UnConflicted

Online poll: State should promote solar energy

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 15:23:00 +0000

by Charles Warner
Editor

February 23, 2012

The State of South Carolina should use business tax credits to promote the growth of solar energy in the state according to the majority of the readers who participated in an online poll conducted by The Union Daily Times.

The Finance Committee of the SC Senate is currently considering House Bill 3346 which would provide tax credits of 35 percent for the installation of solar equipment on commercial buildings. The bill is supported by the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce (SCSBCC) as a means of stimulating economic development and job growth.

In a telephone interview with The Union Daily Times earlier this month, SCSBCC President Frank Knapp pointed out that passage of the bill would provide South Carolina with “a great opportunity to jump start a renewable energy industry” similar to what North Carolina has done. Knapp said North Carolina used tax credits to make solar equipment more affordable for businesses in the state. He said passage of House Bill 3346 would make South Carolina more attractive to the solar energy industry, promoting the growth of the state’s renewable energy sector including small businesses and even solar farms.

While South Carolina currently offers some residential solar tax credits it does not provide them for commercial facilities. Despite this, Knapp said some companies are already installing solar panels on their facilities to heat water and/or generate electricity. Among them is Boeing, which Knapp said has already installed solar panels on its new plant in North Charleston and the Columbia Museum of Art in Columbia which has also installed solar panels on its building.

For many businesses, however, especially small ones, installation of solar equipment is not currently cost-effective without the kind of tax incentives that would be provided with the passage of House Bill 3346. Knapp said that with the tax credits, South Carolina would reap the economic benefits of increased revenue through economic development and job creation resulting from the growth of the solar energy industry.

In addition to the benefits of economic development and job creation, the SCSBCC website states that the growth of the solar energy industry would reduce the need for building expensive new energy producing plants. It would also help reduce the carbon emissions that contribute to climate change which threatens South Carolina’s tourism and recreation industries.

Taken together, Knapp said this makes solar equipment credits for business a good investment for the state.

Poll

An overwhelming majority of those who participated in an online poll conducted last week by The Union Daily Times agreed.

The poll asked readers “Should the State of South Carolina use business tax credits to promote the growth of solar energy?”

A total of 50 votes were cast with 68 percent or 34 voting yes and 32 percent or 16 voting no.

Knapp welcomed the poll results as a sign of growing public support for the use of tax incentives to promote the growth of the solar power industry in South Carolina.

“This is very good news, we’re very happy that the readers of The Union Daily Times agree with the position that we need to offer financial incentives for commercial solar equipment to both create small business jobs and reduce our energy demands,” Knapp said Wednesday afternoon. “Alternative and renewable energy really is the future for South Carolina and the country and passage of this bill will put us on the road to that end.”

Court victory for small businesses

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 14:52:00 +0000

The wheels of justice turn slowly but they do turn.

On Wednesday a ruling by the South Carolina Court of Appeals found in favor of the state’s Consumer Advocate in an extremely important issue affecting workers’ compensation insurance premiums. Our own Department of Insurance was fighting to keep the Consumer Advocate, the S.C. Small Business Chamber and other parties from having the ability to challenge data used by the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI) to justify its proposals that result in premium increases or decreases.

Here is the background (don't let your eyes glaze over).

Currently the law prescribes that proposed average increases in workers’ compensation insurance loss costs rates must be approved by an Administrative Law Judge in a public hearing if requested by the S.C. Consumer Advocate. The “loss cost” is a vital part of how insurance companies determine future rates for businesses. This open process is an opportunity for the Consumer Advocate and business community to challenge in court any proposed rate increase that will effectively raise premiums. However, if the workers’ compensation insurance industry proposes an average decrease in overall loss costs, no matter how slight, the state’s Consumer Advocate and businesses community cannot challenge the proposal before a Judge even if a much more significant decrease is warranted. That was how the Department of Insurance interpreted the current law—so much for transparency.

In 2009 NCCI proposed a 0.3 percent overall decrease in loss costs. Even though many of us felt that the data might justify an even greater decrease, there was no ability to review the data and possibly show that a bigger decrease was justified. The Small Business Chamber, which has intervened numerous times to fight rate increases, and the Consumer Advocate were blocked out of the process.

That’s why Senate Bill 31 was introduced last year--to allow the Consumer advocate to review all NCCI data and request a public hearing before a Judge for any proposed change (increase or decrease) to workers’ compensation insurance loss costs.

But the Consumer Advocate didn’t wait for legislation to help small businesses. Elliott Elam challenged the Department of Insurance and NCCI in court arguing that while NCCI did propose a 0.3 percent average decrease in loss costs, there were businesses categories that were recommended for an increase. This, he argued, meant that he should be able to review all the data and interested parties be allowed to challenge the NCCI filing in Court even if the overall average loss costs is a decrease in rates.

Yesterday the Court of Appeals agreed with the Consumer Advocate—a victory for small business. (See the WorkCompCentral story below.)

So now the question is whether S.31 is needed. The jury is out on that and will probably depend on whether our Department of Insurance wants to keep protecting the insurance industry’s ability to hide data from the consumer by appealing this Court ruling. Stay tuned.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WorkCompCentral
February 23, 2012

Court Upholds Consumer Advocate's Right to Review Rate Filings

The South Carolina Consumer Advocate has a right to inspect loss-cost data from the National Council on Compensation Insurance, even if NCCI is calling for an overall average decrease in rates, the South Carolina Court of Appeals ruled on Wednesday.

The court reversed a decision by the Administrative Law Court that prevented the advocate, who operates under the Department of Consumer Affairs, from reviewing NCCI rate filings when they call for an overall decrease.

The court pointed out that loss costs are just one element of the total rate that is approved by the Department of Insurance. Even when the average rate decreases, loss-cost changes filed by NCCI can result in increases for individual classification codes.

"In this case, the NCCI's filing contains increases in many classifications," the appellate court said in its opinion. "Had the Legislature intended to make publication a requirement only for overall increases, it could have amended Section 38-73-910 to specify it is only concerned with 'overall' increases as it did in other paragraphs of Section 38-73-910."

NCCI has submitted loss-cost filings that call for overall rate decreases in each of the past three years, so Consumer Advocate Elliot F. Elam Jr. has not been able to review the data to form an opinion as to whether the decreases were adequate given insurers' loss experience. For 2010, however, NCCI has called for an average increase of 7.3% to take effect July 1. The Insurance Department has not yet approved the filing.

Action Alert!!!

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 16:55:00 +0000

Put small business development on State’s agenda

The South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce has been a leading advocate of the state putting more emphasis on small business economic development. Senate Bill 1089 has been introduced to do just that. It would create the Division of Small Business and Entrepreneurial Development in the S.C. Department of Commerce.

One primary duty of this new office would be to help local units of government grow locally-owned businesses by giving them expert guidance and facilitation in developing and implementing a small business growth plan. Such a small business program was very successful in Georgia under former Governor Sonny Purdue. This boots on the ground effort mirrors what the state currently does for big business recruitment.

Contact the Senators below before tomorrow (Wednesday) and ask that they vote for S.1089. Tell them:

Small business development is just as important as big business recruitment. Local government needs the same professional help in developing and implementing a small business growth plan as they do for big business recruitment. A Division of Small Business and Entrepreneurship Development is the commitment to small business economic development that we need.

The Senators on the subcommittee will vote on this bill this Wednesday morning. Please use the links below to email them or call their state offices today.

Senators (click on name for email) Telephone
Kevin Bryant, Chairman (803) 212-6024

Shane Massey (803) 212-6000

Lee Bright (803) 212-6108
Glenn Reese (803) 212-6108

Kent Williams (803) 212-6008

NFIB poll: regulations vs. lack of customers

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:26:00 +0000

I know that I pick on these guys relentlessly but every once in a while they produce some good information. I’m talking about the NFIB (National Federation of Independent Business) or in this case the NFIB Research Foundation.

The Foundation released a new study, Small Business, Credit Access, and a Lingering Recession. William J. Dennis Jr., Senior Research Fellow and author of the report, concludes:

The many fruitless attempts by policymakers to understand and improve the credit market for small businesses are due to the fact that they have thus far failed to adequately address the root causes of the economic crisis – lost confidence and uncertainty, and the housing crisis. The real estate situation has been the elephant in the room since the onset of the Great Recession and remains a substantial variable in the current plight of small business. Washington has responded by doing just enough to be dangerous, but far too little to have any long-term positive impact. Until a workable solution is implemented, we can only expect glacial economic improvement from the small-business sector. It is not a good time to be optimistic, but small-business owners by nature seem to be.

I’ve been saying for some time that if we solve the foreclosure problem in the country and allow underwater property owners to refinance or reduce their mortgage principals, we will get the economy rolling by improving real estate values, invigorating the housing construction industry and putting more money in homeowners’ pockets.

But diving into the provided results of this study there is a very interesting finding related to another hot controversy in Washington—what is the top problem holding back small business growth? Is it regulations or lack of consumer spending?

Here is what the NFIB report found regarding the issue of greatest financial concern to small business owners--“uncertainty” (33%), “poor sales” (23%) and “inability to obtain credit” (15%).

The report further broke down the responses for those citing “uncertainty” and found that 54% of these were related to the weak economy (“will sales strengthen or slide? and by how much? What will happen to their input costs?”). Another 23% of the “uncertainty” respondents cited policy/political conditions—federal and state taxes and budgets, regulations, healthcare reform, etc. Another 23% of the “uncertainty” respondents referenced both economic and policy/political conditions.

So that you don’t have to do the math, here are the numbers if we’re just interested in the regulations vs. lack of consumer demand issue.

Of all the responses to the question of what is the greatest financial concern for small business owners, somewhere between 23% and 47% were most concerned about poor sales now and in the future. We can’t know for sure from reading the report because the author didn’t give us enough detail about some of the “uncertainty” responses.

But we do know from the information given that regulations are well down on the small business owners’ list of concerns. The report barely mentions regulations as a response and lumps these with non-regulation responses in the “policy/political uncertainty” category that only accounted for 7.59% of the total responses to the question.

The U.S. Senate will be addressing three anti-regulations bills soon and you can expect a lot of heated rhetoric about “job killing” regulations. Clearly based on this NFIB study, the Senate will be wasting precious time and energy that would be better spent on solving our housing crisis.

"Good" morning

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:27:00 +0000

We made some good progress in the SC Legislature yesterday morning.

A Senate subcommittee carried over a regulation to give the state’s Workers’ Compensation Commission a free hand at changing the methodology used to determine compensation for specific medical providers. Two of the three Senators appeared to be leaning against the proposed regulatory change. The South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce (SCSBCC) opposes this change because the inevitable result will be certain well-heeled medical providers will use their influence to be paid more for services. Workers’ compensation insurance premiums would then have to be raised. We believe that the Legislature should maintain oversight of the current scientifically-based methodology where all medical providers are treated the same regardless of their deep pockets. (See story below)

About 50 independent auto glass installers joined the SCSBCC in a press conference (see pic from yesterday’s blog below) in support of a House Bill to restrict an unfair trade practice used by Safelite Corporation to steer business in its direction. Safelite, a foreign-owned multinational corporation, operates call-centers for about 150 auto insurance companies taking customer calls that include questions about replacing damaged auto glass. The SC Auto Glass Installers Association with over 300 members correctly feels that Safelite should not be able to use its customer call centers for the insurance industry to increase its auto glass business (think how you would feel if your customers had to go through your competition to get to you). Later that morning the Senate Committee hearing the bill approved an amendment to the legislation and voted it out to the full Senate.

It was a good morning for small business, not so good for some well-financed special interests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WorkCompCentral
February 16, 2012

Effort to Break Ties with RBRVS Likely Dead for the Session

By Michael Whiteley, Eastern Bureau Chief

An effort by the South Carolina Workers' Compensation Commission (WCC) for the authority to adopt a fee schedule that isn't tied to Medicare's pricing system appears to be dead for the 2012 legislative session because of fears over what future commissions might do, officials confirmed on Wednesday.

A special subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee met on Wednesday morning and took no action on proposed Regulation 67-1302(A), which the commission voted to send to the South Carolina Legislature for approval last September.

Under South Carolina's Administrate Procedures Act, lawmakers must approve changes to state regulations, vote them down or allow them to take effect without action.

Senate Judiciary Subcommittee Chairman Larry Martin, R-Pickens, said in an interview following the committee meeting that the regulation has no chance of approval by the full Senate in its present form, and that he had no suggestions for changing the proposed regulation.

He said the subcommittee is planning a second hearing, during which it will probably pass a resolution recommending that the proposed rule be withdrawn.

"It looks like the business community is pretty unanimously opposed to the regulation and has expressed serious concerns about what the commission may or may not do in the future," Martin said.

He said he expects the full Senate to support a proposal to order the rule be withdrawn.

The South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce and the South Carolina Small Business Regulatory Review Committee opposed the rule. The groups demanded last year that the commission provide an economic impact statement and regulatory flexibility analysis before going forward with the regulation.

WCC Executive Director Gary Cannon, who testified in favor of the rules change on Wednesday, said the proposed regulation would have no impact without further action by the commission at a later date.

The current regulation sets maximum reimbursements for physicians' fees based on the Resource-Based Relative Value Scale (RBRVS) used by Medicare, plus a single South Carolina conversion factor for services provided by all types of physicians except anesthesiologists, who are paid using a different method.

The state's orthopedic surgeons, pain management doctors and neurologists have called on the commission to create multiple conversion factors or scrap the Medicare-based schedule altogether. They argue the Medicare RBRVS system tends to penalize specialists.

The proposed regulation removes the requirement that maximum allowable payments be "based on a relative value scale and conversion factor set by the commission."

Frank Knapp, president of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce, told the panel on Wednesday that the rules change will boost workers' compensation premiums in the state. He called on lawmakers to exercise their authority to deny the rule.

The National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI) earlier this week submitted a proposal to increase loss costs by 7.3%. That recommendation was not based on the fee schedule, but on increasing indemnity and medical claims costs.

"This ensures that special interest medical providers are not exerting undue influence over the commission as to compensation that would directly benefit only them, as opposed to all providers, and add significant cost to the system," Knapp said.

The South Carolina Orthopaedic Society did not return a telephone call from WorkCompCentral, but has warned lawmakers that some orthopedic surgeons may pull out of the workers' compensation system if payments aren't increased.

Cannon said the commission has no plans to come back to lawmakers with a revised rule.

"The biggest argument I came away with today was the unknown factor," Cannon said. "While they trust the current commission with regard to the fee schedule, there is fear about what future commissions may do."

South Carolina gives lawmakers 120 legislative days to approve a state regulatory change, vote it down or allow it to take effect without action.

The regulation would take effect automatically if the House and Senate don't vote to withdraw it by May 9.

The Senate meeting announcement and a link to the proposed regulation are here.

Busy morning

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:19:00 +0000

No time to write this morning. Before noon I will have testified at 2 state Senate subcommittee meetings, held a press conference and met with two Senators—an unusually busy but important morning.

The issues are these:

1. Protecting businesses from workers’ compensation premium increases by maintaining legislative oversight of the methods used to determine medical service compensation.

2. Increasing the state’s ability to identify and stop false and fraudulent claims for payments from the state.

3. Protecting over 300 small, locally-owned auto glass installers from unfair trade practices of one foreign-owned BIG business.

4. Creating a Division of Small Business and Entrepreneurial Development within the Department of Commerce to devote some resources to helping local government plan for and grow locally-owned businesses.

It’s a great day in South Carolina.

Riots vs. Jobs

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:22:00 +0000

There are riots in Greece. The economies of Britain, Italy and Spain are not bouncing back from the Great Recession like they did after the Great Depression. Why? Because the governments in these countries opted for austerity and deficit reduction instead of investing in jobs as a way out of the recession.

Which brings us to President Obama’s proposed 2013 budget released yesterday.

As you might recall, I serve as Vice Chair of the American Sustainable Business Council. That organization and Business for Shared Prosperity put out a press release yesterday to discuss some of the President’s budget items. The release (below) was picked up by some of the national media (here and here).

Happy Valentine’s Day!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

February 13, 2012

Small Business Owners Support President’s Budget on Taxes, Infrastructure

Majorities favor higher taxes on wealthy, closing corporate loopholes, investing in infrastructure

Washington, DC – Small business owners favor key provisions of the President’s 2013 budget designed to support domestic job creation, modernize infrastructure and raise needed revenue with fairer taxes. These include increasing taxes on the wealthy, eliminating hedge fund manager tax breaks, ending tax deductions for shipping jobs overseas, closing corporate loopholes, investing in infrastructure, and keeping first responders and teachers on the job.

"Small business owners struggled through a recession we didn't cause yet we still lead the economy in job creation. So it's good to see the President propose steps that small business owners know will really jumpstart the economy – investing in infrastructure to create blue-collar jobs, keeping valuable service providers on the job, bringing manufacturing jobs back home and covering the cost by asking the wealthiest and big corporations to pay their fair share in taxes,” said Frank Knapp, President and CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce and Vice Chair of the American Sustainable Business Council. “Austerity plans, like those that are causing riots in Europe, are wrong for America. We need investment in job growth. We are the 'job creators' – listen to us."

