Skip to content

Arkansas Employment and Unemployment – July 2010

 The latest information on Arkansas employment and unemployment was released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Arkansas Department of Workforce Services this morning.  The report showed encouraging signs of continuing improvement in the Arkansas labor market.  The unemployment rate ticked down one-tenth of one percent to 7.4%.   The household survey also showed that the number of unemployed persons fell by 1,800 in July, dropping below 100,000 for the first time since May 2009.

Source:  Bureau of Labor Statistics
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Analysis of the payroll survey is complicated by seasonal patterns.  Without seasonal adjustment, the data show employment down by nearly 11,000 in July.  However, as shown in the chart below, July is typically a low-point in the recurring seasonal cycle diplayed by employment data.  (See Seasonally Adjusted Unemployment Rates for Arkansas MSAs.)  After seasonally adjusting the raw data, the statistics from BLS show that payroll employment rose by 3,600 jobs.  Since the end of 2009, payroll employment has increased by nearly 16,000 jobs.

Source:  Bureau of Labor Statistics
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

The increase was broad-based, with increases in every major sector except financial services and government.  Employment in manufacturing showed its 7th consecutive monthly increase.  Trade, transportation and utilities was up by 900 jobs, and business and professional services rose by 1,400.  Education and health services continued to expand, adding approximately 2,400 jobs in July.  The decline in government employment can be primarily attributed to layoffs of temporary census workers.

Source:  Bureau of Labor Statistics
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Typical summer doldrums aside, the July employment report provides additional evidence that labor markets in Arkansas are steadily improving.

#  #  #

*Seasonally adjusted data for nonfarm payroll employment, reported in a format compatible with the monthly press release from the Arkansas Department of Workforce Services, are available here: 
Table – Seasonally Adjusted NFPE.

Arkansas Taxable Sales up 4% in the Second Quarter

The July General Revenue Report  from the Department of Finance and Administration (DFA) showed that gross receipts collections (primarily sales and use taxes) were up sharply in July– 8.9 percent higher than the previous year and 2.7 percent above the DFA  forecast.   This information implies a surge in taxable sales toward the end of the second quarter of 2010.  

In fact, newly calculated statistics show that Arkansas Taxable Sales rose by 4.0 percent in the second quarter (preliminary*) following a revised 2.6 percent growth rate in the first quarter of the year.  The latest reading represents the third consecutive quarterly increase.

Source: Calculated by IEA using data from the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration
Source: Calculated by the UALR Institute for Economic Advancement using data from the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration

The improvement in Arkansas Taxable Sales growth in the second quarter contrasts with national retail sales data, which showed a slowdown in growth.  After increasing at a 2 percent rate in the first quarter, U.S. Retail Sales rose by only 1 percent in the second quarter.  As illustrated in the chart below, Arkansas Retail Sales have increased by a total of 7.6 percent over the past three quarters of growth, while U.S. Retail Sales have increased by only 6.8 percent over four quarters of growth.  The turnaround in Arkansas sales growth lagged the rest of the nation, but the most recent data on Arkansas Taxable Sales suggests that Arkansas is rebounding more quickly.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration, UALR Institute for Economic Advancement.
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration, UALR Institute for Economic Advancement.

The Arkansas Taxable Sales series is calculated by IEA  to serve as a timely measure of Arkansas retail sales.  The series is derived from sales and use tax data from DFA, adjusting for the relative timing of tax collections and underlying sales, changes in tax laws, and seasonal patterns in the data.

A spreadsheet of the data is available here:  Arkansas Taxable Sales data (Excel file)

* Data are preliminary until the release of the DFA report, Arkansas Fiscal Notes for July 2010, and will be updated when information becomes available.

Metro Area Personal Income – 2009

Statistics on personal income for the nation’s Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) in 2009 were released this morning by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA).  The national economy was hitting the trough of a recession in 2009, so it is not surprising that the majority of MSAs experienced negative growth last year.  From the BEA press release:  “Personal income declined in 223 MSAs, increased in 134, and remained unchanged in 9 MSAs. On average, MSA personal income fell 1.8 percent in 2009, after rising 2.7 percent in 2008.”

The map of metro areas from BEA, displayed below, shows that income growth in Arkansas’ MSAs was mixed, but generally better-than-average.  Pine Bluff was in the highest-growth quintile, with Little Rock in the second quintile.  The remainder of the state’s MSAs ranked in the third and fourth quintiles, with none finishing among the bottom fifth.

MSA2009

Table 1 provides more detail, comparing personal incomes of Arkansas’ MSAs to the total metropolitan portion of the U.S.  Personal income declined in 5 of the state’s 7 MSAs, but increased in the Pine Bluff and Little Rock.   Income growth in each of Arkansas’ MSAs out-performed the nation’s metro areas as a whole.

Source:  Bureau of Economic Analysis
Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis

Table 2 shows figures for per capita income in Arkansas MSAs.  In per capita terms, only Pine Bluff experienced positive income growth in 2009;  Its growth rate of 1.6 percent puts it in the top 25 among the nation’s metro areas.  Fayetteville’s per capita income declined slightly more than the national average, and Jonesboro’s decline was about equal to the total metropolitan portion of the U.S.  The other 5 MSAs in Arkansas experienced smaller losses than other metro areas across the nation.

Source:  Bureau of Economic Analysis
Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis

The last two columns of Table 2 show per capita income in Arkansas’ MSAs as a percent of per capita income in the metropolitan portion of the U.S.  The latest data show that Arkansas’ metro areas generally remain below-average.  Fort Smith, Jonesboro, and Pine Bluff are in the lowest quintile of MSA per capita personal income.  Fayetteville, Hot Springs, and Texarkana are in the fourth quintile.  The MSA with the highest per capita income, Little Rock, ranks in the second quintile.  Despite the fact that Arkansas’ metro areas outperformed other parts of the country in 2009, they gained little ground terms of per capita income.

The 2009 comparison of personal income in Arkansas’ MSAs to the rest of the nation’s metro areas is affected by two factors.  First, the recession in Arkansas was not generally as severe as in many parts of the country.  This accounts for the fact that all of Arkansas’ MSAs experienced above-average income growth.  On the other hand, evidence from statewide income growth and Arkansas taxable sales suggest that Arkansas reached a trough in economic activity in the third quarter of 2009 — one quarter later than the national economy.  This tends to depress measured growth rates for the year compared to those parts of the country that entered an economic recovery phase earlier than Arkansas.  As a result, the annual income statistics for Arkansas’ MSAs in 2009 reflect more weakness than do current economic conditions.

How would expiration of the “Bush-era tax cuts” affect Arkansans?

An economic  issue that is becoming increasingly prominent in national political discourse is the expiration of the “Bush-era tax cuts.”   As a political compromise to meet budget rules, the controversial tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 were legislated to expire at the end of this year.  Congress and the President now face the prospect of allowing the cuts to expire–raising taxes in 2011 relative to taxes in 2010–or extending them.

In the spirit of the Arkansas-centric focus of the Arkansas Economist, we ask the question:  “How does this issue affect families in Arkansas?”

The Tax Foundation just issued a report that provides a state-by-state comparison of the tax implications for a “middle-income” family.   The report compares the  tax change for an average family in the middle 20% of each state’s income distribution.  The comparisons illustrate some interesting features of the tax changes that would result if the tax cuts are allowed to expire.

Table 1 shows the Tax Foundation figures for Arkansas compared to the U.S. as a whole.  For the average middle-income American family, the expiration of the tax cuts would mean a tax increase of $1540.  For a middle-income family in Arkansas the increase would be $1418–a little bit less than the national average.   In percentage terms, however, the difference is remarkable:  the national average represents an increase of 45% while the Arkansas increase is over 100%.

Source:  The Tax Foundation
Source: The Tax Foundation

Table 2 shows a 50-state comparison of the Tax Foundation data, along with some additional calculations to show percentage increases and relative state rankings.   Arkansas ranks 43rd in terms of the dollar-value impact of allowing the tax cuts to expire, but it ranks number 2 (2nd only to Mississippi) in terms of the percentage increase in taxes that it would imply.

