Direct Testimony of Cornelius Hofman.pdf

BEFORE THE
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

In the Matter of the Application of PacifiCorp )
dba Utah Power & Light Company for ) CASE NO. PAC-E-01-16
Approval of Interim Provisions for the Supply )
of Electrical Service to Monsanto Company. )

Direct Testimony of
CORNELIUS A. HOFMAN

On Behalf of
Monsanto Company

July 18, 2002

PACIFICORP

Before the
Public Utilities Commission
of the State of Idaho

CASE NO. PAC-E-01-16

Table of Contents to the
Direct Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman

Page

1. Introduction ..............................................................................................................................1
2. Summary of Finding.................................................................................................................2
3. Summary of Analysis...............................................................................................................3
4. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................12
Appendix A: Curriculum Vitae of Cornelius A. Hofman
Distribution of Monsanto’s Workers..............................................................................Exhibit 224
Population Within the Region.........................................................................................Exhibit 225
Regional Employment History .......................................................................................Exhibit 226
Average Annual Wage Income Within the Region ........................................................Exhibit 227
Basic and Non-Basic Industries......................................................................................Exhibit 228
Year 2000 Basic Employment and Regional Employment Multiplier...........................Exhibit 229
Year 2000 Basic Income (in thousands) and Regional Income Multiplier.....................Exhibit 230
Monsanto's Regional Employment and Population Impact............................................Exhibit 231
Monsanto's Impact on Regional Income.........................................................................Exhibit 232
Estimated State Income Tax Paid by Monsanto-Dependent Employees, 2001..............Exhibit 233
Estimated Property Tax Paid by Monsanto-Dependent Employees, 2001.....................Exhibit 234
Estimated Sales Tax Paid by Monsanto-Dependent Employees, 2001 ..........................Exhibit 235
Estimated Local Tax Paid by Monsanto and Monsanto-Dependent Employees............Exhibit 236

BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
In the Matter of the Application of PacifiCorp )
dba Utah Power & Light Company for ) Case No. PAC-E-01-16
Approval of Interim Provisions for the Supply )
of Electrical Service to Monsanto Company. ) TESTIMONY OF
________________________________________) CORNELIUS A. HOFMAN

1. INTRODUCTION 8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BRIEFLY INTRODUCE YOURSELF.
A My name is Cornelius A. Hofman. I grew up in Pocatello, Idaho, graduated from
Pocatello High School and then left to attend college in New York, Pennsylvania and
Illinois. I moved back to Idaho after completing my schooling, and I currently reside
with my wife and four children in Star, Idaho.
Q WHAT IS YOUR OCCUPATION AND BY WHOM ARE YOU EMPLOYED?
A I am an economist and the owner of General Economic Consulting, Inc., a professional
economic consulting firm with offices in Star, Idaho.
Q PLEASE DESCRIBE YOUR EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND.
A I received a BA from Cornell University in 1991, an MA from the University of
Pennsylvania in 1992, and an MBA in Economics and Finance from the University of
Chicago in 1994.
Q PLEASE DESCRIBE YOUR PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE.
A After graduating from the University of Chicago, I worked as an economist for Crowe
Chizek & Company, a national accounting and business consulting firm. Since 1995, I
have worked as a consulting economist for General Economic Consulting, Inc. I provide
Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman – Page 1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
a broad range of valuation and small business consulting services to businesses,
governments, law firms, investment groups, and individuals in the context of mergers,
expansions, acquisitions, divestitures, and litigation. I have served as an economic expert
and have rendered expert testimony regarding economic valuation issues, including
economic impact analyses, in hundreds of cases across the country. A more detailed
summary of my experience and qualifications are provided in Appendix A.
Q ON WHOSE BEHALF ARE YOU FILING TESTIMONY IN THIS CASE?
A Monsanto.
Q WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF YOUR TESTIMONY?
A I am providing testimony to describe the economic impact and importance of Monsanto
to the regional economy of southeast Idaho, defined as Bannock, Bear Lake, Caribou and
Franklin counties.
2. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Q PLEASE PROVIDE A BRIEF SUMMARY OF YOUR FINDINGS.
A The economic impacts of Monsanto on the Idaho counties of Bannock, Bear Lake,
Caribou and Franklin are significant. • Monsanto has operated its phosphate plant in Soda Springs, Idaho for 50 years
without a single financial-based employee layoff. • Monsanto directly provides full-time employment to 700 people, 380 of which are
Monsanto employees, listed on Monsanto’s payroll, and 320 of which are full-time
sub-contracted workers. • Monsanto indirectly provides full-time employment to an additional 1,000 people.
Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman – Page 2
• Monsanto jobs pay more than twice as much as the average job within the area. In
2000, the average job in the four-county area paid annual wage income of $24,073.
Excluding bonuses, the average Monsanto job (i.e., the average of the 380 jobs on
Monsanto’s payroll) paid $59,722 in wage income in 2001, with the average salaried
worker earning base wages of $69,314 and the average hourly worker earning base
wages of $54,617.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 • The 1,700 Monsanto-based jobs in the region support a total population of over 3,000
people. • In 2001, Monsanto employed the services of and paid over $61,000,000 to 417 Idaho
vendors. • Monsanto recently completed a multimillion-dollar administration facility in Soda
Springs. • Monsanto has mining leases and adequate raw material resources to continue its
Idaho operations for a minimum of 40 years. • In 2001, Monsanto generated over $180,000,000 of income within the four-county
impact area. • In 2001, Monsanto paid approximately $7,723,000 in non-money earnings to its local
employees. • In 2001, Monsanto and its employees accounted for approximately $7,666,000 of
local public sector revenue. • Monsanto routinely donates cash, services and surplus items to the community. • Monsanto’s Soda Springs facility is more highly regarded by the community than any
chemical plant ever tested by Adams Research.
3. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS 24
25
26
27
28
Q WHAT INFORMATION HAVE YOU REVIEWED IN CONDUCTING YOUR
ANALYSIS?
A I have reviewed the following data and information specific to Monsanto and the regional
economy:
Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman – Page 3
• Monsanto and area payroll information (number of employees, pay structure of
employees, details regarding compensation paid to employees, residence of
employees, employment turnover, etc.).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27 • Monsanto and area payments to local public entities (taxes, licenses and other fees). • Information regarding Monsanto’s Idaho vendors (number of vendors and money
paid to vendors). • Executive summary and cross-tabulated data of the 1997 Soda Springs Area Survey
conducted by Adams Research. • Summary of Monsanto’s operations in Idaho (history, products produced, customers,
competitors, phosphate reserves, etc.). • Information regarding Monsanto’s charitable contributions. • January 2000 public opinion research published by Moore Information. • Literature search results regarding local business and employment conditions. • Idaho tax data published by the Idaho State Tax Commission (personal and corporate
income tax data, property tax data, sales tax data, etc.). • County socioeconomic data published by the U.S. Census, the Idaho Department of
Commerce and the Idaho Department of Labor (populations, households, housing
values, employment, income, taxes, etc.). • Employment and income by industry and source published by the Bureau of
Economic Analysis.
Q HOW HAVE YOU DEFINED THE REGIONAL ECONOMY IN YOUR
ANALYSIS?
A In order to perform an economic impact study, a region of impact must be defined. This
analysis defines the impact region as Bannock, Bear Lake, Caribou, and Franklin
counties. This region was chosen because 93 percent of the workers employed in
Monsanto’s Soda Springs plant live in these counties. Exhibit 224 [CAH-1] summarizes
the geographical distribution of Monsanto workers.
Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman – Page 4

