<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Small Business Administration &#8211; CalWatchdog.com</title>
	<atom:link href="https://calwatchdog.com/tag/small-business-administration/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://calwatchdog.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2012 17:36:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">43098748</site>	<item>
		<title>Another small biz bites the dust</title>
		<link>https://calwatchdog.com/2012/10/01/another-small-biz-bites-the-dust/</link>
					<comments>https://calwatchdog.com/2012/10/01/another-small-biz-bites-the-dust/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CalWatchdog Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2012 17:36:53 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jerry Brown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[small business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[budget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Small Business Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[budget deficit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Katy Grimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax increases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legislature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California budget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NFIB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waste]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California Legislature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pensions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[darrell Steinberg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Employee Unions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debra Saunders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republicans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sen. Bob Dutton]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=32750</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Oct. 1, 2012 Katy Grimes: The news that another small Sacramento business is closing its doors seems only to draw yawns these days. The famed Fords Real Burgers, a local Sacramento]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oct. 1, 2012</p>
<p><a href="http://www.calwatchdog.com/2012/10/01/another-small-biz-bites-the-dust/lens2345149_1236434552closed/" rel="attachment wp-att-32761"><img decoding="async" class="alignright size-full wp-image-32761" title="lens2345149_1236434552closed" src="http://www.calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/lens2345149_1236434552closed.jpg" alt="" width="115" height="80" align="right" hspace="20" /></a></p>
<p>Katy Grimes: The news that another small Sacramento business is closing its doors seems only to draw yawns these days.</p>
<p>The famed <em>Fords Real Burgers</em>, a local Sacramento burger joint since 1987, is being forced out of business by increasing costs, higher taxes, strict regulations, and a local disability lawyer/activist.</p>
<p>&#8220;Between a thin margin of profit and increasing costs, we were on a pretty tight edge,&#8221; said former owner Pete Vereschzagin, in a Sacramento Bee <a href="Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/10/01/4868919/longtime-land-park-restaurant.html#storylink=cpy " target="_blank">story</a>.</p>
<p>&#8220;The &#8216;last straw,&#8217; he said, was when Carmichael attorney <a href="http://topics.sacbee.com/Scott+N.+Johnson/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">Scott N. Johnson,</a> who is quadriplegic, wrote a letter to the restaurant about two months ago citing its failures under the Americans with Disabilities Act, including its lack of a disabled parking space and a restroom that could accommodate wheelchair access,&#8221; the Bee wrote.</p>
<div>
<p>I have followed Scott Johnson&#8217;s exploits for several years. Johnson is a quadriplegic Sacramento ADA lawyer notorious for his ruthless shakedowns of tiny businesses, including a local veterinarian, Sacramento area gas stations, another historic hamburger hangout, and numerous other restaurants. Johnson has more than 1,000 lawsuits under his belt.</p>
<p>Johnson has defended his activity and claims to be “an agent of change for the rights of the disabled.” He usually “settles” cases for $4,000 and $6,000.</p>
<p>The typical Johnson approach is to send a letter to a business which states that the business must become ADA compliant. Johnson gives the business formal notice to make changes to the property, or offers to settle with Johnson monetarily to prevent a lawsuit — the shakedown part.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.calwatchdog.com/2012/10/01/another-small-biz-bites-the-dust/closed-out-of-business/" rel="attachment wp-att-32763"><img decoding="async" class="alignright size-full wp-image-32763" title="closed-out-of-business" src="http://www.calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/closed-out-of-business.jpg" alt="" width="262" height="188" align="right" hspace="20" /></a></p>
<p>For businesses unaware of the guidelines, or which were compliant at one time and are now unaware of changes to the ADA guidelines, Johnson’s letters are a total shock and very costly.</p>
<p>In addition to paying Johnson off, many of Johnson’s victim businesses end up paying thousands of dollars in expensive remodeling to bathrooms; for entrance and exit doors; and for re-paving and painting parking lots, changing signage, or even having to install expensive wheelchair ramps.</p>
<p>But because there are more than 2,400 provisions in California alone pertaining to disability access in businesses and public areas, no one seems to actually know what the legal standards are, other than some of the more obvious wheelchair requirements. This has allowed many mean-spirited activists to take advantage of the deep, and not-so-deep pockets of businesses.</p>
<p>Fortunately, after many years and many killed bills, Gov. Jerry Brown finally signed ADA reform bill, SB 1186, by Senators Bob Dutton, R-Rancho Cucamonga, and Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, to put an end to these predatory lawsuits by attorneys who use the law to shake down businesses.</p>
<p>But it&#8217;s too late for Ford&#8217;s Burgers.</p>
<h3>Killing off small business</h3>
<p>What does it mean for California, as small businesses are killed off?</p>
