April 2011 Archives

I was part of an interesting online discussion this morning with some of the top minds of the promotional marketing industry.  We were discussing technology as it relates to the Royal Wedding and Promotional Marketing.

A comment was made:

“They said within an hour after the couple kisses there will be mugs on the street with the photo of the big kiss. They went on to say the same will happen with tee shirts."

My question is how in the world can they do that?”

The answer is simple.  . . advances in digital technology.    High resolution digital cameras take the shot, it is instantly emailed to a secret location where it is cleaned up, a official within the Royal Family approves the image and moments later, production begins.

This could never have happened in the days of Charles and Diana.   Not that promotional marketing was not prevalent, it was.   My mother still has the dual pack of playing cards, one with Charles on it, the other with Diana.

The difference today is, as marketers, we better understand that you are not trying to sell everyone the same product or service.  However, those you do sell, are loyal buyers.  Therefore, developing niche marketing tactics that satisfies their needs not only makes sense, but can be done cost effectively.   Sell to a loyal niche and develop communication that speaks directly to them.

Think about it.  Because the Royal Wedding items are produced digitally, you could even create a limited edition pieces that is numbered and therefore increase the value per piece and margins substantially.

If they produce 10000 mugs at $15.00 each of the first kiss, there is a gross profit of $15000.00.   A nice sum of money for a few days work. . . .

However, if they produce 10 different limited edition numbered mugs at 1000 mugs per set at $25.00 per piece there is another $10000.00 in gross profit.

This might incur an extra $1000.00 total cost to set this up, but you can increase your profit by $9000.00 with really no more effort.

We did this years ago with variable couponing.

We had a database of 50,000 people for a grocery store chain.

We knew what they bought and when based upon the data on their preferred shoppers card.

We produced 50,000 shells and then variably imprinted different no-name coupons based upon individual household buying habits and mailed them directly to them.

Previous coupon redemption rate was in the 3-5%.

We were getting consistently 3 to 4 times that based upon using variable data marketing to a niche market.

In a business that runs in the 10% margin rate, this is huge increase in business.

So figure out who your niche market is and what they want, the experts and the technology are available to help you gain market share without giving up margin.

 

We look forward to help Get YOU Noticed! In 2011.

CMYK Solutions Inc.
Ben Baker
CEL: 604-512-7174
FX:   604-648-9201
[email protected]
www.cmyksolutions.ca

http://www.linkedin.com/in/cmyksolutions

www.twitter.com/cmyksolutions

www.youtube.com/cmyksolutions

 

 

This is the third of five articles that comprise a White Paper titled The Internet and the Franchise Industry - How an industry misused the Internet.  This paper describes the history of Internet communications in the Franchise Industry and suggests ways to improve the current situation.

 

Part 1 - Introduction

Part 2 - Internet Communications in our Society

Part 3 - Understanding Institutions that Support the Franchise Industry

Part 4 - Impact of the Internet on the Franchise Industry

Part 5 - What can be done in the Current Reality and Conclusion

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

 

To best understand how the Internet has impacted on the institutions within the Franchise Industry, one must first understand the scope of this industry and the role of its institutions.

The Franchise Industry is a $624B industry.  It is larger than the entire durable goods industry which includes automobiles, computers, trucks and airplanes.  It creates nearly 10 million jobs and generates approximately $229 B in payroll.  Overall, it accounts for an estimated 7.4% of all private sector jobs. (Source: Economic Impact of Franchised Businesses, A Study for the International Franchise Association Educational Foundation; PriceWaterhouseCoopers, 2004) 

The Franchise Industry is comprised of two distinct groups, franchisees and franchisors.  Franchisees own local businesses and generate revenues by selling products/services to the ultimate consumer.  Franchisors provide support services to franchisees in return for various payments.  Each of these groups have different goals.  Franchisees desire to maximize their profits by limiting their payments to their franchisor while receiving as many support services as possible.  For the Franchisor, the goal is the exact opposite.  Franchisors desire to maximize their revenues from franchisees while spending as little as possible on the services they provide.  This is a symbiotic relationship where both parties are dependent on the other for survival yet compete to maximize their benefit in this relationship.

