cost of living sep 13 - home | natsem natsem working paper yr/no natsem household budget report:...
TRANSCRIPT
1
NATSEM Working Paper Yr/No
NATSEM HOUSEHOLD BUDGET
REPORT:
COST OF LIVING AND STANDARD OF
LIVING INDEXES FOR AUSTRALIA
September 2013
Ben Phillips
Principal Research Fellow
December 2013
About NATSEM
The National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling (NATSEM), a research centre at the
University of Canberra, is one of Australia’s leading economic and social policy research institutes,
and is regarded as one of the world’s foremost centres of excellence for microsimulation, economic
modelling and policy evaluation.
NATSEM undertakes independent and impartial research, and aims to be a key contributor to social
and economic policy debate and analysis in Australia and throughout the world through high quality
economic modelling, and supplying consultancy services to commercial, government and
not-for-profit clients. Our research is founded on rigorous empirical analysis conducted by staff with
specialist technical, policy and institutional knowledge.
Research findings are communicated to a wide audience, and receive extensive media and public
attention. Most publications are freely available and can be downloaded from the NATSEM website.
Acting Director: Professor Mark Evans
© NATSEM, University of Canberra 2013
National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling
University of Canberra ACT 2601 Australia
Phone + 61 2 6201 2780 Fax + 61 2 6201 2751
Email [email protected]
Website www.canberra.edu.au/centres/natsem/
3
Contents
1 Main Points for September 2013 report 5
2 Introduction 6
3 Cost of Living Index 7
4 Standard of Living Index 11
5 Contributions to Cost of Living Changes 15
6 Capital City Cost of Living and Standard of Living Comparison 17
7 Conclusion 19
8 References 21
Author note
Ben Phillips is a Principal Research Fellow at NATSEM and leads the Income, Wealth and Housing
research team at NATSEM.
General caveat
NATSEM research findings are generally based on estimated characteristics of the population. Such
estimates are usually derived from the application of microsimulation modelling techniques to
microdata based on sample surveys.
These estimates may be different from the actual characteristics of the population because of
sampling and nonsampling errors in the microdata and because of the assumptions underlying the
modelling techniques.
The microdata do not contain any information that enables identification of the individuals or
families to which they refer.
The citation for this paper is: Phillips, B. (2013) NATSEM Household Budget Report: Cost of Living and
Standard of Living Indexes for Australia, September quarter 2013.
5
1 Main Points for September 2013 report
• The cost of living increased over the typically more inflationary
September quarter by +0.9 per and +1.3 per cent through the year.
• Household incomes +1.5 per cent through quarter and +1.5 per cent
through year well down on the 5 year average growth of 4.5 per cent.
• Financial standard of living +0.6 per cent through quarter and +0.1 per
cent through the year.
• Since 1988, Household incomes grew 63 per cent more than the cost of
living with an average real increase of $291 per week, or $15,112 per
year.
• Australian households defied the Global Financial Crisis with average
household incomes growing 13.2 per cent over the previous 5 years or
$4,740 per annum after cost of living increases.
• Cost of living increases strongest over September 2013 quarter in
Victoria (+1.2 per cent) and lowest in ACT/NT (0.5 per cent).
• Cost of living increases for September 2013 quarter were higher for low
income households (+1 per cent quarter/+1.6 per cent annual) than
high income households (0.8 per cent quarter/+0.9 per cent annual).
• Strongest cost of living increases for home owners (outright) (+1.3 per
cent quarterly/2.2 per cent annual) and renters (+1 per cent
quarter/+2.4 per cent annual)
• Lowest cost of living increases were for home purchasers (0.6 per cent
quarterly/flat through the year).
• Strongest state financial standard of living annual increases in SA (+1.4
per cent) and combined ACT/NT (+3.7 per cent). NSW, QLD and Victoria
all flat through the 12 months to September. WA benign growth of 0.8
per cent through the year – a strong decline in growth on recent years.
• Strongest contributors to cost of living gains through the year were
utilities (+7.4 per cent) and Education (+5.5 per cent) and easing cost of
living pressures, mortgage interest (-14.5 per cent) and audio-visual (-
4.5).
