Tag: #chartoftheweek

ICAEW chart of the week: UK population in lockdown

3 July 2020: Only a fraction of the population was working at their normal workplace during the Great Lockdown, but what will happen as businesses start to re-open and the furlough scheme becomes less generous?

UK population 67m: workforce 34m (working at workplace 9m, working from home 10m, furloughed 12m, unemployed 3m); outside workforce: children & students 16m, retired 12m, other inactive 5m.

The #icaewchartoftheweek takes a look at the workforce this week, illustrating how the lockdown has transformed the world of work over the last three months.
 
Our (admittedly) back of the envelope calculations based on ONS and HM Treasury data suggest that only around 9m of the 34m strong workforce have been working normally at their ordinary places of work during the lockdown, with somewhere in the region of 10m working remotely. In addition, just under 12m workers have been furloughed, comprising 9.3m employees on the coronavirus job retention scheme (CJRS) and 2.6m self-employed on the self-employed income support scheme (SEISS).
 
Unemployment, which was around 1.2m back in February, has jumped to an extrapolated estimate of around 2.7m by the end of June and is likely to grow still further as the furlough scheme becomes less generous from 1 July. The ONS’s experimental claimant count metric, which includes a wider group of workers needing financial support from the state, had reached 2.8m by the end of May and is expected to have exceeded 3m by the end of June.
 
The overall workforce of 34m excludes the 33m ‘economically inactive’ half of the population, comprising 16m children and students, 12m retirees and 5m other inactive individuals. The 2.1m students over the age of 16 included in this category excludes around 1m or so students with part-time work or who were looking for work prior to the lockdown who are included in the workforce numbers, while retirees include around 1.2m below the age of 65 who have taken early retirement. Other inactive individuals between the ages of 16 and 64 include 1.8m homemakers, 2.3m disabled or ill, and 1.1m not working for other reasons.
 
These numbers are a moving target as more workers will start to return to their normal workplaces over the next few weeks as the economy starts to re-open, even if many continue to work from home where they can. More worryingly, unemployment is likely to rise significantly with the furlough scheme requiring an employer contribution from July onwards and when it comes to an end in October.

This #icaewchartoftheweek was originally published by ICAEW.

ICAEW chart of the month: Cabinet government

26 June 2020: The prime minister has announced a reduction in the number of government departments. How big is the cabinet compared to the rest of the world?

The news that the UK Government is reducing the number of government departments by one prompts the #icaewchartofthemonth to take a look at the size of government executives across the world.
 
As the chart highlights, with 26 members, the UK cabinet is one of the largest amongst major economies – comprising the prime minister Boris Johnson, 21 department ministers and four ‘ministers attending cabinet’. This does not include the Cabinet Secretary or other officials, meaning that cabinet meetings generally involve more than 30 people in total.
 
Compare that with the more compact 16-member German federal cabinet (Chancellor Angela Merkel and 15 departmental ministers) and the ten-member Chinese state council executive (comprising the premier Li Keqiang, five vice-premiers and four other senior departmental ministers).
 
It is certainly much larger than FTSE-100 company boards, where the average size is 11, and very few listed companies have more than 16 board members.
 
There is some debate around whether reducing the size of the UK cabinet would be more conducive to effective government. Some suggestions that the merger of the Department for International Development (DfID) with the Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) to form the new Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) in September is the first step on the way to that goal – with further mergers possible. However, although there will be one fewer departmental minister, there is a reasonable prospect of the minister responsible for development at the FCDO being invited to attend cabinet given its importance to the government’s global agenda.
 
Of course, merging departments is not the only way to achieve a slimmer cabinet – for example, the 31-member Russian cabinet (not shown in the chart) rarely meets as one body. Instead, there are regular meetings of the 10-strong prime ministerial group (the prime minister Mikhail Mishustin and nine deputy prime ministers) and occasional meetings of the 20-strong cabinet praesidium that includes the most senior ministers as well.
 
The UK Cabinet also works in this way to a certain extent, with critical decisions often being made in smaller groupings of senior ministers, such as the 9-member National Security Council, the 9-member Climate Change Committee or the 12-strong EU Exit Operations Committee for example. Canada, with its 37-member cabinet, also operates through a series of cabinet committees ranging from around 8 to 15 members. However, in both cases, the full cabinet still meets regularly and remains the formal executive body for authorising government actions.
 
