Chinese move to boost
VAT squeezes ink vendors
By David Lewis
Special to Newspapers & Technology
China’s
push to reduce its mammoth export growth and clean up chemical pollution is the
latest culprit leading to higher ink prices for U.S. newspapers.
The impact is already being
felt. In August, Flint Group raised the price of its news ink 6 percent and the
cost of other inks by as much as 12 percent, effective Oct. 1. Among pressures
forcing the increase, said Bill Miller, president of Flint Group North America,
was “recent actions taken by the Chinese government to close chemical operations
and the elimination of refunds of the Chinese value-added tax.”

The Chinese government’s move to restructure
VAT refunds threw the chemical market into turmoil.
Sun Chemical unit US Ink
followed suit in early September, hiking the price of commercial, publication
and news inks by as much as 11 percent. Greg Lawson, Sun’s group president, also
pointed to the Chinese economic and regulatory landscape as a major contributing
factor.
Still, said Todd Wheeler, US
Ink’s marketing manager, “The [Chinese situation] is only one factor in the
price/cost equation. As key raw material pricing pressures increase, US Ink is
committed to minimizing any potential ink price impact to the market.”
Quick impact
The economic streams
contributing to the latest uptick in raw materials costs began converging in
June, when China gave little more than a week’s notice it would effectively hike
value-added taxes 13 percent on thousands of products exported to North America,
effective July 1 (see sidebar, page 18).
Among products included were
pigments, pigment intermediate chemicals and rosins used in newspaper printing
inks, said Norm Harbin, Flint Group’s vice president of business and technical
development.
About 90 percent of these
intermediate chemicals made globally are manufactured in China.
Harbin said he and a group of
colleagues were attending a late June meeting in Washington, D.C., when they
first heard of China’s surprise announcement. “We were all looking around at
each other,” he said. “We were shocked.”
Speculation flourished as to
why China made the sudden moves.
One reason was that it could:
“This is what happens when you allow somebody to gain a monopoly on a market.
Well, guess what, if you get that monopoly one of the things it allows you to do
is raise prices,” said Lloyd Wood, spokesman for Washington, D.C.-based AMTAC,
the American Manufacturing Trade Action Coalition trade group. “That may be
exactly what is happening. More people should expect that.”
Few alternatives
The Chinese ministries in
question gave no warning of the increases. Turmoil ensued. Reports emerged of
chaos as frantic exporters rushed ports in China, Singapore and Hong Kong to try
to beat the deadline.
Rumors ballooned that Chinese
authorities would extend a reprieve of the rebate reductions until August or
September, until manufacturers, importers and transport chiefs could straighten
out the mess. But it was not to be.
Harbin said all of the pigment
precursor chemicals are among the commodity categories hit by the tax
adjustment, and that there are few alternative sources available.
“Unfortunately, some of the
intermediate chemicals that are used especially to make color pigments have
moved to China because of the lower costs of dealing with the environmental
issues of producing chemicals,” Harbin said.
Meantime, newspaper production
chiefs interviewed prior to Flint Group raising its prices said they will just
have to deal with any price increases as an additional, albeit unwelcome, cost
of doing business.
“How big a hit this is going
to be I don’t know,” said Paul Briand, director of operations for Seacoast Media
Group in Portsmouth, N.H. “What it does mean is that, as newspapers get into
more and more color, it could have a real big impact.
“In 2007 and beyond, what is
the pressure, what are we being asked to do? We’re being asked to produce more
and more process color pages, so that will put some pressure on the cost of
colored ink.”
Said another production chief
at a major Southeastern daily who declined to be identified, “As we get into
this September and October time frame we all go to budgeting, so my questions
always are, ‘What are the ink prices looking like for next year?’
“We’ve had a couple of color
ink price increases in the last couple of years because of raw material issues.
With declining consumption and all the other bad things going on in the
newspaper business it will be difficult for newspapers to accept another ink
price increase. That doesn’t mean it is not going to happen, but it will be
difficult.”
But the pressure works both
ways, said a consumables buyer for a group of major papers who couldn’t speak
for attribution.
“There are going to be
challenges for ink manufacturers because of what the Chinese government is
doing,” he said. “The issue here in North America will be how the two major ink
manufacturers react to that, and what is the temperature in the marketplace” to
support a price hike.
For their part, ink vendors
say they will continue to moderate price increases as much as possible by
relying on internal supply chains and taking other steps to keep a tight rein on
raw materials.
Flint Group, for example, has
pigment manufacturing facilities in the United States, “so it puts us in a
little better position than many that have no vertical integration when it comes
to this,” Harbin said.
US Ink has taken a similar
tact, said Edward Pruitt, Sun’s chief procurement officer. “As a global buyer of
raw materials we purchase pigments and intermediates from many sources all over
the world,” he said, adding that Sun also has its own plants.
But Pruitt and Harbin concede
that China’s influence as a primary manufacture of many raw components will be
all but impossible to minimize.
“China has become over the
last decade a significant manufacturer and seller of pigments and intermediates
to the world markets,” said Pruitt. “The recent developments in China will
ultimately impact the value chain of these important raw materials as well as
the products, like color inks, that are made from them.”
David
Lewis is a Denver-based freelance writer.
| On June 19, China’s
Ministry of Finance and the State Administration of Taxation jointly
announced that, after consultation with the National Development and
Reform Commission, the Ministry of Commerce and the General
Administration of Customs, as of July 1 refund rates of the state’s
value-added tax for exporters would be reduced by between 5 percent and
13 percent, effectively a tax increase by those amounts.
The edict mentioned 2,831
product classifications and an unknown number of commodities as well.
Some industries, such
as high-energy, high-polluting businesses, particularly those that used
Chinese natural resources, drew the highest tax assessment increases —13
percent.
Tax rates were raised
to a lesser degree for product classes that included textiles, clothing,
shoes and plastic goods.
Additionally, China
shuttered an undisclosed number of high-polluting chemical operations.
Despite the hike, big
manufacturers such as Flint Group and US Ink are able to temper some of
the impact. That’s because of the vagaries of VAT. Buyers purchasing
finished pigments, for example, pay the tax on the entire product.
Those buying
intermediate chemicals, however, need only pay the duty on the chemicals
themselves and not the finished product.
“So it is not the full
shot,” said Norm Harbin, Flint Group’s vice president of business and
technical development. “But still, it is substantial.” |