• Sydney has the highest cost of living of capital cities with a $4,476 (7%)
annual premium over the cheapest capital city, Adelaide. The combined
ACT/NT has the highest financial standard of living with Perth the
second highest.
2 Introduction
In this report we provide a detailed investigation of the cost of living and incomes of Australian
households. The cost of living is an issue that dominates political and social debate. It is often claimed
that the cost of living in Australia is out of control and that household incomes are falling behind that
cost of living. In this report we consider both the cost of living and incomes for a variety of Australian
household types such as high and low income, pensioners, renters, mortgagors and different type of
families to determine their overall financial standard of living. This quarterly report provides a rich set
of information on Australian households since 1988.
NATSEM compiled these statistics based on official data sources from the Australian Bureau of Statistics
(ABS). Data includes all Household expenditure surveys dating back to 1988, detailed capital city based
Consumer Price Index (CPI) data, state and national Australian National Accounts data, housing finance
and Reserve Bank of Australia interest rate data. The report provides an update and expansion of the
AMP.NATSEM Prices these days! publication which AMP and NATSEM released in May, 2012.
Methodologically, the cost of living index is based on the ABS Living Cost Index but expands the scope of
the index to all households, provides a longer time series, and more detail on different types of
households1.
The second half of the standard of living equation is income, or, the benefits of living. Incomes in this
report are based on ABS income and expenditure surveys combined with household information from
the ABS national accounts for the most up-to-date income data.
By comparing changes in the cost of living with changes in incomes we derive how the Australian
household financial standard of living changes through time for a range of household types.
A detailed description of the methodology used to construct the indexes in this report is provided in the
June quarter, 2013 report (Phillips, 2013).
1 Technically, the calculation of a true cost of living index is not feasible, however, the index provided here should be
considered a close approximation. Theoretically, living cost indexes such as the one presented in this paper, are an
over-estimate of the true cost of living due to the well-known ‘CPI bias’. For a full explanation see Diewert, E 1998.
7
3 Cost of Living Index
Over the 2013 September quarter the cost of living for all households increased by 0.9 per cent. Over
the previous 12 months this increase was a benign 1.3 per cent compared to the long run average of 2.9
per cent since 1988. Figure 1 demonstrates that the cost of living changes remain below average over
recent years.
Figure 1 – Household Cost of Living Annual Change, Australia
Source: NATSEM, ABS
The detailed cost of living increases (Table 1) for the September quarter represent an increase on the
quarterly price increases from the June report. September has a strong seasonal component,
particularly with strong recent increases in utility prices usually impacting in the September quarter.
The largest state cost of living increase was in Victoria, followed by Queensland. The lowest cost
increase was observed in the combined territories (ACT/NT). Over the year to September the highest
cost of living increase was felt in Western Australia and Tasmania with annual increases of a still very
benign 1.4 per cent and the ACT/NT at 1.7 per cent. The lowest annual cost increases were experienced
in South Australia at just 0.7 per cent.
In a similar result to the June report we find that lower income households, renters, government
beneficiaries and single parents experienced the strongest increases in their cost of living. The most
divergent household types were renters and mortgagors2. Over the previous 12 months home
purchasers have experienced no change in their cost of living thanks to lower mortgage interest rates.
Renters have experienced cost increases over the past 12 months of 2.4 per cent with the double
2 Q1 represents the lowest 20 per cent income household which increases to Q5, the richest 20 per cent of income
households. The basis for income is disposable income which is ‘equivalised’ to account for household size differences.
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%Annual Change Average
whammy of strong rental increases and a larger expenditure share devoted to electricity and gas
expenditure.
Most household types have experienced cost increases below the CPI measure. The CPI does not
include mortgage interest and treats a number of goods and services differently to the NATSEM cost of
living index and the ABS Living Cost Index (the basis for the NATSEM index)3.
