Q4 and 2024 GDP: Consumer and Capital Spending Stagnates as Bank-GDP Concentration Risks Deepen

  

The government pretends to be endowed with the mystical power to accord favors out of an inexhaustible horn of plenty. It is both omniscient and omnipotent. It can by a magic wand create happiness and abundance. The truth is the government cannot give if it does not take from somebody—Ludwig von Mises 

In this issue

Q4 and 2024 GDP: Consumer and Capital Spending Stagnates as Bank-GDP Concentration Risks Deepen

I. The GDP’s Critical Defects

II. The Mainstream Narrative is Failing

III. Philippine GDP Predicament: Full Employment and Record Credit, Yet Slowing Consumption?

IV. Malinvestments: Retail Expands While Consumer Spending Stagnates

V. Proposed Minimum Wage Hikes to Compound Consumer Woes

VI. Q4 GDP versus SWS’ Q4 Milestone Highs in Self-Poverty Ratings and Hunger; Critical Questions

VII. Q4 GDP Boosted by Government Spending, Services Exports and Private Sector Construction

VIII. Q4 GDP’s Industry Side: Boost from Public Administration and Defense and other Related Sectors

IX. Q4 2024 Boosted by Financialization Even as Manufacturing and Real Estate Sector Languish; Deepening Bank-GDP Concentration Risks

X. More Signs of Consumer Weakening: Material Slowing ‘Revenge Travel’ and Outside Dining GDP

XI. Summary and Conclusion

Q4 and 2024 GDP: Consumer and Capital Spending Stagnates as Bank-GDP Concentration Risks Deepen 

Q4 and 2024 GDP were another big miss for the establishment. Government spending played a pivotal role in boosting growth, while consumers were sidelined. There is little awareness that the former indirectly causes the latter 

I. The GDP’s Critical Defects 

Inquirer.net January 31, 2025: The Marcos administration missed its growth target for the second straight year in 2024, falling below consensus after the onslaught of destructive typhoons had muted the typical surge in economic activities during the holiday season. Gross domestic product (GDP), the sum of all products and services created within an economy, expanded at an average rate of 5.6 percent for the entire 2024, the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) reported on Thursday…At the same time, last year’s performance failed to meet market expectations after settling below the median estimate of 5.8 percent in an Inquirer poll of 12 economists…The statistics agency reported that GDP had expanded by 5.2 percent in the fourth quarter, unchanged from the preceding three months and lower than the year-ago print of 5.5 percent. That was also below the median forecast of 5.8 percent. 

Our preface: the BSP cut official rates in August, October, and December. It also reduced RRR rates in October, while the aggregate fiscal spending in 11-months reached all-time highs (ATHs), signaling massive stimulus or Marcos-nomics. 

Despite this, the Philippine GDP registered 5.2% in Q4 and 5.6% in 2024. 

Although GDP provides insight into how economic output is distributed across sectors—categorized by expenditure and industry—it does not present the equivalent allocation of spending by income class. 

Therefore, it is arguable that the headline figure makes a critically flawed assumption by suggesting that the statistical spending growth applies to the average. 

In other words, it assumes that the average citizen has experienced 5.2% growth in Q4 and 5.6% growth overall. The question, however, is how do you aggregate the spending of a few billionaires with that of those living in poverty? 

And this applies to the inflation deflator used to calculate the headline figure as well: How accurate is it to derive an average inflation rate from a mishmash of diverse spending items like a mobile gaming subscription, rice, and vehicle wheels? 

Apples and oranges, you say? Exactly.

If the nominal GDP and the deflator are flawed, why should we trust that the headline estimates reflect reality?

II. The Mainstream Narrative is Failing 

Every start of the year, mainstream experts proclaim at the top of their lungs that GDP will align with sanguine government targets. Some even tout the likelihood of the economy reaching "middle-income status."

Beyond abstract reasoning, they rarely explain the mechanics of how they arrive at their estimated figures.

Either they ignore the data provided by the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), or their forecasts are based on a 'pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey' approach—bluntly put, faith in magic.

What does the PSA data reveal?

Figure 1

It shows that since the post-pandemic recession, GDP has operated within a secondary trendline. This means that despite occasional growth spikes, GDP growth will be SLOWER than in the pre-pandemic era. (Figure 1, topmost pane)

Using the exponential trend as a gauge, we see that Q4 GDP consistently exceeds the trendline but eventually retraces to the secondary support in the following quarters.

The same dynamic applies to the 2024 GDP. (Figure 1, middle graph)

The point having been made, realize that for GDP to meet the mainstream's numbers, it would require a significant breakthrough not only to reclaim the pre-pandemic trend but also to sustain it.

From a statistical standpoint, none of this is happening. Even the PSA’s chart reinforces the notion of a slowing GDP. (Figure 1, lowest chart)

Figure 2 

As evidence, the government has struggled to wean itself off debt-financed pandemic deficits relative to GDP, which have served as a quasi-stimulus. Data reveals that they have become addicted to it. (Figure 2, topmost image) 

Why, then, do they yearn for pre-pandemic GDP figures? 

