Business groups rally against B & O tax By Jan Teague, President/CEO
I testified opposed to HB 1255 Tuesday to a packed house of trade association executives and chamber of commerce representatives. Lawmakers introduced a poorly written bill that would have required trade associations and chambers to pay 1.5 percent B & O on dues. Even tax accountants who consulted various associations insisted that the way the bill was drafted, it could include us. Only one person in the room signed in support of the bill, a man who wanted the money to go to social services for the poor. Although he named an association that represented the poor, he said he wasn't speaking for them. It was curious to me that he would name them at all and I suspected that they too would have to pay a new B & O tax if the bill passed.
Committee Chair Ross Hunter, who levies a $20 fine on anyone whose cell phone goes off, almost incurred the $20 fine when his cell phone went off, but he insisted it was the alarm on the phone controlling how long we were allowed to speak. It was the only time the room laughed as he refused to pay a fine to an embarrassed clerk who held a pink piggy bank up for him to pay his twenty.
There was a lot of confusion over what the bill did even though staff gave us the impression that the bill was not intended to include us. However, Representative Hunter asked staff to clarify who the bill was targeted for and to write something up. I hope that includes a redraft of the bill to expressly remove trade associations and chambers. There were some in the room who insisted that would be the only way that we would be exempt.
It is important to say that those who would pay the tax include golf courses and social clubs that charge dues. The Office of Financial Management estimates the tax would cost those who pay $1.8 million this next year and $25.2 million over ten years.
What was significant about this hearing was the level of interest that it drew from every corner of the state. It was the first time that I have ever seen so much grassroots business support rally in such a meaningful way in a short amount of time. I sent out the notice for this bill on Friday and hundreds of e-mails began to chatter on Monday, with the packed hearing on Tuesday. In Olympia, they say that grassroots is everything. But it is very difficult to get a business voice to Olympia with everyone working and unable to attend a hearing.
This hearing on HB 1255 was significant for more than the threat of levying a tax on us. It showed what we could do in a short amount of time.
As the CEOs left the hearing, they chattered in the halls about what they had just witnessed. It wasn't that they had just shown up, it was who they were and the large number of people that they represented. It was a significant event and I think they all realized the importance of it.
Tax on pet food proposed By Mark Johnson, WRA VP Government Affairs
You know times are tough when the Legislature proposes a tax on pet food. On Tuesday, January 27 the Senate Agriculture Committee heard testimony on SB 5329 that would impose a $57.50 per ton fee on pet food, the highest in the nation. The funds raised would be put into an account to be used by low-income pet owners to help defer the cost of spaying and neutering their domestic cats and dogs. Now, this sounds like a good idea on the surface and WRA agrees with the program's goals, however, the new tax misses the mark.
Taking into consideration that many of our members sell pet food, I decided it was important to weigh in on the bill. First and foremost this new tax would hurt our customers who are struggling to make ends meet by increasing their pet food costs. If you own a dog, which generally eats more than a cat, you might spend an extra $10 to $20 a month on food. This may not sound like much, but if you've just lost your job in the recessionary cutbacks and are making tough choices about feeding your pets or feeding your family, this additional expense can add up quickly.
If enacted into law, the tax could cost pet owners around the state $106 million in new costs in the next decade, according to the Office of Financial Management.
If pet overpopulation is a societal problem as purported by the proponents than society should pay and the funding should come from the State General Fund. Why should responsible pet owners be on the hook for the costs?
Interestingly, the Department of Agriculture, the agency identified in the bill to administer the program, testified that it doesn't want to do it. Department officials said that this would be their second largest program in that agency!
Another funding mechanism that is already in place with limited success is the "friends of pets" personalized license plates. Folks voluntarily pay a little extra each year for a nifty plate with a pet picture on it. Maybe the proponents should better advertise and promote this option?
There is also a companion bill in the House, HB 1406, that will likely be scheduled for a hearing soon. As with both bills, they would require a two-thirds vote of both chambers in order to impose a new tax.
Two union organizing bills introduced U.S. Supreme Court has struck down a similar California law
Companion union organizing bills with strong support have been introduced in the state Legislature.
Senate bill 5446 and House bill 1528 would prohibit employers from requiring employees to go to meetings to discuss political or religious matters, including labor issues and organizing campaigns. They also would require employers to post notices of employee rights under the act.
The Washington Retail Association will vigorously oppose these efforts on several grounds.
The bills would make it easier to organize workplaces while removing rights of free speech for employers. They pose the threat of driving up employer costs during a retail recession that has resulted in widespread layoffs and store closures.
Higher labor costs get passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices, even as the state's unemployment rate climbed to 7.1 percent in December. In that month, there were an estimated 251,728 unemployed people statewide, 90,000 more than the same month a year ago. Rising prices would only further hurt consumers forced to stretch their budgets and discourage employers from expanding payrolls to help spark an economic recovery.
A similar union-backed effort was tabled last year, in part, due to a request by Governor Christine Gregoire to await a U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding the enactment of a similar bill in California. In a 7-2 decision last June, the Supreme Court upheld the right of employers and employees to engage in open, vigorous debate about labor organizing matters, and struck down the California law.
Despite that, near majorities in the Washington House and Senate have signed up as sponsors of both bills. The House bill lists 47 sponsors, including prime sponsor, Rep. Mike Sells, (D-Everett). It would take 49 votes to pass the bill in the House.
The Senate version lists 21 sponsors, including prime sponsor, Sen. Margarita Prentice, (D-Seattle). It would take 25 votes for the bill to pass through the Senate.
Democrats outnumber Republicans in both state houses; 62 to 36 in the House, and 31 to 18 in the Senate. The Washington bills have been referred to the Senate Labor, Commerce and Consumer Protection committee and the House Commerce & Labor committee for possible further discussion.
Strong bill support and Democrat dominance in the Legislature does not mean the bills will pass.
Despite the negative impacts the bills would have on retailers and the already-struggling state economy, a looming legal question hangs over the bills as well.
Washington's bill is bolder than the act struck down in California. The California law tried to prohibit employers who did business with the state from using funds or grants to "assist promote or deter union organizing."
The Washington bills would apply to all employers regardless of whether they do business with the state.
The Supreme Court was clear in its ruling that states cannot regulate what Congress left unregulated in the National Labor Relations Act, which has been in effect since 1935. The NLRA, the Court wrote, "expressly precludes regulation of speech about unionization" so long as the communications do not threaten or promise anything to an employee.
Washington, D.C., not Washington State, is the proper forum to argue these matters. On that score, a union effort is stumbling in Washington, D.C. to abolish the employer's right to offer employees a secret ballot union election.
Under the federal bill, unions could organize in secret by asking employees to check a card asking whether they wanted a union. A majority would rule without a secret ballot and a labor contract could be imposed on employers through arbitration. WRA also vigorously opposes the federal bill as a costly, high-handed effort that will only further damage the nation's fragile and failing economy.
Legislature session gains momentum with bill filings
As January comes to a close, the 105-day Legislative session is gaining momentum with about one fifth of the scheduled session complete.
To date, several bills of concern to retailers have been filed in addition to the union organizing bills and association taxes reported on earlier.
Mark Johnson, the Washington Retail Association's Vice President of Government Affairs and Tammie Hetrick, WRA's Vice President of Retail Services, have been tracking and testifying against other bills of concern to retailers:
They include:
*HB 1165, proposing a voluntary program for pharmacies to take back unused drugs, would increase business expenses. Johnson has testified at a hearing about these concerns.
*HB 1005, requiring a posted privacy policy on commercial Websites that collect personal information, would add to business liabilities and costs. Johnson spoke in opposition to the bill during a hearing this week.
*HB 1149, a credit-union backed bill to recoup costs for breaches of computerized customer data, would cost retailers involved in a breach additional expenses. Mark testified against this bill in a recent Legislative hearing.
*HB 1402 would limit contact with doctors who are witnesses in court cases. Hetrick said such a law would deter proper management of workers' compensation claims.
*Hetrick is attending a series of weekly meetings with Republican House and Senate leaders of Commerce and Labor committees and House Commerce and Labor chair Steve Conway. She also is meeting weekly with Senate Labor, Commerce and Consumer Protection chair, Senator Jeanne Kohl-Welles.
In other matters:
*WRA has begun a series of weekly meetings with House Speaker Frank Chopp to discuss pending legislation and its impacts on retailers.
*WRA is meeting every other week with Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown to discuss bills and legislation.
*WRA supported Governor Christine Gregoire's budget, containing no new taxes, during Senate testimony to a packed room opposing her budget cuts.
WRA signs petition to delay lead content rules
The Washington Retail Association has signed a petition along with a coalition of manufacturers and other state associations asking for a delay in implementing lead content restrictions in children's products.
The current compliance deadline for retailers is February 10 of this year. But in a presentation Wednesday to the Retail Industry Leaders Association, Washington, D.C. attorney Chuck Samuels said the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and Congress have been inundated with complaints from industry groups concerned about the vagueness of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act and its onerous regulatory obligations.
Samuels said pressure is mounting on Congress to re-examine the act and consider amendments.
Among other concerns, Samuels said it is difficult to reliably determine what are children's products.
