Federal Executive Branch
Here's a look at documents from the U.S. Executive Branch
Featured Stories
Surface Transportation Board Issues Decision Involving Laredo Gateway Industrial Railway
WASHINGTON, March 6 -- The U.S. Department of Transportation Surface Transportation Board issued the following decision (Docket No. FD 36847) entitled "Laredo Gateway Industrial Railway LLC - Construction and Operation Exemption - In Webb County, Texas":
* * *
By petition filed December 8, 2025, Laredo Gateway Industrial Railway, LLC (LGIR), a noncarrier subsidiary of Kraus Development (Kraus), seeks an exemption under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 10502 from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. Sec. 10901 to construct and operate a new rail line in Webb County, Tex. (the Line). (Pet. 1.) According
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 6 -- The U.S. Department of Transportation Surface Transportation Board issued the following decision (Docket No. FD 36847) entitled "Laredo Gateway Industrial Railway LLC - Construction and Operation Exemption - In Webb County, Texas":
* * *
By petition filed December 8, 2025, Laredo Gateway Industrial Railway, LLC (LGIR), a noncarrier subsidiary of Kraus Development (Kraus), seeks an exemption under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 10502 from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. Sec. 10901 to construct and operate a new rail line in Webb County, Tex. (the Line). (Pet. 1.) Accordingto LGIR, the Line would extend approximately 13,707 feet from a switch off the Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) Laredo Subdivision and terminate within the Gateway Industrial Park (the Park), a new industrial park being developed by Kraus. (Id. at 1, Ex. A.) LGIR explains that although it is seeking operating authority over the Line, it intends only to hold a residual common carrier obligation and that it has entered into an agreement with Iron Horse Resources, Inc. (IHR), to operate the Line. (Id. at 1, 3.) LGIR states that IHR will separately seek Board authority to operate on the Line. (Id.)
LGIR explains that the purpose of the project "is to serve shippers utilizing the port-ofentry at Laredo." (Id. at 2.) According to LGIR, Kraus is developing the Park to create warehousing for the logistics industry. (Id. at 1-2.) LGIR states that over half of the Laredo truck traffic using local warehouses transloads commodities from truck to truck, and that it seeks to construct the Line to provide these shippers with a rail alternative at the Park so that commodities may be transloaded from truck to rail and interchanged with UP. (Id. at 2.) LGIR notes that it "sees a gap in the marketplace for local rail freight accessibility and local rail/truck transloading capacity that will produce manifest carloads of rail traffic." (Id. at 2-3.)/1
The petition for exemption raises issues that require consideration by the Board and an environmental and historic review will also be required. By this decision, the Board is instituting a proceeding under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 10502(b). The issues presented by the petition will be addressed in a subsequent decision.
It is ordered:
1. Under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 10502(b), a proceeding is instituted.
2. This decision is effective on its service date.
By the Board, Anika S. Cooper, Chief Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel.
* * *
Footnote:
1/ A letter supporting LGIR's petition was filed on behalf of Webb County, Tex., by Webb County Judge Tano E. Tijerina on December 10, 2025.
* * *
Original text here: https://dcms-external.s3.amazonaws.com/DCMS_External_PROD/1772734657275/52927.pdf
NOAA: Restoring the Indian River Lagoon's Seagrass Meadows and Wetlands
WASHINGTON, March 6 -- The U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration issued the following news:
* * *
Restoring the Indian River Lagoon's Seagrass Meadows and Wetlands
NOAA support is driving large-scale seagrass and wetland restoration in Florida's Indian River Lagoon, delivering benefits for fisheries, water quality, and coastal communities.
This story is part 4 of a series of 4. Read why the restoration of the Indian River Lagoon (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/system-wide-effort-restore-floridas-indian-river-lagoon) matters, the economic benefits
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 6 -- The U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration issued the following news:
* * *
Restoring the Indian River Lagoon's Seagrass Meadows and Wetlands
NOAA support is driving large-scale seagrass and wetland restoration in Florida's Indian River Lagoon, delivering benefits for fisheries, water quality, and coastal communities.
This story is part 4 of a series of 4. Read why the restoration of the Indian River Lagoon (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/system-wide-effort-restore-floridas-indian-river-lagoon) matters, the economic benefitsof this work (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/investing-indian-river-lagoon-restoration-pays-dividends), and how partners are restoring fish reefs and clams (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/restoration-innovation-indian-river-lagoon-spartan-reefs-super-clams-and-more).
*
NOAA Fisheries' Office of Habitat Conservation is supporting a system-wide effort to restore Florida's Indian River Lagoon in partnership with the Indian River Lagoon Council. These projects are designed to deliver lasting ecological and economic benefits.
Restoring Seagrass Meadows, the Buffet Table of the Lagoon
Seagrass meadows once served as the foundation of the Indian River Lagoon's food web. Manatees and other herbivores graze on seagrass, while the plants shelter juvenile baitfish such as pinfish, mullet, and mud minnows. Those fish, in turn, support larger species including red drum, spotted seatrout, tarpon, and flounder. Seagrass also improves water quality by stabilizing sediment and preventing it from clouding the water.
Between 2011 and 2020, a series of severe algal blooms wiped out nearly 75 percent of the lagoon's seagrass.
"We've seen impacts to various species from losses of our seagrass, as well as decreases in habitats those seagrass beds create," said Melissa Meisenburg, lagoon resources manager for the Indian River County Natural Resources Department.
That is why Indian River County is actively participating in the largest seagrass restoration effort on Florida's east coast, including two sites funded by NOAA. In 2025, Natural Resources staff, along with their partners, have planted about 13 acres of seagrass at Big Slough near Sebastian Inlet and another 10 acres at Preacher's Hole near the Wabasso Causeway. The sites were chosen because they historically supported seagrass and are more sheltered than other parts of the lagoon.
"Planting seagrass is challenging because success hinges on many factors," said Meisenburg. "Because of the water depth at Big Slough, installation was easier, allowing us to be on our knees, reach down, and install the grass plugs. But at Preacher's Hole, the water was deeper, requiring a team to plant with one person at the surface holding the stock material while another person is submerged below the water planting the grasses."
To protect the young plants, crews installed steel cages over the seagrass. The cages deter boats from passing over the sites and protect the young grasses from the impacts of marine life such as stingrays.
"Stingrays love to fluff up the sand, which rips out the plants," Meisenburg said.
The cages also require regular maintenance. "Encrusting things like barnacles grow on them," she said. "That blocks light from reaching the grass, so people go out about once a month to clean them."
Permits allow the cages to remain in place for up to 1 year, long enough for the seagrass to anchor firmly in the sediment.
Despite the challenges, the County remains optimistic that their efforts at seagrass restoration will pay off.
"We're shooting for 80 percent survivorship of the outplanted grasses," Meisenburg said. "Aiding in this massive undertaking by Indian River County is the natural recovery of seagrasses that is being observed in the lagoon as well. We are seeing seagrass recovery in parts of the lagoon where it wasn't present 2 years ago, and we're hoping our efforts help enhance that natural recovery."
Letting Wetlands Work Again
Wetlands play an outsized role in maintaining the health of the Indian River Lagoon and protecting coastal communities. They filter out pollutants that reduce water quality and trigger harmful algal blooms.
"Wetlands are the kidneys of our estuaries," said Indian River Lagoon Council Executive Director Duane De Freese. "As wetlands filter the water that leaves the land for the lagoon, they hold back excess nutrients and sediments."
Wetlands are also habitat for fish, birds, and other wildlife. Studies estimate that healthy wetlands can produce about 50 pounds of live fish per acre annually. In addition, wetlands protect communities from flooding by reducing wave and storm surge impacts.
In the Indian River Lagoon, large areas of coastal wetlands were converted into mosquito control impoundments, with miles of dike separating the wetlands from the lagoon. These barriers disrupted natural water flow and limited the movement of fish and other species.
With funding from NOAA, the St. Johns River Water Management District reconnected about 2,000 acres of wetlands within the Kennedy Space Center-Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge complex.
"By cutting down the dikes and filling in the ditches, we bring the land back to wetland elevation," said Ron Brockmeyer, coastal wetland program manager for St. Johns River Water Management District. "After you scrape the dikes down, there is a much wider footprint for wetlands to grow. Within a few months, you start getting vegetative recovery."
Restoring natural water flow allows wetlands to resume their ecological role. Nutrients are filtered before reaching the lagoon, and fish regain access to nursery and foraging habitat.
This project stands out for its cost savings and the economic value of the restored wetlands. Advances in technology allowed the construction contractors to restore wetlands at a fraction of the anticipated cost.
When restoring mosquito impoundments, dikes must be lowered to a precise elevation to restore ecosystem functions. In the past, contractors had to repeatedly stop work to check the elevation with a laser level. However, operators can now use GPS-guided instrumentation to maintain precise grades over miles of dike.
Originally, Brockmeyer estimated the project would cost about $20 per linear foot of dike removed. With the new technology, however, the costs dropped to about $6 per linear foot of dike.
"With the leftover money from the original budget, I'm working with the Refuge and NASA to restore six more impoundments," said Brockmeyer.
Economic analysis estimates that the reconnected wetlands will provide about $78,000 per acre per year in environmental benefits. Wetlands support fisheries by providing fish habitat, improve water quality through filtration, and protect homes and infrastructure from flooding.
Overall, the project is expected to have a cost-benefit ratio of nearly 60 to 1.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/restoring-indian-river-lagoons-seagrass-meadows-and-wetlands
Department of Justice: Hawaii Couple Convicted at Trial in Tax Refund Fraud Conspiracy
WASHINGTON, March 6 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release:
* * *
Hawaii Couple Convicted at Trial in Tax Refund Fraud Conspiracy
Husband and Wife Participated in Nationwide Tax Fraud Scheme
*
A federal jury in Honolulu convicted a Hawaii couple for their roles in a nationwide tax fraud scheme that involved deceiving the IRS into issuing a nearly $200,000 tax refund and then using shell bank accounts and frivolous legal filings to prevent the government from getting it back.
