A Journey into the PCE Jungle 

CE Colored Glasses CE Colored Glasses

Workshop on ConsumptionBureau of Labor StatisticsWashington, D.C.December 12 2005December 12, 2005
Outline

IntroductionData Comparison IssuesHistorical Methodology & ResultsRevised Methodology & ResultsDetailed Example - Recreation 
Comparing CE Expenditure Estimate

wihD f Oh S i

t

h

Data 

from 

O

t

her 

Sources

 Department of Energy Department of Energy

– Residential Energy Consumption Survey– Residential Transportation Energy Consu

Survey

 Health Care Financing Administration

– National Health Expenditures

 Health Care Quality and Research Agenc

– Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (House

 Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)

– Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE

 Pro

gressive Grocer/Su

permarket Busin

g p
Since the Start of the Ongoing CE Since the Start of the Ongoing CE

“What was expected from these compar

was a sense of degree and direction was

a sense of degree and direction 

possible survey errors, rather than an 

measure of bias because the specifmeasure of bias, because the specif

estimates from other sources are n

necessarily the necessarily the ‘true’ values

”

(Gieseman 1987 p 9)(Gieseman 1987, 

p. 9)
PCE: Primary Source of Independ

Data for Comparison O er Time Data for Comparison

O

ver Time

Used for source selection for integra

Used for source selection for integra

published data (Diary or Interview)

Publish comparisons in biennial Publish comparisons in biennial

publications

Monitor consistency of results Monitor consistency of resultsHelp identify areas where CE data 

collection and methods might be impcollection and methods might be imp

by understanding the differences
CE and PCE Compared CE and PCE Compared

 Historical methodology Historical methodology (Gieseman 1987; Branc

(Gieseman 1987; Branc

CE bulletins and reports from 1990-1999)

– Type by expenditure (food, apparel, housing, – T d ti i ti Tren

ds over time 

in ratios 

» 1984-2002

 Revised methodology (April 2000 to present)

– Type by product (durables, non-durables, ser– CE and PCE aggregates and ratios CE and PCE aggregates and ratios

» 1992, 1997, 2002

– Concerns and issues– Detailed example: Recreation (PCE-defined 
Major Findings from Revision Major Findings from Revision

– After adj py ustments for com

parabilit

y, CE/PCE ratio 

» 0.86 for 1992 (vs. 0.67 unadjusted)» 0.85 for 1997 (vs. 0.65 unadjusted)» 0.81 for 2000 (vs. 0.60 unadjusted)

– Owner-occupied dwellings and new autos CE expend

aggregates greater than PCE

– For most other items, CE aggregates lower than PCE 

decreasing over time

– Ex

pa a o s l

a

n

ati

o

n

s

» some can be explained» others need more work to understand 
Making Comparisons: 

I t C id Issues 

to 

Consider 

 Populations Expenditures (publication vs. “comparabl

– Underlying conceptual framework (scope) – Definition

 Sources of data

– Censuses– Surveys– Ad i i t ti d Ad

m

i

n

i

s

trative recor

d

s

– Trade association publications 

 Periodicity

– Collection, reference, production
Populations

 CE: consumer units consumer units  PCE: persons res

and persons

– Civilian non-institutional 

 PCE: persons res

– Individuals

» Persons resident in 

th h h i 

population and some institutional

– Continental U.S., Alaska, 

those who physica

U.S. and have resito reside in U.S. fomore

and Hawaii

– Urban and Rural

» Employees of U.S

abroad for 1 year o

» U.S. government c

N b f 3 4% l military personnel 

abroad regardless 

– Nonprofit institution

i di id l

Numbers of persons 3.4% less

than represented by PCE

individuals
Definition of Expenditure:

CE (P blication) & PCE CE (P

ublication)

& PCE

 CE - What consumers s

p 

end: transaction costs in

excise and sales taxes of goods and services acqduring reference period

– Primarily out-of-pocket expenditures (OOP) reported by con

val e of in al

u

e of in-kind food and rent as pa kind food and rent as pay, 

and food stamps

 PCE - Value of goods and services purchased by 

personal ( ld i l sector 

(exc

l

u

des 

intra-sector transacti 

on

including excise and sales taxes 

– Spent by individuals– Operating expenses of nonprofit institutions serving individ

Operating expenses of nonprofit institutions serving individ

– Value of food, fuel, clothing, rent of dwellings, and financia

received in kind by individuals; and net purchases of used g
Scope: CE (Publication) & PCE Scope: CE (Publication)

& PCE

 In scope for CE out of scope for PCE In scope for CE, out of scope for PCE

– Transactions between households (includes person to 

such as for used vehicles, apparel, etc.)