The petition by the National Association of Manufacturers-Consumer Product Safety Coalition seeks an emergency 185-day extension on the Feb. 10 compliance deadline for lead content. The law imposes increasing restrictions on lead weight content in children's products and requires tracking labels for all children's products by August of this year. Under the law, maximum civil penalties have been increased eightfold, from $1.8 million to $15 million.
Samuels summarized steps retailers can take to protect themselves:
*Insist on documentation from suppliers. *Good faith efforts to comply are the best protection against enforcement actions. *Offer employees clear lines of communications to raise questions about products. *Review insurance for coverage of recalls and related issues. *Address any problems immediately. Samuels said fewer than half the reports to the Consumer Products Safety Commission result in recalls. *Don't be intimidated by CPSC staff members. They are approachable if retailers clearly define an issue or question.
Samuels also advised that the CPSC's Website, cpsc.gov offers numerous helpful links to understand the complexities and requirements of the law as it stands. To visit the site, click on the prior link or click here.
Price matters most in the recession, retail chief says
Consumers have made price their most important shopping decision during the recession, the head of the National Retail Federation said this week.
"Factors like quality, selection, store location and customer service are taking a back seat," NRF CEO Tracy Mullin said at the trade group's annual trade show.
Mullin said the recession has caused deferred purchases and the use of cash more than credit.
Executives from J.C. Penney, Macy's and Wal-Mart, speaking at the same show, said they were planning for 2009 to be equally as tough on retailers as 2008, when layoffs and a housing slump forced layoffs and store closures.
"I think '09 will be a tough year all year," said Penney's CEO Myron "Mike" Ullman, who said he expected economic recovery in 2010.
Ullman predicted more store closures this year. About 175,000 store locations closed last year. Ullman said predictions are there will be 75,000 stores closings nationally the first half of this year.
Source: Reuters
Attorney General issues flood-related alerts
The Attorney General's Office has issued a series of consumer and business alerts related to recent flooding.
Unregistered repair contractors who charge unusually high prices are more common after storms, the office said. To check whether someone's business in registered with the Department of Labor and Industries, click here.
Labor and Industries urges an inspection before re-energizing wires that have been submerged in water. For more information on flood recovery, click here.
Flood victims also are urged to report damages. For local emergency management contact information, click here or dial 2-1-1.
Source: Attorney General of Washington
State Website tracks labor, wage information
A new state Website offers a good way to make monthly checks on changes in the state retail economy.
The site, www.workforceexplorer.com, is compiled by the state Economic Security Department. The site also includes a schedule to learn when monthly updates on jobs and wages will be released. Click here or on the above link to visit the site.
In the year ending last November, the state lost 22,400 jobs as the nation and region slipped into a recession. Nearly 40 percent of those lost jobs, or 9,000 (not seasonally adjusted), were lost in the retail sector.
Source: Employment Security Department
Home Depot recycles fluorescent lights
Owners needing to safely dispose of expired fluorescent light bulbs can do so for free at Home Depot stores.
Customers may bring expired, unbroken fluorescent light bulbs to any Home Depot returns desk. Store associates then turn the bulbs over to an environmental management company that packages, transports and recycles them.
Home Depot also is converting the showroom space in its U.S. stores from incandescent bulbs to more energy-efficient compact fluorescent lights.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, switching to fluorescent lighting will result in a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
The Department of Revenue has updated its Website to help flood victims from the winter snow and rain storms.
Links on the site offer information on obtaining extensions for filing taxes and other agencies that can offer help. When the page loads, scroll down to the "more information" section to find links to help for flood victims.
Best Buy will expand its electronics recycling program to all of its 1.006 stores nationwide beginning on February 15.
Consumers will be able to bring in two units per day, per household, for recycling. The stores will accept most consumer electronics including televisions and monitors up to 32 inches, computer CPUs and notebooks, small electronics, VCR and DVD players and phones, and accessories including keyboards, mice and remotes.
A $10 recycling fee will be charged for items with screens such as televisions, laptops and computer monitors. The consumer will instantly receive a $10 Best Buy gift card in exchange for paying the recycling fee.
Items that will not be accepted include televisions or monitor screens larger than 32 inches; console televisions; items containing Freon such as air conditioners, dehumidifiers and mini refrigerators; microwaves and appliances. The company offers an appliance haul away and pick up program.
Source: Best Buy
The Washington Retail Association, WRA, is a 501 C 6 trade association formed to advocate for Washington State’s retailers at the local, state and national level. Since 1987, the WRA has protected Washington's retailers from unreasonable taxes, fees, regulations and legislation. The efforts of the WRA benefit all Washington state retailers and help fuel statewide economic growth.
