Why I Don ’ t Trust Nonfarm PayrollsGLOBAL ECONOMICS

中文标题

为何我不信任非农就业数据 · 全球经济

Scotiabank Economics09/04/2026updated 10/17/2026

Citable research brief

Core conclusion · Tlines extraction

Scotiabank Economics questions the credibility of the August 2026 nonfarm payrolls report, attributing the upside surprise to an abrupt and unexplained shift in the seasonal adjustment (SA) factor. The bank notes that using prior-year SA factors would have resulted in a much weaker +15k print, and highlights stalled year-over-year payroll growth as a warning sign. It calls for public explanation from the new BLS Commissioner and scrutiny by Fed taskforces.

Institution: Scotiabank Economics
Published: 09/04/2026
Research topic: BLS credibility · US BLS · data quality
Time horizon: short-term · ongoing · current

Key arguments

The +161k payroll gain was entirely due to an abrupt shift in the seasonal adjustment factor, without which payrolls would have risen only 15k.
Low survey response rates at historic lows dent data quality.
Stalled yearly growth in payrolls remains a warning sign for the economy.
The new BLS Commissioner should explain the SA factor change; Fed taskforces should weigh in.
The gain in leisure and hospitality is hard to explain given waning services momentum.

Key numbers

Actual nonfarm payrolls m/m (SA): 162k
Scotiabank forecast: 30k
Consensus forecast: 55k
Payrolls if SA factor unchanged: 15k
Unemployment rate: 4.1%
Two-month net upward revision: 55k
Participation rate: stalled at ~62.5%
Wage growth m/m SAAR: 3%

Main risks

If the SA factor anomaly is unexplained, official labor market data may be unreliable, leading to policy missteps.
Stalled annual payroll growth could signal imminent economic slowdown.
Low survey response rates raise data quality concerns.
Political interference in BLS data could undermine Fed credibility.

Corresponding source evidence

There must be a public explanation here. And it must come from BLS Commissioner Brett Matsumoto ( here ). · short-term
Another data quality dent is historic lows in survey response rates (chart 3). · ongoing
Hours worked are tracking a 1.4% q/q SAAR gain which is quickening but not quick (chart 8). · current

Context: the conclusion is Tlines' automated extraction, not the institution's wording. Quoted evidence is publisher wording. Scope and date must travel with the conclusion.

Verify at the original source ↗

Download institution PDF