– Lif d l i d i Life an

d persona

l

insurance, an

d pens

ions

 In scope for PCE, out of scope for CE pub

– Rental value of owner occupied dwellings and owned 

Rental value of owner occupied dwellings and owned 

– Value of home production for own consumption on fa– Standard clothing issued to military– S i f i h d ith t t b fi i l i t 

Serv

ices 

furn

i

s

h

e

d withou

t paymen

t

by financ

i

a

l

i

n

ter

except life insurance carriers
Scope/Item Definition

Partly Out Of Scope For CE / Part

Scope/Item Definition

Partly Out Of Scope For CE

/ Part

Defined Quite Differently 

– Medical Care Expenditures Medical Care Expenditures– Religious and Welfare

Defined Quite Differently

– Education Expenditures Education Expenditures– Life and Personal Insurance and Pension – Owner-Occu

pied Housin

g Ex

penditures 

p gp
Data So rces and Periodicit Data So

urces and Periodicit

y

 CE: direct

H h ld S

 PCE: indirect (commodit

–

House

h

old

Surveys tl id l)

» Interview» Diary 

Periodicity

mostly residual)

– Sources

» Government census/surve

– Periodicity G t d i i t ti 

» Annual» Quarterly» Monthly

»

Government a

d

ministrati

regulatory agency reports

» Reports from private orga» CE (motor vehicle leasin

g 

» Monthly» Weekly

– Sampling and 

non-sam

plin

g errors

( g

taxis, nursery schools, ch

– Periodicity

» 5-year Benchmark (detail

p g

– Imputation/allocation » Annual » Quarterly

» Monthly

I t l ti / t l ti

–

I

n

terpo

l

ation

/ex

trapo

l

ati

– Expert judgment– Revisions
Historical Methodology: 

CE to PCE P blished Ratios CE to PCE

P

ublished Ratios

 Classification scheme: Classification scheme:

– Type by expenditure– CE into PCE

 Benchmark: 1997 PCE Categories: selected Years: 1984 to 2002
CE to PCE Ratios: 

A erages O er Time A

verages

O

ver Time

0 60.70.80.91.00.20.30.40.50.60.00.10.2

otal food

beverages

s, related

perations

el G & S

portation

tainment

onal care

Reading

cco prod.

l

Tot

Alcoholic bev

Rent, utilities,

HH ope

Apparel

Transpo

Enterta

Person

Re

Tobacc

Miscel

1984 to 1991 1992 to 2002
Stable Higher Ratios Stable, Higher Ratios

Rent, Utilities, and Public Services Food

1 01.2

1.01.2

0 60.81.0

0.60.81.0

0.20.40.6

0.20.4

0.2

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

1997 benchmark1992 benchmark

Historical
Stable/Decreasing Mid Ratio Stable/Decreasing, Mid Ratio

Public Transportation

1.20 60.81.00.20.40.6

4

5

6

7

8

9

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0

1

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

1997 benchmark1992 benchmark

Historical
Decreasing Lower Ratios Decreasing, Lower Ratios

Apparel and Services Apparel and Services Reading

1 01.2

Reading

1.01.2

0 60.81.0

0 60.81.0

0.40.6

0.40.6

0.2

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

0.2

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1997 benchmark

Historical 1992 benchmark
Others Have Been 

Watching and Using Watching and Using

...

 Economic Growth and Economic Trends

– Slesnick (1992, 1998)– Triplett (1997) – Nalewaik (2000)– Fernandez-Villaverde and Krueger (2004) Villaverde and Krueger (2004)– Parker and Preston (2005)

 Consumption based measure of poverty

– GAO (1996) report on Slesnick (1993)

 CE in the production of the CPI

– Fixler and Jaditz (2002)– Johnson and Greenlees (2003)– Lebow and Rudd (2003) Lebow and Rudd (2003)– National Research Council (2002)
Calls for Further Examination 

with Ca tion ith Ca

ution

 Slesnick 

( ) 1992

)

– remaining differences “is a mystery that can only be r

future investigation.” 