Q BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE LABOR ECONOMY WITHIN THE REGION. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
A According to the U.S. Census, 100,631 people were living in the region in 2000 (Exhibit
225 [CAH-2]). Approximately 55,000 people are employed within the region (Exhibit
226 [CAH-3]) with an average annual wage income of $24,073 in 2000 (Exhibit 227
[CAH-4]).
Q HOW DO MONSANTO JOBS COMPARE WITH THE OTHER JOBS IN THE
REGION?
A Monsanto jobs pay more than twice as much as the average job within the area. More
specifically, the average job in the four-county area paid an annual wage income of
$24,073 in 2000. Excluding bonuses, the average Monsanto job (i.e., the average of the
380 jobs on Monsanto’s payroll) paid $59,722 in wage income in 2001, with the average
salaried worker earning base wages of $69,314 and the average hourly worker earning
base wages of $54,617. Furthermore, Monsanto workers also receive significant non-
money compensation including health insurance, dental insurance, vision care benefits,
retirement and savings benefits, life insurance, short-term and long-term disability
insurance, tuition reimbursement, health club discounts, stock options, a common stock
purchase plan and miscellaneous counseling services.
Q WHY DO MONSANTO JOBS PAY SO MUCH MORE THAN THE AVERAGE
JOB WITHIN THE REGION?
A Monsanto jobs require a high level of training and/or education, and Monsanto
employees consist of highly skilled and trained technicians, journeymen and
professionals. Many of Monsanto’s salaried employees consist of engineers, draftsmen,
Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman – Page 5

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
chemists, industrial hygienists, accountants and other such professionals. Simply put,
Monsanto pays market wage rates in order to attract the type and quality of labor it needs
to successfully operate its Soda Springs facility.
Q PLEASE DESCRIBE THE DIRECT IMPACTS A BUSINESS HAS ON A LOCAL
ECONOMY.
A When a new business locates in a community or an existing business expands, there are
both direct and indirect effects on the local economy. The direct effects include the wages
and salaries paid to the employees of the business and the money paid to local vendors
for goods and services.
Q PLEASE DESCRIBE THE INDIRECT IMPACTS A BUSINESS HAS ON A
LOCAL ECONOMY.
A Indirect effects of a business arise because payments made to the company’s workers and
vendors increase the community’s overall income. For example, when workers receive
their wages, they use this income to buy goods outside the local market (travel, catalog
orders, non-local investments, etc.) and to buy goods and services within the local market
(e.g., haircuts, groceries, videos, etc.). The money workers spend on goods and services
outside the area leak to outside economies and are lost to the local economy. However, a
portion of the money workers spend on local goods and services stays within the local
economy and becomes income to the owners and workers of other local businesses. In
short, an increase in overall local income causes economic expansion because one
person’s expenditures become another person’s income. However, because at each step
Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman – Page 6

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
of the spending process some income is either saved or spent outside the region, the local
expansion process is finite.
Q WHAT DIRECT IMPACTS DOES MONSANTO HAVE ON THE REGIONAL
ECONOMY?
A Monsanto provides direct benefits to the region by providing full-time employment to
700 people and by buying goods and services from 417 Idaho vendors. In 2001,
Monsanto paid over $28,000,000 in money earnings to the employees on its payroll and
made payments in excess of $61,000,000 to its Idaho vendors.
Q DOES MONSANTO HAVE ANY INDIRECT IMPACTS ON THE REGIONAL
ECONOMY?
A Yes. While Monsanto currently provides direct full-time employment and income to 700
workers, there are many other people within the region whose employment and income
depend indirectly on Monsanto and its employees (e.g., barbers, grocers, auto mechanics,
carpenters, etc.).
Q HOW DO YOU MEASURE MONSANTO’S INDIRECT IMPACTS?
A This analysis quantifies Monsanto’s indirect economic impacts using regional
employment and income multipliers that were constructed using economic-base analysis.
Q WHAT IS ECONOMIC-BASE ANALYSIS?
A Economic-base analysis is a well-established and accepted methodology for calculating
regional employment and income multipliers. Businesses within basic industries export
goods or otherwise bring money into the local economy from outside sources; basic
Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman – Page 7

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
businesses rely on larger regional or national markets. Monsanto is a basic-industry
business because it pays its local employees and makes purchases of local goods and
services with “outside” income it receives from the export of elemental phosphate.
Businesses within the non-basic sector support the activities of and are dependent on the
existence of businesses within the basic industries; non-basic businesses rely on the local
market for their income. Economic-base analysis compares basic employment and
income in the region with non-basic employment and income in the region to calculate
multipliers that describe the number of jobs and the amount of income that are dependent
on the existence of the basic sector (Exhibit 228 [CAH- 5], Exhibit 229 [CAH-6] and
Exhibit 230 [CAH-7]).
Q WHAT ARE EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME MULTIPLIERS?
A A regional employment multiplier is defined as the ratio of total regional employment to
basic regional employment, and a regional income multiplier is defined as the ratio of
total regional income to basic regional income. The interpretation is not difficult. For
example, an employment multiplier of 2.5 means that each job in the basic sector creates
1.5 additional jobs in the non-basic sector. Similarly, an income multiplier of 2.5 means
that regional income increases $1.50 for each dollar Monsanto pays to its regional
employees or vendors.
Q WHAT MULTIPLIERS DO YOU USE TO CALCULATE THE INDIRECT
ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF MONSANTO?
Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman – Page 8

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
A Based on the regional employment and income data of the Bureau of Economic Analysis,
this analysis uses an employment multiplier of 2.43 and an income multiplier of 2.02
(Exhibit 229 [CAH-6] and Exhibit 230 [CAH-7]).
Q WHAT IS MONSANTO’S INDIRECT IMPACT ON REGIONIAL
EMPLOYMENT?
A Multiplying the employment multiplier (2.43) by the number of people directly employed
at Monsanto (700) yields a total employment impact of 1,701 and an indirect employment
impact of 1,001 (Exhibit 231 [CAH-8]). In other words, in addition to 700 direct jobs,
Monsanto’s presence supports approximately 1,000 other jobs within the region.
Q WHAT IS MONSANTO’S INDIRECT IMPACT ON REGIONIAL INCOME?
A Multiplying the income multiplier (2.02) by the money income paid directly to
Monsanto’s local employees and vendors ($89,000,000) yields an annual total impact of
$180,000,000 and an annual indirect impact of $91,000,000 (Exhibit 232 [CAH-9]).
Q WHAT OTHER BENEFITS DOES MONSANTO PROVIDE TO THE REGIONAL
ECONOMY?
A Monsanto has a significant impact on local tax revenue, and it routinely donates cash,
services and surplus items to the community. Furthermore, without a single financial-
based layoff, Monsanto has been a stable source of employment and income for the
community for over 50 years.
Q EXPLAIN MONSANTO’S IMPACT ON LOCAL TAXES.
Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman – Page 9

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
A Monsanto and Monsanto employees contribute a great deal to the region through the
payment of taxes. Because the average wage of Monsanto employees is twice the average
wage of workers within the region, Monsanto employees supply substantially more tax
dollars to the region and state than does the region’s average worker. Monsanto and
Monsanto-dependent workers contribute revenue to the state and local government
through income, property, and sales taxes. Monsanto also makes additional regional
contributions to the public sector through licenses, permits and land use fees and
royalties. In 2001, Monsanto paid approximately $2,655,000 in local licenses, fees and
taxes. State income taxes, property taxes and sales taxes paid by Monsanto-dependent
workers in 2001 are estimated at $1.8 million (Exhibit 233 [CAH-10]), $1.2 million
(Exhibit 234 [CAH-11]), and $2.0 million (Exhibit 235 [CAH-12]), respectively. Total
local taxes paid in 2001 by Monsanto and Monsanto-dependent employees are estimated
at $7.7 million (Exhibit 236 [CAH-13]).
Q AS IDAHO HAS SOUGHT TO RECOVER FROM THE RECENT ECONOMIC
RECESSION, GOVERNOR DIRK KEMPTHORNE HAS REPEATEDLY
EMPHASIZED THE IMPORTANCE OF RETAINING IDAHO JOBS VIS-À-VIS
ATTRACTING NEW JOBS. WHY IS RETAINING JOBS SO IMPORTANT TO
AN ECONOMY?
A Retaining jobs is an efficient use of both an economy’s and a company’s existing
resources and invested capital, and, all else being equal, retaining jobs is more
economical than trying to attract new ones. While the creation of new jobs is good for a
local economy, attracting new jobs is difficult, competitive and costly. In particular,
when a community attempts to attract new jobs to the area, it is forced to deal with an
Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman – Page 10

