subsidizing oil

[so1970]

why do we subsidize oil companies if they are making a profit?

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

We(ie: US Treasury), does not subsidize the oil industry.

[so1970]

if the U.S. taxpayers aren't subsidizing the oil ,who is?

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

Where did you get the idea the US treasury is subsidizing the oil industry?
What specific subsidies are you referring?

[so1970]

senator clair mccaskil of missouri is proposing to cut oil subsidies

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

senator clair mccaskil of missouri is proposing to cut oil subsidies

What subsidies?

[frep]

I don't think they really get subsidies. I don't know why they keep calling them subsidies. What they really mean is that we should change the tax code so oil companies can't take this credit or this deduction.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

Thanks Frep. I was not busting the OP's chops. What these politicians are referring to are depletion and depreciation allowances/schedules(which legitamately should be looked at), and taxes/royalities, etc, paid to foreign govts.

[so1970]

i dont know how to post the link but yesterday the house republicans voted down the bill to decrease oil subsidies. im not avoiding the question of what subsidies, you can read the article but i dont know how to post it

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

i dont know how to post the link but yesterday the house republicans voted down the bill to decrease oil subsidies. im not avoiding the question of what subsidies, you can read the article but i dont know how to post it

Go to the web site where you read the article. At the top of the browser, where you see either "http" or "www", click and highlight all the text in the box. This is called the URL. Then, right click and select "copy". Come here and paste it.
Hope that is clear.

[so1970]

the article said a similar bill voted down 2 weeks ago would have saved the taxpayers 53 billion dollars taking it away from the top 5 oil companies. does this not mean we are paying the extra 53 billion they are not?

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

the article said a similar bill voted down 2 weeks ago would have saved the taxpayers 53 billion dollars taking it away from the top 5 oil companies. does this not mean we are paying the extra 53 billion they are not?

You need to understand that politicians routinely use the ignorance of the general public to mislead them. The democrats in congress want to remove legitimate business expenses and credits(such as taxes paid to foreign govts) from the oil industry.
Frep and I have listed a few business expenses in prior posts.
The fed govt can also save the taxpayers 100s of billions by removing the mortgage interest and property tax deductions from the tax code.

[so1970]

www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_195764.asp learn something new every day

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

Sol,
That is merely demogaguery.

The oil industry also pays 100s of billions in taxes to literally 100s of jurisdictions. What the politicians also sidestep is the oil industry makes roughly 5 cents on a gallon of gas at the pump, while at the same time, between fed, state and local pump taxes, govts tax anywhere from 30 to about 65 cents per gallon.

Glad to help out with getting links posted!

[so1970]

May 16, 2011 9:37:34 GMT -5 Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ said:

Sol,
That is merely demogaguery. it would be easier on me if you just used the word lie.

[Deleted]

I'm tired of all the subsidies people with kids get from our federal government (oh, I mean tax credits)

[runewell]

May 16, 2011 9:33:19 GMT -5 Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ said:

The fed govt can also save the taxpayers 100s of billions by removing the mortgage interest and property tax deductions from the tax code.

Save? That would be a tremendous tax increase you mean?

[txengineer]

I'm in the Oil & Gas industry, and as far as I know, there is no subsidy that oil companies are receiving. Regular tax deductions for business are applicable, which is no different than any other companies out there.

Sure, there could be additional revenue generated from reducing tax benefits, but the increased cost would just be charged back to consumers.

- corrected typo

[buster]

The problem with the recent democratic bill was they are picking winners and losers with it. The top 5 oil and gas companies are the losers while others in the industry are not affected.

I think getting rid of the ethanol and farm subsidies would go a lot further. Hell, creating ethanol uses as much energy per gallon to create as they get out of it. Talk about a waste of resources.

[Deleted]

May 17, 2011 9:19:05 GMT -5 runewell said:

May 16, 2011 9:33:19 GMT -5 Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ said:

The fed govt can also save the taxpayers 100s of billions by removing the mortgage interest and property tax deductions from the tax code.

Save? That would be a tremendous tax increase you mean?

Yeah, that's the point.

Saying that oil companies get subsidies is like saying that the middle class is getting a subsidy because they take tax deductions (interest, charity, prop taxes).

It's not a subsidy...it's the tax code. And every other company gets the same ones.

[Deleted]

May 18, 2011 1:40:19 GMT -5 buster said:

I think getting rid of the ethanol and farm subsidies would go a lot further. Hell, creating ethanol uses as much energy per gallon to create as they get out of it. Talk about a waste of resources.

It may not be a waste if you expend a resource you have to create a new resource that substitutes a resource you don't have (or are in short supply of).

I'm not saying I'm for ethanol subsidies, just pointing out the bigger picture. I'd like to see ethanol subsidies removed evenly over 5 years.