2014 OASDI Trustees Report

skip to main content
Table of Contents Previous Next Tables Figures Index

B. ECONOMIC ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODS
The three alternative sets of economic assumptions reflect a continuation of the gradual recovery from the recession that started in December 2007. The intermediate assumptions reflect the Trustees’ consensus expectation of sustained moderate economic growth and their best estimate for various other economic parameters. The low-cost assumptions represent a more optimistic outlook: a faster recovery, stronger long-term economic growth, and relatively optimistic levels for other parameters. The high-cost assumptions represent a more pessimistic scenario: a slower recovery, weaker long-term economic growth, and relatively pessimistic levels for other parameters.
Actual economic data were available through the third quarter of 2013 at the time the Trustees set the assumptions for this report. The data indicated that economic activity peaked in December 20071 with the level of gross domestic product (GDP) about 1 percent above the estimated long-term sustainable trend level. A severe recession followed, with a low point in the economic cycle reached in the second quarter of 2009 with GDP about 7 percent below the estimated sustainable trend level. The annual growth rate in real GDP has been positive in all years since then, but not as strong as in most past recoveries. The Trustees project that the economy will return to its sustainable trend level of output within the first 10 years of the projection period and remain on that trend thereafter. However, the speed of the return varies by alternative. The economy is projected to return to its sustainable trend level of output by 2021 for the intermediate assumptions, 2019 for the low-cost assumptions, and 2023 for the high-cost assumptions, about 1 year later than in last year’s report for each alternative. Complete cycles have little effect on the long-range estimates of financial status, so the assumptions do not include economic cycles beyond 10 years.
The key economic assumptions underlying the three sets of projections of the future financial status of the OASI and DI Trust Funds are discussed in the remainder of this section.
1. Productivity Assumptions
Total U.S. economy productivity is defined as the ratio of real GDP to hours worked by all workers.2 The rate of change in total-economy productivity is a major determinant in the growth of average earnings. Over the last five complete economic cycles (1966-73, 1973-79, 1979-89, 1989-2000, and 2000-07, measured peak to peak), the annual increases in total productivity averaged 2.27, 1.10, 1.39, 1.79 and 2.15 percent, respectively. For the 41-year period from 1966 to 2007, covering those last five complete economic cycles, the annual increase in total-economy productivity averaged 1.73 percent.
The Trustees set the ultimate annual increases in total-economy productivity to 1.98, 1.68, and 1.38 percent for the low-cost, intermediate, and high-cost assumptions, respectively.3 These rates of increase are unchanged from the 2013 report.
The average annual rate of change in total economy productivity from 2007 (the end of the last complete economic cycle) to 2013 is estimated to be 1.36 percent. For the intermediate assumptions, the annual change in productivity is assumed to be 1.57 percent for 2014, then increase to 1.92 percent for 2015, gradually decline to 1.55 percent for 2020, and then rise to its ultimate value of 1.68 percent for 2023 and later. For the low-cost assumptions, the assumed annual change in productivity is 1.88 percent for 2014, then increases to 2.21 percent for 2015, averages 1.92 percent for 2016 through 2021, and reaches its ultimate value of 1.98 percent for 2022. For the high-cost assumptions, the assumed annual change in productivity is 1.00 percent for 2014, then averages 1.69 percent for 2015 through 2017, 1.34 percent for 2018 through 2023, and reaches its ultimate value of 1.38 percent for 2026 and later.
2. Price Inflation Assumptions
Future changes in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI) will directly affect the OASDI program through the automatic cost-of-living benefit increases. Future changes in the GDP price index (GDP deflator) affect the nominal levels of GDP, wages, self-employment income, average earnings, and taxable payroll.
The annual increases in the CPI averaged 4.6, 8.5, 5.3, 3.0, and 2.6 percent over the economic cycles 1966-73, 1973-79, 1979-89, 1989-2000, and 2000-07, respectively. The annual increases in the GDP deflator averaged 4.6, 7.5, 4.7, 2.2, and 2.5 percent for the same respective economic cycles. For the 41 years from 1966 to 2007, covering the last five complete economic cycles, the annual increases in the CPI and GDP deflator averaged 4.6 and 4.0 percent, respectively. The estimated average annual change from 2007 (the end of the last complete economic cycle) to 2013 is 2.1 percent for the CPI and 1.5 percent for the GDP deflator.
The Trustees set the ultimate annual increases in the CPI to 3.4, 2.7, and 2.0 percent for the low-cost, intermediate, and high-cost assumptions, respectively. The CPI assumptions differ in three ways from those in the 2013 report. First, the ultimate annual change in the CPI in the intermediate assumptions is 0.1 percentage point lower. Second, the low-cost assumptions now include a higher (rather than lower), and the high-cost assumptions a lower (rather than higher), rate of increase in the CPI than the intermediate assumptions. Third, the spread in the assumed rates of increase in the CPI across the alternatives is now narrower. Note that a higher price inflation rate results in faster earnings and revenue growth immediately, while the resulting added growth in benefit levels occurs with a delay, causing an overall improvement in the actuarial balance. Similarly, a lower price inflation rate causes an overall decline in the actuarial balance.
