Though NOT what I would have thought to be the most important consideration, and something out of the blue during the governor's state of the state speech, the item pricing law has now generated more news than would have been thought. Given the out of nowhere nature that even had Skubick asking WTF on his state of the state commentary, it seems Snyder DID hit on something.
Something completely off the radar.
My first thoughts were to give consideration to consumer protection, and seeing how even WITH the law in place there are times I have caught the wrong price being charged when shopping. The tag on the item made it easier to correct the issue immediately. And still, with with the personal responsibility angles I speak of often, it is hard to overcome what appears to be a certain normalcy. However, Something that gets the unions buzzing about like a stepped on hornet nest is worth a second look.
And then this article (below the fold) popped up.
Study: 30-Year Old Item Pricing Law is $2.2 Billion Hidden Tax on Michigan's Economy.
Comprehensive New Study Explores Massive Costs of Inefficient Regulation, Opportunity to Create Climate to Attract New Jobs, Investment.
National Comparison: Current Law Does Not Create Jobs
LANSING, MI-- According to a study released today by the Coalition for Retail Pricing Modernization and conducted by the Anderson Economic Group (AEG), Michigan's outdated item pricing law results conservatively in a $2.2 billion annual hidden tax on Michigan's economy.
The current item pricing law (IPL) forces retailers to spend millions each year on an expensive, antiquated process and hinders investments in newer, more cost effective tools and technology, the study found. Michigan is the only state using the outdated item pricing requirements.
In addition to the $2.2 billion hidden tax, the AEG study found that Michigan's 1970s-era IPL slows investment, damages the environment, prevents modernization enjoyed by shoppers across the nation and, thanks to new tools and technology, is no longer needed in order to protect consumers at check out.
"Our study found that outdated regulations like the Item Pricing Law cost the state billions and are stopping businesses from investing in Michigan," said Scott Watkins, the Anderson Economic Group's Director of Market and Industry Analysis. "Item price reflects the realities and perceptions that Michigan is stuck in the 20th century and that government is hindering businesses from moving forward."
Governor Rick Snyder publicly identified the IPL as a contributing factor for Michigan's struggling economy and called for retail pricing modernization last week during his first State of the State address.
"(Michigan's Item Pricing Law is) bad for business and it's bad for consumers," Snyder proclaimed. "Let's make item pricing one law that's out of stock."
The study found that modernizing the state's IPL while retaining consumer protection features like Michigan's bounty provision will make the state more attractive to job makers, benefit consumers and the state's economy by freeing up $2.2 billion for retail investment in new stores, better technology, additional customer services, jobs and lower prices.
"The Anderson Economic Group's study confirms what retailers have known for years and makes a compelling case that it is time to modernize Michigan's $2.2 billion item pricing regulation," said Michigan Retailers Association President and CEO Jim Hallan. "According to the research, modernization would empower job makers to take advantage of new technology for shoppers, save Michigan families both time and money at the checkout and create an atmosphere for job creation, investment and innovation."
The IPL went into effect on January 1, 1978 and has not significantly been amended since. Michigan is the only state that still requires a price label to be placed on nearly every consumer item, which creates unnecessary costs for both businesses and consumers, and yields little or no benefits that are not otherwise afforded to consumers in other states.
Other key findings in the AEG study include:
According to leading economists, prices on consumer goods in states using IPL are 8 to 10 percent higher than states without it;
The $2.2 billion cost of IPL represents a $562 hidden tax annually on every Michigan household;
The $2.2 billion cost is a conservative measure based on prices in grocery stores and doesn't take into account potentially higher costs incurred by other retailers;
The greatest burden of IPL falls on businesses operating primarily in Michigan, and on those living in low-income or rural areas where there is often less retail competition;
Michigan's IPL does not create jobs. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, average employment per retail store in Michigan is 12.8, well below the national average of 14.2;
Between 2,000 and 6,000 labor hours that could otherwise be used on customer service are used per store each year on compliance with Michigan's outdated and ineffective IPL;
Retailers spend between $6,000 and $10,000 each year per store on pricing guns, tape and ink--costs that are passed along to customers;
New technology being used in other states to eliminate pricing errors, improve the shopping experience and provide consumers with more information about their purchases are not being used in Michigan because of IPL; and,
IPL creates significant, avoidable environmental damage. If only the smallest price stickers were used on all items, it would take one regular sheet of paper to price 330 items and a stack of paper the height of the Empire State Building to price all of the items sold each year by large grocery stores in Michigan.
The study, "Michigan's Item Pricing Law: The Price Tag for Retailers and Consumers," is available online at www.AndersonEconomicGroup.com
Worth a second look? OK. Also worth noting there is at least one side lobbying for this removal and likely will meet some resistance from labor. Comments?
Though NOT what I would have thought to be the most important consideration, and something out of the blue during the governor's state of the state speech, the item pricing law has now generated more news than would have been thought. Given the out of nowhere nature that even had Skubick asking WTF on his state of the state commentary, it seems Snyder DID hit on something.
