Copyright 2001 eMediaMillWorks, Inc.
(f/k/a Federal
Document Clearing House, Inc.)
Federal Document Clearing House
Congressional Testimony
June 13, 2001, Wednesday
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 3125 words
COMMITTEE:
HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS
HEADLINE: ENERGY
AND TAX LAWS
TESTIMONY-BY: JOSEPHINE S. COOPER,,
PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
AFFILIATION:
ALLIANCE OF AUTOMOBILE MANUFACTURERS
BODY: June 13,
2001
Statement of
Josephine S. Cooper, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
Testimony Before
the Subcommittee on Select Revenue Measures of the House Committee on Ways and
Means
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before your Subcommittee
regarding energy policy issues. My name is Josephine S. Cooper and I am
President and CEO of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, a trade
association of 13 car and light-truck manufacturers. Our member companies
include BMW of North America, Inc., DaimlerChrysler Corporation, Fiat, Ford
Motor Company, General Motors Corporation, Isuzu Motors of America, Mazda,
Mitsubishi, Nissan North America, Porsche, Toyota Motor North America,
Volkswagen of America, and Volvo.
Alliance member companies have more
than 620,000 employees in the United States, with more than 250 manufacturing
facilities in 35 states. Overall, a recent University of Michigan study found
that the entire automobile industry creates more than 6.6 million direct and
spin-off jobs in all 50 states and produces almost $
243 billion
in payroll compensation annually. The Alliance supports efforts to create an
effective energy policy based on broad, market-oriented principles. Policies
that promote research development and deployment of advanced technologies and
provide customer based incentives to accelerate demand of these advanced
technologies set the foundation. This focus on bringing advanced technologies to
market leverages the intense competition of the automobile manufacturers
worldwide. Incentives will help consumers overcome the initial cost barriers of
advanced technologies during early market introduction and increase demand,
bringing more energy efficient vehicles into the marketplace.
This year,
there has been increased attention on vehicles and their fuel economy levels
with particular discussion of the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program.
Rather than simply engage in an exercise updating a 26 year-old program with all
of its flaws, Congress needs to consider new approaches for the 21st century.
The Alliance and its 13 member companies believe that the best approach for
improved fuel efficiency is to aggressively promote the development of advanced
technologies - through cooperative, public/private research programs and
competitive development - and incentives to help pull the technologies into the
marketplace as rapidly as possible. We know that advanced technologies with the
potential for major fuel economy gains are possible. As a nation, we need to get
these technologies on the road as soon as possible in an effort to reach the
national energy goals as fast and as efficiently as we can.
The Alliance
is pleased that Vice President Cheney's National Energy Policy report recommends
and supports a tax credit for advanced technology vehicles (ATVs). Specifically,
it proposes a tax credit for consumers who purchase a new hybrid or fuel cell
vehicle between 2002 and 2007. In addition, the report supported the broader use
of alternative fuel and alternative vehicles. This is consistent with the
Alliance's position of supporting enactment of tax credits for consumers to help
offset the initial higher costs of advanced technology and alternative fuel
vehicles until more advancements and greater volumes make them less expensive to
produce and purchase.
In reviewing House legislation that has been
crafted to spur the sale of advanced technology fuel-efficient vehicles, the
Alliance is in general agreement with H.R. 1864 introduced by Congressman Camp.
Automakers would like to see some minor, technical changes made to the
hybrid-electric vehicle section of the bill and would also support the inclusion
of tax credits for advanced lean burn technology. The Alliance believes that the
overall concepts and provisions found in H.R. 1864 are the right approach and
would benefit American consumers.
The bill would ensure that advanced
technology is used to improve fuel economy. Performance incentives tied to
improved fuel economy are incorporated into the legislation in order for a
vehicle to be eligible for the tax credits. These performance incentives are
added to a base credit that is provided for introducing the technologies into
the marketplace.