The Federal Reserve Board’s monetary policy changed in the 1980s toward more vigilance in preventing high inflation. Recognizing this, the Trustees lowered the assumed ultimate annual rate of increase in the CPI for the intermediate case from 4.0 percent for the 1996 report to 2.8 percent for the 2004 through 2013 reports. Consistent with the Board’s continued emphasis on preventing inflation, as indicated by their current target for the GDP deflator,4 the Trustees have decided to decrease the ultimate annual change in the CPI by 0.1 percentage point for the intermediate assumptions.
For the intermediate assumptions, the Trustees assume the annual change in the CPI will be 1.61 percent for 2014, 1.95 percent for 2015, and then, as the economy moves toward full employment, increase gradually to the ultimate growth rate of 2.70 percent for 2020 and later. For the low-cost assumptions, the Trustees assume the annual change in the CPI will be 1.79 percent for 2014, increase to 2.82 percent for 2015, and reach its ultimate annual growth rate of 3.40 percent for 2019 and later. For the high-cost assumptions, the Trustees assume the annual rate of change in the CPI will increase from 1.48 percent for 2014 to the ultimate annual change of 2.00 percent for 2020 and later.
The annual increase in the GDP deflator differs from the annual increase in the CPI because the two indices are constructed using different computational methods and coverage. The difference between the rate of change in the CPI and the rate of change in the GDP deflator is called the price differential in this report. For the 41 years from 1966 to 2007, covering the last five complete economic cycles, the average annual price differential was 0.5 percent. From 2007 (the end of the last complete economic cycle) to 2013, the average annual price differential is estimated to be 0.6 percent.
The Trustees assume the ultimate price differentials will be 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 percentage point for the low-cost, intermediate, and high-cost alternatives, respectively. Varying the ultimate projected price differential across alternatives recognizes the historical variation in this measure. Accordingly, the assumed ultimate annual increase in the GDP deflator is 3.1 (3.4 less 0.3), 2.3 (2.7 less 0.4), and 1.5 (2.0 less 0.5) percent for the low-cost, intermediate, and high-cost alternatives, respectively. The ultimate price differentials for the three alternatives are unchanged from the 2013 report.
The price differential was 1.6 percentage points for 2011, 0.4 percentage point for 2012, and is estimated to be 0.0 percentage point for 2013. The large change in the price differential between 2011 and 2012 primarily reflects fluctuations in oil prices in recent years. Changes in oil prices affect the CPI much more than the GDP deflator because oil represents a much larger share of U.S. consumption than of U.S. production. The Trustees do not assume any future fluctuations in oil prices because such fluctuations are inherently unpredictable. For the intermediate assumptions, the Trustees assume the price differential will be 0.2 percentage point for 2014 and 0.4 percentage point for 2015 and later.
3. Average Earnings Assumptions
The average level of nominal earnings in OASDI covered employment for each year has a direct effect on the size of the taxable payroll and on the future level of average benefits. In addition, under the automatic adjustment provisions in the law, growth in the average wage in the U.S. economy directly affects certain parameters used in the OASDI benefit formulas as well as the contribution and benefit base, the exempt amounts under the retirement earnings test, the amount of earnings required for a quarter of coverage, and in certain circumstances, the automatic cost-of-living benefit increases.
Average U.S. earnings is defined as the ratio of the sum of total U.S. wage and salary disbursements and net proprietors’ income to the sum of total U.S. civilian employment and armed forces. The growth rate in average U.S. earnings for any period is equal to the combined growth rates for total U.S. economy productivity, average hours worked, the ratio of earnings to total compensation (which includes fringe benefits), the ratio of total compensation to GDP, and the GDP deflator.
The average annual change in average hours worked was -0.27 percent over the last five complete economic cycles covering the period from 1966 to 2007. The annual change in average hours worked averaged -0.71, -0.56, 0.00, 0.15, and ‑0.64 percent over the economic cycles 1966-73, 1973-79, 1979-89, 1989‑2000, and 2000‑07, respectively. From 2007 (the end of the last complete economic cycle) to 2013, the average annual change in average hours worked is estimated to be -0.15 percent.
The Trustees set the ultimate annual rates of change for average hours worked at 0.05, -0.05, and -0.15 percent for the low-cost, intermediate, and high-cost assumptions, respectively. These ultimate annual rates of change for average hours worked are unchanged from the 2013 report.
The average annual change in the ratio of earnings to total compensation was ‑0.20 percent from 1966 to 2007. Most of this decrease was due to the relative increase in the cost of employer-sponsored group health insurance for wage workers. Assuming that the level of total employee compensation is not affected by the amount of employer-sponsored group health insurance, any increase or decrease in employer-sponsored group health insurance leads to a commensurate decrease or increase in other components of employee compensation, including wages. Projections of future ratios of earnings to total compensation follow this principle. The Trustees assume that the total amount of future employer-sponsored group health insurance will increase more slowly than in the past due to provisions of the Affordable Care Act of 2010, as described in the 2010 report. Data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) indicate that the other significant component of non-wage employee compensation is employer contributions to retirement plans. The other component is assumed to grow faster than employee compensation in the future as life expectancy and potential time in retirement increase.
The Trustees set the average annual rate of change in the ratio of wages to employee compensation from 2025 to 2088 to about -0.03, ‑0.13, and ‑0.23 percent for the low-cost, intermediate, and high-cost assumptions, respectively. Under the intermediate assumptions, the ratio of wages to employee compensation is assumed to decline from 0.806 for 2013 to 0.737 for 2088. The rate of this decline is about half the rate assumed prior to enactment of the Affordable Care Act of 2010, as described in the 2010 report. The ratio of earnings to compensation includes self-employment income both in the numerator and in the denominator. As a result, the rate of decline in earnings to compensation (which over the same period averages 0.11 percent under the intermediate assumptions) is less than the rate of decline in wages to employee compensation.
The ratio of total compensation (i.e., employee compensation and net proprietors’ income) to GDP varies over the economic cycle and with changes in the relative sizes of different sectors of the economy. Over the last five economic cycles from 1966 to 2007, this ratio has averaged 0.627. The ratio declined from 0.648 for 2001 to 0.606 for 2012. The Trustees assume that this ratio will rise as the economy recovers, reaching a level of 0.631 for 2022. For years after 2022, relative sizes of different sectors of the economy are assumed to remain constant, and therefore project the ratio of total compensation to GDP to remain unchanged at the 2022 level. The historical and projected ratios of total compensation to GDP are lower than in the 2013 report because BEA changed the methodology of GDP measurement in July 2013.5 The new method results in a higher level of GDP, but without a corresponding change in compensation.
The projected average annual growth rate in average nominal U.S. earnings from 2025 to 2088 is about 3.85 percent for the intermediate alternative. This growth rate reflects the average annual growth rate of approximately ‑0.11 percent for the ratio of earnings to total compensation, and also reflects the assumed ultimate annual growth rates of 1.68, -0.05, and 2.30 percent for productivity, average hours worked, and the GDP deflator, respectively. Similarly, the projected average annual growth rate in average nominal U.S. earnings is 5.17 percent for the low-cost assumptions and 2.55 percent for the high-cost assumptions.
Over long periods, the Trustees expect the average annual growth rate in the average wage in OASDI covered employment (henceforth the “average covered wage”) to be very close to the average annual growth rate in average U.S. earnings. Specifically, the assumed average annual growth rates in the average covered wage from 2025 to 2088 are 5.16, 3.83, and 2.52 percent for the low-cost, intermediate, and high-cost assumptions, respectively. The Trustees estimate that the annual rate of change in the average covered wage is 1.92 percent for 2013. For the intermediate assumptions, as the economy recovers, the Trustees assume the annual rate of change in the average covered wage will average 4.37 percent from 2013 to 2023. Thereafter, the assumed average annual rate of change in the average covered wage is 3.83 percent.
4. Assumed Real-Wage Differential
The Trustees have traditionally expressed the real increase in the average OASDI covered wage in the form of a real-wage differential — the annual percentage change in the average covered wage minus the annual percentage change in the CPI. For the 41-year period including 1967 through 2007, covering the last five complete economic cycles, the real-wage differential averaged 0.89 percentage point, the result of averages of 1.48, 0.01, 0.45, 1.57, and 0.60 percentage points over the economic cycles 1966-73, 1973-79, 1979-89, 1989-2000, and 2000‑07, respectively.
For the years 2025‑88, the Trustees assume that the annual real-wage differentials for OASDI covered employment will average 1.76, 1.13, and 0.52 percentage points for the low-cost, intermediate, and high-cost assumptions, respectively.
The estimated real-wage differential averaged -0.19 percentage point for 2008 through 2013 (the years since the last complete economic cycle). For the intermediate assumptions, the Trustees assume that the real-wage differential will increase from 2.18 percentage points for 2014 to 2.97 percentage points for 2015, an improvement that reflects the economic recovery. Thereafter, the real-wage differential gradually declines to an average of 1.13 percentage points for 2025-88. For the low-cost assumptions, the real-wage differential increases from 3.00 percentage points for 2014 to 3.88 percentage points for 2015, and gradually declines to its long-run average of 1.76 percentage points for 2025-88. For the high-cost assumptions, the real-wage differential increases from 0.81 percentage point for 2014 to 2.10 percentage points for 2016, and gradually declines to an average of 0.52 percentage point for 2025-88.
 
