April, 27 2023, 12:58pm EDT

Final Demand Remains Strong, but Inventories Drag Down First Quarter GDP Growth
An analysis by CEPR economist Dean Baker
The overall economy grew at just a 1.1 percent annual rate in the first quarter, as inventories were a major drag on growth. Weak inventory accumulation in the quarter (inventories actually fell slightly) subtracted 2.26 percentage points from growth in the quarter. Final demand, which excludes changes in inventories, increased at a 3.4 percent annual rate.
Consumption Grows at a 3.7 Percent Rate, Driven by Strong Car Sales
After slowing to just a 1.1 percent growth rate in the fourth quarter, consumption growth rebounded in the first quarter. The major factor was a 16.9 percent growth rate in durable goods consumption after three quarters of modest declines. This jump was in turn driven by vehicle sales, which rose at a 45.3 percent rate in the quarter.
This sort of jump will not be repeated in future quarters, and in fact, car sales may be somewhat of a drag in the rest of the year. Non-durable goods grew at just a 0.9 percent rate, while services increased at a modest 2.3 percent rate after growing at a 1.6 percent rate in the fourth quarter. These are very normal pre-pandemic growth rates for services, suggesting we will not see a big post-pandemic surge.
Saving Rate Rises to 4.8 Percent in the First Quarter
The saving rate rose to 4.8 percent in the first quarter, up from 3.2 percent in the third quarter of 2022 and 4.0 percent in the fourth quarter. This increase is primarily because people are paying less in taxes, which raises disposable income. The 4.8 percent saving rate is lower than the pre-pandemic average, which was over 7.0 percent, but it is likely to rise in future quarters if vehicle sales fall back to more normal levels. There seems to be little basis for fears that people are consuming excessively and running down their pandemic savings.
Decline in Residential Investment Slows
Residential investment fell at double-digit rates in the last three quarters of 2022. This drop was partly driven by a collapse in mortgage refinancing, which had been booming with the low pandemic interest rates. Now that refinancing has virtually stopped, it has no further room to fall. While housing construction has fallen, the number of units under construction is still as high as when the Fed began raising rates last year. This number is due to the large backlog of unfinished houses due to supply chain problems. Construction will slow further as these get finished over the year, but the big declines are largely behind us.
Strong Structure Investment Keeps Non-Residential Investment Positive
Non-residential investment grew at a 0.7 percent annual rate in the quarter. This growth was primarily due to an 11.2 percent rise in structure investment. This rise follows an increase of 15.8 percent in the fourth quarter of last year, after six consecutive quarters of decline. The main factor in the jump in structure investment is manufacturing structures. Investment in factories in the first quarter was 40.5 percent higher than in the third quarter of 2022.
Equipment investment fell at a 7.3 percent rate in the quarter. Most of the drop was due to a fall in spending on aircraft and farm equipment. Investment in farm equipment in the first quarter was down by 25.7 percent from the third quarter level.
Investment in intellectual products grew at a modest 3.8 percent, which is down from 9.7 percent and 8.8 percent rates in 2021 and 2022, respectively. This sector is seeing mixed pressures, as many traditional media and social media companies cut back after major expansions during the pandemic. On the other side, the race for AI will be forcing many companies to increase investment. If we see any declines in this component, they are unlikely to be large.
Trade is Small Positive, as Export Growth Outpaces Imports
Trade contributed 0.11 pp to the quarter’s growth, as a 4.8 percent rise in exports more than offset the impact of a 2.9 percent rise in imports. Goods exports actually rose at a more rapid 10.0 percent, as there was an unusual decline of 5.5 percent in service exports. After expanding rapidly during the pandemic, the trade deficit has fallen back to roughly its pre-pandemic share of GDP. It will not likely be a major factor in GDP growth going forward.
Government Spending Adds 0.81 Percentage Points to Growth in Quarter
Overall, government spending rose at a 4.7 percent annual rate, with federal spending rising at a 7.8 percent rate and state and local spending rising at a 2.9 percent rate. Non-defense federal spending grew at a 10.3 percent rate in the quarter. The strong growth in non-defense federal spending is likely somewhat of an anomaly, as this component is often erratic, especially since the pandemic. It fell by 9.2 percent in the second quarter, after dropping at a 1.1 percent rate in the first quarter.
PCE Deflator Rises at 4.2 Percent Annual Rate
The price indices came in largely as expected, with the overall personal consumption expenditure deflator rising at a 4.2 percent rate and the core index rising at 4.9 percent rate. One encouraging item is a 1.2 percent decline in import prices, the third consecutive quarter of decline. Import prices had risen 13.5 percent and 13.2 percent in the first and second quarters of last year. (These prices do not include shipping costs.) Since imports include both finished consumer goods, like clothes and cars, and also inputs to items produced here, the turnaround should be a good sign for future inflation.
Economy Still Looks Very Healthy
In the spite of the widespread concerns about a looming recession, it is difficult to see the basis for one in the first quarter GDP data. Housing is likely to continue to edge lower over the course of 2023, but the big falls are likely behind us. There is a similar story with non-residential construction, with the surge in factory construction turning this category positive. Consumer spending is growing at a healthy pace, with little obvious reason to expect a reversal any time soon. The fallout from the banking crisis is a big uncertainty, but otherwise this is a very positive picture.
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) was established in 1999 to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face. CEPR is committed to presenting issues in an accurate and understandable manner, so that the public is better prepared to choose among the various policy options.
(202) 293-5380LATEST NEWS
National Team Member Becomes at Least 265th Palestinian Footballer Killed by Israel in Gaza
Muhannad al-Lili's killing by Israeli airstrike came as the world mourned the death of Portugal and Liverpool star Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva in a car crash in Spain.
Jul 04, 2025
Muhannad Fadl al-Lili, captain of the Al-Maghazi Services Club and a member of Palestine's national football team, died Thursday from injuries suffered during an Israeli airstrike on his family home in the central Gaza Strip earlier this week, making him the latest of hundreds of Palestinian athletes killed since the start of Israel's genocidal onslaught.
Al-Maghazi Services Club announced al-Lili's death in a Facebook tribute offering condolences to "his family, relatives, friends, and colleagues" and asking "Allah to shower him with his mercy."
The Palestine Football Association (PFA) said that "on Monday, a drone fired a missile at Muhannad's room on the third floor of his house, which led to severe bleeding in the skull."
"During the war of extermination against our people, Muhannad tried to travel outside Gaza to catch up with his wife, who left the strip for Norway on a work mission before the outbreak of the war," the association added. "But he failed to do so, and was deprived of seeing his eldest son, who was born outside the Gaza Strip."
According to the PFA, al-Lili is at least the 265th Palestinian footballer and 585th athlete to be killed by Israeli forces since they launched their assault and siege on Gaza following the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. Sports journalist Leyla Hamed says 439 Palestinian footballers have been killed by Israel.
Overall, Israel's war—which is the subject of an International Court of Justice (ICJ) genocide case—has left more than 206,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing, and around 2 million more forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened, according to Gaza officials.
The Palestine Chronicle contrasted the worldwide press coverage of the car crash deaths of Portuguese footballer Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva with the media's relative silence following al-Lili's killing.
"Jota's death was a tragedy that touched millions," the outlet wrote. "Yet the death of Muhannad al-Lili... was met with near-total silence from global sports media."
Last week, a group of legal experts including two United Nations special rapporteurs appealed to the Fédération Internationale de Football Association, the world football governing body, demanding that its Governance Audit and Compliance Committee take action against the Israel Football Association for violating FIFA rules by playing matches on occupied Palestinian territory.
In July 2024, the ICJ found that Israel's then-57-year occupation of Palestine—including Gaza—is an illegal form of apartheid that should be ended as soon as possible.
During their invasion and occupation of Gaza, Israeli forces have also used sporting facilities including Yarmouk Stadium for the detention of Palestinian men, women, and children—many of whom have reported torture and other abuse at the hands of their captors.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Highly Inspiring' Court Ruling Affirms Nations' Legal Duty to Combat Climate Emergency
"While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections," said one observer.
Jul 04, 2025
In a landmark advisory opinion published Thursday, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights—of which the United States, the world's second-biggest carbon polluter, is not a member—affirmed the right to a stable climate and underscored nations' duty to act to protect it and address the worsening planetary emergency.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change," a summary of the 234-page ruling states. "Any rollback of climate or environmental policies that affect human rights must be exceptional, duly justified based on objective criteria, and comply with standards of necessity and proportionality."
"The court also held that... states must take all necessary measures to reduce the risks arising, on the one hand, from the degradation of the global climate system and, on the other, from exposure and vulnerability to the effects of such degradation," the summary adds.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change."
The case was brought before the Costa-Rica based IACtHR by Chile and Colombia, both of which "face the daily challenge of dealing with the consequences of the climate emergency, including the proliferation of droughts, floods, landslides, and fires, among others."
"These phenomena highlight the need to respond urgently and based on the principles of equity, justice, cooperation, and sustainability, with a human rights-based approach," the court asserted.
IACtHR President Judge Nancy Hernández López said following the ruling that "states must not only refrain from causing significant environmental damage but have the positive obligation to take measures to guarantee the protection, restoration, and regeneration of ecosystems."
"Causing massive and irreversible environmental harm...alters the conditions for a healthy life on Earth to such an extent that it creates consequences of existential proportions," she added. "Therefore, it demands universal and effective legal responses."
The advisory opinion builds on two landmark decisions last year. In April 2024, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Swiss government violated senior citizens' human rights by refusing to abide by scientists' warnings to rapidly phase out fossil fuel production.
The following month, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea found in an advisory opinion that greenhouse gas emissions are marine pollution under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and that signatories to the accord "have the specific obligation to adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce, and control" them.
The IACtHR advisory opinion is expected to boost climate and human rights lawsuits throughout the Americas, and to impact talks ahead of November's United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP30, in Belém, Brazil.
Climate defenders around the world hailed Thursday's advisory opinion, with United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk calling it "a landmark step forward for the region—and beyond."
"As the impact of climate change becomes ever more visible across the world, the court is clear: People have a right to a stable climate and a healthy environment," Türk added. "States have a bedrock obligation under international law not to take steps that cause irreversible climate and environmental damage, and they have a duty to act urgently to take the necessary measures to protect the lives and rights of everyone—both those alive now and the interests of future generations."
Amnesty International head of strategic litigation Mandi Mudarikwa said, "Today, the Inter-American Court affirmed and clarified the obligations of states to respect, ensure, prevent, and cooperate in order to realize human rights in the context of the climate crisis."
"Crucially, the court recognized the autonomous right to a healthy climate for both individuals and communities, linked to the right to a healthy environment," Mudarikwa added. "The court also underscored the obligation of states to protect cross-border climate-displaced persons, including through the issuance of humanitarian visas and protection from deportation."
Delta Merner, lead scientist at the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement that "this opinion sets an important precedent affirming that governments have a legal duty to regulate corporate conduct that drives climate harm."
"Though the United States is not a party to the treaty governing the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, this opinion should be a clarion call for transnational fossil fuel companies that have deceived the public for decades about the risks of their products," Merner added. "The era of accountability is here."
Markus Gehring, a fellow and director of studies in law at Hughes Hall at the University of Cambridge in England, called the advisory opinion "highly inspiring" and "seminal."
Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife, and oceans at Earthjustice, said that "the Inter-American Court's ruling makes clear that climate change is an overriding threat to human rights in the world."
"Governments must act to cut carbon emissions drastically," Caputo stressed. "While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections for all from the realities of climate harm."
Climate litigation is increasing globally in the wake of the 2015 Paris climate agreement. In the Americas, Indigenous peoples, children, and green groups are among those who have been seeking climate justice via litigation.
However, in the United States, instead of acknowledging the climate emergency, President Donald Trump has declared an "energy emergency" while pursuing a "drill, baby, drill" policy of fossil fuel extraction and expansion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin Quietly Approves Massive Crude Oil Expansion Project
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest," said one environmental attorney.
Jul 04, 2025
The Trump administration has quietly fast-tracked a massive oil expansion project that environmentalists and Democratic lawmakers warned could have a destructive impact on local communities and the climate.
As reported recently by the Oil and Gas Journal, the plan "involves expanding the Wildcat Loadout Facility, a key transfer point for moving Uinta basin crude oil to rail lines that transport it to refineries along the Gulf Coast."
The goal of the plan is to transfer an additional 70,000 barrels of oil per day from the Wildcat Loadout Facility, which is located in Utah, down to the Gulf Coast refineries via a route that runs along the Colorado River. Controversially, the Trump administration is also plowing ahead with the project by invoking emergency powers to address energy shortages despite the fact that the United States for the last couple of years has been producing record levels of domestic oil.
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) issued a joint statement condemning the Trump administration's push to approve the project while rushing through environmental impact reviews.
"The Bureau of Land Management's decision to fast-track the Wildcat Loadout expansion—a project that would transport an additional 70,000 barrels of crude oil on train tracks along the Colorado River—using emergency procedures is profoundly flawed," the Colorado Democrats said. "These procedures give the agency just 14 days to complete an environmental review—with no opportunity for public input or administrative appeal—despite the project's clear risks to Colorado. There is no credible energy emergency to justify bypassing public involvement and environmental safeguards. The United States is currently producing more oil and gas than any country in the world."
On Thursday, the Bureau of Land Management announced the completion of its accelerated environmental review of the project, drawing condemnation from climate advocates.
Wendy Park, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, described the administration's rush to approve the project as "pure hubris," especially given its "refusal to hear community concerns about oil spill risks." She added that "this fast-tracked review breezed past vital protections for clean air, public safety and endangered species."
Landon Newell, staff attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, accused the Trump administration of manufacturing an energy emergency to justify plans that could have a dire impact on local habitats.
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest by authorizing the transport of more than 1 billion gallons annually of additional oil on railcars traveling alongside the Colorado River," he said. "Any derailment and oil spill would have a devastating impact on the Colorado River and the communities and ecosystems that rely upon it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular