Skip to main content

Real Imports: Behind the Headline Numbers

Between 2017 and 2025, U.S. merchandise import figures seemed to surge dramatically, with headlines often citing record-breaking nominal numbers. However, a significant portion of this apparent growth was not an increase in the volume of goods Americans purchased but was pure inflation. When adjusted for rising prices using the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) chain-linked methodology, the story of real import growth is far more modest.

The Inflation Illusion

Headline numbers can be highly deceptive. In 2024, U.S. goods imports hit a nominal record of $3,295.6 billion. But when adjusted for inflation (using 2017 chained dollars), real imports were $2,870.2 billion.

Chart 1: Nominal vs Chain-Linked Real Imports

Figure 1: U.S. merchandise imports in nominal (current) dollars vs. chain-linked real terms (2017 base year). The widening gap reveals how import price inflation masked true volume trends.

The most dramatic divergence between these nominal (current dollar) and real (volume) figures occurred during the 2021-2022 supply chain crisis. Import prices surged to levels unseen in decades, driven by global factors. Research from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that import price inflation peaked at 8% in the second half of 2021. The Federal Reserve Bank of Boston noted that surging shipping costs alone accounted for 68-111% of the increase in import price inflation.

Chart 2: Import Price Index

Figure 2: Import Price Index (normalized to 2017=100) shows the dramatic surge in import prices during 2021-2022, which has since moderated.

During this period, nominal import values exploded not because Americans were buying more stuff, but because that stuff cost significantly more to produce and ship.

Decomposing the Growth: 2017 vs. 2024

Comparing the 2024 data to the 2017 base year reveals the stark difference:

  • Nominal imports (headline number) grew 39.6%.
  • Real imports (actual volume) grew only 14.7%.

The massive 24.9 percentage point gap is attributable purely to import price inflation. The worst year was 2022, when a staggering 22.5 percentage point gap opened between nominal and real growth, driven by an 18.3% surge in import prices that year alone.

Chart 3: Growth Decomposition

Figure 3: Decomposition of year-over-year import growth into real volume growth (green) and import price inflation (red). The stacked areas show how nominal growth splits between these components.

2024: A Return to Normalcy

By 2024, the situation normalized. Import prices finally stabilized as global supply chains recovered and shipping costs fell. This stabilization allowed real economic activity to shine through. The 5.1% real import growth in 2024 was driven by genuine volume increases in key categories:

  • Capital Goods: Computers, accessories, and semiconductors.
  • Consumer Goods: Primarily pharmaceutical preparations.
  • Automotive: Record-breaking imports of vehicles.

The "Real" Trade Deficit

This inflation illusion also distorts the U.S. trade deficit. In 2024, the nominal goods deficit increased by a concerning $148.5 billion. However, the real deficit (which measures the volume imbalance) grew by only $98.8 billion. Nearly $80 billion of the headline deficit increase was just a price effect, not a worsening of the actual trade imbalance in goods.

While future challenges like tariffs could reintroduce price volatility, the 2017-2025 data provides a clear lesson: headline trade numbers often mask the truth. The real story was one of modest volume growth, temporarily obscured by a massive, once-in-a-generation inflationary surge.

Comments

Post a Comment

Constructive feedback is always welcome. Thank you

Popular posts from this blog

Malaysia at a Cross Roads: Diagnosing the Constraints to High Income Status

Malaysia at a Crossroads: Diagnosing Constraints to High-Income Status In 2008, Malaysia was recognized by the Growth Commission – a distinguished panel comprising 2 Nobel Prize Winning Economists and other leading development practitioners – as one of thirteen countries that sustained high growth in the post-war period. The 30-year stretch that caught the attention of the Growth Commission was between 1967 and 1997 when Malaysia grew at an average of 7.3% per year. This long stretch of growth was interrupted by periods of external shocks including the Volcker shock of 1986, the Asian Financial crisis in 1997/8, later the so-called Dot Com Bubble of 2001, and more recently the Global Financial Crisis of 2008. Despite these shocks, Malaysia remained resilient - formally earning the title "Upper Middle Income Country" in 1992. (See summary figure that breaks down the country's per capita growth story). As...
2 comments
Read more

Corporate Network Analysis

The complex interconnections that define modern society are most readily visible from our Facebook, Twitter, or Linkedin networks. What is perhaps less talked about is the extent to which corporations are linked. I just started building a network of cross shareholding among Malaysia's corporations using listed company data. The map below is a preliminary visualization of the country's corporate network as of 2015. I use social network analysis (SNA) tools to partition or color the network into key connected components or communities therein. I have deliberately excluded company names but I will tell you that the biggest nodes represent the most connected shareholders including governments, fund managers, and international asset managers.  Malaysia's Corporate Network in 2015 Created Using Gephi 0.9.1 As the Malaysia economy has grown so has the complexity of the corporate network from few shareholders to many interlinked players. Below is a visualization using sha...
2 comments
Read more

Assessing labor market transitions in Ghana using panel data

Understanding labor market transitions is important for policymakers and researchers in developing countries. Changes in economic activity status (employed, unemployed, out of labor force) vary significantly from one country to another and also within countries from one socio-economic group to another. Below I summarize analysis from the latest Ghana Annual Household Income and Expenditure Survey ( AHIES ) published by the Ghana Statistical Service. The AHIES is a panel survey that has followed over 10,000 individuals since 2022Q1 to assess changes in their livelihoods. I am currently analyzing trends and show here what has happened to economic activity between Q2 and Q3.  Transitions in Ghana labor force status, 2022Q2 - 2022Q3 Source : Own analysis using AHIES from Ghana Statistical Service. Note : Left hand side is 2022Q2 and right side is 2022Q3 81 percent of working age individuals (15-64-years) who were  employed  in 2022Q2 were still employed in 2022Q3; 7 perc...
Post a Comment
Read more