US Economics Analyst

Could More Immigration Make a Dent in the Jobs-Workers Gap? (Phillips)

Research | Economics | By Jan Hatzius and others
  • The gap between the number of available jobs and the number of available workers has allowed wages to rise at a rate well above the pace of wage growth compatible with the Fed’s inflation goal. While reduced labor force participation is primarily behind the lower number of available workers, reduced immigration has also played a role.

  • From 2010 to 2018, foreign-born workers accounted for nearly 60% of the growth in the US labor force, but growth in the foreign-born population slowed to around 100k/yr between 2019 and 2021, leaving the US population around 2 million smaller than it would otherwise have been, and the labor force around 1.6 million smaller.

  • More recently, immigration has rebounded. Green card issuance to new arrivals has roughly returned to its pre-pandemic level, and temporary work visas have gotten close to normal levels in just the last few months.

  • However, immigration rates would need to increase further to make up the shortfall in foreign born workers. Immigration policies could make that difficult, as many immigration categories, including skilled and unskilled temporary workers, are limited by numerical caps that only Congress can change. While we would not rule out near-term congressional changes to the caps on lower-skilled workers in particular, broader legislative changes look unlikely.

  • There are some administrative steps the administration could take. Waiving interviews and expediting other aspects of the green card process could clear backlogs; reinterpreting the application of numerical limits, allowing spouses of all temporary workers to work, and recapturing unused visa allocations from prior years could each boost net migration by around 200k.

  • That said, major immigration changes might not be politically realistic even if there is procedural flexibility to make them. While easing inflation would have clear political benefits and there appears to be some public support for increased legal immigration, substantial changes seem unlikely before the midterm election in November.

  • It seems more likely that the Biden Administration will make modest changes where there is clearer authority to do so, perhaps increasing net migration by a few hundred thousand above the normal pace. This would make a modest dent in the jobs-workers gap, but would still leave most of the work for the Fed.

Could More Immigration Make a Dent in the Jobs-Workers Gap?

As we have written recently, the substantial gap between the number of workers and the number of jobs (i.e., jobs filled plus job openings) has led to wage growth of 5 1/2% over the last year, according to our wage tracker. This implies unit labor cost inflation of 3-3 ½%, assuming 1 ½ productivity growth, which is likely incompatible with the Fed’s 2% longer-run inflation target. This is the result of a quick recovery in labor demand following the pandemic but a much slower rebound in the labor force. We expect labor force participation to gradually increase, closing around 1-1.5mn of this gap over the coming year, but still leaving a sizeable gap.

Exhibit 1: The Tightest Labor Market In Postwar US History

Source: Haver Analytics, Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research

While the decline in labor force participation is the main driver of reduced labor supply, Fed Chairman Powell remarked recently that reduced immigration is also a “big part of the story.” Since 2010, foreign born individuals have accounted for roughly 30% of US population growth but have accounted for nearly 60% of the growth in the US labor force. However, the foreign-born population grew by only 300k from 2019 to 2021, roughly 2 million below the trend over the last decade. The pattern is similar for the foreign-born labor force.

Exhibit 2: The Contribution of Immigration to Population and Labor Force Growth Slowed Meaningfully in 2020

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

Much of the decline in net immigration was likely due to the pandemic itself, in light of temporarily high unemployment and substantially increased logistical obstacles. However, policy changes likely also played a major role. Immigration policy tightened substantially under the Trump Administration, before and particularly after the onset of the pandemic. Among the important changes:

  • Immigrant and nonimmigrant visa ban: In April 2020, President Trump issued a proclamation temporarily suspending issuance of most categories of employment-based and family-based green cards. This expanded in June to also cover several non-immigrant categories, including H1-B and H2-B skilled and unskilled worker visas. President Biden rescinded these in February 2021.

  • Public charge: US law prohibits visa issuance to anyone who is likely to become a “public charge” but this had not generally been an obstacle for green card applicants as they were not eligible for most public benefits in any case. The Trump Administration tightened the restrictions under this policy which led to the denial of some green card applications. The Biden Administration stopped applying the rule in March 2021.

  • Lower refugee caps: The president sets a cap each year on the number of refugees, which has averaged around 75k per year over the last few decades. This was cut roughly in half during the Trump Administration and reached a low of 18k in 2020. For 2022, the Biden Administration has set a cap of 125k.