With rumours of a cabinet reshuffle in the UK this autumn, it will be interesting to see whether moves to reduce the size of the cabinet will actually take place or whether we will see further development of cabinet committees as the places to be ‘in the room where it happens’.

This chart of the month was originally published by ICAEW.

ICAEW chart of the week: PFI contracts past their peak

12 June 2020: PFI contract payments have started to decline following a peak of £10.2bn in 2019-20.

The #icaewchartoftheweek is on private finance initiative (PFI) contracts, illustrating how payments on the UK’s portfolio of over 700 ongoing PFI and PFI2 contracts reached a peak of £10.2bn in the financial year ended 31 March 2020.

Total payments are expected to fall over the years to come as contracts start to come to the end of their (in most cases) 25 to 30-year terms, with the majority scheduled to expire between 2025 and 2050.

The tailing off of payments reflects the lack of new PFI deals to replace expiring contracts since 2010, when PFI2 was introduced without much success and the announcement in 2018 that PFI was over. News is still awaited on whether a new model for public-private partnerships will be adopted to replace PFI, following on from the Infrastructure Finance Review.

In the meantime, the remaining 704 ongoing contracts still need to be managed, including ensuring assets are handed back to public sector in good condition. This will be a big challenge for public bodies, with the National Audit Office recommending that preparations start seven years in advance of the end of each PFI contract.

This chart was originally published by ICAEW.

ICAEW chart of the week: EU spending plans 2021-27

5 June 2020: European Commission proposes €2tn in spending over the next seven years, including a major stimulus package – as illustrated by the #icaewchartoftheweek.

Last week the European Commission submitted its formal proposal for the EU’s multiannual financial framework for 2021 through 2027. This is the outline budget that sets out the EU’s medium-term financial priorities and forms the starting point for each year’s budget.

The proposals include an annual budget for financial commitments of €167bn in 2021, rising to €192bn in 2027 – a total of €1,241bn including inflation or €1,100bn in 2018 prices. There is also a one-off €809bn (€750bn in 2018 prices) proposal for a ‘Next Generation’ economic recovery plan in the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic, to be funded initially by borrowing.

Although the outline budget of €167bn for 2021 is smaller than the €173bn amended commitments budget for the current financial year, it is actually a significant increase once the departure of the UK is taken into account – at least assuming the UK-EU transition period is not extended for a further one or two years.

The largest area of spending is on regional and social development (‘cohesion and values’ in EU jargon), including programmes such as the European Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and Erasmus.

This is followed by agriculture and environment, the majority of which relates to agricultural subsidies and rural development as well as environmental and climate action programmes.

Science, digital and single market includes spending on research and development (including Horizon), the European space programme, Connecting Europe (transport, energy and digitally), Digital Europe, and the operation of the single market.

Security and migration bring together ‘migration and border management’ with ‘resilience, security and defence’, while External includes the cost of development programmes (principally in neighbouring countries), humanitarian aid, and pre-accession assistance for candidate countries that have applied to join the EU.

Spending on institutions mainly comprises the administrative costs of the European Commission, the European Council and the European Parliament, together with other agencies, European Schools, and pensions.

These numbers are for spending commitments, being the maximum amounts that can be authorised in any one year. In practice, commitments can cover several years and the expenditures actually occurred in each year are typically a lower amount – for example, in 2020 budget expenditures are €155bn (including spending from previous year’s commitments), less than the €173bn commitment budget.

These numbers may seem pretty large, but with a population of 448 million, the spending proposals are equivalent to an average of just over €30 a month per person over the seven years, together with a one-off stimulus package costing a further €21 a month per person if spread over the same period.

This chart was originally published by ICAEW.

ICAEW chart of the week: Money for nothing

22 May 2020: The UK Government is being paid to borrow money, with first negative yield gilt

Cash invested £1,026.35 (nominal value £1,000, premium and interest £26.35). Cash returned £1,026.25 (7 coupon payments £26.25, principal repayment £1,000). Net return -£0.10, yield -0.003%.

