Input Stories

Manufacturers are becoming increasingly concerned about the unprecedented number of unbalanced, unworkable regulations being handed down by federal agencies, according to the NAM’s Q2 2023 Manufacturers’ Outlook Survey.

• Sixty-five percent reported that if regulatory burdens were reduced, they would purchase more equipment; more than 46% said they would pay their workers more.
• Over sixty-three percent said they spend more than 2,000 hours complying with federal regulations.

Also notable: Other key conclusions from the quarterly analysis, which was conducted from May 18 to June 1, 2023, include:

• Sixty-seven percent of manufacturers reported being positive about their company’s outlook, a decrease of more than 11% since Q1 (74.7%) and the lowest in nearly three years.
• Seventy-five percent of manufacturers polled said comprehensive permitting reform would help their businesses, allowing them to hire more employees, expand their operations and/or boost wages.

Persistent challenges: As they have in the past three surveys, manufacturers this quarter again cited attracting top talent as their number-one workforce challenge (74.4%).

• The next biggest hurdles reported were a weaker U.S. economy (55.7%), rising health care or insurance costs (53.1%), an unfavorable business climate (52.1%), increased raw materials costs (50.8%) and supply chain challenges (44.9%).

The last word: “Congress and the administration have taken bold steps to support manufacturing in the United States,” NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons said.

• “But the positive effects of tax reform, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the CHIPS and Science Act are being undermined by the growing regulatory burden. The unrelenting barrage of regulations threatens to undermine manufacturers’ competitiveness. If the administration’s regulatory onslaught continues, its manufacturing agenda will fail. Unfortunately, we are seeing the signs of exactly that happening.”

House Republicans are taking the first steps toward restoring tax provisions important to manufacturers, according to The Wall Street Journal (subscription).

What’s happening: Legislators are working to get a bill through the House Ways and Means Committee, potentially as soon as this month, though it’s unlikely to ever reach President Biden’s desk. Instead, this effort might ultimately lead to bipartisan negotiations later this year.
 
What’s in it: The bill hasn’t been released yet, but we do know something about tax writers’ intentions.

• The package would “reverse three business-tax increases that took effect over the past few years, aides said. Those changes limited the deductions companies could claim for interest, research costs and capital expenses.”
• Democrats may be willing to negotiate, especially about reinstating immediate expensing for R&D, undoing a 2022 tax change that has forced companies to deduct R&D costs over a period of years and made innovation more costly.

NAM at work: The NAM has been leading the charge to restore immediate R&D expensing, to enable manufacturers to continue financing growth and make permanent a key incentive for capital equipment purchases.

What we’re saying: As NAM Managing Vice President of Tax and Domestic Economic Policy wrote this week to the House Small Business Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Tax and Capital Access:

• “Several harmful tax changes have gone into effect recently that make it more costly to perform research, buy machinery and finance capital investments. If not reversed, these policies will hurt manufacturers’ ability to innovate, create jobs in the United States, invest in their communities and effectively compete in the global economy.”

As part of the NAM’s advocacy campaign, the NAM recently released the Full Expensing Action Center. This action center, which is in addition to the existing R&D and interest deductibility action centers, features a tool enabling manufacturers to send customized messages directly to Congress.
 

The U.S. government and automakers are on a mission to supply the nation with better, faster charging for electric vehicles, according to The Wall Street Journal (subscription).

What’s going on: The Biden administration “is trying to spur the buildout of so-called fast chargers that can charge EVs in about 15 to 40 minutes. That’s still slower than a traditional fill-up at a gas station, but faster than the hours-long experience at public chargers … ”

• Across the U.S., labs including the National Renewable Energy Lab are coming up with designs capable of fully charging an EV in under half an hour. Some trucking firms and charger makers have piloted systems capable of charging trucks in 15-20 minutes.

The challenges: There is debate over the best way to get more people into EVs, however: is it faster chargers or more slower chargers installed “where people park … in order to make charging a car a convenient and ubiquitous experience”?

