The Commerce Department eliminated two advisory committees on economic statistics gathering (see Marketplace<\/a>). BLS received some additional funds in March as part of a continuing resolution; however the Trump budget proposal includes an 8% reduction in budget in nominal terms.<\/p>\n The BLS, tasked with compiling the CPI as well as other labor market indicators (employment, wages) has been already stretched by stagnant funding colliding with escalating costs.<\/p>\n Recently, this has affected compilation of the CPI. More and more prices are imputed.<\/p>\n Source:<\/strong> Economist<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n Of course, none of this should come as a surprise. A lot of this was prefigured in the Project 2025 (as I documented here<\/a>).<\/p>\n There\u2019s hardly any money to be saved by slashing in real terms funding for the statistical agencies, so one has to wonder what the underlying philosophy of the Trump administration is.<\/p>\n Perhaps, it\u2019s the philosophy of \u201cif a recession occurs, and it\u2019s not measured, will anybody notice?\u201d Perhaps, given Trump\u2019s assault on the Fed\u2019s independence, my guess is that it\u2019s more likely \u201cif inflation accelerates and inflation is not measured, will anybody notice?\u201d.<\/p>\n In any event, June\u2019s FT-Booth survey of macroeconomists was interesting insofar as no one thought that the Administration\u2019s measures would improve data quality.<\/p>\n![\"\"\/](\"https:\/\/econbrowser.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/20250705_EPC135.avif\")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/econbrowser.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/ftbooth_jun25_q11.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n