– “...suggest caution is in order before one assigns full 

und ti i th CEX derreporting in the CEX.” [d t it d f PCE 

[due 

to magnit

u

de o

f PCE r

 Triplett (1997)

–

“

...individual components of PCE and CE have been 

individual components of PCE and CE have been 

little to permit conclusions about which is better ...”

 GAO report (1996) referring to 1994 BEA study

– “...more than half [of the differences in the aggregate exp

was traceable to coverage and definitional differencesremainder due to statistical differences.”
Call For Further Examination Call For Further Examination



National Research Council 

( ) 2002

)

– “On the basis of available evidence, it is unclear whet

or CEX weights are superior...It is an open question aaccuratelyp g ex enditure cate

gories can be mapp f ed 

from 

CEX. We are not in a position to advocate one set of wthe other, but the question certainly warrants further investigation” But then go on to say...

– “The panel concluded that it is likely that the CEX est

consumer expenditure shares are biased, perhaps seri
Revised Methodology Revised Methodology

 Classification:

– Type by product (durables, non-durables, serv– CE into PCE – PCE Bridge to 1997 Input-Output Table

 Benchmark: 1997 Categories

– All– Redefined “comparable” Redefined “comparable”

» e.g., drop used vehicles; include owner-occupied d

 Years: 1992, 1997, 2002
CE Integrated/Personal Consumpt

E pendit res Ratios: E

xpendit

ures Ratios: C bl omparables

1.001.20 1992 1997 20020.600.800.200.400.00

all comparable all comparable all comparable all c

All items Durables Nondurables Serv

Revised
CE to PCE Aggregate E pendit r

CE to PCE Aggregate

E

xpendit

ur

1992 

( ) billions

) 1997 

( ) billions

) 2002 

Total CE $2,856 $3,590 $Total PCE $4,235 $5,545 $

% Total 67% 65% 

Total CE Comparable $2,085 $2,564 $

Total PCE Comparable Total PCE Comparable $2 422 , $3 028 , $

% Comparable 86% 85% 

CE Comp f arable as % of 73% 71% CE TotalPCE Comparable as % of PCE Total

57% 55% 

Revised, 1997 Benchmark
Issues to Consider: CE vs PCE Issues to Consider: CE vs. PCE

 Populations differ Populations differ Expenditures: concept / scope, definition Collection / Sources of data  Sources of error

– CE

» M i easurement errors assoc

iate

d w

i

t

h surveys

» Processing imputation / allocation

– PCE

» Expert judgment» Interpolation / extrapolation» Measurement errors associated with surveys (non

-

Measurement errors associated with surveys (non 

 PCE revisions
Analytical Example Analytical Example

1997 E dit f R t1997

Expenditures 

for 

Recreat

in the CE and PCE
R ti l f Y d E dit C 

R

ationa

le 

for 

Year an

d

Expenditure 

C

 Why 1997? Why 1997?

– Data represent latest benchmark year at time – Benchmark data are available at finer level o

detail

 Why recreation?

– CE di f i i l 

CE expenditures 

for serv

ices, 

in genera

l, are 

of PCE services based on new methodology

– The difference between aggregate CE and PC

recreati ti t i l ti l l tion estima

tes 

is re

l

ative

ly 

large

– As opposed to other service categories exhib

differences, there are no a priori explanation

res ltsres

ults
Expenditures for recreation, total and by m

item cate

gor

y, 1997 CE d PCE CE an

d PCE

Item category CE PCE 

Total recreation

Motion picture & legitimate theaters, 

$107,583 $215,067 

opera, and entertainments of nonprofit institutions (excl. athletic)

Spectator sportsR di & TV i

13,582

5,013

775

15,78110,108

2 850

R

adio 

& TV repair 

Clubs & fraternal organizationsCommercial participant amusementsP i t l t i t & l tt i

775

7,931

10,896

5 616

2,850

16,28559,42318 265

Parimu

tuel ne

t receip

ts 

& lotteries 

Pets, vets, & other pet servicesCable TV 

5,616

11,688

27,697

18,26512,83730,131
Expenditures for recreation, total and by m

item cate

gor

y, 1997 CE d PCE ( ) CE an

d PCE

(cont.