The news this week that the UK Government issued debt with a negative interest rate is the subject of the #icaewchartoftheweek. This shows how purchasers of the 0¾% Treasury Gilt 2023 at an auction on Wednesday 20 May accepted a negative yield of -0.003% on their investment.

At an average price of £102.388 for each £100 gilt or £1,023.88 for ten gilts, someone buying gilts at the auction would have paid £1,026.35 to the Government for each £1,000 of nominal value purchased, once £2.47 for interest already accrued payable with the bid is included. 

That investor will receive less money back, with 7 semi-annual coupon payments of £3.75 before repayment of the principal of £1,000 on 22 July 2023 adding up to £1,026.25, a net loss of 10p.

This is a return of just under -0.01% over 38 months on the £1,026.35 invested, equivalent to an annualised yield of -0.003%.

This is only just negative, and the UK Government still needs to pay to borrow for longer periods, with yields on 10-year and 30-year gilts still in positive territory at around +0.24% and +0.63% respectively.

Although this gilt auction is a milestone, being the first fixed-rate government bond with a duration over two years to be issued at a negative yield in the UK, this is not a new phenomenon in the world of government borrowing. For example, with 10-year and 30-year government bonds currently yielding -0.49% and -0.07% respectively, Germany’s €156bn of projected borrowing this year should end up reducing its interest bill!

Whether this presages a similar situation in the UK is unknowable, so we are not yet at the stage of money for nothing.

This chart of the week was originally published by ICAEW.

ICAEW chart of the week: UK electricity usage

24 April 2020: A dramatic decline in electricity usage confirms the scale of the economic downturn and the impact that will have on tax receipts.

Chart showing 7-day moving average electricity usage between 1 Feb and Apr 22 falling below the 5-year average.

The coronavirus pandemic is having a huge impact on all of us, including in our usage of electricity as illustrated by the #icaewchartofthemonth.

For example, the seven-day moving average electricity generated as of 21 April 2020 was 531 GWh, 23% lower than the 690 GWh supplied on average in the previous five years. This is a dramatic fall, reflecting the closure of much of our high streets, most offices and many factories across the country.

Admittedly, some of the decline will be down to weather, with April in particular being much warmer than usual. However, the collapse in demand since the Great Lockdown began is dramatic, demonstrating just how much has changed in just a few weeks.

A silver lining to the current situation is a significant reduction in carbon emissions, with zero electricity generated from coal or oil power plants in recent weeks. Gas-fired power stations are currently providing only around 20% of UK energy supply, with wind, solar and hydropower together providing in the order of 50% each day. Nuclear provides a further fifth, with the balance coming from biomass (around 5% or so) and imports from France, Belgium and Netherlands (a further 5%, much of which is either from nuclear power plants or from renewable sources in any case). This is very positive news for the environment, even if a bit of a headache for the National Grid electricity system operator in managing a very different mix of generation than normal.

Unfortunately, we will have to wait quite a while to see how this translates into economic statistics, with the OBR amongst others suggesting that the economy could contract by as much as 35% in the second quarter of 2020. This will have major implications for tax receipts and government borrowing, which are rapidly moving in opposite directions.

This chart was originally published by ICAEW.

ICAEW chart of the week: deficit and debt

17 April 2020: The #icaewchartoftheweek is on the ‘coronavirus reference scenario’ put together by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR).

Fiscal deficit 2020-21: £55bn Budget 2020 + £130bn lower receipts +£88bn higher spending = £273bn. Net debt: £1,819bn Budget 2020 +£384bn more borrowing = £2,203bn.

It suggests that the deficit for the current fiscal year could end up somewhere in the region of £273bn, around five times as much as the official Spring Budget forecast of £55bn, while public sector net debt could exceed £2.2tn by 31 March 2021, £384bn more than previously expected.
 
This scenario, which the OBR stresses is not a forecast, is based on a three-month lockdown followed by restrictions for a further three months, resulting in a 35% contraction in the economy in the second quarter of 2020, before bouncing back relatively quickly to leave the economy 13% smaller in 2020 than in 2019.
 
