Which Would You Prefer?

[Rotagilla]

Guess you missed the OP........ He made the claim they do, the onus is on him to prove it....... That's kinda the way it's supposed to work.......

After 37 years of pumping the shit out of the ground, I have yet to receive a subsidy in any form. No mailbox money for me. Ever. And I do know the difference between Agricultural subsidies and standard business expense deductions from taxable income.


Bitch

You're arguing with children. I doubt he even owns a home/has a mortgage.

Probably gets a tax REFUND every year. If he even works.

It's all "theory" and "other people's money" to him.

Are you the same guy who just whined about being called a name in another thread? In fact, you have whined about being called names a few times already.

What gives?

What? You aren't a minor? You're over 21?

Do you own a home?

...or do you live at home?

Do you pay taxes or get a tax refund?

 

[LoneLaugher]

You're arguing with children. I doubt he even owns a home/has a mortgage.

Probably gets a tax REFUND every year. If he even works.

It's all "theory" and "other people's money" to him.

Are you the same guy who just whined about being called a name in another thread? In fact, you have whined about being called names a few times already.

What gives?

What? You aren't a minor? You're over 21?

Do you own a home?

...or do you live at home?

Do you pay taxes or get a tax refund?

I'm 49.

Yes. Two.

.....and I live in one of them....

I pay.

Next.....

 

[Rotagilla]

Are you the same guy who just whined about being called a name in another thread? In fact, you have whined about being called names a few times already.

What gives?

What? You aren't a minor? You're over 21?

Do you own a home?

...or do you live at home?

Do you pay taxes or get a tax refund?

I'm 49.

Yes. Two.

.....and I live in one of them....

I pay.

Next.....

For the record, then.

I'm older.
I own one.
I pay, too.

 

[LoneLaugher]

What? You aren't a minor? You're over 21?

Do you own a home?

...or do you live at home?

Do you pay taxes or get a tax refund?

I'm 49.

Yes. Two.

.....and I live in one of them....

I pay.

Next.....

For the record, then.

I'm older.
I own one.
I pay, too.

That's nice.

 

[Rotagilla]

You're welcome.

 

[bedowin62]

another idiotic false choice by the loser left;

YAWN

 

[Skull Pilot]

Oil & Gas Tax Provisions Are Not Subsidies For "Big Oil" - Forbes

The truth is that the oil and gas industry receives the same kinds of tax treatments that every other manufacturing or extractive industry receives in the federal tax code. There is nothing uncommon or out of the mainstream of tax treatments about any of the provisions that have been repeatedly proposed for repeal.

So how did all of this misinformation get started? It all began in 2009. Within days of being sworn in as the nation’s 44th President, Barack Obama ordered his staff to scour the tax code for any provision that was relevant to the oil and gas industry, and promptly began proposing them for repeal. The oil and gas industry has always been an easy target for political demagoguery, and that dynamic has played out repeatedly and consistently in this Administration.

Unfortunately, most media outlets and reporters have chosen to basically repeat the Administration’s mantra that these tax treatments – several of which have been in the tax code for almost a century – are somehow unique, specific to the oil and gas industry, and are “subsidies” for “big oil”. A great example of just how inaccurate this depiction is applies to Percentage Depletion, which has been a feature of the tax code since 1913, meaning it will be a full century old this year.

Basically, Percentage Depletion is the oil and gas industry’s version of a depreciation deduction for its main asset, which is the oil and natural gas in the ground, commonly known as its reserves. Every industry of any kind is allowed a depreciation deduction on its assets under the U.S. Tax Code, but, far from being a “subsidy” for “big oil”, this tax treatment was in fact repealed for all integrated oil companies, i.e., ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, etc., in 1975, and is today available only to independent producers and royalty owners. So repeal of this extremely long-standing, completely common tax treatment would have no effect on “big oil” at all, and would in fact hit small producers and royalty owners harder than anyone else.

