Release Date: 09/ 01/ 2005
CONTACT: J.L. Wilson, (503) 364-4450 or Tony Malandra, (415) 664-9685
Quarterly Report: State Drops on Key indicators, Despite Welcome Rises in Others
SALEM, Ore. -- Oregon dropped an unhealthy 7 points in the opinion that small-business owners have about the governmental and societal support structure surrounding them, according to the latest Oregon Small-Business ConditionsSM report released today by the National Federation of Independent Business.
NFIB Small-Business ConditionsSM reports on the nation's 26 largest-economy states. The Research Foundation of NFIB, America’s largest small-business advocacy organization, asks Main Street business owners to rate the support they receive from their state’s business environment – which includes government, banks, the media and community groups. Today’s report showed a net 13 percent support rate (highly supportive/supportive minus not supportive/not at all supportive), a drop of 7 points from the June rate of 20 percent. By comparison with 25 other states, Oregon ranked 17th in the net-support category.
“I attribute some of the drop to the conduct of the Oregon Senate during the last legislative session,” said J.L. Wilson, state director for the 12,000-member NFIB/Oregon. “It was a maternity ward for business mandates and pro-lawyer legislation, and a graveyard for every tax reduction and pro-small-business proposal coming out of a much more supportive House. The Senate’s attitude was not wasted on small-business owners who keep a very watchful eye on their lawmakers.”
Not all the news was bad, however. There was an increase in the net-percent rate of small-business owners who said market conditions in their areas were “good,” from 30 percent last quarter to 41 percent this quarter. Still, that was deflated by an 8 percent drop in the net percent of business owners who report things are “improving.” The net percent who said sales were “good” rose 7 points from 45 to 52, quarter to quarter, and the net percent who said profits were “good” spiked 13 points, from 21 percent to 34 percent.
But those encouraging numbers were diminished by inability to pass on price increases. Fifty-three percent reported higher purchasing prices, but only 20 percent reported higher selling prices. One area of higher purchasing prices was employee compensation. While employee insurance costs are rising rapidly, when asked how they would increase employee compensation an extra dollar per hour, 56 percent opted to give it in salaries and 11 percent in benefits.
For information about the Small-Business ConditionsSM project and other small-business research studies conducted by the NFIB Research Foundation, visit www.NFIB.com/research.
| Oregon Small-Business ConditionsSM | ||||||
| This chart shows the results from Oregon and its comparative standing among selected nearby states. | ||||||
| Ore. | No. Calif. |
Wash. | ||||
| Business Climate | Survey Date | |||||
| Overall state business environment | ||||||
| Net % supportive of small business | 8/2005 | 13 | 9 | -1 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 20 | 0 | -4 | |||
| Business conditions in market area | ||||||
| Net % "good" | 8/2005 | 41 | 44 | 42 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 30 | 26 | 33 | |||
| Net % "improving" | 8/2005 | 12 | 16 | 19 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 20 | 15 | 11 | |||
| Outlook for business | ||||||
| Net % "good" in next three months | 8/2005 | 64 | 66 | 67 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 64 | 57 | 63 | |||
| Reason for optimism | ||||||
| % Sales prospects | 8/2005 | 44 | 42 | 44 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 36 | 42 | 42 | |||
| % Lower costs | 8/2005 | 2 | 4 | 2 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 1 | 2 | 1 | |||
| % Price increases | 8/2005 | 3 | 3 | 4 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 4 | 6 | 4 | |||
| % Greater productivity | 8/2005 | 11 | 15 | 17 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 16 | 15 | 13 | |||
| % Government policy | 8/2005 | 4 | 5 | 4 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 4 | 4 | 3 | |||
| % Seasonal/Weather | 8/2005 | 12 | 7 | 8 | ||
| Prior qtr. | - | 13 | - | |||
| Reason for pessimism | ||||||
| % Sales prospects | 8/2005 | IC* | IC | IC | ||
| Prior qtr. | IC | IC | IC | |||
| % Cost increases | 8/2005 | IC | IC | IC | ||
| Prior qtr. | IC | IC | IC | |||
| % Pressure on selling prices | 8/2005 | IC | IC | IC | ||
| Prior qtr. | IC | IC | IC | |||
| % Lower productivity | 8/2005 | IC | IC | IC | ||
| Prior qtr. | IC | IC | IC | |||
| % Government policy | 8/2005 | IC | IC | IC | ||
| Prior qtr. | IC | IC | IC | |||
| Ore. | No. Calif. |
Wash. | ||||
| Sales and earnings (last quarter) | ||||||
| Sales | ||||||
| Net % sales "good" | 8/2005 | 52 | 47 | 52 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 45 | 31 | 44 | |||
| Profits | ||||||
| Net % profits "good" | 8/2005 | 34 | 31 | 32 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 21 | 18 | 24 | |||
| Employment | ||||||
| Current job openings (one or more) | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 8/2005 | 17 | 23 | 21 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 18 | 19 | 15 | |||
| Per employee payroll cost | ||||||
| Net % "risen" | 8/2005 | 25 | 13 | 20 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 20 | 13 | 23 | |||
| Employee cost pressures (greater) | ||||||
| % Wages | 8/2005 | 53 | 52 | 53 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 56 | 49 | 48 | |||
| % Benefits | 8/2005 | 28 | 25 | 29 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 20 | 26 | 29 | |||
| Ore. | No. Calif. |
Wash. | ||||
| Productivity | ||||||
| Upgraded technology/processes (last three months) | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 8/2005 | 45 | 46 | 42 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 43 | 43 | 44 | |||
| Made capital expenditure(s) (last three months) | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 8/2005 | 43 | 44 | 46 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 41 | 38 | 39 | |||
| Made expenditure to train employee(s) (last three months) | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 8/2005 | 41 | 38 | 44 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 40 | 39 | 40 | |||
| Capacity utilization - can increase sales 10% without new inputs | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 8/2005 | 54 | 54 | 53 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 57 | 50 | 45 | |||
| Credit availability (last three months) | ||||||
| % All credit needs satisfied | 8/2005 | 39 | 36 | 36 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 36 | 39 | 42 | |||
| % All credit needs not satisfied | 8/2005 | 7 | 8 | 5 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 6 | 6 | 5 | |||
| % No credit needs | 8/2005 | 48 | 50 | 52 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 51 | 47 | 47 | |||
| Ore. | No. Calif. |
Wash. | ||||
| Prices | ||||||
| Purchasing prices (last three months) | ||||||
| Net % increased | 8/2005 | 55 | 48 | 52 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 62 | 46 | 59 | |||
| Selling prices (last three months) | ||||||
| Net % increased | 8/2005 | 20 | 20 | 19 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 23 | 19 | 19 | |||
| Miscellaneous | ||||||
| Involvement in start of another business | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 8/2005 | 13 | 10 | 11 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 8 | 12 | 9 | |||
| Single most important business problem | ||||||
| % Weak sales | 8/2005 | 10 | 11 | 9 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 10 | 13 | 6 | |||
| % Taxes | 8/2005 | 9 | 10 | 16 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 9 | 11 | 21 | |||
| % Employee quality/costs | 8/2005 | 10 | 12 | 10 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 9 | 7 | 8 | |||
| % Insurance | 8/2005 | 17 | 19 | 12 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 17 | 15 | 14 | |||
| % Big-business competition | 8/2005 | 14 | 13 | 12 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 10 | 15 | 14 | |||
| % Inflation/Rising prices | 8/2005 | 11 | 15 | 12 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 17 | 9 | 10 | |||
| % Credit availability/Interest rates | 8/2005 | 3 | 3 | 1 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 2 | 2 | 2 | |||
| % Regulations/Red tape | 8/2005 | 9 | 6 | 11 | ||
| Prior qtr. | 9 | 10 | 10 | |||
* Insufficient cases
| Oregon Quarterly Spotlight | |
| If you were to give your employees a compensation increase equivalent to $1 per hour, how would you do it? Would you give it to them in... | |
| Wages or salary | 56% |
| Health benefits | 11% |
| Retirement benefits | 5% |
| Paid leave | 2% |
| Some other way | 9% |
| Wouldn't give an increase | 5% |
| Don't know/Refused | 13% |
| Total | 100% |
| If your employees could choose, how would they like to receive a compensation increase of $1 per hour? Do you think they would like the increase in... | |
| Wages or salary | 64% |
| Health benefits | 13% |
| Retirement benefits | 3% |
| Paid leave | 4% |
| Some other way | 3% |
| Wouldn't give an increase | 2% |
| Don't know/Refused | 11% |
| Total | 100% |
The Poll
NFIB’s Oregon Small-Business ConditionsSM is a telephone survey of a random sample of Oregon small employers regarding business conditions within the state. “Small employer” is defined here as employing between one and 250 people (not including the owner(s)) in a for-profit business. Each edition of the survey has a minimum of 350 respondents. The sampling error is ± 5 percentage points. Data are collected quarterly in the months of February, May, August and November, beginning in February 2005. The MRCGroup of Las Vegas conducts the survey for the NFIB Research Foundation.
The Sponsor
The NFIB Research Foundation is a 501 (c)(3) organization that provides policy-makers, media, educators, small-business owners and other interested parties empirically based information on small business and small-business owners. The Foundation is affiliated with the National Federation of Independent Business, the nation’s largest small- and independent-business advocacy organization, and is located in Washington, D.C.