  • “Remain in Mexico”: In 2019, the Trump Administration implemented the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), also known as the “Remain in Mexico” policy, which requires asylum seekers to await their court dates outside the US, rather than detaining them or releasing them into the US while awaiting a ruling. The Biden Administration attempted to reverse the policy, but was blocked by a federal court, so the policy remains in place pending a Supreme Court decision expected by June.

  • Title 42: In response to the pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) issued an order that prohibited many migrants from entering the US and led to the immediate expulsion of most individuals who crossed the border without authorization. This prevented migrants from seeking asylum and reduced the number of unauthorized migrants who were released into the US pending adjudication. However, it also reduced the consequences for unauthorized border-crossers, who would not face criminal penalties or detention. The Biden Administration has announced that the policy will end on May 23, though pending federal litigation may extend that date.

The economic and logistical effects of the pandemic, combined with much more restrictive policies, substantially reduced migration into the US. Visas for temporary workers, in particular, declined substantially in 2020 and again in 2021. This likely understates total net migration as it omits unauthorized entries, but fits reasonably closely with separate estimates of net migration from the Census Bureau.

Exhibit 3: Pandemic Effects, Combined With More Restrictive Policies, Substantially Reduced Migration Into the US.

Source: US Census Bureau, US Department of Homeland Security

More recently, issuance of temporary visas and green cards for new arrivals (i.e., excluding visas that change the status of someone already in the US) have rebounded. Unauthorized crossings of the US-Mexico border have jumped more sharply, even after adjusting for the increased share of repeat encounters since the Title 42 policy went into place. (We note that while border encounters can provide a directional sense of unauthorized immigration trends, legal entrants who overstay their visas are responsible for the greatest share of unauthorized immigration.) Overall, the pace of immigration into the US appears to be at least what it was before the pandemic.

Exhibit 4: The Rate of New Arrivals Has Rebounded

Source: US Department of State, US Customs and Border Protection, Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research

While the annual change in the number of immigrants appears to be close to where it was several years ago, the level is still a couple million short of what it would have been absent policy changes and the pandemic. Estimates from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) suggest that the gap might grow wider.

Exhibit 5: CBO Estimates Suggest the Immigration Gap Might Grow Wider

Source: Congressional Budget Office, Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research

Immigration Policy Makes It Hard to Catch Up

Existing immigration policies make catching up with those prior projections difficult. The most obvious challenge is that US immigration law imposes numerical limits on many categories of visas for immigrants and temporary workers.

Exhibit 6: US Immigration Cheat Sheet

Source: US Department of Homeland Security, Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research

Only Congress can change these, but after failed attempts in 2007 and 2013, broad bipartisan immigration reform legislation looks out of reach. Last year, congressional Democrats sought to include immigration reforms in their Build Back Better legislation, but Senate rules that prohibit non-fiscal policies in “reconciliation” bills would have blocked those from passing with a simple majority in the Senate, had the bill even progressed that far.

That said, there are two remaining potential avenues for narrower legislative changes. A bipartisan group led by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sens. Cornyn (R-Tex.), Padilla (D-Calif.), and Tillis (R-N.C.) has met over the last few weeks in an attempt to put together a narrower package of reforms that might be able to win bipartisan support, though there is little reason to believe this will end in a different outcome than other bipartisan efforts.

An even more targeted set of changes might have a chance, however. The House passed legislation in March 2021 to reform farm worker visas and it is possible the Senate might act on this narrower issue, particularly in light of the bipartisan support (30 Republican votes) it won in that chamber. The House bill would establish a new “certified agricultural worker” status for undocumented immigrants, conferring work authorization for 5.5 years in any sector (i.e., not just agriculture). It would also reform the existing programs to allow for an additional 55k long-term or permanent unskilled worker visas per year. Separate legislation would exempt returning seasonal non-farm workers from caps, which could potentially increase seasonal worker visas by as much as 300k. There appears to be similar interest in expanding the H2B program for non-agricultural seasonal workers.

The Biden Administration could make meaningful changes without Congress. While the Biden Administration cannot simply dial up immigration approvals, there are other steps it might consider under its existing legal authority.[1]

  • A reduction in the administrative backlog. Immigrant visa approvals have nearly caught up with pre-pandemic levels, but there continues to be a substantial backlog—421k applicants as of April 2022—of approved petitions awaiting interview. Expediting or waiving those interviews would likely lead to a bump in approvals.

