Taxes and oil...

laker1963

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/05/12/us-hearings-oil-gas.html

Here is a link to a good article about the oil industry and the taxes they pay in the US. If you pay special attention to the line where they mention they have pre tax profits of some $200 BILLION and pay "more then $5 BILLION" directly in taxes last year.
My math was not all that great in school but I do know that this represent around 2.5% in taxes on $200 BILLION dollars. Wish my personal tax rate was set at 2.5 percent, I might be doing almost as well as the oil companies and their "record" profits year after year.

phobicsquirrel

laker1963:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/05/12/us-hearings-oil-gas.html

Here is a link to a good article about the oil industry and the taxes they pay in the US. If you pay special attention to the line where they mention they have pre tax profits of some $200 BILLION and pay "more then $5 BILLION" directly in taxes last year.
My math was not all that great in school but I do know that this represent around 2.5% in taxes on $200 BILLION dollars. Wish my personal tax rate was set at 2.5 percent, I might be doing almost as well as the oil companies and their "record" profits year after year.

You just need to be able to buy lobbyists to push your agenda. 2.5 would be great though.

xmacro

laker1963:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/05/12/us-hearings-oil-gas.html

Here is a link to a good article about the oil industry and the taxes they pay in the US. If you pay special attention to the line where they mention they have pre tax profits of some $200 BILLION and pay "more then $5 BILLION" directly in taxes last year.
My math was not all that great in school but I do know that this represent around 2.5% in taxes on $200 BILLION dollars. Wish my personal tax rate was set at 2.5 percent, I might be doing almost as well as the oil companies and their "record" profits year after year.

Not quite. The $4 billion in "subsidies" are actually accelerated depreciations - they aren't getting a check from taxpayers, they're being allowed to write off their expenses. At any rate, I'll see your opinion article and raise you another: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/05/12/3-myths-oil-gas-industry

You say 2.5%, this article says 40%; compare that with Apple's 24% and GE's 7% (last year GE, who's CEO is in bed with Obama, paid nothing - so it could be 0%).

The real reason gas prices are so damn high? Not only are we not drilling for our own oil, not only are we giving taxpayer checks to Brazil to drill for oil that they then sell to us, not only is Obama closing down potential drilling sites, but because since Bush, the Fed under Bernanke has systematically been weakening the dollar to make exports look good - the less valuable the dollar, the less it can buy, and the more you need to pay to get the same amount - but it makes the export industry look like it's rebounding, which always helps with a re-election campaign. Think about that next time Bernanke gets in front of a tv camera claiming these food and gas prices are "transitory".

But then again, it's so much easier to say "those evil capitalist oil companies are **** us for their own profit" than to actually look at the underlying economics and the thorny issue of currency valuation, the flow of goods across borders, and the role of core inflation vs food inflation, and the role of increasing supply in 2nd and 3rd world countries.

It's always easier to blame a single villain than to look at the true reasons, which are so much more complex than politicians - which you seem more than happy to quote as Gospel truth - make it out to be

laker1963

xmacro:

laker1963:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/05/12/us-hearings-oil-gas.html

Here is a link to a good article about the oil industry and the taxes they pay in the US. If you pay special attention to the line where they mention they have pre tax profits of some $200 BILLION and pay "more then $5 BILLION" directly in taxes last year.
My math was not all that great in school but I do know that this represent around 2.5% in taxes on $200 BILLION dollars. Wish my personal tax rate was set at 2.5 percent, I might be doing almost as well as the oil companies and their "record" profits year after year.

Not quite. The $4 billion in "subsidies" are actually accelerated depreciations - they aren't getting a check from taxpayers, they're being allowed to write off their expenses. At any rate, I'll see your opinion article and raise you another: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/05/12/3-myths-oil-gas-industry

You say 2.5%, this article says 40%; compare that with Apple's 24% and GE's 7% (last year GE, who's CEO is in bed with Obama, paid nothing - so it could be 0%).

Maybe next time you should read the article first macro. I never said anything, I just posted an article. The article made the assertions not me. To be clear, I don't think the actual % of taxes is the issue. The issue is that the oil and gas industries have been making record profits year after year for years now and the price of oil and gas products keep rising. The rise is price cannot be justified by anything other then profit taking, and since those profits are record profits year after year, I think it can safely be said that the oil and gas industry is soaking us. This isn't a political issue Macro, so you can take off your blinders and just comment on what is happening. IT IS NOT A RIGHT OR LEFT ISSUE, you pay as much for your gas as I do. Well actually I pay more and the oil you burn likely comes from Canada, go figure.