Incredible.

Statisticians-cum-economic experts often don't disclose that their perpetually optimistic forecasts might be about placating or bootlicking the government.

Why? For business and personal reasons. They might want to secure government contracts, underwrite debt issuance, intermediate stock trading, or gain accreditation as credit appraisers, among other things. On a personal level, they seek social desirability or good standing with officials for career advancement (revolving door politics), off-table deals, etc. In short: the principal-agent dilemma.

Essentially, overstating GDP or understating CPI numbers, or the mainstream's erroneous forecasts, come with no consequences for them—they have no "skin in the game."

However, for many in the investing public, consensus projections guide corporate strategies or investments in financial markets.

It’s unsurprising, then, that in addition to distortions in capital goods pricing due to stock market mispricing, overly optimistic guidance often leads to “build-and-they-will-come” debt-fueled malinvestments.

Many also invest their hard-earned savings in financial markets (stocks or fixed income) in the hope of achieving real or inflation-adjusted positive returns, without realizing that their investments are silently transferring wealth to politically connected economic elites, who are absorbing unsustainable amounts of debt.

And remember the inflation spike of 2022? NONE of these experts saw it coming.

In clear words, forecasts based on the principal-agent problem will likely keep the public blind to the escalating risks of a crisis.

Here's an example:

Businessworld, January 24: PROPERTY developers in the Philippine capital need to enhance their market research and consider lowering condominium prices to address the current “mismatch” between available units and buyer demand, according to property analysts. “These overpriced condos aren’t matching with the existing buyers…There are so many buyers, as in we’re talking millions of buyers, but the issue is they cannot afford [a condo in Metro Manila] anymore” (bold added) 

The mainstream’s narrative is failing: Expect more to come. 

III. Philippine GDP Predicament: Full Employment and Record Credit, Yet Slowing Consumption? 

Let's conduct a brief investigation into the PSA's GDP data. 

The government's statistics are riddled with paradoxical figures.

First, the government claims that the employment rate (as of November) has reached nearly its highest level. (Figure 2, middle chart)

Curiously, with low savings, how have entrepreneurs managed to fund investments in real businesses, leading to near-full employment?

FDI numbers hardly support this. Despite a spike in October, the 10-month FDI flow was up by only 6.6%, with 68% of those inflows coming from debt. Debt inflows are no guarantee of “investment.”

The likely source of funds might be from banking loans. Over an 11-month period, consumer credit captured the largest share of the net increase in Universal-Commercial Bank loans at 23%, followed by real estate at 18.74%, electricity at 9.72%, and retail trade at 9.52%.

However, retail and agriculture, which account for the largest shares of the working population at 21.3% and 20% respectively, suggest a different story.

Next, fueled by credit cards and salary loans, consumer credit continues to grow at a breakneck pace, setting nominal records consecutively. (Figure 2, lowest graph)

Ironically, despite full employment and unprecedented consumer credit growth, Q4 2024 saw real consumer spending in GDP terms increase by only 4.7%, similar to Q2 and marking the second lowest since Q2 2011, excluding the period of the pandemic recession.

Stagnating household consumption was a key factor in pulling down the period's GDP.

Moreover, household GDP mirrored the deceleration in Q4 2024, with consumer per capita GDP growth at just 3.8%—the lowest since Q3 2017.

Important questions arise: 

-Where did all that record bank credit expansion go?

-How much of the consumer credit growth has been about refinancing existing debt?

-If productivity has been driving the GDP, why would a nation with full employment experience a sustained slowdown in household consumption?

In this context, government data on employment appears questionable.

IV. Malinvestments: Retail Expands While Consumer Spending Stagnates

Figure 3

What’s more, households are struggling with consumption, mainly due to the inflation tax, which continues to erode their spending power. At the same time, they are using leverage to maintain their lifestyles. As this occurs, retail GDP continues to outgrow consumer spending. (Figure 3, topmost window)

Partly due to the mainstream’s constant cheerleading, retail entrepreneurs are hopeful that the consumption slump will reverse soon, and so have been aggressively expanding capacity. Retail GDP grew by 5.5% in Q4 and has outpaced consumer spending in 3 of the last 4 quarters. (Figure 3, second to the highest image)

Or, to put it simply, because of the mainstream belief in the 'build it and they will come' dogma, supply continues to outpace demand.

V. Proposed Minimum Wage Hikes to Compound Consumer Woes

In the meantime, news reports that "the House Committee on Labor and Employment has approved a bill for a P200 across-the-board legislated wage hike."

Would this not function as a form of redistribution or a protective moat in favor of elite companies, at the expense of micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs)? How would this incentivize grassroots entrepreneurship when authorities are effectively raising the cost of doing business or barriers to entry?

How would minimum wage laws not negatively impact consumption and productivity while acting as a drain on savings?

