Green Scam of the Week

December 31, 2011 that is for ethanol production.

Without ethanol demand, the price of corn would have dropped substantially except for the increased cost of production due to rising fuel costs. The corn subsidies still exist though. Those go mostly to ADM, Cargill, Conagra, and other large corporations. I haven't heard Obama/Reid/Pelosi complaining about agricultural subsidies, which far outstrip the oil subsidies and employ less than 10% of the workforce. I wonder why not?


The ethanol subsidy was $6Billion annually. Originally Posted by blue3122

My bad then, least something was eliminated.

Another "near miss".

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archive...-taxpayers.php

LOL, their own parent company wouldn't give them money, but Chu was willing to give them 2.1 billion of our taxpayer dollars. Sound about right.

I'm not generally for tax breaks for the oil companies, but it is ten times better than wasting our taxpayers dollars with loans on this green crap that doesn't work and is not viable as a business model. Originally Posted by nwarounder

there are no tax breaks for big oil ...there are the same deductions every business or manufacturer gets

they get to write off their expenses and pay taxes on their net. at the end of time every dollar of expense is deducted against every dollar of income, nothing more nothing less, other than one thing and one thing only, the domestic activities production deduction..all manufacturers including contractors etc get this. it is based on domestic activity only, not on anything produced overseas. the domestic productions activities deduction is based on things produced here when people are hired here and wages are paid here. it is designed to increase employment in the united states.

its funny but big oil isnt subsidized by the government, big oil subsidizes the government.

its totally ridiculous the fog that surrounds this.

why the dems and obama talk in mysterious snippets of vitriol against oil companies is based on one thing..they hate the oil industry, the reasons may be varied and they seem to be viscerally felt (emotionally, not in any rational way). obama is without any deeming social value on this, among many other things. he talks about subsidies to oil companies in the tax code as if big oil is special in the application of the tax law when they arent.

yeah, if the so-called "green" energy made sense, free enterprise would have gone there long ago. do we want to give money to foreign despots? no! all the more reason to promote domestic production. the demonization is galling, anti-american, non-sensical, derives from some place hate and envy and blind wrath are stored and is self defeating.

the term "spending in the tax code" is laughable, its some made up verbiage that makes sense only if you buy into the idea everything is owned by the government and we just allow you to keep some of it.

no tax breaks for oil companies?


hahahahahahahahahahaha


and those dems you mention and their mantra, does the former president count??

there are no tax breaks for big oil ...there are the same deductions every business or manufacturer gets

they get to write off their expenses and pay taxes on their net. at the end of time every dollar of expense is deducted against every dollar of income, nothing more nothing less, other than one thing and one thing only, the domestic activities production deduction..all manufacturers including contractors etc get this. Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

That's entirely false, if you look at the tax breaks in the IRS code and relate them to what Obama was trying to repeal, you will see they do get additional breaks that do not relate to other industries. Keep in mind, I am for big oil and any big company, I'm just opposed to the idea congress is smart enough to decide who should get a tax break, when and why.

Limits or repeals certain tax benefits for major integrated oil companies (defined as companies with annual gross receipts over $1 billion and an average daily worldwide production of crude oil of at least 500,000 barrels), including: (1) the foreign tax credit; (2) the tax deduction for income attributable to oil, natural gas, or primary products thereof; (3) the tax deduction for intangible drilling and development costs; (4) the percentage depletion allowance for oil and gas wells; (5) the tax deduction for qualified tertiary injectant expenses. Amends the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to repeal royalty relief (suspension of royalties) for: (1) natural gas production from deep wells in shallow waters of the Gulf of Mexico; and (2) deep water oil and gas production in the Western and Central Planning Area of the Gulf (including the portion of the Eastern Planning Area encompassing whole lease blocks lying west of 87 degrees, 30 minutes west longitude).

That's entirely false, if you look at the tax breaks in the IRS code and relate them to what Obama was trying to repeal, you will see they do get additional breaks that do not relate to other industries. Keep in mind, I am for big oil and any big company, I'm just opposed to the idea congress is smart enough to decide who should get a tax break, when and why.

Limits or repeals certain tax benefits for major integrated oil companies (defined as companies with annual gross receipts over $1 billion and an average daily worldwide production of crude oil of at least 500,000 barrels), including: (1) the foreign tax credit; (2) the tax deduction for income attributable to oil, natural gas, or primary products thereof; (3) the tax deduction for intangible drilling and development costs; (4) the percentage depletion allowance for oil and gas wells; (5) the tax deduction for qualified tertiary injectant expenses. Amends the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to repeal royalty relief (suspension of royalties) for: (1) natural gas production from deep wells in shallow waters of the Gulf of Mexico; and (2) deep water oil and gas production in the Western and Central Planning Area of the Gulf (including the portion of the Eastern Planning Area encompassing whole lease blocks lying west of 87 degrees, 30 minutes west longitude). Originally Posted by nwarounder

the oil companies create thousands upon thousands of jobs, pay billions in taxes, their employees pay billions more, compete against government owned companies at great disadvantage the world over, have done more to help america become the greatest economic power in the world than just about any other industry you can think of, and obama and related idiots constantly attack them.

heres what you need to keep in mind, there is not one deduction unless money is spent, there is no deduction EVER in excess of money spent. the whole thing is a matter of timing. when you can deduct something.