<p>According to the National Federation for Small Business:</p>
<p>* In California, 1.4 million lawsuits are filed every year</p>
<p>*According to recent NFIB/CA study, 2/3 of all small businesses have been threatened with a frivolous “shakedown” lawsuit over the past several years</p>
<p>*On average, tort/legal costs amount to $838/person-or $3,352/family – each year</p>
<p>A recent study of small businesses in conjunction with <a href="http://www.cala.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Californians Against Lawsuit Abuse</a>  showed that more than one-third of small business owners have been sued in the past five years. Nearly 6 in 10 have been threatened with a lawsuit during the same period, and more than three quarters of business owners fear that their business will be sued in the next five years, the NFIB <a href="http://www.nfib.com/california/nfib-in-my-state-content?cmsid=61033" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. Nearly 40 percent of ADA lawsuits in the nation are filed in California.</p>
<p>“Small business owners are in a funk, just like consumers are,” said Bill Dunkelberg, a professor at Temple University and the NFIB&#8217;s Economist. “The exuberance is just not there. In fact, over 70 percent of (NFIB members) say they believe now is a bad time to expand.”</p>
<p>Dunkelberg attributed this funk to several things, including the upcoming Presidential election: the U.S. housing market collapse and high unemployment have created a malaise on consumer confidence. Fluctuating gas prices also have taxed consumers and businesses, he said.</p>
<p>In California, the NFIB represents nearly 20,000 small businesses.</p>
<p>Small businesses make up 99.2 percent of all businesses and create two-thirds of all net new jobs.</p>
<p>75 percent of small businesses pay their business taxes at the individual level, and owners of incorporated businesses pay business taxes as well as personal taxes. Ouch.</p>
<h3>Danger, danger</h3>
<p>&#8220;A slew of tax provisions important to small business are set to expire at the end of 2012,&#8221; the NFIB warns. &#8220;These expiring taxes add up to an almost $500 billion tax increase for 2013 alone.&#8221;</p>
<p>For many small business owners, just as Ford&#8217;s Real Burgers announced, these cost increases will put them over the edge. They are running such tight margins already, that one more tax increase, or one more costly regulation, or one more penalty or fee will kill them.</p>
<p>Every time a &#8220;For Lease&#8221; or &#8220;Closed&#8221; sign goes up in the window of a former small business, the neighborhood loses a little bit of life. These closures are now coming weekly, no longer just one here and there.</p>
<p>There have been many reports during this recession about the increasing defaults on Small Business Administration loans. Lurking behind each SBA loan default is another small business that&#8217;s closed. And when the doors close and a business defaults on a loan, it&#8217;s the business owners who pay; the bank liquidates any available collateral including houses and other personal assets.</p>
<p>The next time you see a small business closure, know that those owners have suffered terribly, and may have even had to give up their home or retirement savings to pay off business debt.</p>
<p>But too many lawmakers refuse to acknowledge this when they cavalierly pass tax increases, or impose more absurd regulations on small business.</p>
<p>Big businesses have lobbyists and lawyers, and negotiate deals and exemptions  with local and state government. It&#8217;s done all the time.</p>
<p>But small business always ends up on the short end of the stick. No wonder small businesses are not hiring, expanding, or making plans for the future in California.</p>
<p>However, small business owners vote.</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://calwatchdog.com/2012/10/01/another-small-biz-bites-the-dust/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">32750</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ending Prop. 13 would slam small business</title>
		<link>https://calwatchdog.com/2012/04/19/ending-prop-13-would-slam-small-business/</link>
					<comments>https://calwatchdog.com/2012/04/19/ending-prop-13-would-slam-small-business/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CalWatchdog Staff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:53:11 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Budget and Finance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prop. 13]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[property tax]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Small Business Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[split roll]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wayne Lusvardi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wells Fargo Bank]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=27847</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[April 19, 2012 By Wayne Lusvardi There is a big elephant in the room when it comes to a conversation about getting rid of Proposition 13, the 1978 tax limitation]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Elephant-wikipedia.jpg"><img fetchpriority="high" decoding="async" class="alignright size-medium wp-image-15171" title="Elephant - wikipedia" src="http://www.calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Elephant-wikipedia-225x300.jpg" alt="" width="225" height="300" align="right" hspace="20" /></a>April 19, 2012</p>
<p>By Wayne Lusvardi</p>
<p>There is a big elephant in the room when it comes to a conversation about getting rid of <a href="http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_13_(1978)" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Proposition 13</a>, the 1978 tax limitation measure, by instituting a &#8220;split roll.&#8221; Under such a change, business property would be taxed at higher rates than residences.</p>
<p>The elephant in the room is that it is not big business that mainly would get socked with higher taxes, but the 857,167 small businesses, which represent <a href="http://cbpa.com/documents/split_roll_final_report.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">97 percent</a> of the total of 878,129 businesses in California.</p>