Quoting economist Thomas Sowell, "Minimum wage laws play Russian roulette with people who need jobs and the work experience that will enable them to rise to higher pay levels." (Sowell, 2006)

VI. Q4 GDP versus SWS’ Q4 Milestone Highs in Self-Poverty Ratings and Hunger; Critical Questions

And there’s more. How does the 5.2% GDP square with polls showing record highs in consumer stress: "Self-Rated Poverty at 63%, highest in 21 years" and "December 2024 hunger was… at the highest level since the record high 30.7% during the COVID-19 lockdowns in September 2020"? (Figure 3, second to the lowest and lowest charts)

While the government touts the 5.2% GDP, SWS found that 63% of Filipino families rated themselves as "Poor," while "25.9% of Filipino families experienced involuntary hunger."

Simply put, this reflects popular sentiment about inflation: a vast majority of the population feels harried by the peso’s loss of purchasing power, and a quarter of them have actually experienced hunger.

Incredible.

So, who is overstating their data—SWS or the government?

Here’s the thing: If the GDP growth is based on unsustainable leveraging, what would the ramifications be?

Or if consumer balance sheets have been burdened by excessive gearing (spend-now, pay-later) to cope with inflation, how would this affect the economy?

When consumers reach the proverbial tipping point of leveraging and begin to scale down, wouldn't this slow the GDP? Wouldn't credit delinquencies rise, affecting the banks' already strained liquidity?

Or, wouldn’t this reduce lending, exacerbating liquidity pressures in the banking system and increasing defaults?

Could this not lead to rising unemployment, creating a feedback loop that slows GDP, decelerates bank lending, and drives up credit delinquencies?

By the same token, what happens to the supply side’s debt-financed overcapacity? Wouldn’t this worsen pressures on unemployment, output, consumer spending, and negatively affect the health of the banking industry?

Wouldn't increasing sentiments of hunger and perceptions of poverty not lead to higher risks of social disorder? 

VII. Q4 GDP Boosted by Government Spending, Services Exports and Private Sector Construction 

If household consumption weighed down the GDP, which sectors propelled it upwards?

Figure 4

From the expenditure side of the data, the answer is the government, construction, and export services. 

Government GDP rose from 5% in Q3 to 9.7% in Q4. While construction GDP dipped from 8.8% to 7.8%, it still exceeded the 5.2% threshold. Private sector construction, driven by households (12.8%) and corporations (5.7%), powered the sector’s GDP, while government construction GDP stagnated at 4.7%. (Figure 4 topmost diagram)

Interestingly, while exports of goods entered a recession, declining by -0.37% in Q3 and -4.6% in Q4, services exports GDP surged from 2.3% to 13.5%, elevating the sector's performance from -1.4% in Q3 to 3.2% in Q4. (Figure 4 middle image) 

Curiously, real estate services firm CBRE reported in 2024 that "32 percent of vacated (office) spaces are from the IT-BPM sector." Why have service export firms like BPOs been downsizing if their businesses were reportedly booming, as suggested by the GDP figures? 

Meanwhile, gross capital formation fell sharply from 13.7% in Q3 to 4.1% in Q4, while durable goods GDP also plunged from 7.9% to just 0.1%. Unfortunately, this indicates a sluggish state of investments, which contrasts with the employment data. 

The expenditure side of the GDP shows that government spending was primarily responsible for the Q4 GDP boost, supported by services exports and private sector construction. However, it also reveals that while consumer spending has stagnated, capital spending has languished. 

VIII. Q4 GDP’s Industry Side: Boost from Public Administration and Defense and other Related Sectors 

On the industry side, sectors like transport (9.5%), financial and insurance (8.5%), professional and business services (8.3%), public administration and defense (7%), education (6.2%), and health (12.1%) all grew above the GDP rate. 

Or, to put it another way, outperforming government and related sectors contributed about 10% of the industry's GDP. 

After the 2020 spike, the share of public administration and defense in GDP remains elevated compared to pre-pandemic levels. This should come as no surprise, as the government is focused on centralization, partly driven by a subtle shift toward a war economy. (Figure 4 lowest graph)

IX. Q4 2024 Boosted by Financialization Even as Manufacturing and Real Estate Sector Languish; Deepening Bank-GDP Concentration Risks

Figure 5

On the other hand, despite showing signs of a slight slowdown in Q4 2024, the financial and insurance sector's contribution to national GDP continues to expand. (Figure 5, upper chart) 

It's not coincidental that the sector's improvements coincided with the BSP's unprecedented sector rescue in 2020. Since then, the sector's growth has not looked back, even as the BSP raised interest rates. That is, the sector’s GDP suggests that there was no tightening at all. 

In Q4, banks accounted for 49% of the sector's GDP, while non-banks and insurance had respective shares of 32% and 13.33%. These sectors posted GDP growth rates of 8%, 8.4%, and 8.2%, respectively. 

Yet the paradox lies in the sector's dependence on the real economy, as it lends and invests to generate profits and contribute value to GDP. 

Real estate, trade (primarily retail), and manufacturing are among their largest borrowers, accounting for 40% of total bank lending as of last November. 