• Most current EV charging takes place at owners’ homes, typically garages or driveways where the cars can “sip” energy for hours. However, “those in multifamily housing have less access to charging.”
• The more commonly used EV charger, called level 2, will charge a battery to about 80% in four to 10 hours.

Faster charger, bigger issues: “Fast chargers require costly utility infrastructure and charging equipment; ultra-rapid charging would be even more expensive. ‘Higher power costs more,’ [Dan Bowermaster, head of electric-vehicle research at the Electric Power Research Institute] says. ‘You get to a point where for these higher power levels you’d need bigger and bigger wire. At some point the wire gets so big that not only it’s heavy, but it can’t readily bend to curve around the charging port.’”

How to solve it: Mechanical assists could lessen the cables’ weight with robotic arms, according to one fast-charging company.

• Another possible fix? A “solid-state battery in which the electrolyte that conducts the electric current is a solid, rather than a liquid as used in most batteries today.”
• Some automakers are switching to 800-volt charging systems over the more common 400-volt ones, “doubling the power that the same current would provide”—but it’s a move that will require “the highest-level charging equipment.”​​​​​​​

In an interview with Nick Pinchuk, you will start with JFK, meander through Ralph Waldo Emerson and the New Testament, meet Mother Teresa along the way and find out only at the end that he helped send the Viking probe to Mars. And let’s not forget another achievement: he delivered his own child in the backseat of the family car.

The Snap-on chairman and CEO, an executive committee member and stalwart supporter of the NAM, sat down for a very wide-ranging interview with NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons at the NAM’s recent board meeting, at which he received the Manufacturing Icon Award. Here are some of the highlights.

Starting with Kennedy: When asked how he got into manufacturing, Pinchuk cites Kennedy’s 1961 speech promising that the U.S. would put a man on the moon by the end of the decade. Pinchuk was one of the “millions of young people” who pursued STEM careers because Kennedy inspired them, he said.

• He then found himself shipped to Vietnam after a stint in the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps. His experience in the army later helped launch him into management at Ford, when the company was looking for someone who could “run something 24 hours a day”—just as he had in Vietnam.
• He “parlayed” that experience into a business degree, then rose fast in two other organizations—United Technologies and Carrier. His experience in Vietnam helped a second time, leading Carrier to choose him to run its Asia operations.
• Finally, Snap-on came calling, looking for someone with international experience. “On a day in which the board of directors likely had too much wine,” Pinchuk joked, “they decided to give me the CEO job.”

Read the full story here.
 

Yesterday, NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons announced recent changes to the organization’s leadership team.

Newhouse to senior advisor: Last month, NAM Senior Vice President Aric Newhouse announced he would step back from his day-to-day management responsibilities of the policy and government relations teams on July 1. Newhouse will now serve the NAM as a senior advisor.

Aligning advocacy: Managing Vice Presidents Chris Netram and Jordan Stoick, respectively, will lead the NAM’s best-in-class policy team and government relations team. To further combine the strengths of the NAM’s government relations, public affairs and communications operations, Stoick and Netram will report to NAM Executive Vice President Erin Streeter.

• Over the past few years, Streeter has led engagement with all of the NAM’s external stakeholders, overseeing advocacy campaigns and key relationships with the White House and members of Congress, while continuing her leadership of communications, marketing and brand reputation.
• “I’m excited about what this means to further integrating our advocacy efforts,” said Timmons following the announcement. “These changes will elevate the leadership and expertise of our best-in-class policy professionals.”

Membership:  NAM Chief of Staff Alyssa Shooshan will take on the role of senior vice president of membership in addition to her current roles of overseeing the executive office and the board initiatives teams. Jeff Pierce will increase his focus on sponsorships, issue advocacy development and new member growth as the senior vice president of strategic development. Pierce’s leadership has been instrumental in the rapid growth of sponsorships and other new revenue streams, and he will continue to lead their expansion.

• These changes bring the membership and board initiatives teams into closer alignment. They also recognize the demand from NAM members to grow operational and thought leadership programming.

