• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats propose further tax hike on offshore oil

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,901
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
WASHINGTON – Senate Democrats are moving to quintuple the tax that oil companies pay into an oil spill liability fund.
The move would raise $15 billion over the coming decade as Congress seeks to shore up the fund in the wake of the catastrophic spill in the Gulf of Mexico. But it's also being used to ease a tax hike passed by the House on investment fund managers.
The new legislation would raise the tax on oil produced offshore from 8 cents to 41 cents per barrel. That's nine cents higher than legislation that passed the House last month.

Democrats propose further tax hike on offshore oil - Yahoo! News



I would agree to this on these conditions. 100% of the funds raised went to disaster preparedness and spill mitigation. Including funding and equipping the 1994 plan.

This tax however should only be applied to barrels produced on the gulf.

None of this tax should be used for anything else.
 

LiberalAvenger

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
16,881
Reaction score
2,980
Location
virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Look what they did with social security. Can we trust any of them. **** no.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
75,283
Reaction score
43,274
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
None of this tax should be used for anything else.
It would be nice, but it's not too likely. I mean, all the tax on tobacco was sold to us as tax to offset the additional costs to the health care system and other systems the tobacco users cause. But it doesn't go for that, and now they try arguing more tax for the same reason. Ideally you have some amount of control over this so you can ensure that the tax gets used only for the purpose it was created for. But you'd need to put in proper oversight and book keeping, and that's most likely not going to happen.
 

webrockk

Active member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
488
Reaction score
159
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Another stealthly tax to be levied on the citizenry. "never let a crisis go to waste"
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,088
Reaction score
32,906
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Another stealthly tax to be levied on the citizenry. "never let a crisis go to waste"
Is it "stealthy" when every single act of congress is public knowledge? I hope the F-22 is sneakier than this.
 

Crunch

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
4,063
Reaction score
890
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Is it "stealthy" when every single act of congress is public knowledge? I hope the F-22 is sneakier than this.
I think you are missing the point.... it is a stealthy tax of the citizens as it will be perceived as a tax only on the oil companies. Most people can't connect the dots.
 

Moon

Why so serious?
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
9,944
Reaction score
5,114
Location
Washington State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I think you are missing the point.... it is a stealthy tax of the citizens as it will be perceived as a tax only on the oil companies. Most people can't connect the dots.
Exactly. The oil companies will pass any tax increase onto their customers, us. I wish more people understood that using taxes as a way to punish companies really doesn't work.
 

Crunch

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
4,063
Reaction score
890
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Of course the next argument we will hear from the libs is, the Oil Companies make too much money and don't pay enough taxes..... so I thought I'd nip that right in the bud.

Before rushing to create a new federal tax, lawmakers should ask two questions:

(1) Do oil companies currently pay too little in taxes compared to profits?
(2) What was the effect of the last windfall profits tax enacted in 1980?

The answer to the first question is that over the past 25 years, oil companies directly paid or remitted more than $2.2 trillion in taxes, after adjusting for inflation, to federal and state governments—including excise taxes, royalty payments and state and federal corporate income taxes. That amounts to more than three times what they earned in profits during the same period, according to the latest numbers from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and U.S. Department of Energy.

These figures do not include local property taxes, state sales and severance taxes and on-shore royalty payments.

The answer to the second question, according to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), is that the 1980s windfall profits tax depressed the domestic production and extraction industry and furthered our dependence on foreign sources of oil.1
The Tax Foundation - Oil Company Profits and Tax Collections: Does the U.S. Need a New Windfall Profits Tax?
 

webrockk

Active member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
488
Reaction score
159
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Macro-economic mental midgets, libs.
 

LiberalAvenger

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
16,881
Reaction score
2,980
Location
virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Exactly. The oil companies will pass any tax increase onto their customers, us. I wish more people understood that using taxes as a way to punish companies really doesn't work.
Hey, let them tax the oil companies and I'll ride my bike more and save money. Hell, I'll even do the unmentionable by an American. I'll walk. **** the oil barons.
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,090
Reaction score
33,263
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Macro-economic mental midgets, libs.
"Lib" being a technical term for anyone who doesn't agree with your point of view.

This tax amounts to about $4.50 per person per year. If it affects the price of gas at all, it will be less than a penny a gallon. It isn't a big deal.

It isn't a big effing deal, not even in Biden's book.