Diamondog

xxxxxxxxxxx

xmacro

^ Edited my post; see above for my response to "oil companies are soaking us".

phobicsquirrel

Diamondog:

No Fuc%ing kidding, I think I'm taxed at around 26% this year....OUCH

lucky!!!!

Diamondog

phobicsquirrel:

Diamondog:

No Fuc%ing kidding, I think I'm taxed at around 26% this year....OUCH

lucky!!!!

Thats fed, prov add in another 12% provincially...so close to 40% then add in another 13% HST on just about everything the left over money gets spent on lol like gas...

Krieg

Now, I’m trying to noodle this one out. While I am not one for corporate welfare, I also do not believe that our government should be singling out specific industries, and particularly specific companies. By the way, let me take this moment to point out that if we had the FairTax, none of this tax subsides nonsense would even be an issue. But moving right along …. so exactly what subsidies are we talking about? Can you answer that question? What subsidies are the Democrats demanding that we get rid of? This excellent article in the American Thinker has the breakdown:

Domestic manufacturing tax deduction -- $1.7 B. This is a tax deduction given to every manufacturer in the US. Per CNN, it was "designed to keep factories in the United States." If that deduction were eliminated for oil companies only, it would mean singling out oil companies from all other manufacturers.

Percentage depletion allowance -- $1 B. Any industry can write down a portion of the cost of its capital equipment as part of the cost of doing business. Right now, oil in the ground is treated as capital equipment. Again, this "subsidy" amounts to how the cost of doing business is defined. All companies get it, not just oil companies.

Foreign tax credit -- $850 million. Companies get credit for taxes they pay to other countries. All companies get this "subsidy," not just oil companies. Should a company pay tax on tax? Should only oil companies pay tax on tax?

Intangible drilling costs -- $780 million. According to CNN, "industries get to write off the costs of doing business, but they must take it over the life of an investment. The oil industry gets to take the drilling credit in the first year." Among these four tax "breaks," this smallest one was the only one that treated oil companies differently.

As Randall Hoven, the author of the American Thinker article, points out … the only subsidy that is specific for the oil industry is the last one for intangible drilling costs. So $3.55 billion that the Democrats want to claim are tax credits that are offered to all industries and manufacturers in the United States. But what if the Democrats get their way and raise taxes? Hoven has the figures …
The amount of earnings not collected in taxes is about $4.3 billion per year -- about 0.2% of this year's deficit and ****enough to fund about 10 hours of current US government spending***.

The only tax in which the oil industry seems to get special treatment compared to other industries is intangible drilling costs. The amount of that subsidy? That would be $0.78 billion per year -- enough to fund less than two hours of federal spending in 2011, and not even half the amount we are lending a foreign-owned and state-owned oil company for drilling offshore Brazil.

So what is really going on here? The Democrats know that people are screaming about the cost of gas. Now the fact of the matter here is that while the people are screaming, they’re also doing something about it. They’re consuming less. As they consume less – as the demand decreases – the supply increases. What happens with reduced demand and increased supply? Prices come down, that’s what, and that’s exactly what happened with the wholesale price of gas this week. Give the dealers the chance to replace the more expensive gas in their storage tanks with less expensive fuel and the price comes down at the pump. But before that happens the Democrats want to make sure that this price crisis doesn’t go to waste. So they haul the oil company executives to Capitol Hill and hammer them with their moronic class warfare rhetoric and lies about wanting that money to reduce our deficit.

The problem again is education. The American people (not all, of course) are not well enough educated to see through this political rhetoric for a glimpse of the truth. But then that’s the very purpose of government control of the education process.

laker1963

Krieg:

Now, I’m trying to noodle this one out. While I am not one for corporate welfare, I also do not believe that our government should be singling out specific industries, and particularly specific companies. By the way, let me take this moment to point out that if we had the FairTax, none of this tax subsides nonsense would even be an issue. But moving right along …. so exactly what subsidies are we talking about? Can you answer that question? What subsidies are the Democrats demanding that we get rid of? This excellent article in the American Thinker has the breakdown:

Domestic manufacturing tax deduction -- $1.7 B. This is a tax deduction given to every manufacturer in the US. Per CNN, it was "designed to keep factories in the United States." If that deduction were eliminated for oil companies only, it would mean singling out oil companies from all other manufacturers.

Percentage depletion allowance -- $1 B. Any industry can write down a portion of the cost of its capital equipment as part of the cost of doing business. Right now, oil in the ground is treated as capital equipment. Again, this "subsidy" amounts to how the cost of doing business is defined. All companies get it, not just oil companies.

Foreign tax credit -- $850 million. Companies get credit for taxes they pay to other countries. All companies get this "subsidy," not just oil companies. Should a company pay tax on tax? Should only oil companies pay tax on tax?

Intangible drilling costs -- $780 million. According to CNN, "industries get to write off the costs of doing business, but they must take it over the life of an investment. The oil industry gets to take the drilling credit in the first year." Among these four tax "breaks," this smallest one was the only one that treated oil companies differently.

As Randall Hoven, the author of the American Thinker article, points out … the only subsidy that is specific for the oil industry is the last one for intangible drilling costs. So $3.55 billion that the Democrats want to claim are tax credits that are offered to all industries and manufacturers in the United States. But what if the Democrats get their way and raise taxes? Hoven has the figures …
The amount of earnings not collected in taxes is about $4.3 billion per year -- about 0.2% of this year's deficit and ****enough to fund about 10 hours of current US government spending***.

The only tax in which the oil industry seems to get special treatment compared to other industries is intangible drilling costs. The amount of that subsidy? That would be $0.78 billion per year -- enough to fund less than two hours of federal spending in 2011, and not even half the amount we are lending a foreign-owned and state-owned oil company for drilling offshore Brazil.

So what is really going on here? The Democrats know that people are screaming about the cost of gas. Now the fact of the matter here is that while the people are screaming, they’re also doing something about it. They’re consuming less. As they consume less – as the demand decreases – the supply increases. What happens with reduced demand and increased supply? Prices come down, that’s what, and that’s exactly what happened with the wholesale price of gas this week. Give the dealers the chance to replace the more expensive gas in their storage tanks with less expensive fuel and the price comes down at the pump. But before that happens the Democrats want to make sure that this price crisis doesn’t go to waste. So they haul the oil company executives to Capitol Hill and hammer them with their moronic class warfare rhetoric and lies about wanting that money to reduce our deficit.

The problem again is education. The American people (not all, of course) are not well enough educated to see through this political rhetoric for a glimpse of the truth. But then that’s the very purpose of government control of the education process.

So if one indusrty is in need of help (subsidies, tax breaks) in order to survive or to deliver a must have service... then every company or industry should be entitled to the same? If that is what you meant can you say how you see there being ANY chance of paying down your debt or eliminating the deficit? Not baiting Kreig, I am interested in where folks think the money should come from.

Krieg

laker1963:

Krieg:

Now, I’m trying to noodle this one out. While I am not one for corporate welfare, I also do not believe that our government should be singling out specific industries, and particularly specific companies. By the way, let me take this moment to point out that if we had the FairTax, none of this tax subsides nonsense would even be an issue. But moving right along …. so exactly what subsidies are we talking about? Can you answer that question? What subsidies are the Democrats demanding that we get rid of? This excellent article in the American Thinker has the breakdown:

Domestic manufacturing tax deduction -- $1.7 B. This is a tax deduction given to every manufacturer in the US. Per CNN, it was "designed to keep factories in the United States." If that deduction were eliminated for oil companies only, it would mean singling out oil companies from all other manufacturers.

Percentage depletion allowance -- $1 B. Any industry can write down a portion of the cost of its capital equipment as part of the cost of doing business. Right now, oil in the ground is treated as capital equipment. Again, this "subsidy" amounts to how the cost of doing business is defined. All companies get it, not just oil companies.

Foreign tax credit -- $850 million. Companies get credit for taxes they pay to other countries. All companies get this "subsidy," not just oil companies. Should a company pay tax on tax? Should only oil companies pay tax on tax?

Intangible drilling costs -- $780 million. According to CNN, "industries get to write off the costs of doing business, but they must take it over the life of an investment. The oil industry gets to take the drilling credit in the first year." Among these four tax "breaks," this smallest one was the only one that treated oil companies differently.

As Randall Hoven, the author of the American Thinker article, points out … the only subsidy that is specific for the oil industry is the last one for intangible drilling costs. So $3.55 billion that the Democrats want to claim are tax credits that are offered to all industries and manufacturers in the United States. But what if the Democrats get their way and raise taxes? Hoven has the figures …
The amount of earnings not collected in taxes is about $4.3 billion per year -- about 0.2% of this year's deficit and ****enough to fund about 10 hours of current US government spending***.