  • A different application of numerical limits. Even if the administrative backlog is cleared, most visa categories have statutory limits on the number issued each year, which could prevent a surge in visa issuance out of the backlog. Some immigration law experts have asserted that the State Department could, under existing law, count only the primary applicant toward the cap, excluding “derivative” visas for spouses and minor children who currently form around 40% of total immigrant visas issued under the caps. Although only some of these visas go to new arrivals, such a change might still allow for around 175k newly arriving immigrants per year.

  • Authorization for more non-employment visa-holders to work. Most spouses of H1-B (skilled worker) and L-1 visa holders are currently allowed to work, but family members of most other non-immigrant visa types are not, including H2-A (agricultural) and H2-B (non-agricultural) workers. Workers in those categories typically do not bring family members, likely in part because of the prohibition. As of 2019, there were nearly 200k dependents of visa holders who lacked work authorization. If H2 visa holders brought family members in the same ratio as H1-B visa holders—this seems likely if they were allowed to work—this might increase temporary migration by another 200k or so.

  • Unused visa recapture. Although immigration law calls for the rollover of unused visa allocations to the following year, quirks in the law often lead to some green card allocations disappearing instead. Congress has approved legislation in the past to recapture some of the unused allocation, and current sponsors of visa recapture legislation estimate that green card issuance has undershot the numerical limit by a cumulative 400k from 1992 through 2021 (another estimate puts the cumulative undershoot in green card issuance since 1922 at 4.5 million, though it is extremely unlikely Congress or the Biden Administration would reach back this far). Of the 400k in unused visa allocations, more than 200k are from FY2021 (Oct. 2020 start), but most of these will automatically roll over to employment-based visa allocations for 2022. This will roughly double the limit on employment-based green cards this year.

  • Broader use of extraordinary authorities. The Administration has particular discretion when it comes to refugees and asylum seekers. The president is responsible for setting the cap on refugee admissions (125k for FY2022) and there is no cap on grants of asylum (the share of asylum requests granted has risen from less than 30% in 2020 to 50% currently). David Bier of the CATO Institute proposes raising the refugee cap to clear the backlog of family-based visa applications from countries that qualify that already have a substantial number of asylum seekers. In comments to the USCIS, immigration lawyer Cyrus Mehta proposes using “parole” authority to clear the visa backlog, modeled on smaller programs for certain countries (e.g. Haiti). This could allow for the entry of anywhere from a few hundred thousand to a few million immigrants, if it were deemed legally permissible.

Overall, it seems likely the Biden Administration could increase annual legal immigration by as much as a few hundred thousand without congressional approval using some of the less controversial steps immigration experts have proposed.

Political Reality: Between a Rock and a Hard Place

A recent New York Times story cites internal White House polling from over a year ago, which was already showing immigration and inflation as the two biggest issues eroding President Biden’s public support. Recent polling from Morning Consult suggests that among President Biden’s major executive actions over his first year in office, reversing the Trump Administration’s immigration restrictions are some of the least popular (COVID-related policies tended to be the most popular). Many Democratic candidates in competitive swing-state elections this November have come out on the opposite side of the White House on border issues, in particular.

Still, there are reasons to believe some liberalization of immigration policies could be politically beneficial. Inflation ranks as a higher priority than immigration among voters of all parties, with the greatest difference among Democrats. President Biden’s approval rating on handling inflation is lower than on handling immigration among voters of all parties, with the greatest divergence among Democratic voters (only 59% approve of his handling of inflation).

Exhibit 7: Polarized Public Opinion Makes Major Immigration Reform Unlikely but Smaller Changes Are Possible

Source: Gallup

Political concerns about immigration also appear to be driven primarily by unauthorized immigration and largely concentrated among Republican voters. Sentiment toward legal immigration is more positive in comparison, with a general uptrend in public support for increased legal immigration. While major changes might be too politically controversial, smaller changes—particularly around temporary work visas and potentially regarding green card recapture—might be in the realm of political reality.

Increased Immigration Might Make a Small Dent in the Jobs-Workers Gap

The steps the Biden Administration has taken to date suggest that immigration policy is likely to move in a less restrictive direction, but that changes will be incremental and will take time. One recent indicator is the decision by the Department of Homeland Security to increase the cap on H2-B visas for non-agricultural workers. Earlier this year, Congress authorized DHS to increase the H2B cap by around 65k through Oct. 2022, essentially tripling it (33k were already allocated for the April to October period). Instead, DHS increased the cap by only 35k. While the exact number of H2B visas has little impact on the broader US labor market, the decision suggests that the Biden Administration remains cautious in its interpretation of immigration laws and is unlikely to take extraordinary steps.

Overall, it seems likely that immigration policy changes might make a small dent in the jobs-workers gap. We have estimated that the gap would need to close by around 2 ½ million to return wage growth to the 4-4½% range, a level that would be consistent with the FOMC’s inflation goals. As noted earlier, increased labor force participation might close 1-1 ½ million of this over the next year. An increase on the order of few hundred thousand above the normal pace might be realistic, but a larger boost seems unlikely. This would make a modest dent in the jobs-workers gap, but would leave most of the work of closing it for the Federal Reserve.

Alec Phillips

We thank Tim Krupa for his contributions.

The US Economic and Financial Outlook

Source: Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research

Economic Releases

Source: Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research

1 ^ For a useful compendium of potential administrative actions to liberalize US immigration policies, see David Bier, et. al, Deregulating Legal Immigration: A Blueprint for Agency Action. Most of the options listed are discussed in more detail in this report.

Investors should consider this report as only a single factor in making their investment decision. For Reg AC certification and other important disclosures, see the Disclosure Appendix, or go to

Disclosure Appendix

Reg AC

We, Jan Hatzius, Alec Phillips, David Mericle, Spencer Hill, CFA, Joseph Briggs, Ronnie Walker and Manuel Abecasis, hereby certify that all of the views expressed in this report accurately reflect our personal views, which have not been influenced by considerations of the firm's business or client relationships.

Unless otherwise stated, the individuals listed on the cover page of this report are analysts in Goldman Sachs' Global Investment Research division.


Regulatory disclosures

Disclosures required by United States laws and regulations

See company-specific regulatory disclosures above for any of the following disclosures required as to companies referred to in this report: manager or co-manager in a pending transaction; 1% or other ownership; compensation for certain services; types of client relationships; managed/co-managed public offerings in prior periods; directorships; for equity securities, market making and/or specialist role. Goldman Sachs trades or may trade as a principal in debt securities (or in related derivatives) of issuers discussed in this report.

The following are additional required disclosures: Ownership and material conflicts of interest: Goldman Sachs policy prohibits its analysts, professionals reporting to analysts and members of their households from owning securities of any company in the analyst's area of coverage.  Analyst compensation:  Analysts are paid in part based on the profitability of Goldman Sachs, which includes investment banking revenues.  Analyst as officer or director: Goldman Sachs policy generally prohibits its analysts, persons reporting to analysts or members of their households from serving as an officer, director or advisor of any company in the analyst's area of coverage.  Non-U.S. Analysts:  Non-U.S. analysts may not be associated persons of Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC and therefore may not be subject to FINRA Rule 2241 or FINRA Rule 2242 restrictions on communications with subject company, public appearances and trading securities held by the analysts. 

Additional disclosures required under the laws and regulations of jurisdictions other than the United States

The following disclosures are those required by the jurisdiction indicated, except to the extent already made above pursuant to United States laws and regulations. Australia: Goldman Sachs Australia Pty Ltd and its affiliates are not authorised deposit-taking institutions (as that term is defined in the Banking Act 1959 (Cth)) in Australia and do not provide banking services, nor carry on a banking business, in Australia. This research, and any access to it, is intended only for "wholesale clients" within the meaning of the Australian Corporations Act, unless otherwise agreed by Goldman Sachs. In producing research reports, members of the Global Investment Research Division of Goldman Sachs Australia may attend site visits and other meetings hosted by the companies and other entities which are the subject of its research reports. In some instances the costs of such site visits or meetings may be met in part or in whole by the issuers concerned if Goldman Sachs Australia considers it is appropriate and reasonable in the specific circumstances relating to the site visit or meeting. To the extent that the contents of this document contains any financial product advice, it is general advice only and has been prepared by Goldman Sachs without taking into account a client's objectives, financial situation or needs. A client should, before acting on any such advice, consider the appropriateness of the advice having regard to the client's own objectives, financial situation and needs. A copy of certain Goldman Sachs Australia and New Zealand disclosure of interests and a copy of Goldman Sachs’ Australian Sell-Side Research Independence Policy Statement are available at: Disclosure information in relation to CVM Resolution n. 20 is available at Where applicable, the Brazil-registered analyst primarily responsible for the content of this research report, as defined in Article 20 of CVM Resolution n. 20, is the first author named at the beginning of this report, unless indicated otherwise at the end of the text.  Canada: This information is being provided to you for information purposes only and is not, and under no circumstances should be construed as, an advertisement, offering or solicitation by Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC for purchasers of securities in Canada to trade in any Canadian security. Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC is not registered as a dealer in any jurisdiction in Canada under applicable Canadian securities laws and generally is not permitted to trade in Canadian securities and may be prohibited from selling certain securities and products in certain jurisdictions in Canada. If you wish to trade in any Canadian securities or other products in Canada please contact Goldman Sachs Canada Inc., an affiliate of The Goldman Sachs Group Inc., or another registered Canadian dealer.  Hong Kong: Further information on the securities of covered companies referred to in this research may be obtained on request from Goldman Sachs (Asia) L.L.C.  India: Further information on the subject company or companies referred to in this research may be obtained from Goldman Sachs (India) Securities Private Limited, Research Analyst - SEBI Registration Number INH000001493, 951-A, Rational House, Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai 400 025, India, Corporate Identity Number U74140MH2006FTC160634, Phone +91 22 6616 9000, Fax +91 22 6616 9001. Goldman Sachs may beneficially own 1% or more of the securities (as such term is defined in clause 2 (h) the Indian Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956) of the subject company or companies referred to in this research report.  Japan: See below.  Korea: This research, and any access to it, is intended only for "professional investors" within the meaning of the Financial Services and Capital Markets Act, unless otherwise agreed by Goldman Sachs. Further information on the subject company or companies referred to in this research may be obtained from Goldman Sachs (Asia) L.L.C., Seoul Branch.  New Zealand: Goldman Sachs New Zealand Limited and its affiliates are neither "registered banks" nor "deposit takers" (as defined in the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act 1989) in New Zealand. This research, and any access to it, is intended for "wholesale clients" (as defined in the Financial Advisers Act 2008) unless otherwise agreed by Goldman Sachs. A copy of certain Goldman Sachs Australia and New Zealand disclosure of interests is available at: Research reports distributed in the Russian Federation are not advertising as defined in the Russian legislation, but are information and analysis not having product promotion as their main purpose and do not provide appraisal within the meaning of the Russian legislation on appraisal activity. Research reports do not constitute a personalized investment recommendation as defined in Russian laws and regulations, are not addressed to a specific client, and are prepared without analyzing the financial circumstances, investment profiles or risk profiles of clients. Goldman Sachs assumes no responsibility for any investment decisions that may be taken by a client or any other person based on this research report.  Singapore: Goldman Sachs (Singapore) Pte. (Company Number: 198602165W), which is regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore, accepts legal responsibility for this research, and should be contacted with respect to any matters arising from, or in connection with, this research.  Taiwan: This material is for reference only and must not be reprinted without permission. Investors should carefully consider their own investment risk. Investment results are the responsibility of the individual investor.  United Kingdom: Persons who would be categorized as retail clients in the United Kingdom, as such term is defined in the rules of the Financial Conduct Authority, should read this research in conjunction with prior Goldman Sachs research on the covered companies referred to herein and should refer to the risk warnings that have been sent to them by Goldman Sachs International. A copy of these risks warnings, and a glossary of certain financial terms used in this report, are available from Goldman Sachs International on request. 

European Union and United Kingdom: Disclosure information in relation to Article 6 (2) of the European Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) (2016/958) supplementing Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council (including as that Delegated Regulation is implemented into United Kingdom domestic law and regulation following the United Kingdom’s departure from the European Union and the European Economic Area) with regard to regulatory technical standards for the technical arrangements for objective presentation of investment recommendations or other information recommending or suggesting an investment strategy and for disclosure of particular interests or indications of conflicts of interest is available at which states the European Policy for Managing Conflicts of Interest in Connection with Investment Research. 

Japan: Goldman Sachs Japan Co., Ltd. is a Financial Instrument Dealer registered with the Kanto Financial Bureau under registration number Kinsho 69, and a member of Japan Securities Dealers Association, Financial Futures Association of Japan and Type II Financial Instruments Firms Association. Sales and purchase of equities are subject to commission pre-determined with clients plus consumption tax. See company-specific disclosures as to any applicable disclosures required by Japanese stock exchanges, the Japanese Securities Dealers Association or the Japanese Securities Finance Company. 

Global product; distributing entities

The Global Investment Research Division of Goldman Sachs produces and distributes research products for clients of Goldman Sachs on a global basis. Analysts based in Goldman Sachs offices around the world produce research on industries and companies, and research on macroeconomics, currencies, commodities and portfolio strategy. This research is disseminated in Australia by Goldman Sachs Australia Pty Ltd (ABN 21 006 797 897); in Brazil by Goldman Sachs do Brasil Corretora de Títulos e Valores Mobiliários S.A.; Public Communication Channel Goldman Sachs Brazil: 0800 727 5764 and / or Available Weekdays (except holidays), from 9am to 6pm. Canal de Comunicação com o Público Goldman Sachs Brasil: 0800 727 5764 e/ou Horário de funcionamento: segunda-feira à sexta-feira (exceto feriados), das 9h às 18h; in Canada by Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC; in Hong Kong by Goldman Sachs (Asia) L.L.C.; in India by Goldman Sachs (India) Securities Private Ltd.; in Japan by Goldman Sachs Japan Co., Ltd.; in the Republic of Korea by Goldman Sachs (Asia) L.L.C., Seoul Branch; in New Zealand by Goldman Sachs New Zealand Limited; in Russia by OOO Goldman Sachs; in Singapore by Goldman Sachs (Singapore) Pte. (Company Number: 198602165W); and in the United States of America by Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC. Goldman Sachs International has approved this research in connection with its distribution in the United Kingdom.

Effective from the date of the United Kingdom’s departure from the European Union and the European Economic Area (“Brexit Day”) the following information with respect to distributing entities will apply:

Goldman Sachs International (“GSI”), authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority (“PRA”) and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) and the PRA, has approved this research in connection with its distribution in the United Kingdom.

European Economic Area: GSI, authorised by the PRA and regulated by the FCA and the PRA, disseminates research in the following jurisdictions within the European Economic Area: the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, Italy, the Kingdom of Belgium, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Kingdom of Norway, the Republic of Finland, the Republic of Cyprus and the Republic of Ireland; GS -Succursale de Paris (Paris branch) which, from Brexit Day, will be authorised by the French Autorité de contrôle prudentiel et de resolution (“ACPR”) and regulated by the Autorité de contrôle prudentiel et de resolution and the Autorité des marches financiers (“AMF”) disseminates research in France; GSI - Sucursal en España (Madrid branch) authorized in Spain by the Comisión Nacional del Mercado de Valores disseminates research in the Kingdom of Spain; GSI - Sweden Bankfilial (Stockholm branch) is authorized by the SFSA as a “third country branch” in accordance with Chapter 4, Section 4 of the Swedish Securities and Market Act (Sw. lag (2007:528) om värdepappersmarknaden) disseminates research in the Kingdom of Sweden; Goldman Sachs Bank Europe SE (“GSBE”) is a credit institution incorporated in Germany and, within the Single Supervisory Mechanism, subject to direct prudential supervision by the European Central Bank and in other respects supervised by German Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht, BaFin) and Deutsche Bundesbank and disseminates research in the Federal Republic of Germany and those jurisdictions within the European Economic Area where GSI is not authorised to disseminate research and additionally, GSBE, Copenhagen Branch filial af GSBE, Tyskland, supervised by the Danish Financial Authority disseminates research in the Kingdom of Denmark; GSBE - Sucursal en España (Madrid branch) subject (to a limited extent) to local supervision by the Bank of Spain disseminates research in the Kingdom of Spain; GSBE - Succursale Italia (Milan branch) to the relevant applicable extent, subject to local supervision by the Bank of Italy (Banca d’Italia) and the Italian Companies and Exchange Commission (Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa “Consob”) disseminates research in Italy; GSBE - Succursale de Paris (Paris branch), supervised by the AMF and by the ACPR disseminates research in France; and GSBE - Sweden Bankfilial (Stockholm branch), to a limited extent, subject to local supervision by the Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority (Finansinpektionen) disseminates research in the Kingdom of Sweden.

General disclosures

This research is for our clients only. Other than disclosures relating to Goldman Sachs, this research is based on current public information that we consider reliable, but we do not represent it is accurate or complete, and it should not be relied on as such. The information, opinions, estimates and forecasts contained herein are as of the date hereof and are subject to change without prior notification. We seek to update our research as appropriate, but various regulations may prevent us from doing so. Other than certain industry reports published on a periodic basis, the large majority of reports are published at irregular intervals as appropriate in the analyst's judgment.

Goldman Sachs conducts a global full-service, integrated investment banking, investment management, and brokerage business. We have investment banking and other business relationships with a substantial percentage of the companies covered by our Global Investment Research Division. Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC, the United States broker dealer, is a member of SIPC (

Our salespeople, traders, and other professionals may provide oral or written market commentary or trading strategies to our clients and principal trading desks that reflect opinions that are contrary to the opinions expressed in this research. Our asset management area, principal trading desks and investing businesses may make investment decisions that are inconsistent with the recommendations or views expressed in this research.

We and our affiliates, officers, directors, and employees, will from time to time have long or short positions in, act as principal in, and buy or sell, the securities or derivatives, if any, referred to in this research, unless otherwise prohibited by regulation or Goldman Sachs policy.

The views attributed to third party presenters at Goldman Sachs arranged conferences, including individuals from other parts of Goldman Sachs, do not necessarily reflect those of Global Investment Research and are not an official view of Goldman Sachs.

Any third party referenced herein, including any salespeople, traders and other professionals or members of their household, may have positions in the products mentioned that are inconsistent with the views expressed by analysts named in this report.

This research is focused on investment themes across markets, industries and sectors. It does not attempt to distinguish between the prospects or performance of, or provide analysis of, individual companies within any industry or sector we describe.

Any trading recommendation in this research relating to an equity or credit security or securities within an industry or sector is reflective of the investment theme being discussed and is not a recommendation of any such security in isolation.

This research is not an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any security in any jurisdiction where such an offer or solicitation would be illegal. It does not constitute a personal recommendation or take into account the particular investment objectives, financial situations, or needs of individual clients. Clients should consider whether any advice or recommendation in this research is suitable for their particular circumstances and, if appropriate, seek professional advice, including tax advice. The price and value of investments referred to in this research and the income from them may fluctuate. Past performance is not a guide to future performance, future returns are not guaranteed, and a loss of original capital may occur. Fluctuations in exchange rates could have adverse effects on the value or price of, or income derived from, certain investments.

Certain transactions, including those involving futures, options, and other derivatives, give rise to substantial risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investors should review current options and futures disclosure documents which are available from Goldman Sachs sales representatives or at and Transaction costs may be significant in option strategies calling for multiple purchase and sales of options such as spreads. Supporting documentation will be supplied upon request.

Differing Levels of Service provided by Global Investment Research: The level and types of services provided to you by the Global Investment Research division of GS may vary as compared to that provided to internal and other external clients of GS, depending on various factors including your individual preferences as to the frequency and manner of receiving communication, your risk profile and investment focus and perspective (e.g., marketwide, sector specific, long term, short term), the size and scope of your overall client relationship with GS, and legal and regulatory constraints. As an example, certain clients may request to receive notifications when research on specific securities is published, and certain clients may request that specific data underlying analysts’ fundamental analysis available on our internal client websites be delivered to them electronically through data feeds or otherwise. No change to an analyst’s fundamental research views (e.g., ratings, price targets, or material changes to earnings estimates for equity securities), will be communicated to any client prior to inclusion of such information in a research report broadly disseminated through electronic publication to our internal client websites or through other means, as necessary, to all clients who are entitled to receive such reports.

All research reports are disseminated and available to all clients simultaneously through electronic publication to our internal client websites. Not all research content is redistributed to our clients or available to third-party aggregators, nor is Goldman Sachs responsible for the redistribution of our research by third party aggregators. For research, models or other data related to one or more securities, markets or asset classes (including related services) that may be available to you, please contact your GS representative or go to

Disclosure information is also available at or from Research Compliance, 200 West Street, New York, NY 10282.

© 2022 Goldman Sachs.

No part of this material may be (i) copied, photocopied or duplicated in any form by any means or (ii) redistributed without the prior written consent of The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.