"The defendants made a deliberate choice to participate in a criminal conspiracy -- they
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 6 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release:
* * *
Hawaii Couple Convicted at Trial in Tax Refund Fraud Conspiracy
Husband and Wife Participated in Nationwide Tax Fraud Scheme
*
A federal jury in Honolulu convicted a Hawaii couple for their roles in a nationwide tax fraud scheme that involved deceiving the IRS into issuing a nearly $200,000 tax refund and then using shell bank accounts and frivolous legal filings to prevent the government from getting it back.
"The defendants made a deliberate choice to participate in a criminal conspiracy -- theypaid for false documents, fraudulently claimed an enormous tax refund and then spent years obstructing the IRS's efforts to get it back," said Assistant Attorney General A. Tysen Duva of the Justice Department's Criminal Division. "Schemes like this are not victimless -- every dollar fraudulently paid out by the IRS is a dollar stolen from the U.S. Treasury and from the hardworking Americans who fund it. The Criminal Division will deliver accountability for the American taxpayer by continuing to aggressively prosecute those who seek to defraud the IRS."
"Co-conspirators moved the proceeds of this scheme through business entities, hid it in trusts and invested it across the country. But, every time money moves, there's a receipt," said Special Agent in Charge Carrie Nordyke of IRS Criminal Investigation's Seattle Field Office. "Our agents work to expose tax fraud so that public funds can continue to benefit the public."
According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, from approximately February 2015 through November 2018, Beverly Braumuller-Hawver and Scott Hawver, of Ewa Beach, Hawaii, engaged in a fraudulent tax refund scheme by paying a promoter a series of fees in exchange for fraudulent tax paperwork. Armed with those materials, the Hawvers filed an amended 2014 tax return attaching a fabricated IRS Form 1099-MISC -- a document that falsely claimed a mortgage company had paid Hawver $749,163 in income and withheld $424,163 of that amount in federal taxes. The fictitious withholding claim prompted the IRS to issue the Hawvers a tax refund for $192,845 -- a refund that Braumuller-Hawver was not entitled to receive.
At trial, the jury heard evidence that the Hawvers moved quickly to put the money out of the government's reach. They deposited the U.S. Treasury check into a newly opened bank account and then, within days, transferred $170,000 into a separate account held in the name of BeverlyB Music LLC, an unrelated music business the Hawvers operated. On that same day, the Hawvers paid co-conspirators more than $70,000 from the BeverlyB Music account for their roles in the scheme. Braumuller-Hawver later wired $22,000 from that account to a jeweler to purchase gold and silver coins. When the IRS began seeking to recover the fraudulent refund, the Hawvers did not simply ignore the notices -- they sent scripted, frivolous correspondence to the IRS, filed a petition in U.S. Tax Court to thwart collection and participated as plaintiffs in multiple frivolous civil RICO lawsuits against IRS employees who were doing their jobs.
The jury convicted Braumuller-Hawver and Hawver of conspiring to defraud the IRS. The jury also convicted Braumuller-Hawver of filing a false tax return and money laundering. Both are scheduled to be sentenced on June 25 and face a maximum penalty of five years in prison for the conspiracy conviction. Braumuller-Hawver also faces maximum penalties of 10 years in prison for each count of money laundering and a maximum penalty of three years in prison for filing a false tax return. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
The Hawvers' convictions are among the latest in a series of prosecutions arising from a nationwide tax fraud scheme that drew in more than 200 participants across at least 19 states. In 2022, the main promoters of the scheme were sentenced to 11 years in prison, more than 8 years in prison, and 51 months in prison. In Hawaii, the scheme was organized and led by Rosemarie Lastimado-Dradi, who marketed the operation as the "Escrow Trust Refund" program, recruited clients (including the Hawvers) and directed her cut of their fraudulent refunds -- between 25 and 40 percent -- into accounts held in the name of fictitious business entities and purported trusts. In January 2026, Lastimado-Dradi was sentenced to a total of nine years in prison. Other Hawaii participants in the scheme have also received significant sentences, including Elvah Miranda (48 months in prison), Marciaminajuanequita Dumlao (33 months in prison), Daniel Miranda (30 months in prison), Brigida Chock (27 months in prison) and Lazerrick Lawrence (20 months in prison).
IRS Criminal Investigation is investigating the case.
Trial Attorneys Sarah A. Kiewlicz and Megan L. Jones of the Criminal Division's Tax Section are prosecuting the case.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/hawaii-couple-convicted-trial-tax-refund-fraud-conspiracy
Census Bureau Releases State Government Finance Data
WASHINGTON, March 6 -- The U.S. Census Bureau issued the following tip sheet on March 5, 2026:
* * *
Census Bureau Releases State Government Finance Data
The U.S. Census Bureau today released new data tables for the Annual Survey of State Government Finances. These statistics provide a summary of the finances of state governments for fiscal year 2024. Tables include data for each state, along with detailed information on revenue sources, spending and debt.
