The Economic Impact - Industry Partners

The Economic Impact of Travel on Tennessee Counties 2015

A Study Prepared for the Tennessee Department of Tourist Development by the Research Department of the U.S. Travel Association Washington, D.C. August 2016

Preface

PREFACE This study was conducted by the Research Department of the U.S. Travel Association for the Tennessee Department of Tourist Development. The study provides preliminary 2015 and 2014 estimates of domestic and international traveler expenditures in Tennessee, as well as the employment, payroll income, and federal, state and local tax revenue directly generated by these expenditures. Total impact of travel on output, employment and payroll income (including indirect and induced impact) is also included. Additionally, this study provides estimates by county for domestic travel expenditures, as well as employment, payroll income, and state and local tax revenue directly generated by domestic travel.

U.S. Travel Association Washington, D.C. August 2016

Note: The 2015 Economic Impact of Travel on Tennessee Counties report follows The Travel Economic Impact Model (TEIM) which developed by the U.S. Travel Association; jobs and payrolls supported by air couriers and tax revenue generated from air couriers are eliminated in this study.

Preface

Note: The 2015 Economic Impact of Travel on Tennessee Counties report follows The Travel Economic Impact Model (TEIM) which developed by the U.S. Travel Association; jobs and payrolls supported by air couriers and tax revenue generated from air couriers are eliminated in this study.

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .........................................................................................................................................2 TRAVEL IMPACT ON THE U.S. ECONOMY IN 2015 ........................................................................................4 NATIONAL SUMMARY 2015 .......................................................................................................................................4 U.S. TRAVEL VOLUME IN 2015..................................................................................................................................5 TRAVEL EXPENDITURES IN 2015 ............................................................................................................................... 6 TRAVEL EMPLOYMENT IN 2015 .................................................................................................................................9 TRAVEL IMPACT ON TENNESSEE – 2015 ........................................................................................................ 13 DIRECT TRAVEL EXPENDITURES ............................................................................................................................. 13 DIRECT TRAVEL EXPENDITURE TRENDS.................................................................................................................. 15 DIRECT TRAVEL-GENERATED PAYROLL.................................................................................................................. 17 DIRECT TRAVEL-GENERATED EMPLOYMENT .......................................................................................................... 19 DIRECT TRAVEL-GENERATED TAX REVENUE ......................................................................................................... 22 MULTIPLIER IMPACT OF TRAVEL SPENDING IN TENNESSEE ............................................................... 24 DOMESTIC TRAVEL IMPACT ON TENNESSEE COUNTIES IN 2015 ......................................................... 26 COUNTY TABLES ................................................................................................................................................... 28 APPENDICES............................................................................................................................................................ 68 APPENDIX A: TRAVEL ECONOMIC IMPACT MODEL ................................................................................................. 69 APPENDIX B: GLOSSARY OF TERMS......................................................................................................................... 73 APPENDIX C: TRAVEL-RELATED INDUSTRY MEASUREMENT................................................................................... 74 APPENDIX D: SOURCES OF DATA............................................................................................................................. 77 APPENDIX E: RIMS II .............................................................................................................................................. 78

List of Tables

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Overall U.S. Economic Indicators, 2013-2015 .............................................................................. 5 Table 2: Travel Expenditures - U.S. Nationwide .......................................................................................... 8 Table 3: Travel Generated Employment - U.S. Nationwide ....................................................................... 10 Table 4: U.S. Travel Forecasts ................................................................................................................... 11 Table 5: Direct Travel Expenditures in Tennessee by Industry Sector, 2014-2015 ................................... 14 Table 6: Direct Travel Expenditure Trends in Tennessee, 2005-2015 ....................................................... 16 Table 7: Direct Travel-Generated Payroll in Tennessee by Industry Sector, 2014-2015 .......................... 18 Table 8: Direct Travel-Generated Employment in Tennessee by Industry Sector, 2014-2015 .................. 21 Table 9: Direct Travel-Generated Tax Revenue in Tennessee by Level of Government, 2014-2015 ......... 23 Table 10: Multiplier Impact of Travel Spending in Tennessee, 2014-2015 ................................................ 25 Table 11: Domestic Travel Impact in Tennessee - Top 5 Counties, 2014 and 2015 .................................. 27 Table A: Alphabetical by County, 2015 ...................................................................................................... 29 Table B: Ranking of Counties by Expenditure Levels, 2015 ....................................................................... 33 Table C: Percent Distribution by County, 2015 ......................................................................................... 37 Table D: Percent Change, 2015 Over 2014 ............................................................................................... 41 Table E: Alphabetical by County, 2014 ...................................................................................................... 45 Table F: Alphabetical by Region, 2015 ...................................................................................................... 49 Table G: Change in Travel Spending from 2014 by Region ....................................................................... 53 Table H: Percent Change Over 2014 by Region ........................................................................................ 57 Table I: Alphabetical by Region, 2014 ....................................................................................................... 61 Table J: Region Total, 2015........................................................................................................................ 65 Table K: Region Total, 2014 ....................................................................................................................... 66 Table L: Percent Change Over 2014 by Region ......................................................................................... 67

Introduction

INTRODUCTION This report presents preliminary 2015 estimates of the impact of U.S. resident and international traveler spending in Tennessee, as well as the employment, payroll income and tax revenue directly generated by this spending. For the purpose of comparison, 2014 impact data are also included in this report. All estimates of the economic impact of travel contained in this volume are the product of the U.S. Travel Association's Travel Economic Impact Model (TEIM), a proprietary economic model developed expressly to indicate the expenditures, employment, payroll, and tax revenue generated by travel away from home in the United States. The TEIM was created to capture the highly complex nature of the U.S. travel industry at national, regional, state and local levels. The TEIM was designed so that economic impact estimates could be compared across all fifty states and the District of Columbia, thereby allowing states and localities to assess their market share nationally, regionally or within the state. The domestic component of TEIM is based on national surveys conducted by the U.S. Travel Association and other travel-related data developed by the U.S. Travel Association, various federal agencies and national travel organizations each year. A summary of the methodology is provided in Appendix B. The international traveler expenditure estimates are based on the Office of Travel and Tourism Industries’ (OTTI) In-Flight Survey and data provided to OTTI from Canada and Mexico. Other estimates of the economic impact of international visitors to the U.S. are generated by the TEIM by incorporating the estimated international travelers’ expenditures with the data series utilized to produce the domestic estimates. U.S. residents traveling in Tennessee include both state residents and out-of-state visitors traveling away from home overnight in paid accommodations, or on day or overnight trips to places 50 miles or more away from home. Travel commuting to and from work; travel by those operating an airplane, bus, truck, train or other form of common carrier transportation; military travel on active duty; and travel by students away at school are all excluded from the model. In addition, the payroll and employment estimates represent impact generated in the private sector and exclude public-supported payroll and employment. Since additional data relating to travel and its economic impact in 2015 will become available subsequent to this study, U.S. Travel Association reserves the right to revise these estimates in the future.

1

Executive Summary

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Total Impact of Travel 

Total domestic and international travel output in Tennessee, including direct, indirect and induced output, grew close to $30.1 billion in 2015, a 3.6 percent increase from 2014, not adjusted for inflation.



Total payroll income earned by domestic and international travel-supported employees reached $6.2 billion in 2015, up 5.7 percent from 2014.



Total employment in Tennessee supported by domestic and international traveler expenditures reached to 249,600 jobs in 2015, up 2.9 percent from 2014.

Direct Impact of Domestic and International Travel 

Domestic and international travelers directly spent $18.4 billion in Tennessee during 2015, an increase of 3.7 percent from 2014, not adjusted for inflation.



Payroll income, supported directly by domestic and international traveler spending in Tennessee, reached $3.7 billion during 2015, up 6.1 percent from 2014.



Domestic and international traveler expenditures directly supported 157,400 jobs within Tennessee in 2015, up 2.9 percent from 2014. These jobs in Tennessee comprised 5.4 percent of total non-farm employment in the state during 2015.



On average, every $117,031 spent in Tennessee by domestic and international travelers supported one job in the state in 2015.



Domestic and international traveler spending in Tennessee directly generated $3.0 billion in tax revenue for federal, state and local governments in 2015, up 7.5 percent from 2014.

Direct Impact of Domestic Travel 

In 2015, domestic travelers directly spent $17.8 billion in Tennessee, an increase of 3.7 percent from 2014.



Payroll supported by domestic travel spending reached $3.5 billion in 2015, up 6.1 percent from 2014.

2

Executive Summary



Domestic travel directly supported 151,800 jobs for Tennessee residents, up 2.9 percent from 2014.



Tax revenue generated by domestic traveler spending for federal, state and local governments totaled $2.9 billion, up 7.5 percent from 2014.



Davidson County, including the city of Nashville, received more than $5.7 billion in domestic traveler expenditures to lead all Tennessee counties during 2015, up 4.8 percent from 2014.



Nineteen of Tennessee’s 95 counties received over $100 million in domestic traveler expenditures in 2015. Domestic traveler spending directly supported one thousand jobs or more in thirteen counties during 2015.

3

Travel Impact on the U.S. Economy in 2015

TRAVEL IMPACT ON THE U.S. ECONOMY IN 2015 National Summary 2015 The U.S. economy on the whole performed relatively well in 2015, with real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growing 2.6 percent from 2014. Matching the previous year’s growth, the U.S. economy outpaced most other advanced economies in 2015. The first three quarters of 2015 were characterized by solid economic growth In the first quarter, a 2.0 percent annualized increase in real GDP reflected strong gains in business investment and inventory along with moderate consumer spending. These gains were balanced out by decreased trade, amidst the global headwinds of a strong dollar and the temporary west coast port shutdown. In the second quarter, a 2.6 percent annualized increase in real GDP was encouraging, but masked a shift in the economy away from business investment and inventory spending. Trade and personal consumption increased their contribution to real GDP growth, but business investment slowed down considerably and inventories were not drawn down enough to warrant more investment, creating a drag on the economy. This drag continued into the third quarter: 2.0 percent annualized growth in real GDP reflected continued slow-downs in business investment, especially in structures and inventory. In fact, despite a robust quarter of consumer spending (2.7 percent annualized), inventories were drawn down by a lesser amount than in previous quarters, prompting less incentive for businesses to improve inventory investment. Finally, in the fourth quarter, a consumer spending slowdown added more downward pressure on the economy; continued sluggishness from business investment and inventories dragged the economy down to 0.9 percent growth. Global headwinds of low oil prices and a strong dollar continued to force a startling disconnect in the U.S. economy in 2016. Consumer spending increased, especially in the second quarter (6.2 percent annualized). However, this contribution was counterbalanced by substantial decreases in business investment and inventories (business investment, for instance, was down 9.7 percent annualized in the second quarter). The result was a very slow first half of 2016 for the economy: 0.8 percent annualized real GDP growth in the first quarter and 1.2 percent in the second quarter. While inventories may draw down enough with robust consumer spending numbers, it remains to be seen whether continued uncertainty will affect future business investment. The U.S. employment situation continued to improve in 2015: nonfarm employment increased by 2.7 million jobs from December 2014 to 143.4 million jobs in December 2015. During the same period, the travel industry directly added 102,000 jobs, reaching 8.2 million in December 2015. Total personal income for 2015 also grew a solid 4.4 percent. Both indicators have seen steady gains coming into the first three months of 2016, with disposable income reaching high monthly gains for January and March of 0.4 percent per month.

4


Consumer inflation was mild in 2015. The overall CPI edged up just 0.1 percent and, excluding food and energy prices which tend to be more volatile, core CPI edged up 1.8 percent compared to 2014. The U.S. Travel Association’s TPI, however, decreased sharply by 2.7 percent over the same period. Since spending on gasoline is one of the most important components of travelers’ expenditures, especially for auto travel, decreases in motor fuel prices during 2015 were a primary reason the TPI grew at a slower rate than CPI.

Table 1: Overall U.S. Economic Indicators, 2013-2015 Sector

2013

2014

2015

Nominal gross domestic product ($Billions)

16,691.5

17,393.1

18,036.6

Real gross domestic product ($ Billions)*

15,612.2

15,982.3

16,397.2

Real disposable personal income ($Billions)*

11,527.6

11,931.0

12,343.3

Real personal consumption expenditures ($Billions)*

10,565.4

10,868.9

11,214.7

Consumer price index**

233.0

236.7

237.0

Travel Price Index**

275.6

279.6

272.4

Non-farm payroll employment (Millions)

136.4

139.0

141.9

7.4

6.2

5.3

Percentage change from previous year Nominal gross domestic product

3.3%

4.2%

3.7%

Real gross domestic product

1.7%

2.4%

2.6%

-1.4%

3.5%

3.5%

Real personal consumption expenditures

1.5%

2.9%

3.2%

Consumer price index

1.5%

1.6%

0.1%

Travel Price Index

0.9%

1.5%

-2.6%

Non-farm payroll employment

1.6%

1.9%

2.1%

Unemployment rate (%)

Real disposable personal income

Source: BEA, BLS, U.S. Travel Association * In 2009 chained dollars ** 1982-84=100

U.S. Travel Volume in 2015 Helped by a significant decline in gasoline prices, U.S. domestic travel, including leisure and business travel, increased notably by 3.3 percent to a total of 2.2 billion person-trips in 2015. A person-trip is defined as one person on a trip away from home overnight in paid accommodations, or on a day or overnight trip to places 50 miles or more, one-way, away from home.

5


Domestic leisure travel, which includes visits to friends and relatives as well as trips taken for outdoor recreation and entertainment purposes, increased 3.6 percent in 2015 to 1.7 billion person-trips and is forecasted to increase 2.1 percent in 2016. Leisure travel accounted for 78.9 percent of all U.S. domestic travel in 2015. Domestic business travel grew 1.9 percent in 2015 to 459.4 million person-trips and is expected to increase 0.6 percent in 2016. International inbound travelers, including overnight visitors from Canada, Mexico and overseas, made 77.5 million visits1 to the United States in 2015. Overseas visitor arrivals to the U.S. (from all countries except Canada and Mexico) reached 38.4 million in 2015 and accounted for half of total international arrivals to the United States, according to U.S. Department of Commerce. Canadian overnight arrivals to the U.S are estimated to have decreased from 23 million in 2014 to 21 million in 2015, while Mexican overnight arrivals are estimated to have increased from 17 million in 2014 to 18 million in 2015.

Travel Expenditures in 2015 Total domestic and international travelers spending in the U.S. increased 2.1 percent, growing from $928 billion in 2014 to $947 billion in 2015, not adjusted for inflation (excluding international airfare payments to the U.S airlines). After a slight lull, the U.S. Travel Association expects total domestic and international traveler expenditures to pick up to 2.7 percent growth in 2016. Domestic travel expenditures grew 2.7 percent from 2014 to $814 billion in 2015. International travelers, on the other hand, spent $133 billion in the U.S. in 2015, a decrease of 2.0 percent2 from 2014. It should be noted here that this traveler spending excludes international airfare payments to U.S. airlines, as well as international visitors’ expenses on education, health care and expenditures by cross-border day-trip visitors and seasonal workers. International traveler spending is expected to bounce back in 2016, increasing 2.5 percent from 2015. International airfare receipts are total passenger fares paid by international residents on U.S. flag air carriers. In 2015, international airfare receipts totaled $42 billion, down 5.3 percent from 2014. In the first six months of 2016, international airfare receipts decreased 6.2 against the first quarter of 2015. Leisure traveler spending totaled $651 billion in 2015, a 0.9 percent increase from 2014, accounting for 68.7 percent of all traveler expenditures. Business traveler spending increased 4.7 percent over 2014 to $296 billion in 2015, 31.3 percent of all traveler expenditures.

1

This number does not match the total number of international visitations published by the Department of Commerce. Published estimates from the Department of Commerce for 2014 and 2015 are not comparable to each other or previous years because (1) in 2014, additional 1+ night visitations were included due to a technical-processing change; (2) in 2015, the published numbers reflect the availability of additional electronic records. 2

Reflects Department of Commerce data issued in June and does not include any revisions made in July.

6


7


Table 2: Travel Expenditures - U.S. Nationwide 2014 Spending ($ Billions) Domestic Intl.* Total

Category

2015 Spending ($ Billions) Domestic Intl.* Total

Public Transportation Auto Transportation Lodging Foodservice Entertainment & Recreation General Retail Trade

$160.6 161.2 142.1 191.5

$15.0 1.6 39.5 28.9

$175.6 162.8 181.6 220.4

$162.9 148.0 154.9 206.9

$14.9 1.6 39.9 28.4

$177.8 149.6 194.8 235.4

82.2 54.8

10.6 40.1

92.7 94.9

83.8 57.5

10.6 37.5

94.5 95.0

Total

$792.4

$135.7

$928. 1

$814.1

$133.0

$947.1

Source: U.S. Travel Association

* Excludes international passenger fare payments.

Changes of Direct Travel Expenditures* in the U.S., 2003-2015 10.0%

8.3%

8.7% 7.7%

8.0%

6.5%

6.0% 4.0%

6.8%

5.9%

5.2%

4.7%

4.7% 3.7%

2.8%

2.1%

2.0% 0.0% -2.0%

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

-4.0% -6.0% -8.0% -10.0%

-9.4%

-12.0% Source: U.S. Travel Association. *Excludes international passenger fare payments.

8

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015


Travel Employment in 2015 The year 2015 continued the banner jobs recovery seen in the years following the Great Recession. After bottoming out in February 2010, the nonfarm payroll employee count, as measured by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), made a full recovery from the Great Recession in May 2014, surpassing the pre-recession jobs peak of nearly 138.4 million jobs in January 2008. The positive momentum continued: after adding three million jobs during the 12 months of 2014, the economy added another 2.7 million in 2015 to reach 143.1 million by December. After peaking at 9.6 percent in 2010, the unemployment rate fell to an average monthly rate of 5.3 percent in 2015, starting at 5.7 percent in January and ending at 5.0 percent in December. The unemployment rate fell to 4.9 percent in January and February 2016, but returned to 5.0 percent in April, still above the 4.4 percent pre-recession low. American service industries, of which the travel industry is a part, played a major role in the jobs recovery, accounting for 84.1 percent of the jobs recovered from 2010-2015. The travel industry joined healthcare, administrative services, accommodation and foodservices and retail trade, as one of the leading growth industries in terms of overall jobs created from 2010 to 2015. Travel accounted for 6.8 percent of nonfarm jobs created from 2010 to 2015, despite holding a 5.8 percent share of all nonfarm jobs in 2015. In 2015, traveler spending directly supported over 8.2 million U.S. jobs, including both full-time and seasonal/part-time positions, up 1.9 percent from 2014. This job increase constituted 5.2 percent of total nonfarm job growth since 2014. These 8.2 million travel-generated jobs constituted 5.8 percent of total nonfarm employment in the U.S. in 2015. Without these jobs, the 2015 national unemployment rate of 5.3 percent would have nearly doubled to 10.5 percent, an increase of 5.2 percentage points. The travel industry remained a strong creator of jobs despite the Great Recession, passing its own pre-recession peak (7.7 million in 2008) in 2014. Between 2005 and 2015, total nonfarm employment in the U.S. increased 5.8 percent while travel-generated employment increased 8.6 percent. Focusing on the post-recession recovery, travel-generated employment increased 10.7 percent from 2010 to 2015, whereas total nonfarm employment increased 8.8 percent from the same years.

9


Table 3: Travel Generated Employment - U.S. Nationwide 2014 Employment (Thousands) Category Public Transportation Auto Transportation

2015 Employment (Thousands)

Domestic

Intl.*

Total

Domestic

Intl.*

Total

891.2

64.3

955.6

923.2

65.1

988.2

273.4

2.0

275.4

279.8

2.0

281.8

Lodging

1,245.6

255.2

1,500.8

1,276.3

243.7

1,520.0

Foodservice

2,804.9

417.7

3,222.6

2,907.9

396.8

3,304.7

Entertainment & Recreation

1,161.6

225.2

1,386.8

1,174.8

225.1

1,399.9

General Retail Trade

336.7

164.3

500.9

341.6

151.7

493.4

Travel Planning

165.4

0.0

165.4

169.4

0.0

169.4

6,878.8

1,128.7

8,007.4

7,073.0

1,084.4

8,157.4

Total Source: U.S. Travel Association

* Excludes jobs supported by international passenger fare payments.

10

U.S. Travel Trends, 2009-2018

Table 4: U.S. Travel Forecasts

Real GDP ($ Billions)* Unemployment Rate (%) Consumer Price Index (CPI)** Travel Price Index (TPI)** Total Travel Expenditures in U.S. ($ Billions) U.S. Residents International Visitors*** Total International Visitors to the U.S. (Millions) Overseas Arrivals to the U.S. (Millions) Total Domestic Person-Trips (Millions) Business Leisure Percent Change from Previous Year (%) Real GDP Consumer Price Index (CPI) Travel Price Index (TPI) Total Travel Expenditures in U.S. U.S. Residents International Visitors Total International Visitors to the U.S. Overseas Arrivals to the U.S. Total Domestic Person-Trips Business Leisure

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

14,418.7 9.3 214.5 241.5 699.8 609.1 90.7 55.1 23.8 1,900.1 434.3 1,465.8

14,783.8 9.6 218.1 250.7 747.4 640.6 106.9 60.0 26.4 1,963.7 446.4 1,517.3

15,020.6 8.9 224.9 266.9 812.7 694.0 118.6 62.8 27.9 1,997.5 440.7 1,556.8

15,354.6 8.1 229.6 273.0 854.7 728.0 126.7 66.7 29.8 2,030.3 439.4 1,590.9

15,612.2 7.4 233.0 275.6 886.2 751.2 135.0 70.0 32.0 2,059.6 444.9 1,614.7

15,982.3 7.4 236.7 279.6 928.1 792.4 135.7 74.8 34.4 2,109.3 451.0 1,658.3

16,397.2 5.3 237.1 272.4 947.1 814.1 133.0 77.5 38.4 2,178.2 459.4 1,718.8

18,500.8 4.9 240.0 275.1 947.1 814.1 133.0 79.1 39.9 2,217.1 462.2 1,754.9

19,331.9 4.6 245.2 283.7 947.1 814.1 133.0 81.7 41.3 2,249.7 466.1 1,783.6

20,253.2 4.7 250.4 293.3 947.1 814.1 133.0 85.4 43.7 2,287.5 471.7 1,815.8

-2.8 -0.4 -6.3 -9.4 -8.8 -13.3 -5.2 -6.3 -3.3 -5.8 -2.5

2.5 1.6 3.8 6.8 5.2 17.8 8.9 11.0 3.3 2.8 3.5

1.6 3.2 6.5 8.7 8.3 11.0 4.7 5.8 1.7 -1.3 2.6

2.2 2.1 2.3 5.2 4.9 6.8 6.1 6.7 1.6 -0.3 2.2

1.7 1.5 0.9 3.7 3.2 6.5 5.0 7.7 1.4 1.3 1.5

2.4 1.6 1.5 4.7 5.5 0.5 NAa NAa 2.4 1.4 2.7

2.6 0.1 -2.6 2.1 2.7 -2.0 NAb NAb 3.3 1.9 3.6

2.0 1.2 1.0 2.7 2.8 2.5 2.1 3.9 1.8 0.6 2.1

2.4 2.2 3.1 3.1 2.8 4.6 3.2 3.6 1.5 0.9 1.6

2.3 2.1 3.4 4.2 3.8 6.7 4.5 5.7 1.7 1.2 1.8

Sources: U.S. Travel Association's Travel Forecast Model, BLS, Department of Labor; OTTI, BEA, Department of Commerce, Tourism Economics. * In chained 2009 dollars **1982-84=100. ***International traveler spending does not include international passenger fares. a According to the National Travel and Tourism Office, the completion of the I-94 automation project now provides a more accurate determination of how many nights were spent in the United States which makes it possible to be more inclusive of one-night stays (travelers from overseas countries) given that the arrival-departure record match is now more complete and accurate. With the inclusion of one-night stay travelers in 2014, arrivals data from overseas countries in 2013 and 2014 are basically not comparable. b 2015 changes reflect a combination of additional records counted and market condition. As such, 2015 data is not comparable to earlier years.

11

Direct Travel Impact on the United States in 2015

Direct Travel Impact on the United States in 2015

Travel Expenditures $947.1 Billion

Business Receipts

Corporate Taxes

Payroll $231.6 Billion

Payroll Taxes

Gross Receipts Tax Sales Tax Excise Tax Property Tax

Tax Revenue $147.9 Billion

Employees 8.2 Million

Source: U.S. Travel Association, BEA *Does not include international passenger fare payments and other economic impact generated by these payments.

12

Direct Travel Impact on Tennessee in 2015

TRAVEL IMPACT ON TENNESSEE – 2015 Direct Travel Expenditures Travel spending in Tennessee by both domestic and international travelers reached $18.4 billion on transportation, lodging, food, entertainment and recreation and general retail trade, up 3.7 percent from 2014. 

In 2015, foodservice, the largest domestic traveler spending sector in Tennessee, reached $5.7 billion and accounted for nearly one third (31.9%) of the state total domestic travel expenditures.



Domestic traveler spending on lodging ranked second with $3.7 billion in 2015, up 13.3 percent from 2014.



Auto transportation accounted for 17.3 percent of the domestic total at $3.1 billion, a decrease of 11.6 percent from 2014 largely caused by gasoline price decreases. Direct Domestic Travel Expenditures in Tennessee by Industry Sector, 2015 Public Transportation 8.7%

General Retail Trade 10.6%

Auto Transportation 17.3%

Entertainment & Recreation 10.9%

Lodging 20.5%

Foodservice 31.9%

1. Auto transportation sector includes privately-owned vehicles that are used for trips (e.g., automobiles, trucks, campers or other recreational vehicles), gasoline service stations, and automotive rental. 2. Foodservice sector includes restaurants, grocery stores and other eating and drinking establishments. 3. Public transportation sector comprises air, intercity bus, rail, boat or ship, and taxicab or limousine service. 4. Lodging sector consists of hotels and motels, campgrounds, and ownership or rental of vacation or second homes. 5. General retail trade sector includes gifts, clothes, souvenirs and other incidental retail purchases. 6. Entertainment and recreation sector includes amusement parks and attractions, attendance at nightclubs, movies, legitimate shows, sports events, and other forms of entertainment and recreation while traveling.

13

Direct Travel Impact on Tennessee in 2015

Table 5: Direct Travel Expenditures in Tennessee by Industry Sector, 2014-2015 2015 Expenditures

Domestic ($ Millions)

Domestic Travel Public Transportation Auto Transportation Lodging Foodservice Entertainment & Recreation General Retail Trade Domestic Total International Total Grand Total 2014 Expenditures Domestic Travel Public Transportation Auto Transportation Lodging Foodservice Entertainment & Recreation General Retail Trade Domestic Total International Total Grand Total

Percentage Change, 2015 over 2014 Domestic Travel Public Transportation Auto Transportation Lodging Foodservice Entertainment & Recreation General Retail Trade

$1,558.2 3,085.7 3,658.2 5,690.5 1,939.7 1,889.7

8.7% 17.3% 20.5% 31.9% 10.9% 10.6%

$17,822.0 $595.2 $18,417.2

100.0%

$1,511.9 3,488.7 3,228.1 5,335.4 1,827.1 1,794.2

8.8% 20.3% 18.8% 31.0% 10.6% 10.4%

$17,185.3 $576.5 $17,761.8

100.0%

3.1% -11.6% 13.3% 6.7% 6.2% 5.3%

Domestic Total International Total Grand Total

3.7% 3.2% 3.7%

Source: U.S. Travel Association, OTTI/ITA

14

% of Domestic Total

Direct Travel Expenditures on Tennessee – 2005-2015

TRAVEL IMPACT ON TENNESSEE, 2005-2015 Direct Travel Expenditure Trends From 2005 to 2015, total nominal direct travel expenditures in Tennessee increased 60.5 percent, faster than the nationwide growth rate of 44.9 percent during the same period. From 2004 to 2007, travel spending in Tennessee grew steadily, rebounding from the shocks caused by the 2001 terrorist attacks and the 2002 recession. The economic recession that started in December 2007 slowed traveler spending growth in 2009 to 1.5 percent. The impact of the recession had an aftershock in 2010; sharply falling motor fuel prices in particular caused a 7.5 percent decline in traveler spending. The market rebounded soon after, jumping up 15.5 percent in 2011 and moderated back down to 3.4 percent growth in 2013 and a strong growth of 6.3 percent in 2014. In 2015, total travel spending in Tennessee increased 3.7 percent, better than the national growth of 2.1 percent.

Changes in Total Direct and International Expenditures in Tennessee, 2005-2015 20%

15.5%

15% 10%

8.3% 5.8%

7.6%

5.9%

5%

3.7%

3.5%

1.5%

6.3%

5.2%

0% -5%

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010 -7.5%

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

-10%

Total Direct and International Expenditures in Tennessee, 2005-2015 (current $ billion) 20 15

$14.2

$14.4

$12.4

$13.4

$11.5

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

$15.4

$16.2

$16.7

2011

2012

2013

$17.8

$18.4

2014

2015

$13.3

10 5 0 2010

15

Direct Travel Expenditure Trends, 2005-2015

Table 6: Direct Travel Expenditure Trends in Tennessee, 2005-2015

Year 2015

Domestic Travel Spending Tennessee U.S. ($ Millions) ($ Millions)

2014

17,822 17,185

814,110 792,355

2013

16,183

2012

Market Share (%) 2.19%

Percent Change From Previous Year Tennessee U.S. (%) (%) 3.7% 2.7%

2.17%

6.2%

5.5%

751,214

2.15%

3.3%

3.2%

15,660

727,960

2.15%

5.0%

4.9%

2011

14,910

694,006

2.15%

15.3%

8.3%

2010

12,927

640,574

2.02%

-7.8%

5.2%

2009

14,024

609,095

2.30%

1.7%

-8.8%

2008

13,796

667,916

2.07%

6.1%

3.5%

2007

13,008

645,269

2.02%

7.6%

4.6%

2006

12,084

617,078

1.96%

8.2%

7.0%

2005

11,164

576,836

1.94%

Year 2015 2014

International Travel Spending Tennessee U.S. ($ Millions) ($ Millions) 595 133,001 577 135,723

Market Share (%) 0.45% 0.42%

5.5% 7.4% Percent Change From Previous Year Tennessee U.S. (%) (%) 3.2% -2.0% 8.4% 0.5%

2013

532

135,015

0.39%

7.0%

2012

497

126,745

0.39%

10.4%

6.8%

2011

450

118,645

0.38%

22.3%

11.0%

2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005

368 353 362 362 344 312

106,853 90,679 104,620 92,732 79,572 77,000

0.34% 0.39% 0.35% 0.39% 0.43% 0.41%

Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005

Total Travel Spending Tennessee U.S. ($ Millions) ($ Millions) 18,417 947,111 17,762 928,078 16,715 886,229 16,157 854,705 15,360 812,651 13,295 747,427 14,377 699,774 14,158 772,536 13,370 738,001 12,428 696,650 11,476 653,836

Sources: U.S. Travel Association, OTTI/ITA and BEA

16

Market Share (%) 1.94% 1.91% 1.89% 1.89% 1.89% 1.78% 2.05% 1.83% 1.81% 1.78% 1.76%

6.5%

4.2% 17.8% -2.5% -13.3% 0.0% 12.8% 5.2% 16.5% 10.3% 3.3% 15.6% 10.5% Percent Change From Previous Year Tennessee U.S. (%) (%) 3.7% 2.1% 6.3% 4.7% 3.5% 3.7% 5.2% 5.2% 15.5% 8.7% -7.5% 6.8% 1.5% -9.4% 5.9% 4.7% 7.6% 5.9% 8.3% 6.5% 5.8% 7.7%

Direct Travel Impact on Tennessee - 2015

TRAVEL IMPACT ON TENNESSEE – 2015 Direct Travel-Generated Payroll Travel-generated payroll is the wage and salary income paid to employees directly serving the traveler within the industry sectors from which these travelers purchase goods and services. Each dollar spent on travel generates different amounts of payroll income within the various travel industry sectors depending on the labor content and the wage structure of each sector. 

In 2015, total salary and wages paid by Tennessee travel-related firms and directly attributable to domestic and international traveler spending increased 6.1 percent compared with 2014 at nearly $3.7 billion.



The foodservice sector posted the largest payroll generated by domestic travel spending in 2015, with $1.3 billion paid to employees, up 6.8 percent from 2014.



The payroll generated by domestic travel spending in the entertainment and recreation sector ranked second in 2015 with $649.2 million, up 9.6 percent from 2014.



The public transportation sector reported a 3.0 percent increase on domestic payroll, totaling $551.7 million.