Specifically, H.R. 1864 has a number of important
provisions addressing various types of advanced technologies. These include:
Fuel Cell Vehicles
The most promising long-term technology
offers breakthrough fuel economy improvements, zero emissions and a shift away
from petroleum-based fuels. A $
4,000 base credit is included
along with performance based fuel economy incentives of up to an additional
$
4,000. The credit is available for 10 years to accelerate
introduction - extremely low volume production is expected to begin in the
2005-2007 timeframe.
Hybrid Vehicles
Electronics that integrate
electric drive with an internal combustion engine offer near term improvements
in fuel economy. A credit of up to $
1,000 for the amount of
electric drive power is included along with up to $
3,000
depending upon fuel economy performance. The credit is available for 6 years to
accelerate consumer demand as these vehicles become available in the market and
set the stage for sustainable growth. To be eligible for the credit, hybrid
vehicles must meet or beat the average emission level for light duty vehicles.
Dedicated Alternative Fuel Vehicles
Vehicles capable of running
solely on alternative fuels, such as natural gas, LPG, and LNG, promote energy
diversity and significant emission reductions. A base credit of up to
$
2,500 is included with an additional $
1,500
for vehicles certified to "Super Ultra Low Emission" standards (SULEV).
Battery Electric Vehicles
Vehicles that utilize stored energy
from "plug-in" rechargeable batteries offer zero emissions. A base credit of
$
4,000 is included (similar to the fuel cell -- both have full
electric drive systems) and an incremental $
2,000 is available
for vehicles with extended range or payload capabilities.
Alternative
Fuel Incentives
Alternative fuels such as natural gas, LNG, LPG,
hydrogen, B100 (biomass) and methanol are primarily used in alternative fueled
vehicles and fuel cell vehicles. To encourage the installation of distribution
points to support these vehicle applications, a credit of $
0.50
for every gallon of gas equivalent is provided to the retail distributor. This
credit is available for 6 years and will support the distribution of these fuels
as vehicle volume grows and may be passed on to the consumer by the retail
outlet. Note that ethanol is not included in these provisions due to the
existing ethanol credit.
Alternative Fuel Infrastructure
Complementary to the credit for the fuel itself, the existing
$
100,000 tax deduction for infrastructure is extended for 10
years and a credit for actual costs up to $
30,000 for the
installation cost of alternative fuel sites available to the public is included.
One of the key hurdles to overcome in commercializing alternative fuel vehicles
is the lack of fueling infrastructure. For nearly a century, infrastructure has
focused primarily on gasoline and diesel products. These infrastructure and fuel
incentives will help the distributors overcome the costs to establish the
alternative fuel outlets and support distributors during initial lower sales
volumes as the number of alternative fuel vehicles increases.
Automobile
manufacturers believe that CAFE, however well- intended, has not achieved its
desired goals and has had a number of unintended consequences. Meeting
CAFE standards is not something that manufacturers can do by
themselves. Because the standards are a sales-weighted fleet average, the
ultimate outcome depends on what the consumer purchases. If not enough customers
purchase the higher fuel economy models of a given manufacturer, then the fleet
average for that automaker may not achieve the
CAFE standard.
Since manufacturers have widely varying fleet mixes and product offerings, the
CAFE program has had widely disparate impacts on automakers and has afforded
some manufacturers with significant competitive advantages at times.
Increasing
CAFE standards will only exacerbate these
problems. Higher standards may result in vehicles that are less attractive to
customers in terms of meeting their needs for work and family. If consumer
demand is not aligned with manufacturers production, there is the potential for
significant negative impact on employment throughout the industry. Ultimately,
any fuel savings that result will come at high cost to consumers, manufacturers
and the economy. In short, automakers need to produce vehicles that appeal to
customers. CAFE acts as a market intrusion that over time will create
distortions and unintended adverse consequences.