Federal, state and local governments, and educational and research organizations use the data for comparative studies and other activities
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 6 -- The U.S. Census Bureau issued the following tip sheet on March 5, 2026:
* * *
Census Bureau Releases State Government Finance Data
The U.S. Census Bureau today released new data tables for the Annual Survey of State Government Finances. These statistics provide a summary of the finances of state governments for fiscal year 2024. Tables include data for each state, along with detailed information on revenue sources, spending and debt.
Federal, state and local governments, and educational and research organizations use the data for comparative studies and other activitieslike developing the government component of the gross domestic product.
This recurring survey is a supplement of the Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances.
No news release associated with this product. Tip sheet only.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026/state-government-finance-data.html
BLS Western Region Issues Report on Alternative Measures of Labor Underutilization in Oregon 2025
SAN FRANCISCO, California, March 6 (TNSLrpt) -- Alternative Measures of Labor Underutilization in Oregon 2025 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Western Region - March 5, 2026
* * *
In 2025, the broadest measure of labor underutilization, designated U-6 (which includes the unemployed, workers employed part-time for economic reasons, and those marginally attached to the labor force), was 9.6 percent in Oregon, compared to the 8.0-percent rate for the nation, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Regional Commissioner Chris Rosenlund noted that the
... Show Full Article
SAN FRANCISCO, California, March 6 (TNSLrpt) -- Alternative Measures of Labor Underutilization in Oregon 2025 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Western Region - March 5, 2026
* * *
In 2025, the broadest measure of labor underutilization, designated U-6 (which includes the unemployed, workers employed part-time for economic reasons, and those marginally attached to the labor force), was 9.6 percent in Oregon, compared to the 8.0-percent rate for the nation, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Regional Commissioner Chris Rosenlund noted that themeasure corresponding to the official concept of unemployment, U-3 (all jobless persons who are available to take a job and have actively sought work in the past 4 weeks), was 5.4 percent for Oregon. Nationally, the U-3 rate was 4.3 percent. (See chart 1 and table A.) The Technical Note at the end of this release provides additional information on the differences between unemployment measures and the reliability of Current Population Survey (CPS) estimates.
* * *
Chart 1. The six alternative measures of labor underutilization, Oregon and the United States, 2025 11-month averages
Table A. Alternative measures of labor underutilization for Oregon and the United States, 2025 11-month averages
* * *
Oregon had 118,800 unemployed residents, according to the CPS. (See chart 2.) In addition, there were 68,400 workers who were employed part time for economic reasons (also known as involuntary part time). These individuals were working part time because of slack work or business conditions or because they were unable to find a full-time job.
* * *
Chart 2. Numbers of selected underutilized workers in Oregon, 2025 11-month averages
* * *
In Oregon, 26,600 individuals were considered marginally attached to the labor force, indicating they want to work and have looked in the past year, but have not actively looked in the last four weeks for reasons such as school attendance, family responsibilities, or because they believe no jobs are available. The U-5 measure, which incorporates marginally attached workers, was 6.5 percent in Oregon. In the United States, the U-5 measure was 5.2 percent.
Within Oregon's marginally attached population, 8,200 (31 percent) were discouraged workers who have stopped searching mainly because they believe no jobs are available to them. The U-4 measure, which includes discouraged workers and the unemployed, was 5.7 percent in Oregon; the national rate was 4.6 percent.
See table 1 for national and state estimates.
* * *
2025 Federal Government Shutdown
This news release presents 11-month averages from the CPS for 2025 that exclude the October reference month. Data for October 2025 were not collected due to the federal government shutdown. As a result, these estimates are not strictly comparable with annual averages for other years.
* * *
Technical Note
The estimates in this release are based upon the six measures of labor underutilization produced by the Current Population Survey (CPS). For the United States, BLS publishes these six measures monthly in the Employment Situation news release. The state-level alternative measures of labor underutilization are provided each quarter as 4-quarter moving averages.
Measures of unemployment
The U-3 rates for states presented in this release are derived directly from the CPS and are not the official unemployment rates. The official unemployment rates for states are the model-based estimates available through the Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS) program and may differ from the CPS estimates. The LAUS estimates are developed from statistical models that incorporate CPS estimates in addition to data from other sources. The LAUS models greatly improve the reliability of the monthly top-side labor force and unemployment estimates. CPS estimates are used in this release because this is the only source of data for the various components of the other five measures.
The other CPS measures are provided to data users and analysts who want more narrowly (U-1 and U-2) or broadly (U-4 through U-6) defined measures.
Additional information on the differences between the CPS and LAUS estimates can be found in Notes on Using Current Population Survey (CPS) Subnational Data.