And here is the other side of the coin, did you ever think about the fact that for every tax deduction you get, because you spent the money, someone else has income equal to your deduction? so where is the loss to the government? nowhere actually, except if you can't write off your expenses and they can still tax the person you paid. its a matter of timing. if you spend money and thereby create taxable income to the person you pay and at the same time you cant offset your income by that expense? well hell yeah the government loves that. the whole thing is about timing

except two things:

a. domestic activities deduction- which every company that makes something gets, if done domestically

b. statutory depletion, which NOT one big oil company gets.

1. FOREGN TAX CREDIT
every one gets that. you get it if you pay foreign tax. hell if you took a job in saudia arabia the first $90,000 you make is tax free.

if you have dividend income and they take out foreign tax because it was a foreign company? (which they do all the time) you get that as a credit on your Form 1040

why is that associated as a subsidy to oil when everyone gets that?

countries have entered into tax treaties so that their citizens are protected, and if the foreign country is part of the treaty and you pay tax there you get to offset the income tax here by that tax within certain parameters.

BIG HOLLYWOOD GETS THAT


2. Deduction attributable to oil and gas production?

unless its operating expenses,
the only thing i can think of here is depletion, statutory, which they DO NOT GET

so they can deduct operating expenses????

what are you talking about here, i know you just went somewhere and copied some boiler plate so asking you what this is is sort of unfair. but what is it?

BIG HOLLYWOOD GETS TO WRITE OFF THEIR OPERATING EXPENSES

3. IDC

idc is just money you spent on wells . you cannot go get it..you cant move it. you cant see it or touch it. its money spent and gone


so you get to deduct expenses? thats rich. IDC are costs incurred to drill wells, some wells are successful, many arent. IDC is the drilling costs on sucessful ones. it does not include the equipment used in drilling or equipment placed on the well once producing, those are tangible costs.

mining companies get the same thing for digging holes. they can deduct their mining expenses.

did you know that alternative minimum tax can be due on the right to deduct money you spent drilling? nah you didnt

did you know that integrated oil companies, just for the privilege of deducting their expenses in this area have to reduce their expenses by 30% and write that off over 60 months

did you know that IDC, intangible expenses, cannot be deducted on wells drilled outside the u.s.? nah you didnt. they are written off over ten years.

did you know that BIG HOLLYWOOD, they can write off the first $15,000,000 spent on making a movie, $20,000,000 if the movie is made in a depressed area? nah you didnt. thats per movie.

SO WHY PICK ON OIL COMPANIES? the answer is politics

4. Percentage Depletion Allowance????

thats laughable,. If you produce over 1,000 barrels of oil or its equivalent per day you DO NOT GET percentage depletion. did you know that? nah you didnt.

i produce almost that, thats 250 barrels of oil for 4 wells. or 50 barrels a day for 200 wells.

if your gross production to your interest is 1000 barrels a day at maybe $90 (which is about what you get) thats $90,000 per day. times 365 days thats $32,850,000 in a year. does exxon have more revenue in a year than $32 million? what the hell do you think?

exxon would laugh. im laughing. some independent producers of oil, very very very small independents get that, along with royalty owners only. even the bigger royalty owners cant get that.

5. tertiary production?

do you even have a clue want that is? nah you dont

primary is where the formation has pressure that allows the oil or gas to seep to the well bore in an effort to equalize the pressure. that allows you to get it up out of the ground.

secondary is where you have to go to extreme lengths to create a formational drive so the fluids can be pumped to the surface. you have to inject water or gas or some other drive, i have seen leases where they were fire flooded, you ignite the oil and gas at one end of the field to attempt to create pressure to drive the fluid to the production well bores.

tertiary? those are highly difficult and extreme methods of attempting to produce what never could be produced before. highly costly, high risk, replete with failure. so theres a tax deduction for that? so what? you have spent the money, i'd hope you could deduct it , you spent it. the government gets theirs if theres money to be made, and they wouldnt get a dime otherwise.

Additional

the royalty suspension?

i remember something abt that, but not a lot

it had something to do with, if you take the risk in this wildcat high risk deep water block, we will not charge you a royalty for a period of time.

has nothing to do with tax policy

well rounder, a valid argument anchored by factual data doesnt carry any weight against an opinion.

personally, I'm all for letting oil companies take tax deductions for depleating a well.
eos

heres what you need to keep in mind, there is not one deduction unless money is spent, there is no deduction EVER in excess of money spent. the whole thing is a matter of timing. when you can deduct something.

except two things:

1. domestic activities deduction- which every company that makes something gets, if done domestically

2. statutory depletion, which NOT one big oil company gets.