Source:  The Tax Foundation
Source: The Tax Foundation

The state rankings reveal a clear pattern:  Those states in which middle-income families would bear the largest dollar-value increase in tax bills (e.g. Alaska, Connecticut, and New Jersey) are the same states that show the lowest percentage increases.  Those that have the smaller dollar-value changes (e.g. Mississippi, Arkansas, and West Virginia) are the states with the largest percentage changes.

This pattern is related to the structure the Bush-era tax cuts.   The tax cuts were across-the-board, but the largest cuts–in dollar terms–went to the wealthiest Americans.  In percentage terms, however, the largest reductions went to lower and middle-income Americans.   As a state with a relatively low median income, Arkansas has many families that benefited from higher exemptions, the reduction of the lowest tax rate, and larger tax-offsets like the increase in the child tax credit.  As a result, a complete expiration of these modifications to the tax code would result in large percentage increases in the tax burdens of middle-income Arkansans.

The course of legislative action on the issue is uncertain, but President Obama has proposed to extend the tax cuts for all taxpayers except married couples with incomes over $250,000 (or single people with incomes over $200,000).  Table 3 gives an indication of how many households this limited extension might affect:  It reports data from the Census Bureau’s 2008 American Community Survey (ACS) on the number of households in each state with an income greater than $200,000.  In Arkansas, over 20,000 households fall into this category– about 1.8% of the total.  This is the second-lowest percentage among the 50 states.

Source:  U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey

An Excel file of the data in this post is available here.

Metro Area Employment and Unemployment – June Update

June data for metro area employment and unemployment came out earlier this week (see Metropolitan Area Employment and Unemployment Summary from the BLS).  According to the raw numbers—not seasonally adjusted—unemployment rates were unchanged or higher in each of the state’s metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs).   However, June is typically a month in which unemployment ticks upward for purely seasonal reasons.   One factor:  teachers and students are off for the summer, and students in particular are reported as being unemployed if they are seeking, but fail to find summer jobs.** 

After accounting for these recurrent patterns, seasonally adjusted statistics paint a much brighter picture.  Unemployment rates fell in every one of the state’s MSAs.  In many cases, the declines were substantial.

Source:  Bureau of Labor Statistics
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Employment statistics for June (seasonally adjusted by the BLS) showed that payrolls fell in most of Arkansas’ MSAs.  Employment was down by 0.1% in Fayetteville, down 0.9% in Fort Smith, down 0.6% in Little Rock, down 0.4% in Memphis and down 1.1% in Pine Bluff.   Employment was unchanged in Jonesboro, but was up by 0.3% in Hot Springs and up 0.2% in Texarkana.

Cumulative job losses in the state’s MSAs since the start of the recession have varied considerably.   The chart below shows the percentage decline for each MSA since December 2007.

Source:  Bureau of Labor Statistics
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Jonesboro has lost the fewest jobs:  total losses reached a peak of 2.2% in April but have recovered over the past two months.  Similarly, Texarkana has come back from a cumulative loss of 3.3% in December of last year to a total loss of only 1.2% as of June.  Hot Springs losses totalled 6.7% in April, but have bounced back to within 3.8% of the December 2007 level.  Employment in the remaining MSAs is at or near recent low points, having yet shown little sign of recovery.

#   #   #

**The June 2010 issue of Arkansas Labor Market, from the Department of Workforce Services, includes a feature article describing some of the reasons that employment data show seasonal fluctuations.

Arkansas Employment and Unemployment – June 2008

The latest information on Arkansas employment and unemployment was released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Arkansas Department of Workforce Services this morning.  The reports indicate that the employment situation in Arkansas is continuing to improve.

The unemployment rate dropped by two-tenths of a percent, falling to 7.5 percent in June.  The number of unemployed fell by 4,100 to 100,943.  This is the lowest reading since the number of unemployed first topped 100,000 in June of 2009.   The unemployment rate would have fallen further had it not been for a contraction in the size of the labor force.   The labor force declined by more than 8,000 in June, following three months of previous declines.  The most obvious explanation for this phenomenon is an increase in the number of “discouraged workers” who have given up looking for employment–at least for the time-being.   Overall, however, the news from the June employment report should serve as a reason for more encouragement going forward.