Annual percentage changea in—
Real-
wage
differ-
ential b
Economic cycles:c
2013 d

a
For rows with a single year listed, the value is the annual percentage change from the prior year. For rows with a range of years listed, the value is the compound average annual percentage change.

b
For rows with a single year listed, the value is the annual percentage change in the average annual wage in covered employment less the annual percentage change in the Consumer Price Index. For rows with a range of years listed, the value is the average of annual values of the differential. Values are rounded after all computations.

c
Economic cycles are shown from peak to peak, except for the last cycle, which is not yet complete.

d
Historical data are not available for the full year. Estimated values vary slightly by alternative and are shown for the intermediate assumptions.

e
Greater than -0.005 and less than 0.005 percent.

5. Labor Force and Unemployment Projections
The Office of the Chief Actuary at the Social Security Administration projects the civilian labor force by age, sex, marital status, and presence of children. Projections of the labor force participation rates for each group reflect disability prevalence, educational attainment, the average level of Social Security retirement benefits, the state of the economy, and the change in life expectancy. The projections also include a “cohort effect,” which reflects a shift upward in female participation rates across cohorts born through 1948.
The annual rate of growth in the size of the labor force decreased from an average of about 2.4 percent during the 1966-73 economic cycle and 2.7 percent during the 1973-79 cycle to 1.7 percent during the 1979-89 cycle, 1.3 percent during the 1989-2000 cycle, and 1.0 percent during the 2000-07 cycle. The Trustees expect further slowing of labor force growth due to a substantial slowing of growth in the working age population in the future — a consequence of the baby-boom generation approaching retirement and succeeding lower-birth-rate cohorts reaching working age. Under the intermediate assumptions, the Office of the Chief Actuary projects that the labor force will increase by an average of 0.9 percent per year from 2013 to 2023 and 0.5 percent per year over the remainder of the 75‑year projection period.
The projected labor force participation rates are derived from a historically based structural relationship that uses demographic and economic assumptions specific to each alternative. More optimistic economic assumptions in the low-cost alternative are consistent with higher labor force participation rates, but demographic assumptions in the low-cost alternative (such as slower improvement in longevity) are consistent with lower labor force participation rates. These relationships with various basic assumptions move the labor force participation rates in opposite directions. Therefore, the projected labor force participation rates do not vary substantially across alternatives.
Historically, labor force participation rates reflect trends in demographics and pensions. Between the mid‑1960s and the mid‑1980s, labor force participation rates at ages 50 and over declined for males but were fairly stable for females. During this period, the baby-boom generation reached working age and more women entered the labor force. This increasing supply of labor allowed employers to offer attractive early retirement options. Between the mid‑1980s and the mid‑1990s, participation rates roughly stabilized for males and increased for females. Since the mid‑1990s, however, participation rates for both sexes at ages 50 and over have generally risen significantly.
Many economic and demographic factors, including longevity, health, disability prevalence, the business cycle, incentives for retirement in Social Security and private pensions, education, and marriage patterns, will influence future labor force participation rates. The Office of the Chief Actuary models some of these factors directly. To model the effects of other factors related to increases in life expectancy, the office adjusts projected participation rates upward for mid-career and older ages to reflect projected increases in life expectancy. For the intermediate projections, this adjustment increases the total labor force by 2.9 percent for 2088.
For men age 16 and over, the projected age-adjusted labor force participation rate6 for 2088 is 73.1 percent for each of the low-cost, intermediate, and high-cost assumptions. For women age 16 and over, the projected age-adjusted labor force participation rates for 2088 are 60.9, 60.8, and 60.6 percent for the low-cost, intermediate, and high-cost assumptions, respectively. These rates are higher than the actual 2012 levels published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of 70.6 percent for men and 58.0 percent for women, primarily due to the assumed increase in life expectancy. In the first ten years, the assumed labor force participation rates also increase as the economic recovery draws more people into the labor force. Increasing disability prevalence rates offset these increases somewhat in the intermediate and high-cost assumptions, but a decrease in disability prevalence further contributes to increases in labor force participation in the low-cost assumptions.
The unemployment rates presented in table V.B2 are in the most commonly cited form, the civilian rate. For years through 2023, the table presents total civilian rates without adjustment for the changing age-sex distribution of the population. For years after 2023, the table presents unemployment rates as age-sex-adjusted rates, using the age-sex distribution of the 2011 civilian labor force. Age-sex-adjusted rates allow for more meaningful comparisons across longer time periods. The age-sex adjusted unemployment rate is about 0.1 percentage point lower than the unadjusted rate for 2024.
