Over the last two years, U.S. businesses have been slowly but steadily depleting their stocks of inventories—but in the next few quarters that is set to change.
On the 27th of July, the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis issued its first official estimate of second-quarter gross domestic product (GDP). It came in at a 4.1-percent annualized growth rate—the fastest growth rate since the third quarter of 2014. Although some of this strength was attributable to payback from a weak first quarter and an outsized surge in soybean exports, there is no denying that the U.S. economy is churning at a robust pace.
Labor markets have been historically strong; as of the time of this writing, 2.4 million additional people have attained jobs in the last year, the unemployment rate has fallen to 3.9 percent, and the employment cost index for wages and salaries (that is, nominal wages) grew 2.8 percent year-over-year as of the first quarter, the fastest pace in nearly ten years. Household net worth was up 7 percent over the year before in the first quarter, surpassing the US$100 trillion mark for the first time. Survey readings of purchasing managers in the manufacturing sector are robust. Measures of consumer mood are holding at historically lofty levels, and growth of total retail sales in June over the year before was the fastest since early 2012. Across the economy, indicators are consistent with a firm expansion.
Article Figures
[Figure 1] Inventory-to-sales-ratios have trended downwardEnlarge this image
[Figure 2] Business inventory investment to rebuild after lean yearsEnlarge this image
In spite of the second quarter's strong reading on GDP growth, it could have been higher were it not for the continued depletion of inventories. Companies decreased their inventory investment, which dragged down real (or inflation-adjusted) GDP growth by 1.1 percentage points, continuing a pattern of inventory drawdowns that has generally held since mid-2015. Businesses have been gradually decreasing their holdings of inventories ever since a rapid buildup in 2015 that was caused by a "perfect storm" of factors, including a strong U.S. dollar, which decreased the competitiveness of U.S. exports abroad, and a decline in global oil and commodity prices, which reduced spending on equipment and structures in the energy industry. Additionally, labor disruptions occurred at customs ports on the U.S. West Coast, which interrupted the flow of goods and then caused a glut of supply when they were finally resolved in late February 2015.
At the culmination of this inventory buildup, the ratio of overall nonfarm inventories to final sales rose from a post-recession low of 2.28 to 2.45 by the end of 2015. Businesses then began unwinding this buildup. Since the third quarter of 2015, inventory investment has subtracted an average of 0.3 percentage point from annualized GDP growth every quarter. Inventory-to-sales ratios have shrunk, and the nonfarm inventory-to-sales ratio is now the lowest it has been since 2012. (Figure 1 shows inventory-to-sales ratios for nonfarm sectors.)
Numerous factors have contributed to this drawdown. First, holding onto inventory has become relatively pricier. Although economywide inflation is positive and currently accelerating, the cost of goods (as opposed to services) is declining; excluding food and energy, year-on-year growth of the price index for goods has been negative every month since 2012. Businesses therefore have sought to keep as little supply on shelves as possible to avoid making a loss. The growth of electronic commerce, or the "Amazon effect," is also tamping down on inventories, as online suppliers need to maintain less stock than brick-and-mortar establishments to ensure that demand can be met. In the auto sector, inventories of light vehicles were pared down sharply last fall by elevated replacement demand stemming from hurricane damage. Finally, robust consumption has helped to take some supply off of grateful businesses' hands. According to the National Federation of Independent Business, the net percent of small businesses that believed that inventories were too high was zero in June, the lowest proportion since September 2014—a sign of strong sales. The net percent of owners planning to build inventory was the highest since November 2017.
What's on the horizon?
As strong as economic growth has been, IHS Markit believes that the second quarter of 2018 represented the low point of the inventory cycle, and inventory accumulation will grow during the second half of 2018. We believe that current inventory levels are unsustainably low and that the second quarter's overall nonfarm inventory-to-sales ratio of 2.32 is beneath the optimal level. In our forecast as of this writing,real GDP growth overall is estimated to be 3.2 percent for 2018 (from Q4 2017 to Q4 2018), which would make it the best year since 2004. With consumption set to continue at a robust pace—fueled by gains in employment, higher real disposable (after-tax) incomes, and home values—we expect back-to-school retail sales this year to rise 5.2 percent compared to the year before, which would be the best year of growth in school sales since 2011.1 In this environment, businesses must add to their inventory holdings, or shelves of materials and supplies will become uncomfortably bare. For this reason, we expect inventory investment to rise over the next four quarters to contribute an average of five-tenths per quarter to annualized GDP growth. After that, we believe inventory investment will peak in the third quarter of 2019 (at an annualized rate of about US$86 billion chained 2012 dollars) and return to an average of US$60 billion in 2020. (See Figure 2.) This projection of strong inventory investment will stabilize the inventory-to-sales ratio and begin raising it toward our estimate of the optimal level in 2019.
Although our forecast calls for the pickup in inventory investment to progress at a healthy rate, there exist some signs of a possible disruption. Both the Markit PMI (Purchasing Manager Index) and the Institute for Supply Management's reports on manufacturing are currently showing supplier delivery issues. When purchasing managers face supply issues, they often broaden their searches and buy slightly more than they plan to use "just in case." In the past, this has resulted in unsustainable inventory builds like the one seen in 2015—and there is the potential that it could result in a similar boom/bust scenario in the future.
