Viewing blog posts written by Gino DiCaro
Tipping point for California manufacturing investmentPosted by Gino DiCaro, VP, Communications on April 18, 2013
These days, it seems like states are figuring out how important manufacturing is to healthy economies. The competition is picking up, as states move to reduce costs or create incentives for manufacturers. After all, companies put investment capital in locations with the most attractive business climates.
This could be good news for California. We have state-of-the-art advanced manufacturing facilities employing thousands of California workers. These companies could grow here if conditions are favorable. But there is one key issue that needs to be fixed if California is going to compete for its share of manufacturing growth.
A sales tax exemption on the purchase of manufacturing equipment is a policy most other states have adopted. This gives them a competitive advantage for their campaigns to grow high-wage manufacturing jobs. California had a similar tax rule, but it expired in 2003. We could catch up by reinstating the exemption, which would put California back on so many lists for future investment and growth. For many manufacturers, the sales tax exemption could be the 'tipping point' for a decision to invest in California.
In the 1990's, when the tax credit was in place, California attracted on average almost 6 percent of the country's manufacturing investment dollars. Manufacturing investment in California has now slowed to an average 1.9 percent of the country's, since that credit expired.
The credit helped Intel grow its wafer fabrication plant in Santa Clara and it helped Northrop Grumman grow in part to more than 27,000 employees. Because the exemption still exists in specific enterprise zones, it helped Fontana-based California Steel recently pay for a $100 million expansion. Imagine if this powerful tool were available to every manufacturer again in California.
CMTA had its lobby day this week on the issue to start informing the legislature of the tremendous economic benefits, including new net revenues to the state. Large employers, Intel, California Steel, Kimberly-Clark, International Paper, and Northrop Grumman joined to educate legislators why it is important to eliminate the tax on manufacturing investments.
Economist, Bill Watkins put it perfectly last week when he urged the state Legislature to "Create an opportunity economy." This manufacturing sales tax exemption would do exactly that and create the particular opportunity that California so badly needs.
(There are two sales tax exemption bills. Assm. Kevin Mullin's AB 486 will be heard in Assm. Revenue and Taxation Committee on Monday, April 22 and Sen. Lou Correa's SB 376 will be heard in Sen. Governance and Finance Committee on Wednesday, April 24)
0 comments | Post your comment
Mounting support for competitive tax policy for manufacturing growthPosted by Gino DiCaro, VP, Communications on Feb. 21, 2013
In 2003 California manufacturers lost a sales tax credit on their capital equipment purchases, making them approximately six percent less competitive than manufacturers in most other states. Since then, there have been no less than 20 proposed exemptions in different forms before our state legislature. None -- with one failing exception -- have made it to even a second committee hearing.
The annual proposals indicate that some legislators, like those in most states, understand the importance of competitive tax policy for manufacturers -- and the jobs, innovation and ripple effect they bring to a regional economy. Unfortunately the proposals stumble every year on an unwarranted fear of lost state revenues.
This year, after a decade of limited bipartisan support, that might change.
Yesterday, Senator Lou Correa and Assemblyman Kevin Mullin held a press conference at CMTA's office to announce new legislation to provide a sales tax exemption designed to stimulate our manufacturing base.
CMTA president Jack Stewart summed it up with clarity at the press conference, "By creating a sales tax exemption for manufacturing equipment, California sends a strong signal to investors around the United States and around the world that California is serious about attracting new investment."
Competitive state tax policy is absolutely critical for California to attract domestic manufacturing investment.
California is the largest manufacturing state, but our state has been among the lowest performing states in per capita manufacturing investment in the last decade.
There are many reasons for this, but the state’s total valuation of costs makes it very difficult to compete for new manufacturing start-ups and expansions.
Advanced manufacturing equipment is expensive, often resulting in millions of dollars per year in new equipment or retrofits for a company. A six percent tax disadvantage on these critical inputs means less investment and fewer middle-class jobs for California. Often this doesn't result in companies moving out of state, but means a company quietly elects to grow elsewhere.
Some folks think the exemption equates to less revenue for the state. The opposite is true. A study done by the Milken Institute on a similar exemption showed that after the first three years of the policy, the state would reap more than 45,000 jobs and bring in more than $500 million in new state revenues with a net increase of $39 million to the state. Senator Correa’s legislation delays a company’s ability to recognize the tax savings for the first three years, allowing the state to reap the revenue benefits before paying for the exemption.
The legislation is more popular than ever with co-authors from both parties jumping on board. There is no reason our legislature shouldn’t fully embrace this concept when so many other states already do.
0 comments | Post your comment
Why not California #11 & #12 -- MiaSole and FacebookPosted by Gino DiCaro, VP, Communications on Jan. 28, 2010
California took more employment and innovation bruises this month with two announcements from companies producing the state's favorite products - web technology and solar power.
"The social media powerhouse confirmed Thursday that it has picked the economically depressed Central Oregon town for Facebook's first company-owned data center, drawn to the region by reliable and affordable power, a favorable climate and tax breaks."
"A Silicon Valley-based company that makes low-cost, high-efficiency solar modules is planning a manufacturing plant in metro Atlanta that could employ up to 1,000. While California remains a hub for solar startups, Oregon, Texas, Colorado and Arizona are becoming destinations as solar firms chase skilled labor and low operating costs, said Terry Peterson, a San Carlos, Calif.-based solar power consultant. While Georgia’s cheap fossil-fueled electricity lowers manufacturing costs, it squelches local demand for solar power."
0 comments | Post your comment
How can CA win the Lottery?: Become a powerful magnet for the next wave of innovative productsPosted by Gino DiCaro, VP, Communications on May 20, 2009
Many in both the capitol and media circles have argued that companies aren't leaving the state and they often use that as carte blanche to oppose the removal of any barriers to conducting business in California -- including reinstatement of the sales tax exemption that our employers lost back in 2003.
I don't even care anymore about proving the decisions of current and potential California companies. It's like arguing whether a last place basketball team is really the worst in the league - no offense to the Sacramento Kings. It's not even an interesting question anymore, and a last place team needs to do only one thing - improve. Yes California is beautiful ... no, California doesn't lose thousands of jobs daily to other states ... yes, we don't know the reasons for all of the decisions being made all over the country that don't include California ... no, the state won't crumble into the ocean ... yes we've lost more than 30 percent of our industrial base -- most of those 530,000 job losses coming before the recent economic recession.
Let's just fix the problem. Everything starts with signals to manufacturers that this state wants these types of operations.
CMTA's president, Jack Stewart, issued a formal media statement today that summed it up perfectly:
The Sac Bee's Dan Walters wrote an entire piece this weekend on understanding California's woes and then called out "silly Republicans" for trying to understand certain reasons for migrations to Nevada. That trip was meant simply to gather information going forward and the facts still proved a 2 percent growth in industrial jobs in Nevada during the same time California's sector plummeted by 28 percent. No one ever said Nevada stole all our manufacturing jobs. Eight legislators just wanted to ask some questions about what Nevada was doing right. What everyone in that room found was that Nevada was actively hunting down business as a lifeblood of the state's success.
Even Gov. Schwarzenegger's administration has gotten in on the act. Two weeks ago, Brian McGowan, the Deputy Secretary for Economic Development and Commerce at the state's Business, Transportation and Housing Agency wrote in the Capitol Weekly that California "remains a powerful magnet for business." I challenge anyone to find two companies that are exploring growth options that agree with that statement.
If we were a powerful magnet for employers, a $21 billion deficit wouldn't be sitting on every Californians doorstep today. This brings me to a formula that we should all understand going forward after yesterday's iniative failures:
Then look at the per employee tax revenue of a manufacturer. This is all the taxes the company pays in the state (divided by the number of employees) plus the taxes an employee pays. I asked one of our member companies for their sample numbers. Basically their per employee tax revenue amounted to $19,255 per year, which does not include the taxes their employees pay on an average $60,000 salary. Compare that to the revenue the state generates from the service sector that pays far less tax revenue overall and a wage that is, on average, $20,000 less.
Like Walters said in the end of his piece, we should solely pay attention to our future. Agreed completely. Then one must ask what we want to look like in 2 years? For many reasons, we want Californians making more money, the state producing and selling innovative products, employment numbers growing and a budget balanced to pay for bold government programs. Making us a "powerful magnet" for the next wave of innovative products will get us there. Global recession or not, California will be in a better place.
Tags: Anna Caballero Assembly Republicans Dan Logue economic recovery sales tax exemption Why not California
0 comments | Post your comment
It's time for 15 economic recovery policies in CaliforniaPosted by Gino DiCaro, VP, Communications on Jan. 23, 2009
California is dependent on income, sales, corporate and property tax for its general fund dollars. More than 50 percent of the general fund is dependant on income tax alone. Our government programs survive on profitable businesses employing a high-wage workforce. With the country's third worst unemployment rate (9.3 percent), and few growing sectors outside government services, the state will not get out of the current crisis without improving the business climate.
These recommendations by a very diverse group of industries are meant to create a springboard for the state's economic recovery and change the legislature's attitude toward a healthy business climate. Without real incentives -- like the one Tesla Motors received back in June -- and long term certainty in California, we will not see the growth that is mandatory for our recovery.
The manufacturers are firmly behind this growing effort, and this group -- titled "California Businesses for Economic Recovery"-- will not stop advocating for the collective proposals now and in the future. While each proposal has a different value for individual organizations, we all agree that the combined list deserves serious attention.
Key points for lawmakers and media to consider as impetus for the listed recommendations:
• The uncertainty of California's regulatory and fiscal environment makes it almost impossible for short and long term business growth
• Taxes, fees, mandates and regulations are currently enacted without considering their cumulative and dynamic impact
• Industries such as high tech, manufacturing, entertainment and agriculture are being lured away by Nevada, Arizona and other regions
• Business costs in California are 23 percent higher than the national average
• California’s unemployment rate (8.4%) is third worst in the country and at its highest level since the early 90's
• Delayed sales tax exemption
• Design build
• Eliminate corporate penalty
• Employment training panel
• Energy infrastructure Development
• Flexible workweek/alternative schedules
• Greenhouse gas emissions AB 32 and CEQA
• Homebuyer tax credit
• Infrastructure bonds
• Meal and rest period clarification
• Public private partnerships
• Research and development tax credit
• SB 375 land use and transportation bill clean up
• Tourism tax repair
See cover letter to legislature
See details of proposals
See press release
See economic recovery two-pager
* American Council of Engineering Companies
* Antelope Valley Board of Trade
* Assn. of Destination Management Companies
* California Business Properties Assn.
* California Building Industry Assn.
* California Grocers Assn.
* California Independent Petroleum Assn.
* California Manufacturers & Technology Assn.
* California Restaurant Assn.
* California Retailers Assn.
* California Space Authority
* California Trucking Assn.
* Chemical Industry Council
* National Federation of Independent Business
* Santa Barbara Technology & Industry Assn.
* Technology Council of Southern California
0 comments | Post your comment
View next 5 entries