Economy

Narrower Trade Deficit for Goods

Thinkstock

The international trade deficit did not come in anywhere as high as expected in March, implying that perhaps that pesky dollar strength’s trend abatement might be in the works is showing up in the numbers already. In fact, the trade deficit was down by some 9.5% to $56.9 billion. February’s reading was a deficit of $62.9 billion, and the consensus estimate from Bloomberg was a $62.6 billion deficit for the month of March.

Exports were down by 1.7% to $116.7 billion. Consumer goods showed a rather sharp drop, and there were low readings in autos, industrial supplies and food-related products. Exports of capital goods did manage to rise by 1.5%.

Declining domestic demand was down about 9% in consumer goods, and domestic capital goods were down by about 3.6%.

What is interesting here is that the difference may be enough to tweak gross domestic product (GDP) revisions marginally higher. As a reminder, the trade deficit acts a drag on GDP, so a lower deficit (less negative) acts as a plus on the domestic front.

Another issue that stands out about the $56.9 billion deficit is not just that was lower than the $62.6 billion consensus, nor just that it was lower than the $62.9 billion from February. It really stands out that this was under the range of all economists.

This all sounds good on the surface, but it may be another generation or two before we ever get a trade surplus again. Stay tuned.

Sponsored: Attention Savvy Investors: Speak to 3 Financial Experts – FREE

Ever wanted an extra set of eyes on an investment you’re considering? Now you can speak with up to 3 financial experts in your area for FREE. By simply clicking here you can begin to match with financial professionals who can help guide you through the financial decisions you’re making. And the best part? The first conversation with them is free.Click here to match with up to 3 financial pros who would be excited to help you make financial decisions.

Thank you for reading! Have some feedback for us?
Contact the 24/7 Wall St. editorial team.