Reuters: US employment growth through March revised sharply lower

  • Revision estimate comes days after weak August nonfarm payrolls
  • Job growth was stalling before Trump’s tariffs, estimate shows
  • BLS revision estimate linked to birth-death model problems

The U.S. economy likely created 911,000 fewer jobs in the 12 months through March than previously estimated, the government said on Tuesday, suggesting that job growth was already stalling before President Donald Trump’s aggressive tariffs on imports.

The preliminary annual benchmark revision estimate to the closely watched payrolls data from the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) followed on the heels of news last Friday that job growth almost stalled in August and the economy shed jobs in June for the first time in four and a half years.

The revision estimate is equivalent to 76,000 fewer jobs per month. It implied that nonfarm payroll gains averaged about 71,000 per month, instead of 147,000. Economists had expected the estimated revision to be between 400,000 and 1 million jobs.

“This means labor market momentum is being lost from an even weaker position than originally thought,” said James Knightley, chief international economist at ING.

In addition to being hobbled by uncertainty stemming from trade policy, the labor market has also been pressured by the White House’s immigration crackdown, which has undercut labor supply. A shift by businesses to artificial intelligence tools and automation also is curbing demand for workers.

Once a year, the BLS compares its nonfarm payrolls data, based on monthly surveys of a sample of employers, with a much more complete database of unemployment insurance tax records, the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) data.

A final benchmark revision will be released in February along with the BLS’ employment report for January. Government statisticians will use the final benchmark count to revise payroll data for the months prior to and after March.

Economists have attributed the revisions to the “birth-and-death” model, a method the BLS uses to try to estimate how many jobs were gained or lost because of companies opening or closing in a given month. These companies are not initially available for sampling.

Though economists at Goldman Sachs agreed the labor market had softened materially, they cautioned the revision estimate was too excessive. They noted the QCEW was prone to upward revisions and might have difficulties accounting for unauthorized immigrants.

“Our own model of net job gains from firm births and deaths, one of the key points of uncertainty in monthly payrolls growth that the benchmarking process corrects for, suggests a downward revision of around 550,000, or 45,000 per month, via that channel,” they wrote in a note.

“While the BLS’ birth-death adjustment for nonfarm payrolls was probably too generous in second half of 2024, we estimate that the overstatement has since narrowed to around 10,000 jobs per month, cautioning against extrapolating too much from the benchmark revision.”

Last year, the preliminary estimate was for payrolls to be revised down by 818,000 jobs in the 12 months through March 2024. Payrolls were in the end only downgraded by 598,000.

‘ACCURATE, INDEPENDENT AND TRUSTED’

Leisure and hospitality employment was estimated to be revised down by 176,000 jobs over the 12 months through March. Trade, transportation, and utilities payrolls could be slashed by 226,000 positions, while professional and business services employment was projected to be reduced by 158,000 jobs.

Manufacturing employment could be lowered by 95,000 jobs. Government employment was estimated to be cut by 31,000 positions. Modest upgrades were estimated for only the transportation and warehousing, and utilities industries.

U.S. financial markets were little moved by the report.

Economists continued to expect the Federal Reserve would resume cutting interest rates next Wednesday, with a quarter-point reduction, after pausing its easing cycle in January because of uncertainty over the impact of tariffs.

With the consumer price data on Thursday expected to show inflation pressures building in August, the estimated revisions could fan fears of stagflation.

The monthly employment report is based on data derived from the Current Employment Statistics (CES) program, which surveys about 121,000 businesses and government agencies, representing about 631,000 individual worksites. The QCEW data is derived from reports by employers to the state unemployment insurance programs, and represents about 95% of total employment.

Sharp downgrades last month to May and June employment figures totaling 258,000 jobs angered Trump, who fired BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer, accusing her, without evidence, of faking the employment data. Trump has nominated E.J. Antoni to replace McEntarfer.

Antoni, who has penned opinion pieces critical of the BLS and even suggested suspending the monthly employment report, is viewed as unqualified by economists across the political spectrum. The National Association for Business Economics on Monday urged “policymakers, business leaders, and the economics community to stand with BLS and ensure that America’s statistics remain accurate, independent, and trusted worldwide.”

Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer blamed the estimated revision on what she said was a failure by leaders at the statistical agency “to improve their practices” during former President Joe Biden’s administration, “utilizing outdated methods that rendered a once-reliable system completely ineffective.”

But the BLS, like other statistical agencies, has suffered from years of inadequate funding under both Democratic and Republican administrations.

“Any political retaliation due to today’s release will harm the ability for BLS to provide timely and unbiased statistics,” said Elise Gould, a senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute.

https://www.reuters.com/business/us-payrolls-benchmark-revision-estimate-suggests-labor-market-weaker-than-2025-09-09

Alternet: Will ‘hurt American families’: Economists sound alarm on new Trump attack

Economists are warning that US President Donald Trump’s efforts to meddle with the Federal Reserve are going to wind up raising prices even further on working families.

Michael Madowitz, principal economist at the Roosevelt Institute, said on Wednesday that the president’s efforts to strong-arm the US central bank into lowering interest rates by firing Federal Reserve Gov. Lisa Cook would backfire by accelerating inflation.

“The administration’s efforts to politicize interest rates—an authoritarian tactic—will ultimately hurt American families by driving up costs,” he said. “That helps explain why Fed independence has helped keep inflation under 3%, while, after years of political interference in their central bank, Turkey’s inflation rate is over 33%.”

Heidi Shierholz, the president of the Economic Policy Institutesaid that the president’s move to fire Cook “radically undermines what Trump says his own goal is: lowering U.S. interest rates to spur faster economic growth.”

She then gave a detailed explanation for why Trump imposing his will on the Federal Reserve would likely bring economic pain.

“Presidential capture of the Fed would signal to decision-makers throughout the economy that interest rates will no longer be set on the basis of sound data or economic conditions—but instead on the whims of the president,” she argued. “Confidence that the Fed will respond wisely to future periods of macroeconomic stress—either excess inflation or unemployment—will evaporate.”

This lack of confidence, she continued, would manifest in investors in US Treasury bonds demanding higher premiums due to the higher risks they will feel they are taking when buying US debt, which would only further drive up the nation’s borrowing costs.

“These higher long-term rates will ripple through the economy—making mortgages, auto loans, and credit card payments higher for working people—and require that rates be held higher for longer to tamp down any future outbreak of inflation,” she said. “In the first hours after Trump’s announcement, all of these worries seemed to be coming to pass.”

Economist Paul Krugman, a former columnist for The New York Timeswrote on his personal Substack page Thursday that Trump’s moves to take control of the Federal Reserve were “shocking and terrifying.”

“Trump’s campaign to take over monetary policy has shifted from a public pressure to personal intimidation of Fed officials: the attack on Cook signals that Trump and his people will try to ruin the life of anyone who stands in his way,” he argued. “There is now a substantial chance that the Fed’s independence, its ability to manage the nation’s monetary policy on an objective, technocratic basis rather than as an instrument of the president’s political interests and personal whims, will soon be gone.”

The economists’ warnings come as economic data released on Friday revealed that core inflation rose to 2.9% in August, which is the highest annual rate recorded since this past February. Earlier this month, the Producer Price Index, which is considered a leading indicator of future inflation, came in at 3.3%, which was significantly higher than economists’ consensus estimate of 2.5%.

Data aggregated by polling analyst G. Elliott Morris shows that inflation is far and away Trump’s biggest vulnerability, as American voters give him a net approval of -23% on that issue.

https://www.alternet.org/trump-cook-economy

Moneywise: Trump’s ‘no tax on overtime’ is now US law — but some Americans don’t even qualify. Here’s the catch

They say that the only two certainties in life are death and taxes. The recently passed “Big Beautiful Bill,” however, claims to eliminate one of those — at least for overtime hours.

The budget bill, passed in July, followed up on a key Trump campaign promise to eliminate taxes on overtime pay. Even better: the law is retroactive to the beginning of 2025, giving those who work overtime an additional six months of tax-free wages ahead of all the money the bill will save them going forward.

But the reality may be far less generous than it sounds.

Before you start planning how to spend all that extra cash, be aware that the new law contains several big, not-so-beautiful catches.

Not all overtime pay is tax exempt

In touting the elimination of taxes on overtime pay in the budget bill, the White House claimed that the law “makes good on … President Trump’s cornerstone campaign promises and benefits hardworking Americans where they need it the most — their paychecks.”

