THE 6-percent increase in imports to $11.17 billion in the first quarter of the year is supposedly an indication that the import-dependent manufacturing sector of the country recovered from a 3.6-percent decline suffered in the first three months of 2005.
       In March alone, payments worth $4.138 billion for purchases of foreign merchandise showed a slightly faster rate of increase at 8 percent.
       However, discrepancies observed by BusinessMirror in the data of the National Statistics Office (NSO) raise doubts on the integrity of government figures.
       The NSO reported a trade deficit of $276 million from January to March of 2006. It also stated that the latest figure is “lower compared to last year’s deficit of $983 million.”
       A check with the archive section of the NSO website indicated, however, the balance of trade in the same period in 2005 showed a surplus of $122 million.
       A similar inconsistency may also be observed on a monthly basis. The NSO reported a trade deficit of $12 million or “lower from last year’s deficit of $564 million.”
       Again, however, upon review of the past figures, the trade deficit of March 2005 is revealed to be only $180 million.
       Economists recognize the importance of revising statistics for the purpose of coming up with updated and accurate figures to guide the public, particularly investors abroad. Usually, however, revisions do not result in huge discrepancies between the recent and past trade data.
       Victor Abola, the director of the Strategic Business Economics of the University of Asia and the Pacific (UA&P), described the numbers as misleading.
       “How do we now trust the 2006 figures?” Abola asked, while agreeing that the revisions are indeed large. “How can you just change the figures after a year?”
       He said that UA&P economists are also having difficulties creating economic models because of these huge adjustments. “Our economic models are getting muddled because of the changes.”
       In factoring oil imports alone, Abola said the amount of the commodity could reach $140 million in a month.
       Total imports of mineral fuels, lubricants and related materials in March cost the country $615.06 million, or a 29.4-percent growth from $475.49 million registered in the same month in 2005. The NSO attributed this to the increase in world prices of imported diesel and petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals. With a 14.9- percent share, the items ranked second to electronics on the list of imports.
       According to the NSO, electronics accounted for 45.4 percent of the total import bill. Payments amounted to $1.878 billion, or a 3.6-percent improvement over last year’s $1.813 billion.
       As for the sharp increase in the exports of electronics in March, Abola linked this to the longer shipping days during the month. He said that it is better to compare this with the upcoming April figures.
       Recall that electronics exports increased 24.7 percent to $2.706 billion in March from $2.171 billion in the same month a year ago. The NSO said this is the highest gain since July 2002.
       Total exports in March reached $4.126 billion, according to a recent report of the NSO. On a cumulative basis, third-quarter exports reached $10.896 billion.
       Another economist, however, warned of a slump in demand for Philippine commodities in the last six months of 2006.
       “There could be a weakening in the US demand in the second half of the year. We will have to watch out for this,” said Jody Santiago of UBS Securities.
       He added that although the exports growth rate in March is a good number, there could be some base effects from last year.
       “You cannot conclude that exports is strong,” Santiago said.
       For his part, Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry president Donald Dee predicted that the movement of electronics would be horizontal. “It won’t go down but neither will it go up. So, in a sense, the growth is sustainable,” he said.