On Sept. 1, California will launch a survey to identify chemicals found in various personal care, cleaning and other consumer products, including many produced by INDA members. The 2013 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey will require companies to report 2013 sales and formulation data, along with other information. The California Air Resource Board (CARB) will use this information to maintain an inventory of products containing volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and to control ozone pollution by limiting the emissions of VOCs.

These new surveys are more comprehensive than previous ones and part of a broader effort by California to update statewide emissions data for all sources of air pollution. A key component to the state’s clean air strategy is reducing emissions from sources of VOCs, which can react with other pollutants in the atmosphere to form ground-level ozone and fine particulate matter. CARB’s previous surveys have required ingredient information to be provided for about 50,000 products while the new survey requires more extensive information about 300,000 products.

The survey must be completed by “any company listed on the label of a chemically formulated consumer or commercial product sold or supplied for use in California in 2013.” CARB has identified seven broad product categories subject to the survey:

• adhesives, sealants and related products;
• household and institutional products;
• personal care products;
• pesticide products;
• solvents and thinning-related products;
• vehicle and marine vessel aftermarket products; and
• aerosol coating products.

The product categories encompass dozens of everyday products, including air fresheners; arts and crafts supplies; cleaners and degreasers; dishwashing and laundry products; fuels and lighter materials; garden and lawn care products; office supplies; leather care products; antiperspirants and deodorants; cosmetics; hair care products; nail polish; herbicides; insecticides; antimicrobial agents; solvents; and spray paint and other aerosol coatings.

It is expected that as many as 2,000 manufacturers and suppliers will be required to participate in the multi-year data gathering. They will have until March 1, 2015, to submit sales data and detailed ingredient information for 2013.

To determine whether your company must complete the survey, go to:
https://ssl.arb.ca.gov/consprod/regact/2013surv/2013pre/survey.htm

Congress Passes Short-Term Measure for Highway Trust Fund

Fortunately, Congress was able to attend to one important item of business–passing a temporary fix for highway and transit programs–before leaving town for an extended recess. The 10-month funding measure reached the President’s desk July 31, the day before reimbursements to states for road projects would have decreased due to a diminishing balance in the Highway Trust Fund. 

The Senate and House had each passed bills with bipartisan support to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent, but took different approaches to funding, setting up a final hour showdown. The House version provided $10.8 billion in temporary funding for projects until May 2015 while the $8.1 billion Senate version paid for projects only through Dec. 19. Ultimately the almost $11 billion House version prevailed, which will be paid for by a change in customs fees and the way pension funding is calculated.

When the Highway Trust Fund was established in 1956, users fees–taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel–were envisioned as the primary source of revenue for federal transportation spending. In recent years, however, the federal government has paid its portion out of general revenues with Congress waiting until the fund is close to being unable to meet its obligations and then bailing it out with short term fixes. The latest “patch” to the Highway Trust Fund continues this trend and has caused many observers to call for a better solution for infrastructure funding in order to provide more certainty and long term planning of projects that ad hoc, short term patches cannot.

Highway infrastructure project funding is particularly important to INDA members because nonwoven geotextiles can be used in these applications. For this reason and because all manufacturers require a stable and reliable infrastructure to thrive and compete, INDA joined with other industry groups in a July 15 letter to House members urging them to pass a measure replenishing the trust fund. While the current fix is better than no fix, Congress will eventually need to come to terms with decreasing user fees due to its refusal since 1993 to raise the unpopular gas tax and declining revenues due to increased fuel efficiency.  

Reauthorization of Export-Import Bank Uncertain

The Export-Import Bank’s charter is set to expire at the end of September, and its reauthorization is one more item to add to the list of previously routine matters that have become gridlocked in the current Congress. While the bank typically has enjoyed bipartisan congressional support for the past 80 years, its reauthorization is in jeopardy this year due to a growing debate not between the usual suspects of the Democratic and Republican parties, but between two factions of the Republican Party–one pro-business and the other anti-establishment.   

The Export-Import Bank helps U.S. companies sell products to foreign customers, mostly by providing or guaranteeing loans to those buyers. Detractors call the agency a tool of corporate welfare and have made its elimination a priority. Groups such as the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, on the other hand, have called the bank essential to American manufacturers’ competiveness overseas.  

Supporters of the bank, which include Democrats and establishment Republicans, say the entity supports hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs and levels the playing field for American companies competing in foreign markets. According to its most recent annual report, the Ex-Im Bank helped to facilitate more than $37 billion in U.S. exports during 2013, which supported approximately 205,000 American jobs at more than 3,400 companies, mostly small businesses.  Proponents of the bank argue that while it does help foreign customers buy American-made equipment from companies like Boeing, Caterpillar and General Electric, almost 90 percent of the Bank’s transactions directly benefitted small manufacturers, and tens of thousands of other small businesses benefitted indirectly by supplying products to large exporters. 

Supporters assert that eliminating the Bank would constitute “unilateral disarmament,” because fifty-nine other countries have official export credit agencies, including China, Japan, South Korea most European countries, and Brazil, which assist foreign companies in gaining market share.  While opponents may label the Bank supporting Boeing in competing with Airbus ”corporate welfare,” the Bank also facilitates small and medium-sized manufacturers entering emerging markets where their products are in demand, but financing capabilities are not readily available.  Supporters note that unlike “welfare” programs, the Export-Import Bank does not cost taxpayers money, but actually earns money through fees from foreign customers–in fact, more than $1 billion for the U.S. last year. The Bank also has a strong record of assessing risk, with a default rate currently at 0.211 percent.

The Club for Growth, Heritage Action for America, Americans for Prosperity and other conservative groups say the agency is a prime example of “crony capitalism” and distorts the free market to benefit a few connected corporations. They argue that the U.S. government should play no role in financing sales to foreign companies that compete with American businesses. 

Historically reauthorization of the Ex-Im Bank has been a drama-free process, involving near-unanimous support in the House and Senate.  Occasionally, mild protestations have erupted from either side, but the first time the bank’s reauthorization was truly in doubt was in 2012, when 93 House Republicans opposed it. It is difficult to predict the outcome this year, as the issue has become more of a hot potato. With leading Republicans in the House, such as Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (CA-23rd) and House Financial Service Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (TX 5th), whose committee oversees the bank, announcing their opposition to reauthorization, it will be a heavy lift to convince a majority of the House GOP to vote for the Bank.  Some insiders have suggested that a post midterm election compromise could be reached during the lame-duck session, but, of course, that would occur after the Sept. 30 expiration of the Bank’s current charter. 

To learn more about the Export-Import Bank, go to: www.exim.gov/smallbusiness/index.cfm