<p>Those advocates for ending Prop. 13 for commercial properties say it is big business that is not paying its fair share of taxes.  But the owners of large commercial properties &#8212; shopping centers, recreational theme parks like Disneyland, and large Class A apartment complexes &#8212; would just pass higher rents through to tenants, who in turn would raise prices on goods and services.</p>
<p>Property owners would also pass through higher property taxes to tenants when leases are renegotiated. This is perhaps why the <a href="http://www.scottcommercialrealtor.com/?cat=3" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dataquick</a> real estate information service reports that in the First Quarter of 2012 “the only real positive seen in the retail sector is that the triple net or absolute net, single tenant, long corporate-backed leased property, with investment grade tenants continues to sell briskly.”</p>
<p>Owners of small businesses would have to suck up the higher taxes.  And it is those small commercial properties that have been most affected by the economic recession.</p>
<h3>Proposition</h3>
<p>The proponents of <a href="http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/cleared-for-circulation.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Ballot Initiative No. 1560</a> to end Prop. 13 for commercial properties claim it would generate $4 billion in new tax revenues. That would be $4,555 per year added tax burden on average for the 857,167 small businesses in California. That would equate to an average increase of $455,000 in assessed value for each small commercial property.</p>
<p>According to data from a U.S. Small Business Administration study, <a href="http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/sbl_10study.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">74 percent</a> of all small business loans in California in 2010 &#8212; or 587,225 loans &#8212; were for $100,000 or less.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/sbl_10study.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Eighty-three percent</a>,</p>
<p>Of 659,617 loans made by Wells Fargo Bank as of June 2010, 547,727 were &#8220;micro loans&#8221; of less than $100,000. And the average micro loan averaged just $17,335.  Most of these “micro” loans were not loans backed by the Small Business Administration.  This indicates that a preponderance of small businesses with bank loans could not easily absorb an increase of property taxes of $4,555 per year.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>Wells Fargo Bank Small Business Loan Data 2010</strong></p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="152"></td>
<td valign="top" width="168">Total   Dollar Amount of Small Business Loans</td>
<td valign="top" width="179">Total   Number of Loans</td>
<td valign="top" width="91">Percent</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="152">Micro-business   loans($100,000   or less)</td>
<td valign="top" width="168">$9,495,000,000<br />
($17,335 average)</td>
<td valign="top" width="179">547,727</td>
<td valign="top" width="91">83%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="152">Macro-business   loans($100,000   to $1 million)</td>
<td valign="top" width="168">$29,300,000,000<br />
($261,864 average)</td>
<td valign="top" width="179">111,890</td>
<td valign="top" width="91">17%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="152">Total   All Small Business Lending</td>
<td valign="top" width="168">$38,800,000,000</td>
<td valign="top" width="179">659,617</td>
<td valign="top" width="91">100%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top" width="590">Source:   <a href="http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/sbl_10study.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/sbl_10study.pdf</a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>And the actual added tax burden on small businesses is bound to be much higher than $4,555 per year. That is because about only about 20 percent of all commercial properties would actually have their taxes raised if Prop. 13 were ended.</p>
<h3>Change of ownership</h3>
<p>Most commercial properties have changed ownership since 1993 and have been reassessed at close to full market price.  The median sales year for most commercial properties is <a href="http://cbpa.com/documents/split_roll_final_report.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">1993</a>.  It is those properties with old assessments frozen at pre-1993 base values that are going to end up paying the bulk of the $4 billion in added taxes per year.  And by and large, those properties with old assessments are small commercial properties with gross leases or owned by mom and pop business proprietors.</p>
<p>In a &#8220;gross lease,&#8221; the landowner pays the property taxes.  In a &#8220;net lease.&#8221; the tenant typically pays the property taxes.</p>
<p>Let’s assume 50 percent of all commercial properties are going to roughly end up paying 80 percent of the added taxes. Consequently, small business properties with old assessments roughly would have their taxes increased by $7,466 per year. Once again, small businesses with low profit margins easily eroded by economic adversity are not going to be able to easily absorb that magnitude of a tax increase.</p>
<p>Larger commercial properties with net leases typically have caps on the amount taxes and other expenses that can be passed through to the tenant. So the landowner, not the tenants, will be socked with more taxes on commercial properties.  Higher property taxes won’t be able to be passed through to commercial tenants until their lease is renewed for larger commercial properties.</p>
<p>The reason the public can’t seem to see the proverbial “elephant in the room” when it comes to ending Prop. 13 for commercial properties is that it is a midget elephant symbolic of a small businessperson. And for the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/30/magazine/30wwln_safire.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">little man</a>, who speaks truth to those in power?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://calwatchdog.com/2012/04/19/ending-prop-13-would-slam-small-business/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">27847</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!--
Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: https://www.boldgrid.com/w3-total-cache/


Served from: calwatchdog.com @ 2026-04-14 16:30:31 by W3 Total Cache
-->