OTAA Government Affairs Update

All referenced legislation, and House and Senate contact information is available via the Ohio General Assembly's Web site link below.

www.legislature.state.oh.us

 

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE – FROM OUR AFFILIATE MEMBER – OHIO COUNCIL OF RETAIL MERCHANTS

 

Legislature Kicks Off Second Half of the 127^th General Assembly;

 

Energy Legislation at the Forefront of Debate

 

The Ohio General Assembly began 2008 with continued consideration of Senate Bill 221, energy legislation proposed by the Governor that constitutes a major policy shift from the law enacted in 1999 permitting the development of competition in the electric marketplace.  The goal of that law is to ensure that Ohio customers have access to affordable and reliable sources of electricity through competition among providers.  Although a competitive marketplace is still developing, S.B. 221 would stifle that development and create a hybrid system of re-regulation as opposed to relying on the cornerstone of customer choice and competition in current law.

 

Both the Speaker of the House and the Chairman of the House Public Utilities Committee have taken the position that the best way to adequately protect Ohio’s electric consumers is a marketplace.  The Council agrees with these leaders that the legislature should not automatically abandon existing law.  The current law needs some tweaking in regard to rate predictability, but it is our position that the baby needn’t be thrown out with the bath water.

 

Additionally, S.B. 221 would require Ohio’s electric utilities to produce at least 25% of their electricity from advanced energy sources by 2025, with 50% of that amount required to be generated from sustainable resources, which must include solar.  Other sustainable resources recognized in the bill are wind, biomass, landfill gas, biofuel, hydro, geothermal and fuel cells powered by these resources.  The bill also directs the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio to establish rules requiring electric utilities to implement energy efficiency measures.

 

While the Council concurs with the principle of investing in green technologies, S.B. 221’s mandated investment by utilities is not the right way to stimulate or incentivize customers to improve their individual energy use patterns.  We believe that customers, not utilities, will make the best choices and investments in green technologies to advance an alternative energy future that is best for Ohio.  Relying on utilities for the provision of green technologies without the benefit of competition would guarantee unnecessary costs to customers.  It is our position that practical green energy technologies are so important for Ohio’s future that they need the independent study and careful thought of a separate bill that is based on customer choice, not a utility mandate.

 

We urge Council members to please contact their legislators and tell them that Ohio needs a competitive electric marketplace, not the re-regulation proposed by S.B. 221.  Also ask them to address investment in green technologies in separate legislation that provides for customer choice among competing alternative energy providers.  To obtain contact information for your legislators, visit www.legislature.state.oh.us and enter your ZIP+4 under “Locating Legislators.”  For additional assistance with locating your legislators, or for questions regarding S.B. 221, contact Lora Miller at (614) 221-7833 or by e-mail at loram@ohioretailmerchants.com. 

 

 

Changes to the Streamlined Sales Tax Agreement Necessitate Additional Changes to Ohio Law

 

In a surprise development, at the December meeting of the Streamlined Sales Tax Governing Board—the states that have passed laws necessary to be in compliance with the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement (SSUTA)—an amendment was adopted that permits origin sourcing of sales tax on sales within a state.  Origin sourcing is applying the appropriate sales tax rate for a sale based on the location of the vendor.

 

You may remember that the SSUTA is a compact among numerous states to voluntarily collect and remit sales tax for each other when a sale is being made into a participating state from another participating state.  The goal of the SSUTA is the comprehensive reform of the sales tax systems of the various states to reduce the compliance and administrative burden of all vendors.  The long-term revenue consequences of a streamlined system are very significant, to states and retailers alike.  Implementation of the SSUTA would also help level the playing field between brick-and-mortar retailers and Internet and catalog retailers as many of the latter don’t currently collect and remit sales taxes.

