orangeblock

Insurance industry reacts to doubled windscreen tariffs

12 March 2013 | Non-life | Motor | Fiona Zerbst

A polarising issue that is set to have a direct impact on both the automotive glass industry and the insurance industry is the recent increase in the rate of customers duty on vehicle windscreens. The International Trade Administration Commission (ITAC) i

“We are fighting unfair imports – the Chinese are, in effect, exporting unemployment,” says Stewart Jennings, CEO of PG Group, which manufactures, distributes and sells windscreens under the trade name Shatterprufe.

“Chinese prices are subsidised to the point at which their prices are below raw material cost and there is no way any manufacturer can compete with unfair competition. It is not a level playing field. If we are going to sort out employment, all South Africans must appreciate that we have to stand behind local manufacturers who have invested billions in this economy.

Jennings feels the only way we can grow the economy is to ensure that more people are employed; this will swell the tax base, grow the market and ensure that more people purchase motor cars and insure their vehicles. “It is very short-sighted to support highly subsidised imports and jeopardise our manufacturing base,” he says.

But Viviene Pearson, motoring manager at SAIA, is disappointed by ITAC’s decision. “The insurance industry would obviously support local manufacturers if their prices were lower. It is a business decision, because we have to drive costs down to keep premiums affordable. This decision directly impacts on the affordability of motor insurance,” she says.

The consumer should be able to choose

Windscreens are big business in South Africa and the insurance market receives about 500 000 claims for windscreens a year. “About 70% of road accident claims deal with repairs,” says Pearson. “I would say that between 60%-70% of those repair costs are around parts. In 2010, that amounted to approximately R16bn in claims – that figure is probably higher now.”

Pearson feels that consumers should be able to choose what they are prepared to pay to replace windscreens. “The market must be free to vote with its feet,” she says. “The consumer should not have to pay more simply to help local manufacturers operate at a profit. This is not the consumer’s responsibility.”

The SAIA made a submission to the trade commission stating that competition is healthy and pointing out that insurers are also consumers and should have free choice.

Manufacturing growth sub-par

The ITAC, meanwhile, has indicated that it hopes to “significantly improve” the competitiveness of the domestic windscreen industry by allowing it to fully use its existing production capacity and achieve economies of scale thorough longer production runs, with a reduction in the marginal cost of production.

Jennings says this will alleviate some of the pressures that manufacturers are under with the high cost of electricity and a lack of government subsidisation. “We are going to lose jobs because our products are not selling, which puts us out of business. Manufacturing used to make up 21% of GDP but today it makes up less than 15%. The only way we can bring our prices down is to improve economies of scale.”

Jennings feels that if consumers bought South African windscreens, tires and other parts it would boost manufacturing and bring about economies of scale. Without this buy-in, there is no way to even attempt to compete with China, which undercuts local prices by an average of 40%.

“We cannot grow employment in this way. The Kagiso Index put manufacturing below 50 points for the fifth month in a row,” he says. “The fact of the matter is that wages are coming down because of imports. But nobody wants to look at the big picture – it is always ‘someone else’ who is responsible for creating employment.”

Meeting consumer expectations

“Windscreens are a huge, costly item, and are part of the bigger issue of high cost related to parts,” says Pearson. “There’s no doubt the industry needs to work with more affordable quality products. If we could repair vehicles in a more cost-effective way we would see fewer write-offs and more repairs, which would provide work for more people in the repair (spares) industry.”

Although she says that it is not her or the insurance industry’s place to comment on the way the manufacturers do business, she suggests that manufacturers could revisit their business models in order to become more competitive. “There are different ways to distribute glass, for example,” she says. “Costs do not necessarily lie in the manufacturing process itself. We reiterate that we would love to support local manufacturers but the bottom line is that we want to have access to safe, good-quality products at affordable prices. This is what consumers expect.”

Editor’s thoughts:
South African retailers and wholesalers must take note of the current trade deficit, which widened to R24.5 billion in January due to the influx of significant imports. This is one of the reasons that unemployment has ballooned and Jennings says that unless South Africans support local manufacturing the country is not going to assist in bringing down the over 25% unemployment rate. Because the manufacturing and insurance industries envisage different ways of achieving this, it appears the tariff issue is going to rankle for some time to come. Comment below or email [email protected].