Direct Domestic Travel-Generated Payroll in Tennessee by Industry Sector, 2015 Travel Planning 3.1% General Retail Public Trade Transportation 8.2% 15.6% Auto Transportation 3.4% Entertainment & Recreation 18.4% Lodging 14.7%

Foodservice 36.5%

17

Direct Travel-Generated Payroll

Table 7: Direct Travel-Generated Payroll in Tennessee by Industry Sector, 2014-2015 2015 Payroll Domestic Travel Public Transportation Auto Transportation Lodging Foodservice Entertainment & Recreation General Retail Trade Travel Planning *


% of Domestic Total

$551.7 121.2 519.0 1,286.5 649.2 287.6 110.0

15.6% 3.4% 14.7% 36.5% 18.4% 8.2% 3.1%

$3,525.3 $131.7 $3,657.0

100.0%

$535.6 113.4 500.3 1,204.9 592.4 276.3 99.5

16.1% 3.4% 15.1% 36.3% 17.8% 8.3% 3.0%

$3,322.4 $124.7 $3,447.1

100.0%

Domestic Total International Total Grand Total 2014 Payroll Domestic Travel Public Transportation Auto Transportation Lodging Foodservice Entertainment & Recreation General Retail Trade Travel Planning * Domestic Total International Total Grand Total

Percentage Change, 2015 over 2014 Domestic Travel Public Transportation Auto Transportation Lodging Foodservice Entertainment & Recreation General Retail Trade Travel Planning *

3.0% 6.8% 3.7% 6.8% 9.6% 4.1% 10.6%


6.1% 5.6% 6.1%

Source: U.S. Travel Association Note: * Refers to payroll income that goes to travel agents, tour operators, and other travel service employees who arrange passenger transportation, lodging, tours and other related services.

18


TRAVEL IMPACT ON TENNESSEE – 2015 Direct Travel-Generated Employment The most impressive contribution that travel and tourism makes to the Tennessee economy is the number of businesses and jobs it supports. These jobs include a large number of executive and managerial positions, as well as service-oriented occupations. 

During 2015, domestic and international traveler spending in Tennessee supported 157,400 jobs, including full-time and seasonal/part-time positions in the state, up 2.9 percent from 2014. On average, every $117,031 spent by domestic and international travelers in Tennessee directly supported one job.



It is important to note that these domestic and international traveler spending supported jobs comprised 5.4 percent of total nonfarm employment in Tennessee during 2015. Without these jobs, Tennessee’s 2015 unemployment rate of 5.8 percent would have been 5.1 percentage points higher, or the equivalent of 10.9 percent of the labor force.



Within the travel industry, the foodservice sector, which includes restaurants and other eating and drinking places, provided more jobs than any other industry sector. During 2015, domestic traveler spending in this sector supported 80,100 jobs, accounting for 52.8 percent of the state total. The labor-intensiveness of these businesses and the large proportion of travel expenditures spent on foodservice contribute to the importance of this sector.

Direct Domestic Travel-Generated Employment in Tennessee by Industry Sector, 2015 General Retail Trade 9.1%

Travel Planning 1.4%

Public Transportation 6.3% Auto Transportation 2.6%

Entertainment & Recreation 12.0%

Lodging 15.9%

Foodservice 52.8%

19


20

Direct Travel-Generated Employment

Table 8: Direct Travel-Generated Employment in Tennessee by Industry Sector, 2014-2015 Domestic (Thousands)

% of Domestic Total

9.5 3.9 24.2 80.1 18.3 13.8 2.1

6.3% 2.6% 15.9% 52.8% 12.0% 9.1% 1.4%

151.8 5.6 157.4

100.0%

9.5 3.8 23.4 78.0 17.2 13.5 2.1

6.4% 2.6% 15.8% 52.9% 11.7% 9.2% 1.4%


147.4 5.5 152.9

100.0%

Percentage Change, 2015 over 2014 Domestic Travel Public Transportation Auto Transportation Lodging Foodservice Entertainment & Recreation General Retail Trade Travel Planning *

0.3% 2.6% 3.4% 2.6% 6.1% 1.9% 4.3%


2.9% 2.5% 2.9%

2015 Employment Domestic Travel Public Transportation Auto Transportation Lodging Foodservice Entertainment & Recreation General Retail Trade Travel Planning * Domestic Total International Total Grand Total 2014 Employment Domestic Travel Public Transportation Auto Transportation Lodging Foodservice Entertainment & Recreation General Retail Trade Travel Planning *

Source: U.S. Travel Association Note: * Refers to jobs created in travel arrangement firms such as travel agencies, wholesale and retail tour companies, and other travel-related service businesses.

21


TRAVEL IMPACT ON TENNESSEE – 2015 Direct Travel-Generated Tax Revenue Travel tax receipts are the federal, state and local tax revenues attributable to travel spending in Tennessee. Travel-generated tax revenue is a significant economic benefit, as governments use these funds to support the travel infrastructure and help support a variety of public programs. 

In 2015, total tax revenue generated by domestic and international traveler spending in Tennessee reached almost $3 billion, an increase of 7.5 percent compared to 2014.



Domestic traveler spending in Tennessee generated nearly $1.4 billion for the federal government in 2015, up 7.2 percent from 2014. This represents nearly half (48.1%) of all domestic travel-generated tax collections in the state. Each dollar spent by domestic travelers in Tennessee produced 7.7 cents for federal tax coffers.



Spending by domestic travelers in Tennessee also generated $963.1 million in tax revenue for the state treasury through state sales and excise taxes, and taxes on personal and corporate income, up 8.8 percent from 2014. This composed one-third (33.6%) of all domestic travel-generated tax revenue collected in the state for 2015. On average, each domestic travel dollar produced 5.4 cents in state tax receipts.



Local governments in Tennessee directly benefited from travel as well. During 2015, domestic traveler spending generated $524.1 million in sales and property tax revenue for localities, up 6.0 percent from 2014. This represents 18.3 percent of total domestic travelgenerated tax revenue in the state. Each domestic travel dollar produced nearly 2.9 cents for local tax coffers. Direct Domestic Travel-Generated Tax Revenue in Tennessee by Industry Sector, 2015 Local 18.3%

Federal 48.1%

State 33.6%

22

Direct Travel-Generated Tax Revenue

Table 9: Direct Travel-Generated Tax Revenue in Tennessee by Level of Government, 2014-2015


2015 Tax Revenue

% of Domestic Total

Domestic Travel Federal State Local

$1,375.8 963.1 524.1

48.1% 33.6% 18.3%


$2,863.0 $113.7 $2,976.7

100.0%

Domestic Travel Federal State Local

$1,283.9 885.1 494.3

48.2% 33.2% 18.6%


$2,663.3 $106.2 $2,769.5

100.0%

2014 Tax Revenue

Percentage Change, 2015 over 2014 Domestic Travel Federal State Local

7.2% 8.8% 6.0%


7.5% 7.0% 7.5%


23

Multiplier Impact of Travel Spending in Tennessee

MULTIPLIER IMPACT OF TRAVEL SPENDING IN TENNESSEE Travelers in Tennessee produce “secondary” impacts over and above that of their original expenditures previously detailed. These secondary outputs (sales) and earnings (wage and salary income) arise from “indirect” and “induced” spending. Indirect impact occurs as travel industry business operators, such as restaurants, purchase goods, such as food and beverages, and services, such as electricity and building maintenance, from local suppliers. These purchases generate additional output or sales indirectly. Induced impact occurs as a result of the employees of businesses, and their suppliers, spending part of their earnings in the area. This spending itself generates sales additional to the indirect impact. The sum of the indirect and induced effects comprises the total secondary impact of traveler expenditures in the area. The ratio of the sum of primary output generated (travel spending) plus secondary output to initial expenditures alone is commonly termed the sales or output “multiplier.” During the secondary impact process, wage and salary income (earnings) are generated in addition to that produced by the initial travel expenditures as the suppliers employ labor to produce the additional output. The “earnings multiplier” is the ratio of the total primary and secondary earnings generated by the initial travel spending to that spending. Just as additional earnings are created, employment is also generated during the secondary impact process. The “employment multiplier” represents the number of jobs provided, directly and indirectly, for each one million dollars of output or expenditures generated. Table 10 summarizes the direct, indirect and induced, and total impacts of domestic and international travel spending on the Tennessee economy during 2014 and 2015. In 2015, the $18.4 billion spent directly by domestic and international travelers in Tennessee generated a total output value of $30.1 billion, a 3.6 percent increase compared with 2014. The ratio of the total output to the initial spending is 1.63, the output multiplier. This indicates that the average travel dollar generated an additional 63 cents in secondary sales for a total impact of $1.63. In addition to nearly $3.7 billion in payroll income supported by direct domestic and international travelers’ spending, close to $2.6 billion in earnings was produced in secondary impact during 2015. The ratio of total earnings generated to the initial spending is 0.34, the earnings multiplier. Each dollar of domestic and international travelers’ expenditures generated 34 cents in total earnings in the Tennessee economy. Travel produced a total of 249,600 jobs for Tennessee residents, including direct and secondary employment in travel industry and other industries of the Tennessee economy. The ratio of total employment to the initial direct spending is 13.6, the employment multiplier. This means that every million dollars in domestic and international travel expenditures supported nearly 14 jobs in Tennessee during 2015.

24

Multiplier Impact of Travel Spending in Tennessee

Table 10: Multiplier Impact of Travel Spending in Tennessee, 2014-2015 2015 Multiplier Impact Direct Impact

Indirect & Induced Impact

Total Impact

$18,417.2

$11,648.3

$30,065.5

$3,657.0

$2,588.3

$6,245.3

157.4

92.3

249.6

$17,761.8

$11,250.5

$29,012.3

$3,447.1

$2,460.9

$5,908.0

152.9

89.8

242.7

Expenditures

3.7%

3.5%

3.6%

Earnings

6.1%

5.2%

5.7%

Employment

2.9%

2.7%

2.9%

Impact Measure Expenditures ($ millions) Earnings ($ millions) Employment (thousands)

2014 Multiplier Impact Expenditures ($ millions) Earnings ($ millions) Employment (thousands)

Percent Change, 2015 over 2014

Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, RIMS II; IMPLAN; U.S. Travel Association

25

Domestic Travel Impact on Tennessee Counties in 2015

DOMESTIC TRAVEL IMPACT ON TENNESSEE COUNTIES IN 2015 During 2015, travel-related expenditures occurred throughout all ninety-five counties of Tennessee. Domestic travelers spent over $17.8 billion while traveling in Tennessee, up 3.7 percent from 2014. The $17.8 billion of domestic traveler spending in Tennessee directly supported $3.5 billion in payroll and 151,800 jobs. Additionally, domestic traveler spending in Tennessee generated $963.1 million in tax revenue for the state treasury and $524.1 million tax revenue for local governments during 2015.

Domestic Travel Impact in Top Five Counties The top five counties in Tennessee received more than $12.9 billion in direct domestic travel expenditures, 72.6 percent of the state total. The top five counties also earned over $2.7 billion in payroll (77.2 percent of the state total) and 116,600 jobs (76.8 percent of the state total) in 2015. Additionally, domestic travel in the top five counties generated $671.9 million in tax revenue for the state treasury and $346.0 million tax revenue for local governments during 2015. Davidson County, which includes the city of Nashville, led all counties in 2015. Domestic traveler expenditures in Davidson County registered almost $5.7 billion, accounting for 31.9 percent of the state total. More than $1.3 billion in payroll income and 59,400 jobs were supported in this county. Shelby County, which includes the city of Memphis, ranked second with $3.2 billion in domestic travel spending in 2015, representing 17.9 percent of the state total. The county's payroll income of $623.5 million was paid to 20,000 workers. Sevier County posted over $2.0 billion in domestic expenditures to rank third. These expenditures supported $440.7 million in payroll as well as 20,500 jobs within the county. Hamilton County edged up to rank fourth with $1 billion from domestic travelers, 5.7 percent of the state total. This county benefited from $154.4 million in payroll and 7,500 jobs. Knox County received $1 billion in domestic travel expenditures, $178.5 million in payroll income and 9,200 jobs within the county in 2015.

26

Top Five Counties, 2014 and 2015

Table 11: Domestic Travel Impact in Tennessee - Top 5 Counties, 2014 and 2015 2015 Impact Expenditures ($ Millions)

Payroll ($ Millions)

Employment (Thousands)

State Tax Receipts ($ Millions)

Local Tax Receipts ($ Millions)

$5,686.3 3,196.9 2,031.3 1,016.1 1,015.0

$1,323.0 623.5 440.7 154.4 178.5

59.4 20.0 20.5 7.5 9.2

$285.5 158.4 115.0 59.8 53.2

$147.4 91.0 60.1 22.9 24.5

$12,945.6 $17,822.0 72.6%

$2,720.1 $3,525.3 77.2%

116.6 151.8 76.8%

$671.9 $963.1 69.8%

$346.0 $524.1 66.0%

$5,426.6 3,158.9 1,872.2 988.0 983.1

$1,236.3 606.3 395.1 172.2 144.9

57.4 19.9 19.2 9.1 7.2

$259.2 150.0 100.9 50.0 54.5

$137.4 87.8 54.1 23.5 21.5

$12,428.9 $17,185.3 72.3%

$2,554.8 $3,322.4 76.9%

112.8 147.4 76.5%

$614.5 $885.1 69.4%

$324.3 $494.3 65.6%

DAVIDSON SHELBY SEVIER HAMILTON KNOX

4.8% 1.2% 8.5% 3.4% 2.7%

7.0% 2.8% 11.5% 6.5% 3.7%

3.5% 0.6% 7.0% 3.0% 1.0%

10.1% 5.6% 14.0% 9.6% 6.5%

7.3% 3.6% 11.1% 6.8% 4.3%

Top Five Total State Total

4.2% 3.7%

6.5% 6.1%

3.4% 2.9%

9.3% 8.8%

6.7% 6.0%

County DAVIDSON SHELBY SEVIER HAMILTON KNOX Top Five Total State Total Share of Top 5 Counties 2014 Impact DAVIDSON SHELBY SEVIER KNOX HAMILTON Top Five Total State Total Share of Top 5 Counties

Percent Change 2015 Over 2014


27

County Tables

COUNTY TABLES The following tables list the results of the County Economic Impact Component of the U.S. Travel Association’s Travel Economic Impact Model for Tennessee in 2014 and 2015. The estimates presented are for direct domestic traveler expenditures and related economic impact.

Table A shows the counties listed alphabetically, with 2015 travel expenditures, travelgenerated payroll and employment, and state tax revenue and the local tax revenue for each. Table B ranks the counties in order of 2015 travel expenditures from highest to lowest. Table C indicates the percent of the state totals accounted for by each county in 2015. Table D shows the percent change in 2015 over 2014 estimates for each of the measures of economic impact. Table E shows the counties, listed alphabetically, with 2014 travel expenditures, travelgenerated payroll and employment, and state tax revenue and local tax revenue shown for each. Table F shows the counties grouped by region with each measure of travel impact in 2015. Table G indicates the counties grouped by region with 2015 and 2014 travel expenditures, shown with the percent change in 2015 over 2014. Table H shows the percent change in 2015 over 2014 estimates, with the counties grouped by region. Table I indicates the counties grouped by region, with 2014 estimates for each measure of travel impact. Table J shows each measure of travel impact for each region in 2015. Table K shows each measure of travel impact with 2014 estimates by each region. Table L indicates the percent change in each measure of travel impact in 2015 over 2014 for each Tennessee region.

