Hi. I'm looking at the economic impact of brokerage services (sector 435) in a number of states. To pick an extreme example, let's look at Mississippi. I'm using the 2014 data. For every $100 of revenue, sector 435 in Mississippi spends $120 on intermediate inputs from sector 435 itself (69% of that outside the state)! It spends $113 on noncomparable imports, $80 on real estate, $71 on other financial investment services, etc. The result is that, while there's $87 of employee compensation and $42 of proprietor income, other property income shows a $789 loss, and total value added is strongly negative. The result of this is that impacts of industry changes in this sector in this state come out strongly negative in GDP terms. Some of the same unusual characteristics are in the national data for this sector as well, albeit less starkly. OPI shows a 30% loss in the national data, although total value added for the industry is still positive, as it is in most states. In 2013 (R3), there was a 25% OPI loss at the national level. Could you help me understand the strange economics of this industry in general (how is it so consistently losing money? Is there a strange accounting issue I'm not grasping?), and in states like Mississippi in particular? Nationally, I assume the intermediate spend and value added data are grounded in BEA tables, but can you tell me where the Mississippi intermediate spend and value added numbers come from? Thanks.
Please sign in to leave a comment.