Source:  Bureau of Labor Statistics
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

The payroll survey for June showed a healthy rate of job-creation:  Nonfarm payroll employment increased by 6,000 jobs (seasonally adjusted).  Since December of last year, payroll employment has risen by 11,400 and it is up by 4,200 from a year ago.  From the low-point for employment measured in February 2010, the number of jobs has increased by more than 15,000.

Source:  Bureau of Labor Statistics
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Recent data have shown employment gains in some of the key sectors for the Arkansas economy:  Manufacturing employment was up by 1000 jobs, and has now increased for five consecutive months.  Employment in Trade, Transportation and Utilities edged up by 800 jobs in June, recovering the job losses from earlier in the year.  Employment in Education and Health services resumed a healthy pace of job creation, increasing by 4,500 jobs in June.

Source:  Bureau of Labor Statistics
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Interpreting the growth in public sector employment is complicated by seasonal patterns and changes in the Census Bureau’s employment of temporary workers.  On a not-seasonally-adjusted basis, government employment was down by 4,700 jobs, with an 1,800 decline in Federal Government employment largely attributable to the winding-down of Census Bureau employment.  However, much of the decline in state and local government employment was related to typical fluctuations in public school employment.  After taking account of this school-year phenomenon, seasonally adjusted employment by government entities increased by 1,800  (with federal government employment down by 2,100 jobs and state & local employment up by a total of 3,900 jobs).

#  #  #

*Seasonally adjusted data for nonfarm payroll employment, reported in a format compatible with the monthly press release from the Arkansas Department of Workforce Services, are available here: 
Table – Seasonally Adjusted NFPE.

Is the U.S. Economy Facing a “Double-Dip” Recession?

Earlier this week, I was quoted on Talk Business.net as questioning the relevance of a “double-dip” recession.  There are several reasons that I take that position.

First, The Business Cycle Dating Committee at the National Bureau of Economic Research has laid out clear criteria for defining a recession.  They cover a broad range of economic measures, including production, income and employment–not just quarter-to-quarter movements in GDP.  In fact, the Business Cycle Dating Committee has never defined or declared that we’ve seen a double dip recession.  The chair of the Committee, Dr. Robert Hall has recently referred to the recessions of 1980 and 1981 as the closest thing he’s seen to a “double-dip,” yet the Committee decided at the time to define two separate recessions  (See A ‘Double-dip’ Recession Defined).

Another reason that I question the current danger of a double-dip recession is that most economic indicators continue to show a moderate rate of recovery in the economy.  The buzz about a double dip recession seems to have intensified following the release of the June employment report, which was somewhat weaker than expected.  It is never wise to put too much emphasis on one month’s data, and in this case it can be misleading.  As shown in the chart below, private-sector employment has shown increases in each of the past six months. 

Source:  Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Total employment has been subject to fluctuations in Government employment due to the hiring of temporary workers by the Census Bureau.  When the report on May employment came out, many media sources pointed out that the strong monthly showing was entirely due to Census hiring, with private sector employment falling.  Subsequent revisions to the data now show that private sector employment did increase in May, albeit only slightly.

One of the reasons that the June employment report looked so discouraging was that the Census Bureau laid off many of the workers it had hired in earlier months, so that total employment declined, on net.  Yet private sector hiring showed its sixth consecutive month of increase.

Evidence from previous recessions–particularly the two most recent recessions–shows that employment tends to be a lagging indicator, picking up only slowly during the early stages of an economic expansion.  So far, we’ve seen total growth of about 900,000 jobs during 2010.  This is not consistent with a robust rebound, but it does indicate a clear sign of a turnaround in the job market. 

Meanwhile, the other key indicators that are considered by the Business Cycle Dating Committee–industrial production, real income growth, and total sales–are all showing patterns of renewed strength since the middle of 2009.  The economy is recovering, but it’s looking like this recovery will follow a pattern similar to the last two “jobless recoveries.”