There is another reason why businesses may look to stock up on inventories in the short term: tariffs. The Trump administration, as of this writing, has already enacted tariffs on imported steel, aluminum, washing machines, and solar panels, covering approximately US$57 billion worth of imported goods; it has also targeted a broad collection of goods specifically from China that amounts to a further US$34 billion. These totals are dwarfed by the list of tariffs that are currently under review or threatened, which as of this writing would collectively cover around an additional US$624 billion in goods. Although the existing tariffs were ostensibly intended to protect domestic primary metal producers, more American industries are users than producers of metals—the machinery, farm, construction, and transportation industries, for instance. Tariffs serve to both raise the costs of inputs for these industries and limit their supply; increased costs also filter down to consumers. Already, rising materials costs have become visible in consumer prices; the Consumer Price Index for major appliances grew 5.6 percent versus the year before in June, the most since before the Great Recession.
The fear of tariffs—those enacted and those threatened—means that businesses may anticipate rising costs in the future and significantly build up their inventories in the short run to protect against these price hikes. Both to shore up their bottom line and to ensure adequate supply, businesses in affected industries may double down on inventory investing in the upcoming quarter, shifting this investment earlier and moving it out of the fourth quarter and those following. The consequence would be another boom for inventories, to be followed by another bust—especially if many of the threatened tariffs really do become reality.
Â
Notes:
1.IHS Markit defines back-to-school retail sales as not-seasonally adjusted retail sales from July through September at all retail locations excluding gasoline stations, motor vehicle and parts retailers, grocery and liquor stores, and restaurants.Â
Companies in every sector are converting assets from fossil fuel to electric power in their push to reach net-zero energy targets and to reduce costs along the way, but to truly accelerate those efforts, they also need to improve electric energy efficiency, according to a study from technology consulting firm ABI Research.
In fact, boosting that efficiency could contribute fully 25% of the emissions reductions needed to reach net zero. And the pursuit of that goal will drive aggregated global investments in energy efficiency technologies to grow from $106 Billion in 2024 to $153 Billion in 2030, ABI said today in a report titled “The Role of Energy Efficiency in Reaching Net Zero Targets for Enterprises and Industries.”
ABI’s report divided the range of energy-efficiency-enhancing technologies and equipment into three industrial categories:
Commercial Buildings – Network Lighting Control (NLC) and occupancy sensing for automated lighting and heating; Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based energy management; heat-pumps and energy-efficient HVAC equipment; insulation technologies
Manufacturing Plants – Energy digital twins, factory automation, manufacturing process design and optimization software (PLM, MES, simulation); Electric Arc Furnaces (EAFs); energy efficient electric motors (compressors, fans, pumps)
“Both the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP) continue to insist on the importance of energy efficiency,” Dominique Bonte, VP of End Markets and Verticals at ABI Research, said in a release. “At COP 29 in Dubai, it was agreed to commit to collectively double the global average annual rate of energy efficiency improvements from around 2% to over 4% every year until 2030, following recommendations from the IEA. This complements the EU’s Energy Efficiency First (EE1) Framework and the U.S. 2022 Inflation Reduction Act in which US$86 billion was earmarked for energy efficiency actions.”
Economic activity in the logistics industry expanded in November, continuing a steady growth pattern that began earlier this year and signaling a return to seasonality after several years of fluctuating conditions, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index report (LMI), released today.
The November LMI registered 58.4, down slightly from October’s reading of 58.9, which was the highest level in two years. The LMI is a monthly gauge of business conditions across warehousing and logistics markets; a reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
“The overall index has been very consistent in the past three months, with readings of 58.6, 58.9, and 58.4,” LMI analyst Zac Rogers, associate professor of supply chain management at Colorado State University, wrote in the November LMI report. “This plateau is slightly higher than a similar plateau of consistency earlier in the year when May to August saw four readings between 55.3 and 56.4. Seasonally speaking, it is consistent that this later year run of readings would be the highest all year.”
Separately, Rogers said the end-of-year growth reflects the return to a healthy holiday peak, which started when inventory levels expanded in late summer and early fall as retailers began stocking up to meet consumer demand. Pandemic-driven shifts in consumer buying behavior, inflation, and economic uncertainty contributed to volatile peak season conditions over the past four years, with the LMI swinging from record-high growth in late 2020 and 2021 to slower growth in 2022 and contraction in 2023.
“The LMI contracted at this time a year ago, so basically [there was] no peak season,” Rogers said, citing inflation as a drag on demand. “To have a normal November … [really] for the first time in five years, justifies what we’ve seen all these companies doing—building up inventory in a sustainable, seasonal way.
“Based on what we’re seeing, a lot of supply chains called it right and were ready for healthy holiday season, so far.”
The LMI has remained in the mid to high 50s range since January—with the exception of April, when the index dipped to 52.9—signaling strong and consistent demand for warehousing and transportation services.