The total civilian unemployment rate reflects the projected levels of unemployment for various age-sex groups of the population. The Office of the Chief Actuary projects each group’s unemployment rate by relating changes in the unemployment rate to the changes in the economic cycle, as measured by the ratio of actual to potential GDP.7 For each alternative, the total civilian unemployment rate moves toward the ultimate assumed rate as the economy moves toward the long-range sustainable growth path.
The ultimate assumed unemployment rates are 4.5, 5.5, and 6.5 percent for the low-cost, intermediate, and high-cost assumptions, respectively. These values are unchanged from the 2013 report. The ultimate rates are reached in 2020 for the low-cost, 2021 for the intermediate, and 2023 for the high-cost assumptions.
6. Gross Domestic Product Projections
The value of real GDP equals the product of three components: (1) average weekly total employment;8 (2) productivity; and (3) average hours worked per week. Consequently, the growth rate in real GDP is approximately equal to the sum of the growth rates for total employment, productivity, and average hours worked. For the period from 1966 to 2007, which covers the last five complete economic cycles, the average growth rate in real GDP was 3.1 percent. This average growth rate approximately equals the sum of the average growth rates of 1.6, 1.7, and ‑0.3 percent for total employment, productivity, and average hours worked, respectively. As a result of the 2007-09 recession, the real GDP in 2012 was only 4.0 percent above the 2007 level. The estimated real GDP growth from 2012 to 2013 is 1.8 percent.
For the intermediate assumptions, the average annual growth in real GDP is 2.8 percent from 2013 to 2023, the approximate sum of component growth rates of 1.1 percent for total employment, 1.7 percent for productivity, and 0.0 percent for average hours worked. The projected average annual growth in real GDP of 2.8 percent for this period is 0.6 percentage point higher than the underlying sustainable trend rate of 2.2 percent. This 0.6 percentage point above-trend component reflects a relatively rapid increase in employment as the economy recovers and the age-sex adjusted unemployment rate falls from 7.4 percent in 2013 to its assumed ultimate level of 5.5 percent in 2021. After 2023, the assumptions do not explicitly reflect economic cycles. The projected annual growth rate in real GDP combines the projected growth rates for total employment, total U.S. economy productivity, and average hours worked. After 2023, the annual growth in real GDP averages 2.1 percent, based on the projected average annual growth rate of 0.5 percent for total employment and the assumed ultimate growth rates of 1.7 percent for productivity and -0.05 percent for average hours worked. The assumed growth rate of real GDP is slower than the past average growth rate mainly because the working-age population is expected to grow slower than in the past.
For the low-cost assumptions, the annual growth in real GDP averages 3.4 percent over the decade ending in 2023. The relatively faster growth is due mostly to higher assumed rates of growth for employment and worker productivity. For the high-cost assumptions, the annual growth in real GDP averages 2.1 percent for the decade ending in 2023.
7. Interest Rates
Table V.B2 presents average annual nominal and real interest rates for newly issued trust fund securities. The nominal rate is the average of the nominal interest rates for special U.S. Government obligations issuable to the trust funds in each of the 12 months of the year. Interest for these securities is generally compounded semiannually. The real interest rate is defined as the annual yield rate for investments in these securities divided by the annual rate of growth in the CPI for the first year after issuance. The real rate shown for each year reflects the actual realized (historical) or expected (future) real yield on securities issuable in the prior year.
To develop a reasonable range of assumed ultimate future real interest rates for the three alternatives, the Office of the Chief Actuary examined historical experience for the last five complete economic cycles. For the 41-year period from 1966 to 2007, the real interest rate averaged 2.8 percent per year. The real interest rates averaged 1.3, -1.0, 5.2, 4.0, and 2.2 percent per year over the economic cycles 1966-73, 1973-79, 1979-89, 1989-2000, and 2000-07, respectively. The assumed ultimate real interest rates are 3.4 percent, 2.9 percent, and 2.4 percent for the low-cost, intermediate, and high-cost assumptions, respectively. These rates are unchanged from the 2013 report.
The actual average annual nominal interest rate was approximately 1.5 percent for 2012, which means that securities newly issued in 2012 would yield 1.5 percent if held one year. Estimated average prices rose from 2012 to 2013 by approximately 1.4 percent. The annual real interest rate for 2013 is 0.0 percent, the approximate difference between the nominal interest rate and the rate of price increase. For the 10-year short-range projection period, projected nominal interest rates depend on changes in the economic cycle and in the CPI. When combined with the ultimate CPI assumptions of 3.4, 2.7, and 2.0 percent, the assumed ultimate real interest rates yield ultimate nominal interest rates of 6.8 percent for the low-cost assumptions, 5.6 percent for the intermediate assumptions, and 4.4 percent for the high-cost assumptions. These nominal rates for newly issued trust fund securities reach their ultimate levels by the end of the short-range period.
Average annual
unemployment rate a
Annual percentage changeb in—
Labor
force c
Total
employment d
Real
GDP e
Nominal f
Real g
Economic cycles:h
2013i

