The important partnership between credit unions and small businesses

first_img 12SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr,Curt Long Curt Long was named director of research and chief economist in August 2014. In this role, he serves as the association’s chief economic analyst, conducting economic and financial policy … Web: www.nafcu.org Details Since the inception of the credit union industry, there has been a connection between credit unions and small businesses. Both institutions were founded on helping local communities and working towards providing valuable services and products to Main Street consumers. A lot of credit unions are small businesses solely serving the needs of their local community. As the credit union industry continues to grow, so does their lending portfolio, especially regarding member business lending. Even though credit unions face regulatory limitations, small businesses still prefer the personalized member-lending experience credit unions offer. Over the past 10 years, the number of credit unions offering business loans has increased 20 percent. Today, a small business can get a loan at more than 2,000 credit unions. For 18 percent of credit unions, business loans make up at least 5 percent of their total loan portfolio. A decade ago that figure was just 8 percent.That growth stands in stark contrast to recent trends at other financial institutions, and speaks to credit unions’ increasing role in funding America’s small businesses. Since 2007, total business loans extended by credit unions have tripled. Banks, on the other hand, have cut their outstanding loans to small businesses 8 percent over that same time. The Federal Reserve’s triennial Survey of Consumer Finances shows a similar rise in the importance of credit unions to small businesses. The share of household business owners that used credit unions to start or acquire their business grew from 2.4 percent in 2010 to 6.3 percent in 2016.All this growth has taken place amid the backdrop of a severe decline in business dynamism. Startups are becoming rarer, and consolidation is a feature of many industries. The U.S. Census Bureau has two sources of data related to business dynamism. The Business Dynamics Statistics (BDS) database provides annual data on startups as a share of total businesses through 2015. The bureau’s Business Formation Statistics (BFS) is a recently released database with more current quarterly estimates of startup activity. The chart below shows both datasets, and each confirms a sizable drop in business formations around the mid-2000s. While the national picture may not be pretty, the BFS data, just unveiled in February, allow us to take a closer look. The map below shows per capita startups in 2017 by state. The most vibrant states have formation rates that are twice as high as the weakest ones. But is there any hope for a turnaround? Policymakers have taken note. Former Fed Chair Janet Yellen, observing the decline in business formations, stated that it could lead to lower productivity, wage growth, and employment, along with increased income inequality. Those sentiments were echoed by the Congressional Joint Economic Committee’s 2018 Annual Report, which focused its discussion of the weak economic recovery on the decline in business formations. The committee’s top recommendation was to reduce regulatory burden on small businesses.The good news for credit unions is that even if the status quo persists, they have proven that they can operate successful business lending programs in such an environment. And if policymakers do create more favorable conditions for startups, credit unions would be well positioned to capitalize.          Business Formations per 1,000 People (2017)last_img read more

PREMIUM[Analysis] A glance at ESG, why it matters and opportunities ahead

first_imgMore companies and organizations globally are increasing their focus on environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues, as well as ensuring they can manage ESG-related risks effectively. This is important because the ability to handle ESG issues will provide added value to the company and affect the company’s long-term sustainability. However, the implementation of ESG in Indonesia appears to be underdeveloped.Citing the 2019 National ESG Survey conducted by the Indonesian Center of Risk Management and Sustainability (CRMS), the majority of respondents have not considered ESG in decision-making processes and other business processes in the organization. This survey was conducted through 171 companies in Indonesia from 16 industrial sectors, where the majority came from the financial and insurance sector (33 percent) and the mining and quarrying sector (9 percent).The major… Google Facebook Topics : Forgot Password ? Log in with your social account Linkedin LOG INDon’t have an account? Register here analysis bank-mandiri ESG environmental-social-and-governancelast_img read more

Wendi Wicks: Justice committee members all voted for Seymour’s bill

first_imgNZ Herald 22 December 2017• Wendi Wicks is convener of Not Dead Yet Aotearoa, a group of disabled people who do not support the legalisation of euthanasia or assisted suicide in New Zealand.Family First Comment: A very good analysis of the ‘dodgy’ stuff that happened in Parliament last week with the 1st Reading on euthanasia… Disturbing.“This bill is literally a matter of life and death. It’s not a time to cut corners, or do backroom deals for procedural advantage. We need to ensure choice is not only a choice to die, and not make life for disabled and other at-risk people even more risky. It’s a time to take the time to listen and think very carefully.”Make a submission – www.protect.org.nzDavid Seymour should buy a Lotto ticketSomething unusual happened in Parliament on Wednesday night of last week. Not the 76-44 vote in favour of the first reading of Seymour’s End of Life Choice Bill. That was entirely predictable.No, it was what happened next which suggests that Seymour is very lucky indeed.Seymour rose to move that the bill be referred to the Justice Select Committee which would have to report back within nine months. Just a procedural motion, right? Hmm.The extraordinarily lucky thing for Seymour is that all eight members of that committee had just voted in favour of the first reading. All of them.Call me suspicious, call me cynical, but that strikes me as … improbable. In fact, it’s a 2.6 per cent probability.Here’s the maths: 76 of 120 members voted in favour, or a 63.33 per cent likelihood that any individual would vote in favour. The likelihood that 8 randomly selected members all voted in favour is therefore 0.6333 raised to the power of 8, which is 0.02588, or 2.6 per cent between friends.So either Seymour is very lucky, or it wasn’t random at all. That it was in fact all arranged beforehand.Now, that’s maybe clever inside politics, but maybe it’s also not very clever outside politics. Because it’s going to raise the level of scrutiny of how the Justice Select Committee goes about its work on this bill. Is it going to be an open, transparent and fair hearing of all New Zealanders who want to have their say?When you come from a 25 per cent majority constituency (disabled people) who are alarmed to be directly in the loosey-goosey eligibility criteria cross hairs of this bill, open fair and transparent select committee dealings are minimum standard.Will we get it? It’s a big ask for disabled people to trust the select committee process when there already appears to be a certain bias.There’s an argument doing the rounds that the Health Select Committee finished its long hearings into Maryan Street’s petition earlier this year, so there’s no need to repeat the exercise.Two things could be said here: first, that the select committee was not considering a bill but investigating the broader issues surrounding end of life in general, and suicide in particular. So New Zealanders have not yet had the chance to have their say about this particular bill.Second – and pay attention now – six of the eight members of the Health Select Committee who issued the final report voted no at the first reading of Seymour’s bill. That is, 75 per cent of the people who actually read the evidence, and heard directly from New Zealanders, thought about it and said “No thanks, David”.This bill is literally a matter of life and death. It’s not a time to cut corners, or do backroom deals for procedural advantage. We need to ensure choice is not only a choice to die, and not make life for disabled and other at-risk people even more risky. It’s a time to take the time to listen and think very carefully.Or maybe buy a Lotto ticket and hope for the best?http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?objectid=11963888&ref=twitterKeep up with family issues in NZ. Receive our weekly emails direct to your Inbox.last_img read more