The last word: “As Aric steps back after 16 years, he leaves a record of accomplishment widely recognized by his peers in the association community,” said Timmons. “From being named CEO Update’s Association Lobbyist of the Year in 2016, to The Hill naming him a ‘top lobbyist’ for many years, to his most recent inclusion in Washingtonian Magazine’s Top 500 Influential list, his wisdom, influence and bipartisan approach are legendary.”

• “There are two things any high-performing organization looks to achieve in these moments of change: continuity and improvement. And that’s what this leadership will deliver—to continue advancing the competitiveness of manufacturers in the United States.”

The Save Our Gas Stoves Act—which is expected to pass the House in the near future, though it has been temporarily blocked due to an argument over the debt ceiling—would prevent the Department of Energy from moving forward with its overly stringent efficiency threshold for gas stoves.

That would be a win for reining in DOE overreach, but work remains in the fight against a regulatory onslaught by the agency. The NAM and its association partners are leading the way.

What’s going on: Since January, the DOE has undertaken an unprecedented slew of regulations aimed at home appliances—and if implemented, these measures would yield little in the way of energy savings for consumers and result in appliances that cost more.

• They would pile on the costs for manufacturers, too—more than $2.5 billion, according to the DOE’s own estimates, in a package of standards that could go into effect as early as 2027.
• “There are currently nine open rules [from the DOE] on appliance products that have very little energy savings for the consumer while they have really significant cost to the industry,” said Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers Vice President of Communications and Marketing Jill Notini, whose organization is urging consumers to call on Congress to support the Save Our Gas Stoves Act.

The background: Under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, the DOE is required to review appliance-efficiency standards every six years—but it’s not required to tighten them, Notini said, adding that the last time reviews were done for gas cooking appliances, the agency opted against making any changes.

Higher costs for all: These new DOE standards would significantly raise production costs for manufacturers while reducing features, performance and affordability for consumers, according to AHAM calculations based on DOE data.

• Consumers would save just $1.51 a year in energy costs, or 12.5 cents a month.

Too tight: It’s no surprise, then, that the proposed standards are so stringent as to make almost all on-the-market gas ranges noncompliant, Notini said.

• According to the DOE’s own technical analysis, 96% of gas cooking appliances would fail to meet the proposed efficiency threshold.
• The standards would have a significant effect on consumers, too. Redesigned gas stoves would only be able to have a single high-input burner, increasing the amount of time it would take to boil water or cook a meal, Notini said.

Washing machines: Another recently proposed DOE regulation requires that washing machines use almost 25% less water and cooler water temperatures, a restriction that would also hit consumers hard.

• The point-of-purchase price tag for washing machines would increase $150 per washer—while saving consumers just $7.85 a year, according to the DOE.
• Inflation has become a major concern for consumers across income segments, but particularly among low- to middle-income households, which will see the biggest impact from the proposed standard, Notini pointed out.

The last word: “Manufacturers rely on regulatory clarity and certainty. Unfortunately, DOE’s proposals only add to the regulatory onslaught manufacturers are currently facing,” said NAM Director of Energy and Resources Policy Chris Morris.

• “The NAM remains committed to working with all federal agencies, including the DOE, to ensure that rules and regulations are practical and feasible and do not harm manufacturers.”

Companies are turning to seemingly unlikely sources for the lithium needed to make electric vehicles, according to The Wall Street Journal (subscription): oil-and-gas reservoirs.

What’s going on: “These oil-and-gas sites harbor not only hydrocarbons, but also brine that contains metals including sodium, calcium and some lithium. When drillers poke holes into oil-saturated formations, the brine flows back to the surface along with the molecules that end up as fuel, and companies have been prompt to discard the earthy marinade.”

• “But now that the EV battery material has become a prized commodity, lithium companies are developing technologies to remove it from this brine—and oil-and-gas companies are also taking a second look.”
• Lithium companies in the U.S. and Canada are working with oil-and-gas firms to get the metal out of old oil fields and produce it from wastewater pumps.