 

The original SSUTA required destination-based sourcing on all in-state delivery sales, meaning the sales tax rate that is applied to the sale is the rate in the county where the purchase is being delivered, and in 2003 Ohio changed its law to be in compliance with this requirement.  The outcry from vendors was heard across the state as they realized that compliance with the law meant costly changes to their POS systems.  The legislature delayed the destination sourcing requirement and subsequently adopted a tiered implementation based on sales volume.  In the meantime, Ohio’s legislative representatives to the SSUTA Governing Board continued to lobby for a change to the Agreement to permit origin sourcing for intrastate sales, but a majority of participating states remained opposed time and again.

 

Out of frustration, Ohio’s representatives to the Governing Board declined to attend the December 2007 meeting of the Board, which is when an amendment offered by the state of Oklahoma was adopted that permits the use of origin sourcing for intrastate sales.  The Governing Board finally accepted that the effort cannot succeed without the participation of Ohio and other states with larger populations.  What is unclear, however, is whether the amendment requires all vendors to use origin sourcing for intrastate sales in states that elect to use origin sourcing.  If so, that would mean that vendors that have already transitioned to destination sourcing for delivery sales would have to revert back to origin sourcing for all sales.  We are working with the Department of Taxation and Ohio’s legislative representatives to the SSUTA Governing Board to ascertain what will be required in order for Ohio to maintain origin sourcing.

 

Senate Bill 274 and House Bill 429 have been introduced to permit vendors that have switched to destination sourcing to return to origin sourcing.  The question is whether the word “permit” needs to be changed to “require” in order for Ohio to be in compliance with the SSUTA.  We will keep Council members informed as the legislation progresses.  In the meantime, should you have questions or concerns on this issue, please contact Lora Miller at (614) 221-7833 or by e-mail at loram@ohioretailmerchants.com. 

 

 

Mandatory Sick Leave Ballot Initiative Sent to the Ohio General Assembly

 

Labor-backed “Ohioans for Healthy Families” submitted over 250,000 signatures to the Ohio Secretary of State in December to potentially place on the November 2008 ballot a mandatory paid sick leave ballot initiative.  The Secretary of State certified that proponents met the signature threshold of 120,683 signatures on January 4, 2008.  Unlike a Constitutional Amendment, the proposal must first be presented to the Ohio General Assembly for debate.  The General Assembly has 120 days to enact the bill before another round of 120,683 signatures may be sought to place the issue on the November 4, 2008 ballot.  We soundly believe that the issue will be on the November ballot.  

 

The Council and other similarly aligned associations are discussing options for challenging this disastrous proposal.  The citizen-initiated bill requires employers with 25 or more employees to provide seven days of paid sick leave annually.  The bill also sets the full-time work week at 30 hours and requires “pro-rata” paid sick leave for part-time employees.  These are just a handful of the anti-business provisions.  For more information please contact Gordon Gough at (614) 221-7833, or by e-mail at GordonG@ohioretailmerchants.com.

 

Ohio Civil Rights Commission Considering Pregnancy Leave Rule     

 

In early December 2007, the Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review (JCARR) sent the 12-week pregnancy leave rule back to the Ohio Civil Rights Commission (OCRC) for further review.  JCARR requested that the fiscal impact on state and local government be studied before the rule would be considered by the Committee.  Initially, the OCRC pegged the rule’s fiscal impact at zero. 

 

As you may recall, the proposed rule would require employers with four or more employees to provide up to 12 weeks of paid or unpaid pregnancy leave to female employees, as well as establish a light duty requirement.

 

The Council retains its original position that major policy proposals of this magnitude should be debated by the Ohio Legislature, not a five-person, Governor-appointed board.  For more information please contact Gordon Gough at (614) 221-7833, or by e-mail at GordonG@ohioretailmerchants.com.