)

Item category CE PCE 

Film developing & photo studiosS

portin

g & recreational cam

p

s

5,5702,254

12,602

1,414

p g

p 

Video cassette rental

Internet service providersCommercial amusements, not else4,255 2,181 8,193 3,575 

,

where classified 10,125 23,311 
Derivation of CE Estimates Derivation of CE Estimates

 Interview survey is the source for about 86 

percent of aggregate recreation expenditurewhile the Diary survey accounts for the remwhile the Diary survey accounts for the rem

14 percent

 Individual ex

p pg enditure re

ports ori

ginate in 

ways.

– Directly reported by respondent– All ti f dit h d t 

Allocation o

f expenditures w

here respon

den

t r

expenditure for a combination of items

– Imputation of expenditures where respondent

acknowledges purchase, but does not provide 
Derivation of PCE Estimates Derivation of PCE Estimates

 Process uses data created for preparation o

output accounts for U. S.

 The benchmark purchasers’ value of goods 

services is calculated to determine allocabservices is calculated to determine allocaboutput.

 Total purchasers’ value is allocated among

intermediate and end users.
Amount of value added to total recreation 

esti b f 1997 PCE imate by

factor, 1997 PCE

Factor

Value added

(millions of dollars) (millions of dollars)

Total $215,067

Basic value

Wholesale margin

$208,064

Wholesale margin 30Transportation costWholesale taxes

3076

6,153

Retail marginRetail taxes

677

68
Aggregation and allocation of receipts for 

recreati 1997 I/O A ( ion, 1997 I/O

Accounts 

(millions of do

B i Wh l

T

Comm & 

Aggre

gation of receipts

Basic h l R il 

value

Wh

ole. 

margin

Trans

.cost

w

h

ole. 

taxes

Retail

margin

Payroll establishments Nonemployer establishmentsTax-exempt establishments

$310,593

19,922

82 $330,597

Adjustments:

Secondary productionNonemployer misreportingFiler misreportingNonfiler misreporting

14,783

1,6641,505

Nonfiler misreporting 3,337Capital consumption allow. 507 21,796

Allocable receipts $352,393 $112 $294 $7,565 $752 Imports Adjustments:

2,332

Census re-exports NIPA territorial adj. to imports 

-41

1

Allocable import receipts 2,292 Total allocable recei

pts 354,685 112 294 7,565 752 p , , 
Aggregation and allocation of receipts for r

1997 I/O A 1997 I/O

Accounts 

– cont. 

(millions of dollars)

Allocation of Production

Basic 

value

Whole.

margin

Trans. 

cost

Comm & 

whole. taxes

Retail 

margin

R

t

Exports of goods

Intermediate production

1,400

19 186

3046

78

119

0

74

6

Intermediate production Travel & conference servicesReal estate servicesLegal, accounting, & insurance servicesCommunication & utility services

19,186

7,1246,505

5

4,054

46

0000

119

0000

74

9

38

0

59

6

Rental & leasing of equipmentRepairs & maintenance costsGovernment purchases & sales –

Federal, state, local, foreign

Net purchases & sales of foreigners

11,748

9,870

-1,828

2 099

0000

0000

261

53

-284

0

Net purchases

& sales of foreigners 

Change in inventoriesUnspecified costsUnallocated output

2,099

44

41,497

5,783

0150

01

13

0

00

565259
Aggregation and allocation of receipts for re

1997 I/O Accounts 

– cont. 

(millions of dollars)

Allocation of Production

Basic 

value

Whole.

margin

Trans. 

cost

Comm & 

whole. taxes

Retail 

margin

R

t

PCE Sporting Equipment

PCE Sports Supplies Incl Ammo

602

48

01

03

50

0

41

PCE Sports Supplies, Incl. Ammo PCE Fish & SeafoodPCE Food in Purchased MealsPCE Alcohol in Purchased MealsPCE Other Meats

4878

452

98

129

10000

35000

00

33

00

4128

000

PCE Toys, Dolls, & GamesPCE Electrical RepairPCE Laundry & Garment RepairPCE Beauty Shops & Health ClubsPCE C i l & V ti l S h l

16

1,708

230

6,5571 742

00000

00000

0

2212

169

1

00000

PCE

Commercial &

Vocational S

c

hools 

PCE Elementary & Secondary SchoolsPCE Miscellaneous Personal ServicesPCE BusPCE Mass Transit S

ystems

1,742

832

15

663

7,686

00000

00000

10000

00000

y ,
Aggregation and allocation of receipts for re

1997 I/O A 1997 I/O

Accounts 

– cont. 