Reliability of estimates
The alternative measures for states are analyzed on a 4-quarter average basis in order to increase the reliability of the CPS estimates, which are based on relatively small sample sizes at the state level, and to eliminate seasonality. Due to the small state sample sizes, neither monthly nor quarterly statewide data from the CPS satisfy BLS publication standards.
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.
* * *
Table 1. Alternative measures of labor underutilization by state, 2025 11-month averages (percent)
* * *
View original text plus charts and tables here: https://www.bls.gov/regions/west/news-release/2026/laborunderutilization_oregon_20260305.htm
BLS Western Region Issues Report on Alternative Measures of Labor Underutilization in Hawaii 2025
SAN FRANCISCO, California, March 6 (TNSLrpt) -- Alternative Measures of Labor Underutilization in Hawaii 2025 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Western Region - March 5, 2026
* * *
In 2025, the broadest measure of labor underutilization, designated U-6 (which includes the unemployed, workers employed part-time for economic reasons, and those marginally attached to the labor force), was 5.7 percent in Hawaii, compared to the 8.0-percent rate for the nation, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Regional Commissioner Chris Rosenlund noted that the
... Show Full Article
SAN FRANCISCO, California, March 6 (TNSLrpt) -- Alternative Measures of Labor Underutilization in Hawaii 2025 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Western Region - March 5, 2026
* * *
In 2025, the broadest measure of labor underutilization, designated U-6 (which includes the unemployed, workers employed part-time for economic reasons, and those marginally attached to the labor force), was 5.7 percent in Hawaii, compared to the 8.0-percent rate for the nation, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Regional Commissioner Chris Rosenlund noted that themeasure corresponding to the official concept of unemployment, U-3 (all jobless persons who are available to take a job and have actively sought work in the past 4 weeks), was 2.5 percent for Hawaii. Nationally, the U-3 rate was 4.3 percent. (See chart 1 and table A.) The Technical Note at the end of this release provides additional information on the differences between unemployment measures and the reliability of Current Population Survey (CPS) estimates.
* * *
Chart 1. The six alternative measures of labor underutilization, Hawaii and the United States, 2025 11-month averages
Table A. Alternative measures of labor underutilization for Hawaii and the United States, 2025 11-month averages
* * *
Hawaii had 17,500 unemployed residents, according to the CPS. (See chart 2.) In addition, there were 14,400 workers who were employed part time for economic reasons (also known as involuntary part time). These individuals were working part time because of slack work or business conditions or because they were unable to find a full-time job.
* * *
Chart 2. Numbers of selected underutilized workers in Hawaii, 2025 11-month averages
* * *
In Hawaii, 8,100 individuals were considered marginally attached to the labor force, indicating they want to work and have looked in the past year, but have not actively looked in the last four weeks for reasons such as school attendance, family responsibilities, or because they believe no jobs are available. The U-5 measure, which incorporates marginally attached workers, was 3.7 percent in Hawaii. In the United States, the U-5 measure was 5.2 percent.
Within Hawaii's marginally attached population, 1,100 (14 percent) were discouraged workers who have stopped searching mainly because they believe no jobs are available to them. The U-4 measure, which includes discouraged workers and the unemployed, was 2.7 percent in Hawaii; the national rate was 4.6 percent.
See table 1 for national and state estimates.
* * *
2025 Federal Government Shutdown
This news release presents 11-month averages from the CPS for 2025 that exclude the October reference month. Data for October 2025 were not collected due to the federal government shutdown. As a result, these estimates are not strictly comparable with annual averages for other years.
* * *
Technical Note
The estimates in this release are based upon the six measures of labor underutilization produced by the Current Population Survey (CPS). For the United States, BLS publishes these six measures monthly in the Employment Situation news release. The state-level alternative measures of labor underutilization are provided each quarter as 4-quarter moving averages.
Measures of unemployment
The U-3 rates for states presented in this release are derived directly from the CPS and are not the official unemployment rates. The official unemployment rates for states are the model-based estimates available through the Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS) program and may differ from the CPS estimates. The LAUS estimates are developed from statistical models that incorporate CPS estimates in addition to data from other sources. The LAUS models greatly improve the reliability of the monthly top-side labor force and unemployment estimates. CPS estimates are used in this release because this is the only source of data for the various components of the other five measures.
The other CPS measures are provided to data users and analysts who want more narrowly (U-1 and U-2) or broadly (U-4 through U-6) defined measures.
Additional information on the differences between the CPS and LAUS estimates can be found in Notes on Using Current Population Survey (CPS) Subnational Data.
Reliability of estimates
The alternative measures for states are analyzed on a 4-quarter average basis in order to increase the reliability of the CPS estimates, which are based on relatively small sample sizes at the state level, and to eliminate seasonality. Due to the small state sample sizes, neither monthly nor quarterly statewide data from the CPS satisfy BLS publication standards.
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.
