Open Letter to Congress on the Need for Ex-Im Bank

AIA's President and CEO, Marion C. Blakey, in a recent letter to both chambers of Congress, made a strong case for the reautorization of the Export-Import Bank of the U.S.

We know that not reautorizing hte bank would be equivilent economic unilateral disarmament agains nearly 60 other foreign credit agencies. We hope you will join with us to support the Ex-Im Bank to sustain the American economy and U.S. jobs. 

Sign the Petition


Leveling the Playing Field: The Ex-Im Bank & U.S. Manufacturing

Leveling the Playing Field: The Ex-Im Bank & U.S. Manufacturing

In the wake of an uneven global economic recovery, countries are competing in an unprecedented race to create jobs and stimulate economic growth through increased exports. In this competition, not all countries abide by the same set of rules that the United States follows to support their companies' exports. Indeed, American companies often come up against government-owned, government-protected or government-subsidized competitors from countries such as China, Brazil, India and various European nations, making for a brutally competitive and uneven playing field.

In this race, the U.S. Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im Bank) serves as a critical engine for U.S. jobs by leveling the playing field and helping American companies to compete toe-to-toe against their competitors in the global marketplace. Ex-Im Bank is acting as a vital catalyst of U.S. economic growth, enabling billions of dollars of exports and supporting hundreds of thousands of export-related U.S. jobs. In 2013 alone, Ex-Im Bank transactions promoted $34.7 billion of exports in fields such as power turbines, locomotives, agricultural equipment and satellites, and sustained or created more than 205,000 American jobs.

AIA believes that American companies can continue to compete and win in the global marketplace against their overseas counterparts, but they cannot do it with one hand tied behind their backs. Foreign competitors continue to enjoy significant financial assistance from their governments. To protect the competitiveness of our industry and American manufacturing, we need to ensure the Ex-Im Bank has the long-term support from Congress it needs to support and grow the American manufacturing workforce.

The Economic Impact of the Budget Control Act of 2011 on DOD & non-DOD Agencies

The Economic Impact of the Budget Control Act of 2011 on DOD & non-DOD Agencies

AIA and economist Dr. Stephen Fuller of George Mason University unveiled a new report detailing job loss figures resulting from the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Deloitte: The Aerospace and Defense Industry in the U.S.

The Aerospace and Defense Industry in the U.S.: A financial and economic impact study

This report was commissioned by AIA to assess the contribution and financial impact the U.S. aerospace and defense industry has had on the American economy, in terms of employment, cash taxes paid, impact on gross domestic product and other financial, economic and qualitative factors. Although typically focused on military and commercial aircraft, space systems and related supply chain portions of “aerospace and defense,” we broadened the definition for this study to include land vehicles and systems, naval vehicles and systems, security and defense contracting software and services. The scope does not cover the users of these products and services, thereby excluding the air transportation industry (cargo and passenger airlines) as well as government employees.

We estimate that the U.S. aerospace and defense industry directly employed 1.05 million workers in 2010. These workers received $84.2 billion in wages and paid $15.4 billion in U.S. Federal individual income
taxes, and $1.9 billion in state individual income taxes. Although not directly in the scope of this study, in addition we found that the Federal government employs an estimated 845,198 aerospace and defense skilled workers at armed forces maintenance and repair depots, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), other defense agencies including Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and civilians working at the Department of Defense.

We found the industry has an estimated indirect and induced employment of 2.36 jobs for every 1 directly employed. This employment multiplier is a “direct effect” multiplier, which accounts for primary and secondary effect employment associated with the aerospace and defense industry. It does not contemplate “final demand,” or employment associated with tertiary effect employment well beyond the direct effect of this industry’s employment base. Thus, we believe that indirect and induced employment totals 2.48 million workers, in addition to those cited above who are directly employed. Together with these indirect employees, we estimate the grand total direct, indirect and induced employment associated with the U.S. aerospace and defense industry is 3.53 million jobs, not including industry skilled workers employed by the Federal government or airlines. 

We estimate that these U.S. aerospace and defense companies generated $324.0 billion in sales revenue in 2010, with $15.6 billion in net income after tax at an average pre-tax reported operating profit margin of 10.5%. This margin percent metric was below average, when compared to other industries in America. These companies paid $5.5 billion in corporate income taxes on their earnings, as well as $1.7 billion in state income and similar business taxes. Thus together with individual direct employee taxes, the total industry generated an estimated $37.8 billion in wage and income based taxes to state and Federal government treasuries, not including the taxes paid by indirect and induced industry employment. 

The industry is the largest net exporter, and one of the largest contributors to our nation’s gross exports at $89.6 billion, with a larger portion made up of commercial aircraft bound for foreign carriers. The industry’s
contribution to the nation’s GDP is 2.23%, and as described below, we conclude the industry “punches above its weight,” when considering other beneficial and qualitative impacts to our economy beyond these metrics.

Indeed the industry contributes in ways not directly included in GDP, employment, and taxes paid. Although it has only been 108 years since the Wright Brothers’ first flight, the industry has contributed fundamentally to the way we live, work, travel and communicate with the technology created and continued innovations in jet aircraft, communications satellites, the internet and Global Positioning Systems (GPS), for example. Also, the industry is primarily
responsible for the reduction of casualties in armed conflict due to the technology innovations that keep our warfighters out of harm’s way with unmanned aircraft, sophisticated surveillance sensors and over the horizon strike capability.

Current economic challenges resulting in defense budget declines may impact direct and indirect employment, ability to conduct research and development, and taxes paid. On the other hand, the current up-cycle in commercial aircraft production, thus employment, portends years of future growth potential. However, due to its weighting, the uptick in commercial aircraft production is not expected to make up for the shortfall in overall industry revenues and
employment due to the size of the pending defense downturn.

This study demonstrates the significant economic and financial contributions made by the aerospace and defense industry, and its broader impact on our society. These will be important considerations as constituents assess the impact of changes to investments in research and development and the industrial base, and the continued ability of the industry to create the next generation of game changing products and services.

Competing for Space: Satellite Export Policy and U.S. National Security

Competing for Space: Satellite Export Policy and U.S. National Security

As we enter a new era of budget austerity and the threat of draconian sequestration loom, failure to revise export controls could result in an ongoing loss of critical industrial base suppliers and pose an increasing risk to national security.