28

Table A: Alphabetical by County, 2015


Expenditures ($ Millions)





$119.17 27.76 24.75

$19.24 4.82 3.63

0.92 0.21 0.14

$7.27 1.64 1.52

$2.60 1.10 2.68

3.33 345.93 137.23

0.46 83.04 12.47

0.02 3.07 0.90

0.19 19.07 8.55

0.54 12.07 2.96

CAMPBELL CANNON CARROLL

54.52 4.03 18.80

9.43 0.38 2.46

0.44 0.01 0.11

3.21 0.25 1.11

2.87 0.28 0.73

CARTER CHEATHAM CHESTER

36.46 21.63 11.01

4.92 3.61 1.06

0.19 0.14 0.04

2.24 1.27 0.69

2.32 0.75 0.35

CLAIBORNE CLAY COCKE

18.20 6.74 46.29

2.90 1.38 8.34

0.13 0.05 0.43

1.07 0.38 2.73

1.39 0.60 2.09

88.17 8.93 112.29

14.76 1.35 22.99

0.69 0.07 0.95

5.28 0.53 6.51

2.36 0.40 4.78

5,686.34 12.62 42.71

1,323.01 1.58 8.04

59.44 0.04 0.28

285.47 0.72 2.50

147.45 2.27 5.70

DICKSON DYER FAYETTE

63.36 57.21 8.64

10.82 8.79 1.04

0.54 0.42 0.04

3.80 3.55 0.51

1.58 1.36 0.48

FENTRESS FRANKLIN GIBSON

12.43 21.71 44.60

1.90 3.13 5.11

0.08 0.12 0.20

0.73 1.34 2.88

0.85 1.03 1.35

County ANDERSON BEDFORD BENTON BLEDSOE BLOUNT BRADLEY

COFFEE CROCKETT CUMBERLAND DAVIDSON DECATUR DEKALB

29


Table A: Alphabetical by County, 2015 (Continued)






GILES GRAINGER GREENE

23.27 14.85 85.82

3.24 2.22 13.06

0.14 0.07 0.56

1.45 0.85 5.29

1.02 0.29 2.33

GRUNDY HAMBLEN HAMILTON

8.67 90.87 1,016.11

0.99 7.62 154.37

0.02 0.47 7.45

0.52 5.65 59.76

1.56 2.04 22.94

HANCOCK HARDEMAN HARDIN

1.21 24.57 39.28

0.14 3.38 6.22

0.01 0.14 0.21

0.07 1.47 2.35

0.26 1.43 3.40

HAWKINS HAYWOOD HENDERSON

37.27 14.71 26.14

5.52 2.00 3.52

0.24 0.08 0.15

2.15 0.87 1.60

2.09 0.66 0.85

HENRY HICKMAN HOUSTON

55.55 8.02 5.90

8.93 1.09 0.86

0.30 0.04 0.04

3.26 0.47 0.34

7.22 0.78 0.65

HUMPHREYS JACKSON JEFFERSON

34.44 2.28 59.18

6.28 0.30 9.89

0.26 0.01 0.40

1.84 0.14 3.63

2.31 0.28 4.40

9.72 1,014.98 10.07

1.57 178.53 1.97

0.06 9.20 0.10

0.56 53.21 0.58

0.76 24.50 0.77

LAUDERDALE LAWRENCE LEWIS

17.34 39.76 6.16

2.20 5.47 0.93

0.08 0.22 0.05

1.02 2.43 0.36

1.41 1.10 0.30

LINCOLN LOUDON MCMINN

22.77 54.25 44.11

3.03 8.50 6.10

0.14 0.40 0.29

1.42 3.33 2.70

0.74 1.39 1.11

County

JOHNSON KNOX LAKE

30








MCNAIRY MACON MADISON

11.46 7.50 196.37

1.53 1.10 35.26

0.06 0.05 1.70

0.67 0.44 11.81

0.65 0.40 4.29

MARION MARSHALL MAURY

34.35 21.98 117.12

5.52 3.75 15.61

0.26 0.15 0.70

2.07 1.35 7.22

1.27 0.59 2.48

MEIGS MONROE MONTGOMERY

7.28 38.53 205.10

1.21 6.55 32.84

0.03 0.28 1.53

0.42 2.27 12.88

0.97 2.65 3.98

MOORE MORGAN OBION

1.65 4.81 53.00

0.22 0.50 8.69

0.01 0.01 0.38

0.09 0.29 3.19

0.08 0.62 1.62

OVERTON PERRY PICKETT

7.68 6.70 7.14

1.04 0.85 1.43

0.04 0.02 0.05

0.47 0.36 0.40

0.49 1.78 1.02

POLK PUTNAM RHEA

28.04 122.15 32.50

5.92 18.68 5.49

0.22 0.91 0.23

1.52 7.43 1.91

2.49 2.53 2.21

ROANE ROBERTSON RUTHERFORD

65.76 50.08 316.45

9.57 6.63 48.10

0.43 0.29 2.33

3.97 3.28 19.40

3.47 1.37 6.89

SCOTT SEQUATCHIE SEVIER

11.13 6.50 2,031.32

1.61 0.90 440.70

0.07 0.03 20.52

0.63 0.38 115.03

0.67 0.49 60.12

SHELBY SMITH STEWART

3,196.89 11.76 8.23

623.45 1.43 0.98

19.99 0.05 0.03

158.39 0.72 0.48

90.98 0.52 1.24

County

31



County SULLIVAN SUMNER TIPTON TROUSDALE UNICOI UNION VAN BUREN WARREN WASHINGTON WAYNE WEAKLEY WHITE WILLIAMSON WILSON STATE TOTALS






356.52 135.28 32.49

93.04 20.95 4.25

3.14 0.97 0.19

19.69 8.41 2.08

9.92 3.15 1.07

3.97 8.73 6.44

0.45 1.85 1.04

0.02 0.07 0.03

0.24 0.49 0.37

0.14 0.72 0.97

9.13 23.17 236.90

1.91 3.44 24.46

0.06 0.14 1.67

0.52 1.38 14.10

0.97 0.94 5.60

10.58 19.56 20.65

1.68 2.63 2.18

0.06 0.11 0.08

0.63 1.18 1.26

0.68 0.67 0.99

410.69 144.27

64.68 24.56

3.00 1.08

24.67 8.66

8.56 4.34

$17,822.01

$3,525.27

151.78

$963.06

$524.14

©2016 U.S. Travel Association

32

Table B: Ranking of Counties by Expenditure Levels, 2015







$5,686.34 3,196.89 2,031.32

$1,323.01 623.45 440.70

59.44 19.99 20.52

$285.47 158.39 115.03

$147.45 90.98 60.12

HAMILTON KNOX WILLIAMSON

1,016.11 1,014.98 410.69

154.37 178.53 64.68

7.45 9.20 3.00

59.76 53.21 24.67

22.94 24.50 8.56

SULLIVAN BLOUNT RUTHERFORD

356.52 345.93 316.45

93.04 83.04 48.10

3.14 3.07 2.33

19.69 19.07 19.40

9.92 12.07 6.89

WASHINGTON MONTGOMERY MADISON

236.90 205.10 196.37

24.46 32.84 35.26

1.67 1.53 1.70

14.10 12.88 11.81

5.60 3.98 4.29

WILSON BRADLEY SUMNER

144.27 137.23 135.28

24.56 12.47 20.95

1.08 0.90 0.97

8.66 8.55 8.41

4.34 2.96 3.15

PUTNAM ANDERSON MAURY

122.15 119.17 117.12

18.68 19.24 15.61

0.91 0.92 0.70

7.43 7.27 7.22

2.53 2.60 2.48

CUMBERLAND HAMBLEN COFFEE

112.29 90.87 88.17

22.99 7.62 14.76

0.95 0.47 0.69

6.51 5.65 5.28

4.78 2.04 2.36

GREENE ROANE DICKSON

85.82 65.76 63.36

13.06 9.57 10.82

0.56 0.43 0.54

5.29 3.97 3.80

2.33 3.47 1.58

JEFFERSON DYER HENRY

59.18 57.21 55.55

9.89 8.79 8.93

0.40 0.42 0.30

3.63 3.55 3.26

4.40 1.36 7.22

County DAVIDSON SHELBY SEVIER

33


Table B: Ranking of Counties by Expenditure Levels, 2015 (Continued)






CAMPBELL LOUDON OBION

54.52 54.25 53.00

9.43 8.50 8.69

0.44 0.40 0.38

3.21 3.33 3.19

2.87 1.39 1.62

ROBERTSON COCKE GIBSON

50.08 46.29 44.60

6.63 8.34 5.11

0.29 0.43 0.20

3.28 2.73 2.88

1.37 2.09 1.35

MCMINN DEKALB LAWRENCE

44.11 42.71 39.76

6.10 8.04 5.47

0.29 0.28 0.22

2.70 2.50 2.43

1.11 5.70 1.10

HARDIN MONROE HAWKINS

39.28 38.53 37.27

6.22 6.55 5.52

0.21 0.28 0.24

2.35 2.27 2.15

3.40 2.65 2.09

CARTER HUMPHREYS MARION

36.46 34.44 34.35

4.92 6.28 5.52

0.19 0.26 0.26

2.24 1.84 2.07

2.32 2.31 1.27

RHEA TIPTON POLK

32.50 32.49 28.04

5.49 4.25 5.92

0.23 0.19 0.22

1.91 2.08 1.52

2.21 1.07 2.49

BEDFORD HENDERSON BENTON

27.76 26.14 24.75

4.82 3.52 3.63

0.21 0.15 0.14

1.64 1.60 1.52

1.10 0.85 2.68

HARDEMAN GILES WARREN

24.57 23.27 23.17

3.38 3.24 3.44

0.14 0.14 0.14

1.47 1.45 1.38

1.43 1.02 0.94

LINCOLN MARSHALL FRANKLIN

22.77 21.98 21.71

3.03 3.75 3.13

0.14 0.15 0.12

1.42 1.35 1.34

0.74 0.59 1.03

County

34








CHEATHAM WHITE WEAKLEY

21.63 20.65 19.56

3.61 2.18 2.63

0.14 0.08 0.11

1.27 1.26 1.18

0.75 0.99 0.67

CARROLL CLAIBORNE LAUDERDALE

18.80 18.20 17.34

2.46 2.90 2.20

0.11 0.13 0.08

1.11 1.07 1.02

0.73 1.39 1.41

GRAINGER HAYWOOD DECATUR

14.85 14.71 12.62

2.22 2.00 1.58

0.07 0.08 0.04

0.85 0.87 0.72

0.29 0.66 2.27

FENTRESS SMITH MCNAIRY

12.43 11.76 11.46

1.90 1.43 1.53

0.08 0.05 0.06

0.73 0.72 0.67

0.85 0.52 0.65

SCOTT CHESTER WAYNE

11.13 11.01 10.58

1.61 1.06 1.68

0.07 0.04 0.06

0.63 0.69 0.63

0.67 0.35 0.68

LAKE JOHNSON VAN BUREN

10.07 9.72 9.13

1.97 1.57 1.91

0.10 0.06 0.06

0.58 0.56 0.52

0.77 0.76 0.97

CROCKETT UNICOI GRUNDY

8.93 8.73 8.67

1.35 1.85 0.99

0.07 0.07 0.02

0.53 0.49 0.52

0.40 0.72 1.56

FAYETTE STEWART HICKMAN

8.64 8.23 8.02

1.04 0.98 1.09

0.04 0.03 0.04

0.51 0.48 0.47

0.48 1.24 0.78

OVERTON MACON MEIGS

7.68 7.50 7.28

1.04 1.10 1.21

0.04 0.05 0.03

0.47 0.44 0.42

0.49 0.40 0.97

County

35








PICKETT CLAY PERRY

7.14 6.74 6.70

1.43 1.38 0.85

0.05 0.05 0.02

0.40 0.38 0.36

1.02 0.60 1.78

SEQUATCHIE UNION LEWIS

6.50 6.44 6.16

0.90 1.04 0.93

0.03 0.03 0.05

0.38 0.37 0.36

0.49 0.97 0.30

HOUSTON MORGAN CANNON

5.90 4.81 4.03

0.86 0.50 0.38

0.04 0.01 0.01

0.34 0.29 0.25

0.65 0.62 0.28

TROUSDALE BLEDSOE JACKSON

3.97 3.33 2.28

0.45 0.46 0.30

0.02 0.02 0.01

0.24 0.19 0.14

0.14 0.54 0.28

MOORE HANCOCK

1.65 1.21

0.22 0.14

0.01 0.01

0.09 0.07

0.08 0.26

$17,822.01

$3,525.27

151.78

$963.06

$524.14

County

STATE TOTALS


36

Table C: Percent Distribution by County, 2015


Expenditures

Payroll

Employment

State Tax Receipts

Local Tax Receipts

ANDERSON BEDFORD BENTON

0.67% 0.16% 0.14%

0.55% 0.14% 0.10%

0.61% 0.14% 0.09%

0.76% 0.17% 0.16%

0.50% 0.21% 0.51%

BLEDSOE BLOUNT BRADLEY

0.02% 1.94% 0.77%

0.01% 2.36% 0.35%

0.01% 2.02% 0.59%

0.02% 1.98% 0.89%

0.10% 2.30% 0.57%


0.31% 0.02% 0.11%

0.27% 0.01% 0.07%

0.29% 0.01% 0.07%

0.33% 0.03% 0.12%

0.55% 0.05% 0.14%


0.20% 0.12% 0.06%

0.14% 0.10% 0.03%

0.12% 0.09% 0.02%

0.23% 0.13% 0.07%

0.44% 0.14% 0.07%


0.10% 0.04% 0.26%

0.08% 0.04% 0.24%

0.08% 0.03% 0.29%

0.11% 0.04% 0.28%

0.26% 0.11% 0.40%

COFFEE CROCKETT CUMBERLAND

0.49% 0.05% 0.63%

0.42% 0.04% 0.65%

0.45% 0.04% 0.63%

0.55% 0.05% 0.68%

0.45% 0.08% 0.91%

31.91% 0.07% 0.24%

37.53% 0.04% 0.23%

39.16% 0.03% 0.18%

29.64% 0.07% 0.26%

28.13% 0.43% 1.09%


0.36% 0.32% 0.05%

0.31% 0.25% 0.03%

0.36% 0.27% 0.03%

0.39% 0.37% 0.05%

0.30% 0.26% 0.09%


0.07% 0.12% 0.25%

0.05% 0.09% 0.15%

0.05% 0.08% 0.13%

0.08% 0.14% 0.30%

0.16% 0.20% 0.26%

County

DAVIDSON DECATUR DEKALB

37


Table C: Percent Distribution by County, 2015 (Continued)

