Big Oil Subsides

[CuteOldGuy]

Thanks, oglfp12, that's more like it. It appears to support CBJ7's Greenpeace post, but with more updated information.

There's a lot there, but let's begin with paying the oil industry to search for oil. WTF? Like they won't look for oil without the subsidy? Sorry, that one has to go.

Special treatment for industry, especially this industry, is bullshit.

[essence]

Originally Posted by oglfp12

I thought the link that CJ7 provided in post #24 did a good job of answering this question. Since it's from the Texas comptroller, I think it is a pretty good source.

Click on it and read it:

http://www.window.state.tx.us/specia...dex.php#oilgas

I have already read it and commented, let me say again, it is either irrelevant chicken shit, or sensible accounting practice for this specialised industry. So I can;t see any unusual subsidies. I say again, different industries have different tax rules, I know the landlord industry has special rules, probably every industry does. I think I can claim 10% of revenue as a loss for wear and tear. There are strict rules on what are fixed items and non fixed items.

As shown in another thread, the oil companies don't want subsidies, they are irrelevant, chicken feed, and also I could not see the oil companies admitting any subsidies already exist, they are just saying that any subsidies (pre - existing or planned in the future) are irrelevant.

There must be some phrase to describe all this fuss over nothing, but it is too late for me to remember it. Ghost busters?

I am all in favour of simplifying taxes if possible, I don;t see why an army of taxation specialists is needed to produce mammoth books of rules and regulations.

[essence]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Thanks, oglfp12, that's more like it. It appears to support CBJ7's Greenpeace post, but with more updated information.

There's a lot there, but let's begin with paying the oil industry to search for oil. WTF? Like they won't look for oil without the subsidy? Sorry, that one has to go.

Special treatment for industry, especially this industry, is bullshit.

Can you point me to the relevant paragraph?

If it's the one I think you mean, are you saying that paying wages should not be regarded as a business expense?

I think you are just repeating lies. I will keep provoking this until somebody can actually come up with something specific which is not chicken feed.

I would be perfectly happy to be shown some subsidy, I have absolutely no axe to grind, I am genuinely curious, but I do dislike smoke and mirros.

Be specific. Stop waffling.

I already quoted a paragraph from the link in my post #46, but nobody helped me understand why my analysis might be incorrect, so I assume I was correct in that post - it is just normal business expenses.

Although the quote does say:

The Expensing of Exploration and Development Costs Credit allows investors in oil or gas exploration and development to “expense” (to deduct from their corporate or individual income tax) ....

and I dont; know whether "expense" is put in quotes deliberately - it is not usual to offset expenses against tax, expenses are offset against revenue and then the income is taxed.

Can somebody clarify? Is this a different way of expensing, to offset against tax, not revenue ?

[CuteOldGuy]

Federal Research and Development Spending

In 2006, Congress appropriated $64 million for Oil and Gas Research and Development by the Department of Energy (DOE). 22 Historically, most of this federal funding has gone to joint projects funded with federal, university and independent company funds intended to develop new reserves and extend the life of old ones. 23 Congress also appropriated $6.9 million for Oil Spill Research in the Department of Interior’s Minerals Management Service in 2006. 24


That's one. We could go into accelerated depreciation and others, but I don't favor special treatment.



Honestly, I oppose the income tax altogether, which would eliminate many of these problems, but as long as we have it, special breaks should not be given to certain corporations.

[Guest123018-4]

I spent a great deal of time working on fuel cell research with one of the major oil companies. We also worked on hydrogen generation programs. You may want to look at what that research money is going for before you start knocking it.

Are you in favor of eliminating all government research programs or just the ones that the oil companies participate in even if it is in the search for an alternative energy source? Are you aware that oil companies habve some great minds and facilities at their disposal so that new facilities are not required to be built so they get more for their research dollar?

I personally am in favor of all research money being stopped that is funded by taxpayer dollars. It is not the job of the government to do this and private companies can do it without the aid of government if there is a market for the product and it is profitable. If there is no market and no profit can be made then it is a waste of resources.

[essence]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Federal Research and Development Spending

In 2006, Congress appropriated $64 million for Oil and Gas Research and Development by the Department of Energy (DOE). 22 Historically, most of this federal funding has gone to joint projects funded with federal, university and independent company funds intended to develop new reserves and extend the life of old ones. 23 Congress also appropriated $6.9 million for Oil Spill Research in the Department of Interior’s Minerals Management Service in 2006. 24


That's one. We could go into accelerated depreciation and others, but I don't favor special treatment.



Honestly, I oppose the income tax altogether, which would eliminate many of these problems, but as long as we have it, special breaks should not be given to certain corporations.

Hold the front page, government contributes money to government bodies and to university research.

Wow, I would never have guessed.

Of course, it only does that to research directly related to maximising oil compnay profits, and to no other industry.

CoG, you've really convinced me, how could I have been so blind. And a whopping $64 million? And what percentage, may I ask, is that of the total tax revenue from those directly and indirectly involved in the oil industry?

I'm still ghost hunting.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by CJ7

Mlodinow goes on to describe the origins of Microsoft. IBM, whose success was built largely on government subsidized research, had belatedly decided to get into the personal computer business, that bevvy of geniuses having dismissed the trend in its planning during the 1970′s. They did not even have a program to run a PC, and so approached Gates for some help. Gates didn’t have one either, and referred them to Gary Kildall of Digital Research Inc.

FYI, DR-DOS was the forerunner of MS-DOS. the operating system of a computer was in a very early stages of development. Bill Gates basically ripped off DR over its operating system, DR-DOS.

[dilbert firestorm]

with regards to other comments about subsidy & taxes, if I'm reading this right, a tax exemption is considered a subsidy?