Recent sales figures
support this position. The top ten most fuel- efficient vehicles account for
less than 2% of total sales. The ultimate goal for any business is to provide
products consumers want to buy. Increasing
CAFE standards will
require automakers to produce less of the products that American consumers are
actually purchasing today and more of the products that are in lower demand.
Fuel economy standards only address the supply side of the equation. The
Alliance believes, however, that Congress does not need to set new standards or
change the structure of the program as the law requires the Department of
Transportation (DOT) to promulgate new light truck standards (pickups, SUVs,
minivans and vans) at the maximum level taking into consideration certain
criteria. Automakers will be working with the DOT to ensure appropriate
standards are set.
In the industry, CAFE regulations affect each
Alliance member differently. Manufacturers whose fleets are comprised primarily
of larger, lower fuel economy vehicles are more constrained in their product
planning by
CAFE standards than manufacturers with fleets
comprised mainly of smaller, higher fuel economy vehicles. As each manufacturer
attempts to design, produce and sell vehicles in their target markets, CAFE
operates, for some manufacturers, as a roadblock to supplying their vehicles to
the market.
The domestic/non-domestic passenger car fleet distinction is
another important matter. While originally designed to keep small car production
in the U.S. and protect American jobs, this distinction has inhibited some
manufacturers from increasing the procurement of U.S. parts and materials. The
domestic/non- domestic distinction has had widely disparate impacts on
automakers. The requirement for separate fleets serves as a clear example of
CAFE's market distorting effects, which then have a negative impact on the U.S.
economy.
Another consequence of CAFE has been the downsizing of the
passenger car fleet. Weight and size reductions remain one of the prime means of
achieving improved fuel efficiency. The basic laws of physics dictate that
smaller, lighter vehicles fare worse in accidents than larger, heavier vehicles,
all things being equal.
To reiterate, a better way to improve vehicle
and fleet fuel economy, and one that is more in tune with consumer preferences,
is to encourage the development and purchase of advanced technology vehicles
(ATVs). Consumers are in the driver's seat and most independent surveys show
that Americans place a high priority on performance, safety, space and other
issues with fuel economy ranking much lower even with today's gas prices. ATVs
hold great promise for increases in fuel efficiency without sacrificing the
other vehicle attributes consumers desire. Just as important, the technology is
transparent to the customer.
Member companies of the Alliance have
invested billions of dollars in research and development of more fuel-efficient
vehicles. Automobile companies around the globe have dedicated substantial
resources to bringing cutting-edge technologies - electric, fuel cell, and
hybrid electric vehicles as well as alternative fuel vehicles and powertrain
improvements - to the marketplace. These investments will play a huge role in
meeting our nation's energy and environmental goals.
These advanced
technology vehicles are more expensive than their gasoline counterparts during
early market introduction. As I mentioned earlier, the Alliance is supportive of
Congressional legislation that would provide for personal and business end-user
tax incentives for the purchase of advanced technology and alternative fuel
vehicles. Make no mistake: across the board, tax credits will not completely
cover the incremental costs of new advanced technology. However, it will make
consumers more comfortable with accepting the technology and begin to change
purchasing behavior. In short, tax credits will help bridge the gap towards
winning broad acceptance among the public leading to greater volume and sales
figures throughout the entire vehicle fleet. This type of incentive will help
"jump start" market penetration and support broad energy efficiency and
diversity goals.
Enabling consumers to make more effective
fuel-efficient choices rather than mandating government standards makes more
sense to achieve the desired outcome. After all, the industry already spends a
significant amount on compliance with government regulations while investing
large sums in capital improvements and competitive designs.
Some of the
discussion today has centered on the vehicles of the automobile manufacturers.
But it is important not to forget about a vital component for any vehicle - the
fuel upon which it operates. As automakers looking at the competing regulatory
challenges for our products -- fuel efficiency, safety and emissions -- and
attempting to move forward with advanced technologies, we must have the best
possible and cleanest fuels. EPA has begun to address gasoline quality but it
needs to get even cleaner. This is important because gasoline will remain the
prevalent fuel for years to come and may eventually be used for fuel cell
technology.
