Bills Digest No. 149 2001-02
Export Market Development Grants Amendment Bill
2002
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as
introduced and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest
does not have any official legal status. Other sources should be
consulted to determine the subsequent official status of the
Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage History
Purpose
Background
Main Provisions
Concluding Comments
Endnotes
Contact Officer & Copyright Details
Passage History
Export Market Development Grants
Amendment Bill 2002
Date Introduced:
15 May 2002
House: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Trade
Commencement:
Royal
Assent
Purpose
To amend the
Export Market Development Grants Act 1997 in order to
increase the minimum grant from $2 500 to $5 000.
The EMDG Scheme has provided support to
Australian exporters since 1974. It has been reviewed and modified
on a number of occasions the last review was undertaken in 2000 at
the request of the Minister for Trade. As a result of the 2000
Review the EMDG Scheme was extended by five years, with a further
review to be completed by 30 June 2005.(1)
The 2000 Review was conducted by the Austrade
Board with the assistance of a Steering Committee comprising
representatives of industry and other government agencies. The
results of the review were published in June 2000 and included a
review of the EMDG Scheme by PriceWaterhouseCoopers and an
econometric analysis of the effectiveness of the scheme by
Professor Ronald Bewley of the University of New South
Wales.(2)
The current EMDG Scheme provides direct
financial assistance in the form of taxable grants to small and
medium businesses (SMEs) to assist their export promotion
activities. This is paid as a 50 per cent subsidy for marketing and
promotion expenditures. Eligible SMEs may receive eight grants of
up to $200 000 in total.
The budgetary cost of the EMDG Scheme is fixed
at $150 million per year, as are administration costs which are
fixed at a maximum of five per cent of budget funding ($7.5
million). Around $143 million is therefore available to new and
existing exporters each year. Since the grants are taxable,
currently up to 30 per cent of grants could return to consolidated
revenue in the form of company tax. In 2000/01, there were
approximately 3000 recipients of EMDG Scheme grants, with the
average grant being around $46 000.(3)
Since the scheme s inception, there have been
significant changes to the structure of the Australian economy and
a reorientation of Australia s trade towards North East Asia. With
each review of the scheme, the focus of the scheme has been
modified to that of assisting SMEs and improving the effectiveness
of the scheme as trade stimulant. The scheme, which is part of the
spectrum of government involvement in trade promotion efforts,
seeks to develop and foster 'an export culture'.
Grants are available to Australian-based
businesses (individuals, partnerships, companies, associations,
co-operatives, statutory corporations or trusts) which are
developing export markets for Australian goods, services,
intellectual property rights and know-how.(4) More
specifically, eligible goods and services, intellectual property
and know-how include:
-
- goods made in Australia that have at least 50 per cent
Australian content
-
- goods made outside Australia of which at least 75 per cent of
their components have 50 per cent or more Australian content
-
- services delivered outside Australia
-
- services delivered within Australia to non-residents and
in-bound tourism services
-
- trademarks owned, assigned or first used in Australia, and
-
- know-how resulting from substantial research or work performed
in Australia.
For a business to be eligible for a grant it
must
-
- be spending at least $15 000 a year on eligible export
promotion (for the first year, a business may combine two years
expenses to meet the threshold)
-
- have annual export earnings of less than $25 million
-
- have a total income of less than $50 million
-
- have received fewer than 8 grants, and
-
- not be under insolvency administration.
There are five categories of eligible expenses
under the scheme:
-
- overseas representation and marketing consultants (the cost of
maintaining ongoing representation)
-
- market visits ($200 per day allowance for accommodation,
entertainment, etc.; travel costs)
-
- communications
-
- the provision of free samples
-
- trade fair literature and advertising.
Expenses that cannot be claimed include those
that:
-
- relate to trade with New Zealand
-
- are of a capital nature
-
- are commissions, discounts and sales related expenses
-
- are subject to reimbursement by a third party, and
-
- are fraudulent or related to an illegal activity.
The Austrade Board as part of the 2000 Review
commissioned an econometric analysis of the EMDG Scheme. The aim of
the analysis was to trace the impact of a dollar of EMDG Scheme
funding on the sequence of responses: eligible export promotion
expenditure, exports, and tax resulting from any additional exports
that may arise. The research examined the five years of data used
in the 1994 Review of the EMDG Scheme and an additional six years
of data for the 2000 Review.(5)
By comparing the results obtained from the 1994
Review with more recent data, the study found that the EMDG Scheme
stimulated additional export promotion expenditure. According to
the results of the analysis, an EMDG Scheme recipient business
spent 70 per cent more than it otherwise would have done. This
multiplier was consistent with that found for year one businesses
in the 1994 Review, but in that review the multiplier was found to
increase with experience in exporting.(6)
The 1994 Review had established that the exports
(or returns) from eligible expenditure on export promotion increase
with experience but this ratio tends to plateau as the export
experience is fully embodied into a firm s export
culture.(7)
The study estimated that in 1997/98, $133.7
million provided in grants resulted in $135 million in additional
export promotion. The additional export promotion expenditure in
turn produced total incremental exports of $1.69 billion. In its
report to the Minister for Trade, the Austrade Board noted:
the Bewley analysis suggests that this is more
than $12 in additional exports for every $1 grant provided by
government. The evidence from the survey suggests that increased
exporting activity is contributing to the adoption of best practice
activities and that EMDG recipients are generally more export and
best practice focussed than non-EMDG recipients.
It also suggests that EMDG is effectively
meeting the financial needs of business. Particularly in the early
years, it is evident that business relies heavily on EMDG to fund
export promotion activity together with retained
earnings.(8)
The additional tax revenue flowing from the
additional profitability of exporting was calculated to be $29
million.