When an individual franchisee needs to communicate with their franchisor, for good or bad, they can be at a disadvantage when dealing with a large organization.  It is for this reason that the Franchisee Association exists.  Franchisee Associations provide many services to franchisees including educational programs, informational newsletters, facilitating communications with franchisors, developing or supporting business development initiatives, educating franchisees and conducting proprietary research.

While all these services are important to ongoing franchise relations, it is research that is least understood and (arguably) of most importance.  There are times when franchisor and franchisee look at opportunities or challenges from a different perspective.  Perhaps franchisees feel that a particular product is priced too low or that advertising is ineffective.  Alternatively, franchisees may feel that vendor product or pricing is too high.  In order to justify a change these types of changes, solid documentation is often necessary.  It is this ongoing research that provides franchisee groups with the supporting evidence and/or documentation to support this franchisee perspective, or to quantify the negative impact of what may currently be a bad business policy.  The need for this documentation is particularly important when the franchisor perspective is in conflict with the franchisee perspective. 

Out of necessity, Franchisee Associations have morphed into two types.  In the absence of Franchisee Associations paid for and supported by the franchisee community, franchisors have created similar organizations and provided them with funding.  Where both forms of association exist, those supported through funding by the franchisor tend to dominate because they have the ear of the franchisor and also the financial resources to undertake initiatives.  Unfortunately, these franchisor supported groups can be in conflict with franchisee interests.  Their dependence on the franchisor for funding and support services limits their ability to fully represent the franchisees.  To cite just one example, there is no reason for a franchisor to support and fund research by a Franchisee Association when the research results could conflict with their own corporate agenda.

The term Independent Franchisee Association refers to the franchisee association that is fully funded by franchisees with a sole purpose of representing franchisee views in all dealings with their franchisor.  Because of its independence from the franchisor, this group tends to be better able to represent the franchisee perspective and support their interests.

Franchisee Associations also exist at more global level.  These groups can provide a single voice for the numerous franchise specific associations when it comes to broader issues.   These associations may serve as a lobby group to the government, for example, or to undertake research of or on behalf of the entire franchise industry.  These associations may represent franchisors or franchisees.

 --------

About the Author

Perry Shoom is the founder of FranchiseFacts, a company that provides research services for the Franchise Industry.  The company also publishes an Annual Report of the results from its National Franchisee Survey.  The 2010 Annual Report, and the 2011 Franchisee Survey that is currently in progress, can both be found at www.FranchiseFactsUSA.com. The survey is open to all franchise owners and store managers.  FranchiseFacts does not disclose identifying information that may be provided by survey respondents. 

Email signatures (a.k.a. sig lines) are powerful, low-cost, high-return marketing tools (a virtual business card or ad) for your foundation or organization. What’s interesting is how seldom sig lines are used.

Consider this: If your organization has 30 employees, each of whom sends 15 emails daily outside the organization, then (assuming 250 business days) that’s 112,500 business cards or ads distributed annually, at no cost. If you have 100 employees, that’s 375,000 cards or ads annually.

What Is an Email Signature?

In general, your email signature is information automatically added as the last few lines of your outgoing email to let people know who/where/what you are. Consider your sig line as your online business card with “callback” abilities.

Here are a few examples:

Alison N. Smith
InsideNGO
Operational Excellence for Global Impact
19 South Compo Road
Westport, CT 06880
203-226-3650
www.InsideNGO.org

Julie Stofer
Nonprofit Marketing Manager
www.networkforgood.org
http://twitter.com/network4good
240.482.3313
202.270.1339 (cell)
AIM: jestofer

Nancy E. Schwartz
Helping Nonprofits Succeed through Effective Marketing
(973) 762-0079
Nancy Schwartz & Company www.NancySchwartz.com
Getting Attention Blog & E-News www.GettingAttention.org

Holly Ross, Executive Director
NTEN: The Nonprofit Technology Network
www.nten.org | [email protected]
p) 415.397.9000 f) 415.814.4056
twitter: http://twitter.com/ntenhross

What a Strong Email Signature Does for Your Organization

Making the most of your sig lines, for yourself and every colleague in your organization, is analogous to leaving your business cards — but even more powerful.

