Green | May 13, 2011 | 4 comments

Senate Holds Hearing on Big Oil Tax Breaks

source: http://350.org

Image
TriplePundit
The Senate Finance Committee held a hearing yesterday on tax breaks for the nation’s top five oil companies: Chevron, Shell, ConocoPhillips, BP America, and Exxon Mobil. At stake is $21 billion in alleged subsidies. Should oil companies be allowed to keep the tax credits? Should tax payers no longer subsidize big oil?

If the debate were over a bonafide subsidy, the solution would be clear and simple. End the subsidy. And while they are at it, end all corporate subsidies. Regardless if the corporation involved were an oil company or a renewable energy company, the answer would be to cut the subsidies. Tax payer money should not be lining the profits for corporations. The story would end here. But…

Subsidy or Tax Credit?
However, this topic of debate is not so cut and dry. The terminology between subsidy and tax credit has been muddled.

For example, take the an initiative by 350.org, “Big Oil is raking in record profits, funding the climate denial machine, and heating up our planet—there’s no reason to be spending our tax dollars to support them.” The language at the end of the statement implies that money is going from the tax payer to big oil. The image of a check further hints at a big payout to big oil.

Even take the exchange between Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Chevron Chairman and CEO John Watson. Senator Rockefeller questioned, “How much profit on a barrel of oil do you have to make, to not be needful of these subsidies?”

Mr. Watson responded, “As we have described, we don’t receive subsides.” Politicians and businessmen alike cannot even settle on this subtle yet profound difference between a subsidy and tax credit. It’s no surprise that oil executives lashed out against a tax cut, which some call a subsidy.

Post Continues: http://www.triplepundit.com/2011/05/senate-holds-hearing-on-big-oil-tax-reaks/
  1. groups:
    Green
  2. tags:
    Renewable Energy,  corporate social responsibility,  Policy & Government
  3.     
    |

4 comments // Senate Holds Hearing on Big Oil Tax Breaks

  • Wetdog
    • 0
      Wetdog  

    • Don't use oil.

      Biofuels can do anything that can be done with petroleum. Better, cleaner, safer and cheaper.

      We can use ethanol, biodiesel and methane----made right here, by workers who live here. We do not have to support dictators, terrorists or fight wars to make and use biofuels. Biofuels are safe and non toxic---they do not damage the evironment. We do not have to maintain huge trade deficits to import biofuels.

      We can make biofuels out of anything, any kind of organic waste material at all, including sewage and landfills. We can make all we need. And we can keep on making all we need as long as we need to.

      Biofuels do not stink. Petroleum stinks.

    • 1 year ago
  • Gravity_Man
    • 0
      Gravity_Man  
    • Wetdog:

      The tail has gotten big enough to want to wag the dog. Government (Obama + Congress) want a seat at the stockholder's meeting. But fuel? Why drill it when it's already free => air & water!

      An engine cylinder filled FIRST with Steam Heat can't be flash frozen to a stop by straight minus 320 degree Liquid Air. An Exponential Explosion results, no pollution, no well drilling, no taxes.

      NO FUEL PUMPS.

      NO STOPPING FOR FUEL PUMPS. EVER.

      INCLUDING TRACTOR-TRAILERS. AND NO ARMY SUPPLY LINES.

    • 1 year ago
  • Gravity_Man
  • Gravity_Man
    • 0
      Gravity_Man  
    • Wetdog:

      Take the Leap Man! Super heated steam + super cooled air = an explosion like a Vinegar+Baking Soda explosion, except it repeats non-stop in a repeating LOOP. Take the Leap WetDog, leap past your fuels => Leap into the Future.

      Leap into a big pot of Gold at the end of the rainbow. hahaha

    • 1 year ago
more from Green:
from the community

top videos