 

Legislation Billed as Health Care Simplification Could Have Problematic Outcome

 

A bill currently pending in the Senate Judiciary-Civil Justice Committee, House Bill 125, was introduced on behalf of health care providers in an effort to provide them with additional leverage when dealing with health insurers.  Providers claim that the legislation is an attempt to relieve them from many of the “excessive administrative demands” placed upon them by insurers.  Insurers and many employers have a different  perspective on the proposal.  Opponents of the measure believe that the bill will increase the cost of health insurance for Ohio employers, including those with self-insured plans, as well as decrease choice, flexibility, and the access employees have to qualified providers of health care services. 

They contend that this proposal is contradictory to the efforts underway to reduce the number of uninsured and make health care coverage more accessible and affordable.

 

H.B. 125 is intended to apply to all health insurers and third party administrators of self-insured plans.  It is being argued that its provisions could interfere with the uniform administration of health benefit plans across multiple states, which is what ERISA preemption of state laws is meant to protect.  The intent of proponents is that the measure also apply to Medicare, Medicaid and workers’ compensation health care contracts.

 

Providers are seeking a greater level of negotiating power regarding health insurance contracts and the ability to opt out of participation in certain health insurance products they deem unacceptable.  Insurers are offering a variety of products that are more affordable to smaller employers as they require greater out-of-pocket costs from employees that providers must collect on their own.  Employers are demanding products that provide comprehensive benefits for their employees at an affordable price.  The problem is that no one knows what impact this proposal could have on the health care system in Ohio because no other state has ever passed legislation that intervenes this significantly into the provider/insurer contracting process.

 

From a public policy and business perspective, such an intrusion into the free market process is a definite cause for concern.  Although the bill passed very quickly through the House, the process slowed down in the Senate, however, providers continue to maintain the upper hand in interested party discussions on the proposal.  It is being said that the Senate is nearing the end of the debate over H.B. 125 and will soon bring it up for a vote.

 

If you are concerned that passage of H.B. 125 could increase the cost to your business of providing health insurance coverage to your employees—or prevent you from offering it at all—you should contact your legislators immediately and share this legitimate concern.  To obtain contact information for your legislators, visit www.legislature.state.oh.us and enter your ZIP+4 under “Locating Legislators.”  For additional assistance with locating your legislators, for questions regarding S.B. 221, or to obtain a copy of the most current version of H.B. 125, contact Lora Miller at (614) 221-7833 or by e-mail at loram@ohioretailmerchants.com.

 

 

 

 

 

The Ohio Receivables Management Association Joins the Ohio Council of Retail Merchants as an Affiliate

 

Beginning fourth quarter of 2007, OCRM began managing the day-to-day operations of the group formerly know as the Ohio Collectors Association.  “We are both pleased and excited to have entered into this mutually beneficial relationship with OCRM,” said Don Wood, President of the Ohio Receivables Management Association. 

 

“This is a great opportunity to strategically expand the membership scope of OCRM,” added John C. Mahaney, Jr., President of the Ohio Council of Retail Merchants.  “The Ohio Receivables Management Association is a premier association,” Mahaney continued.  “We look forward working with ORMA and its board of directors.”  OCRM staff executive Gordon Gough serves as ORMA’s Executive Director.

 

The Ohio Receivables Management Association is a trade group representing companies in the credit and collection industries.

 

Ohio Department of Education Survey on the Educational Needs of Employers

 

In light of today’s global economy and the desire to educate students to succeed in higher education and their careers, as well as to be fully participating citizens, the Ohio State Board of Education is asking stakeholders from all aspects of the business community to provide input into policy recommendations and next steps. 

 

The web address below links to a brief survey that asks respondents to offer comments on the types of skills, knowledge and behaviors that employees need today to be successful in the workplace and also what will be needed in the future to ensure that Ohio is competitive in the new global economy.  The State Board of Education will use the results from the survey to help develop policy recommendations and define next steps in reforming Ohio’s education system.  Your participation in this survey will help shape the educational future for Ohio’s students.  We encourage you to visit the web page to offer your input to help achieve this very important goal.

https://webapp1.ode.state.oh.us/odesurvey/surveys/Edge_Survey.asp