Table 1 – September quarter summary results for cost of living index (NATSEM)
Quarterly Annual 5 year Average
State
NSW 0.8% 1.0% 1.8%
VIC 1.2% 1.1% 1.8%
QLD 1.1% 1.1% 1.7%
SA 0.9% 0.7% 1.8%
WA 0.8% 1.4% 1.7%
TAS 0.9% 1.4% 1.7%
ACT/NT 0.5% 1.7% 1.9%
AUST 0.9% 1.3% 1.9%
Income Level
Q1 1.0% 1.6% 2.3%
Q2 1.0% 1.5% 2.1%
Q3 0.9% 1.4% 1.9%
Q4 0.9% 1.1% 1.6%
Q5 0.8% 0.9% 1.4%
Tenure
Owner 1.3% 2.2% 2.3%
Purchaser 0.6% 0.0% 0.9%
Renter 1.0% 2.4% 2.7%
Other 1.1% 2.1% 2.2%
Main Income Source
Wages/Salaries 0.8% 1.0% 1.6%
Business 0.8% 1.0% 1.7%
Government 1.0% 1.9% 2.5%
Other 1.2% 2.0% 2.1%
Family Type
Couple/Kids 0.8% 1.0% 1.6%
Single Parent 0.8% 1.4% 2.1%
Couple Only 0.9% 1.1% 1.6%
Lone 0.9% 1.4% 2.0%
Other/Group 1.0% 1.7% 2.0%
CPI 1.2% 2.2% 2.3%
3 The overall growth of the NATSEM cost of living index is almost identical to the ABS CPI when measured from the starting
point of the NATSEM index (December 1988).
9
Over the long term there is little difference in the growth of the cost of living on a state basis. Since
1988, Figure 2a shows the cost of living has grown fractionally quicker in South Australia and
Queensland. The lowest increase in the cost of living is observed in the ACT/NT and Tasmania. South
Australia’s cost of living has grown by around 2.3 per cent more than the national average over the
almost 25 year period. The combined ACT/NT grew by around 3.9 per cent less than average over the
same period. This demonstrates the stability of price change between the states over a long period of
time.
Figure 2a – Household Cost of living by State, Index - December 1988 = 100
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS ACT/NT
Figure 2b – Household Cost of living by Disposable Income level, Index - December 1988 = 100
Source: NATSEM, ABS
Figure 2b shows the cost of living increases since 1988 for different household income levels. ‘Q1’
or quintile 1 represents the poorest 20 per cent of households while ‘Q5’or quintile 5 represents
the richest 20 per cent of households. There is a modest difference in the overall growth of the
cost of living between income levels. Highest income households have experienced lower cost of
living increases (6.9 per cent lower) since December 1988 compared to low income groups4.
Regardless of the small differences between certain household types all household types have
experienced only quite minor increases in their cost of living through the past year and over the
medium to longer term. All households have experienced particularly small cost of living increases
in recent years with the average cost of living increase only 1.3 per cent over the previous 12
months and an average increase over the previous 5 years of just 1.9 per cent. Renters and
government beneficiaries have experienced modestly higher average increases of 2.7 per cent
and 2.5 per cent respectively over the previous 5 years. Those households purchasing a house
have experienced cost of living increases of only 0.9 per cent, on average.
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5
,
11
4 Standard of Living Index
What the cost of living debate often ignores is the incomes that households receive. If a
household’s income increases more strongly than prices for the goods and services they purchase
then their financial standard of living is improving. Figure 3 shows a dramatic increase in
Australia’s financial standard of living over the past 25 years. Overall, Australia’s financial standard
of living has increased by 63 per cent. After accounting for cost of living increases the average
Australian household is ahead by around $291 per week or $15,000 per year.
Over the September quarter average household disposable incomes in Australia increased by 1.5
per cent while the cost of living increased by 0.9 per cent, implying a standard of living increase of
0.6 per cent through the quarter. Through the year the outcome is less impressive with a standard
of living increase of just 0.1 per cent. Figure 3 shows the dramatic drop in the growth of Australian
household standard of living in 2013. The likely principal drivers of such a reduction in growth are
a slower growing economy, a moderately weaker labour market, lower terms of trade and a
mildly tighter government budget. While Australia has become accustomed to a strongly growing
economy and continuously higher living standards, maintaining such growth may not be easy and
is not guaranteed.