Lending to the financial sector itself accounted for a 7.7% share, which together with the aforementioned sectors, totals 48.5% of all bank loans (from universal commercial, thrift, and rural banks). 

Incidentally, these sectors are also significant contributors to the GDP, making up a 42.7% share of the national GDP. Including the financial sector, the aggregate GDP increases to 52.5%. 

Aside from retail, the manufacturing sector posted a real GDP growth of 3.1%, while real estate GDP materially slowed to 3.0%, pulling its share of the national GDP to an all-time low! (Figure 5, lower diagram) 

We previously discussed the sector's deflationary spiral, and the Q4 decline could signal further price drops in the sector. 

To illustrate the struggles of the manufacturing sector, JG Summit announced the shutdown of its Petrochem business last week, in addition to the goods export recession in Q4. 

To summarize, the Philippine GDP and bank lending exposure reveal an increasingly fragile economy heavily dependent on a few sectors, which have been buoyed by bank credit. This means that the higher the concentration risks, the greater the potential impact of an economic downturn. 

X. More Signs of Consumer Weakening: Material Slowing ‘Revenge Travel’ and Outside Dining GDP 

Another piece of evidence that consumer spending has been slowing can be found in the food and accommodation sectors' GDP. 

The authorities' response to the pandemic with economy-wide shutdowns initially pushed Food GDP into an upward spiral, while the reopening triggered a "revenge travel" GDP surge in the accommodation sector. 

However, the massive distortions caused by these radical political policies have started to unwind.

Figure 6

Accommodation GDP slowed from 12.2% in Q3 to 8.7% in Q4, while food GDP dropped from 10.1% to 4.9%. Since food accounts for a large portion (68%) of the sector, the overall GDP for the sector moderated from 10.7% to 6.1%. (Figure 6, topmost and middle charts) 

The distortions caused by pandemic policies have led many investors to believe that the 'revenge travel' trend, or the recovery streak in tourism, will continue, fueling massive investments in the sector. 

In our humble opinion, they have critically misread the market, as the growth rate of foreign tourist arrivals has substantially slowed in 2024. (Figure 6, lowest image) 

Moreover, the sector's declining GDP further highlights the weakening of domestic tourism. 

XI. Summary and Conclusion 

1 Q4 and 2024 have reinforced the secondary trendline in GDP, continuing to show a slowdown in GDP growth.

2 Dwindling consumer spending has been a critical factor driving this slowdown.

3 Importantly, capital spending growth has also been lackluster.

4 Conversely, government spending has provided crucial support to GDP, along with contributions from other ancillary sectors.

Yet, these dynamics reveal that the Philippines operates under the flawed assumption of political "free lunches" — where government spending is seen as having only a positive impact, while ignoring the negative effects of the crowding out syndrome. 

They also highlight the pitfalls of the BSP's 'trickle-down' policies, which have deepened concentration risks due to the bank-dependent financing of a few sectors. 

It’s no surprise, then, that after the initial easing by the BSP in the second half of the year — which contributed to the dismal Q4 GDP, the January 2025 PSEi 30 crash and rising bond yields, the BSP proposes to continue the same strategy, slashing rates by 50 basis points and reducing reserve requirements by 200 basis points. 

Succinctly, they are "doing the same thing and expecting different results."

____

references 

Thomas Sowell, A Glimmer of Hope August 08, 2006, realclearpolitics.com 

Philippines December 2024 CPI: A Possible Turning Point for the Third Wave of the Current Inflation Cycle?

 

The second mischief is that those engaged in futile and hopeless attempts to fight the inevitable consequences of inflation — the rise in prices — are disguising their endeavors as a fight against inflation. While merely fighting symptoms, they pretend to fight the root causes of the evil. Because they do not comprehend the causal relation between the increase in the quantity of money on the one hand and the rise in prices on the other, they practically make things worse—Ludwig von Mises 

In this issue

Philippines December 2024 CPI: A Possible Turning Point for the Third Wave of the Current Inflation Cycle?

I. A Closer Look at the Flawed Foundations of the CPI

II. Does December’s CPI Mark the Turning Point for the Third Wave of the Current Inflation Cycle?

III. A Brief Look at Inflation Era 1.0; Key Questions

IV. Divergent Sentiments: Government Data vs. SWS 21-Year High in Self-Rated Poverty

V. Demand Side Inflation: Record 11-Month Public Spending 

VI. More Demand Side Inflation: BSP’s Easing Cycle Designed to Rescue the Struggling Real Estate Sector and the Banking System

VII. Demand-Side Inflation: The Impact of the USD-PHP Soft Peg and Rising US Treasury Bond Yields

VIII. Conclusion: Strengthening Signs of an Emergent Third Inflation Wave

Philippines December 2024 CPI: A Possible Turning Point for the Third Wave of the Current Inflation Cycle?

A sharp increase in liquidity conditions last November, driven by BSP measures and bank activities, has likely spilled over into prices. Could December’s CPI signal the start of a third wave in the current inflation cycle?