Comments

Added by Humphrey, 13 Mar 2013
Quite a complex issue and Government and unions / labour are 100% to blame. As consumers we pay far too much for everything because: 1) We are taxed to death (import taxes, vat etc.); 2) Local labour are generally not the most efficient bunch but nevertheless are on constant strike for higher remuneration pushing up costs; 3) Government doing exactly what they have done here by pushing up prices (of course they have a vested interest to push up prices – this means more VAT to subsidize the gravy train) to support local inefficiencies and excess profit margins (local business must learn to adapt to international competition). We are heading down a dangerous road here as our people continue to breed like rabbits (even though they cannot afford them) pushing up unemployment (perhaps a single child policy is overdue in Africa); labour / unions are forcing industry to mechanise due to labour costs & lost productivity due to strikes etc. reducing available jobs and thereby pushing up unemployment; business continues to close down because it is so difficult to do business in SA (all the over regulation and compliance requirements and costs), government does not control the influx of people across our borders (this pushes up unemployment and not to mention the type of crimes being committed) and government sticks its head in the ground because it really does not know what to do about all of this (but sets the example with inefficiencies in government and controlled entities such as Eishkom, SAA, local government etc. etc.). Yes we do need to support local business but this must be subject to a reduction in excess profits, labour and government supporting remuneration models based on individual productivity solely (and cut out all these strikes), government to stop over regulating business (freeing up time for business to focus on their business and to cut down on compliance costs and finally to reduce excess taxes (of course this can only happen when we cut our corruption and inefficiencies)
Report Abuse
Added by Ayanda, 12 Mar 2013
Mr Jennings needs to do a course in basic economics. A nation does not prosper by paying more for goods than it needs to. What it saves by buying less expensive clothing, food, tyres and windscreens it can spend on better education, healthcare, housing and general quality of life. It can also save more for retirement and thus create more investment in the country and thus more economic growth. It is an entirely false economy to suggest that by buying more expensive things our nation will do better.This would be like standing in a bucket and trying to lift oneself up by the handle! I am sure Mr Jennings actually knows this.
Report Abuse
Added by Craig, 12 Mar 2013
Doesn't the PG Group effectively have a monopoly on windscreen glass in South Africa? Shatterprufe is manufactured by the PG Group and seems that it is fitted by other companies in SA, and not just PG. So is this more about protecting profits? Feels like it.
Report Abuse
Added by Johann, 12 Mar 2013
The problem with competing against highly subsidised imports in an internally overtaxed environment are self explanatory. Basic economics in an overprotected under achieving production scenario are far more complex than those stated. There really isn't one simple solution, but jobs must be protected and therefor local production needs incentives to produce more cost effectively. The Chinese underpay and subsidise, we strike and penalise industry.
Report Abuse
Added by Harry Bloem, 12 Mar 2013
What Mr Jennings is saying: Can, not let certain people pay more for the same thing thereby supporting another group of people. Without a choice. I agree with Ayanda, it is heavily lacking in basic economics. Those who have owes those who don't have. The old story here in S.A. Teach them to fish, don't give them a fish.
Report Abuse
Added by Hein Eksteen, 12 Mar 2013
The cost of all motorcar parts in South Africa, if you buy them at a dealer are rediculous. And the industry can rather take a look at themselves instead of running to goverment with tears in there greasy eyes. I have to replace a windscreen on a BMW 5 series. The prices in Centurion PG Auto Glass R11 500.The price at the dealer R6800. Both prices are still rediculous. If you live in a glass house, dont throw stones.
Report Abuse
Added by Craig, 12 Mar 2013
As consumers we are constantly being held hostage by high prices. Prices are being forced upwards in all sectors. Food, fuel, power, health care and education, just to name a few. To add to this the Competition Commission is constantly unearthing new scandals, scams and price fixing. Bread, construction, telecommunications, etc are some examples. (I am not in any way insinuating there price fixing here.) Prices are inflated all over the place and it is the consumer who takes the brunt of it. So now we are being forced to carry the burden of local glass not willing to deal with competition, not willing to relook at their business model, not willing to pursue more effective, price efficient means of manufacture ... ... rather it is easier to bleat about unfair competition from China. I stand to be corrected, but the insurance industry accounts for +/- 35-40% of all windscreen replacements. What are the rest of the consumers buying? So why is the industry singled out? A huge pity that PG et al couldn't compete fairly rather than looking for protection.
Report Abuse
Added by Johann, 12 Mar 2013
"Unfair" protection isn't what is required, often we become the target of dumping and it is allowed in the name of better consumer prices, this is presently killing our dairy industry and several other agricultural sectors. Mugabe allowed this to take place and destroyed the zim Dollar and the country's economy in total. Larger economies can more readily protect their own production but can we really destroy our own capacity at the risk of becoming totally dependant on imports. South Africa does not have cheap labour, if measured in productivity we have extremely high labour costs, but it is so protected in favour of the employee that every producer should mechanise as rapidly as possible. There is no such thing as a happy failure.
Report Abuse
Added by Alan, 12 Mar 2013
Competition should be welcomed in any free and fair business environment, but because we seem to prefer to legislate people out of poverty in this country rather than using the usual means like education, strict financial management of your balance sheet, cost containment, etc, we will be in this situation for ever. The main problem is that unskilled or low skilled people in this country want to earn the salary of highly skilled workers when they haven't put in the effort to up-skill themselves. Try not burning down your schools, try striking for better service delivery from your schools rather than to nationalise mines and banks, try putting in some constructive effort rather than pointing fingers at other harder working countries. What about teaching proper morals and ethics at home which doesn't cost a cent.
Report Abuse

Comment on this Post

Name*

Email Address*

Comment*

Insurance industry reacts to doubled windscreen tariffs
quick poll
Question

If you had to hazard a guess, when do you reckon the COFI Bill will be signed into law?

Answer