The LMI is a monthly survey of logistics managers from across the country. It tracks industry growth overall and across eight areas: inventory levels and costs; warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices; and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The report is released monthly by researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP).
"After several years of mitigating inflation, disruption, supply shocks, conflicts, and uncertainty, we are currently in a relative period of calm," John Paitek, vice president, GEP, said in a release. "But it is very much the calm before the coming storm. This report provides procurement and supply chain leaders with a prescriptive guide to weathering the gale force headwinds of protectionism, tariffs, trade wars, regulatory pressures, uncertainty, and the AI revolution that we will face in 2025."
A report from the company released today offers predictions and strategies for the upcoming year, organized into six major predictions in GEP’s “Outlook 2025: Procurement & Supply Chain.”
Advanced AI agents will play a key role in demand forecasting, risk monitoring, and supply chain optimization, shifting procurement's mandate from tactical to strategic. Companies should invest in the technology now to to streamline processes and enhance decision-making.
Expanded value metrics will drive decisions, as success will be measured by resilience, sustainability, and compliance… not just cost efficiency. Companies should communicate value beyond cost savings to stakeholders, and develop new KPIs.
Increasing regulatory demands will necessitate heightened supply chain transparency and accountability. So companies should strengthen supplier audits, adopt ESG tracking tools, and integrate compliance into strategic procurement decisions.
Widening tariffs and trade restrictions will force companies to reassess total cost of ownership (TCO) metrics to include geopolitical and environmental risks, as nearshoring and friendshoring attempt to balance resilience with cost.
Rising energy costs and regulatory demands will accelerate the shift to sustainable operations, pushing companies to invest in renewable energy and redesign supply chains to align with ESG commitments.
New tariffs could drive prices higher, just as inflation has come under control and interest rates are returning to near-zero levels. That means companies must continue to secure cost savings as their primary responsibility.
Specifically, 48% of respondents identified rising tariffs and trade barriers as their top concern, followed by supply chain disruptions at 45% and geopolitical instability at 41%. Moreover, tariffs and trade barriers ranked as the priority issue regardless of company size, as respondents at companies with less than 250 employees, 251-500, 501-1,000, 1,001-50,000 and 50,000+ employees all cited it as the most significant issue they are currently facing.
“Evolving tariffs and trade policies are one of a number of complex issues requiring organizations to build more resilience into their supply chains through compliance, technology and strategic planning,” Jackson Wood, Director, Industry Strategy at Descartes, said in a release. “With the potential for the incoming U.S. administration to impose new and additional tariffs on a wide variety of goods and countries of origin, U.S. importers may need to significantly re-engineer their sourcing strategies to mitigate potentially higher costs.”
Freight transportation providers and maritime port operators are bracing for rough business impacts if the incoming Trump Administration follows through on its pledge to impose a 25% tariff on Mexico and Canada and an additional 10% tariff on China, analysts say.
Industry contacts say they fear that such heavy fees could prompt importers to “pull forward” a massive surge of goods before the new administration is seated on January 20, and then quickly cut back again once the hefty new fees are instituted, according to a report from TD Cowen.
As a measure of the potential economic impact of that uncertain scenario, transport company stocks were mostly trading down yesterday following Donald Trump’s social media post on Monday night announcing the proposed new policy, TD Cowen said in a note to investors.
But an alternative impact of the tariff jump could be that it doesn’t happen at all, but is merely a threat intended to force other nations to the table to strike new deals on trade, immigration, or drug smuggling. “Trump is perfectly comfortable being a policy paradox and pushing competing policies (and people); this ‘chaos premium’ only increases his leverage in negotiations,” the firm said.
However, if that truly is the new administration’s strategy, it could backfire by sparking a tit-for-tat trade war that includes retaliatory tariffs by other countries on U.S. exports, other analysts said. “The additional tariffs on China that the incoming US administration plans to impose will add to restrictions on China-made products, driving up their prices and fueling an already-under-way surge in efforts to beat the tariffs by importing products before the inauguration,” Andrei Quinn-Barabanov, Senior Director – Supplier Risk Management solutions at Moody’s, said in a statement. “The Mexico and Canada tariffs may be an invitation to negotiations with the U.S. on immigration and other issues. If implemented, they would also be challenging to maintain, because the two nations can threaten the U.S. with significant retaliation and because of a likely pressure from the American business community that would be greatly affected by the costs and supply chain obstacles resulting from the tariffs.”
New tariffs could also damage sensitive supply chains by triggering unintended consequences, according to a report by Matt Lekstutis, Director at Efficio, a global procurement and supply chain procurement consultancy. “While ultimate tariff policy will likely be implemented to achieve specific US re-industrialization and other political objectives, the responses of various nations, companies and trading partners is not easily predicted and companies that even have little or no exposure to Mexico, China or Canada could be impacted. New tariffs may disrupt supply chains dependent on just in time deliveries as they adjust to new trade flows. This could affect all industries dependent on distribution and logistics providers and result in supply shortages,” Lekstutis said.