Expenditures

Payroll

Employment

State Tax Receipts

Local Tax Receipts


0.13% 0.08% 0.48%

0.09% 0.06% 0.37%

0.09% 0.05% 0.37%

0.15% 0.09% 0.55%

0.20% 0.06% 0.44%


0.05% 0.51% 5.70%

0.03% 0.22% 4.38%

0.01% 0.31% 4.91%

0.05% 0.59% 6.20%

0.30% 0.39% 4.38%


0.01% 0.14% 0.22%

0.00% 0.10% 0.18%

0.01% 0.09% 0.14%

0.01% 0.15% 0.24%

0.05% 0.27% 0.65%


0.21% 0.08% 0.15%

0.16% 0.06% 0.10%

0.16% 0.05% 0.10%

0.22% 0.09% 0.17%

0.40% 0.13% 0.16%


0.31% 0.04% 0.03%

0.25% 0.03% 0.02%

0.20% 0.03% 0.03%

0.34% 0.05% 0.04%

1.38% 0.15% 0.12%


0.19% 0.01% 0.33%

0.18% 0.01% 0.28%

0.17% 0.01% 0.26%

0.19% 0.01% 0.38%

0.44% 0.05% 0.84%

JOHNSON KNOX LAKE

0.05% 5.70% 0.06%

0.04% 5.06% 0.06%

0.04% 6.06% 0.06%

0.06% 5.53% 0.06%

0.14% 4.67% 0.15%


0.10% 0.22% 0.03%

0.06% 0.16% 0.03%

0.06% 0.14% 0.03%

0.11% 0.25% 0.04%

0.27% 0.21% 0.06%


0.13% 0.30% 0.25%

0.09% 0.24% 0.17%

0.09% 0.26% 0.19%

0.15% 0.35% 0.28%

0.14% 0.27% 0.21%

County

38



Expenditures

Payroll

Employment

State Tax Receipts

Local Tax Receipts


0.06% 0.04% 1.10%

0.04% 0.03% 1.00%

0.04% 0.03% 1.12%

0.07% 0.05% 1.23%

0.12% 0.08% 0.82%


0.19% 0.12% 0.66%

0.16% 0.11% 0.44%

0.17% 0.10% 0.46%

0.22% 0.14% 0.75%

0.24% 0.11% 0.47%


0.04% 0.22% 1.15%

0.03% 0.19% 0.93%

0.02% 0.18% 1.01%

0.04% 0.24% 1.34%

0.18% 0.51% 0.76%

MOORE MORGAN OBION

0.01% 0.03% 0.30%

0.01% 0.01% 0.25%

0.01% 0.01% 0.25%

0.01% 0.03% 0.33%

0.02% 0.12% 0.31%


0.04% 0.04% 0.04%

0.03% 0.02% 0.04%

0.03% 0.01% 0.03%

0.05% 0.04% 0.04%

0.09% 0.34% 0.20%

POLK PUTNAM RHEA

0.16% 0.69% 0.18%

0.17% 0.53% 0.16%

0.14% 0.60% 0.15%

0.16% 0.77% 0.20%

0.48% 0.48% 0.42%


0.37% 0.28% 1.78%

0.27% 0.19% 1.36%

0.28% 0.19% 1.54%

0.41% 0.34% 2.01%

0.66% 0.26% 1.31%


0.06% 0.04% 11.40%

0.05% 0.03% 12.50%

0.05% 0.02% 13.52%

0.07% 0.04% 11.94%

0.13% 0.09% 11.47%


17.94% 0.07% 0.05%

17.69% 0.04% 0.03%

13.17% 0.04% 0.02%

16.45% 0.07% 0.05%

17.36% 0.10% 0.24%

County

39



Expenditures

Payroll

Employment

State Tax Receipts

Local Tax Receipts

SULLIVAN SUMNER TIPTON

2.00% 0.76% 0.18%

2.64% 0.59% 0.12%

2.07% 0.64% 0.12%

2.04% 0.87% 0.22%

1.89% 0.60% 0.20%

TROUSDALE UNICOI UNION

0.02% 0.05% 0.04%

0.01% 0.05% 0.03%

0.02% 0.05% 0.02%

0.03% 0.05% 0.04%

0.03% 0.14% 0.19%

VAN BUREN WARREN WASHINGTON

0.05% 0.13% 1.33%

0.05% 0.10% 0.69%

0.04% 0.09% 1.10%

0.05% 0.14% 1.46%

0.19% 0.18% 1.07%

WAYNE WEAKLEY WHITE

0.06% 0.11% 0.12%

0.05% 0.07% 0.06%

0.04% 0.08% 0.05%

0.07% 0.12% 0.13%

0.13% 0.13% 0.19%

WILLIAMSON WILSON

2.30% 0.81%

1.83% 0.70%

1.98% 0.71%

2.56% 0.90%

1.63% 0.83%

100.00%

100.00%

100.00%

100.00%

100.00%

County

STATE TOTALS


40

Table D: Percent Change, 2015 over 2014

Table D: Percent Change, 2015 Over 2014

Expenditures

Payroll

Employment

State Tax Receipts

Local Tax Receipts

ANDERSON BEDFORD BENTON

2.94% 1.55% 0.79%

5.13% 3.72% 2.93%

1.71% 0.34% -0.41%

8.20% 6.75% 5.28%

5.41% 4.00% 3.21%

BLEDSOE BLOUNT BRADLEY

1.58% 4.60% 3.43%

3.74% 6.83% 5.63%

0.36% 3.35% 2.19%

6.12% 9.95% 8.72%

4.02% 7.12% 5.91%


0.51% 1.94% 2.59%

2.64% 4.10% 4.77%

-0.69% 0.72% 1.36%

5.65% 5.69% 7.29%

2.92% 4.39% 5.05%


4.38% 4.49% 5.84%

6.60% 6.71% 8.09%

3.14% 3.24% 4.58%

9.72% 9.83% 11.25%

6.89% 7.00% 8.39%


5.16% 0.76% 5.31%

7.40% 2.90% 7.55%

3.91% -0.45% 4.05%

10.54% 4.83% 10.70%

7.69% 3.18% 7.84%

COFFEE CROCKETT CUMBERLAND

4.69% 0.93% 5.32%

6.92% 3.08% 7.56%

3.44% -0.27% 4.06%

10.04% 5.92% 10.71%

7.20% 3.36% 7.85%

DAVIDSON DECATUR DEKALB

4.79% 0.99% 3.75%

7.02% 3.14% 5.96%

3.54% -0.21% 2.51%

10.15% 5.81% 9.06%

7.30% 3.42% 6.25%


4.13% 1.60% 1.75%

6.34% 3.76% 3.91%

2.89% 0.39% 0.53%

9.46% 6.80% 6.18%

6.63% 4.04% 4.20%


1.34% 0.31% 0.41%

3.49% 2.44% 2.55%

0.13% -0.89% -0.79%

5.75% 4.68% 5.31%

3.77% 2.72% 2.82%

County

41


Table D: Percent Change, 2015 Over 2014 (Continued)

Expenditures

Payroll

Employment

State Tax Receipts

Local Tax Receipts


0.12% 0.39% 0.18%

2.25% 2.52% 2.32%

-1.08% -0.81% -1.01%

5.24% 4.76% 5.31%

2.53% 2.80% 2.59%


1.48% 4.22% 3.36%

3.64% 6.44% 6.51%

0.27% 2.98% 3.04%

5.91% 9.56% 9.62%

3.92% 6.73% 6.79%


-2.72% 4.46% 2.74%

-0.65% 6.68% 4.93%

-3.13% 3.21% 1.52%

2.25% 8.91% 6.90%

-0.38% 6.97% 5.21%


-0.10% 0.44% 3.68%

2.02% 2.58% 5.89%

-1.30% -0.76% 2.44%

3.80% 4.82% 8.57%

2.30% 2.86% 6.17%


0.07% 1.38% -3.84%

2.20% 3.54% -1.79%

-1.12% 0.17% -3.33%

5.19% 5.71% 0.67%

2.48% 3.82% -1.53%

0.90% 2.64% 4.21%

3.04% 4.82% 6.43%

-0.31% 1.41% 2.97%

3.77% 7.89% 9.54%

3.32% 5.10% 6.72%

0.47% 2.73% -0.80%

2.60% 3.67% 1.31%

-0.73% 1.00% -1.15%

4.46% 6.50% 3.46%

2.88% 4.25% 1.58%

0.80% 1.71% 2.28%

2.94% 3.87% 4.46%

-0.41% 0.49% 1.06%

5.33% 6.91% 6.93%

3.22% 4.15% 4.74%

-0.18% 1.09% 2.38%

1.94% 3.24% 4.55%

-1.38% -0.12% 1.15%

4.66% 6.26% 7.61%

2.21% 3.52% 4.84%

County

HUMPHREYS JACKSON JEFFERSON JOHNSON KNOX LAKE LAUDERDALE LAWRENCE LEWIS LINCOLN LOUDON MCMINN

42



Expenditures

Payroll

Employment

State Tax Receipts

Local Tax Receipts


1.57% 1.23% 2.84%

3.73% 3.39% 5.02%

0.36% 0.03% 1.61%

6.77% 5.43% 8.10%

4.01% 3.67% 5.31%


3.46% 1.89% 4.09%

5.66% 4.06% 6.30%

2.22% 0.67% 2.84%

8.75% 7.10% 9.41%

5.94% 4.34% 6.59%


0.67% 3.17% 1.32%

2.81% 5.36% 3.47%

-0.53% 1.94% 0.67%

4.68% 7.70% 6.50%

3.09% 5.65% 3.75%

MOORE MORGAN OBION

1.52% 0.08% -0.35%

3.68% 2.21% 1.77%

0.31% -1.12% -1.23%

5.47% 4.61% 4.74%

3.96% 2.48% 2.04%


4.37% 1.55% -4.13%

6.59% 3.71% -2.09%

3.13% 0.34% -1.28%

9.71% 5.68% -0.07%

6.88% 3.99% -1.83%

POLK PUTNAM RHEA

3.13% 3.52% 1.24%

5.32% 5.72% 3.40%

1.90% 2.29% 0.04%

7.42% 8.82% 5.11%

5.61% 6.01% 3.68%


0.26% 2.51% 2.92%

2.40% 4.69% 5.11%

-0.93% 1.29% 1.69%

5.39% 7.75% 8.19%

2.67% 4.97% 5.40%


2.79% 0.18% 8.50%

4.97% 2.31% 11.54%

1.56% -1.02% 6.95%

7.61% 4.54% 14.05%

5.26% 2.58% 11.11%


1.20% 1.93% 0.56%

2.83% 4.09% 2.70%

0.59% 0.71% -0.64%

5.61% 6.69% 5.22%

3.64% 4.38% 2.98%

County

43



Expenditures

Payroll

Employment

State Tax Receipts

Local Tax Receipts

4.56% 3.30% -4.58%

6.78% 5.49% -2.55%

3.31% 2.06% -1.71%

9.91% 8.58% 1.17%

7.07% 5.78% -2.28%

TROUSDALE UNICOI UNION

0.15% 2.60% 2.16%

2.28% 4.78% 4.33%

-1.05% 1.37% 0.94%

4.56% 7.15% 6.38%

2.55% 5.06% 4.61%

VAN BUREN WARREN WASHINGTON

2.84% 0.27% 0.59%

5.02% 2.41% 1.92%

1.61% -0.92% 0.17%

6.74% 5.40% 5.23%

5.31% 2.68% 3.01%

0.06% 2.74% -0.19%

2.19% 4.93% 1.93%

-1.13% 1.51% -1.38%

4.60% 7.52% 4.92%

2.47% 5.21% 2.21%

WILLIAMSON WILSON

0.79% 3.77%

2.94% 5.97%

0.36% 2.53%

5.95% 9.07%

3.22% 6.26%

STATE TOTALS

3.71%

6.10%

2.95%

8.81%

6.04%

County SULLIVAN SUMNER TIPTON

WAYNE WEAKLEY WHITE


44

Table E: Alphabetical by County, 2014







$115.77 27.33 24.56

$18.30 4.64 3.53

0.91 0.20 0.14

$6.72 1.54 1.45

$2.47 1.06 2.60

3.28 330.72 132.68

0.44 77.74 11.81

0.02 2.97 0.88

0.18 17.35 7.86

0.52 11.27 2.80


54.24 3.96 18.32

9.19 0.36 2.35

0.44 0.01 0.11

3.04 0.23 1.04

2.79 0.27 0.69


34.93 20.70 10.40

4.61 3.38 0.98

0.18 0.13 0.03

2.04 1.15 0.62

2.17 0.70 0.32


17.31 6.69 43.96

2.70 1.34 7.75

0.12 0.05 0.42

0.97 0.36 2.47

1.29 0.58 1.94

84.22 8.84 106.62

13.80 1.31 21.38

0.67 0.07 0.92

4.80 0.50 5.88

2.20 0.39 4.43

5,426.62 12.50 41.16

1,236.28 1.53 7.58

57.41 0.04 0.27

259.17 0.68 2.29

137.41 2.20 5.37


60.85 56.30 8.49

10.17 8.48 1.01

0.53 0.41 0.04

3.47 3.32 0.48

1.48 1.31 0.46


12.26 21.64 44.42

1.84 3.05 4.99

0.08 0.13 0.21

0.69 1.28 2.73

0.82 1.01 1.31

County ANDERSON BEDFORD BENTON BLEDSOE BLOUNT BRADLEY

COFFEE CROCKETT CUMBERLAND DAVIDSON DECATUR DEKALB

45


Table E: Alphabetical by County, 2014 (Continued)







23.25 14.79 85.66

3.17 2.16 12.76

0.14 0.07 0.56

1.38 0.81 5.02

1.00 0.28 2.27


8.54 87.19 983.08

0.96 7.16 144.94

0.02 0.45 7.23

0.49 5.16 54.51

1.50 1.91 21.48


1.25 23.52 38.23

0.14 3.17 5.93

0.01 0.14 0.21

0.07 1.35 2.19

0.26 1.33 3.23


37.31 14.65 25.21

5.41 1.95 3.32

0.24 0.08 0.15

2.07 0.83 1.47

2.04 0.64 0.80


55.51 7.91 6.14

8.74 1.06 0.88

0.31 0.04 0.04

3.10 0.45 0.34

7.04 0.76 0.66


34.13 2.22 56.79

6.09 0.28 9.29

0.26 0.01 0.39

1.78 0.13 3.32

2.23 0.27 4.12

9.67 988.05 10.15

1.53 172.21 1.95

0.06 9.11 0.10

0.54 49.97 0.56

0.74 23.50 0.75


17.21 39.09 6.02

2.14 5.26 0.89

0.08 0.22 0.05

0.97 2.27 0.34

1.36 1.06 0.29


22.81 53.67 43.09

2.98 8.23 5.84

0.14 0.40 0.29

1.36 3.13 2.51

0.72 1.35 1.06

County

JOHNSON KNOX LAKE

46









11.28 7.41 190.95

1.48 1.06 33.57

0.06 0.05 1.68

0.63 0.42 10.93

0.63 0.39 4.07


33.20 21.57 112.52

5.23 3.60 14.68

0.25 0.15 0.68

1.91 1.26 6.60

1.20 0.57 2.33


7.23 37.35 202.43

1.18 6.21 31.73

0.03 0.27 1.52

0.40 2.11 12.09

0.94 2.51 3.84

MOORE MORGAN OBION

1.62 4.81 53.19

0.22 0.49 8.54

0.01 0.01 0.38

0.09 0.27 3.04

0.08 0.61 1.59


7.36 6.60 7.45

0.98 0.82 1.46

0.04 0.02 0.05

0.43 0.34 0.40

0.46 1.72 1.04

POLK PUTNAM RHEA

27.19 117.99 32.10

5.62 17.67 5.31

0.21 0.88 0.23

1.42 6.83 1.82

2.36 2.39 2.13


65.59 48.86 307.47

9.34 6.34 45.76

0.43 0.28 2.29

3.77 3.04 17.93

3.38 1.30 6.53


10.83 6.49 1,872.22

1.54 0.88 395.12

0.07 0.03 19.19

0.58 0.36 100.86

0.64 0.47 54.11


3,158.90 11.54 8.18

606.28 1.37 0.96

19.87 0.05 0.03

149.97 0.67 0.45

87.79 0.50 1.21

County

47



County SULLIVAN SUMNER TIPTON TROUSDALE UNICOI UNION VAN BUREN WARREN WASHINGTON WAYNE WEAKLEY WHITE WILLIAMSON WILSON STATE TOTALS






340.98 130.96 34.04

87.13 19.86 4.36

3.04 0.95 0.19

17.91 7.75 2.06

9.27 2.98 1.09

3.97 8.51 6.31

0.44 1.76 0.99

0.02 0.07 0.03

0.23 0.45 0.35

0.13 0.69 0.93

8.88 23.11 235.50

1.82 3.36 24.00

0.06 0.14 1.67

0.49 1.31 13.40

0.92 0.92 5.44

10.57 19.04 20.69

1.64 2.51 2.14

0.06 0.11 0.08

0.60 1.10 1.20

0.67 0.64 0.97

407.46 139.03

62.83 23.17

2.99 1.05

23.28 7.94

8.29 4.09

$17,185.27

$3,322.43

147.44

$885.11

$494.29


48

Table F: Alphabetical by Region, 2015


Region/County





$36.46 85.82 1.21 37.27 9.72 356.52 8.73 236.90

$4.92 13.06 0.14 5.52 1.57 93.04 1.85 24.46

0.19 0.56 0.01 0.24 0.06 3.14 0.07 1.67

$2.24 5.29 0.07 2.15 0.56 19.69 0.49 14.10

$2.32 2.33 0.26 2.09 0.76 9.92 0.72 5.60

$772.63

$144.55

5.92

$44.58

$24.00

$119.17 345.93 54.52 18.20 46.29 14.85 90.87 59.18 1,014.98 54.25 38.53 4.81 65.76 11.13 2,031.32 6.44

$19.24 83.04 9.43 2.90 8.34 2.22 7.62 9.89 178.53 8.50 6.55 0.50 9.57 1.61 440.70 1.04

0.92 3.07 0.44 0.13 0.43 0.07 0.47 0.40 9.20 0.40 0.28 0.01 0.43 0.07 20.52 0.03

$7.27 19.07 3.21 1.07 2.73 0.85 5.65 3.63 53.21 3.33 2.27 0.29 3.97 0.63 115.03 0.37

$2.60 12.07 2.87 1.39 2.09 0.29 2.04 4.40 24.50 1.39 2.65 0.62 3.47 0.67 60.12 0.97

$3,976.25

$789.67

36.87

$222.59

$122.14


NORTHEAST TENNESSEE REGION CARTER GREENE HANCOCK HAWKINS JOHNSON SULLIVAN UNICOI WASHINGTON Total EAST TENNESSEE REGION ANDERSON BLOUNT CAMPBELL CLAIBORNE COCKE GRAINGER HAMBLEN JEFFERSON KNOX LOUDON MONROE MORGAN ROANE SCOTT SEVIER UNION Total

49


Table F: Alphabetical by Region, 2015 (Continued)

Region/County






$4.03 6.74 112.29 42.71 12.43 2.28 7.50 7.68 7.14 122.15 11.76 9.13 23.17 20.65

$0.38 1.38 22.99 8.04 1.90 0.30 1.10 1.04 1.43 18.68 1.43 1.91 3.44 2.18

0.01 0.05 0.95 0.28 0.08 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.91 0.05 0.06 0.14 0.08

$0.25 0.38 6.51 2.50 0.73 0.14 0.44 0.47 0.40 7.43 0.72 0.52 1.38 1.26

$0.28 0.60 4.78 5.70 0.85 0.28 0.40 0.49 1.02 2.53 0.52 0.97 0.94 0.99

$389.67

$66.18

2.76

$23.13

$20.38

$3.33 137.23 8.67 1,016.11 44.11 34.35 7.28 28.04 32.50 6.50

$0.46 12.47 0.99 154.37 6.10 5.52 1.21 5.92 5.49 0.90

0.02 0.90 0.02 7.45 0.29 0.26 0.03 0.22 0.23 0.03

$0.19 8.55 0.52 59.76 2.70 2.07 0.42 1.52 1.91 0.38

$0.54 2.96 1.56 22.94 1.11 1.27 0.97 2.49 2.21 0.49

$1,318.10

$193.45

9.45

$78.02

$36.53

UPPER CUMBERLAND REGION CANNON CLAY CUMBERLAND DEKALB FENTRESS JACKSON MACON OVERTON PICKETT PUTNAM SMITH VAN BUREN WARREN WHITE Total SOUTHEAST TENNESSEE REGION BLEDSOE BRADLEY GRUNDY HAMILTON MCMINN MARION MEIGS POLK RHEA SEQUATCHIE Total