Of course, it's possible that the federal government will use it for other things once it is passed, but wouldn't it be a good idea to have a contingency fund, paid for by the oil companies, for just such a disaster as is happening now?

or is it only "libs" who would like to see some preparation instead of waiting for disaster, then pointing fingers of blame and expecting the taxpayers to bail out the company that created the disaster through their own poor planning?
 

webrockk

Active member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
488
Reaction score
159
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
"Lib" being a technical term for anyone who doesn't agree with your point of view.

This tax amounts to about $4.50 per person per year. If it affects the price of gas at all, it will be less than a penny a gallon. It isn't a big deal.

It isn't a big effing deal, not even in Biden's book.

Of course, it's possible that the federal government will use it for other things once it is passed, but wouldn't it be a good idea to have a contingency fund, paid for by the oil companies, for just such a disaster as is happening now?

or is it only "libs" who would like to see some preparation instead of waiting for disaster, then pointing fingers of blame and expecting the taxpayers to bail out the company that created the disaster through their own poor planning?
Within the EPA, there is a "funded" emergency contigency plan for oil spill disasters. It was enacted in 1994. The good Rev has provided the particulars in another thread. No...this is simply an indirect tax that will find its way into the general fund and rerouted to some social program.

On edit: I have no problem with a contingency fund mandated through government regulation and monetized by oil companies...the problem l have is government stewardship of it.
 
Last edited:

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,088
Reaction score
32,906
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Exactly. The oil companies will pass any tax increase onto their customers, us. I wish more people understood that using taxes as a way to punish companies really doesn't work.
The customer is the consumer. We're not blameless in this energy situation, you know.
 

Crunch

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
4,063
Reaction score
890
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The customer is the consumer. We're not blameless in this energy situation, you know.
Did you **** up the oil platform?..... I know I am totally blameless, but you seem to have a guilty conscience.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,088
Reaction score
32,906
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Did you **** up the oil platform?..... I know I am totally blameless, but you seem to have a guilty conscience.
Reread my post. You may notice I didn't mention the oil platform.
 
Last edited:

upsideguy

Pragmatic Idealist
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
17,131
Reaction score
9,990
Location
Rocky Mtn. High
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Companies can not simply pass a tax along. The concept of incidence of tax is a fundamental concept of economics. Sometimes the taxes can be passed along 100%, sometimes the company eats 100% of the tax. Almost always the taxes are shared in same ratio reflective to the elasticity of the price of the underlying product. A tax can only be fully passed along when you have products with a high degree of price inelasticity, which so happens to be the case with gasoline.
 
Last edited:

Moon

Why so serious?
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
9,944
Reaction score
5,114
Location
Washington State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The customer is the consumer. We're not blameless in this energy situation, you know.
The proposed tax has nothing to do with the energy situation, but rather its stated intent is to fund clean up efforts for future oil spills/leaks. That being the case, your point really has no bearing on either the OP or my post.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I would agree to this on these conditions. 100% of the funds raised went to disaster preparedness and spill mitigation. Including funding and equipping the 1994 plan.
I could agree with that. We are woefully unprepared for any sort of environmental disaster. I would add one more thing to your list though: More money so that the EPA can have better enforcement of its drilling regulations. This whole thing might have been averted if someone had made sure BP and/or Halliburton were in compliance with the law.

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
This tax however should only be applied to barrels produced on the gulf.
I disagree with you here. Keep in mind that the Exxon Valdez spill occurred off the coast of Alaska.
 
Last edited:

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I think you are missing the point.... it is a stealthy tax of the citizens as it will be perceived as a tax only on the oil companies. Most people can't connect the dots.
True, but that's OK. It's not like BP was just drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico for fun. They were drilling to sell it to us. So oil consumers SHOULD indirectly bear the cost of the spill, since they are indirectly responsible for it. These kind of accidents need to be factored into the price.
 

jujuman13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
4,075
Reaction score
579
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I would agree to this on these conditions. 100% of the funds raised went to disaster preparedness and spill mitigation. Including funding and equipping the 1994 plan.

This tax however should only be applied to barrels produced on the gulf.

None of this tax should be used for anything else.
Right now you have had your laugh.

You know as well as almost anyone else that monies set aside for one purpoise are always appropriated by the Democrats and (naturally on a temporary basis) borrowed for the general fund, they might feel generous and give this emergency fund a loan note (there you go, I made a funny).

Well it might have been funny if it were not true.
 
Top Bottom