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
ReposiTrak, a global food traceability network operator, will partner with Upshop, a provider of store operations technology for food retailers, to create an end-to-end grocery traceability solution that reaches from the supply chain to the retail store, the firms said today.
The partnership creates a data connection between suppliers and the retail store. It works by integrating Salt Lake City-based ReposiTrak’s network of thousands of suppliers and their traceability shipment data with Austin, Texas-based Upshop’s network of more than 450 retailers and their retail stores.
That accomplishment is important because it will allow food sector trading partners to meet the U.S. FDA’s Food Safety Modernization Act Section 204d (FSMA 204) requirements that they must create and store complete traceability records for certain foods.
And according to ReposiTrak and Upshop, the traceability solution may also unlock potential business benefits. It could do that by creating margin and growth opportunities in stores by connecting supply chain data with store data, thus allowing users to optimize inventory, labor, and customer experience management automation.
"Traceability requires data from the supply chain and – importantly – confirmation at the retail store that the proper and accurate lot code data from each shipment has been captured when the product is received. The missing piece for us has been the supply chain data. ReposiTrak is the leader in capturing and managing supply chain data, starting at the suppliers. Together, we can deliver a single, comprehensive traceability solution," Mark Hawthorne, chief innovation and strategy officer at Upshop, said in a release.
"Once the data is flowing the benefits are compounding. Traceability data can be used to improve food safety, reduce invoice discrepancies, and identify ways to reduce waste and improve efficiencies throughout the store,” Hawthorne said.
Under FSMA 204, retailers are required by law to track Key Data Elements (KDEs) to the store-level for every shipment containing high-risk food items from the Food Traceability List (FTL). ReposiTrak and Upshop say that major industry retailers have made public commitments to traceability, announcing programs that require more traceability data for all food product on a faster timeline. The efforts of those retailers have activated the industry, motivating others to institute traceability programs now, ahead of the FDA’s enforcement deadline of January 20, 2026.
Inclusive procurement practices can fuel economic growth and create jobs worldwide through increased partnerships with small and diverse suppliers, according to a study from the Illinois firm Supplier.io.
The firm’s “2024 Supplier Diversity Economic Impact Report” found that $168 billion spent directly with those suppliers generated a total economic impact of $303 billion. That analysis can help supplier diversity managers and chief procurement officers implement programs that grow diversity spend, improve supply chain competitiveness, and increase brand value, the firm said.
The companies featured in Supplier.io’s report collectively supported more than 710,000 direct jobs and contributed $60 billion in direct wages through their investments in small and diverse suppliers. According to the analysis, those purchases created a ripple effect, supporting over 1.4 million jobs and driving $105 billion in total income when factoring in direct, indirect, and induced economic impacts.
“At Supplier.io, we believe that empowering businesses with advanced supplier intelligence not only enhances their operational resilience but also significantly mitigates risks,” Aylin Basom, CEO of Supplier.io, said in a release. “Our platform provides critical insights that drive efficiency and innovation, enabling companies to find and invest in small and diverse suppliers. This approach helps build stronger, more reliable supply chains.”
Logistics industry growth slowed in December due to a seasonal wind-down of inventory and following one of the busiest holiday shopping seasons on record, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index (LMI) report, released this week.
The monthly LMI was 57.3 in December, down more than a percentage point from November’s reading of 58.4. Despite the slowdown, economic activity across the industry continued to expand, as an LMI reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
The LMI researchers said the monthly conditions were largely due to seasonal drawdowns in inventory levels—and the associated costs of holding them—at the retail level. The LMI’s Inventory Levels index registered 50, falling from 56.1 in November. That reduction also affected warehousing capacity, which slowed but remained in expansion mode: The LMI’s warehousing capacity index fell 7 points to a reading of 61.6.
December’s results reflect a continued trend toward more typical industry growth patterns following recent years of volatility—and they point to a successful peak holiday season as well.
“Retailers were clearly correct in their bet to stock [up] on goods ahead of the holiday season,” the LMI researchers wrote in their monthly report. “Holiday sales from November until Christmas Eve were up 3.8% year-over-year according to Mastercard. This was largely driven by a 6.7% increase in e-commerce sales, although in-person spending was up 2.9% as well.”
And those results came during a compressed peak shopping cycle.
“The increase in spending came despite the shorter holiday season due to the late Thanksgiving,” the researchers also wrote, citing National Retail Federation (NRF) estimates that U.S. shoppers spent just short of a trillion dollars in November and December, making it the busiest holiday season of all time.
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).
Specifically, the two sides remain at odds over provisions related to the deployment of semi-automated technologies like rail-mounted gantry cranes, according to an analysis by the Kansas-based 3PL Noatum Logistics. The ILA has strongly opposed further automation, arguing it threatens dockworker protections, while the USMX contends that automation enhances productivity and can create long-term opportunities for labor.
In fact, U.S. importers are already taking action to prevent the impact of such a strike, “pulling forward” their container shipments by rushing imports to earlier dates on the calendar, according to analysis by supply chain visibility provider Project44. That strategy can help companies to build enough safety stock to dampen the damage of events like the strike and like the steep tariffs being threatened by the incoming Trump administration.
Likewise, some ocean carriers have already instituted January surcharges in pre-emption of possible labor action, which could support inbound ocean rates if a strike occurs, according to freight market analysts with TD Cowen. In the meantime, the outcome of the new negotiations are seen with “significant uncertainty,” due to the contentious history of the discussion and to the timing of the talks that overlap with a transition between two White House regimes, analysts said.
That percentage is even greater than the 13.21% of total retail sales that were returned. Measured in dollars, returns (including both legitimate and fraudulent) last year reached $685 billion out of the $5.19 trillion in total retail sales.
“It’s clear why retailers want to limit bad actors that exhibit fraudulent and abusive returns behavior, but the reality is that they are finding stricter returns policies are not reducing the returns fraud they face,” Michael Osborne, CEO of Appriss Retail, said in a release.
Specifically, the report lists the leading types of returns fraud and abuse reported by retailers in 2024, including findings that:
60% of retailers surveyed reported incidents of “wardrobing,” or the act of consumers buying an item, using the merchandise, and then returning it.
55% cited cases of returning an item obtained through fraudulent or stolen tender, such as stolen credit cards, counterfeit bills, gift cards obtained through fraudulent means or fraudulent checks.
48% of retailers faced occurrences of returning stolen merchandise.
Together, those statistics show that the problem remains prevalent despite growing efforts by retailers to curb retail returns fraud through stricter returns policies, while still offering a sufficiently open returns policy to keep customers loyal, they said.
“Returns are a significant cost for retailers, and the rise of online shopping could increase this trend,” Kevin Mahoney, managing director, retail, Deloitte Consulting LLP, said. “As retailers implement policies to address this issue, they should avoid negatively affecting customer loyalty and retention. Effective policies should reduce losses for the retailer while minimally impacting the customer experience. This approach can be crucial for long-term success.”