Figure 3 – Household Growth in Standard of living index (Income – Cost of living)
-3.0%
-2.0%
-1.0%
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
8.0%
De
c-8
9
De
c-9
0
De
c-9
1
De
c-9
2
De
c-9
3
De
c-9
4
De
c-9
5
De
c-9
6
De
c-9
7
De
c-9
8
De
c-9
9
De
c-0
0
De
c-0
1
De
c-0
2
De
c-0
3
De
c-0
4
De
c-0
5
De
c-0
6
De
c-0
7
De
c-0
8
De
c-0
9
De
c-1
0
De
c-1
1
De
c-1
2
Annual Growth Average
12
Figure 4 and Figure 5 provides the state-by-state financial standard of living estimates. Western
Australian households have doubled their financial standard of living over the past 25 years. WA
households have an extra $24,044 per annum in income after their cost of living increases. The
lowest growth state is Tasmania with an increase in their standard of living of around 49 per cent,
leaving average households ahead by $10,246 per year. The strongest gains in both per cent
increase and in raw dollar terms are the combined NT and ACT territories with higher annual
income of $26,354 per year since 1988 and $10,057 per year since 2008.
Figure 4 – Standard of Living, Australia, Index – December 1988 = 100, NATSEM
Source: NATSEM, ABS.
-$2,000
$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
$14,000
$16,000
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
NSW VIC QLD
SA WA TAS
ACT/NT AUST Dollar Gain ($pa RHS)
,
13
Figure 5 – Household Gains in financial standard of living after living costs, $s per year
Source: NATSEM, ABS.
While the last 5 years and certainly the last 25 years provided Australian households with a
significant boost to their financial standard of living the most recent year has not added
materially to the national standard of living. Over the past 12 months Australia’s three largest
states all recorded annual growth rates in standard of living close to zero. Following annual
growth over the 5 years to 2012 of 5.5 per cent, WA recorded growth of just 0.8 per cent in the
12 months to September 2013. The strongest performers were SA and the combined ACT/NT
territories.
$4,842$4,151
$2,910$3,726
$10,760
$2,555
$10,057
$4,741
$15,309$13,436 $13,285 $12,466
$24,044
$10,246
$26,354
$15,112
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS ACT/NT AUST
2008 onwards 1988 onwards
14
Figure 6 – State Gains in Household Financial Standard of Living, September 2013
While the annual results are a concern it is important to reflect on the fact that the recent
conservative growth numbers are following on from an extraordinary run of growth, the like of
which may not be seen for decades to come. Maintaining such a run was never a likely
outcome and Australia households face the likelihood of more benign growth in our standard
of living in the short to medium term.
Over the last 5 years household incomes increased across Australia by around 14 per cent after
cost of living increases since 2008. WA benefited most with an increase of over 28 per cent
while each of the three largest states, NSW, Victoria and Queensland gained by a more
moderate, but still healthy, 9 to 14 per cent.
There were strong gains in household standards of living across all household levels; however,
these gains have not been equally spread across income levels since 1988. Figure 7 provides
the distribution of gains by income level. The top 20 per cent of income households (Q5, or
quintile 5) experienced the strongest gains of just over 70 per cent, while the gains of the
bottom 20 per cent (Q1, or quintile 1) were around 42 per cent. The ‘benefits of the boom’
have most strongly gone to the highest income group with sharp increases between 2004 and
2007.
0.4%
0.0%
0.2%
1.3%1.4%
1.1%0.8%
0.6%0.2% 0.0% 0.2%
1.4%
0.8%0.6%
3.7%
0.1%
2.6%2.3%
1.7%
2.2%
5.1%
1.7%
4.0%
2.6%
-1.0%
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS ACT/NT AUST
Quarterly Annual 5 year (annual)
,
15
In raw dollar terms, at December 2011, the lowest income group was ahead by $4,300 per year
while the highest income group is a substantially higher $32,700 per year better off than in
December 19885.
Figure 7 – Standard of Living, Income levels, NATSEM6
Source: NATSEM, ABS.
5 Contributions to Cost of Living Changes
While the overall cost of living increase in the September quarter was an overall 0.9 per cent
and just 1.3 per cent through the year there was, as always, considerable variation amongst
different goods and services in the household basket. Figure 8 provides a more detailed view
of the price changes in the household basket of goods.