And in some ways, it does. The reality, however, is that the “Big Beautiful Bill” only eliminates some tax on overtime pay.

To start, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) noted that the tax break only pertains to a portion of overtime pay, or the “‘half’ of ‘time and a half pay’, required under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.”

For example, if a worker makes $40 an hour, then their time and a half overtime would amount to $60 an hour. Of that $60, only $20 (the “half” part of “time and a half”) remains tax-free.

Additionally, “no tax on overtime” is a federal income-tax change only. State and local income taxes still apply (unless your state separately conforms), and Social Security and Medicare taxes are still withheld on all wages, including overtime.

As well, there’s a cap to how much overtime pay remains tax-exempt: $12,500 per person annually, or $25,000 for people filing together. Earners who make more than $150,000 (or $300,000 combined between two people filing together) are not eligible for tax-free overtime pay.

Another issue, raised by Forbes, is horizontal equity: two people with the same annual pay can end up taxed differently. An hourly worker who logs FLSA overtime can deduct part of that overtime, while a salaried worker putting in the same extra hours gets no break.

Then there are those workers whose overtime pay is dictated by different agreements or laws. The WSJ pointed to airline and railroad workers as examples of those “who often get overtime pay under union contracts and are exempt from FLSA because they are covered by the Railway Labor Act.” These workers generally will not qualify for the deduction on their contract overtime.

They added that “One result is different treatment for similar jobs. An airline jet mechanic wouldn’t get the deduction but an airplane mechanic at a separate maintenance company could.”

The long-term fallout

Beyond the immediate monetary effect, a more broad catch to the new law could make itself known in the long run.

The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) raised concerns that the law will incentivize many to work as much overtime as possible to gain the extra income, including evenings and weekends — habits “associated with a range of negative impacts on physical and mental health, well-being, and productivity.”

In addition, those unable to work overtime for personal or health reasons will lose out on the benefits. The EPI called the law “another gimmick that does more harm than good” and suggested that offering workers raises so they don’t have to work the extra hours would prove a better option.

Forbes, meanwhile, labeled the law “a stealth anti-job creation measure” because it lessens the need for employers to hire more workers.

“A 50-hour week for one employee can be replaced by tacking on an additional 10 hours across five separate workers. The overtime deduction thus may boost take-home pay for some, but it does so by encouraging a labor distribution that concentrates hours in the hands of fewer people.”

That said, according to Tax Policy Center estimates, only 9% of American households will actually save money by paying fewer taxes on overtime pay, resulting in an average added windfall of roughly $1400 annually. Most workers will see the benefit at tax time.

And, of course, there’s one final caveat to the “no tax on overtime pay” law: it expires in 2028.

As usual where King Donald is concerned, the joke’s on us!

https://moneywise.com/news/trumps-no-tax-on-overtime-is-now-law-but-some-americans-dont-even-qualify-heres-the-catch

Daily Beast: Florida Proposes ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ to House Illegal Migrants

The state’s AG has pitched a dystopian Everglades detention camp surrounded by crocs and snakes as an “efficient” solution for holding “criminal aliens.”

ICE’s assault on illegal migrants could be about to take a dystopian twist—with the creation of a detention camp dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz.”

Florida’s Attorney General James Uthmeier has proposed building a center in the middle of the Everglades—surrounded by ‘gators, crocs and snakes—as a “low-cost” solution for detaining what he described as “criminal aliens.”

Speaking from the Miami-Dade Collier training facility, Uthmeier said in a video posted to his X account that the abandoned airfield site in a 30-square-mile patch of isolated swamp, could quickly be transformed into what he called “Alligator Alcatraz.”

“People [detained migrants] get out, there’s not much waiting for them other than alligators and pythons. Nowhere to go, nowhere to hide,” he declared. “It presents an efficient, low-cost opportunity… because you don’t need to invest that much in the perimeter.”

With ICE detention centers overflowing, Uthmeier claimed the site could be operational within 30 to 60 days of breaking ground and could house up to 1,000 people.

Uthmeier also did not provide any details about funding, oversight, and federal involvement…. The [DHS] department is tearing through its budget, which is already more than $1 billion in the red, according to a report in Axios on Monday.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/florida-attorney-general-james-uthmeier-proposes-alligator-alcatraz-to-house-illegal-migrants