Most importantly, in this age when we’re all inundated with too many emails, your email signature is a clear signal to your recipient that the message is from you and provides the context (e.g., job title, organization name, and web site) that reminds that person who you are and enriches their understanding of your message. That’s a lot more than can quickly be deciphered from your email address in the “from” field.

Beyond this most basic benefit, your email signature is a business card or ad that alerts the recipient to special news and enables them to have direct access to your web site or send email back to you with the swift click of a mouse.

How a Consistent Email Signature Style Benefits Your Organization

What’s critical is that everyone in your organization uses the same sig line format. Specifics such as name, title, email, and direct phone line obviously will change. However, certain elements (organization name, web site address, tagline) and the order of elements should be standard for all staff sig lines.

Sig line consistency benefits your organization in the following ways:

  • Builds a brand or recognizable identity for your organization. The sig line becomes a key element of overall branding.
  • Serves as a cognitive flag, enabling email recipients to make connections among emails received from various members of your organization.

Case Study

Here is an example of a good email sig and a recommendation to make it even stronger. To protect the innocent, I’ll use a generic version of the sample I was analyzing for this example.

Example (9 lines):

Name
Title
Organization Name
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code

Phone
Fax
Email

I recommend cutting the street address (2 lines), line space, fax number, and email address and adding the organization’s web address.

Recommendation (6 lines):

Name
Title
Organization Name
Phone
Organization Web Address (URL)
Twitter, Facebook and/or IM here (optional)

How to Create an Effective Email Sig Line

First of all, keep it brief. A general rule of thumb is that a good sig line is four-six lines in length. Eight lines is the maximum length, but that is pushing it. Remember, those to whom you email frequently see your email signature line again and again.

  • Musts include:
    • Name
    • Title
    • Organization name
    • Phone number
    • Web address
  • Optional elements include:
    • Tagline (organizational or specific event, campaign, etc.
    • Social media contacts (Twitter, Facebook) and/or IM
    • Graphical elements such as a horizontal line to distinguish your sig line from the rest of the email.

Inclusion of your email address is not recommended, since it’s in the “from” field of the email and gets forwarded with an email that’s passed on. Best to drive audiences to your web site for more contact information details such as your mailing address and fax number.

More Creative Uses for Your Sig Line

A signature line can be used much like a classified ad if you’re trying to motivate clients to use your services or register for your workshop. Add one line and/or a link. Examples include:

  • A quotation to share your organization’s point of view.
  • A call to contribute to a capital campaign or other fundraising focus.
  • An issue-oriented tagline to promote an advocacy campaign.
  • An announcement of a new program, service, or publication.
  • An invitation to a special event, conference, or to subscribe to your organization’s email newsletter.

Just make sure to keep sig lines up to date.

Adding Your Sig Line to Your Emails

Once you’ve decided on sig line content and format, you’ll need to add it to your email program. Remember to train all staff members in creating their sig line as per organizational style and in adding it to the email program.

Check your email program’s HELP menu and search for signatures. You should be able to find some information there about how to set one up on your program.

 


© 2002 - 2011 Nancy E. Schwartz. All rights reserved.

For more articles and case studies, subscribe now to the Getting Attention e-update.

About the Author

Nancy E. Schwartz helps nonprofits succeed through effective marketing and communications. As President of Nancy Schwartz & Company, Nancy and her team provide marketing planning and implementation services to organizations as varied as the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Center for Asian American Media, and Wake County (NC) Health Services. Subscribe to her free Getting Attention e-update and read her blog at http://www.gettingattention.org for more insights, ideas and great tips on attracting the attention your organization deserves.

This is the second of five articles that comprise a White Paper titled The Internet and the Franchise Industry - How an industry misused the Internet.  This paper describes the history of Internet communications in the Franchise Industry and suggests ways to improve the current situation.

 

Part 1 - Introduction

Part 2 - Internet Communications in our Society

Part 3 - Understanding Institutions that Support the Franchise Industry

Part 4 - Impact of the Internet on the Franchise Industry

Part 5 - What can be done in the Current Reality and Conclusion

 ---------------------------------

 

For over a century we have relied on print media to provide us with in depth and unbiased information about our society.  The Internet is viewed as an improvement on our ability to communicate with each other and to access information.

 

Media has now moved to the online world.  Magazines and newspapers have lost their traditional customer base - both advertisers and those who purchase the product.  Media is challenged by convincing consumers to purchase their product(s) when they also distribute the same information for free on the Internet.  And in today's society, people are too busy to read in depth articles on a particular subject.  Most individuals prefer to listen to brief sound bytes or read short articles that summarize the information for us.  In this environment, the market for print media is declining at a rapid pace.

 

The consequences of this are significant.  We continue to lose the gatekeepers who were most capable of providing relevant information to us.  The print media that remains today is much smaller and less capable of providing the quality information of the past.  What remains is shorter in length, less effectively researched and more dependent on biased sources of information that is easily reproduced.  Former reporters of the news were the first to migrate to the online world in order to replace the incomes they lost as their jobs disappeared.  Through this transition, it was hoped that the tradition of effective and relevant print media would migrate to the Internet.  It has not worked out this way.  Most former print media writers found that they could no longer earn a living in a world where few would pay enough for their expertise.  Yet this was only the beginning of the decline in media.

 

The online world quickly became overpopulated with individuals reporting or redistributing information.  Individuals began to build their own personal online presence for many reasons - far too many to describe here.  They often did so because there was no longer a significant cost to online communications.  Simply start a inexpensive web site, blog or just reply to existing articles.  Most felt they could earn a living by selling advertising yet very few have proven capable of doing so.  There are now far too many information sites seeking advertising dollars in a world where few are willing to pay for content.

 

There is now an unrealistic consumer expectation that information should be available at no cost to the reader.  I would argue that the fault for this lies entirely with the newspaper industry.  They made a decision to put their content online for free despite the high cost of gathering this content.  This has destroyed the perceived value of their product and had many unintended repercussions.  Reporting news is costly.  Without revenues to cover these costs, many jobs have been lost.  Publications became smaller and less frequent.  Many have disappeared.  The information we now see in these publications is usually less effectively researched and dependent on less credible but easily available sources of information.  The ripple effect of these events, however, is what this paper is attempting to address.  Many necessary institutions that also depended on placing a value on information (and intellectual expertise) have been negatively affected by these events.

 

In place of these failing institutions we now have too many news websites, online newsletters, web sites and blogs.  The belief that everyone could sustain their new businesses with advertising revenue was and remains impractical.  To feed this growing expanse of sites that provide free distribution of information, we have seen an increase in communications directed to these sites - press releases, company announcements, government initiatives and privately contracted (or internally generated) surveys to support specific products/views.  And the reporters of this information no longer have the desire or ability to focus on unbiased and relevant information while ignoring biased sources of information.  In short, we have sacrificed quality of information for an increasing quantity of irrelevant or unreliable information.  It is now up to the reader to decide what information is relevant and accurate, while also identifying what information may be false, incorrect, misrepresented or simply fabricated.  And it is increasingly evident to me that most individuals are not up to this task.

 

None of these drawbacks to Internet communications are recent.  As early as 1998, an article in a Chinese publication used the term "Internet junk" to describe "use of the Internet to disseminate ... product catalogues and advertisements."  This article talks about the spread of a massive amount of "junk" at extremely low cost.  This was combined with a "lack of regulations and standards ..... to produce any type of information - real and fake information, correct and wrong information, good and bad information - thus creating a flood of information online.  The result is to make it easier to mislead people .... while increasing the difficulty and cost of searching and using valuable information, thus wasting considerable Internet resources and time."  (Source: The Negative Impact of the Internet and Its Solutions by Ru Guangrong, The Chinese Defense Science and Technology Information Monthly, Issue 121, 1998)

 

Further adding to the destruction of informed reporting of information is a more recent phenomenon of allowing readers to comment on a particular article or posting.  It is ironic that individuals who could not be bothered to write a letter on a topic think nothing of drafting a poorly thought out, nasty or otherwise inappropriate e-mail to anyone of their choosing.  Unlike Letters to the Editor which are selected for publication based on content and awareness of the author, these online comments are often not controlled in any way.  Posters can and often do hide their identity and choose not to disclose their reason(s) for posting.  This anonymity and lack of disclosure often results in a less than professional discussion of the topic.  Individuals who can contribute useful information on a subject are often less likely to participate in a public discussion that very often degenerates into a mean spirited distortion of the topic at hand.

 

About the Author

Perry Shoom is the founder of FranchiseFacts, a company that provides research services for the Franchise Industry.  The company also publishes an Annual Report of the results from its National Franchisee Survey.  The 2010 Annual Report, and the 2011 Franchisee Survey that is currently in progress, can both be found at www.FranchiseFactsUSA.com. The survey is open to all franchise owners and store managers.  FranchiseFacts does not disclose identifying information that may be provided by survey respondents. 

 

 

(From the PBS News Hour Transcript of Potential Risks of Borrowing Money)

JOSH KOSMAN: The Boston Consulting Group last year predicted half of their companies would default. Let's say the companies that go bankrupt end up laying off a quarter of their people, a third. You know, you can easily get to more than a million people. That's a lot of people.

PAUL SOLMAN: In fact, says Kosman, half of the S&P-rated firms that went bankrupt last year, besides banks, that is, were private equity acquisitions, including Chrysler, Simmons, Six Flags, and "Reader's Digest," where retirees, including executives, had their pensions slashed by a debt-driven bankruptcy.

Ken Gordon was president.

KEN GORDON, former president, "Reader's Digest": I have lost 80 percent of my total pension.

PAUL SOLMAN: Did you ever imagine you might not see that money?

KEN GORDON: Not in my wildest dreams.

PAUL SOLMAN: Same for former editor in chief Ed Thompson.

ED THOMPSON, former editor in chief, "Reader's Digest": I lost about $75,000 a year.

PAUL SOLMAN: What was your reaction?

ED THOMPSON: Anger. How could they have screwed up this company to the point where they have to go through bankruptcy

JANE PERSONENI, former head of international advertising, "Reader's Digest": When you begin to see these people taking over, it's like Predator drones are coming in.

PAUL SOLMAN: Jane Personeni, head of international advertising, lost about a third of her pension.

JANE PERSONENI: Am I crying poverty? No, I'm not. But it certainly -- it was something I felt I had earned. It was something I thought was going to keep going. And it stopped.

PAUL SOLMAN: Others are near poverty, however.

Franchise owners are, by definition, local business people. They pride themselves on having a local presence, on being locally owned and operated. But when it comes to appearing to be local, well, that’s a different story.

Even though we know that local marketing, local listings and social media play a huge role in bringing in franchisee business, corporate marketing departments are often slow to adopt social media programs. There seem to be so many barriers for them, like who will run it, who will “approve” the content, do we have enough staff to take this on, what guidelines need to be put in place in terms of content, what about legal issues, and so on. And so on.

There has long been an argument about who owns the brand and who is responsible for social and digital communications. Is it the franchisor or the franchisee? Should franchisors have full autonomy over messaging? Or should individual franchises be in charge of their communication as it relates to the communities they serve? This is a heated ongoing discussion, and it appears there isn’t a clear cut answer. One thing is for sure, though. When corporate marketing stops caring about what their franchisees have to say about their local markets, franchisees stop caring about compliance.

One way to keep both happy is to communicate a central brand message through multiple digital media, while allowing individual franchisees the latitude to build their own social networks. Through templates for local websites, facebook pages, blogs, twitter and other vehicles, zees can engage their customers on a local level, and truly appear local instead of corporate.

Of course, both corporate and system want these outlets to appear professional – that’s why it’s good to invest in some upfront training. Seminars or webinars on how best to use social media, what works best in the digitial marketplace and how to keep a handle on it. If done well, these training sessions provide a great way to increase visibility and connect with customers.

 

As 2011 unfolds, we continue to witness a growing consumption of mobile videos. The number of U.S. mobile users watching video on their mobile devices was nearly 25 million people by the end of 2010 ( source: Nielsen new mobile video report. And, the newest trends revealed in Cisco’s Global Mobile Data Reportpromises us a bright future.

- Global mobile data nearly tripled for the third year in a row.
Global mobile data traffic in 2010 was 237 petabytes per month, and 49.8 percent of this traffic was video usage.

- Mobile devices are becoming more compatible with video usage.
It is more convenient and engaging to watch videos nowadays. Mobile connection speeds doubled in 2010 and many mobile devices have more powerful processors and larger screens than ever before.

- Usage of smartphones is increasing.
Though smartphones represent only 13 percent of total global handsets in use today, they are responsible for over 78 percent of total global mobile devices traffic. In 2010, the typical smartphone racked up 24 times more mobile data traffic than the typical basic-feature cell phone. Furthermore, the average consumption of traffic more than doubled in the past year (from 35 MB per month in 2009 to 79 MB in 2010).

- Mobile videos are available beyond the power of electrical grids and geographical borders.
There are 48 million people in the world who have mobile phones even though they do not have electricity at home. One of my most astounding discoveries during my travel to Rwanda was that there were more people who owned mobile phones than people with access to electricity.

- The Vimeo iPhone App is now live.
With the newly released Vimeo application, users can now upload, edit, manage and watch more videos than before on the iPhone.

New technological advances in the space also increased opportunities for monetizing of mobile videos. Ad support became stronger. The arrival of HTML5 allows videos to run without the use of plug-ins such as Flash, opening up new opportunities for video advertisers.

As the year progresses, we’ll see a lot of new twists in the changing world of mobile videos. I am looking forward to new developments and will try to keep you up-to-date. And, the great news is that mobile devices are among the many places where your videos can be watched. So, let’s keep on producing great videos and increasing our visibility to the rest of the world.

This is the first of five articles that comprise a White Paper titled The Internet and the Franchise Industry - How an industry misused the Internet.  This paper describes the history of Internet communications in the Franchise Industry and suggests ways to improve the current situation. 

Part 1 - Introduction

Part 2 - Internet Communications in our Society

Part 3 - Understanding Institutions that Support the Franchise Industry

Part 4 - Impact of the Internet on the Franchise Industry

Part 5 - What can be done in the Current Reality and Conclusion

 -------------------


Part1of5.pngThe Internet is now an accepted part of the way in which we all communicate.  Low cost computers, cell phones and networks have allowed this technology to become ubiquitous.  We access more information than ever before at lower (or no) cost.  Industries and institutions have changed to embrace this technology.  Yet our ability to manage and understand this information has not improved.  In many ways, much of our society has lost the ability to critically evaluate information. 

It has been nearly fifteen years since I wrote about technology.  Back in the 1990s, I published approximately two dozen articles on how to best utilize technology for business and investing.  My focus was on the use of the Internet and information technologies.  I was also a public speaker on these same topics at technology conferences in Canada and the USA.  Since 1998, I have been part of the franchise industry.

Today, I look back on how the Internet has developed over the past twenty years with disappointment.  The Internet is, first and foremost, a mechanism for communication and the sharing of information.  So how is it, in the Franchise Industry that I have been part of for more than a decade, that during this same time franchisees seem to have lost ground during a period when the ability to communicate among themselves has improved so dramatically?  Why is it that franchisors are now perceived as being more ruthless in their dealings with franchisees than ever before?  Is this perception correct? This paper  documents the way in which I have come to understand what has happened these past twenty years.  Through this process I have come to three conclusions.

A.  Franchisors have not changed in the way they work with their franchisees.  Franchisors have adapted, out of necessity, to changes that have been forced upon them by the franchisee community. 