Over the last 12 months, the largest increase in consumer inflation was for utilities with a 7.4
per cent jump in prices (which is a reduction in inflation rates compared to recent years).
5 The latest available income distribution data is from the ABS Survey of Income and Housing, 2011-12. Data for
June 2013 is not yet available.
6 Q1 refers to Quintile 1, which is the bottom 20 per cent of household income households using equivalised
disposable income, Q2 refers to Quintile 2 which is percentiles 20 to 40 and so on up to Q5 which is the top 20
per cent of household incomes.
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5
16
Other strong contributors were health (+3.9 per cent), education (+5.5 per cent) and alcohol
and tobacco (+4.1 per cent). While these three groups have experienced very strong inflation
they make up around 16 per cent of our index in terms of their ‘weight’ and so it is important
to consider all the other elements of the basket of goods and services.
Offsetting these increases was a drop in mortgage interest payments through the year of 14.5
per cent thanks to standard variable loans declining. Audio-visual equipment also dropped by
4.5 per cent while other groups including household goods and services, personal care,
clothing and footwear and food all barely changed in price over the 12 months to September.
Figure 8 – Price change for Cost of Living detailed groups, NATSEM, ABS.
Source: NATSEM, ABS.
-4.5%
1.8%
5.5%
3.9%
3.7%
0.3%
-14.5%
-0.1%
2.7%
3.2%
3.0%
4.1%
0.5%
-0.8%
4.0%
2.6%
7.4%
-20.0% -15.0% -10.0% -5.0% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0%
Audio Visual
Communication
Education
Health
Holidays, Airfares
Household G&S
Mortgage
Personal Care
Recreation
Rent
Transport
Alcohol, Tobacco
Clothing, Footwear
Food
Housing other
Other
Utilities
An
n
,
17
6 Capital City Cost of Living and Standard of Living
Comparison
How much does the cost of living vary between capital cities of Australia? The above analysis
shows that costs have not altered greatly in terms of the change in prices between capital
cities but do prices vary by level between capitals?
Figure 9 provides estimates of the price of our typical basket of goods and services in Australia,
and then the same basket repriced specifically in each capital city of Australia78. Sydney is the
most expensive capital city with the typical basket of goods costing $68,023 per annum9.
Adelaide has the lowest cost of living, cheaper by $4,476 per year compared to Sydney. Darwin
and Canberra are similar to Sydney with respect to their cost of living. Melbourne has a $2,139
discount compared to Sydney. Hobart is the second cheapest capital city, only marginally more
expensive than Adelaide. Perth and Brisbane sit in the middle of the capital city cost of living
comparison.
7 These estimates are based on ABS ‘experimental’ spatial price research with some data gaps overcome by
NATSEM and updating to the most recent ABS CPI release. The estimates remain experimental and should only
be considered as a guide and only relevant to the ‘average’ dwelling in Sydney. In some states it is likely that
expenditure patters will differ from Sydney. For example, Canberra households devote a larger share of
expenditure to gas and electricity than Sydney due to greater heating needs in winter. This analysis does not
account for such regional differences in ‘quantity’ of purchase.
8 The methodology has been altered in the September publication with the average ‘basket of goods’ relating to the
Australian average, rather than Sydney. This has altered the price level and price relativities in the index.
9 This figure relates to the average expenditure across all households.
18
Figure 9 – Capital City Cost of Living Comparison to Sydney, June 2013, NATSEM, ABS
Source: NATSEM, ABS.
As emphasised throughout this report cost is only one part of the standard of living equation –
income is equally important. While Adelaide has the lowest cost of living it also has relatively
low average household incomes.
Using All Capitals as the benchmark Figure 10 considers both the income and the cost of each
capital city compared to our benchmark. After accounting for both income and cost we find
that both the ACT and Darwin have a financial standard of living around 30 to 35 per cent
higher than the all capitals average. Perth is around 23 per cent higher while Sydney,
Melbourne, Brisbane and Adelaide have marginally lower standards of living compared to the
all capitals average. Hobart has a standard of living around 17 per cent lower than average and
a staggering 38 per cent lower than the highest standard of living city, Canberra.
$68,023
$65,884
$64,599
$63,547
$65,951
$64,076
$67,406 $67,537
$66,073
$61,000
$62,000
$63,000
$64,000
$65,000
$66,000
$67,000
$68,000
$69,000
,
19
Figure 10 – Standard of Living Index, Capital Cities, NATSEM, ABS
Source: NATSEM, ABS.
7 Conclusion
NATSEM’s cost of living index shows that prices in Australia are very much under control with
annual changes in the cost of living at only 1.3 per cent through the year to September 2013.
The cost of living increased by 0.9 per cent in the September quarter. Benign price rises are
estimated across all household types although lower income groups and renters have
experienced moderately higher cost of living increases compared to higher income groups,
particularly mortgagors who have benefited from very low interest rates through the previous
12 months.
NATSEM’s standard of living index shows that after a run of strong household income growth
we are now experiencing much more subdued income growth. Over the 12 months to
September household incomes grew by only 0.1 per cent more than the cost of living.
Following on from a rise of around 63 per cent in after-cost of living increases since 1988 this
still leaves households in a remarkably strong position.
96.8 97.794.2 96.5
123.1
82.6
131.7134.5
100.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
110.0
120.0
130.0
140.0
20
While SA and the combined territories continue to enjoy healthy household incomes and gains
to their financial standard of living we find that NSW, Victoria and Queensland are struggling to
improve their standard of living with all three states effectively flat over the past 12 months.
WA’s incredible income growth in recent years is showing signs of slowing with growth in
household incomes of only 0.8 per cent after their cost of living increases which is well down
on their average growth of 5.4 per cent over the previous 5 years.
There are certain services such as utilities, health and education that have risen in price much
more sharply than the general cost of living, however, these price increases have been offset
by low or negative price increases for mortgages, clothing and footwear and many imported
high technology goods such as audio-visual equipment and household goods and services.
Sydney remains Australia’s highest cost capital city, with a premium of over $4,476 per year
compared to the cheapest city, Adelaide. Canberra and the NT have the highest standard of
living while Hobart has the lowest standard of living of the capital cities in Australia. The main
drivers of differences in the cost of living between cities relate to the high cost of housing in
Sydney. The higher standard of living in Canberra, NT and Perth relates to significantly higher
household incomes than other cities and regions of Australia.
This report does not suggest that there are not families who face financial hardships; however,
it does show that most socioeconomic groups and regions are better placed financially than in
the past. While Australian households have enjoyed significant improvements to their financial
standard of living through the last decade it would seem that such strong growth may not be
repeated in the coming years as the economy struggles with a lower terms of trade, weaker
jobs growth and tighter budgets at both the state and federal level. With relatively benign
price growth and very low mortgage rates many households are however, maintaining, and for
some, increasing their standard of living in spite of the economic head winds.
,
21
8 References
Australian Bureau of Statistics, (1988) Household Expenditure Survey, 6540.0 Microdata.
Australian Bureau of Statistics, (1993) Household Expenditure Survey, 6540.0 Microdata.
Australian Bureau of Statistics, (1998) Household Expenditure Survey, 6540.0 Microdata.
Australian Bureau of Statistics, (2003) Household Expenditure Survey and Survey of Income and
Housing, 6503.0 Microdata.
Australian Bureau of Statistics, (2003) Comparing Living Costs in Australian Capital Cities, 32nd
Conference of Economist.
Australian Bureau of Statistics, (2009) Household Expenditure Survey and Survey of Income and
Housing, 6503.0 Microdata.
Australian Bureau of Statistics, (2013) Selected Living Cost Indexes, Australia, Jun 2013.
Diewert, E (1998) Index Number Issues in the Consumer Price Index, Journal of Economic
Perspectives, V12, pp 47-58.
Phillips, B (2012). Prices these days! The Cost of Living in Australia.
Phillips, B (2013). NATSEM Household Budget Report, June 2013 .
More information
Further publications related to this topic can be found on NATSEM’s
website at www.natsem.canberra.edu.au. To learn more about
Income, Wealth and Housing research at NATSEM or for media calls,
contact:
Ben Phillips: Ph. +61 2 6201 2760 M. 0403 929 395
22