Small business owners made their views clear on taxes and investment in a recent nationwide survey in which 50 percent of respondents identified as Republican or independent-leaning Republican; 32 percent as Democrat or independent-leaning Democratic; and 15 percent as independent. Majorities in the scientific poll commissioned by the American Sustainable Business Council, Main Street Alliance and Small Business Majority, said the following:

Taxes

· 57 percent said individuals earning more than $1 million a year should pay a higher tax rate on the income over $1 million.

· 81 percent favor hedge fund managers paying taxes at the ordinary income tax rate, which currently tops out at 35 percent, rather than the 15 percent capital gains rate they pay now.

· 91 percent said that U.S. multinational corporations’ use of accounting loopholes to shift their U.S. profits to their offshore subsidiaries to avoid taxes is a problem.

· When asked what would do the most to create jobs, small business owners chose eliminating incentives to move jobs overseas.

· 51 percent say tax cuts on taxable household income over $250,000 a year should expire (only 40 percent believe they should be extended).

Infrastructure and other Investment

· 69 percent of small business owners support committing $50 billion to new and existing infrastructure projects that would generate jobs—such as making improvements to road, bridge and water systems.

· 59 percent favor creating a nationwide wireless network and improving the accessibility of high-speed wireless services.

· 59 percent support creating a National Infrastructure Bank to help fund infrastructure, like roads, bridges, and water systems, via private and public capital.

· 53 percent favor spending $35 billion to prevent layoffs of police officers, teachers, and firefighters.

Read the poll reports here:

Small Business Owners’ Views on Taxes and How to Level the Playing Field with Big Business

Small Business Owner Opinions on Access to Credit and Proposals to Boost the Economy

“The American Sustainable Business Council supports the sensible tax and investment provisions in the President’s budget,” said David Levine, CEO of the American Sustainable Business Council. “The smart use of public funds for job creation, education, infrastructure and scientific research is crucial to restoring American leadership in world-class innovation, services and manufacturing.”

“As a successful corporate executive, I recognize that our tax code is unfair and replete with tax shelters and loopholes favoring the wealthy,” said Jack Kintslinger, chairman emeritus of KCI Technologies, Inc. and a member of Business for Shared Prosperity. “Most wealthy business executives I know are prepared to contribute more in taxes if the additional revenues are spent wisely. They know that they can spare paying higher taxes and that the nation desperately needs more revenue for essential services.”

“The combination of a hurting middle class, crumbling infrastructure and irresponsibly low taxes on the biggest corporations and richest Americans is no recipe for innovation, employment and national success,” said Jody Gorran, owner of Aquatherm Industries Inc., a manufacturer in New Jersey. “It’s time for big corporations and wealthy Americans to stop passing the buck, pay their fair share in taxes, create jobs here at home and invest in our nation’s future.”

Poll results reported in this statement represent findings from a scientific nationwide survey of 500 small business owners, commissioned by the American Sustainable Business Council, Main Street Alliance and Small Business Majority, and conducted by Lake Research Partners. The survey was conducted in December 2011 and January 2012. It has a margin of error of +/- 4.4%.

###

The American Sustainable Business Council is a growing coalition of business networks representing over 100,000 companies and 200,000 business leaders. ASBC advocates for public policies that meet the realities of the 21st century global economy. www.asbcouncil.org

Business for Shared Prosperity is a national network of forward-thinking business owners, executives and investors. BSP is a member of the American Sustainable Business Council. www.businessforsharedprosperity.org

Action Alert!!

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:49:00 +0000

Protect Workers’ Comp Rates from Special Interests Wanting More Money

The Workers’ Compensation Commission is asking the Legislature for a free hand at changing the way medical providers are compensated. Well-financed special interest medical providers are pushing for this change. If they are successful, the result will be higher premiums for the small businesses of our state.

This Wednesday at 9AM, three Senators will hold a public hearing on R.4188. The South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce, the South Carolina Small Business Regulatory Review Committee and the American Insurance Association all oppose R.4188.

We need your help. Please contact the three Senators below and ask them to vote NO on R.4188. Please tell them the following:

The current system for determining compensation to medical providers is objective and fair. The General Assembly should not give the Workers’ Compensation Commission the power to make changes to this system without first going to the Legislature with a specific proposal. A vote for R.4188 is a vote for raising workers’ compensation insurance premiums on small businesses.

Please email or call the state offices of these Senators immediately. They’re contact information can be found below.

Senators:
Larry Martin (Chair) http://www.scstatehouse.gov/member.php?code=1172727132

Tom Davis http://www.scstatehouse.gov/member.php?code=0456818127

Floyd Nicholson http://www.scstatehouse.gov/member.php?code=1419318012

New proposal to help underwater homeowners

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:31:00 +0000

Today or tomorrow all 50 states are expected to sign off on a $37 billion settlement with Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citibank and Ally Financial that will provide compensation to homeowners who were harmed with nefarious foreclosure practices.

This deal between the big banks and the states’ attorneys general will result in mortgage principle reductions, refinancing at lower rates and cash to the wronged homeowners.

While this is good news for those who suffered and will give some help to the economy from an influx of money at the local level, we need to help the rest of the underwater homeowners in this country and put the final nail in the coffin of this down-economy.

In his State of the Union address last month President Obama said:

I’m sending this Congress a plan that gives every responsible homeowner the chance to save about $3,000 a year on their mortgage, by refinancing at historically low interest rates. No more red tape. No more runaround from the banks. A small fee on the largest financial institutions will ensure that it won’t add to the deficit, and will give banks that were rescued by taxpayers a chance to repay a deficit of trust.

But with the GOP in Congress unlikely to allow any Obama-proposal that will help improve the economy before November, a New York Times editorial proposes another path to helping homeowners struggling to pay mortgages while invigorating the new housing construction market.

According to the editorial the Treasury Department can, without Congressional approval, give stronger financial incentives to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and private banks to help homeowners by reducing the principle on underwater home loans.

If a politically paralyzed Congress is not going to take action to accelerate our economy by reducing foreclosures and thus jump-starting the home building industry, then the Administration must do what it can on its own.

Small business poll

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:34:00 +0000

On regulations, taxes and money in politics…"We're not like them"

Columbia, SC—A national poll shows the opinions of small business owners differ dramatically from the advocacy of big businesses and multinational corporations. The results of the national scientific poll were released over the past four weeks by the American Sustainable Business Council, Main Street Alliance and Small Business Majority. The poll was conducted by Lake Research Partners between December 8, 2011 and January 4, 2012.

"Many of the real opinions of small business owners are far different than what are portrayed by big business interests," said Frank Knapp, Jr., Vice Chair of the American Sustainable Business Council and President/CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce.

"There are some real ‘man-bites-dog’ stories here that are particularly amazing since half of the respondents self-identified as either Republican or leaning Republican," said Knapp.

"Small business owners do not hate regulations,” said Knapp. “They support regulations ensuring clean air and water and those moving the country toward energy efficiency and clean energy. And regulations are not stopping hiring as we've been hearing—lack of consumer demand is doing that. In fact, small business owners view regulations as protecting them from big business."

“Small business owners also don’t agree with the big business mantra on taxation,” said Knapp. “They say that big businesses and multinational corporations use loopholes to avoid paying their fair share of taxes which harms small businesses. A majority of these owners also support higher tax rates on individual income over $1 million, even $250,000.”

“These opinions fly in the face of the rhetoric about not raising taxes on the wealthiest because they are the ‘job creators’”, said Knapp. “Small businesses are leading the job recovery in this country and they believe the wealthiest corporations and individuals are not paying their fair share of taxes.”

“On other issues small business owners share the public’s disgust with money in politics and disapprove of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision,” said Knapp. “Citizens United has unleashed massive amount of money from big corporations and millionaires and billionaires into political campaigns. Small businesses believed they have been harmed because of this.”

Below are details of the poll results:

Small business owners see their top problem as weak customer demand, not regulations: 34 percent cited weak customer demand as the most important problem for their business, while only 14 percent named government regulations.
On the question of what would do the most to create jobs, cutting regulations came in low on the list: the top response was eliminating incentives to move jobs overseas at 24 percent; reducing regulation was fifth at 10 percent.
Small business owners see an important role for standards and safeguards: 78 percent believe some standards are important to protect small businesses from unfair competition, and 76 percent believe regulations on the books should be enforced.
Small business owners see regulations as necessary for a modern economy: 93 percent agree their business can live with some regulation if it is fair, manageable and reasonable.
Small business owners express strong support for specific rules and standards: 78 percent support rules to prevent health insurance companies from increasing rates excessively, 84 percent support food safety standards, 80 percent support product safety standards and 80 percent support disclosure and regulation of toxic materials.
Small business owners support clean energy policies: 79 percent support ensuring clean air and water, and 61 percent support moving the country towards energy efficiency and clean energy.
Small businesses believe in streamlining government processes: 73 percent of respondents believe we should allow for one-stop electronic filing of government paperwork.
Nine out of ten small business owners say big corporations use loopholes to avoid taxes that small businesses have to pay: 92 percent say big corporations’ use of such loopholes is a problem. Three-quarters of owners say their small business is harmed when loopholes allow big corporations to avoid taxes.
Nine out of ten small business owners say that U.S. multinational corporations’ use of accounting loopholes to shift their U.S. profits to their offshore subsidiaries to avoid taxes is a problem: 91 percent agree it is a problem, with 55 percent saying it’s a very serious problem. When asked what would do the most to create jobs, small business owners chose eliminating incentives to move jobs overseas.
Small business owners say big corporations are not paying their fair share of taxes: 67 percent believe big corporations pay less than their fair share. An even bigger majority, 73 percent, says multinational corporations pay less than their fair share.
Small business owners say millionaires pay less than their fair share in taxes: 58 percent say households whose annual income exceeds $1 million pay less than their fair share.
Small business owners support a higher tax rate for individuals earning more than $1 million: 57 percent agree that individuals earning more than $1 million a year should pay a higher tax rate on the income over $1 million.
Small business owners want to eliminate the “carried interest” loophole that gives hedge fund managers a big break on their taxes: 81 percent favor hedge fund managers paying taxes at the ordinary income tax rate, which currently tops out at 35 percent, rather than the 15 percent capital gains rate they pay now.
Small business owners support ending upper-income tax cuts: 51 percent say Congress should let tax cuts on taxable household income over $250,000 a year expire (only 40 percent believe they should be extended).
Respondents in this scientific national survey were politically diverse, with a majority Republican or independent-leaning Republican: 50 percent identified as Republican (27 percent) or independent-leaning Republican (23 percent); 32 percent as Democrat (14 percent) or independent-leaning Democratic (18 percent); and 15 percent as independent.
Small business owners say Citizens United decision hurts small businesses: 66 percent of small business owners view Citizens United v. FEC decision as bad for small businesses; 88 percent hold negative view of money in politics overall.

Read the full poll reports at these links:

http://www.asbcouncil.org/poll_regulations.html

http://www.asbcouncil.org/uploads/Taxes_Poll_Report_FINAL.pdf

http://www.asbcouncil.org/poll_money_in_politics.html

http://www.asbcouncil.org/poll_access_to_credit.html

What's better than the Super Bowl? An award.

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 16:00:00 +0000

The highlight for most people this past weekend was the Super Bowl. For me it was receiving the South Carolina Sierra Club’s Media Person of the Year award for my weekday talk-radio show.

The Sierra Club has appreciated the opportunity to talk about conservation, the environment and alternative renewable energy on the air with me in a radio market not particularly friendly to its issues. But for many years I and the SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce have recognized the importance of these issues to the state and our economy. My radio show has been an extension of those positions.

No general business organization in the state has been more supportive of efforts to fight against climate change than the Small Business Chamber. We recognize the negative effects will impact our small business tourism economy severely. We also see the potential of alternative energy in controlling energy costs and creating new small businesses.

So thank you Sierra Club for the recognition. The plaque is already on my wall.

Poll: Small Business Owners Say Big Businesses, Millionaires Not Paying Fair Share of Taxes

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 15:52:00 +0000

90 percent of small business owners in nationwide poll say big corporations use loopholes to avoid taxes that small businesses have to pay; majority support increasing taxes on millionaires and letting high-end tax cuts expire

Washington, DC – Small business owners see corporate tax loopholes and accounting gimmicks used to shift U.S. profits offshore to avoid taxes as serious problems, according to an independent nationwide opinion poll released today. Small business owners think big corporations and the wealthy don’t pay their fair share of taxes, the poll shows. They support increasing taxes on millionaire incomes, letting high-end tax cuts expire, and closing the carried interest loophole that gives big tax breaks to hedge fund managers.

These are among the key findings summarized below of a scientific nationwide survey of small business owners released by the American Sustainable Business Council, Main Street Alliance and Small Business Majority. Click here to read the report.

“I’ve been in business 32 years, and I’m appalled at how big corporations and millionaires have shrunk their taxes,” said Lew Prince, managing partner of Vintage Vinyl, an independent music store in St. Louis, MO. “Ingrates like Amazon wouldn’t even exist without the Internet, which grew out of government research. The least that big corporations and their executives could do is pay their fair share for the roads, ports, education, research, public safety and everything else that tax dollars buy.”

“When big corporations like GE use loopholes and tax havens to avoid paying taxes, they’re starving our country of the revenues we need to invest in our communities and our future,” said Amanda Harrow, director of the Montana Small Business Alliance, a statewide network of small businesses. “Small business owners know that to build vibrant local economies we have to invest in education, infrastructure and building a healthy customer base. When big corporations that benefit from these essential investments don't do their part to support them, they’re jeopardizing our future. That’s unacceptable.”

“We need a Buffett Rule for wealthy individuals and a GE Rule for corporations,” said Scott Klinger, director of tax policy for Business for Shared Prosperity, a partner in the American Sustainable Business Council. “Warren Buffett spotlighted the madness of a tax code that lets him pay a lower rate than his secretary. Likewise, U.S. multinational corporations who shift U.S. profits offshore to avoid taxes shouldn’t be rewarded with a tax rate below Main Street employers.”

“Small businesses are the backbone of the economy, yet they feel the playing field is tilted in big businesses' favor and small firms are at a disadvantage when it comes to taxes and corporate loopholes,” said John Arensmeyer, founder and CEO of Small Business Majority. “Our economy needs to work for everyone. Policymakers need to listen to small businesses and level the economic playing field. If they do, we will all benefit from what small businesses can offer.”

Key findings from the survey include:

· Nine out of ten small business owners say big corporations use loopholes to avoid taxes that small businesses have to pay: 92 percent say big corporations’ use of such loopholes is a problem. Three-quarters of owners say their small business is harmed when loopholes allow big corporations to avoid taxes.

· Nine out of ten small business owners say that U.S. multinational corporations’ use of accounting loopholes to shift their U.S. profits to their offshore subsidiaries to avoid taxes is a problem: 91 percent agree it is a problem, with 55 percent saying it’s a very serious problem. When asked what would do the most to create jobs, small business owners chose eliminating incentives to move jobs overseas.

· Small business owners say big corporations are not paying their fair share of taxes: 67 percent believe big corporations pay less than their fair share. An even bigger majority, 73 percent, says multinational corporations pay less than their fair share.

· Small business owners say millionaires pay less than their fair share in taxes: 58 percent say households whose annual income exceeds $1 million pay less than their fair share.

· Small business owners support a higher tax rate for individuals earning more than $1 million: 57 percent agree that individuals earning more than $1 million a year should pay a higher tax rate on the income over $1 million.

· Small business owners want to eliminate the “carried interest” loophole that gives hedge fund managers a big break on their taxes: 81 percent favor hedge fund managers paying taxes at the ordinary income tax rate, which currently tops out at 35 percent, rather than the 15 percent capital gains rate they pay now.

· Small business owners support ending upper-income tax cuts: 51 percent say Congress should let tax cuts on taxable household income over $250,000 a year expire (only 40 percent believe they should be extended).

· Respondents in this scientific national survey were politically diverse, with a majority Republican or independent-leaning Republican: 50 percent identified as Republican (27 percent) or independent-leaning Republican (23 percent); 32 percent as Democrat (14 percent) or independent-leaning Democratic (18 percent); and 15 percent as independent.

For more information on these poll findings, visit:

http://www.asbcouncil.org/uploads/Taxes_Poll_Report_FINAL.pdf

http://mainstreetalliance.org/5535/poll-taxes/

http://www.smallbusinessmajority.org/small-business-research/downloads/020612_Taxes_Poll_Report.pdf

Poll results reported in this statement represent findings from a scientific national survey of 500 small business owners, commissioned by the American Sustainable Business Council, Main Street Alliance and Small Business Majority, and conducted by Lake Research Partners. The nationwide Internet survey was conducted between December 8, 2011, and January 4, 2012. It has a margin of error of +/- 4.4%.

###

The American Sustainable Business Council is a powerful coalition of business networks representing over 100,000 companies and 200,000 business leaders. ASBC advocates for public policies that meet the realities of the 21st century global economy. www.asbcouncil.org

The Main Street Alliance is a national network of state-based small business coalitions. MSA creates opportunities for small business owners to speak for themselves on issues that impact their businesses and local economies. www.mainstreetalliance.org

Small Business Majority is a national nonpartisan small business advocacy organization, founded and run by small business owners, and focused on solving the biggest problems facing America’s 28 million small businesses. We conduct extensive opinion and economic research and work with small business owners, policy experts and elected officials nationwide to bring small business voices to the public policy table. www.smallbusinessmajority.org

More jobs, less unemployment…thank small businesses

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 15:46:00 +0000

243,000 more jobs in January. Unemployment rate down to 8.3% from 8.5% last month.

All good news from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The ADP National Employment Report had a different number, 170,000, for new jobs in January for nonfarm private employment. But the ADP’s analysis of where those jobs came from was important.

Total new jobs:                                                                        170,000
Small Businesses   (1-49 employees)                                        95,000 (56%)
Medium Businesses   (50-499 employees)                                72,000 (42%)
Large Businesses (500 and more employees)                           3,000 (less than 2%)

Small business continues to lead the way in growing the economy. Now if Congress would only listen to our voices about our needs instead of listening to big business and multinationals pretending to be concerned with small business.

Small business polls reject anti-regulation rhetoric

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 15:34:00 +0000

The Hill's Congress Blog
February 1, 2012

By Frank Knapp, Jr.

With Congress back in session, the Senate will have several bills to consider that seek to make it nearly impossible for federal agencies to implement regulations. The REINS Act, the Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act and the Regulatory Accountability Act have already passed in the House.

Advocates for these radical measures claim they are primarily needed because regulations are the top reason for small businesses not hiring. But a new nationwide poll of small business owners released today adds to numerous other surveys that refute this position.

The poll conducted by Lake Research for three national business organizations – American Sustainable Business Alliance, Main Street Alliance and Small Business Majority – found that the top problem for small business was weak customer demand, not regulations. In fact, reducing regulations came in fifth when small business owners were asked what needed to be done to create jobs. Eliminating incentives for employers to move jobs overseas came in first.

Contrary to anti-regulations rhetoric, 78 percent of small business owners see government standards as an important tool to level the playing field with big business and 86 percent view regulations as a necessary component of a modern economy: 93 percent agreed that their business could live with fair regulations and 78 percent agree that some standards are important to protect small businesses from unfair competition. Moreover, 76 percent said that regulations on the books should be enforced.

Small business owners express strong support for specific rules and standards:

•    84 percent support food safety standards
•    80 percent support product safety standards
•    80 percent support disclosure and regulation of toxic materials
•    79 percent support ensuring clean air and water
•    78 percent support rules to prevent health insurance companies from increasing rates     excessively
•    67 percent support rules to curtail financial speculation by Wall Street and banks.
•    61 percent support moving the country towards energy efficiency and clean energy.

There was much evidence of the same results to the “customer demand versus regulations” debate in 2011:

•    McClatchy News Service reported in September 2011 that they surveyed owners of small businesses, many of them mom-and-pop operations, to find out whether they thought they were being “choked by regulation.” Not one of the owners complained about regulation in their industries, “and most seemed to welcome it,” McClatchy reported.

•    In November 2011 the Hartford Financial Services Group reported that its survey of 2000 small businesses found that 75 percent of the respondents were struggling to succeed. The biggest barriers to their success were identified as lack of customer demand.

•    The National Federation of Independent Businesses survey of small business (conducted annually) reported that when asked what their most important problem is, almost 30 percent of small businesses reported "poor sales"; less than 14 percent reported regulation.

•    In May 2011, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce released a poll of small businesses, members and non-members. When asked what the top obstacle to hiring new employees was, only 8 percent said “too much regulation.”

Even an October Gallup poll being touted in the House Committee on Small Business hearing today as showing regulations as the top concern of small businesses actually, with more unbiased analysis, shows that the lack of customer demand is by far the number one issue of small business.

A recent big business survey shows similar results. The Business Roundtable reported last month that the main reasons for two-thirds of the biggest U.S. companies not planning on hiring in the next six months are this country’s “sluggish growth” and Europe’s economic problems. This result corresponds to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics report that 30 percent of layoffs in the first half of 2011, according to the businesses themselves, were due to lack of business demand. Less than 1 percent of the layoffs were attributed to government regulations.

So if small businesses aren’t self-identifying regulations as their top impediment to growth and big businesses in general are not citing regulations for holding back hiring, who are the pushers of the anti-regulation bills really representing?

The answer is clear. Most of the complaints we hear in Washington are from only two industries -- those impacted by Wall Street reform (Dodd-Frank) and new Environmental Protection Agency regulations. K Street lobbyists regale Congress and the public about the dire economic consequences to small businesses of regulations that will prevent another Great Recession or protect the health and safety of our citizens. In reality, the financial giants who drove our economy off a cliff and the powerful oil/coal industries (and the surrogates of both) are driving the anti-regulation train in the name of small businesses.

The truth is that small business owners favor regulations to protect the air, water, food, financial system and themselves (from big business). Wall Street and the oil and coal lobbies should stop using small business as an excuse to run roughshod over regulations and take our nation backwards in time to the era before Theodore Roosevelt.

Knapp is the vice-chair of the American Sustainable Business Council and the president/CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce.

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/economy-a-budget/207957-small-business-polls-reject-anti-regulation-rhetoric

OPINION POLL: SMALL BUSINESSES SAY WEAK CUSTOMER DEMAND, NOT REGULATIONS, THEIR PROBLEM

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:36:00 +0000

National poll finds 78 percent of small businesses say regulations needed to protect small businesses from unfair competition, level playing field with big business; 86 percent see regulations as necessary part of a modern economy

Washington, DC – Small business owners say their main concern is weak customer demand, not regulations, according to independent opinion polling released today. In fact, when asked what would do the most to create jobs, small business owners’ top response was eliminating incentives to move jobs overseas. Reducing regulation came in fifth place.

Small business owners see government standards as an important tool to level the playing field with big business. In addition to protecting small businesses the vast majority of owners view regulations as a necessary component of a modern economy. Click here to read the report, based on a national survey of 500 small business owners, released today by the American Sustainable Business Council, Main Street Alliance and Small Business Majority.

“These survey results underscore what Main Street small business owners have been saying all along: we need more customers, more demand, not deregulation,” said Jim Houser, owner of Hawthorne Auto Clinic in Portland, Oregon, and a leader with the Main Street Alliance. “In fact, I’ve seen first-hand from over 35 years in the auto industry that smart standards help create jobs and promote innovation in the U.S. economy.”

“Despite the heated rhetoric, regulations simply aren’t small businesses’ top concern,” said John Arensmeyer, founder and CEO of Small Business Majority. “Small businesses can be the jobs engine we need to jumpstart the economy, but not if legislators are focusing on something that isn’t their top problem. Policymakers should listen to what real small businesses are saying and act accordingly.”

"With football at the top of everyone's mind, if we played the game with no rules the Super Bowl winner would come down to which team was bigger or willing to play dirtier," said Frank Knapp, Jr., Vice Chair of the American Sustainable Business Council and president and CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce. "Well, regulations are the rules of the game we call private sector competition. An overwhelming percent of small business owners agree that without fair regulations creating a level playing field, small businesses won't be able to compete against big businesses. From our perspective, the effort to kill regulations is big businesses’ way of rigging the game in their favor."

Key findings from the survey include:

Small business owners see their top problem as weak customer demand, not regulations: 34 percent cited weak customer demand as the most important problem for their business, while only 14 percent named government regulations.
On the question of what would do the most to create jobs, cutting regulations came in low on the list: the top response was eliminating incentives to move jobs overseas at 24 percent; reducing regulation was fifth at 10 percent.
Small business owners see an important role for standards and safeguards: 78 percent believe some standards are important to protect small businesses from unfair competition, and 76 percent believe regulations on the books should be enforced.
Small business owners see regulations as necessary for a modern economy: 93 percent agree their business can live with some regulation if it is fair, manageable and reasonable.
Small business owners express strong support for specific rules and standards: 78 percent support rules to prevent health insurance companies from increasing rates excessively, 84 percent support food safety standards, 80 percent support product safety standards and 80 percent support disclosure and regulation of toxic materials.
Small business owners support clean energy policies: 79 percent support ensuring clean air and water, and 61 percent support moving the country towards energy efficiency and clean energy.
Small businesses believe in streamlining government processes: 73 percent of respondents believe we should allow for one-stop electronic filing of government paperwork.

For more information on these poll findings, visit:

http://www.asbcouncil.org/poll_regulations.html

http://mainstreetalliance.org/5511/poll-regs-economy/

http://smallbusinessmajority.org/small-business-research/downloads/020112_Regulations_Poll_Report.pdf

Poll results reported in this statement represent findings from an Internet survey of 500 small business owners nationwide, commissioned by the American Sustainable Business Council, Main Street Alliance and Small Business Majority, and conducted by Lake Research Partners. The survey was conducted between December 8, 2011, and January 4, 2012. It has a margin of error of +/- 4.4%.

###

The American Sustainable Business Council is a network of business organizations representing over 100,000 companies and 200,000 business leaders. ASBC advocates for public policies that meet the realities of the 21st century global economy including strategic investments in workforce and infrastructure; standards and safeguards that promote innovation, prevent abuse and protect critical resources; and a new sustainable economic model that fosters a growing, economically-secure middle class. http://www.asbcouncil.org/

The Main Street Alliance is a national network of state-based small business coalitions. MSA creates opportunities for small business owners to speak for themselves on issues that impact their businesses and local economies. http://www.mainstreetalliance.org/

Gallup misleading Congress and public

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:34:00 +0000

Tomorrow the U.S. House Committee on Small Business holds a hearing featuring the results of a Gallup poll conducted in October last year. The title of the hearing is The Path to Job Creation but the better title might be The Path to Deceiving Congress.

The issue is the role government regulations play in small business job creation. The GOP mantra this election season is that regulations are hindering job growth and must be eliminated or severely reduced. Last year the House passed numerous bills to do just that. Those bills are now in the Senate where the majority party has a different perspective on regulations and what really is holding back growth in small business—lack of cusumer demand.

The preponderance of polling results last year clearly indicate that the lack of customers is the main reason small businesses have not been able to more vigorously lead us out of the Great Recession as they have in other downturns. But the anti-regulation crowd has been trying to use the recession both to eliminate regulations opposed by big business and as a partisan weapon in this year’s elections.

The hearing tomorrow looks like an effort to elevate the regulations issue for the media and public and force the Senate into taking action on the anti-regulation bills the House has sent it.

This is where the Gallup poll comes into play. According to that poll, 22% of small business owners said that complying with government regulations was the most important problem facing small-business owners today. Gallup’s analysis of this open-ended question (respondents were not given answers to choose from) showed that of all the responses, “regulations” was the number one answer.

I have a Master’s degree in Social Psychology. But familiarity with opinion polling is not needed to bust Gallup on this poll result.

First, using an open-ended question is troubling because the decision of how to categorize each response is subjective. A response might contain mixed messages and thus must be interpreted giving the Gallup employee the final say on what the small business owner really meant in answering the question. At this point the employee’s own biases (or the biases of the employer) come into play throwing the accuracy of the poll results into question. It is interesting to note that this was the only open-ended question apparently used by Gallup in this poll.

Second, Gallup’s reporting of the answers to this question clearly shows an effort to obtain the results they wanted. Here is how Gallup listed the results:

What do you think is the most important problem facing small-business
owners like you today? [OPEN-ENDED]

Complying with government regulations                           22%
Consumer confidence                                                      15%
Lack of consumer demand                                              12%
Lack of credit availability                                                 10%
Poor leadership/Government/President                             9%
Cash flow                                                                        7%
New healthcare policy                                                      5%
Competition from big business and overseas                     4%
Lack of jobs                                                                    4%

It is not hard to see that the responses of “consumer confidence” and “lack of jobs” are simply explanations for why there is a “lack of consumer demand”. Combining those responses we find that 31% of small-business owners identified “lack of consumer demand” as their number one response far exceeding “complying with government regulations”.

We can even make the argument that “cash flow” is a problem because of “lack of consumer demand”. That would show 38% of the responses being “lack of consumer demand”.

Third, Gallup only gives us 88% of the responses to this question. Were the remaining answers so nebulous or divergent that they weren’t of value? Shouldn’t the number of these unreported responses alone have told Gallup that the open-ended question was a problem.

So now we know how Gallup was able to report the response to the question the way it did. Now the question is why?

The answer is clear. This was a Wells Fargo/Gallup poll. Wells Fargo and the other big financial giants have been vigorous opponents of the regulations coming from the passage of Dodd/Frank that is designed to protect all of us, including small businesses, from another Great Recession. Only the petroleum/coal industry has been trying harder to turn government regulations into the boogeyman responsible for all the country’s economic problems.

The PR tactic to bash regulations has been to convince Congress and the public that regulations are hurting small businesses. But as previously noted much of the survey work last year on the issue didn’t come to that conclusion. Tomorrow, results of another poll will be released by three national business organizations—American Sustainable Business Council, Main Street Alliance and Small Business Majority—again throwing water on the anti-regulation rhetoric.

It is obvious that Gallup was trying to deliver to its financing partner a response the anti-regulation folks could promote. Hence the hearing tomorrow featuring Dr. Dennis Jacob, Chief Economist of Gallup, who will talk about the poll.

But to Gallup’s credit it did ask another question with structured responses that undermines the result produced for Wells Fargo.

Thinking ahead to 2012, what would be a primary motivation or reason
for hiring and new employees?

When revenues or sales have increased                          27%
When the economy improves                                         20%
If you need to support growth or expansion plans             17%
If you need to replace an employee who left                    10%
Having tax credits for hiring unemployed workers             7%
Some other reason                                                           7%

That’s essentially 67% of small-business owners saying “increased consumer demand” will lead to job growth. Maybe the “when regulations are reduced” answer is buried in the “some other reason” response.

Multinationals aren't here to help

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:04:00 +0000

“We don’t have an obligation to solve America’s problems.”

Remember this quote from an Apple executive as reported by Charles Duhigg and Keith Bradsher. It appeared in the first of a two part story that will surely win the two New York Times journalists deserved recognition for exposing Apple’s decidedly un-American manufacturing standards in China.

Remember this quote the next time you hear Apple, which is sitting on $98 billion in cash on hand, and other multinational corporations offer to help the American economy if we only lower their corporate taxes and let them bring home overseas profits with little taxation so they can hire workers.

Remember that quote the next time Apple and their ilk lobby for more trade deals with other countries to create jobs here at home like we did with China in 2001 (we’ve lost 6 million manufacturing jobs since then).

Remember that quote when you hear Apple and their big business elite or one of their organizations like the U.S. Chamber telling the American people that they know what is best for our country.

Remember that the real motive of Apple and other multinational corporations is not to solve America’s problems. That’s because they are not American businesses any longer—they’re “citizens of the world” Thomas Friedman correctly points out in his column yesterday.

These multinationals have no allegiance to any country. They have only one goal—to make as much profit for their executives and shareholders as possible by increasing production and lowering costs. The slave-labor like conditions and slave-labor wages at Apple’s Chinese manufacturing plants are detailed in the New York Time’s stories.

Likewise, America should have no allegiance to these multinationals. When Steven Jobs told President Obama last February that the iPhone jobs aren’t coming back to America, the President should have told him that we were going to start getting tough on trade enforcement. No longer should we allow other countries to produce cheaper products due to little concern for their workers and environment. “Meet our standards or pay tariffs” the President should have told Mr. Jobs.

Almost a year after that meeting with Mr. Jobs, the President did call on tougher trade enforcement in his State of the Union. Let’s hope he means it and give him our support.

Why campaign spending rules hurt small business

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:33:00 +0000

CNN Opinion
January, 26, 2012

By David Brodwin, Special to CNN

(CNN) -- Two years ago, the Supreme Court upended the rules for campaign finance, unleashing a tsunami of unregulated, unrestricted and undisclosed spending that has, in effect, allowed donors to buy elections. The full impact of this decision is just now becoming clear, and it's bad both for America's businesses and for our democracy.

By a 5-4 majority, the Supreme Court affirmed that money is essentially speech -- a notion first addressed in Buckley v. Valeo in 1976 -- and it outlawed nearly all restrictions on independent spending by corporations or other groups, including unions, to influence elections. Such restrictions are unconstitutional violations of free speech, the court said, and are prohibited by the First Amendment.

You might expect business owners to welcome the elimination of these restrictions, but if so, you're about to be surprised. A recent poll conducted by Lake Research found that 66% of a random sample of 500 small-business owners believe the Citizens United decision was "mostly bad" or "somewhat bad" for small business. Since small businesses create 70% of new jobs in the private sector, according to the Small Business Administration, their view should matter a lot.

The poll was commissioned by the American Sustainable Business Council, the Main Street Alliance, and Small Business Majority -- three groups that represent the views of small business and which have a combined membership of more than 100,000 small businesses nationwide. The poll tapped the views of 500 small-business owners nationwide, most of whom are not members of the organizations conducting the survey.

In addition to taking a dim view of Citizens United, 88% of the small-business owners in the poll had a negative view of the role money plays in politics. (The margin of error in the poll is plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.)

Small-business owners believe in our market-based, capitalist system, which depends on open and robust competition.

Unlimited campaign spending undermines this competition, in three crucial ways.

First, allowing unlimited money into politics allows the past to hold the future hostage. Companies (and individuals who own them) with sufficient resources to sway elections often represent the industries and companies of the past, rather than the industries and companies that are creating the future.

The evidence on this is indirect, because since Citizens United was announced less than a year before the last federal election, its impact has not yet been fully felt or measured. However, we can gauge its future impact by looking at lobbying expenditures, for which multiyear data is widely available. For the period 2008-2011, the computer and Internet industry -- a wellspring of innovation -- spent $458 million on lobbying, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, while the energy and natural resources industry spent more than three times as much: $1.55 billion. The ratio for election-related spending, post Citizens United, will likely be similar.

Second, allowing unlimited money in politics allows the big to achieve an unfair advantage over the small. This is ironic in light of the huge role small business plays in creating private sector jobs in America, even as some large corporations act as net destroyers of American jobs, when outsourcing and offshoring are factored in.

For example, this kind of money in politics gives power to the push by big companies to repatriate offshore profits, giving some big and profitable multinational corporations lower effective tax rates than the grocer on Main Street.

Moreover, unlimited contributions give major Wall Street firms the edge over community banks, because the big banks can win loan guarantees, taxpayer bailouts and deeply discounted borrowing rates that smaller banks can't touch.

Third, allowing unlimited money in politics allows companies to collect IOUs for special favors from presidential candidates -- particularly as a result of contributions made early in the election season, when a few million dollars can swing the result in a small state like New Hampshire.

America's small-business owners embrace competition -- but they demand the competition be open, robust and vigorous. They don't want to be whipped by big corporations that bought an unfair advantage from senators, congressional representatives and other elected officials. When that happens, it's bad for business and America. Many solutions have been proposed, ranging from the Supreme Court reversing its decision, to legislation, to a constitutional amendment.

Momentum for change is growing, as candidates from both political parties learn what it's like to have a campaign with broad public support crushed by a single individual with deep pockets who steps in to help the other side.

Citizens United is an assault on our economy, which is supposed to be based on vigorous, free and open competition. It's time for us to reinvigorate our economy by getting government out of the protection racket, and preventing industries and companies from buying special favors. We must undo the damage wrought by Citizens United.

David Brodwin is a co-founder and board member of the American Sustainable Business Council, a liberal-leaning, nonprofit national business coalition that advocates for public policies that meet the realities of the 21st century global economy.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/26/opinion/brodwin-citizens-united/index.html?hpt=op_t1

OPINION POLL: Small Business Owners Say Access to Credit a Problem; Support Current Proposals to Boost Economy

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 15:44:00 +0000

January 26, 2012

Opinion polling released today shows 90 percent of small business owners believe access to credit is a problem and that loans are harder to get now than four years ago; majority support key provisions in president’s American Jobs Act

Washington DC, Jan. 26, 2012 – Opinion polling released today shows 90 percent of small business owners see the availability of credit as a problem for small business, and they strongly support increasing the lending authority of community banks and credit unions. Small business owners also support current proposals being debated in Congress that aim to boost the economy and create jobs.

Small business lending has become such an issue that 90 percent of small employers support community banks and credit unions being able to lend more to small businesses, and 82 percent support more stringent credit card regulations, such as clearer identification of terms and interest rate caps, according to the poll released by the American Sustainable Business Council, Main Street Alliance and Small Business Majority. Additionally, 61 percent say it’s harder now than it was four years ago to get a loan.

The poll also asked respondents about proposals in the president’s American Jobs Act. The vast majority, or 69 percent of small business owners support committing $50 billion to new and existing infrastructure projects that would generate jobs—such as making improvements to road, bridge and water systems. Another 59 percent favor creating a nationwide wireless network and improving the accessibility of high-speed wireless services. Read the report here.

“Loans that will help small businesses grow and create jobs are harder and harder to come by,” said John Arensmeyer, founder and CEO of Small Business Majority. “With banks’ lending portfolios shrinking and small businesses’ dependence on credit cards growing, lawmakers need to look for smart ways to revamp the credit landscape.”

“Small businesses create 65 percent of the net new private sector jobs in America,” said David Brodwin, co-founder and board member of ASBC. “Our deregulated, damaged banking system isn’t providing the credit they need, and they are calling for change.”

“Small business owners want action from Congress to boost the economy,” said Kelly Conklin, owner of Foley-Waite Associates in Bloomfield, New Jersey and a leader with the Main Street Alliance. “Invest in infrastructure to build the foundation for business success. Take serious steps to deal with the mortgage crisis and restore consumer purchasing power. Put teachers and firefighters back on the job serving our communities and boosting local economies. That’s what small businesses need.”

Additional findings in the report include:

52 percent of those surveyed have turned to credit cards to finance their business
6 in 10 small business owners support making loans more accessible by reducing collateral requirements

· 77 percent support creating incentives for community banks to lend more

By a 2:1 margin, small businesses support increasing credit unions’ lending cap from 12.25 percent to 27.5 percent
73 percent of small employers believe their business has been hurt to some degree by the drop in consumer demand resulting from the housing and mortgage crisis
57% of respondents agree reducing the principal on underwater mortgages to the current market value would boost consumer spending, helping small businesses regain their vigor through increased profits.

For more information on these poll findings, visit:
http://www.asbcouncil.org/poll_access_to_credit.html

http://mainstreetalliance.org/5500/poll-credit-economy/

http://www.smallbusinessmajority.org/small-business-research/downloads/012612_Access_to_Credit_Poll_Report.pdf

Poll results represent findings from an Internet survey of 500 small business owners nationwide, commissioned by the American Sustainable Business Council, Main Street Alliance and Small Business Majority and conducted by Lake Research Partners. The survey was conducted between December 8, 2011 and January 4, 2012. It has a margin of error of +/- 4.4%.

The American Sustainable Business Council is a network of business organizations representing over 100,000 companies and 200,000 business leaders. ASBC advocates for public policies that meet the realities of the 21st century global economy including strategic investments in workforce and infrastructure; standards and safeguards that promote innovation, prevent abuse and protect critical resources; and a new sustainable economic model that fosters a growing, economically-secure middle class. http://www.asbcouncil.org/

The Main Street Alliance is a national network of state-based small business coalitions. MSA creates opportunities for small business owners to speak for themselves on issues that impact their businesses and local economies. www.mainstreetalliance.org

Small Business Majority is a national nonpartisan small business advocacy organization, founded and run by small business owners, and focused on solving the biggest problems facing America’s 28 million small businesses. We conduct extensive opinion and economic research and work with small business owners, policy experts and elected officials nationwide to bring small business voices to the public policy table. www.smallbusinessmajority.org

White House hears calls for action

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:52:00 +0000

I’m sending this Congress a plan that gives every responsible homeowner the chance to save about $3,000 a year on their mortgage, by refinancing at historically low interest rates. No more red tape. No more runaround from the banks. A small fee on the largest financial institutions will ensure that it won’t add to the deficit, and will give banks that were rescued by taxpayers a chance to repay a deficit of trust.—President Barack Obama, State of the Union 2012

A lot of people, including me in my blog on Monday, have been calling for the President and Congress to take strong action to stop the housing foreclosure crisis not only to keep hard working American’s in their homes but also to revive the housing construction industry. Last night President Obama indicated that he has heard our message and will challenge Congress to force financial institutions to allow “responsible” homeowners to refinance at today’s rock bottom interest rates with “no questions asked”.

That’s great news. But now we need to see the details of the plan. How are “responsible” homeowners defined? We need to include as many homeowners as we can, not just ones current in their mortgages. And we also should include investment properties not just owner-occupied housing. It hurts the economy and property values just as much went a rental unit occupied by a working American is kicked out of the house they rent due to foreclosure.

The bigger issue is how do we stop the big banks from killing the idea in Congress?

On Monday I said, “It is time for these private banks to give back to the country for bailing them out. The profits they’re reeling in now wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for the taxpayer.” Last night the President said the program “will give banks that were rescued by taxpayers a chance to repay a deficit of trust.”

But I doubt that our calls for the big financial institutions to grow a conscience will be effective. That's why we must all push hard against the upcoming lobbying effort to stop this plan. Tell your member of Congress to support the President on this issue.

Funding a resource for small business

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:09:00 +0000

It would be nice to believe that with Rick Perry dropping out of the GOP primary last week that the idea he floated earlier this month in South Carolina of killing off the Small Business Administration would itself be killed off. But that’s not going to happen.

There are still too many politicians willing to sacrifice one of the only federal agencies charged with providing services to small business for the goal of deficit reduction. And there are too many small business owners siding with the SBA-bashers because they have no clue as to the services of the SBA and the Small Business Development Centers (SBDC) if funds.

So here is a primer on the SBDC in South Carolina. It is a statewide network of 17 local centers promoting economic development through business consultation to new entrepreneurs and existing small businesses. The program is supported with federal, state, local and private funds and is open to any present or prospective small business owner generally fee free. As one of the few state supported efforts to help small businesses grow and prosper, the SBDC sees upwards of 3,500 entrepreneurs and current small business owners a year.

Nationwide it is the same positive story. The country has 900 local SBDC’s that provided services to over a half million entrepreneurs and small businesses in 2010. SBDCs help those thinking about starting a business or needing help in applying for a loan as well as working with existing small businesses wanting to find new markets or trying to right-size in the face of a bad economy.

Talk at the federal or state levels of ending the SBA or under funding the SBDC is economic development foolishness for those saying they want to create or save jobs. We should be expanding the SBDC’s ability to serve our state’s small businesses and that’s why the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce supports our SBDC’s budget request of $520,000.

A needed message in State of the Union address

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 15:12:00 +0000

One of the issues we are expecting to hear about in President Obama’s State of the Union address tomorrow night is the housing crisis. Economists tell us that the nation’s economy won’t dramatically improve until the housing market stabilizes and demand for new homes gets back on track. That’s how important the housing construction industry is to creating jobs.

But that industry won’t be coming back for a while if there is no effective action taken by the federal government.

As I pointed out last October, according to an analysis by McClatchy Newspapers, at that time there were 2.2 million homes whose owners had received initial foreclosure notices or notices of default but hadn’t yet been foreclosed on. Another 1.9 million properties at that time had owners who were 90 days or more behind on their payments but hadn’t yet been served with foreclosure notices. That’s 4.1 million homes that are soon to be put into the foreclosure bucket. To put that into perspective the official number of all houses for sale in the nation is only 3.5 million.

The drum beat for the President and Congress to take strong action to solve this crisis to boost our economy has been growing. Last week 27 Congressional Democrats from California asked for a meeting with the President after meetings with top Administration officials such as Tim Geithner failed to produce needed action.

For some time I’ve been advocating that we should “muscle the private banks and Fannie and Freddie to do everything in their power to keep the current home owners in their homes by letting them refinance at today’s rock bottom rates (no questions asked) and, if necessary, reducing the principle they owe.”

There is a push in the House to have the government-controlled Fannie and Freddie write down mortgage principles for owners deep under water. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke wrote this month that “it might be worth the expense to lose money now in an effort to shore up the books of the government-sponsored enterprises for the long term while helping the economic recovery.”

But what about the big private banks of JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, and Ally Financial? The states’ attorneys general have been working since the fall of 2010 to have these financial giants help the homeowners they victimized by their earlier foreclosure papers robo-signing scandal. However this agreement is expected to compensate only about one million homeowners with principle reductions. That will be too late for many and a drop in the bucket to really help our economy.

It is time for these private banks to give back to the country for bailing them out. The profits they’re reeling in now wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for the taxpayer.

A call for principle reductions and the lowering of interest rates for both public and private mortgage holders in trouble should in the President’s speech tomorrow night. If he really wants to get the economy rolling sooner than later, this is the course of action we must follow.

Small Business Strategies: Obama's proposal could hurt

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:13:00 +0000

By Rhonda Abrams, USA TODAY

January 20, 2012

Want an SBA loan? Don't bother applying if you needed less than a few hundred thousand dollars.

In looking at President Obama's just-announced proposal to combine the SBA with five other agencies, I'm fearful we'll soon return to the days when small business received little attention and fewer dollars from the government.

The president has proposed to consolidate a number of departments focused on business and trade into one super pro-business agency. The goal is laudable.

"We'd have one department where entrepreneurs can go from the day they come up with an idea and need a patent, to the day they start building a product and need financing for a warehouse, to the day they're ready to export and need help breaking into new markets overseas," Obama said in announcing the plan.

Everyone can agree it's a good idea to make it easier to navigate government programs and reduce government waste.

But is this really the place to start? After all, it's not like small-business programs are rolling in dough. The network of Small Business Development Centers — one of the most efficient and effective government programs ever created — now receives what one person so aptly described as "budget dust."

"These changes would help small-business owners like you. It would also help medium and large businesses," Obama said.

Uh-oh. What do you think's going to happen when programs charged with helping businesses like yours and mine get subsumed in an agency charged with helping large corporations, too? Who do you think is going to get the bulk of attention?

It doesn't have to be malevolence, just human nature.

If I'm a government official charged with helping businesses grow, it's a lot less effort to help one 3,000-person company grow to 5,000 employees than helping 200 small companies add 10 employees each.

I'm also somewhat concerned about the president's use of the term "entrepreneur."

A trend is developing with some entrepreneurship advocates to focus only on fast-growing companies with the potential of being the next Google, Apple, or Microsoft.

I love those kind of companies. Heck, I live in Silicon Valley, and I'm surrounded by entrepreneurs working on building mega-businesses. America needs them, they keep us competitive and they create tens of thousands of jobs.

But America needs companies with 10 employees as well as 10,000.

Companies with fewer than 20 workers employ more than 21 million Americans, and companies with fewer than 100 workers employ about another 21 million. That's roughly a third of all working Americans.

And that's not counting the many millions of one-person businesses — the self-employed construction workers, consultants, hair stylists, software programmers. In much of America, self-employment is the only path to a middle-class income.

Small businesses and the self-employed represent a significant portion of our economy. We need a decently-financed, strong agency that will work especially for small companies with an independent voice.

If the president's plan goes through as proposed, small businesses will lose their seat at the table.

Obama just elevated the Small Business Administration chief, Karen Mills, to a Cabinet position. But she shouldn't get too comfortable with her chair. In the proposed agency, the new director would replace her.

I'm all for creating a one-stop website to make it easier for companies to access all the resources available from the federal government. But that doesn't require restructuring a bunch of agencies. In fact, Obama announced that he's soon launching a site called Business USA.

Why collapse the SBA?

Being part of a larger agency is almost certain to diminish what little voice it has now. Instead, why not give the Small Business Administration greater powers, bringing more of the far-flung programs within other agencies under its purview?

Details of the proposed uber-agency have not yet been explained, and we'll have to see what those are.

But, remember, while it may be a great idea to bring all the animals under one roof, when you do, the smallest ones are most likely to get trampled.

Rhonda Abrams is president of The Planning Shop and publisher of books for entrepreneurs. Her newest is the 5th edition of The Successful Business Plan: Secrets and Strategies. Register for Rhonda's free newsletter at www.PlanningShop.com and "like" The Planning Shop on Facebook for updates. For an index of her columns, go to smallbiz.usatoday.com. Twitter: twitter.com/RhondaAbrams.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/smallbusiness/columnist/abrams/story/2012-01-19/obama-small-business-plan/52685870/1

Help communities be more small-business friendly

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 15:51:00 +0000

Since 2006 the SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce (SCSBCC) has been advocating for our Department of Commerce to develop a community-based development plan modeled after one started in 2004 by Georgia’s Republican Governor Sonny Perdue. The concept was simple but effective. Help local communities become more small-business friendly by providing expert consultation on the ground to develop a plan and assist in working the plan.

Our Department of Commerce has always supplied that kind of on the ground support for community efforts to recruit big business and we should do the same to help grow small business. Unfortunately, Commerce and our Governors have never agreed with our proposal. Consequently South Carolina still does not have a comprehensive and promising small business economic development plan.

Fortunately Senate Vincent Sheheen has been a supporter of our concept and has introduced Senate Bill 1089 that would create a Division of Small Business and Entrepreneurial Development within our Department of Commerce. Included in the responsibilities of this Division would be the implementation of our community-based economic development assistance program.

The SCSBCC appreciates Senator Sheheen’s leadership on this important issue and supports S.1089. You can reach Senator Sheheen to offer your support by clicking here.

You can also ask Senator Greg Ryberg, chairman of the Senate Labor, Commerce, and Industry Committee, to support S.1089 by clicking here.

Poll Results--Money in Politics

noreply@blogger.com (The SC Small Business Chamber of Commerce) — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 14:08:00 +0000

Small Businesses Reject Role of Money in Politics; View Citizens United Decision as Bad for Business

On Jan. 21, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in its Citizens United decision that corporations are free to spend unlimited sums of money in elections. According to opinion polling released by the American Sustainable Business Council, Main Street Alliance and Small Business Majority, two-thirds of small business owners see this decision as bad for small business. The poll also shows small business owners overwhelmingly believe corporations have been given too much freedom to spend money that directly influences political campaigns.