50



Region/County






$21.63 5,686.34 63.36 5.90 34.44 205.10 50.08 316.45 8.23 135.28 3.97 410.69 144.27

$3.61 1,323.01 10.82 0.86 6.28 32.84 6.63 48.10 0.98 20.95 0.45 64.68 24.56

0.14 59.44 0.54 0.04 0.26 1.53 0.29 2.33 0.03 0.97 0.02 3.00 1.08

$1.27 285.47 3.80 0.34 1.84 12.88 3.28 19.40 0.48 8.41 0.24 24.67 8.66

$0.75 147.45 1.58 0.65 2.31 3.98 1.37 6.89 1.24 3.15 0.14 8.56 4.34

$7,085.75

$1,543.76

69.68

$370.73

$182.38

$27.76 88.17 21.71 23.27 8.02 39.76 6.16 22.77 21.98 117.12 1.65 6.70 10.58

$4.82 14.76 3.13 3.24 1.09 5.47 0.93 3.03 3.75 15.61 0.22 0.85 1.68

0.21 0.69 0.12 0.14 0.04 0.22 0.05 0.14 0.15 0.70 0.01 0.02 0.06

$1.64 5.28 1.34 1.45 0.47 2.43 0.36 1.42 1.35 7.22 0.09 0.36 0.63

$1.10 2.36 1.03 1.02 0.78 1.10 0.30 0.74 0.59 2.48 0.08 1.78 0.68

$395.63

$58.58

2.54

$24.04

$14.06

MID-CUMBERLAND REGION CHEATHAM DAVIDSON DICKSON HOUSTON HUMPHREYS MONTGOMERY ROBERTSON RUTHERFORD STEWART SUMNER TROUSDALE WILLIAMSON WILSON Total

SOUTH CENTRAL TENNESSEE REGION BEDFORD COFFEE FRANKLIN GILES HICKMAN LAWRENCE LEWIS LINCOLN MARSHALL MAURY MOORE PERRY WAYNE Total

51



Region/County





$24.75 18.80 8.93 57.21 44.60 55.55 10.07 53.00 19.56

$3.63 2.46 1.35 8.79 5.11 8.93 1.97 8.69 2.63

0.14 0.11 0.07 0.42 0.20 0.30 0.10 0.38 0.11

$1.52 1.11 0.53 3.55 2.88 3.26 0.58 3.19 1.18

$2.68 0.73 0.40 1.36 1.35 7.22 0.77 1.62 0.67

$292.47

$43.58

1.83

$17.79

$16.80

$11.01 12.62 24.57 39.28 14.71 26.14 11.46 196.37

$1.06 1.58 3.38 6.22 2.00 3.52 1.53 35.26

0.04 0.04 0.14 0.21 0.08 0.15 0.06 1.70

$0.69 0.72 1.47 2.35 0.87 1.60 0.67 11.81

$0.35 2.27 1.43 3.40 0.66 0.85 0.65 4.29

$336.15

$54.56

2.43

$20.18

$13.91

$8.64 17.34 3196.89 32.49

$1.04 2.20 623.45 4.25

0.04 0.08 19.99 0.19

$0.51 1.02 158.39 2.08

$0.48 1.41 90.98 1.07

$3,255.36

$630.95

20.30

$162.00

$93.94

$17,822.01

$3,525.27

151.78

$963.06

$524.14


NORTHWEST TENNESSEE REGION BENTON CARROLL CROCKETT DYER GIBSON HENRY LAKE OBION WEAKLEY Total SOUTHWEST TENNESSEE REGION CHESTER DECATUR HARDEMAN HARDIN HAYWOOD HENDERSON MCNAIRY MADISON Total MEMPHIS DELTA REGION FAYETTE LAUDERDALE SHELBY TIPTON Total

STATE TOTALS


52

Table G: Change in Travel Spending from 2014 by Region


Region/County

2015 Travel Expenditures ($ Millions)


2015/2004 Change (Percent)

$36.46 85.82 1.21 37.27 9.72 356.52 8.73 236.90

$34.93 85.66 1.25 37.31 9.67 340.98 8.51 235.50

4.4% 0.2% -2.7% -0.1% 0.5% 4.6% 2.6% 0.6%

$772.63

$753.80

2.5%

$119.17 345.93 54.52 18.20 46.29 14.85 90.87 59.18 1,014.98 54.25 38.53 4.81 65.76 11.13 2,031.32 6.44

$115.77 330.72 54.24 17.31 43.96 14.79 87.19 56.79 988.05 53.67 37.35 4.81 65.59 10.83 1,872.22 6.31

2.9% 4.6% 0.5% 5.2% 5.3% 0.4% 4.2% 4.2% 2.7% 1.1% 3.2% 0.1% 0.3% 2.8% 8.5% 2.2%

$3,976.25

$3,759.58

5.8%


53


Table G: Change in Travel Spending from 2014 by Region (Continued)

Region/County




$4.03 6.74 112.29 42.71 12.43 2.28 7.50 7.68 7.14 122.15 11.76 9.13 23.17 20.65

$3.96 6.69 106.62 41.16 12.26 2.22 7.41 7.36 7.45 117.99 11.54 8.88 23.11 20.69

1.9% 0.8% 5.3% 3.8% 1.3% 2.6% 1.2% 4.4% -4.1% 3.5% 1.9% 2.8% 0.3% -0.2%

$389.67

$377.34

3.3%

$3.33 137.23 8.67 1,016.11 44.11 34.35 7.28 28.04 32.50 6.50

$3.28 132.68 8.54 983.08 43.09 33.20 7.23 27.19 32.10 6.49

1.6% 3.4% 1.5% 3.4% 2.4% 3.5% 0.7% 3.1% 1.2% 0.2%

$1,318.10

$1,276.87

3.2%


54



Region/County




$21.63 5,686.34 63.36 5.90 34.44 205.10 50.08 316.45 8.23 135.28 3.97 410.69 144.27

$20.70 5,426.62 60.85 6.14 34.13 202.43 48.86 307.47 8.18 130.96 3.97 407.46 139.03

4.5% 4.8% 4.1% -3.8% 0.9% 1.3% 2.5% 2.9% 0.6% 3.3% 0.1% 0.8% 3.8%

$7,085.75

$6,796.80

4.3%

$27.76 88.17 21.71 23.27 8.02 39.76 6.16 22.77 21.98 117.12 1.65 6.70 10.58

$27.33 84.22 21.64 23.25 7.91 39.09 6.02 22.81 21.57 112.52 1.62 6.60 10.57

1.6% 4.7% 0.3% 0.1% 1.4% 1.7% 2.3% -0.2% 1.9% 4.1% 1.5% 1.5% 0.1%

$395.63

$385.15

2.7%

MID-CUMBERLAND REGION CHEATHAM DAVIDSON DICKSON HOUSTON HUMPHREYS MONTGOMERY ROBERTSON RUTHERFORD STEWART SUMNER TROUSDALE WILLIAMSON WILSON Total SOUTH CENTRAL TENNESSEE REGION BEDFORD COFFEE FRANKLIN GILES HICKMAN LAWRENCE LEWIS LINCOLN MARSHALL MAURY MOORE PERRY WAYNE Total

55



Region/County




$24.75 18.80 8.93 57.21 44.60 55.55 10.07 53.00 19.56

$24.56 18.32 8.84 56.30 44.42 55.51 10.15 53.19 19.04

0.8% 2.6% 0.9% 1.6% 0.4% 0.1% -0.8% -0.4% 2.7%

$292.47

$290.34

0.7%

$11.01 12.62 24.57 39.28 14.71 26.14 11.46 196.37

$10.40 12.50 23.52 38.23 14.65 25.21 11.28 190.95

5.8% 1.0% 4.5% 2.7% 0.4% 3.7% 1.6% 2.8%

$336.15

$326.74

2.9%

$8.64 17.34 3,196.89 32.49

$8.49 17.21 3,158.90 34.04

1.7% 0.8% 1.2% -4.6%

$3,255.36

$3,218.64

1.1%

$17,822.01

$17,185.27

3.7%


STATE TOTALS


56

Table H: Percent Change Over 2014 by Region






4.4% 0.2% -2.7% -0.1% 0.5% 4.6% 2.6% 0.6%

6.6% 2.3% -0.7% 2.0% 2.6% 6.8% 4.8% 1.9%

3.1% -1.0% -3.1% -1.3% -0.7% 3.3% 1.4% 0.2%

9.7% 5.3% 2.3% 3.8% 4.5% 9.9% 7.2% 5.2%

6.9% 2.6% -0.4% 2.3% 2.9% 7.1% 5.1% 3.0%

2.5%

5.2%

1.7%

7.4%

4.9%

ANDERSON BLOUNT CAMPBELL CLAIBORNE COCKE GRAINGER HAMBLEN JEFFERSON KNOX LOUDON MONROE MORGAN ROANE SCOTT SEVIER UNION

2.9% 4.6% 0.5% 5.2% 5.3% 0.4% 4.2% 4.2% 2.7% 1.1% 3.2% 0.1% 0.3% 2.8% 8.5% 2.2%

5.1% 6.8% 2.6% 7.4% 7.5% 2.5% 6.4% 6.4% 3.7% 3.2% 5.4% 2.2% 2.4% 5.0% 11.5% 4.3%

1.7% 3.4% -0.7% 3.9% 4.1% -0.8% 3.0% 3.0% 1.0% -0.1% 1.9% -1.1% -0.9% 1.6% 7.0% 0.9%

8.2% 10.0% 5.6% 10.5% 10.7% 4.8% 9.6% 9.5% 6.5% 6.3% 7.7% 4.6% 5.4% 7.6% 14.0% 6.4%

5.4% 7.1% 2.9% 7.7% 7.8% 2.8% 6.7% 6.7% 4.3% 3.5% 5.6% 2.5% 2.7% 5.3% 11.1% 4.6%

Total

5.8%

8.4%

4.5%

10.8%

8.0%

Region/County


NORTHEAST TENNESSEE REGION CARTER GREENE HANCOCK HAWKINS JOHNSON SULLIVAN UNICOI WASHINGTON Total EAST TENNESSEE REGION

57


Table H: Percent Change Over 2014 by Region (Continued)






1.9% 0.8% 5.3% 3.8% 1.3% 2.6% 1.2% 4.4% -4.1% 3.5% 1.9% 2.8% 0.3% -0.2%

4.1% 2.9% 7.6% 6.0% 3.5% 4.8% 3.4% 6.6% -2.1% 5.7% 4.1% 5.0% 2.4% 1.9%

0.7% -0.4% 4.1% 2.5% 0.1% 1.4% 0.0% 3.1% -1.3% 2.3% 0.7% 1.6% -0.9% -1.4%

5.7% 4.8% 10.7% 9.1% 5.8% 7.9% 5.4% 9.7% -0.1% 8.8% 6.7% 6.7% 5.4% 4.9%

4.4% 3.2% 7.9% 6.2% 3.8% 5.1% 3.7% 6.9% -1.8% 6.0% 4.4% 5.3% 2.7% 2.2%

3.3%

5.7%

2.4%

8.4%

5.4%

BLEDSOE BRADLEY GRUNDY HAMILTON MCMINN MARION MEIGS POLK RHEA SEQUATCHIE

1.6% 3.4% 1.5% 3.4% 2.4% 3.5% 0.7% 3.1% 1.2% 0.2%

3.7% 5.6% 3.6% 6.5% 4.6% 5.7% 2.8% 5.3% 3.4% 2.3%

0.4% 2.2% 0.3% 3.0% 1.2% 2.2% -0.5% 1.9% 0.0% -1.0%

6.1% 8.7% 5.9% 9.6% 7.6% 8.7% 4.7% 7.4% 5.1% 4.5%

4.0% 5.9% 3.9% 6.8% 4.8% 5.9% 3.1% 5.6% 3.7% 2.6%

Total

3.2%

6.2%

2.7%

9.2%

6.0%

Region/County UPPER CUMBERLAND REGION CANNON CLAY CUMBERLAND DEKALB FENTRESS JACKSON MACON OVERTON PICKETT PUTNAM SMITH VAN BUREN WARREN WHITE Total

SOUTHEAST TENNESSEE REGION

58



Region/County






4.5% 4.8% 4.1% -3.8% 0.9% 1.3% 2.5% 2.9% 0.6% 3.3% 0.1% 0.8% 3.8%

6.7% 7.0% 6.3% -1.8% 3.0% 3.5% 4.7% 5.1% 2.7% 5.5% 2.3% 2.9% 6.0%

3.2% 3.5% 2.9% -3.3% -0.3% 0.7% 1.3% 1.7% -0.6% 2.1% -1.0% 0.4% 2.5%

9.8% 10.1% 9.5% 0.7% 3.8% 6.5% 7.8% 8.2% 5.2% 8.6% 4.6% 5.9% 9.1%

7.0% 7.3% 6.6% -1.5% 3.3% 3.8% 5.0% 5.4% 3.0% 5.8% 2.6% 3.2% 6.3%

4.3%

6.6%

3.2%

9.5%

6.8%

1.6% 4.7% 0.3% 0.1% 1.4% 1.7% 2.3% -0.2% 1.9% 4.1% 1.5% 1.5% 0.1%

3.7% 6.9% 2.4% 2.2% 3.5% 3.9% 4.5% 1.9% 4.1% 6.3% 3.7% 3.7% 2.2%

0.3% 3.4% -0.9% -1.1% 0.2% 0.5% 1.1% -1.4% 0.7% 2.8% 0.3% 0.3% -1.1%

6.7% 10.0% 4.7% 5.2% 5.7% 6.9% 6.9% 4.7% 7.1% 9.4% 5.5% 5.7% 4.6%

4.0% 7.2% 2.7% 2.5% 3.8% 4.2% 4.7% 2.2% 4.3% 6.6% 4.0% 4.0% 2.5%

2.7%

4.9%

1.6%

7.8%

4.6%



59







0.8% 2.6% 0.9% 1.6% 0.4% 0.1% -0.8% -0.4% 2.7%

2.9% 4.8% 3.1% 3.8% 2.5% 2.2% 1.3% 1.8% 4.9%

-0.4% 1.4% -0.3% 0.4% -0.8% -1.1% -1.2% -1.2% 1.5%

5.3% 7.3% 5.9% 6.8% 5.3% 5.2% 3.5% 4.7% 7.5%

3.2% 5.1% 3.4% 4.0% 2.8% 2.5% 1.6% 2.0% 5.2%

0.7%

2.8%

-0.4%

5.7%

2.9%

CHESTER DECATUR HARDEMAN HARDIN HAYWOOD HENDERSON MCNAIRY MADISON

5.8% 1.0% 4.5% 2.7% 0.4% 3.7% 1.6% 2.8%

8.1% 3.1% 6.7% 4.9% 2.6% 5.9% 3.7% 5.0%

4.6% -0.2% 3.2% 1.5% -0.8% 2.4% 0.4% 1.6%

11.3% 5.8% 8.9% 6.9% 4.8% 8.6% 6.8% 8.1%

8.4% 3.4% 7.0% 5.2% 2.9% 6.2% 4.0% 5.3%

Total

2.9%

5.0%

1.6%

7.9%

5.1%

1.7% 0.8% 1.2% -4.6%

3.9% 2.9% 2.8% -2.5%

0.5% -0.4% 0.6% -1.7%

6.2% 5.3% 5.6% 1.2%

4.2% 3.2% 3.6% -2.3%

1.1%

2.8%

0.6%

5.6%

3.6%

3.7%

6.1%

2.9%

8.8%

6.0%

Region/County


NORTHWEST TENNESSEE REGION BENTON CARROLL CROCKETT DYER GIBSON HENRY LAKE OBION WEAKLEY Total SOUTHWEST TENNESSEE REGION

MEMPHIS DELTA REGION FAYETTE LAUDERDALE SHELBY TIPTON Total

STATE TOTALS


60

Table I: Alphabetical by Region, 2014


Region/County





$34.93 85.66 1.25 37.31 9.67 340.98 8.51 235.50

$4.61 12.76 0.14 5.41 1.53 87.13 1.76 24.00

0.18 0.56 0.01 0.24 0.06 3.04 0.07 1.67

$2.04 5.02 0.07 2.07 0.54 17.91 0.45 13.40

$2.17 2.27 0.26 2.04 0.74 9.27 0.69 5.44

$753.80

$137.35

5.82

$41.50

$22.87

$115.77 330.72 54.24 17.31 43.96 14.79 87.19 56.79 988.05 53.67 37.35 4.81 65.59 10.83 1,872.22 6.31

$18.30 77.74 9.19 2.70 7.75 2.16 7.16 9.29 172.21 8.23 6.21 0.49 9.34 1.54 395.12 0.99

