Why Was First Quarter GDP Growth Revised Down to 3.0%?


First quarter GDP growth was a little less than we thought. It was revised down to an annualized rate of 3.0% from its initial estimate of 3.2%, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. This came as a surprise to economists. Even though GDP was revised downward, they expected the opposite -- for the second estimate to raise growth to 3.5%. What happened?

First, for those who like charts, here's some historical perspective of GDP:

gdp rev 2 2010-q1.PNG

Even with this slight revision, the first quarter remained the second highest quarterly growth rate we've seen since the recession began in late 2007.

The revision was caused almost entirely by the personal consumption expenditures portion, i.e. consumer spending. Even though this got a lot better in the first quarter, it didn't improve as much as originally thought. It was responsible for 2.42% of the 3.0% growth. The prior estimate reported a 2.55% contribution. That 0.13% difference is responsible for the vast majority of the 0.2% revised drop.

In particular, spending on services -- not on goods -- was overestimated. The services that consumers didn't use as much as thought were housing and utilities, and food services and accommodations.

Of course, 0.2% isn't much. But it is a little disappointing where most of this revision came from. Spending needs to drive the recovery to create jobs. It's also unfortunate that restaurants and travel was one of the most downwardly revised components; spending on these non-necessities is also an indicator that consumers are feeling much more comfortable opening their wallets. This component, and spending overall, still showed a healthy increase compared to 2009, but these revisions make their progress a little less impressive.

Also interesting to note, but not a source of the revision, was how trade estimates changed. Exports were revised up a bit. They increased by $27.3 billion instead of $22.0 billion. Meanwhile, however, imports were also revised up to a $47.6 billion increase from $41.0 billion in the initial estimate. So the net result is mostly a wash: the two revisions approximately cancel each other out. But it is good to see more exports than originally anticipated.

Finally, keep in mind that there's still another revision coming. Since downward revisions are more common than upward revisions, while there's a chance that we could return to the 3.2% original estimate, it's not too likely. But hopefully the final number won't sink below 3.0%.

Note: Data above is seasonally adjusted.

Jump to comments
Presented by

Daniel Indiviglio was an associate editor at The Atlantic from 2009 through 2011. He is now the Washington, D.C.-based columnist for Reuters Breakingviews. He is also a 2011 Robert Novak Journalism Fellow through the Phillips Foundation. More

Indiviglio has also written for Forbes. Prior to becoming a journalist, he spent several years working as an investment banker and a consultant.
Get Today's Top Stories in Your Inbox (preview)

Why Are Americans So Bad at Saving Money?

The U.S. is particularly miserable at putting aside money for the future. Should we blame our paychecks or our psychology?

Elsewhere on the web

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register. blog comments powered by Disqus


The Death of Film

You'll never hear the whirring sound of a projector again.


How to Hunt With Poison Darts

A Borneo hunter explains one of his tribe's oldest customs: the art of the blowpipe


A Delightful, Pixar-Inspired Cartoon

An action figure and his reluctant sidekick trek across a kitchen in search of treasure.


I Am an Undocumented Immigrant

"I look like a typical young American."


Why Did I Study Physics?

Using hand-drawn cartoons to explain an academic passion



More in Business

Just In