The only tax in which the oil industry seems to get special treatment compared to other industries is intangible drilling costs. The amount of that subsidy? That would be $0.78 billion per year -- enough to fund less than two hours of federal spending in 2011, and not even half the amount we are lending a foreign-owned and state-owned oil company for drilling offshore Brazil.

So what is really going on here? The Democrats know that people are screaming about the cost of gas. Now the fact of the matter here is that while the people are screaming, they’re also doing something about it. They’re consuming less. As they consume less – as the demand decreases – the supply increases. What happens with reduced demand and increased supply? Prices come down, that’s what, and that’s exactly what happened with the wholesale price of gas this week. Give the dealers the chance to replace the more expensive gas in their storage tanks with less expensive fuel and the price comes down at the pump. But before that happens the Democrats want to make sure that this price crisis doesn’t go to waste. So they haul the oil company executives to Capitol Hill and hammer them with their moronic class warfare rhetoric and lies about wanting that money to reduce our deficit.

The problem again is education. The American people (not all, of course) are not well enough educated to see through this political rhetoric for a glimpse of the truth. But then that’s the very purpose of government control of the education process.

So if one indusrty is in need of help (subsidies, tax breaks) in order to survive or to deliver a must have service... then every company or industry should be entitled to the same? If that is what you meant can you say how you see there being ANY chance of paying down your debt or eliminating the deficit? Not baiting Kreig, I am interested in where folks think the money should come from.

It is not the Government's responsibility to bailout, subsidize or whatever for private businesses. If the company is having trouble, then they need come up w/ a new or better an existing product or something else, ultimately it's up to them. Free enterprise. If the Govt starts picking out individual industries and starts taxing or whatever...who's to stop them there from starting to pick out specific companies? Or individuals? (which I'm sure they do somehow) Just more baby steps towards a govt controlled economy

laker1963

I think I agree, but what about the subsidies? Do they / should they get them or have them revoked? I think we can agree they don't need them, but I don't know if you are saying the oil companies should get them too if other companies are getting them.
If you are saying NO industry or individual company should get them...what about money for R&D for military projects? I am still not clear on who gets what or if you think none of them should get anything?
Thanks for keeping it civil. I am not engaging in a political discussion here, I am trying to understand your position.

PuroFreak

My whole problem with this is that a tax break isn't a subsidy. Subsidies are where the government gives money from someone else to a company. That I believe shouldn't happen for any company. Not oil companies, car companies, banks, or any other financial institution. A tax break is not a subsidy, its a tax break. I don't disagree with tax breaks, but I do disagree with subsidies. Just my two cents on the issue.

laker1963

PuroFreak:

My whole problem with this is that a tax break isn't a subsidy. Subsidies are where the government gives money from someone else to a company. That I believe shouldn't happen for any company. Not oil companies, car companies, banks, or any other financial institution. A tax break is not a subsidy, its a tax break. I don't disagree with tax breaks, but I do disagree with subsidies. Just my two cents on the issue.

So you would be OK with companies being given a tax break (i.e. they don't pay their taxes) but not a subsidy? Why do you consider money owed to the government which is not collected is not a subsidy? If that money were collected it could be diverted into many other needed programs or just to pay down the debt. Tax money NOT collected cost the population the same as money given directly to a company.

PuroFreak

laker1963:

PuroFreak:

My whole problem with this is that a tax break isn't a subsidy. Subsidies are where the government gives money from someone else to a company. That I believe shouldn't happen for any company. Not oil companies, car companies, banks, or any other financial institution. A tax break is not a subsidy, its a tax break. I don't disagree with tax breaks, but I do disagree with subsidies. Just my two cents on the issue.

So you would be OK with companies being given a tax break (i.e. they don't pay their taxes) but not a subsidy? Why do you consider money owed to the government which is not collected is not a subsidy? If that money were collected it could be diverted into many other needed programs or just to pay down the debt. Tax money NOT collected cost the population the same as money given directly to a company.

Don't misunderstand, I do have a problem with a company paying no taxes at all like GE this last year. But to spur job growth in industries which have outrageous overhead costs, then yes, I'm ok with letting them keep more of their own money. Hell about 50% of the citizens in this country pay no income taxes... Why is that not complained about, but if a company that provides jobs and crucial services to our country gets a tax break people throw a fit? (Not aimed at you Doug, just people in general.)

Krieg

round and round we go...