0.91 2.97 0.44 0.12 0.42 0.07 0.45 0.39 9.11 0.40 0.27 0.01 0.43 0.07 19.19 0.03

$6.72 17.35 3.04 0.97 2.47 0.81 5.16 3.32 49.97 3.13 2.11 0.27 3.77 0.58 100.86 0.35

$2.47 11.27 2.79 1.29 1.94 0.28 1.91 4.12 23.50 1.35 2.51 0.61 3.38 0.64 54.11 0.93

$3,759.58

$728.43

35.28

$200.87

$113.08



61


Table I: Alphabetical by Region, 2014 (Continued)

Region/County






$3.96 6.69 106.62 41.16 12.26 2.22 7.41 7.36 7.45 117.99 11.54 8.88 23.11 20.69

$0.36 1.34 21.38 7.58 1.84 0.28 1.06 0.98 1.46 17.67 1.37 1.82 3.36 2.14

0.01 0.05 0.92 0.27 0.08 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.88 0.05 0.06 0.14 0.08

$0.23 0.36 5.88 2.29 0.69 0.13 0.42 0.43 0.40 6.83 0.67 0.49 1.31 1.20

$0.27 0.58 4.43 5.37 0.82 0.27 0.39 0.46 1.04 2.39 0.50 0.92 0.92 0.97

$377.34

$62.63

2.69

$21.33

$19.33

$3.28 132.68 8.54 983.08 43.09 33.20 7.23 27.19 32.10 6.49

$0.44 11.81 0.96 144.94 5.84 5.23 1.18 5.62 5.31 0.88

0.02 0.88 0.02 7.23 0.29 0.25 0.03 0.21 0.23 0.03

$0.18 7.86 0.49 54.51 2.51 1.91 0.40 1.42 1.82 0.36

$0.52 2.80 1.50 21.48 1.06 1.20 0.94 2.36 2.13 0.47

$1,276.87

$182.21

9.20

$71.46

$34.45


62



Region/County






$20.70 5426.62 60.85 6.14 34.13 202.43 48.86 307.47 8.18 130.96 3.97 407.46 139.03

$3.38 1236.28 10.17 0.88 6.09 31.73 6.34 45.76 0.96 19.86 0.44 62.83 23.17

0.13 57.41 0.53 0.04 0.26 1.52 0.28 2.29 0.03 0.95 0.02 2.99 1.05

$1.15 259.17 3.47 0.34 1.78 12.09 3.04 17.93 0.45 7.75 0.23 23.28 7.94

$0.70 137.41 1.48 0.66 2.23 3.84 1.30 6.53 1.21 2.98 0.13 8.29 4.09

$6,796.80

$1,447.89

67.52

$338.63

$170.84

$27.33 84.22 21.64 23.25 7.91 39.09 6.02 22.81 21.57 112.52 1.62 6.60 10.57

$4.64 13.80 3.05 3.17 1.06 5.26 0.89 2.98 3.60 14.68 0.22 0.82 1.64

0.20 0.67 0.13 0.14 0.04 0.22 0.05 0.14 0.15 0.68 0.01 0.02 0.06

$1.54 4.80 1.28 1.38 0.45 2.27 0.34 1.36 1.26 6.60 0.09 0.34 0.60

$1.06 2.20 1.01 1.00 0.76 1.06 0.29 0.72 0.57 2.33 0.08 1.72 0.67

$385.15

$55.82

2.50

$22.29

$13.44



63



Region/County





$24.56 18.32 8.84 56.30 44.42 55.51 10.15 53.19 19.04

$3.53 2.35 1.31 8.48 4.99 8.74 1.95 8.54 2.51

0.14 0.11 0.07 0.41 0.21 0.31 0.10 0.38 0.11

$1.45 1.04 0.50 3.32 2.73 3.10 0.56 3.04 1.10

$2.60 0.69 0.39 1.31 1.31 7.04 0.75 1.59 0.64

$290.34

$42.39

1.83

$16.83

$16.33

$10.40 12.50 23.52 38.23 14.65 25.21 11.28 190.95

$0.98 1.53 3.17 5.93 1.95 3.32 1.48 33.57

0.03 0.04 0.14 0.21 0.08 0.15 0.06 1.68

$0.62 0.68 1.35 2.19 0.83 1.47 0.63 10.93

$0.32 2.20 1.33 3.23 0.64 0.80 0.63 4.07

$326.74

$51.94

2.39

$18.71

$13.23

$8.49 17.21 3,158.90 34.04

$1.01 2.14 606.28 4.36

0.04 0.08 19.87 0.19

$0.48 0.97 149.97 2.06

$0.46 1.36 87.79 1.09

$3,218.64

$613.79

20.19

$153.48

$90.71

$17,185.27

$3,322.43

147.44

$885.11

$494.29



STATE TOTALS


64

Table J: Region Total, 2015

2015 Impact of U.S. Resident Travel on Tennessee Table J: Region Total, 2015





NORTHEAST TENNESSEE REGION

$772.63

$144.55

5.92

$44.58

$24.00

EAST TENNESSEE REGION

3,976.25

789.67

36.87

222.59

122.14

389.67

66.18

2.76

23.13

20.38


1,318.10

193.45

9.45

78.02

36.53

MID-CUMBERLAND REGION

7,085.75

1,543.76

69.68

370.73

182.38

SOUTH CENTRAL TENNESSEE REGION

395.63

58.58

2.54

24.04

14.06

NORTHWEST TENNESSEE REGION

292.47

43.58

1.83

17.79

16.80

SOUTHWEST TENNESSEE REGION

336.15

54.56

2.43

20.18

13.91

3,255.36

630.95

20.30

162.00

93.94

$17,822.01

$3,525.27

151.78

$963.06

$524.14

Region

UPPER CUMBERLAND REGION

MEMPHIS DELTA REGION STATE TOTALS



65

Table K: Region Total, 20140

2014 Impact of Travel on Tennessee Table K: Region Total, 2014 Region NORTHEAST TENNESSEE REGION EAST TENNESSEE REGION UPPER CUMBERLAND REGION SOUTHEAST TENNESSEE REGION MID-CUMBERLAND REGION SOUTH CENTRAL TENNESSEE REGION NORTHWEST TENNESSEE REGION SOUTHWEST TENNESSEE REGION MEMPHIS DELTA REGION STATE TOTALS

Expenditures

Payroll

Employment

State Tax Receipts

Local Tax Receipts

$753.80

$137.35

5.82

$41.50

$22.87

3,759.58

728.43

35.28

200.87

113.08

377.34

62.63

2.69

21.33

19.33

1,276.87

182.21

9.20

71.46

34.45

6,796.80

1,447.89

67.52

338.63

170.84

385.15

55.82

2.50

22.29

13.44

290.34

42.39

1.83

16.83

16.33

326.74 3,218.64 $17,185.27

51.94 613.79 $3,322.43

2.39 20.19 147.44

18.71 153.48 $885.11

13.23 90.71 $494.29


66

Table L: Percent Change Over 2014 by Region Total

2015 Impact of U.S. Resident Travel on Tennessee Table L: Percent Change Over 2014 by Region

Region

Expenditures

Payroll Employment

State Tax Receipts

Local Tax Receipts

NORTHEAST TENNESSEE REGION

2.5%

5.2%

1.7%

7.4%

4.9%

EAST TENNESSEE REGION

5.8%

8.4%

4.5%

10.8%

8.0%

UPPER CUMBERLAND REGION

3.3%

5.7%

2.4%

8.4%

5.4%


3.2%

6.2%

2.7%

9.2%

6.0%

MID-CUMBERLAND REGION

4.3%

6.6%

3.2%

9.5%

6.8%

SOUTH CENTRAL TENNESSEE REGION

2.7%

4.9%

1.6%

7.8%

4.6%

NORTHWEST TENNESSEE REGION

0.7%

2.8%

-0.4%

5.7%

2.9%

SOUTHWEST TENNESSEE REGION

2.9%

5.0%

1.6%

7.9%

5.1%

MEMPHIS DELTA REGION

1.1%

2.8%

0.6%

5.6%

3.6%

STATE TOTALS

3.7%

6.1%

2.9%

8.8%

6.0%


67

APPENDICES

68

Appendix A: Travel Economic Impact Model

Appendix A: Travel Economic Impact Model Introduction The Travel Economic Impact Model (TEIM) was developed by the research department at U.S. Travel Association (formerly known as Travel Industry Association) to provide annual estimates of the impact of the travel activity of U.S. residents on national, state and county economies in this country. It is a disaggregated model comprised of 16 travel categories. The TEIM estimates travel expenditures and the resulting business receipts, employment, personal income, and tax receipts generated by these expenditures. The TEIM has the capability of estimating the economic impact of various types of travel, such as business and vacation, by transport mode and type of accommodations used, and other trip and traveler characteristics. The County Impact Component of the TEIM allows estimates of the economic impact of travel at the county and city level.

Definition of Terms There is no commonly accepted definition of travel in use at this time. For the purposes of the estimates herein, travel is defined as activities associated with all overnight trips away from home in paid accommodations and day or overnight trips to places 50 miles or more, one way, from the traveler's origin. The word tourism is avoided in this report because of its vague meaning. Some define tourism as all travel away from home while others use the dictionary definition that limits tourism to personal or pleasure travel. The travel industry, as used herein, refers to the collection of 16 types of businesses that provide goods and services to the traveler or potential traveler at the retail level (see Glossary of Terms). With the exception of Amtrak and second home ownership and rental, these business types are defined by the Office of Management and Budget in the 1997 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) and well as in its predecessor, the 1987 Standard Industrial Classification System (SIC). In each case, the relevant NAICS and SIC codes are included. A travel expenditure is assumed to take place whenever a traveler exchanges money for an activity considered part of his/her trip. Total travel expenditures are separated into 16 categories representing traveler purchases of goods and services at the retail level. One category, travel agents, receives no travel expenditures as these purchases are allocated to the category (i.e. air transportation) actually providing the final good or service to the traveler. Travel expenditures are allocated among states by simulating where the exchange of money for goods or service actually took place. By their nature, some travel expenditures are assumed to occur at the traveler's origin, some at his/her destination, and some enroute.

69


Economic impact is represented by measures of spending, employment, payroll, business receipts and tax revenues generated by traveler spending. Payroll includes all forms of compensation, such as salaries, wages, commissions, bonuses, vacation allowances, sick leave pay and the value of payments in kind paid during the year to all employees. Payroll is reported before deductions for social security, income tax insurance, union dues, etc. This definition follows that used by the U.S. Census Bureau in the quinquennial Census of Service Industries. Employment represents the number of jobs generated by traveler spending, both full and part-time. As such, it is consistent with the U.S. Department of Labor series on nonagricultural payroll employment. Tax revenues include corporate income, individual income, sales and gross receipts, and excise taxes by level of government. Business receipts reflect travel expenditures less the sales and excise taxes imposed on those expenditures.

Description of the Model Estimates of Travel Expenditures Total travel expenditures includes spending by travelers on goods and services during their trips, such as lodging, transportation, meals, entertainment, retail shopping. Sixteen (16) categories of activities are covered in the TEIM. Generally, the TEIM combines the activity levels for trips to places within the United States with the appropriate average costs of each unit of travel activity, (e.g., cost per mile by mode of transport, cost per night by type of accommodation), to produce estimates of the total amount spent on each of 16 categories of travel-related goods and services by state. For example, the number of nights spent by travel parties in hotels in Vermont is multiplied by the average cost per night per travel party of staying in a hotel in the state to obtain the estimate of traveler expenditures for hotel accommodations. The data on domestic travel activity levels (e.g., number of miles traveled by mode of transportation, the number of nights spent away from home by type of accommodation) are based on national travel surveys conducted by TIA, The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Survey of Consumer Expenditures, Smith Travel Research's Hotel and Motel Survey, etc. Average cost data are purchased and collected from different organizations and government agencies. Total sales and revenue and other data collected from state, local and federal government and other organizations are employed to compare, adjust and update the spending database of TEIM, as well as linking spending to other impact components. The international travel expenditure estimates are based on Tourism Industries’ (OTTI) In-Flight Survey and data provided to OTTI from Canada and Mexico. Other estimates of the economic impact of international visitors to the U.S. are generated by TEIM by incorporating the estimated international traveler expenditures with the data series utilized to produce the domestic estimates. Estimates of Business Receipts, Payroll and Employment The Economic Impact Component of the TEIM estimates travel generated business receipts, employment, and payroll. Basically, the 16 travel categories are associated with a type of 70


travel-related business. For example, traveler spending on commercial lodging in a state is related to the business receipts, employment and payroll of hotels, motels and motor hotels (SIC 701; NAICS 7211) in the state. It is assumed that travel spending in each category, less sales and excise taxes, equals business receipts for the related business type as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. It is assumed that each job in a specific type of business in a state is supported by some amount of business receipts and that each dollar of wages and salaries is similarly supported by some dollar volume of business receipts. The ratios of employment to business receipts are computed for each industry in each state. These ratios are then multiplied by the total amount of business receipts generated by traveler spending in a particular type of business to obtain the measures of travel generated employment and payroll of each type of business in each state. For example, the ratio of employees to business receipts in the state commercial lodging establishments is multiplied by travel generated business receipts of these establishments to obtain traveler generated employment in commercial lodging. A similar process is used for the payroll estimates. The total sales, payroll and employment data of each travel related industry (by SIC and NAICS) are provided by and collected from state, local and federal government, such as the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Census Bureau and The Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Estimates of Tax Revenues The Fiscal Impact Component of the TEIM is used to estimate traveler generated tax revenues of federal, state and local governments. The yield of each type of tax is related to the best measure of the relevant tax base available for each state consistent with the output of the Economic Impact Component. The ratios of yield to base for each type of tax in each state are then applied to the appropriate primary level output to obtain estimates of tax receipts generated by travel. For example, the ratio of Tennessee State personal income tax collections to payroll in the state is applied to total travel generated payroll to obtain the estimate of state personal income tax receipts attributable to traveler spending in Massachusetts. Estimates for Counties and Local Areas Local area travel impact estimates is derived by distributing the state estimates to the area using proper proportions of each related category in the area. The proportions of a local area are calculated based on a set of data collected from federal, state and local governments and private organizations. The data can be gathered at the zip code level. Data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census, Smith Travel Research, Enos Foundation, Runzheimer International, Cruise Lines International Association, Prentice-Hall, U.S. Department of Labor's Consumer Expenditure Survey and ES-202, American Society of Travel Agents, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Department of Transportation, Amtrak, the Federal Highway Administration, state revenue departments, TIA’s travel surveys and other sources are used in building and updating the model. These data indicate the change in travel spending for each of 71


the expenditure categories for each state over the previous year, as well as changes in the relationship of travel spending to employment, payroll and tax revenue.

Limitations of the Study This study is designed to indicate the impact of U.S. traveler expenditures on employment, payroll, business receipts and tax revenue in each of the states. These impact estimates reflect the limitations inherent in the definition of travel expenditures. Two important classes of travel-related expenses have not been estimated due to various reasons. Consumers purchase certain goods and services in anticipation of a trip away from home. These include sports equipment (tennis racquet, skis, scuba gear, etc.), travel books and guides, and services such as language lessons and lessons for participatory sports (tennis, skiing, underwater diving, etc.). The magnitude of these purchases in preparation for a trip cannot be quantified due to lack of sound, relevant data. The second type of spending not covered due to lack of sufficient data is the purchase of major consumer durables generally related to outdoor recreation on trips. Further research is required in this area to determine to what extent pre-trip spending on consumer durable products can justifiably be included within a travel economic impact study.

72

Appendix B: Glossary of Terms

Appendix B: Glossary of Terms Automobile Transportation Expenditure. This category includes a prorated share of the fixed costs of owning an automobile, truck, camper, or other recreational vehicle, such as insurance, license fees, tax, and depreciation costs. Also included are the variable costs of operating an automobile, truck, camper, or other recreational vehicle on a trip, such as gasoline, oil, tires, and repairs. The costs of renting an automobile or other motor vehicle are included in this category as well. Entertainment/Recreation Expenditure. Traveler spending on recreation facility user fees, admissions at amusement parks and attractions, attendance at nightclubs, movies, legitimate shows, sports events, and other forms of entertainment and recreation while traveling. Food Expenditure. Traveler spending in commercial eating facilities and grocery stores or carry-outs, as well as on food purchased for off-premise consumption. Incidental Purchase Expenditure. Traveler spending on retail trade purchases including gifts for others, medicine, cosmetics, clothing, personal services, souvenirs, and other items of this nature. Lodging Expenditure. Traveler spending on hotels and motels, B&Bs, campgrounds and trailer parks, rental of vacation homes and other types of lodging. Public Transportation Expenditures. This includes traveler spending on air, bus, rail and boat/ship transportation, and taxicab or limousine service between airports and central cities. Travel-generated Tax Receipts. Those federal, state and local tax revenues attributable to travel in an area. For a given state locality, all or some of the taxes may apply. "Local" includes county, city or municipality, and township units of government actually collecting the receipts and not the level that may end up receiving it through intergovernmental transfers. Federal. These receipts include corporate income taxes, individual income taxes, employment taxes, gasoline excise taxes, and airline ticket taxes. State. These receipts include corporate income taxes, individual income taxes, sales and gross receipts taxes, and excise taxes. Local. These include county and city receipts from individual and corporate income taxes, sales, excise and gross receipts taxes, and property taxes.

