A lot of people are saying small business is dying in America. An article on Brookings charted data from the U.S. census of the bureau, which tells us:
- 1978 had a ~14% firm entrance rate and a ~11% firm exit rate
- 2011 had an ~8% firm entrance rate and a ~9.5% firm exit rate
In short, the U.S. is now losing more businesses than its creating. This trend developed slowly over three to four decades.
The question is why? Here are the most common theories that explain why the U.S. isn’t creating as many small businesses:
1. Big companies are taking up the market
It’s simple math. If Starbucks opens 1,000 new stores, it means mom and pop cafes will have to suffer. Markets are limited. If customers are going to big companies then small businesses are losing customers.
Big companies also tend to hog the best talent in the industry. Put yourself in these worker’s shoes. Would you rather work for a 10-employee tech company? Or take a 6-figure salary at Google?
Also, large companies absorb smaller ones and set them up as subsidiaries. The bigger they become the less small businesses there are.
2. Healthcare costs
The cost of healthcare is astronomical. Not only do entrepreneurs have to pay for their own health insurance, but they also have to pay for employee benefits.
Large companies have an advantage in this regard since healthcare becomes cheaper when you purchase it in bulk.
3. Technology costs
Technology is imperative to streamline production and scale business. Unfortunately, it’s usually expensive to acquire and properly implement. It’s not cheap to develop an online presence and big business usually scoops up the talent.
There’s also automation, which saves tons of time and money for businesses, but it’s so expensive that only bigger businesses can afford it. If a customer wants self-checkout, chances are they will go to Wal-Mart or Lowe’s before a small business.
4. Our systems are not small business friendly
Some point out that small businesses are held to similar regulations as giant companies. Small businesses must pay income taxes, sales taxes, unemployment taxes, payroll taxes, and more. They are not equipped to handle these regulations and are punished by the IRS.
Others point out that the U.S. government does not provide a lot of assistance to help jump-start small businesses. Some have called for lower taxes on small businesses or for government funds to help them.
5. Can’t get funding
Starting a business costs a lot of money and it’s a huge risk. Consequently, the loans that are readily available to entrepreneurs have high-interest rates and quick payback terms. This crushes small businesses early in their development when they need money the most.
Another problem is that professional investors heavily favor mature companies that have a proven track record of growth. The capital available for business tends to go to larger companies rather than small businesses.
6. Student debt
Young adults have a student debt problem. Many of them are exiting college with several loans that will take years to pay off. On top of this, many are saving up to buy houses. Therefore, they view starting a small business as unwise at best.
A lot of entrepreneurs rely on a personal savings account to cushion the costs of launching a business. But few have the finances to pull that off.
Unfortunately, many would-be-entrepreneurs are crippled from launching a small business.
The decline of small business may not be bad
Some experts posit that the decline of small businesses is not necessarily a bad thing. We just have to look at it the right way.
With the dawn of the internet, a lot of business is now conducted online. This gave rise to the gig economy, a workforce that is difficult to measure. Since remote work is becoming easier, companies hire freelance writers, web designers, remote secretaries, temporary bookkeepers, and more.
Factors like this are hard to calculate when analyzing the overall health of the American economy. In other words, the decline of small businesses may be a natural development in a technological economy.
What do you think is causing small businesses to decline?
Have a 401k? You Can Now Invest In Private Equity Funds
There’s good news for investors who are looking to add a little spice to their retirement accounts. For the first time ever, defined contribution plans – like 401ks – have access to private equity investments.
U.S. Secretary of Labor Eugene Scalia said in a statement yesterday that this step “will help Americans saving for retirement gain access to alternative investments that often provide strong returns.”
Typically viewed as a way to outperform the stock market, the average private equity investment has actually underperformed the stock market over the last 10 years. According to a study by Bain & Company, private equity investments returned an average of 15.3% compared to 15.5% for the S&P 500. The study does mention that top-tier private equity funds did manage to outperform the market.
Scalia’s announcement went on to add, “The Letter helps level the playing field for ordinary investors and is another step by the Department to ensure that ordinary people investing for retirement have the opportunities they need for a secure retirement.”
You won’t be able to invest directly into private equity funds in your 401k. You’ll only have access through specific investment vehicles like target-date funds. Defined benefit plans – like pensions – have had access to private equity investments for some time now. So, as Scalia mentions, this move now levels the playing field for investors.
Securities and Exchange Commissioner Jay Clayton supports the decision to allow defined contribution plans access to private equity investments. He also mentions that the new capital coming in will increase the funding sources available to private businesses.
How It Should Be Perceived
Investors, however, shouldn’t look at the ability to invest in private equity funds as a panacea of retirement riches.
Private equity investments are often much riskier than traditional stocks. As we mentioned earlier, they don’t always provide greater returns.
In an interview with Fox Business, Ed Slott, founder of IRAHep.com, said that investment losses in February and March may have caused a sense of panic among savers who might be searching for larger returns.
“Some of those [private equity] returns are sensational but, with anything, you could lose a boatload too,” Slott said. “It doesn’t mean private equity always makes money.”
You may lose money while investing in private equity funds. When that happens, you’ll likely have no recourse against your broker or fiduciary who put you in those investments.
As part of the announcement, Slott noted that there is a “liability shield” for fiduciaries. As long as they follow the guidelines set out by the Department of Labor, they will be within their fiduciary obligations. This makes it harder for investors to sue over losses.
The ability to invest in a private equity fund is alluring. However, the best advice comes from Alano Massi, the managing director of Palm Capital Management.
“Should that investor not feel comfortable with private equity, or simply does not understand it, then he or she should not participate,” Massi said.