Arkansas Employment and Unemployment – May 2010

The latest information on Arkansas employment and unemployment was released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Arkansas Department of Workforce Services this morning.  The reports show that the unemployment rate dropped from 7.8% to 7.7% in May (seasonally adjusted).  This is the first decline since March 2008.  More significantly, the number of unemployed persons fell for the second consecutive month. Over the months of April and May, the number of unemployed has fallen by over 2000. 

Source:  Bureau of Labor Statistics
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Nonfarm payroll employment report also contained positive news:  the number of jobs was up by 2800 in May (seasonally adjusted)*. 

Source:  Bureau of Labor Statistics
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Gains were particularly notable in some of Arkansas largest sectors:  Manufacturing employment was up by 900; Trade, Transportation and Utilities was up by 2100; and Education and Health Services was up by 900.

Source:  Bureau of Labor Statistics
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Government employment was also up sharply +4200 jobs.  Mirroring the pattern seen in the national data for May, many of these jobs were related to temporary hiring by the Census Bureau.  Federal Government employment in Arkansas was up by 4600 in May.

Since December of 2009, employment is up by 6300 jobs (including 6000 in manufacturing).  4000 of those jobs are government-related, with an increase in private-sector employment of 2300.

#  #  #

*Seasonally adjusted data for nonfarm payroll employment, reported in a format compatible with the monthly press release from the Arkansas Department of Workforce Services, are available here: 
Table – Seasonally Adjusted NFPE.

Arkansas Personal Income – 2010:Q1

State-level data on personal income in the first quarter were released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis this morning.  The statistics show a second consecutive quarter of positive growth for Arkansas.  Personal income was up 0.4% in the first quarter of this year, following a (revised) growth rate of 0.6% in the previous quarter.  For the U.S. as a whole, personal income growth was 0.9%.

Among the 50 states, this growth rate was among the lowest in the country (47th).  However, as indicated by the figure below, Arkansas personal income did not fall nearly as sharply during the recession as did incomes in much of the rest of the country.  From the peak in 2008Q2, personal income in Arkansas fell by only 1.5% by the 2009Q3.  Over the same period, personal income for the U.S. was down by 2.3% (at its lowest point, U.S. personal income was down by 2.7% in the 2009Q1).  In some sense, the latest figures show that the rest of the country is now catching up with Arkansas. 

Source:  Bureau of Economic Analysis
Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis

Although the report showed total personal income was up in the first quarter, net earnings were slightly lower (-0.3%) as were dividends, interest and rent (-1.0%).  Consequently, the overall increase in income was attributable to transfer payments (+3.2%).   This pattern was common in many other states as well, with the increase due to payments associated with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).  ARRA payments were up by over 33% in Arkansas in the first quarter.

Breaking down the decline in net earnings by sector, the decline was most pronounced in farm income.  Earnings were up in manufacturing, wholesale and retail trade, and several other categories of service-sector employment (including government).

Arkansas Taxable Sales – Update

As noted in a recent post announcing Arkansas Taxable Sales for the first quarter of 2010, the initial data are preliminary until after more detailed statistics are published by the Department of Finance and Administration (DF&A).  With the release of Arkansas Fiscal Notes for April 2010, revised figures are now available.

The final data show a slightly smaller sales figure for the first quarter, with a downward revision amounting to only 0.25 percent.  The final data still show a strong gain in the 2010:Q1, up 2.1% (seasonally adjusted).  This follows a 1.0% gain in the fourth quarter of last year.

TextBox2010Q1

The release this morning of the monthly general revenue report for May also provides information to update the monthly series with preliminary data for April 2010.   These estimates show that  Arkansas Taxable Sales in April were up 1.7 percent from March (seasonally adjusted).  Although these data are based on preliminary and incomplete information, it would appear that retail sales were off to a strong start in the second quarter of 2010. 

Arkansas Taxable Sales statistics are constructed by the Institute for Economic Advancement using tax collection data from the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration. Data for April 2010 are preliminary.
Arkansas Taxable Sales statistics are constructed by the Institute for Economic Advancement using tax collection data from the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration. Data for April 2010 are preliminary.

 Updated and revised data are available in Excel spreadsheet form by clicking here.