| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front Economy |
| Exxon Mobil CEO Warns Ending Tax Breaks |
| 2006-12-01 |
| Just gotta raise taxes. Seems it's in their genes. Who do you think will pay for this? I've got plenty of liberal friends, and to a man they think that big oil is evil, and they all think that eliminating any tax breaks they get cut into their bottom lines and prices won't go up. Maybe it will cut into their profits a bit, but I think the lion's share will be shouldered by the consumer, and it will a bonus of impacting the economy. I see no value in taxing the oil companies at all except to encourage alternative energy sources. Big oil feeds our economy. If I've got this wrong please let me know in the usual no uncertain terms! Proposals by congressional Democrats to eliminate oil industry tax breaks and subsidies would set a bad example overseas and discourage new industry investments, Exxon Mobil's top executive said Thursday. Rex W. Tillerson said moves suggested by leaders of the incoming Democratic congressional majority would encourage similar steps by governments abroad, where Exxon Mobil Corp. generates the bulk of its profit. "I think the bigger concern I have is not so much the economic direct effect of the fact that they want to take a tax break off here or there. But it's the message it sends the rest of the world that you don't have to provide stable (regulatory) frameworks," Tillerson told reporters after a speech to the Boston College Chief Executives' Club. "And if that happens, none of us are going to be able to take the risk in this business." |
| Posted by:gorb |
| #11 Those pump stickers only show the taxes paid at the pump, and do not include all the other taxes hidden in the cost - such as corporate income tax, employer social security 'contribution', etc. Not to mention royalties, which aren't really a tax, but on oil produced from government lands or water are money paid to the government. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2006-12-01 19:30 |
| #10 I wish other states had that system, Silentbrick. I've never seen it in any of my travels. I guess the other states are too embarrassed to fess up. |
| Posted by: Swamp Blondie 2006-12-01 19:22 |
| #9 People DO know what taxes they pay on oil. Lots of stations here in Tenn put little stickers on the pumps that tell you just how much Federal and State taxes you are paying PER Gallon. Always lovely to see just how badly the government is gouging you;) |
| Posted by: Silentbrick 2006-12-01 17:52 |
| #8 I would like to see concrete proposals on Rantburg for making the US import less Islamic oil, but have seen very little here so far. We've been around it a few times. The options are coal and nuclear. That's it. All the rest is pointless hand waving that mostly make the problem worse, with precious few exceptions. Although, I did come across one good idea recently, a natural gas unit that functions as both a home electricity generator and heater(saves the very substantial energy wastage in centrally generated and distributed electricity). |
| Posted by: phil_b 2006-12-01 15:22 |
| #7 AH, how is that presentation unfair? Everything else in this nation has risen at 3+%/year since the 70s. Yes, I'll agree that part of that inflation could very well be because of the rise in crude oil prices. A lot of us here also believe that a lot of inflation is due to tax increases like this hair-brained idea. Put another way, WHY shouldn't we present gas prices vs. inflation? When virtually any other good in this country has skyrocketed in price (again, possibly because of oil prices), why shouldn't we look at ANY of those goods in terms of inflation. Heck, I make 10x as much money now than I did in the 70s, so I'd venture to guess that gas is now a LOT lower part of the hit in my pocketbook than it was in the 70s (% wise). Of course, oil is the one commodity/good that affects the prices of ALL other goods. That's why the Donk plan of taxing it (which, again the corporations don't pay, but pass on to the consumer) is going to RAISE the price of EVERYTHING in this country. He!!, I've already seen plenty of goods skyrocket the last few years (my garbage company's easily doubled their fees, milk has gone through the roof, diapers have jumped in price, etc.), all because of those specific companies' fuel/transportation costs. About the only things that have dropped in price are electronics, and that's only because we've shipped that overseas to China. /soapbox |
| Posted by: BA 2006-12-01 13:33 |