a
The Office of the Chief Actuary adjusts the civilian unemployment rates for 2024 and later to the age-sex distribution of the civilian labor force in 2011. For years through 2023, the values are the total rates without adjustment for the changing age-sex distribution.

b
For rows with a single year listed, the value is the annual percentage change from the prior year. For rows with a range of years listed, the value is the compounded average annual percentage change.

c
The U.S. civilian labor force.

d
Total U.S. military and civilian employment.

e
The value of the total output of goods and services in 2009 dollars.

f
The average of the nominal interest rates, which compound semiannually, for special public-debt obligations issuable to the trust funds in each of the 12 months of the year.

g
The realized or expected annual real yield for each year on securities issuable in the prior year.

h
Economic cycles are shown from peak to peak, except for the last cycle, which is not yet complete.

i
Historical data are not available for the full year. Estimated values vary slightly by alternative and are shown for the intermediate assumptions.

j
Greater than -0.005 and less than 0.005 percent.


1
See www.nber.org/cycles/cyclesmain.html.

2
Historical levels of real GDP are from the Bureau of Economic Analysis’ National Income and Product Accounts. Historical total hours worked is an unpublished series provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics that includes all U.S. Armed Forces and civilian employment.

3
These assumptions are consistent with ultimate annual increases in private non-farm business productivity of 2.42, 2.06, and 1.69 percent. Compared to total-economy productivity, private non-farm business productivity is a more widely known concept that excludes the farm, government, non-profit institution, and private household sectors.

4
The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) targets a rate of 2 percent for the price index for Personal Consumption Expenditures, which is substantially the same as the GDP deflator. See
www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20120125c.htm.

5
“2013 Comprehensive Revision of the National Income and Product Accounts.”
See www.bea.gov/national/an1.htm#2013comprehensive.

6
The Office of the Chief Actuary adjusts the labor force participation rates to the 2011 age distribution of the civilian noninstitutional U.S. population.

7
Potential GDP is the level of GDP assuming the economy is operating at the underlying sustainable trend rate of growth.

8
Total employment is the sum of the U.S. Armed Forces and total civilian employment, which depends on the projected total civilian labor force and unemployment rates.


Table of Contents Previous Next Tables Figures Index
SSA Home | Privacy Policy | Website Policies & Other Important Information | Site Map | Actuarial Publications July 28, 2014