73

Appendix C: Travel-Related Industry Measurement

Appendix C: Travel-Related Industry Measurement SIC-NAICS TRANSITION As described in Appendix A, the 16 types of travel categories used in TEIM are associated with types of travel-related businesses. For many years, TIA selected these business types using 1987 U.S. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system codes. The SIC system has been used for decades with tremendous success to classify all businesses in the U.S. by the types of products or services they make available. To its credit, the SIC system has facilitated the collection, tabulation and analysis of data. It has also promoted “apples-toapples” comparability in statistical analyses. At the industry group level, SIC Codes report industry groups as 2- or 3-digit categories to 4 digits at their most specific. However, as a direct consequence of rapid and widespread structural changes throughout the American economy in recent years, the SIC system has become largely outdated. Therefore, its business classification capabilities have become increasingly less than optimal. In 1998, the United States Office of Management and Budget published a new industry classification system – the 1997 (and 2002 update) North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) to replace the SIC system. In contrast, the 2- to 6-digit NAICS industry classification system includes more useful and detailed economic data and provides a more comprehensive statistical representation of our industry. NAICS offers four major advantages over the SIC system: Relevance: NAICS identifies hundreds of new, emerging, and advanced technology industries. Perhaps most important in terms of quantification of travel-related activity, NAICS reorganizes industries into more meaningful sectors, especially in the service-producing segments of the economy. A few examples of travel-related industries that are separately recognized for the first time: -Convenience stores -Gas stations with convenience stores -Casino hotels -Casinos -Other gambling industries -Bed and breakfast inns -Limited service restaurants International Comparability: NAICS was developed by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in cooperation with Statistics Canada and Mexico’s Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática (INEGI). NAICS provides for comparable statistics among the three NAFTA trading partners. Consistency: NAICS defines industries according to a consistent principle -- businesses that use similar processes are grouped together. Adaptability: NAICS will be reviewed every five years, so classifications and information keep up with our changing economy. 74

Appendix C: Travel-Related Industry Measurement

TEIM: SIC/NAICS INDUSTRY CATEGORIES With the transition to NAICS, TIA has adjusted its selections of the travel-related business types using the new NAICS codes and brought its travel economic research into conformity with NAICS. For measurement purposes, TIA’s Travel Economic Impact Model tracks business activity in seven (7) major travel-related industry groups. These, in turn, are comprised of sixteen (16) business subcategories. The industry groups and subcategories used in the model are outlined below, followed by a detailed table of SIC and NAICS Codes. 1. Automobile Transportation Industry: Gasoline service stations, motor vehicle/parts dealers and passenger car rental. 2. Entertainment/Recreation Industry: Entertainment, art, and recreation industry. 3. Foodservice Industry: Eating & drinking places, and grocery stores. 4. General Retail Trade Industry: General merchandise group stores and miscellaneous retail stores, including gift and souvenir shops. Incidental Purchases Industry: See above, General Retail Trade Industry. 5. Lodging Industry: This industry includes hotels, motels, and motor hotels, camps and trailer parks. 6. Public Transportation Industry: Air transportation, taxicab companies, interurban & rural bus transportation, railroad passenger transportation (Amtrak) and water passenger transportation. Also is the "dummy" industry of "other transportation." 7. Travel Arrangement Industry: This includes travel agencies, tour operators, and other travel arrangement & reservation services.

75

1987 SIC – 1997 NAICS: Selected Travel-Related Categories

SIC DESCRIPTION(S)

SIC CODE(S)

NAICS DESCRIPTION(S)

NAICS CODE(S)

Accommodations Hotels and Motels Recreational Vehicle Parks & Campsites

701 703

Traveler Accommodation Recreational Vehicle Parks & Campgrounds

7211 7212

Auto Transportation Passenger Car Rental Gasoline Service Stations Automotive Dealers

7514 554 55 (excl. 554)

Passenger Car Rental Gasoline Stations with Convenience Stores; Other Gasoline Stations Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers

532111 447110; 447190 4411; 4412; 4413

Entertainment and Recreation Amusement and Recreational Services

79

Museums, Art Galleries, Botanical and Zoological Gardens

84

Amusement, Gambling & Recreation Industries Performing Arts, Spectator Sports & Related Industries Museums, Historical Sites & Similar Institutions

713 711 712

Food Eating & Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages) Grocery Stores

581 541

Foodservices & Drinking Places Food and Beverage stores

7221; 7222; 7224 4451; 4452; 4453

Public Transportation Air Transportation Rail - Local & Suburban Transit Interurban & Rural Bus Carriers Charter Bus/Interstate Taxi & Limousine Services Water Transportation of Passengers --

45 4111 413 4142 412 448 --

Passenger Air Transportation; Airport Support Activities Rail Transportation Interurban & Rural Bus Transportation Charter Bus (interstate/interurban) Taxi & Limousine Services Water Passenger Transportation Scenic & Sightseeing Transportation

481; 4881 485112 4852 4855102 4853 483112; 483114; 483212 487

(New industry-includes parts of SICs 4119,4489,4522,4789,7999)

Retail General Merchandise Stores Miscellaneous Retail Stores

53 59

General Merchandise Stores Other Retail Stores

452 453; 44611; 4483; 45111; 45112; 45121

Travel Arrangement Travel Arrangement

472

Travel Arrangement & Reservation Services (includes travel agencies and tour operators)

5615

76

Appendix D: Sources of Data

Appendix D: Sources of Data

This appendix presents major sources of data used in this report.

Organizations Airlines for America (A4A), (formerly known as Air Transport Association of America - ATA) American Automobile Association Amtrak American Society of Travel Agents Bureau of Census, U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior Office of Travel and Tourism Industries (OTTI)/ITA, U.S. Department of Commerce Tennessee Department of Tourist Development Tennessee Department of Labor & Workforce Development Tennessee Department of Revenue Smith Travel Research U.S. Travel Association

77

Appendix E: RIMS II

Appendix E: RIMS II

REGIONAL INPUT-OUTPUT MODELING SYSTEM A BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Regional Economic Analysis Division Bureau of Economic Analysis U.S. Department of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20230 (202) 523-0594

78

Appendix E: RIMS II

RIMS II Many types of public sector and private sector decisions require an evaluation of probable regional effects. For example, Federal requirements for environmental impact statements and the urban impact of Federal policies necessitate regional impact analyses. A growing concern, therefore, about the effects of public and private decisions has created a demand for regional economic models. As a result of this demand, economic impact models have been developed for many States and regions. These models vary considerably in terms of structure, reliability, sectoral and geographical detail, flexibility in application, and cost of development and use. In general, the models that provide the most reliable and industrially-detailed secondary impact estimates are the most expensive to construct, while the less costly models that can be used in numerous small-area studies often provide less accurate estimates. In response to the growing need for improved techniques for regional impact analysis, the Regional Economic Analysis Division of the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) developed the Regional Industrial Multiplier System (RIMS) in the mid-1970's. RIMS was designed to estimate input-output type multipliers for use in estimating the secondary regional impacts of public and private economic development policies. RIMS was capable of estimating multipliers for any region composed of one or more contiguous counties and for any of the 478 industrial sectors in the 1967 BEA national input-output (I-O) table. A significant improvement over the more summary measures often used in regional impact analysis, RIMS was capable of providing reliable multiplier estimates without the high cost of gathering survey data. The Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II) is a major revision of RIMS. The basic differences between RIMS II and RIMS are the use of more recent national I-O tables (1972 and 1977), the use of more detailed and more current data for regionalizing the national I-O tables, and greater flexibility in the derivation of regional impact estimates through the use of a matrix inversion technique that provides industrially-disaggregated impacts. RIMS II developmental research is focused currently on estimating regional transactions tables, and comparing RIMS II estimates of state-specific imports and exports with survey-based estimates from the Census Bureau's Commodity Transportation Survey. RIMS II is also being adapted to analyze the regional and industrial impacts of defense procurement.

RIMS II METHODOLOGY In order to estimate impacts such as those presented above, RIMS II uses the BEA national I-O tables which show the input and output structure of 500 industries. Since firms in all national industries are not found in each region, some direct requirements that are not produced in a study region are identified, using Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) 4-digit Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) county earnings data. The earnings data are used as proxies for the industryspecific input and output data which are seldom available at the small-area level. Using the same

79

Appendix E: RIMS II

earning data, the resulting regional I-O table then can be aggregated to the level of industrial detail appropriate for the impact study.

More specifically, the RIMS II approach can be viewed as three-step process. In the first step, the national I-O matrix is made region-specific by using corresponding 4-digit SIC location quotients (LQ's). The LQ's are used to estimate the extent to which requirements are supplied by firms within the region. For this purpose, RIMS II employs LQ's based on two types of data. According to this mixed-LQ approach, BEA county personal income data, by place of residence, are used for the calculation of LQ's in the service sectors, while BEA earnings data, by place of work, are used for the LQ's in the nonservice sectors. The second step involves estimations of the household row and the household column of the matrix. The household-row coefficients are estimated based on value-added gross-output ratios from the national I-O table and introduced into each industry's coefficient column. A household column is constructed, based on national consumption and savings rate data and national and regional tax rate data. The last step in the RIMS II estimating procedure is to calculate the multipliers. Since it is most often necessary to trace the impact of changes in final demand on numerous individual directlyand indirectly-affected industries, RIMS II applications employ the Leontief inversion approach for obtaining multipliers. This inversion process produces output and earnings multipliers for all additionally affected industries.

ACCURACY OF RIMS II Empirical tests of the accuracy of RIMS II multipliers indicates that RIMS II yields estimates that are not substantially different from those generated by regional I-O models based on the costly gathering of survey data. For example, a comparison of 224 industry-specific multipliers from survey based tables for Massachusetts, Washington, and West Virginia indicate that the RIMS II average multipliers overestimate the average multipliers from the survey based tables by approximately 5 percent, and, for the majority of individual industry-specific multipliers is less than 10 percent. In addition, RIMS II and survey multipliers show a statistically-similar distribution of affected industries.

ADVANTAGES OF RIMS II There are numerous advantages to RIMS II. First, it is possible to provide estimates of economic impact without building a complete survey I-O model for each region under study, since RIMS II produces multipliers that are derived from secondary data sources. Second, the RIMS II multipliers are derived from a limited number of secondary data sources, thus eliminating the costs associated with the compilation of data from a wide variety of these sources. Third, because of the disaggregated sectoring plan employed by RIMS II, analysis maybe performed at a detailed industrial level, thereby avoiding aggregation errors that often occur when different 80

Appendix E: RIMS II

industries are combined. Fourth, the RIMS II multipliers are based on a consistent set of procedures across areas, thus making comparisons among areas more meaningful than would be the case if the results were obtained from incompatible impact models designed only for an individual area. Fifth, the multipliers can be updated to reflect the most recent local area earning and personal income data. The industrial output and personal earnings impacts estimated by RIMS II can be crucial for estimating effects not directly specified by RIMS II itself. For example, the estimation of regional, fiscal, labor migration, and environmental effects often depends on the estimation of the regional output and earnings impact of the initial stimulus. Since many of these important effects are often best analyzed on a case-by-case basis, one of the major advantages of using RIMS II is that valuable research resources can be spent on the analysis of these effects, rather than on the construction of an impact model. Therefore, when using RIMS II, a cost-effective impact study might devote most of its research budget to specifying initial impacts in industry specific detail, and analyzing the implications for other important aspects of regional economic activity of the RIMS II estimates impacts.

APPLICATIONS OF RIMS II RIMS II multipliers, like the original RIMS multipliers, can be used in various types of impact studies. For example, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has used RIMS II multipliers in the environmental impact statements required for licensing nuclear electricity-generated facilities. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has used RIMS multipliers to assess the effects of various types of urban redevelopment expenditures. Specifically, BEA was able to quantify probable regional impacts based on the size, type, and location of the numerous individuals and groups outside the Federal Government. These multipliers have been used in analyzing the regional economic impacts of various projects, such as the operation of a prototype coal gasification plant, the expansion of port facilities, the reclamation of strip-mined land, the adoption of alternative energy futures, and the construction of mass transit facilities. In August 1982, Association for University Business and Economic Research (AUBER) published a paper, "RIMS II: Overview and Applications," which, in addition to presenting an annotated review of regional economic modeling approached, describes the results of several recent applications of RIMS II and indicates several on-going RIMS II-based research projects. The paper is contained in Readings in Business and Economic Research (Vol. 3), available from Professor William A. Strang, Secretary-Treasurer of AUBER, Office of Research Administration, Graduate School of Business, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1155 Observatory Drive, Madison, Wisconsin 53707. A paper, "Trade in Regional I-O Tables", presented at the 1984 annual meetings of the Southern Regional Science Association, describes ongoing research undertaken (1) to evaluate further the usefulness of the techniques underlying RIMS II, and (2) to extend the RIMS II model beyond the estimation of regional transactions tables, as well as the levels of industry-specific imports and exports by state. As discussed in the paper, the research to date has focused on comparisons of estimates from the Census Bureau's Commodity Transportation Survey with those from RIMS II-based models. The report is available for copying cost ($10.00) from the Regional Economic 81

Appendix E: RIMS II

Analysis Division, BE-61, Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20230.

RIMS II MULTIPLIERS RIMS II multipliers are intended to show the total regional effects on industrial output and personal earnings for any county or group of counties in the United States and for any of the 500 industrial sectors in the 1972 and 1977 BEA national I-O tables. More specifically, RIMS II multipliers can be used to estimate changes in total regional output and earnings resulting from changes in regional final demand for the output of specific industries. Regional output in the I-O context is similar to sales and includes sales to industries in the region and to final demand. In RIMS II, final demand includes sales to government, other regions, and capital formation. For example, based on RIMS II multipliers, $1 million of new warehouse construction in the Denver-Boulder, Colorado MSA would increase personal earnings in the MSA by $.7 million; the same expenditure in the Wilmington, North Carolina MSA would increase earnings there by $.5 million. The difference between the earnings impacts in the two MSA's occurs because the Denver-Boulder economy locally provides more of the total input requirements for construction of warehouses than does the Wilmington economy. In general, multipliers are smaller in smaller regional economies. However, multipliers and estimated regional impacts also depend on which industry is initially affected. For example, if the initial $1 million were spent on the maintenance and repair of streets in Wilmington, the earnings effect there would be $.7 million, which is the same as the effect of a $1 million expenditure for warehouse construction in the larger DenverBoulder metropolitan area. This overview briefly describes RIMS II multipliers, the multiplier-estimation procedures, and some of the advantages and uses of RIMS II. For additional information, see Regional InputOutput Modeling Systems (RIMS II), which is available from the U.S. Government Printing Office.

82

Appendix F: Industry Ranking by Employment and Payroll in Tennessee, 2014

Appendix F: Industry Ranking by Employment and Payroll in Tennessee, 2015 Top 10 Industries by Nonfarm Payroll (Tennessee, 2015) Total Wages Rank

NAICS Code*

Industry Name

($ Millions)

1

541

Professional and technical services

2

621

Ambulatory health care services

8,772

3

561

Administrative and support services**

6,771

4

622

Hospitals

6,131

5

551

Management of companies and enterprises

4,200

6

423

Merchant wholesalers, durable goods

4,027

7

336

Transportation equipment manufacturing

3,871

9

238

Travel & Tourism*** Specialty Trade Contractors

3,657 3,433

10

722

Food services and drinking places**

2,752

8

$9,722

Top 10 Industries by Nonfarm Employment (Tennessee, 2015) Total Employment Rank

NAICS Code*

1

561

Administrative and support services**

212.7

2

722

Food services and drinking places**

167.3

4

621

Travel & Tourism*** Ambulatory health care services

157.4 144.1

5

541

Professional and technical services

128.2

6

622

Hospitals

104.7

7

238

Specialty trade contractors

71.3

8

336

Transportation equipment manufacturing

66.7

9

423

Merchant wholesalers, durable goods

62.6

10

452

General merchandise stores**

57.1

3

Industry Name

(Thousands)

Sources: U.S. Travel Association, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. * The North American Industry Classification System. NAICS 541 includes certain professional and business services (formerly SICs 73, 87). NAICS 561 includes business services NEC (formerly SIC 7389). ** Excludes wages or jobs attributable to the travel and tourism industry. *** Payroll and employment generated by both domestic and international travel spending

83