* * *
Table 1. Alternative measures of labor underutilization by state, 2025 11-month averages (percent)
* * *
View original text plus charts and tables here: https://www.bls.gov/regions/west/news-release/2026/laborunderutilization_hawaii_20260305.htm
BLS Issues Report on U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes January 2026
WASHINGTON, March 6 (TNSLrpt) -- U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes January 2026 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics - March 5, 2026 (20 pages)
* * *
U.S. import prices increased 0.2 percent in January, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today, following a 0.2-percent advance in December. Higher prices for nonfuel imports more than offset lower prices for fuel imports in January. Prices for U.S. exports rose 0.6 percent in January, after rising 0.6 percent the previous month.
* * *
Chart 1. One-month and 12-month percent changes in the Import Price
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 6 (TNSLrpt) -- U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes January 2026 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics - March 5, 2026 (20 pages)
* * *
U.S. import prices increased 0.2 percent in January, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today, following a 0.2-percent advance in December. Higher prices for nonfuel imports more than offset lower prices for fuel imports in January. Prices for U.S. exports rose 0.6 percent in January, after rising 0.6 percent the previous month.
* * *
Chart 1. One-month and 12-month percent changes in the Import PriceIndex: January 2025 - January 2026
* * *
Imports
U.S. import prices increased 0.2 percent in January following an advance of 0.2 percent in December. Prices for U.S. imports declined 0.1 percent from January 2025 to January 2026. (See table 1.)
Fuel Imports: Prices for import fuel fell 2.2 percent in January following a decline of 1.1 percent in December. Lower prices for petroleum more than offset higher prices for natural gas in January. The price index for import fuel has not advanced on a 1-month basis since July. In January, prices for import petroleum fell 2.7 percent and import natural gas prices increased 3.3 percent. Fuel import prices declined 13.4 percent from January 2025 to January 2026. The price index for petroleum imports decreased 15.9 percent over the past 12 months and prices for import natural gas advanced 36.4 percent over the same period.
All Imports Excluding Fuel: Prices for nonfuel imports increased 0.5 percent in January, following a rise of 0.2 percent in December. Higher prices for nonfuel industrial supplies and materials; capital goods; automotive vehicles; consumer goods; and foods, feeds, and beverages drove the increase. Over the past year, nonfuel import prices increased 1.2 percent and have not declined on a 12-month basis since February 2024. From January 2025 to January 2026, higher prices for nonfuel industrial supplies and materials and for capital goods more than offset lower prices for foods, feeds, and beverages and for automotive vehicles.
Foods, Feeds, and Beverages: Foods, feeds, and beverages import prices increased 0.2 percent in January following a rise of 0.4 percent in December. Higher prices in January for fish and shellfish; green coffee; and wine, beer, and related products more than offset lower prices for bakery and confectionery products and for other animal and vegetable preparations and products.
Nonfuel Industrial Supplies and Materials: Import prices for nonfuel industrial supplies and materials advanced 0.9 percent in January, after rising 1.6 percent in December. Higher prices for finished metals shapes and advanced manufacturing, finished nonmetals, and chemicals more than offset lower prices for nonmonetary gold and other precious metals.
Finished Goods: Prices for the major finished goods import categories were up in January. Import capital goods prices increased 0.4 percent. Higher prices for industrial and service machinery; scientific and medical machinery; and computers, peripherals and semiconductors drove the advance. The price index for import automotive vehicles increased 0.2 percent and import prices for consumer goods ticked up 0.1 percent in January.
* * *
Table A. Percent change in Import and Export Price Indexes, selected categories
Chart 2. One-month and 12-month percent changes in the Export Price Index: January 2025 - January 2026
* * *
Exports
Prices for U.S. exports rose 0.6 percent in January following a 0.6-percent advance in December. Higher prices for both nonagricultural and agricultural exports drove the increase. U.S. export prices advanced 2.6 percent over the 12-month period ended in January. (See table 2.)
Agricultural Exports: The price index for agricultural exports increased 0.2 percent in January following no change in December. Higher prices for export other foods and food preparations as well as corn more than offset lower prices for export fruit and meat. Prices for agricultural exports have not recorded a monthly decline since September 2025. The price index for agricultural exports advanced 2.2 percent over the past 12 months, as higher prices for other foods and food preparations, soybeans, nuts, and meat drove the over-the-year rise.
All Exports Excluding Agriculture: Nonagricultural export prices increased 0.7 percent in January, after rising 0.7 percent in December. Higher prices for capital goods, nonagricultural industrial supplies and materials, consumer goods, and automotive vehicles drove the advance. Prices for nonagricultural exports increased 2.7 percent from January 2025 to January 2026. Higher prices for capital goods, nonagricultural industrial supplies and materials, and consumer goods drove the 12-month increase.
Nonagricultural Industrial Supplies and Materials: Nonagricultural industrial supplies and materials export prices increased 0.5 percent in January, after advancing 1.3 percent the previous month. Higher prices for nonferrous metals and chemicals more than offset lower prices for natural gas and petroleum.