B.  Internet technology was never envisioned as a way to destroy institutions that have existed for decades.  Yet that is exactly what has and continues to occur in the Franchise Industry.  This situation has come about by decisions made by a very significant proportion of individuals (franchisees) to no longer support their own institutions.

C.  The necessary equilibrium in franchise relations has been disrupted.  Franchisors no longer have the opportunity to work with franchisees speaking with a single voice.  The organization tasked with this responsibility, when it exists, no longer has the financial resources and intellectual capital  needed to fulfill this role.

This paper provides an overview of how the Internet has affected overall communications and flow/quality of information.  It then addresses how these changes have become entrenched in the Franchise Industry.  Finally, recommendations are provided for improving the current situation.

 

 -----

About the Author

Perry Shoom is the founder of FranchiseFacts, a company that provides research services for the Franchise Industry.  The company also publishes an Annual Report of the results from its National Franchisee Survey.  The 2010 Annual Report, and the 2011 Franchisee Survey that is currently in progress, can both be found at www.FranchiseFactsUSA.com. The survey is open to all franchise owners and store managers.  FranchiseFacts does not disclose identifying information that may be provided by survey respondents.

Many years ago, I had the pleasure of teaching the Logic of Collective Action, by Mancur Olson, to a group of University of Waterloo students.  (I believe that the book is out of print, but it is a wonderful classic of great interest to franchisee association leaders, their executive and staff, especially those in government relations.)

One of the topics, the role of associations and their influence on the legislative process is very relevant to a recent discussion of the pro's and con's of the passage of Comprehensive 1099 Taxpayer Protection and Repayment of Exchange Subsidy Overpayments Act of 2011 (HR 4).

Legislation always has costs and benefits; an association wants the lion share of benefits to accrue to its members or constituents and the costs to be visited on its competitors.  Naturally, not all associations can win this game and the role of rational governance is to make sure that this game of musical chairs doesn't get so intense as to remove the entire benefit of anyone playing it.

Today's letter, April 5th, 2011, from AICPA, the Accountant's trade association, sets out with clarity the cost issues related to the repeal of 1099 reporting requirements.

"Both of the 1099 reporting requirements were intended to raise revenue. To pay for repeal, the bill will increase the amount of the new IRC § 36B health care premium assistance credit that is subject to recapture. Under this amendment, taxpayers whose household income is over 400% of the poverty line for a particular tax year would have to pay back their advance health care premium assistance credit payments (previously this provision applied to taxpayers whose household income was over 500% of the poverty line). For taxpayers whose household income is less than 400% of the poverty line for a particular tax year, the amount of the increase in tax under section 36B(f)(2)(A) due to excess advance payments of the credit will be limited to the applicable dollar amounts in this table:

Household Income table

The associations successfully persuaded the legislature that the regulatory position taken by the IRS would not decrease significantly the compliance costs associated with 1009 and the repeal has now passed.

The IRS position and AICPA response is nicely summarized by the AICPA letter of February 14th, 2011.

"In May 2010, Commissioner  Shulman stated that the IRS plans to use its “administrative authority to exempt from this new requirement business transactions conducted using…credit cards and debit cards.”  This potential  exemption may mitigate some burden; however, we are still concerned with the overall level of burden placed on taxpayers.  Thus, we remain convinced that repeal of section 9006 of the PPACA and section 2101 of the SBJA is the best solution for both taxpayers and the government."

The Wall Street Journal neatly summarized the trade-off as follows:

The approved repeal would make up for taxes lost to vendor evasion by requiring low- and middle-income Americans who receive a tax credit for buying their own health insurance to repay the credit if their income winds up being too high. The repayment obligation would show up as a tax charge during the tax filing season.

Now, after this legislation has passed, all the associations will explain to their members why they are economic winners and the costs associated with the repeal of 1099 will be visted on other people.  Of course, not all of these associations can be right anymore than we can all be above average in height, intelligence and looks.

So some associations must have backed the wrong horse, as a matter of pure logic.  

Who do you think will be the winners and losers among those associations who lobbied for the repeal, now that we know how the Healthcare Act is going to be funded?