I. A Closer Look at the Flawed Foundations of the CPI

Before we proceed with our exegesis of the Philippine Consumer Price Index (CPI) from last December, it is essential to clarify our position, which diverges from the mainstream acceptance of the inflation benchmark.

We argue that the CPI is structurally flawed for the following reasons:

1. Subjective Nature of Personal Utilities

Because people engage in exchanges to improve their well-being, prices reflect the subjective evaluations of individual economic participants.

As such, comparing personal utilities is inherently impossible because they are subjectively determined, depending on the specific circumstances of an individual, including their operating environment, preferences, values, and hierarchy of needs.

As we explained in 2022 (bold original):

Yet, the thing is, the most substantial argument against the CPI comes from its essence: it is impossible to quantify or average the spending activities of individuals. Everyone has different 'inflation.' The consumption basket varies from one individual to another. And the composition of an individual's consumption basket is never static or constant because it is subjectively determined; it is dynamic or consistently changes. 

Therefore, because the assumption used to generate an estimated CPI is fallacious, the CPI is structurally flawed. (Prudent Investor 2022) 

2. CPI as a Political Statistic 

The CPI is not merely an economic measure; it is, arguably, the most significant political statistic.  

From the Philippine Statistics Authority (FAQ): CPI allows individuals, businesses, and policymakers to understand inflation trends, make economic decisions, and adjust financial plans accordingly. The CPI is also used to adjust other economic series for price changes. For example, CPI components are used as deflators for most personal consumption expenditures in the calculation of the gross domestic product.  Moreover, it serves as a basis to adjust the wages in labor management contracts, as well as pensions and retirement benefits. Increases in wages through collective bargaining agreements use the CPI as one of their bases.

In this context, the political objectives of the administration may influence the calculation of economic indicators, rather than reflecting actual estimates. 

For example, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) plays a significant role in determining bond market rates and interest rates. By understating the CPI, the government can effectively engage in "financial repression," which entails the implicit and artificial lowering of interest rates to subsidize government debt.  

Moreover, beyond facilitating government borrowing, an artificially suppressed CPI also inflates GDP figures, creating a perception of stronger economic performance. 

The periodic (six-year) base year adjustments used for calculating the CPI—intended to reflect the most current composition of goods and services—are inherently biased toward reducing inflation rates. Consequently, CPI figures would likely be higher if calculated using the previous base year of 2006 compared to the current base year of 2018. 

3. The CPI Data and Official Narrative on Inflation 

CPI data and the official narrative often portray inflation as an inherently supply-side-driven phenomenon. 

The sectoral composition of the CPI baskets appears biased, fostering the perception that price increases (inflation) are predominantly caused by supply-side factors. This perspective is consistently reinforced by official explanations, which highlight supply disruptions as the primary drivers of inflation. 

Ironically, however, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP)’s policy responses have been predominantly demand-side in nature. These responses include interest rate adjustments, reserve requirement ratio (RRR) changes, and regulatory relief measures such as the credit card interest rate cap, as well as quantitative easing or liquidity injections. On rare occasions, political interventions, like the Rice Tariffication Law, address supply-side issues directly. 

In reality, if prices were allowed to function freely, supply-side imbalances would typically resolve themselves in the short term. 

Moreover, with a fixed money supply, an increase in demand for specific goods or services, leading to higher prices, would naturally result in reduced demand for other goods or services, causing their prices to decline. This dynamic reflects changes in relative prices (increases and decreases), which do not equate to a general rise in overall price levels. For example, households operating within fixed budgets and without access to credit exemplify this principle. 

However, when prices for most goods and services rise simultaneously, it indicates a condition of "too much money chasing too few goods." In other words, a generalized price increase arises when the growth of money supply (via credit expansion) outpaces the growth in goods and services. 

In the immortal words of Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman in an interview: (bold mine) 

It [Inflation] is always and everywhere, a monetary phenomenon. It's always and everywhere, a result of too much money, of a more rapid increase in the quantity of money than an output…

If you listen to people in Washington and talk, they will tell you that inflation is produced by greedy businessmen or it's produced by grasping unions or it's produced by spendthrift consumers, or maybe, it's those terrible Arab Sheikhs who are producing it. Now, of course, businessmen are greedy. Who of us isn't? Trade unions are grasping. Who of us isn't? And there's no doubt that the consumer is a spendthrift. At least every man knows that about his wife. 

But none of them produce inflation for the very simple reason that neither the businessman, nor the trade union, nor the housewife has a printing press in their basement on which they can turn out those green pieces of paper we call money. (Friedman, Heritage Foundation)

This underscores the reality that inflation is driven by excessive monetary expansion rather than purely supply-side factors.

Figure 1

Aside from this author, has anyone pointed out the deepening reliance of GDP on money supply growth? (Figure 1, topmost graph)

4. The CPI as a Tool for Narrative Control

The BSP and the government’s approach to inflation management often involves shaping public perception through strategic "narrative control." A clear example of this is the establishment’s "pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey" CPI forecasting exercise:

-At the close of each month, the BSP releases a forecast range for the monthly inflation rate, usually spanning a margin of approximately 80 basis points.

-"Establishment experts" then publish their single-point predictions, which the media aggregates into a "median estimate."

-When the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) announces the official inflation rate, it almost always falls within the BSP’s forecast range—except during anomalous periods, such as the CPI spikes in 2022-2023.

This practice reinforces the establishment narrative and helps frame the public’s understanding of inflation within a constrained Overton Window, limiting alternative interpretations of its causes and dynamics.

As I elaborated in 2024 (bold and italics original): 

In essence, they blame the supply side for inflation, but use demand-side instruments to manage it. This disconnect is often lost on the lay public, who are unfamiliar with the technical details surrounding the mechanics of inflation. 

The general idea is that distortions from the supply side are seen as representing market failure, namely greed, and that the BSP is considered immaculate, foolproof, and practices Bentham's utilitarianism (for the greater good) when it comes to its demand-side policies. Therefore, it would be easier to sell more interventions when the authorities are perceived as saints.  

Ironically, the BSP has been advocating for the "trickle-down theory" in its policies: subsidize demand while controlling or restricting supply (Kling,2016) 

More importantly, the public is unaware of the entrenched "principal agent syndrome" in action: the BSP regulates these mainstream institutions. As such, the BSP indirectly controls the narratives or dissemination of information on inflation.   

Make no mistake: the structural flaws of the CPI arise not only from a critical economic perspective but, more significantly, from a political dimension designed to shift the blame for price instability onto the market economy.  

II. Does December’s CPI Mark the Turning Point for the Third Wave of the Current Inflation Cycle?

Our dialectic of the CPI’s critical flaws serves as the foundation for examining December’s CPI data. 

Let us explore the issue from the perspective of the mainstream viewpoint.

Reuters, January 7: Philippine annual inflation quickened for a third straight month in December due to the faster pace of increases in food and utility costs, the statistics agency said on Tuesday. The consumer price index (CPI) rose 2.9% in December, higher than the 2.6% forecast in a Reuters poll, and was above the previous month's 2.5% rate. December's inflation print brought average inflation in 2024 to 3.2%, well within the central bank's 2%-4% target for the year, marking the first time since 2021 that the Philippines has achieved its inflation goal. 

Though December marked the third consecutive monthly YoY increase, boosting the month-on-month (MoM) change, the upward momentum has not been strong enough to signal a decisive breakout from its year-on-year (YoY) downtrend. (Figure 1, middle image) 

Typically, a MoM rate exceeding 1% is required to achieve this. 

However, while food prices continue to play a significant role in driving up the headline CPI, their influence has been diminishing. This shift indicates broader sectoral contributions, primarily driven by housing, utilities, and transport in December. (Figure 1, lowest diagram)

Figure 2

The uptrend has been most pronounced in the transport sector, while momentum in housing and utilities has recently gained strength. (Figure 2, topmost chart)

The broadening increase in prices has also led to an expansion in the non-food and energy CORE CPI. Both the CORE and headline CPI appear to have made a turn reminiscent of patterns seen in 2015 and 2022. (Figure 2, middle pane) 

If this momentum persists, the headline CPI may be transitioning into the third wave of the current inflation cycle, which has now entered its tenth year.

III. A Brief Look at Inflation Era 1.0; Key Questions

Should the third wave, characterized by the current series of increases, be confirmed, the headline CPI is likely to surpass its 2022 high of 8.7%. 

This inflation cycle is not an anomaly; it mirrors historical precedent, specifically the secular inflation era (1.0), which spanned three inflation cycles from 1958 to 1986. (Figure 2, lowest graph) 

This brings us to several critical questions:

>How do supply-side (cost-push) factors contribute to driving an inflation cycle or even a prolonged era of inflation?

>Does the current inflation cycle mark the beginning of an "Inflation Era 2.0"?

>Which mainstream experts have anticipated and explained this phenomenon?

IV. Divergent Sentiments: Government Data vs. SWS 21-Year High in Self-Rated Poverty

A striking contrast exists between the government's data on the bottom 30% of income earners and the Social Weather Stations (SWS) self-rated poverty survey.

Figure 3

The Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the bottom 30% income group presents one of the most fascinating – and somewhat contradictory – data points in CPI coverage. (Figure 3, topmost window) 

It indicates that the food CPI for this income group has decreased at a faster rate than the overall headline CPI, resulting in a negative spread for the first time since at least 2022. This suggests that the bottom 30% has benefited from easing food inflation, ostensibly leading to ‘reduced inequality.’ 

This assumption appears to be based on the notion that stores have provided price discounts to this income group or that conditions have improved due to assistance from food banks. 

Conversely, a private poll reported that instances of self-rated poverty surged to their highest level since 2003, reaching a 21-year high! 

SWS Report, January 8 2025: The December 2024 percentage of Self-Rated Poor families of 63% was 4 points up from 59% in September 2024, rising steadily for the third consecutive quarter since the significant 12-point rise from 46% in March 2024 to 58% in June 2024. This was the highest percentage of Self-Rated Poor families in 21 years, since 64% in November 2003. (Figure 3, middle visual) 

If this poll is accurate, it implies that a vast majority of households continue to suffer from the erosion of the peso’s purchasing power. 

The recent decline in the CPI rate, far from indicating relief, might instead signify a “boiling frog syndrome”—a slow, almost imperceptible build-up of economic hardship. This is evidenced by deteriorating consumption patterns and increasing pessimism, despite near-record employment rates. 

In November 2024, employment rates reached their third-highest level, continuing a trend of near-full employment since Q4 2023. (Figure 3, lowest chart) 

Still, despite this robust employment dynamic, inflation has continued to decline. 

Does this mismatch between self-rated poverty levels and employment gains highlight productivity improvements that are not reflected in wage and income growth?  

Alternatively, could this gap reflect potential manipulation or "padding" of labor data for political purposes ahead of upcoming elections? 

As I noted back in October 2024: (bold and italics original) 

All these factors point to the SWS Q3 data indicating an increase in self-rated poverty, which not only highlights the decline in living standards for a significant majority of families but also emphasizes the widening gap between the haves and the have-nots.  

As a caveat, survey-based statistics are vulnerable to errors and biases; the SWS is no exception. 

Though the proclivity to massage data for political goals is higher for the government, we can’t discount its influence on private sector pollsters either. 

In any case, we suspect that a phone call from the office of the political higher-ups may compel conflicting surveys to align as one. 

Apparently, that phone call to influence the self-rated poverty survey has yet to occur. 

Furthermore, the multi-year high in self-rated poverty could also be symptomatic of government policies involving "financial repression" or an "inflation tax," which redistributes finances and resources from the private sector to the government to subsidize its political spending.

This raises an important question: Whose sentiment truly reflects the public's conditions?  

On one hand, government data suggests a vague improvement for low-income households due to easing food prices.  On the other hand, SWS data indicates a historic rise in self-rated poverty.  

The divergence between these two perspectives underscores the complex economic realities faced by different segments of society as they confront inflation.

V. Demand Side Inflation: Record 11-Month Public Spending

Let us now shift our focus to the demand side of the inflation cycle.

Figure 4

The first and most significant demand-side driver of inflation cycles is public debt-fueled deficit spending. (Figure 4, topmost image)

Thanks to robust tax collections, the 11-month fiscal deficit has fallen to its lowest level since 2020, despite reaching a historic high in public spending over the same period. 

However, while current tax revenues have supported fiscal health, they are subject to the variability of economic conditions and the efficiency of tax administration, whereas government spending is determined by Congressional appropriations. 

Still, diminishing returns and the crowding-out effect could slow GDP growth—or even trigger a recession—leading to reduced tax revenues. This could drive deficits back to record-high levels. 

In any case, public spending at an all-time high inevitably fosters heightened competition with the private sector for resources and financing. This competition—the crowding out syndrome—serves political objectives but disrupts economic allocation, production, and pricing. 

The Philippine budget is set to grow by 9.7% to Php 6.326 trillion in 2025, reinforcing its long-term upward trend in public expenditures. 

Unsurprisingly, this accelerating trend in public spending has closely correlated with the first inflation cycle. 

Also, this is in seeming response to the Q3 2024 GDP slowdown and a deflationary spiral in real estate prices, 'Marcos-nomics' stimulus measures have only intensified. 

That’s in addition to the administration’s positioning for this year’s elections.

VI. More Demand Side Inflation: BSP’s Easing Cycle Designed to Rescue the Struggling Real Estate Sector and the Banking System 

Despite the CPI gradually rising, the BSP cut interest rates twice in Q4 2024, supported by a significant reduction in the bank’s reserve requirements. 

When similar measures were implemented during the pre-pandemic and pandemic phases (2018–2020), they fueled the first leg of the second wave of the inflation cycle. Is history repeating itself? (Figure 4, middle diagram)

After an 11-month plateau, the banking system’s net claims on the central government (NCoCG) surged to a record-high Php 5.31 trillion in November 2024! (Figure 4, lowest window) 

Banks may have responded to an implicit directive from the BSP, which has contributed to the growth of the money supply. 

Additionally, the BSP’s ‘easing cycle’ prompted a surge in bank lending, particularly to the struggling real estate sector and consumers.

Universal-commercial (UC) bank lending grew by 11.34% in November, driven largely by a 10.11% increase in lending to the real estate sector, which reached a record-high Php 2.57 trillion. 

Meanwhile, UC consumer bank lending (excluding real estate) jumped 23.3% to a historic Php 1.54 trillion.

Figure 5

Overall, systemic leverage—defined as UC bank loans plus public debt—expanded by 11.1%, reaching an all-time high of Php 28.44 trillion.  (Figure 5, topmost chart) 

This growth drove a sharp increase in M3 money supply, from 5.43% in October to 7.7% in November. 