- We Just Set A Record For The Greatest 50-Day Rally In Stocks
- Fed Economist: V-Shaped Recovery Requires Negative Interest Rates
- Need Income? Here Are 8 Safe Stocks That Yield More Than 2.5%
We Just Set A Record For The Greatest 50-Day Rally In Stocks
The S&P 500 just turned in its best 50-trading day rally since the index expanded to 500 companies in 1957, according to research from LPL Financial.
Over that time period, the index has returned 37.7%. If history is any indication, there are plenty more gains ahead.
LPL went back and looked at every 50-day rally since 1957 when the index expanded. Their research found that six and 12 months later, stocks were higher 100% of the time.
The average return for the six months following a 50-day rally was 10.2%. On the other hand, the average return for the 12 months following a 50-day rally was 17.3%.
After the longest bull market in history ended this year when the S&P 500 dipped all the way down to 2,191.86 on March 23, the market has been on a rocket ship higher. In just 50 trading days, the index has climbed 41.7% from the March 23 low. This puts it only 9% below the all-time high set in February.
Markets have been pushed higher by a combination of record stimulus packages and low-interest rates. In March, President Trump signed the $2 trillion CARES Act that provided financial aid to families and small businesses. Around the same time, the Federal Reserve cut interest rates to zero. Also, more recently it started directly purchasing Treasury bonds, mortgage-backed securities and even bond ETFs as it pledges an unlimited amount of asset purchases.
Uneven Recoveries Despite A Rally
While the stock market has surged higher over the last 50 trading days, recovery has been uneven, to say the least. This comes with some stocks – and entire industries – getting hammered by the economic lockdown caused by the coronavirus. Meanwhile, others, particularly those that benefit from people being home all day – and working from home – have lead the charge.
Amazon, Facebook and Netflix have all surged to all-time highs. Meanwhile, the video conferencing platform Zoom has jumped 228% this year alone.
On the other side are stocks like cruise line operator Carnival Corporation or American Airlines. Both have fallen 66% as the travel industry came to a standstill.
Despite the appearance of strength by the stock market, even the greatest 50-day rally in history can’t shake the doubters loose.
Since the rally began back in late March, the country has had more than 40 million people file for unemployment. Our country’s economic output is expected to drop by as much as 50% this quarter, and numerous CEOs refused to provide forward guidance for their companies as they just simply don’t know how bad and for how long the economy will suffer.
Throw in ongoing civil unrest and a very strong likelihood of a full-blown trade war between the US and China, and it remains to be seen if the economic recovery can continue to blossom in the coming weeks and months.
Nobel-Prize Winning Economist: Time to Admit Our Programs Have Failed
Senate Republicans have endorsed a bipartisan bill that would give small business owners more flexibility on how they choose to spend their PPP loans. However, at least one outspoken critic has said the program failed American workers.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senator Marco Rubio, who chairs the Small Business Committee, both endorsed the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act. This almost passed last week, in a nearly unanimous 417-1 vote.
“I hope and anticipate the Senate will soon take up and pass legislation that just passed the House by an overwhelming vote of 417-1 to further strengthen the Paycheck Protection Program so it continues working for small businesses that need our help,” McConnell said during a speech on the Senate floor Monday.
The Paycheck Protection Program provides forgivable loans of up to $10 million to businesses. The money is for businesses with fewer than 500 workers that were affected by the coronavirus pandemic.
Originally, for the loans to be forgiven, the businesses had to abide by strict requirements. They need to let loaners know how the money could be used. Around 75% of the loan had to go towards maintaining the businesses’ payroll. This includes salaries, health insurance, leave and severance pay, as well as having to rehire workers by June 30.
Easing Up Restrictions of Programs
The bill endorsed by McConnell and Rubio that passed on Thursday would ease some of those restrictions. This includes allowing businesses to spend 60% of the money on payroll. It also includes freeing up 40% of other expenses like rent and utilities. The new bill would also remove the requirement of rehiring workers by June 30. Also, it gives businesses 24 weeks to spend their PPP money on. This is far longer than the current 8-week limit.
The new bill isn’t perfect. However, they created programs such as this in an effort to address concerns by small business owners. Many of these business owners think the loan forgiveness requirements can become too strict to meet their needs. Many are fearful of inadvertently violating the rules and being on the hook to repay the loans.
Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz says that no matter how they structure PPP loans, they have failed the American worker.
During an appearance on CNBC, Stiglitz said “The problem wasn’t just the amount of money. It was how the programs were designed. Our programs have failed, and we have to admit that.”
He says the loans went to the businesses who were most connected, not the ones who were most in need.
“The businesses with the best connections with the banks, the best customers, got at the head of the line, and those weren’t the smallest businesses, they weren’t the people who needed it most,” he said.
He said a better way to keep workers employed is looking at a model from Denmark or New Zealand. In the said countries, the government paid companies directly to keep workers on their payroll.
Stiglitz added, “We just haven’t thought enough about how we get money to the businesses in ways that make sure they really keep the attachment to the workers with those businesses.”
Investing9 months ago
How To Invest In Drones
News6 years ago
The Federal Reserve Is A Ticking Time Bomb
News6 years ago
How to Invest in Graphene
News6 years ago
How To Invest Money in Oil and Gas Today
Dividend Stocks9 months ago
Mcdonalds the Worst Slump in a Decade
News6 years ago
3 Reasons to Invest in the Russian Stock Market Right Now
Commodities9 months ago
Latest Update On Oil – Expected to Settle Between $45 and…
Entrepreneurship7 months ago
Tesla Just Unveiled Its “Cybertruck” With a Price Starting at Only $39,900