'Whack-a-Troll' Tops Agenda
under such a scenario. In the event clients are not allowed to deduct their advertising expenses, it stands to reason that they would soon budget less for printing. If passed, this could be painful for the printing industry.
“We bear the brunt if there’s an effort to eliminate the tax [deductions] for advertising or ban the advertising altogether,” Lyons says.
The last proposals advanced to the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee called for the elimination of advertising deductibility to help to pay for a comprehensive tax reform package. Though those proposals died quietly, it is one of the post-election priorities that is bound to gain traction.
Lyons believes it is critical for PIA members to communicate the unintended consequences of eliminating the deductions.
“Hopefully, we can take this off the table as a potential revenue raiser going forward,” she adds.
Paper Option Advocacy
This initiative is not so much an actionable item as it is a game of “Whack-A-Mole,” according to Lyons. The paper advocacy group Consumers for Paper Options is made up of paper and printing concerns such as the PIA (and its affiliates), the American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA), the Envelope Manufacturers Association (EMA), RR Donnelley and Hallmark. Its goal is to ensure the federal government is held accountable for the cost benefit approach to transitioning from paper to Internet-only resources. Thus, whenever some agency cries out “Go paperless,” the Consumers for Paper Options is there to tamp down often needless and unfounded concerns.
One example was a response to the Internal Revenue Service, which eliminated the printing and mailing of tax preparation booklets to taxpayers. That left taxpayers who relied on the mailed materials in the past having to pay Uncle Sam in order to receive a copy from the Government Publishing Office (GPO).
The Consumers for Paper Options backed a bill, “The Personal Access to Paper Election Reform (PAPER) Act,” which amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mail paper forms and instructions to people who filed a paper return for the preceding tax year.
“This bill shows our common sense approach to the forms,” Lyons says. “We’re not saying the IRS has to print everything for everyone in perpetuity, but this bill covers taxpayers who previously filed by mail. Those citizens made a choice to interact with the government by mail and should be allowed to continue doing that without being penalized.”
Another case related to the elimination of paper documents cropped up with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which is in the process of eliminating the mandate for mutual funds to mail shareholder reports and other financial information to investors. The new rule would allow mutual funds to satisfy SEC rules by making shareholder reports and quarterly portfolio holdings available online.
In joint comments with the Consumer Action and the National Consumers League, the groups pointed to SEC research that concluded an overwhelming majority of American investors prefer to receive shareholder reports in paper form. Meanwhile, only a small percentage has opted into digital delivery.
The Consumers for Paper Options was also able to beat back an effort by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which sought to eliminate drug package inserts that are furnished to health care providers (doctors, pharmacies and hospitals). These efforts, in tandem with aid from the new paper and packaging caucuses in the House and Senate, will greatly augment the printing industry’s interests on Capitol Hill.
“With these paperless initiatives, most of these agencies are not…taking into account the impact on citizens and the downstream impact on the economy,” Lyons remarks.