Once the crisis has passed and policy interventions have unwound, the OBR thinks that annual borrowing could return to roughly the Spring Budget 2020 forecast. However, net debt would continue to be much higher, potentially £260bn (10% of GDP) more than the baseline forecast by 31 March 2025.
 
This is only of one many potential scenarios, but what is clear is that whatever actually happens, the damage to the public finances from the coronavirus pandemic will be extremely severe.
 
We can (and will) worry about the bill later, when the need for a long-term fiscal strategy to put the public finances onto a sustainable path will be more important than ever before.

This chart was originally published by ICAEW.

ICAEW chart of the week: retail sales

3 April 2020: the #icaewchartoftheweek is on the subject of retail sales, with UK supermarkets experiencing a 20.5% growth in sales in the four weeks ending on Saturday 21 March 2020 according to Nielsen.

Supermarket sales: £9.2bn 4 weeks to 23 Mar 2019 + £1.2bn 3 more shopping trips +£0.7bn 1 more item per basked = £11.2bn 4 weeks to 21 Mar 2020.

This is dramatic for the sector, with sales in the last week in that period up 43% over the equivalent week last year.

Although newspaper headlines are full of stories about panic buying, the statistics themselves provide a more nuanced perspective. Shoppers each made an additional three visits to supermarkets over the four-week period at the same time as adding an extra item to each basket (up from 10 to 11 items on average), with the average spend per basket increasing from £15 to £16.

Although some of those extra £1s will have gone on stocking up on toilet rolls and pasta, in practice the majority of this additional spending will have simply replaced food and drink previously bought elsewhere, as pubs, restaurants, works canteens and school lunches have all ceased to operate over the course of the last few weeks.

A boom time for supermarkets, but terrible for most of the rest of the retail sector.

This chart was originally published by ICAEW.

ICAEW chart of the week: Public sector employment

Headcount / FTEs - Health and social work: 1,925,000 / 1,657,000; Education 1,500,000 / 1,105,000; Public administration 1,056,000 / 897,000; HM Forces and Police: 402,000 / 391,000; Other 505,000 / 464,000.

The #icaewchartoftheweek is about public sector employment, illustrating how just under 5.4m people work for public bodies in the UK or around 4.5m full-time equivalents (FTEs). This is 16.5% of the total UK workforce of 32.8m as of last September on a seasonally-adjusted basis.

The largest employer in the public sector is the NHS, with a headcount of 1.7m out of the 1.9m who work in the health and social work sector (1.5m FTEs). Included in the million or so people who work in public administration is the 451,000-strong Civil Service (419,000 FTEs) with most of the remaining 605,000 working for local authorities and non-departmental public bodies (FTEs 478,000).

Total public sector headcount has started to increase again in recent years with NHS and non-NHS headcount up 6.8% and 0.6% respectively over a nadir of 5.2m three years ago (up 2.5% overall), compared with an increase of 3.8% and a fall of 12.1% respectively over the previous seven years (down 7.8% overall between September 2009 and December 2016).

With increasing demand on the NHS from more people living longer and the ‘end of austerity’ we should expect to see further increases in public sector employment over the next few years.

ICAEW chart of the week: Inflation

Chart: RPI 4% in Jan 2018, 2.5% in Jan 2019, 2.2% in Dec 2019. CPI: 3%, 1.8%, 1.3%. CPIH: 2.7%, 1.8%, 1.4%.

The #icaewchartoftheweek is on inflation this week, with the Office for National Statistics reporting that consumer price inflation fell to 1.3% in December 2019 – its lowest level for over three years and towards the lower end of the Bank of England’s target range of 1% to 3%.

Accompanied by very low levels of economic growth, this has prompted speculation that the Bank of England may cut interest rates at some point this year to try and stimulate the economy. They may also be hoping that plans to boost infrastructure spending will help kick-start the economy and encourage a tad more inflation at the same time.

The Chancellor is currently consulting on plans to converge the statistically flawed Retail Prices Index with CPIH (CPI including housing) over the coming decade. This will be good news for commuters and some students, given RPI’s use in calculating fare increases and interest payments. However, it will be less good for many pensioners and holders of government debt who currently benefit from higher rates.