Another great example of the specious mischaracterization of these tax treatments is the Manufacturer’s Tax Deduction, more commonly referred to as Section 199. The Section 199 provision was enacted by congress in 2004 as a means of encouraging manufacturers to relocate overseas jobs to the U.S., and is in no way specific to or limited to the oil and gas industry. In fact, the oil & gas industry’s ability to take advantage of this provision has already been singled out for limitation – in 2008, Congress reduced the industry’s deduction under this provision to 2/3rds of what other manufacturing industries are allowed to deduct.

The tax code contains a couple of credits related to the oil and gas industry – the Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) Tax Credit, and the Marginal Well Tax Credit. Far from being “subsidies” to “big oil”, these tax credits are used almost exclusively by small to mid-size independent producers who tend to become the operators of marginal oil and gas fields as they age and are divested by the larger companies. The EOR credit was implemented in 1990, and the Marginal Well Credit was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1994.

Finally, let’s talk about Intangible Drilling Costs (IDCs), another feature of the federal tax code that will enjoy its’ 100th birthday in 2013. Basically, IDCs are the costs incurred by the oil and gas industry in the drilling of its wells. Since drilling wells is the only means of finding oil and natural gas, IDCs essentially amount to what any other industry would be able to deduct as a part of its cost of goods sold, a concept of accounting and tax law as old as the tax code itself.

Independent producers and royalty owners are allowed an election to either a) expense these costs in the year they are incurred, or b) amortize them over a 5-year period. Again, most media reports commonly characterize this as a “subsidy” for “big oil”, as does the Obama Administration. The truth is that “big oil” – the ExxonMobils, Chevrons, Shells and BPs of the world – benefit much less from this tax treatment, it having been severely limited to them by congress in 1986, and again in 1992. And the truth also is that IDCs are not a “subsidy” to anyone engaged in the oil and gas business.

Bottom line: Despite the Administration’s rhetoric that has been so widely repeated in the press, the tax treatments in question are not “subsidies” that are in any way outside of the mainstream of tax treatments commonly available to all U.S. industries. Rather than being mostly a benefit to “big oil”, the repeal of these and other oil and gas industry-related tax provisions would mainly impact smaller independent producers and royalty owners. Such repeal would serve no legitimate public policy purpose, other than to unfairly discriminate via the tax code against one of the nation’s most productive – albeit easily demonized – manufacturing industries.

It would be a benefit to everyone if media outlets and their reporters would quit repeating Administration talking points on this issue, and instead engage in some real journalism on the subject. I doubt anyone in the oil and gas industry will be holding their breath waiting for that to happen.

 

[TheJedi]

Oil and natural gas receive no federal subsidies.

Next...

Technically you are right int he sense that the tax deductions they get are not subsidies but they do get huge breaks and then some are still defined as subsidies. It's rather confusing to say the least. Here a few links to ponder including a Forbes article that has an interesting take:

http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/http://

Energy subsidies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oil & Gas Tax Provisions Are Not Subsidies For "Big Oil" - Forbes

Oil & Gas Subsidies: Myth vs. Fact

The Truth on Oil and Natural Gas 'Subsidies'

I find this interesting. What I see here is a lot of wordplay without any real clarification. I am going to research further before I take a position on this.

 

[Jarlaxle]

There is no question that our oil, gas and coal industries receive subsidies.

It is clear that you don't want to respond to the question. I wonder why?

I've seen those claims of "subsidies" and they count crap like LIHEAP (electricity welfare program) which is a POVERTY program, not a hand-out to the oil companies at all.. Because OIL plays very little role in home heating or electricity.

Actually, a HUGE number of homes heat with oil in the northeast.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Right..If you get caught a lie turns into a "mistake".

Are you being serious?

Are you denying it?
I just watched you do it.

Denying what?

I admitted making a mistake.

Let's examine this. If I lied in this case....why did I do so?

You said "you're welcome" for no reason. I asked you why. You said you were being polite. I then made an error and attributed a "thank you" instead if a "you're welcome" to you.

Why in the fuck would I lie about that?