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
enormous amount of uncertainty by having to compete with other countries, states, and
cities for the same jobs. Preserving existing employment, on the other hand, creates
economic stability, predictability and consumer confidence that can serve to maintain and
enhance an economy’s liquidity.
Q HAS THERE BEEN A RECENT LOSS OF BASIC INDUSTRY JOBS WITHIN
THE REGION?
A Yes. For example, 300 direct employees and 466 subcontractor employees lost
employment when the Astaris plant west of Pocatello closed last December. Agrium
Conda Phosphate Operations recently laid-off 20 workers and has announced plans to
lay-off an additional 25 workers by the beginning of next year. The J.R. Simplot Co.
recently cut 15 salaried employees and will lay-off 70 hourly workers in August due to its
decision to close its ammonia production facility and otherwise reorganize its operations.
Less than 3 years ago in 1999, Chemical Lime Company in Bancroft cut 19 local jobs
when it chose to utilize lime deposits elsewhere in the United States. Also in 1999,
approximately 80 workers at Kerr-McGee lost their employment when the company shut
down its vanadium operations. Furthermore, these recent jobs cuts are in addition to the
hundreds of jobs that have been eliminated over the past 3 to 4 years by Union Pacific
Railroad at its Pocatello depot and the loss of almost 100 jobs due to the closure of J.R.
Simplot Co.’s office building in Chubbuck in 2000.
Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman – Page 11

Q DOES THE CURRENT STATUS OF THE LOCAL LABOR ECONOMY AFFECT
YOUR OPINIONS REGARDING THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF
MONSANTO?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
A As my analysis shows, the loss of Monsanto would cause significant negative impacts to
the region’s economy at any point in time. If Monsanto were to abandon its operations in
Idaho, the Monsanto-based jobs and income described in my analysis would be lost and
the amount of regional income would decrease accordingly. And because of fixed
expenses, at some point decreases in the revenues of local businesses will turn profits to
losses, causing businesses to shut down. Therefore, given that recent layoffs and
cutbacks associated with relatively high paying jobs within the basic sector have already
impacted the level of regional income, the loss of Monsanto right now could be
especially damaging to the region’s economy.
4. CONCLUSIONS 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Q WHAT ARE YOUR CONCLUSIONS?
A Monsanto plays a major role in the region’s economy. Monsanto’s employment record
provides an unparalleled level of economic stability to the region. Its presence in
Southeast Idaho provides a stable source of economic security that is essential to the
liquidity of the region’s market. Monsanto’s high paying jobs provide secondary income
and employment within the region that would be difficult, if not impossible, to replace.
While trying to attract new business to the region is important, it is even more important
not to neglect existing businesses. With infrastructure already in place, it is much easier
Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman – Page 12