(millions of dollars)

Basic Whole. Trans. Comm & Retail R

Allocation of Production value margin cost whole. taxes margin tPCE Other Purchased Intercity 

Transportation

PCE Other Motor Vehicle Services

6,242

98

00

00

37

2

00

PCE Other Motor Vehicle Services PCE Hotels & MotelsPCE PostagePCE Household Operations Services, 

Not Elsewhere Classified (NEC)

C f i lA i i

98

418

16

4,1054 41

00000

00000

2

15

0

74

0

00000

P

CE Professional Association Expenses 

PCE Social WelfarePCE Recreation

4,41

7

2,980

208,064

00

30

00

76

08

6,153

00

677

354, 685 112 294 7,565 752 
E al ation of CE and PCE Estima

E

val

uation of CE and PCE Estima

Standard errors and confidence 

intervals

Expert judgmentClassification of items Classification of itemsCollection issues
Standard error and 95% confidence interv

t t l ti dit 1997 CE t

o

t

a

l recreation expenditures, 1997 CE

It

Value

em (millions of dollars) (millions of dollars)

Total recreation $107,583Standard error Standard error $2 430 ,95% confidence intervals

U li it Upper li

mit $112 346 $112,346

Lower limit $102,820
Quality identifier in PCE Quality identifier in PCE

 Since PCE is compiled from numerous so

Since PCE is compiled from numerous so

calculating standard errors and confidencintervals is not feasible.

 The basic value for each transaction contr

The basic value for each transaction contr

to PCE is assigned a quality ID of 1, 2, or decreasing order of quality or level of con
Quality identifier in PCE Quality identifier in PCE

– con

 Quality ID of 1 Quality ID of

1

– basic value based on survey c

basic value based on survey, c

other reliable published source

 Quality ID of 2 – basic value based on source da

further estimates made by BEA

 Quality ID of 3 – basic value not based on surve

other reliable source other reliable source

 83 percent of basic value for recreation derived f

Quality ID 2 transactions

 Remaining 17 percent derived from Quality ID 3 

transactions
Expert Judgment in CE Expert Judgment in CE

Data adjustment in CE 

– Allocation 

procedures

– Imputation procedures

“Analyst judgment” in PCE

– T diti & i Tradition 

& exper

ience 

– ‘S’ ‘R’ 

‘S’s, ‘R’s 

‘IED998’s

E li it

–

Expli

cit
Impact of data adjustment procedures on r

esti t 1997 CE tima

tes, 1997 CE ( illi f d ll ) (

millions of

d

ollars

)

Allocated

% Imputed

% 

Item Total

Allocated

%

Allocated

Imputed

%

Imputed

Total recreation $107,583 $3,447 3.2% $2,663 2.5% 

Movies theater etc Movies, theater, etc. 13 582 , 259 1 9%. 608 4 4%. Spectator sports 5,013 86 1.7% 299 6.0% Radio & TV repair 775 67 8.6% 15 1.9% Clubs & frat orgs Clubs

& frat. orgs. 7 931 , 0 0 0%. 323 4 1%. 

Comm. participant

amusements 10,896 1,285 11.8% 582 5.3% 

Parimut & lotteries Parimut. & lotteries 5 616 , 347 6 2%. 0 0 0%. Pets & vets 11,688 109 0.9% 32 0.3% 

* Other includes manual adjustment, combined imputation and allocation, and special 

processing (Trips and Vacations).
Impact of data adjustment procedures on r

esti t 1997 CE tima

tes, 1997 CE

– con

t. ( illi f d ll ) (

millions of

d

ollars

)

Allocated

% Imputed

% 

Item Total

Allocated

%

Allocated

Imputed

%

Imputed

Cable TV $27,697 189 0.7% $223 0.8% Film developing & Film developing

&

photo studios 5,570 403 7.2% 228 4.1% 

Sport. & rec. camps 2,254 404 17.9% 0 0.0% 

Video cassette rental 4,255 0 0.0% 186 4.4% 

Internet service

providers 2,181 0 0.0% 17 0.8% 

Commercial amusements, NEC 10,125 298 2.9% 150 1.5% 

* Other includes manual adjustment, combined imputation and allocation, and special processing (Trips and Vacations).
Expert Judgment in PCE Expert Judgment in PCE