Skyrocketing demand: U.S. demand for lithium is expected to increase to nearly six times its current size by 2030, to $52 billion, according to Boston Consulting Group.

Why it’s important: Most lithium today comes from China, Chile and Australia, with the three countries providing around 92% of the lithium extracted globally last year. But in the U.S., the process would be more environmentally friendly.

• “Because energy companies have drilled millions of oil-and-gas wells and collected subsurface data in the process, lithium prospectors know where to look.”

A faster process: The direct extraction method could significantly speed lithium production. In it, “brine is sent to a processing unit, where chemicals, a resin or a membrane, among other technologies, are used to capture the lithium ions. The water is then reinjected into the aquifer where it originated. The process takes at most a few days, and recoveries are up to 90%.”

• Some are hoping direct extraction will allow lithium producers to get the metal in the Permian basin of West Texas and New Mexico.

New orders for manufactured products rose for the second month in a row in April, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

What’s going on: New orders inched up 0.4% in April, following a 0.6% gain in March.

• Durable goods orders increased 1.1%, owing mostly to a rise in defense aircraft and parts orders, which can be volatile from month to month.
• Excluding transportation equipment, factory orders dipped 0.2% in April, the third straight month of declines.

The big picture: Overall, orders for new manufactured goods have declined 2.6% since peaking a year ago.

• With factory orders (excluding transportation) down 4.3% over the past 10 months, manufacturing activity has contracted notably since last summer.

The good news: New orders for core capital goods (nondefense capital goods excluding aircraft) rose 1.3% in April after two straight months of declines.

• Core capital goods orders are considered a proxy for capital spending in the U.S. economy. These totaled $73.982 billion in April, just under the record $73.985 billion in December and signifying 2.5% year-over-year growth.

Factory shipments: Factory shipments decreased 0.4% in April, the third straight month of declines.

• Overall, total factory shipments have declined 2.9%—or 4.2% excluding transportation equipment—since peaking a year ago.
• However, core capital goods shipments rose 0.5% in April to $73.848 billion, just slightly under January’s record of $73.850 billion. Core capital goods shipments have risen 4.1% year-over-year.

UL Solutions broke ground on its North America Advanced Battery Laboratory in Auburn Hills, Michigan, yesterday—with the NAM in attendance! The new facility will offer testing and certification for EVs and industrial batteries, a crucial step in establishing EV-ecosystem hubs.

A Charlotte, North Carolina–based company that started life as a paper mill is now the world’s largest lithium producer—and “a key cog in a tight global supply chain for battery metals used in electric cars, smartphones and other applications at a time when governments are pushing to electrify their economies,” according to The Wall Street Journal (subscription).

What’s going on: Albemarle is one of the few companies that can produce lithium at a competitive cost, thanks in large part to its 2015 purchase of a lithium producer in New Jersey.

• The global lithium market has grown an enormous 2,900% since that purchase, to $48 billion from $1.6 billion.
• To keep up with demand, “Albemarle has embarked on new acquisitions and capacity building,” including an ongoing bid to purchase Australian lithium miner Liontown Resources.
• Last month, Albemarle—which also mines lithium at operations in Nevada and Chile—announced plans to double the capacity of a lithium hydroxide plant in Western Australia in which it has an 85% stake.
• Lithium is also used in “industrial-scale batteries that can store energy from solar panels and wind farms and smaller ones for residential use.”

Competing with China: The company’s “integrated approach has put it at the center of Western efforts to diversify supply lines” to counter China’s dominance in the electric-vehicle market.

• “China has emerged as a global leader in EV production and is spending billions to boost its access to lithium-mine production globally. Meanwhile, it dominates the business of refining lithium extracted elsewhere in the world. The West is trying to catch up.”

What’s next: Last fall, the Department of Energy gave Albermarle a grant of nearly $150 million to produce EV batteries.

• In March, the company said it would spend more than $1.3 billion on a lithium-processing plant in South Carolina.