Despite BSP claims of ‘restrictive’ financial conditions, growth rates of systemic leverage have been rising steadily since its trough in September 2023. 

The BSP’s easing measures in the second half of 2024 have undoubtedly contributed to this systemic expansion in leverage. 

The combination of liquidity injections through NCoCG and surging systemic leverage has also driven growth in M1 money supply, which again rose 7.7% in November—reaching levels seen in October 2023. 

If history offers any guidance, reminiscent of 2014 and 2019, the current surge in cash circulation—which accounted for 30.83% of November’s M1—has likely contributed to the broadening increase in non-food and non-energy core inflation, supporting the notion that the headline and core CPI have already bottomed out. (Figure 5, middle graph) 

Notably, M1’s influence on price pressures occurs with a time lag. This means that certain price increases, due to increased spending in sectors benefiting most from credit expansion—such as real estate and their principal lenders, the banks—eventually percolates into the broader economy. 

This clearly reflects the BSP’s implicit backstop for the real estate sector and its key counterparties—the banking system. 

VII. Demand-Side Inflation: The Impact of the USD-PHP Soft Peg and Rising US Treasury Bond Yields 

Another factor that appears to be providing a behind-the-scenes support to inflation is the BSP’s US dollar Philippine peso USDPHP exchange rate cap. 

As we previously noted,

Widening Trade Deficit: First, the cap widens the trade deficit by making imports appear cheaper and exports more expensive. An artificial ceiling exacerbates imbalances stemming from the historical credit-financed savings-investment gap. (Prudent Investor, 2024)

Although November’s trade deficit narrowed to USD 4.77 billion due to a 4.93% decline in imports and an 8.7% slump in exports, it remains within the record levels seen in 2022. (Figure 5 lowest window)

Figure 6

The risk of a sudden devaluation grows as the persistent trade deficits erode the BSP's ability to defend the USDPHP ceiling magnifying inflation risks. (Figure 6, topmost diagram) 

Additionally, the recent shift in the Philippine treasury yield curve—from a flattening, belly-inverted slope to a steepening curve driven by surging bond rates—has further underscored this vulnerability. (Figure 6, middle image) 

Besides, rising yields on US Treasury bonds could influence upward pressure on Philippine rates. (Figure 6, lowest chart) 

US inflation can indirectly impact the Philippines through global trade, commodity prices, and capital flows.  For example, rising US inflation may lead to higher prices for imported goods, thus contributing to increased inflation domestically in the Philippines. 

Additionally, US Treasury yields act as a global benchmark for interest rates. When US yields rise, typically due to higher inflation expectations or tightening monetary policy by the Federal Reserve, it can exert upward pressure on bond yields in other countries, including the Philippines. 

This dynamic occurs as foreign investors may seek higher returns, which in turn can push up domestic yields. The influence of rising US bond rates on Philippine yields underscores the interconnectedness of global financial markets and reflects the broader impact of US economic conditions on emerging market economies. 

Furthermore, if the BSP insists on continuing its ‘easing cycle’ under such conditions, it risks stoking the embers of inflation, which could further weaken the USD-Philippine peso exchange rate. 

Sure, while it’s true that the structural economic conditions of the Inflation Era 1.0 differ from today’s—marked by advances in technology, globalization, and other factors—the political landscape remains strikingly similar. Authorities are still using leverage both directly (through deficit spending) and indirectly (through asset bubbles) to extract resources from the private sector. As such, the outcome—an Inflation Era 2.0—seems increasingly likely to echo its predecessor. 

VIII. Conclusion: Strengthening Signs of an Emergent Third Inflation Wave 

To wrap things up, December’s CPI has shown signs of a potential bottom and has laid the groundwork for the third upside wave of this inflation cycle. 

Aside from the turnaround in the CORE CPI, which indicates a broadening of price increases across the economy, the record quantitative easing by banks in support of record public spending and all-time highs in public debt have injected substantial liquidity into the system. 

This, combined with the accelerating growth in bank lending, has intensified liquidity growth. As a result, this increased liquidity tends to diffuse into the economy with a time lag, eventually leading to higher prices.

___

References: 

Prudent Investor, The President and the Markets "Disagree" on the CPI; Global Financial Crisis Icebreaker: The Collapse of Sri Lanka July 11, 2022

Philippine Statistics Authority Consumer Price Index and the Inflation Rate, Frequently Asked Questions 

Milton Friedman, The Real Story Behind Inflation, The Heritage Foundation 

Prudent Investor, Has the May 3.9% CPI Peaked? Are Filipinos Really Spending More On Non-Essentials? Credit Card and Salary Loan NPLs Surged in Q1 2024! June 10 2024  

Prudent Investor, Has the Philippine Government Won Its Battle Against Inflation? SWS Self-Poverty Survey Disagrees, Unveiling Its Hidden Messages October 13, 2024  

Prudent Investor, How the BSP's Soft Peg will Contribute to the Weakening of the US Dollar-Philippine Peso Exchange Rate, January 2, 2025