Can you think of any reason? If so....please explain.

Thanks.

 

[Rotagilla]

Are you being serious?

Are you denying it?
I just watched you do it.

Denying what?

I admitted making a mistake.

Let's examine this. If I lied in this case....why did I do so?

You said "you're welcome" for no reason. I asked you why. You said you were being polite. I then made an error and attributed a "thank you" instead if a "you're welcome" to you.

Why in the fuck would I lie about that?

Can you think of any reason? If so....please explain.

Thanks.

Sure..sure..whatever you say, ace. Keep swinging.

 

[RGR]

Actually, a HUGE number of homes heat with oil in the northeast.

"Huge" doesn't translate to all that much in terms of liquid fuels used overall. And they should stop, burning a valuable chemical feedstock just to create heat is about as damn dumb as it gets.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Sure..sure..whatever you say, ace. Keep swinging.

Is that an answer?

Why would I lie about this?

You are a person who claims to desire honest discussion. Are you being honest now?

This is your chance to practice what you preach. Gonna blow it?

Whatever you say, ace.
I've played this game with you already. You evade, dodge, purposely distort and play word games time and time again.

Like I said, you're dishonest.

I'm not going to run around in circles for your amusement.

Declare "victory" if it makes you feel better. I don't care.

Huh? I don't declare victory, bro. That is a USMB nutter deal.

There are times when I am right. There are times when I am wrong.

This time. I am right. I have not lied to you.

How about you. Ever make a mistake?

 

[flacaltenn]

Actually, a HUGE number of homes heat with oil in the northeast.

"Huge" doesn't translate to all that much in terms of liquid fuels used overall. And they should stop, burning a valuable chemical feedstock just to create heat is about as damn dumb as it gets.

Jaraxle is correct that I overstated my point. In fact, oil heat was common in Florida also, because you could store it over from season to season and rarely use it. My guess is, its getting rarer in newer homes if being used at all. But oil has nothing to do with electrical generation or as a direct alternative to wind or solar.. So choices like the OP puts it, make no sense....

 

[Mr. H.]

Oil and natural gas receive no federal subsidies.

Next...

Technically you are right int he sense that the tax deductions they get are not subsidies but they do get huge breaks and then some are still defined as subsidies. It's rather confusing to say the least. Here a few links to ponder including a Forbes article that has an interesting take:

http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/http://

Energy subsidies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oil & Gas Tax Provisions Are Not Subsidies For "Big Oil" - Forbes

Oil & Gas Subsidies: Myth vs. Fact

The Truth on Oil and Natural Gas 'Subsidies'

I find this interesting. What I see here is a lot of wordplay without any real clarification. I am going to research further before I take a position on this.

First link doesn't work.
Wiki isn't anywhere near my idea of credibility.
I've read the Forbes article before and like it.
Oceana incorrectly assumes such subsidies exist.
Energy Tomorrow is da bomb.

Thanks for putting these forth. It should be easy for anyone to differentiate between reality and bullshit here.

But not everyone does and that's why we have petrophobic crackpots who attack oil and gas at every turn.

 

[Darkwind]

So.....I am caught off guard with this denial regarding subsidies......so I go to the Heritage Foundation to see what they have to say about oil subsidies.

BINGO! You fuckers are following the party line. I am shocked.

You don't consider tax concessions to be subsidies.......because........well........because!

Dishonest fuckers.

What? Tax concessions? Are you serious? IT is their money to begin with!

 

[whitehall]

We are faced with a choice, folks. Please tell us which you would prefer:

1: Give solar energy and wind energy companies the same federal subsidies that oil, natural gas and coal companies get.

2: Eliminate all subsidies for energy companies.

Why not offer subsidies to psychics? They offer the same "prophecy for money" as the global warming "scientists"? How many condors and eagles will be killed by windmills during the 30 year kill permit issued by the administration? The freaking world runs on fossil fuel and the middle class Americans depend on low cost energy. What are democrats doing about it?