In November 2001 the Productivity Commission published a staff
research paper which examined the use and impact of government
business programs, including the EMDG Scheme.(9) It
concluded that:
- only 16 per cent of firms used export market development
grants. Most firms (84 per cent of targeted companies) did not use
the Scheme(10) and
- Austrade had overestimated the amount of return in export
earnings attributed to each $1 of EMDG grant. The Productivity
Commission paper acknowledged that the grant program helped
exporters but said that its benefits had been exaggerated by
Austrade. Instead of the more than $12 in additional exports for
every $1 grant provided by the government, the Productivity
Commission suggested that the benefit was worth only $6 for every
$1 spent.(11) And even that figure could be overstated
because some companies might have spent their own money on
marketing and promotion if EMDG support had not been
available.(12)
Section 63 of the Export Market Development
Grants Act 1997 is the general rule for working out an
applicant s provisional grant amount. Subsection 63(2A) was
inserted by the Export Market Development Grants Amendment Act
2001 and states that:
(2A) If, after applying subsection (1) and
subsection (2) (where applicable), an applicant s provisional grant
amount for a grant year is less than $2,500, the applicant s
provisional grant amount for the grant
year is $2,500.
This measure was intended to ensure that all
claimants not affected by the exporter performance test are
provided with a worthwhile amount of grant.
Item 1 of Schedule 1 provides
that the minimum grant of $2 500 be increased to $5 000.
This fulfils an election promise made by the Coalition in October
2001.(13) The increased minimum grant will apply from
the grant year that commenced on 1 July 2001 (Item
2).
The Explanatory Memorandum states that the
increase in the minimum grant will cost $0.4 million in each of the
financial years 2002/03 up to and including 2005/06.(14)
The 2002/03 Budget provides additional funding to Austrade to cover
the increase for the 2002/03 financial year.(15)
The EMDG Scheme has become a generally accepted
means of enhancing export performance and remains an important
instrument in commercial and trade policy.(16) The role
of the EMDG Scheme has been to create an awareness of exporting as
a growth and market expansion option for SMEs and to remove
barriers to exporting. The reorientation of Australia s trade
towards North East Asia that has occurred over the last twenty
years reflects the focus of export promotion activities towards
this region. In this sense, the scheme has a direct impact on
Australia s export activity and performance and affects overall
foreign economic policy. As the 2000 Review noted, the most popular
export region for EMDG Scheme applicants is North East
Asia.(17)
The econometric analysis by Professor Bewley
established a clear linkage between the partial subsidy for export
promotion expenditure, additional expenditure by SMEs and
incremental export earnings, confirming the modelling results of
the earlier 1994 Review. Even if one does not accept Austrade s
estimated size of the export multiplier of 12.0, and prefers the
Productivity Commission s figure of 6.0, the linkage appears not
open to question.
-
- These changes were made by the Export Market Development
Grants Amendment Act 2001.
- See: Review of the Export Market Development Grants
Scheme, Australian Trade Commission, 30 June 2000. The Review
is available at http://www.austrade.gov.au/ExportAssistance.
- Hon Larry Anthony, Second Reading Speech , Export Market
Development Grants Amendment Bill 2002, House of Representatives,
Debates, 15 May 2002, p. 2111.
- Eligibility rules are provided for under the Export Market
Development Grants Act 1997.
- See: Review of the Export Market Development Grants
Scheme, Australian Trade Commission, 30 June 2000, pp. 220
242.
- ibid., p. 238.
- ibid., p. 220.
- ibid., p. 15.
- Revesz, John, and Ralph Lattimore, Statistical Analysis of
the Use and Impact of Government Business Programs,
Productivity Commission Staff Research Paper, Canberra, November
2001.
- ibid., p. ix.
- ibid., p. x.
- The differences between the two reports have been debated in
the press. See for example, Austrade cash fails to deliver , by Sid
Marris, Australian, 20 November 2001; Assistance not
always helpful [Editorial], Financial Review, 27 November
2001; Austrade s multiplication game , by Peter Urban,
Financial Review, 28 November 2001; Getting the Austrade
equation right , by Ron Bewley, Financial Review, 29
November 2001; Austrade proud of its achievements for the nation ,
by Charles Jamieson, Financial Review, 30 November 2001.
- Australians Exporting to the World [Coalition Election
Policy], 23 October 2001, p. 3.
- Explanatory Memorandum, Export Market Development
Grants Amendment Bill 2002, p. 1.
- Agency Budget Statements 2002-2003 Australian Trade Commission,
p. 92. At:
www.dfat.gov.au/dept/budget/2002_2003_pbs/2002-2003_DFAT_PBS_PartC_Austrade.pdf
- The rules governing the kinds of export promotion subsidisation
countries engage in are broadly agreed upon under the GATT.
- Review of the Export Market Development Grants Scheme,
Australian Trade Commission, 30 June 2000, p. 32.
Michael Priestley and Rosemary Bell
29 May 2002
Bills Digest Service
Information and Research Services
This paper has been prepared for general distribution to
Senators and Members of the Australian Parliament. While great care
is taken to ensure that the paper is accurate and balanced, the
paper is written using information publicly available at the time
of production. The views expressed are those of the author and
should not be attributed to the Information and Research Services
(IRS). Advice on legislation or legal policy issues contained in
this paper is provided for use in parliamentary debate and for
related parliamentary purposes. This paper is not professional
legal opinion. Readers are reminded that the paper is not an
official parliamentary or Australian government document.
IRS staff are available to discuss the paper's
contents with Senators and Members and their staff but not with
members of the public.
ISSN 1328-8091
© Commonwealth of Australia 2002
Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the
Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be
reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including
information storage and retrieval systems, without the prior
written consent of the Parliamentary Library, other than by Members
of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official
duties.
Published by the Department of the Parliamentary Library,
2002.
Back to top