Tradition & experience

– ‘S’ – Domestic supply Domestic supply– ‘IED998’ – Converted 1992 comm

flow records flow records

– ‘R’ - Residual

Explicit

–

“Based on analyst judgment

”

Based on analyst judgment
Classification of Items Classification of Items

CE - UCC for parimutuel receipts inc

miscellaneous fees, such as pet, fishinhunting licenses that can’t be separate

CE - UCC for sportin

g and recreation

camp fees includes sports camps, suc

football and baseball.

– PCE assigns sports instruction camps to 

commercial amusements, NEC.
Collection Iss es: Spectator Spor

Collection Iss

ues: Spectator Spor

 Items in PCE Items in PCE

– Pro & semi-pro baseball admission receipts– Pro & semi-pro football admission receipts– Oth & i Other pro 

& sem

i

-

pro sport lb d i i ts c

l

u

bs a

d

m

iss

ion

– Other receipts from sports teams & clubs– Admission receipts for horse racetracks

– Admission receipts for dog racetracks

– Admission receipts for auto racetracks

– Racing (excl. track oper., radio, TV, & ads) Racing (excl. track oper., radio, TV,

& ads)

– Exhibition bowling– Travel arrangement & reservation services
Collection Issues: Spectator Sports Collection Issues: Spectator Sports 

 Items in PCE Items in PCE

– cont.

– Promoters of performing arts, sports, and sim– College sports College sports– Sales & services of higher educational est. in

to education activities

– Government sales of elementary & secondary 

education services
Collection Issues: Spectator Sports Collection Issues: Spectator Sports 

 UCC s’ in CE

– 620221 – Admission to sporting events– 620222 – Admission to sporting events, out-of-town t

 Questions for UCC 620221

– “Since the 1st of (month, 3 months ago), have you (or 

members of your CU) purchased any of the following members of your CU) purchased any of the following 

own use?”

- Season tickets to sporting events

– “Have you (or any members of your CU) paid any sin

admissions to spectator sporting events such as footbahockey, or soccer?”
Collection Issues: Spectator Sports Collection Issues: Spectator Sports 

 Questions for UCC 620222 

– For trips paid for at least in part by the CU and not a p

“Did you (or any members of your CU) spend anythin

for entertainment or admissions (not counting what th

deal covered? Hand respondent information booklet, pag

– The info booklet gives the following cues:

» Movies Theaters Concerts» Museums Tours Sports events» Other entertainment event

– 25 

p 

ercent of the amount is allocated to UCC 620222 

trips, 11 percent if the trip is reported as a local overn
Collection Issues: Spectator Sports

– For reimbursed trips, trips for non-CU members and pac

Collection Issues: Spectator Sports

“Did [the trip] expenses include anything for - ?

Food and beverages LodgingTrans

portation An

y g thin

g else

– A portion of “Anything else” is allocated to entertainmen

admissions depending on what other items were included 

– 25 percent of the entertainment and admissions portion i

25 percent of the entertainment and admissions portion i

allocated to UCC 620222.

 Thus, the CE instrument and methodology do not e

same d t il t t t d

e

t

ail on spec

t

a

tor spor

ts expenses as th PC

e 

data provides. The questions are also asked towarof the interview at which point fatigue may be a fa
Summary of Evaluation Summary of Evaluation

 Differential between 1997 CE and PCE estima

billion

– If true CE estimate at upper end of confidence inter

billion

– Though we have no estimates of effects, it is unlike

adjusting other BLS allocation/imputation proceduadjusting other BLS allocation/imputation procedu

reapplying BEA expert judgment in allocation decitotal purchasers’ value would have an appreciable i

expendit diff ti l diture differenti

a

l.

 Remaining differential - approx. $100 billion A t ti l th d l i l f th diff 

A po

tenti

a

l meth

o

d

o

log

ica

l reason 

for the diffe

questionnaire design in the CE. 
Summary

Revised methodology for compariso

Revised methodology for compariso

Product replaces expenditures in 

classifications

Explanation of differences in estima

between CE and PCE between CE and PCE

Results

– Overall– Detailed recreation