Finished Goods: Prices for the major finished goods export categories were up in January. Prices for export capital goods rose 0.9 percent. Higher prices for computers, peripherals, and semiconductors; civilian aircraft, aircraft engines and parts; and scientific and medical machinery drove the increase. Export automotive vehicles prices ticked up 0.1 percent in January and export consumer goods prices increased 1.0 percent over the same period.
More information for the major import and export price indexes can be found at www.bls.gov/web/ximpim/largest.htm.
Measures of Import and Export Prices by Locality
Imports by Locality of Origin: Import prices from China increased 0.3 percent in January, following no change the previous month. The January increase was the largest monthly rise since the index advanced 0.4 percent in October 2022. Despite the monthly advance, the price index for imports from China fell 2.6 percent over the past 12 months. Prices for imports from Japan increased 0.3 percent in January following a decrease of 0.3 percent in December. The price index for imports from Japan advanced 1.2 percent over the past 12 months. Prices for imports from Canada increased 0.4 percent in January following an advance of 0.7 percent the previous month. In contrast, the price index for imports from the European Union fell 0.1 percent in January and import prices from Mexico declined 0.2 percent. (See table 7.)
Exports by Locality of Destination: Prices for exports to China decreased 0.5 percent in January following a decline of 0.2 percent in December. Over the past 12 months, the price index for exports to China increased 1.3 percent. Prices for exports to Japan increased 3.2 percent in January, the largest monthly advance since the index rose 5.0 percent in March 2022. From January 2025 to January 2026, the price index for exports to Japan increased 6.7 percent. Prices for exports to Canada increased 3.4 percent in January following an advance of 2.0 percent in December. In contrast, the price index for exports to the European Union fell 0.1 percent in January and export prices to Mexico decreased 0.2 percent. (See table 8.) Terms of Trade Indexes:
Terms of trade indexes are based on country, region, or grouping and measure the change in the purchasing power of exports relative to imports. The U.S. terms of trade index with China decreased 0.7 percent in January, following a 0.2-percent decline in December. Higher import prices from China and lower export prices to China contributed to the decline of the U.S. terms of trade index with China. The index for U.S. terms of trade with Japan increased 3.0 percent in January. The index for U.S. terms of trade with the European Union increased 0.1 percent in January, after rising 1.0 percent in December. In January, the U.S. terms of trade index with Canada increased 3.0 percent and the U.S. terms of trade with Mexico ticked up 0.1 percent. (See table 9.)
Import and Export Services
Imports: Import air passenger fares decreased 10.1 percent in January, after an increase of 6.4 percent in December. The January decrease was the largest monthly decline since the index fell 14.3 percent in July 2025. Lower Asian and Latin American/Caribbean fares more than offset higher European fares. Import air passenger fares advanced 3.6 percent over the past year. Prices for import air freight decreased 4.1 percent in January following a 3.7-percent advance in December. Lower prices for import Asian air freight in January more than offset higher prices for import European air freight. Import air freight prices fell 2.1 percent from January 2025 to January 2026. (See table 10.)
Exports: The price index for export air passenger fares advanced 13.2 percent in January, the largest monthly rise since the index increased 14.5 percent in November 2020. Higher Latin American/Caribbean, Asian and European fares in January contributed to the overall advance. Despite the monthly increase, export air passenger fares fell 2.8 percent from January 2025 to January 2026. Prices for export air freight rose 3.4 percent in January following a 0.7-percent increase in December. Higher prices for export European air freight in January more than offset lower prices for export Asian air freight. Over the past 12 months, the price index for export air freight declined 4.2 percent.
U.S. Import and Export Price Index data for February 2026 are scheduled for release on Wednesday, March 25, 2026, at 8:30 a.m. (ET).
* * *
Impacts of Federal Government Shutdowns on U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes
As a result of the lapse in appropriations from October 1, 2025, through November 12, 2025, some U.S. Import and Export Price Index (MXP) values for October 2025 are permanently suppressed for publication. For additional information see www.bls.gov/mxp/notices/2026/availability-of-oct-2025-mxpi-in-blsdatabase.htm.
The effects of the 2025 government shutdown will continue to delay publication of MXP data releases. Revised MXP release dates will be posted at www.bls.gov/bls/2025-lapse-revised-release-dates.htm as they become available.
