Release Date: 03/ 01/ 2005
CONTACT: Carolyn Logue, (360) 786-8675 or Tony Malandra, (415) 664-9685
WASHINGTON -- On today's inaugural launch of 26 state-specific quarterly surveys on small-business environments across the nation, Washington ranked dead last in a key component, even worse than notoriously high-tax and high-regulation New York, which came in second to last, according to the new reports from the National Federation of Independent Business.
In compiling its Washington Small-Business ConditionsSM report, one question NFIB asked small-business owners was to rank how supportive the state's business environment – which included government, banks, the media, and community groups – was to them. Washington racked up a negative-9 percent in the net supportive tally, while New York eked out a plus-3 percent. In fact, Washington was the only one of the 26 states to have a negative rating in that category. By comparison, Northern California had 17 percent support rate; Oregon, 29 percent; and Colorado, 35 percent. In all of the net categories, the report compared Washington's numbers to Colorado's, Oregon's, and Northern California. California was divided into three regions.
"We now have quantifiable evidence to back up what many of us have known for a long time," said Carolyn Logue, state director for the 15,000-member Washington chapter of NFIB, "and that is while our state has all the tools necessary to be a great state for small business, our regulations and policies are dragging us down. The results show that even though the economy is getting better, small businesses are afraid to take risks because of increasing payroll costs, increasing taxes, and burdensome regulations."
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. Future surveys will be released on June 1, September 1 and December 1. On those dates, the survey will be compared to the previous quarter, as well as to neighboring states.
| Washington Small-Business ConditionsSM | ||||||
| This chart shows the results from Washington and its comparative standing among selected states in the region. | ||||||
| Wash. | No. Calif. |
Colo. | Ore. | |||
| Business Climate | Survey Date | |||||
| Overall state business environment | ||||||
| Net % supportive of small business | 2/2005 | -9 | 17 | 35 | 29 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Business conditions in market area | ||||||
| Net % "good" | 2/2005 | 36 | 41 | 41 | 39 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Net % "improving" | 2/2005 | 26 | 24 | 27 | 23 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Outlook for business | ||||||
| Net % "good" in next three months | 2/2005 | 67 | 66 | 68 | 66 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Reason for optimism | ||||||
| % Sales prospects | 2/2005 | 51 | 43 | 43 | 37 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Lower costs | 2/2005 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Price increases | 2/2005 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 6 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Greater productivity | 2/2005 | 16 | 13 | 14 | 14 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Government policy | 2/2005 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Reason for pessimism | ||||||
| % Sales prospects | 2/2005 | 27 | 5 | 25 | 31 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Cost increases | 2/2005 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Pressure on selling prices | 2/2005 | 0 | 15 | 8 | 15 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Lower productivity | 2/2005 | 13 | 0 | 17 | 0 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Government policies | 2/2005 | 33 | 35 | 0 | 23 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Wash. | No. Calif. |
Colo. | Ore. | |||
| Sales and earnings (last quarter) | ||||||
| Sales | ||||||
| Net % sales "good" | 2/2005 | 43 | 36 | 38 | 48 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Profits | ||||||
| Net % profits "good" | 2/2005 | 23 | 23 | 29 | 28 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Employment | ||||||
| Current job openings (one or more) | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 2/2005 | 20 | 22 | 16 | 15 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Per employee payroll cost | ||||||
| Net % "risen" | 2/2005 | 28 | 12 | 13 | 16 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Employee cost pressures (greater) | ||||||
| % Wages | 2/2005 | 55 | 52 | 57 | 55 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Benefits | 2/2005 | 25 | 32 | 27 | 24 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Wash. | No. Calif. |
Colo. | Ore. | |||
| Productivity | ||||||
| Upgraded technology/processes (last three months) | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 2/2005 | 48 | 41 | 45 | 43 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Made capital expenditure(s) (last three months) | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 2/2005 | 46 | 39 | 44 | 48 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Made expenditure to train employee(s) (last three months) | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 2/2005 | 43 | 39 | 40 | 42 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Capacity utilization - can increase sales 10% without new inputs | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 2/2005 | 62 | 57 | 58 | 54 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Credit availability (last three months) | ||||||
| % All credit needs satisfied | 2/2005 | 36 | 38 | 39 | 39 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % All credit needs not satisfied | 2/2005 | 10 | 7 | 4 | 3 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % No credit needs | 2/2005 | 52 | 50 | 52 | 51 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Wash. | No. Calif. |
Colo. | Ore. | |||
| Prices | ||||||
| Purchasing prices (last three months) | ||||||
| Net % increased | 2/2005 | 54 | 45 | 50 | 54 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Selling prices (last three months) | ||||||
| Net % increased | 2/2005 | 22 | 18 | 15 | 22 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Miscellaneous | ||||||
| Involvement in start of another business | ||||||
| % "Yes" | 2/2005 | 16 | 13 | 8 | 9 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Single most important business problem | ||||||
| % Weak sales | 2/2005 | 10 | 10 | 12 | 10 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Taxes | 2/2005 | 19 | 11 | 12 | 8 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Employee quality/costs | 2/2005 | 11 | 9 | 8 | 11 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Insurance | 2/2005 | 14 | 19 | 19 | 15 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Big-business competition | 2/2005 | 12 | 13 | 12 | 18 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Inflation/Rising prices | 2/2005 | 10 | 7 | 9 | 9 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Credit availability/Interest rates | 2/2005 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 3 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| % Regulations/Red tape | 2/2005 | 11 | 11 | 10 | 13 | |
| Prior qtr. | - | - | - | - | ||
| Washington Quarterly Spotlight | |
| Have higher energy prices experienced over the last year or so imposed a very serious, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not at all serious burden on your business? | |
| Very serious | 13% |
| Somewhat serious | 33% |
| Not too serious | 31% |
| Not at all serious | 21% |
| Don't know/Refused | 2% |
| Total | 100% |
| On balance, is your business very positively, somewhat positively, somewhat negatively, or very negatively impacted by trade with other countries? | |
| Very positively | 9% |
| Somewhat positively | 15% |
| Neither; not impacted | 47% |
| Somewhat negatively | 14% |
| Very negatively | 7% |
| Don't know/Refused | 7% |
| Total | 100% |
The Poll
NFIB’s Washington Small-Business ConditionsSM is a telephone survey of a random sample of Washington 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.
