Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Al B.

And you are still not counting the royalties. You also seem to imply that 33.4% state taxes is a good number. Do you know any other industry or any other state with such a high figure? How would your business do if you paid 33.4% to the state before you had to jump into federal taxes?


33 posted on 04/13/2012 12:37:58 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: thackney
When you look at the ND state and private landowner take in ND, it's about 33%. Amanda Coyne at the Alaska Dispatch made the case that ND's 33% compares to Alaska's 39%. She states that there is a discrepancy but it's not the wild-eyed 85% vs 11% that some of the Big 3's proponents make.

She also makes the case that Alaska's state take on oil compares very favorably to other places in the world, including TX and LA when you factor in the private landowner take.

Myth-busting claims in Alaska's oil tax debate: Part I

There's also a Part II lined in the above article.

I don't like taxes period, but there should be an agreement between rational people based on truth when it comes to sharing profits between resource owners and operators. I certainly agree that the marginal curve under ACES probably needs changing to further incentivize operators when prices are high, but nothing like the giveaway that the Big 3 are demanding in exchange for....nothing but words.

37 posted on 04/13/2012 1:05:28 PM PDT by Al B. ("Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid." -- Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson