Article

2010-05-25 Economy

Congress Set To Quadruple Crude Oil Tax - 8 cents to 32 cents/bbl

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Anonymoose 2010-05-25 00:00|| || Front Page|| [4 views ] Top

#1 So this particular tax works out to $0.016 per gallon of refined gasoline, more or less, up from $0.004.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-05-25 07:05|| 2010-05-25 07:05|| Front Page Top

#2 Seems an appropriate way to tax the oil business and an appropriate intended use of such tax revenues.
But "Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund has about $1.5 billion available" could be problematic - is it any different than the Social Security Trust Fund? That is, once taxes are collected will they be immediately spent on something else, and IOU's put in the Trust Fund?
And, is it not likely that this tax will continue to be raised each time there is a disaster or other 'crisis' (like climate change)?

Posted by Glenmore 2010-05-25 07:45|| 2010-05-25 07:45|| Front Page Top

#3 - is it any different than the Social Security Trust Fund?

Heck is it any different than the federal gasoline tax that was suppose to be used for road infrastructure and has since vanished into the great accounting books of the Beltway? /rhet question

Wait till the EPA gets them to tax everyone [with the exception of the 'poor'] for carbon dioxide release.

Posted by Procopius2k 2010-05-25 08:29|| 2010-05-25 08:29|| Front Page Top

#4 "Taxpayers will not pick up the tab," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Monday.

Yeah, and there is a tooth fairy too.

Posted by JohnQC 2010-05-25 09:10|| 2010-05-25 09:10|| Front Page Top

#5 "Taxpayers will not pick up the tab," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Monday.

Dude, it's a tax - they're by definition "taxpayers". Although, admittedly, when hypocritical senators pontificate about "the taxpayers", they don't mean to cite the big companies whose names actually show up on the tax transfer forms. Since libertarian economic theory holds that no corporation pays tax anyways - they just pass the pain on to their customers in the form of higher costs - it's not even true in the sense Reid intends.

Anyways, I am not adamantly opposed to this tax increase, not as much as I am to the government's continued bumbling involvement in the whole process. The tax increase is the cost, the government's radical inefficiency and ineptitude is what is incurring the cost. If we the governed weren't demanding that the government force the oil exploration crews tap offshore oil resources as fucking far from the coasts as possible, those coasts probably wouldn't be threatened by the current oil-spill.

Posted by Mitch H. 2010-05-25 10:50|| http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/ 2010-05-25 10:50|| Front Page Top

#6 Just another thing to help the economy.
snark

Posted by newc 2010-05-25 10:59|| 2010-05-25 10:59|| Front Page Top

#7 Now if it were on imported oil only....

Posted by BrerRabbit 2010-05-25 12:24|| 2010-05-25 12:24|| Front Page Top

#8 And, is it not likely that this tax will continue to be raised each time there is a disaster or other 'crisis' (like climate change)?

Well, you know what the man said...Never let a good crisis go to waste.

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2010-05-25 15:07|| 2010-05-25 15:07|| Front Page Top

#9 IF they had been spending the proceeds from this tax on cleanup equipment instead of dumping it into the general fund there'd be plenty of equipment waiting for the next spill (And unless Zero wants to forego Air Farce One and walk everywhere, yes, there's going to be a next spill).

Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2010-05-25 15:49|| 2010-05-25 15:49|| Front Page Top

#10 OK, there's 300 million people in the US.

Assuming each person uses 10 gallons of gas a week... and there's been about 18 years since the last spill...

.004*10*52*300,000,000*18 = 11,232,000,000 dollars should be in the fund _right now_. Neglecting gains from interest or losses from inflation.

Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2010-05-25 22:14|| 2010-05-25 22:14|| Front Page Top

00:17 JosephMendiola
23:57 twobyfour
23:39 GirlThursday
23:32 JosephMendiola
23:28 Barbara Skolaut
23:13 Rex Mundi
23:12 Procopius2k
23:09 JosephMendiola
22:57 Frank G
22:57 ed
22:56 JosephMendiola
22:53 gorb
22:52 gorb
22:50 gorb
22:48 ed
22:42 JosephMendiola
22:39 linker
22:39 gorb
22:37 JosephMendiola
22:31 gorb
22:30 OldSpook
22:29 rhodesiafever
22:18 Asymmetrical
22:14 Thing From Snowy Mountain