Turn Off the Oil Subsidy Spigot

[JBeukema]

Three weeks ago, the Senate rejected a proposal to eliminate about $35 billion in tax subsidies to oil companies as millions of gallons of oil spewed into the Gulf of Mexico. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) proposed using these funds to reduce the deficit and fund state energy efficiency programs. The Sanders plan to close these loopholes lost by a vote of 35-61, with every Republican voting against it.

Turn Off the Oil Subsidy Spigot

 

[Sarah G]

Three weeks ago, the Senate rejected a proposal to eliminate about $35 billion in tax subsidies to oil companies as millions of gallons of oil spewed into the Gulf of Mexico. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) proposed using these funds to reduce the deficit and fund state energy efficiency programs. The Sanders plan to close these loopholes lost by a vote of 35-61, with every Republican voting against it.

Turn Off the Oil Subsidy Spigot

I heard about this. I agree with you, get rid of the subsidies. I think I heard it was $45 billion and it's too much to be going to big oil.

 

[editec]

What exactly are they talking about when they say subsidies?

A link to the legislation that was defeated would be useful.

Because without that we really cannot tell what exactly these "sudsides" really are.


This is what CLEANTECH organization has to say about "subsidies"

The exact number is slippery and hard to quantify, given the myriad of programs that can be broadly characterized as subsidies when it comes to fossil fuels. For instance, the U.S. government has generally propped the industry up with:

• Construction bonds at low interest rates or tax-free
• Research-and-development programs at low or no cost
• Assuming the legal risks of exploration and development in a company's stead
• Below-cost loans with lenient repayment conditions
• Income tax breaks, especially featuring obscure provisions in tax laws designed to receive little congressional oversight when they expire
• Sales tax breaks - taxes on petroleum products are lower than average sales tax rates for other goods
• Giving money to international financial institutions (the U.S. has given tens of billions of dollars to the World Bank and U.S. Export-Import Bank to encourage oil production internationally, according to Friends of the Earth)
• The U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve
• Construction and protection of the nation's highway system
• Allowing the industry to pollute - what would oil cost if the industry had to pay to protect its shipments, and clean up its spills? If the environmental impact of burning petroleum were considered a cost? Or if it were held responsible for the particulate matter in people's lungs, in liability similar to that being asserted in the tobacco industry?
• Relaxing the amount of royalties to be paid (more below)

source

Seems to me that at least some of these "sudsidies" aren't susidies at all.

For example are:

"Construction and protection of the nation's highway system"
The U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve

really susidies to the oil companies?

Other things definitely DO seem to a gift to the oil companies, however. Like these:

Construction bonds at low interest rates or tax-free
Research-and-development programs at low or no cost
Assuming the legal risks of exploration and development in a company's stead
Assuming the legal risks of exploration and development in a company's stead

Relaxing the amount of royalties to be paid (more below)

One thing seems obvious to me.

The oil companies aren't empoverished start up companies.

The certainly ought to be able to write off the legitimate costs of exploration and production of oil.

But they certainly make more than enough money to pay the same kind of costs associated with their business that the REST OF US PAY to keep our businesses going.

 

[sparky]

isn't the pentagon BP's biggest customer already?

~S~

 

[topspin]

I agree who needs cheap energy anyway, shit you should all be paying $6 gallon. Oh wait!!

 

[editec]

I agree who needs cheap energy anyway, shit you should all be paying $6 gallon. Oh wait!!

Legitmate expenses oil companies ought to be able to write off.

What are these subsidies that they want to end?

DETAILS, please.

 

[topspin]

ever heard of passed on to the consumer

 

[JBeukema]

What exactly are they talking about when they say subsidies?

A link to the legislation that was defeated would be useful.

Because without that we really cannot tell what exactly these "sudsides" really are.


This is what CLEANTECH organization has to say about "subsidies"

The exact number is slippery and hard to quantify, given the myriad of programs that can be broadly characterized as subsidies when it comes to fossil fuels. For instance, the U.S. government has generally propped the industry up with:

• Construction bonds at low interest rates or tax-free

They have plenty of profits to reinvest in construction

• Assuming the legal risks of exploration and development in a company's stead
• Below-cost loans with lenient repayment conditions
• Income tax breaks, especially featuring obscure provisions in tax laws designed to receive little congressional oversight when they expire
• Sales tax breaks - taxes on petroleum products are lower than average sales tax rates for other goods
• Giving money to international financial institutions (the U.S. has given tens of billions of dollars to the World Bank and U.S. Export-Import Bank to encourage oil production internationally, according to Friends of the Earth)
• The U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve
• Construction and protection of the nation's highway system
• Allowing the industry to pollute - what would oil cost if the industry had to pay to protect its shipments, and clean up its spills? If the environmental impact of burning petroleum were considered a cost? Or if it were held responsible for the particulate matter in people's lungs, in liability similar to that being asserted in the tobacco industry?
• Relaxing the amount of royalties to be paid (more below)

• Research-and-development programs at low or no cost

They have plenty of money for R&D and they don't even bother researching how to fix their fuckups- BP literally spent ZERO DOLLARS on such research over the past 40 years. So we socialize the costs and the risks and privatize the profits?

The certainly ought to be able to write off the legitimate costs of exploration and production of oil.

So the only costs they should have to pay themselves is the money spent on transport? The US taxpayer should pay for them to produce oil we then buy form them on the world market?

But they certainly make more than enough money to pay the same kind of costs associated with their business

They make enough to pay their own way. Two words: record profits. If we pay their costs, then we we get the oil for free and we keep the profits from foreign sales. If we're paying for it, that makes it our company. Either nationalize it and let those who pay for it keep the profits from our damned capital or, better yet, let them pay their own way from their own record profits like it should be in a capitalist system.

 

[JBeukema]

I agree who needs cheap energy anyway, shit you should all be paying $6 gallon. Oh wait!!

Legitmate expenses oil companies ought to be able to write off.
.

So we should pay all their bills for them and then pay them for the products they produce using our money? Socialize the cost and the risk and privatize the profits, eh?

 

[editec]

I agree who needs cheap energy anyway, shit you should all be paying $6 gallon. Oh wait!!

Legitmate expenses oil companies ought to be able to write off.
.

So we should pay all their bills for them and then pay them for the products they produce using our money? Socialize the cost and the risk and privatize the profits, eh?

You are entirely misconstruing what I've written, I think.

The word SUBSIDY here is not clearly defined.

Obviously every business writes off legitimate expenses. I have no problem with that

Subsidies are NOT legitimate expenses.

Subsidies in this case would amount to corporate welfare.

Hence my request for DETAILS about what they mean by sudsidies.

We are being asked to judge something here with virtually NO information.

 

[Mr. H.]

In the U.S., the vast majority of wells that are drilled for oil and natural gas are done so by independent companies- not major international firms. Additionally, there are well over 500,000 "marginal" wells whose contribution to domestic production is significant.

These "subsidies" are standard business deductions and incentives that have been a part of the tax code for decades and they are similar to, if not the same as, the ones used by almost every other industry.

There's a witch hunt on oil and gas right now. It's founded on ignorance and misinformation- the ingredients I see too much of on this message board.

 

[KissMy]

ConocoPhillips crude oil refinery gets $30 million subsidy.

 

[Widdekind]

In the U.S., the vast majority of wells that are drilled for oil and natural gas are done so by independent companies- not major international firms. Additionally, there are well over 500,000 "marginal" wells whose contribution to domestic production is significant.

These "subsidies" are standard business deductions and incentives that have been a part of the tax code for decades and they are similar to, if not the same as, the ones used by almost every other industry.

There's a witch hunt on oil and gas right now. It's founded on ignorance and misinformation- the ingredients I see too much of on this message board.

