitoussi (September 2009)
Questions
- What are the shortcomings of using GDP as a measure of a nation’s well-being?
- Summarise the main findings of the Stiglitz/Sen/Fetoussi report.
- What items would be included in a happiness or well-being index that (a) are not included in GDP; (b) not included in Stiglitz and Sen’s proposed net national product measure? How would such an index be compiled?
- Would it be satisfactory to compile such an index purely on the basis of survey evidence? Why might such evidence prove unreliable?
- What are the political advantages and disadvantages of using such an index?
- Is utilitarianism the best basis for judging the progress of society?