* * *
Table 1. U.S. import price indexes and percent changes for End Use categories of goods: January 2025 to January 2026
Table 2. U.S. export price indexes and percent changes for End Use categories of goods: January 2025 to January 2026
Table 3. U.S. import price indexes and percent changes for NAICS industries: January 2025 to January 2026
Table 4. U.S. export price indexes and percent changes for NAICS industries: January 2025 to January 2026
Table 5. U.S. import price indexes and percent changes for Harmonized categories of goods: January 2025 to January 2026
Table 5. U.S. import price indexes and percent changes for Harmonized categories of goods: January 2025 to January 2026 -- Continued
Table 5. U.S. import price indexes and percent changes for Harmonized categories of goods: January 2025 to January 2026 -- Continued
Table 6. U.S. export price indexes and percent changes for Harmonized categories of goods: January 2025 to January 2026
Table 6. U.S. export price indexes and percent changes for Harmonized categories of goods: January 2025 to January 2026 -- Continued
Table 7. U.S. import price indexes and percent changes by locality of origin: January 2025 to January 2026
Table 8. U.S. export price indexes and percent changes by locality of destination: January 2025 to January 2026
Table 9. U.S. terms of trade indexes and percent changes by locality: January 2025 to January 20261
Table 10. U.S. international price indexes and percent changes for selected transportation services: January 2025 to January 2026
* * *
TECHNICAL NOTE
Import and Export Goods and Services Price Indexes - All indexes use a modified Laspeyres formula and are not seasonally adjusted. Price indexes are reweighted annually, with a 2-year lag in the weights. Published series use a base year of 2000=100 where possible. More detailed index series and additional information may be obtained at www.bls.gov/mxp or by calling (202) 691-7101.
Merchandise Goods Classification Systems - The merchandise price indexes are published using three classification systems. Items are classified by end use according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis Classification System, by industry according to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), and by product category according to the Harmonized System (HS). While classification by end use and product category are self-explanatory, some notes are in order for classifying items by industry. In the NAICS imports and exports tables, items are classified by output industry, not input industry. As an example, NAICS import index 326 (plastics and rubber products manufacturing) includes outputs such as manufactured plastic rather than inputs such as petroleum. The NAICS classification structure also matches the classification system used by the Producer Price Index (PPI) to produce the NAICS primary products indexes.
Import Price Goods Indexes - Items are classified by the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (TSUSA). Import prices are based on U.S. dollar prices paid by the U.S. importer. The prices are generally either "free on board" (f.o.b.) foreign port or "cost, insurance, and freight" (c.i.f.) U.S. port transaction prices, depending on the practices of the individual industry.
Export Price Goods Indexes - Items are classified by the Harmonized Schedule B classification system of the U.S. Bureau of the Census. The prices used are generally either "free alongside ship" (f.a.s.) factory or "free on board" (f.o.b.) transaction prices, depending on the practices of the individual industry.
Services Price Indexes - Indexes for import and export air passenger fares calculate changes in the average revenue received per passenger by foreign carriers from U.S. residents and by U.S. carriers from foreign residents, respectively. The air freight indexes are calculated from data collected directly from airlines. These data exclude mail and passenger baggage. The scope of the service being priced is the movement of freight from airport to airport only and does not include any ground transportation or port service. The air freight indexes are presented using two definitions: balance of payments (which represents transactions between U.S. and foreign residents) and international (which represents transactions inbound to and outbound from the United States.)
Import Price Indexes by Locality of Origin - Prices used in these indexes are a subset of the data collected for the import price indexes. The indexes are specific to a country, region, or grouping and, beginning with January 2002, are based on the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) covering goods-producing industries. Nonmanufactured goods are defined as NAICS 11 and 21, and manufactured goods are defined as NAICS 31-33.
Export Price Indexes by Locality of Destination - Prices used in these indexes are a subset of the data collected for the export price indexes. The indexes are specific to a country, region, or grouping and are based on the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) covering goods-producing industries. Nonmanufactured goods are defined as NAICS 11 and 21, and manufactured goods are defined as NAICS 31-33.
Terms of Trade Indexes - Terms of trade indexes measure the relative price of exports in terms of import prices for a specific country, region, or grouping. The indexes are calculated as one country, region, or grouping's all-export goods price index divided by the corresponding all-import goods price index on a scale of 100.
Relative Importance - A relative importance is a specific index's price-updated value share (expressed as a percentage) of overall imports or exports at a specific point in time. Relative importance values are affected by the trade weights at the point indexes are reweighted and index changes relative to other indexes since the reweight point. If an index is rising in value relative to other indexes over time, the relative importance will increase as well.
Revision Policy - To reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents, monthly data may be revised in each of the 3 months after original publication. After 3 months, no further data revisions take place. For example, data first published in the January release will be subject to revision in the releases for February, March, and April.
Rounding Policy - Index values are rounded to the tenth decimal place after being calculated. All percent changes are then derived from the rounded index values and subsequently rounded to the tenth decimal place.
Uses of the Data - The primary use of the indexes is to deflate trade statistics, notably the foreign trade sector of the National Income and Product Accounts (NIPA) constructed by the Department of Commerce. Other published indexes are useful for general market analysis. For trade in international services, balance of payments indexes are used for deflating NIPA, while international indexes are more appropriate for market analysis.
Additional Information - More detailed data are available on the Import/Export Price Indexes home page at www.bls.gov/mxp. For import and export price indexes data requests, send an email to mxpinfo@bls.gov.
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.
* * *
View original text plus charts and tables here: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ximpim.pdf
