Federal Reserve Economic Data

The FRED Blog has discussed population changes, including movement in and out of the United States and across US counties. Today, we consider the related question of what influences a worker who works from home to relocate to another state?

The FRED map above shows data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics on the percent change in the size of each state’s labor force in 2024. A careful review of the map shows that all states recorded at least some growth in their labor force. However, there were large differences: from 0.02% growth in Delaware to 2.59% growth in Washington, DC.

FRED doesn’t currently have data on what fraction of the labor force works remotely, but recent research from the St. Louis Fed sheds some light on those patterns.

Alexander Bick, Adam Blandin, Cassandra Marks, Karel Mertens, and Hannah Rubinton studied the reasons that commuters and remote workers relocated. They found that remote workers most frequently moved for reasons related to housing. Thus, the affordability of regional housing markets likely weighed heavily in their decisions and could partly be reflected in faster growth in some states’ labor forces.

Of course, other demographic factors (e.g., fertility, immigration) are at play here. But if you’re a remote worker considering relocating to reduce your housing costs, we recommend reading this FRED Blog post on regional price differences.

How this map was created: Search FRED for “Civilian Labor Force in Ohio” and click the “View Map” option. Click on the “Edit Map” option, and under “Units” select “Percent Change from Year Ago.”

Suggested by Diego Mendez-Carbajo.

The FRED Blog has discussed trends in the construction of new residential housing. Today we tap into new research from the St. Louis Fed to examine a related question: Where and what type of new construction is taking place?

The FRED graph above uses data from the US Census and Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to show the number of newly issued residential building permits in three types of construction: multi-family homes (orange dashed line), single-family homes (teal dotted line), and overall (blue solid line). The data are scaled by the number of persons residing in the United States and presented as building permits per 1000 people to easily observe their change over time.

The overall number of residential building permits, measured in proportion to the total population, peaked in 1972 and reached its lowest value in 2009, during the Great Recession. In 2024, the latest data available at the time of this writing, there were 4.3 new building permits issued per 1000 people in the U.S. However, the volume of new construction activity varies greatly with geography.

Recent research from Victoria Gregory and Kevin Bloodworth at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis maps out new residential building activity across metropolitan (that is, urban) areas and helps illuminate ongoing trends in the housing market.

These researchers used annual regional data from 2023, the latest available data they had at the time, and found that major population centers on the West Coast, Northeast, and some of the Great Lakes areas of the Midwest recorded half the number of building permits per 1000 people than the national average. But most metro areas in Arizona, Florida, and Texas recorded substantially larger numbers of building permits than the national average. These disparities can help explain regional price differences in housing markets.

For more about this and other research, visit the publications page of the St. Louis Fed’s website, which offers an array of economic analysis and expertise provided by our staff.

How this graph was created: Search FRED for and select “New Privately-Owned Housing Units Authorized in Permit-Issuing Places: Total Units.” From the “Edit Graph” panel, use the “Edit Line” tab to customize the data by searching for and adding “Population.” Remember to click on the “Add” button. Next, type the formula a/(b/1000) and click on “Apply Formula.” Next, use the “Add Line” tab to search for and add “New Privately-Owned Housing Units Authorized in Permit-Issuing Places: Single-Family Units.” Repeat the steps described above to customize the data and add the multi-family housing units data.

Suggested by Diego Mendez-Carbajo.

In this post, we explore trends in corporate profits, which provides a summary measure of firms’ financial health and can help us gauge the overall performance of the economy. When contrasted with measures of aggregate income, they provide an overview of how income is distributed.

The FRED graph above shows quarterly data on corporate profits from the US national income and product accounts (NIPA) published by the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Corporate profits (with inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments) totaled $3.1 trillion in the third quarter of 2024. That’s a significant increase relative to 2019, when corporate profits were $2.2 trillion, and relative to 2010, when they were $1.6 trillion. This increase might reflect an increase in firms’ market power. Although corporate profits have doubled since the end of 2010, so did national income.

Corporate profits in terms of national income have trended upward since the COVID-19 pandemic, but the increase is less spectacular than the nominal value would suggest. Profits have now stabilized at around 15.7% of national income; they were 14.4% of national income in 2010 and 13.6% in 2019.

How does the share of corporate profits compare with the shares of other components of national income? The FRED graph above shows the shares of the four major components of national income*:

1. compensation of employees (green dashed, right axis)
2. corporate profits (red solid, left axis)
3. taxes on production and imports net of subsidies (purple dotted, left axis)
4. proprietors’ income (orange dashed, left axis)

(Admittedly, the graph is quite crowded, so here’s a link to the same graph without legends.)

The compensation of employees as a fraction of national income is the mirror image of corporate profits, i.e., it tends to go up when corporate profits go down. Despite the uptick during the pandemic, the compensation of employees is back to pre-pandemic levels, at 62% of national income. In contrast, taxes net of subsidies as a fraction of national income went in the opposite direction. They collapsed during the pandemic and are now back at their historical level, at 8%. Proprietors’ income has been stable over the past few years, also accounting for 8% of national income.

*National income’s 7 components:

1. compensation of employees: wages, salaries, and employer contributions for pension funds
2. proprietors’ income: income of self-employed individuals and unincorporated business owners
3. rental income from housing, land, and natural resources
4. corporate profits
5. net interest payments: the difference between interest received and interest paid
6. taxes on production and imports, e.g., customs duties and excise, property, and sales taxes
7. smaller-value items: e.g., government subsidies, surplus of government enterprises, and business current transfer payments

How this graph was created: In FRED, search for “Corporate Profits” and select “Corporate Profits with Inventory Valuation Adjustment (IVA) and Capital Consumption Adjustment (CCAdj) (CPROFIT)” from the search results. Click on the “Edit Graph” button and use the “Edit line” tab to search for “NICUR” or “national income” in the “Customize data” section. In the “Formula” section below, type in 100*(a/b) to get corporate profits as a fraction of national income. Use the “Add Line” tab to find and add the series “National Income: Compensation of Employees, Paid (COE),” “Proprietors’ Income with Inventory Valuation Adjustment (IVA) and Capital Consumption Adjustment (CCAdj) (PROPINC),” and “Taxes on production and imports less subsidies (W254RC1Q027SBEA).” To make these time series a fraction of national income, use the “Edit line” tab to repeat the steps for corporate taxes above.

Suggested by Ricardo Marto.