1. FOREGN TAX CREDIT
every one gets that. you get it if you pay foreign tax

2. Deduction attributalbe to oil and gas production?

the only thing i can think of here is depletion, statutory, which they DO NOT GET

what are you talking about here, i know you just went somewhere and copeied some boiler plate so asking you what this is is sort of unfair. but what is it?

3. IDC

idc is just money you spent on wells . you cannot go get it..you cant move it. you cant see it or touch it. its money spent and gone


so you get to deduct expenses? thats rich. IDC are costs incurred to drill wells, some wells are successful, many arent. IDC is the drilling costs on sucessful ones. it does not include the equipment used in drilling or equipment placed on the well once producing, those are tangible costs.

mining companies get the same thing for digging holes. they can deduct their mining expenses.

did you know that alternative minimum tax can be due on the right to deduct money you spent drilling? nah you didnt

did you know that intergrated oil companies, just for the privilege of deducting their expenses in this area have to reduce their expenses by 30% and write that off over 60 months

did you know that IDC, intangible expenses, cannot be deducted on wells drilled outside the u.s.? nah you didnt. they are written off over ten years.

did you know that BIG HOLLYWOOD, they can write off the first $15,000,000 spent on making a movie, $20,000,000 if the movie is made in a depressed area? nah you didnt. thats per movie.

SO WHY PICK ON OIL COMPANIES? the answer is politics

4. Percentage Depletion Allowance????

thats laughable,. If you produce over 1,000 barrels of oil or its equivalent per day you DO NOT GET percentage depletion. did you know that? nah you didnt.

i produce almost that, thats 250 barrels of oil for 4 wells. or 50 barrels a day for 200 wells.

if your gross revenue is 1000 barrels a day at maybe $90 (which is about what you get) thats $90,000 per day. times 365 days thats $32,850,000 in a year. does exxon have more revenue in a year than $32 million? what the hell do you think?

exxon would laugh. im laughing. some independent producers of oil, very very very small independents get that, along with royalty owners only. even the bigger royalty owners cant get that.

5. tertiary production?

do you even have a clue want that is? nah you dont

primary is where the formation has pressure that allows the oil or gas to seep to the well bore in an effort to equalize the pressure. that allows you to get it up out of the ground.

secondary is where you have to go to extreme lengths to create a formational drive so the fluids can be pumped to the surface. you have to inject water or gas or some other drive, i have seen leases where they were fire flooded, you ignite the oil and gas at one end of the field to attempt to create pressure to drive the fluid to the production well bores.

tertiary? those are highly difficult and extreme methods of attempting to produce what never could be produced before. highly costly, high risk, repete with failure. so theres a tax deduction for that? so what. the government gets theirs if theres money to be made, and they wouldnt get a dime otherwise.

Additional

the royalty suspension?

i remember something abt that, but not a lot

it had something to do with, if you take the risk in this wildcat high risk deep water block, we will not charge you a royalty for a period of time.

has nothing to do with tax policy Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

You stated they get no additional tax breaks, when they do, by your own admission. That's all I was saying. Your right, I have no clue about the oil or mining industry and I never want to be involved with it. As I said before, I'm for eliminating all tax breaks for every company because congress uses deductions to pay their campaign donors back, I'm not just picking on the oil industry. I got the info from govtracks and reference to Senate bill 2204 that was introduced March 19, 2012. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s2204

well rounder, a valid argument anchored by factual data doesnt carry any weight against an opinion.

personally, I'm all for letting oil companies take tax deductions for depleating a well.
eos Originally Posted by CJ7

Admittedly, I can't argue the facts of the oil industry, except that Obama proclaimed that this bill would end big oil tax breaks. Wouldn't be the first time he lied though, I was simply going off what he and the congress attempted to do in an effort to punish big oil? But at the same time, If they do not help, why have the section in the code in the first place?

You stated they get no additional tax breaks, when they do, by your own admission. That's all I was saying. Your right, I have no clue about the oil or mining industry and I never want to be involved with it. As I said before, I'm for eliminating all tax breaks for every company because congress uses deductions to pay their campaign donors back, I'm not just picking on the oil industry. I got the info from govtracks and reference to Senate bill 2204 that was introduced March 19, 2012. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s2204 Originally Posted by nwarounder

by my admission?

they dont , how about that admission?

Admittedly, I can't argue the facts of the oil industry, except that Obama proclaimed that this bill would end big oil tax breaks. Wouldn't be the first time he lied though, I was simply going off what he and the congress attempted to do in an effort to punish big oil? But at the same time, If they do not help, why have the section in the code in the first place? Originally Posted by nwarounder

I think you missed the intent of my comment

presidents wanting to, talking about it, yet doing nothing about tax subsidies on oil didnt originate in Obamas house, no punishment intended by all.

so theres a tax deduction for that? so what? Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

?

I think you missed the intent of my comment

presidents wanting to, talking about it, yet doing nothing about tax subsidies on oil didnt originate in Obamas house, no punishment intended by all. Originally Posted by CJ7

I guess I did, sorry. It's hardly even worth discussing to me honestly.

I guess I did, sorry. It's hardly even worth discussing to me honestly. Originally Posted by nwarounder

yup.

The End