Ohio’s Manufacturing Sector Was Devastated By Financial Crisis And Recession, And Has Added Jobs Steadily Since

After Plunging By Nearly 200,000 Jobs From 2007 Through Mid-2009, Ohio’s Manufacturing Sector Has Steadily Added Jobs. Since its low point in November 2009, the Ohio manufacturing sector has added 54,000 jobs. Below is a chart of BLS data on seasonally-adjusted manufacturing jobs in Ohio from 2007 to the present:

[BLS.gov, accessed 9/25/12]

Ohio Manufacturers Association Head: “Ohio’s Recovery Has Been Driven By Manufacturing.” From CNNMoney: “It’s boom times once again for Ohio’s manufacturing industry. Manufacturing, the largest sector in the Buckeye State’s economy, is revving up production and employment after being hit hard by the Great Recession. […] The revival in Ohio is being fueled by the return of the American auto industry, the growth of energy production in the U.S. and the skyrocketing demand for steel and other building materials overseas. ‘Ohio’s recovery has been driven by manufacturing,’ said Eric Burkland, president of the Ohio Manufacturers Association. ‘There is enormous investment in new technology and new plants.'” [CNNMoney, 3/5/12]

JobsOhio Manager: A Quarter Of Ohio’s Growth Since 2010 From Manufacturing As Companies Bring Jobs Back To U.S. From Abroad. From CNNMoney: “After taking a good hit during the recession, the Ohio manufacturing industry has rebounded strongly in the past year or so, said Kristi Tanner, general manager for manufacturing at JobsOhio, the state’s privatized economic development organization. The sector accounts for about a quarter of the state’s job growth over the past two years, while it has increased output by $8 billion, or 12%.  Companies are rebuilding their inventories, increasing capacity and relocating jobs back to the U.S. from India, Mexico and Asia, she said. Many employers are finding it cheaper and easier to produce products for North America in the U.S.” [CNNMoney, 3/5/12]

ACA Includes Small Tax On Medical Device Manufacturers That Will “Gain Business Due To Health Reform”

Tax On Medical Device Manufacturers Is Effectively Just 1.5 Percent. From the Columbus Dispatch: “Medical-device manufacturers and their advocates want to eliminate a 2.3 percent excise tax included in the federal health-care overhaul. […] In an industry report in August, Phillip Seligman of Standard & Poor’s said the 2013 start date of the tax gives the industry time to realign its cost structure to remain profitable. Because it’s an excise tax, the tax is deductible for income-tax purposes, making its effective rate about 1.5 percent, he wrote.” [Columbus Dispatch, 5/15/12]

CBPP: Medical Device Manufacturers Are Being Taxed Because Health Care Law Will Increase Their Business. From the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: “The House will soon consider legislation to repeal the excise tax on medical devices that was enacted to help pay for health reform.  The provision is sound, however, and the industry lobbying campaign aimed at repealing it is based on misinformation and exaggeration. … The medical device industry is not being singled out.  The excise tax is one of several new levies on sectors that will gain business due to health reform.  The expansion of health coverage will increase the demand for medical devices and could offset the effect of the tax.” [CBPP.org, 4/31/12, emphasis original]

Repealing Medical Device Tax Would Cost $29 Billion. From the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: “The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that repealing the excise tax would cost $29 billion over the 2013-2022 period.  Repealing the tax would undercut health reform in at least two ways.  Pay-as-you-go procedures would require Congress to offset the cost of repeal by increasing other taxes or reducing spending; one likely target would be the provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that expand health coverage to 33 million more Americans.  Also, repealing the tax would encourage efforts to repeal other revenue-raising provisions of the ACA, which in turn would either require still more painful offsets or increase the budget deficit (if Congress failed to offset the cost).” [CBPP.org, 4/31/12, internal citation removed]