Beyond gasoline, the auto industry is working with a variety
of suppliers of alternative fuels. In fact, the industry already offers more
than 25 vehicles powered by alternative fuels. More than 1 million of these
vehicles are on the road today and more are coming. Today, we find vehicles that
use:
- Natural gas, which reduces carbon monoxide emissions by 65 to 90
percent;
- Ethanol, which produces fewer organic and toxic emissions
than gasoline with the longer term potential to substantially reduce greenhouse
gases;
- Liquefied petroleum gas (propane), the most prevalent of the
alternative fuels, which saves about 60% VOC emissions; and
- For the
future, hydrogen, which has the potential to emit nearly zero pollutants.
The Alliance has submitted comments to the DOT in support of an
extension of the dual fuel vehicle incentives through 2008. Current law provides
CAFE credits - up to 1.2 mpg - for manufacturers that produce vehicles with dual
fuel capability. These vehicles can operate on either gasoline or domestically
produced alternative and renewable fuels, such as ethanol. However, the dual
fuel credits end in model year 2004 unless extended via rulemaking by the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The Alliance believes an
extension is important so that these vehicles continue to be produced in high
volume to help encourage the expansion of the refueling infrastructure and
giving consumers an alternative to gasoline.
In addition to alternative
fuels, companies are constantly evaluating fuel-efficient technologies used in
other countries to see if they can be made to comply with regulatory
requirements in the United States. One such technology is diesel engines, using
lean-burn technology, which have gained wide acceptance in Europe and other
countries. Automakers have been developing a new generation of highly
fuel-efficient clean diesel vehicles - using turbocharged direct injection
engines - as a way to significantly increase fuel economy and reduce greenhouse
gas emissions. However, their use in the U.S. must be enabled by significantly
cleaner diesel fuel.
Earlier this year, EPA promulgated its heavy-duty
diesel rule that the Alliance supports, as far as it goes. The rule reduces the
amount of sulfur in the fuel. Low sulfur diesel fuel is necessary to enable the
new clean diesel technology to be used in future cars and light trucks.
Providing cleaner fuels, including lowering sulfur levels in gasoline and diesel
fuel, will provide emission benefits in existing on-road vehicles. Sulfur
contaminates emissions control equipment, such as catalytic converters. Efforts
to reduce sulfur content will provide environmental benefits and allow vehicles
to operate more efficiently. Unless there are assurances that fuels will be
available, companies will not invest in new clean diesel technologies.
As you can tell, the automobile companies - from the top executives to
the lab engineers - are constantly competing for the next breakthrough
innovation. If I can leave one message with the Subcommittee today, it is to
stress that all manufacturers have advanced technology programs to improve
vehicle fuel efficiency, lower emissions and increase motor vehicle safety.
These are not "pie in the sky" concepts on a drawing board. In fact, many
companies have advanced technology vehicles in the marketplace right now or have
announced production plans for the near future. That's why now is the perfect
time for the enactment of tax credits to help spur consumers to purchase these
new vehicles which years of research and development have made possible.
Higher
CAFE standards, with all of the disparate
impacts inherent in that program, would divert limited resources from these
ongoing efforts and distort the market for our products. Competition will drive
improvements and success in the area of increasing vehicle fuel economy. This
powerful market force should be allowed to work where it can and should be
enhanced with incentives where they are needed to "prime the pump."
We
would urge that public policy decisions focus on the steps that will achieve
real improvements in fuel consumption and benefits our environment. We believe
that advanced technology vehicles and appropriate tax policy are a better way to
increase fuel efficiency than the policy of CAFE that effectively limits
consumer choice, adversely affects safety and affordability and creates "winners
and losers" within the auto community.
Thank you for the opportunity to
testify before the Subcommittee today. I would be happy to answer any questions
you may have.
LOAD-DATE: June 19, 2001