Higher Shoe and Clothing Prices for New Yorkers

October 02, 2010 :: Posted by - admin :: Category - News

Since September 2005, purchases of clothing and footwear costing $110 or more per item or pair in New York City incurred a 8 7/8% rate. Purchases costing less than $110 were fully exempt.

As of Friday, October 1, 2010, New Yorkers can expect to pay higher prices at the register on clothing and footwear. A 4.375 percent tax is now being charged on these items that cost less than $110. This was put in place as an attempt to collect more revenue to help offset the state’s projected $8.2 billion deficit. For the next six months, all clothing and footwear purchased in the city will be charged the four-percent New York State sales and use tax, as well as an additional 3/8 percent Metropolitan Commuter Transportation District tax to benefit the MTA.

The exemption will return in April of 2011 through March of 2012, but only on clothing and footwear purchases less than $55. Unless another change to the law is passed, the under $110 exemption will be back for good on April 1, 2012.


Import Fees on Footwear on the Rise in Europe

May 28, 2010 :: Posted by - admin :: Category - News

Most everyone is aware that not only the US has been suffering economically.

We have discussed a couple times in the past the Affordable Footwear Act. No, none of the current manufacturers of footwear in the US oppose the Affordable Footwear Act. This is because we do not make the kind of shoes here in the US that are being imported from China to be sold here. But while people here are fighting to eliminate the import fees on footwear being imported from China, China’s Commerce Ministry imposed a 96.5% duty on certain types of nylon imports from the US, more than doubling a preliminary anti-dumping tariff of 36.2% set last October. In the meantime the European Union, Russia and Taiwan were assessed anti-dumping penalties in October’s ranging between 4% to 23.9%.

We would like to explain what an anti-dumping duty is. It is a penalty imposed upon suspiciously low-priced imports, to increase their price in the importing country and so protect local industry from unfair competition. Anti-dumping duties are assessed generally in an amount equal to the difference between the importing country’s FOB price of the goods and (at the time of their importation) the market value of similar goods in the exporting country or other countries.

In Europe the economy is hurting as well. Unlike the US though they have extended import duties of up to 16.5 percent on Chinese shoes.

In December, Brussels extended import duties of up to 16.5 per cent on Chinese shoes, claiming that they unfairly undercut the cost of EU producers.

The European Footwear Alliance, estimates that EU consumers and businesses could lose hundreds of millions of euros through 2011. Meanwhile, the charges could generate euro 1 billion in tariffs, without helping Europe recoup lost manufacturing jobs because shoes from China and Vietnam are now being replaced by imports from other emerging countries.

The charges add between 9.7 percent and 16.5 percent to the import price of Chinese shoes and 10 percent to Vietnamese shoes. The EU says that equates to price jumps less than euro 1.50 for shoes that sell for euro 50, because the product is being imported at a price around euro 9.

So why are we trying to make it better for China to sell their goods here in the US while they are making it even harder for us to sell our goods in China?


Update to the Status of the Affordable Footwear Act

December 18, 2009 :: Posted by - admin :: Category - News

Back in November of 2008 we first brought you the story Lower Shoe Prices for Who? We have been following this headline for over a year and are once again bringing you an update.

On December 16th, two members of the House of Representatives, Representatives Joseph Crowley (D-NY), and Kevin Brady (R-TX) reintroduced the Affordable Footwear Act (H.R. 4316). as a last minute push before Congress adjourns for the holidays.

According to the AAFA, the American Apparel and Footwear Association, “99 percent of all footwear sold in the United States is being imported with a whopping 80 percent being imported from China. The Affordable Footwear Act seeks to end the shoe tax, to ultimately lower the price of shoes.”

The shoe tax was originally introduced during the Great Depression in 1930. This tax had the original intentions to keep U.S. factories open while maintaining employment for Americans during these hard times. It did this by levying and import tax on items such as footwear and agricultural products.

Today the US economy is in trouble. The government is deeper in debt than it has ever been, with most of our debt being bought up by China. A lot of automotive manufacturers have moved their facilities to cheaper regions of the world. Our textile plants and steel mills have long been shut down and abandoned. The U.S. has become a consumer, and one of the largest consumers in the world.

Don’t we need to bring manufacturing and business back to the U.S.?? With the unemployment rate as high as 13% in some areas of the country, why don’t we try and rely less on China and worry about making more products here in the U.S.? By lowering or eliminating the duties we are promoting the economy of overseas industries and giving them right of passage, while also taking money away from our government and slamming the door in the faces of the few manufactures that still produce shoes here in the USA. It is impossible for domestic industries to survive unprotected trade with inferior nations that have lower wages and relaxed EPA and government standards without compromising themselves or their product. As of right now, the average tax payer in America owes the U.S. government right around 10 to 15 thousand dollars. Don’t take us wrong please. Nobody enjoys paying taxes and we agree that the middle and lower classes bear much of the burden that taxes impose. We just find it hard to swallow that the importers that would benefit on the decrease or elimination of the tax, are going to pass these savings along to the retailers that purchase from them. With fuel costs back on the rise, this could be one of the largest excuses heard of why the prices do not drop. Between the costs of the fuel to have them brought overseas from China and the fuel costs to transport the merchandise across the United States, it would be surprising if retailers see any savings. If we do see any savings, we will pass it along to our customers.