and more economical to keep a business in the region than it is to attract new businesses
to the region. Additional conclusions are:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
• Monsanto has operated its phosphate plant in Soda Springs, Idaho for 50 years
without a single financial-based employee layoff. Monsanto is a stable and
significant support to the region’s economy. • Monsanto jobs pay more than twice as much as the average job within the area.
Monsanto employment brings income and public support to the local economy that is
well above average. • Monsanto gives rise to 1,700 jobs in the region, supporting a total population of over
3,000 people. • Monsanto generates over $180,000,000 of regional income each year. • Monsanto provides approximately $7,700,000 in non-money earnings to its local
employees each year. • Monsanto and its employees account for more than $7,600,000 of local public sector
revenue each year. • Monsanto’s impact on the local economy extends well beyond one year of operations.
Monsanto has been operating in Soda Springs for 50 years, and with long-term
mining leases, a new administration facility and adequate raw material resources,
Monsanto is positioned to continue its Idaho operations for at least another 40 years. • Assuming Monsanto continues to operate its Soda Springs facility for even another 10
to 30 years, the present value1 of its impact on the area’s income, tax revenue and
employee benefits ranges from $1.3 to $1.9 billion.
Q DOES THIS CONCLUDE YOUR TESTIMONY?
A Yes.

1 Present values are calculating using a Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) risk adjusted
discount rate of 13.89%. This CAPM expected rate of return is based on a current long-term
(20-year) risk free rate of 4.21 percent, an equity beta for Monsanto of 0.75, a market equity risk
premium of 12.11 percent, and a size premium of 0.6 percent.
Testimony of Cornelius A. Hofman – Page 13
Appendix A
Appendix A: Curriculum Vitae of Cornelius A. Hofman

NAME: Cornelius A. Hofman

EDUCATION: University of Chicago
MBA, Economics and Finance
Chicago, IL
1994

University of Pennsylvania
MA, Japanese Studies
Philadelphia, PA
1992

Cornell University
BA, Asian Studies, Magna Cum Laude
Ithaca, NY
1991

RELATED
EXPERIENCE:
General Economic Consulting, Inc. (GEC)
President

Provide a broad range of valuation and small business consulting
services to businesses, governments, law firms, investment
groups, and individuals in the context of mergers, expansions,
acquisitions, divestitures, and litigation. Render expert testimony
regarding economic damages and valuation issues. Valuation
analyses include: present value analyses of lost wages, business
valuations, preferred stock valuations, lost profit calculations.
Litigation engagements include: business interruption, patent
infringement, personal injury, wrongful death, wrongful
discharge, divorce, breach of contract, franchise disputes.

1995 to present

Appendix A

RELATED
EXPERIENCE:
(Continued)
Crowe, Chizek & Company
Economist, Special Projects Group

Engaged in a wide variety of projects that require an advanced,
working knowledge in economics, finance, accounting, and
statistics. Provided consulting services relating to business
valuations, mergers and acquisitions, company divestitures,
economic damage disputes, stock option valuations, preferred
stock valuations. Rendered expert testimony in the context of
personal injury and wrongful death litigation.

1993 - 1995

General Economic Consulting Company (GEC)
Analyst

Performed economic research and computer modeling.

1991 - 1993

HONORS AND
AWARDS:
Graduated Magna Cum Laude
Cornell University

Cornell Tradition Award
Cornell University

Foreign Language and Area Studies Award
University of Pennsylvania

Appendix A

SERVICE
ACTIVITIES:
Director of Litigation Case Studies
Stanford Journal of Law, Business & Finance
1994 to 2000

Editor
The Economic Counselor
1997 to present

Conference Discussant, “Issues in Forensic Economics”
National Association of Forensic Economics/Midwest Economics
Association
1995

Conference Discussant, “Forecasting Wages”
National Social Science Association
1995

Conference Discussant, “Firm and Organizational Behavior”
Western Economic Association
1996

Conference Chairperson, “Macroeconomic Theory”
International Atlantic Economic Society
1997

Conference Chairperson, “Career Development and Labor-
Management Relations”
International Atlantic Economic Society
1998

Conference Discussant, “Topics in Labor: Employment
Discrimination Against Disabled Workers”
Midwest Economics Association
2000

Conference Chairperson, “Productivity”
Midwest Economics Association
2000

Appendix A

PROFESSIONAL
ASSOCIATIONS:
American Economics Association

National Association of Forensic Economics

National Association for Business Economists

National Social Science Association

Midwest Economics Association

Western Economic Association

International Atlantic Economic Society

LECTURES: “Calculating Economic Loss in the Legal Context: A
Comparison Between Japan and the United States” Visiting
lecturer at the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business
in Chicago, IL.