Archived-Articles: About Those Oil Subsidies

Oil "subsidies" are actually standard corporate tax-deductions, allowing oil-companies to avoid $4B in Taxes per year; Exxon pays $8B in Taxes per quarter. None of the so-called subsidies are actually refunds.

 

[peach174]

Then we should also stop the subsidies to wind turbines which are not working.

 

[Artevelde]

Then we should also stop the subsidies to wind turbines which are not working.

Sounds reasonable.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What exactly are they talking about when they say subsidies?

A link to the legislation that was defeated would be useful.

Because without that we really cannot tell what exactly these "sudsides" really are.


This is what CLEANTECH organization has to say about "subsidies"

The exact number is slippery and hard to quantify, given the myriad of programs that can be broadly characterized as subsidies when it comes to fossil fuels. For instance, the U.S. government has generally propped the industry up with:

• Construction bonds at low interest rates or tax-free
• Research-and-development programs at low or no cost
• Assuming the legal risks of exploration and development in a company's stead
• Below-cost loans with lenient repayment conditions
• Income tax breaks, especially featuring obscure provisions in tax laws designed to receive little congressional oversight when they expire
• Sales tax breaks - taxes on petroleum products are lower than average sales tax rates for other goods
• Giving money to international financial institutions (the U.S. has given tens of billions of dollars to the World Bank and U.S. Export-Import Bank to encourage oil production internationally, according to Friends of the Earth)
• The U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve
• Construction and protection of the nation's highway system
• Allowing the industry to pollute - what would oil cost if the industry had to pay to protect its shipments, and clean up its spills? If the environmental impact of burning petroleum were considered a cost? Or if it were held responsible for the particulate matter in people's lungs, in liability similar to that being asserted in the tobacco industry?
• Relaxing the amount of royalties to be paid (more below)

source

Seems to me that at least some of these "sudsidies" aren't susidies at all.

For example are:

"Construction and protection of the nation's highway system"
The U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve

really susidies to the oil companies?

Other things definitely DO seem to a gift to the oil companies, however. Like these:

Construction bonds at low interest rates or tax-free
Research-and-development programs at low or no cost
Assuming the legal risks of exploration and development in a company's stead
Assuming the legal risks of exploration and development in a company's stead

Relaxing the amount of royalties to be paid (more below)

One thing seems obvious to me.

The oil companies aren't empoverished start up companies.

The certainly ought to be able to write off the legitimate costs of exploration and production of oil.

But they certainly make more than enough money to pay the same kind of costs associated with their business that the REST OF US PAY to keep our businesses going.

Thank you!

so hard to talk to idiots who think a tax deduction or depreciation is now a "Subsidy"

They don't even question it! The Collective Mind just spews out "end Subsidies for Big Oil!"

 

[Mr. H.]

If this shit is such a gravy train, why aren't more people in the oil business?
Go on folks, dig a hole in the ground. It's certain free money.
Cocksukkin hacks.

 

[Big Fitz]

Three weeks ago, the Senate rejected a proposal to eliminate about $35 billion in tax subsidies to oil companies as millions of gallons of oil spewed into the Gulf of Mexico. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) proposed using these funds to reduce the deficit and fund state energy efficiency programs. The Sanders plan to close these loopholes lost by a vote of 35-61, with every Republican voting against it.

Turn Off the Oil Subsidy Spigot

I heard about this. I agree with you, get rid of the subsidies. I think I heard it was $45 billion and it's too much to be going to big oil.

How about a compromise. We cut off the subsidy, and the drilling moratoriums go away.

Hey, it's a win/win!

 

[whitehall]

The democrat majority in the senate must be smarter than they look.

 

[Widdekind]

Labyrinthine Laws, that nobody completely comprehends, manufacture myriad "pretexts" for everybody to yell, at everybody else.

how about a "KISS" Tax-code, "Taxes = (Revenues - Expenses) x 10%" -- shift the decimal one place, write a check to the IRS, and nobody can work-the-system either way.