| #6 It appears that Democrats are trying to get rid of big-oil tax breaks out of anger, not out of trying to encourage development of other sources of energy. They may end up accompishing something good by accident, which in my mind doesn't really count. If they want to encourage development of other sources of energy, they should just say so. But given their rhetoric and the rhetoric of my liberal friends, that's not what they're thinking. And if it is, then they think that voters are mindless and have to fool them into doing the right thing through subversive means, which is not a good thing to be caught doing. Ask Jon Karry. If this were an honest attempt to develop other sources of energy, I would say remove the tax breaks and put every penny of the new taxes into that development, and not into pet projects. But you know that won't happen, so it's not sincere. |
| Posted by: gorb 2006-12-01 13:30 |
| #5 I believe adjusting oil prices for inflation is an unfair way to present the issue -- isn't modern inflation in part due to the increase in oil costs since 1973? Looking at myself in the mirror and adjusting for increases in age and weight, I'm every bit as good looking and thin as I was when I was 20! Riiight. I would like to see concrete proposals on Rantburg for making the US import less Islamic oil, but have seen very little here so far. Some of my ideas: (1) Certainly the US could drill more wells in areas previously off limits, but the cost would be high, the benefit delayed for years, and the payoff doubtful, remember the oil rig still disabled so long after Katrina. (2) Building many more nuclear power plants for electricity is also a no-brainer, but the electorate and MSM seem to be suffering from drain bamage at the moment. (3) Perhaps a nice stiff import tax on oil would help promote efficiency and support investment in and development of alternatives, but any interference with the abundance and cost of imported oil would definitely hit every American in the pocket book, and perhaps cause a recession. --- Our vulnerability: If the Iranians sank a oil tanker or two in the Persian Gulf, oil consumers would all suffer right quick -- I am getting the impression that is the real reason W is going easy on Iran, we may have very little choice in the matter. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2006-12-01 11:30 |
| #4 That truism is so true. If only we could convince the Donks followers that the evil Big Oil companies will NOT pay the tax increases, but the customers will. Let's put this "windfall tax" thingy in the ground for good. To put it into perspective, the biggest offshore rig in the Gulf cost something like $5 billion to build. And that's just one of 100's of offshore rigs. That's half of Exxon-Mobil's quarterly profits in 1 rig! Granted, it was a joint venture to build over many years, but, you get the "perspective" of it all. And, to boot, the thing was knocked sideways by Katrina. So, I'm sure another few $100 million-$1 billion will be eaten up fixing the thing. I'm all for the pursuit of alternative sources of energy. But, in the short term, you've gotta realize this could very well drag our economy to a grinding hault if taxed too heavily. And, again, the "fat cats" won't be the ones paying the IRS, but us Joe and Jane consumers. Basic market fluctuations, that's all. One final note: We are still WAY below the price spikes of the 70's. Adjusted for inflation, I believe those spikes were akin to the low $3/gallon range, which we're still about 50% below. You've got to put this all in perspective. |
| Posted by: BA 2006-12-01 10:56 |
| #3 It's political, not economic. Oil companies are evil - didn't you watch Dallas? And they gouge the consumer - gasoline prices have gone up by $2.00 since 1960 (from 30 cents to $2.30 per gallon), while postage stamps have only gone up by 34 cents (how do you like my dumbocrat statisticizing?) Seriously, oil taxes will go up, for two reasons; 1) it's where the money is, and 2) the people won't mind paying it (because they don't know they are) - they'll be happy the greedy rich are paying 'their share'. It may even be a good idea, for a different reason. We really could be a more energy efficient nation, and less vulnerable to supply disruption; perhaps higher prices (through taxes) would encourage that. 'You get less of what you tax'. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2006-12-01 10:11 |
| #2 Big oil imports feed and employ Americans one way or the other. Punishing the companies is self-defeating, a practice the Democrats are very good at. Taxing or restricting oil company profits will do ZIP toward decreasing US dependence on imported oil, which is what really needs to be done. I have no good answers for that, but the cited hare-brained ideas are foolish. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2006-12-01 10:06 |
| #1 A truism I hold dear is that corporations don't pay taxes... their customers do. |
| Posted by: eLarson 2006-12-01 09:49 |