“Tort Law and the Recoverability of Economic Damages”
Visiting lecturer at the University of Notre Dame Law School in
South Bend, IN.

“Forensic Economics: The Role of the Economic Expert”
Visiting lecturer at the University of San Diego School of Law in
San Diego, CA.

“The Present Value of Projected Economic Losses: What
Attorneys Should Know About Growing and Discounting”
Visiting lecturer at Arizona State University Law School in
Tempe, AZ.

“Valuing Household Services” Visiting lecturer at the University
of Utah College of Social and Behavioral Sciences in Salt Lake
City, UT.

Appendix A

LECTURES:
(Continued)
Contemporary Issues in Labor Economics, Course lecturer at
Idaho State University Department of Economics in Pocatello, ID.

“Applied Economics” Visiting lecturer at Ricks College
Department of Economics in Rexburg, ID.

Principles in Economics, Course lecturer at Idaho State
University Department of Economics in Pocatello, ID.

“Feasibility Analysis: A Multidiscipline Process” Visiting
lecturer at the Gigot Center for Entrepreneurial Studies at Notre
Dame College of Business Administration in South Bend, IN.

“Entrepreneurial Management: Growing a Multigenerational
Family Business” Yale University, Yale Entrepreneurial Society
in New Haven, CT.

“Expanding a Company Through a Small Business Initial Public
Offering” Cornell University, Cornell Entrepreneur Organization
in Ithaca, NY.

PUBLICATIONS /
PRESENTATIONS:
with Cornelius A. Hofman and Gary R. Wells, “The Impact of
Education on the Value of Human Capital” Social Science
Perspectives Journal April, 1994.

“Risk Free Rates” in Litigation Services Handbook, 2nd edition,
edited by Roman L. Weil, Michael J. Wagner, and Peter B. Frank
(New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1995).

“Treasury Yields, Maturity Premiums and Inflation: Valuing
Future Cash Flows” Social Science Perspectives Journal April,
1995.

“Technology and the Economist: What to Expect from an
Economic Expert Witness” Idaho Inns of Court in Twin Falls, ID
(1996).

Appendix A

PUBLICATIONS /
PRESENTATIONS:
(Continued)
with Charles M. Linke, “Estimating Personal Consumption: A
Regression Analysis of BLS Consumer Expenditure Data”
Western Economic Association Annual Convention in San
Francisco, CA (1996).

with Cornelius A. Hofman, “The Variation in Effective Tax Rates
Across Household Income and Household Size” American
Economic Association Annual Convention in New Orleans, LA
(1997).

“Interest Rates on Government Bonds of Different
Denominations” Western Economic Association Annual
Convention in Seattle, WA (1997).

“Volume Discounted Yield Curves” The Valuation Examiner
June/July 1997.

“Measuring Beta and Risk Premium in CAPM: Selecting a
Financial Market” International Atlantic Economic Conference
in Philadelphia, PA (1997).

“Market Portfolio Selection when Using the Capital Asset Pricing
Model: A Summary” International Advances in Economic
Research Vol 4, No. 2 (May 1998).

“Risk Adjusted Cost of Capital in a Non-Diversified Portfolio:
Quantifying the Key Person Risk Premium” International
Atlantic Economic Conference in Boston, MA (1998).

“Forensic Economics” Fall Conference of the American Board of
Vocational Experts in Chicago, IL (1998).

“Contract Valuation Analysis” Idaho State University Economics
Club in Pocatello, ID (1999).

“Interpreting Fluctuations in Worker Populations Across Age and
Occupation” Midwest Economics Association Conference in
Chicago, IL (2000).

“Economic Analysis: Causation and Economic Damages”
Difficult Issues for Business Lawyers – Presented by the Business
& Corporate Law Section of the Idaho State Bar Association in
Boise, ID (2002).