Posted on 10/01/2008 8:16:29 PM PDT by Koblenz
From page 180 of the Bailout bill:
1 SEC. 116. CERTAIN INCOME AND GAINS RELATING TO IN
2 DUSTRIAL SOURCE CARBON DIOXIDE TREAT
3 ED AS QUALIFYING INCOME FOR PUBLICLY
4 TRADED PARTNERSHIPS.
5 (a) IN GENERAL.Subparagraph (E) of section
6 7704(d)(1) (defining qualifying income) is amended by in
7serting or industrial source carbon dioxide after tim
8 ber).
9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.The amendment made by
10 this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment
11 of this Act, in taxable years ending after such date.
12 SEC. 117. CARBON AUDIT OF THE TAX CODE.
13 (a) STUDY.The Secretary of the Treasury shall
14 enter into an agreement with the National Academy of
15 Sciences to undertake a comprehensive review of the Inter
16 nal Revenue Code of 1986 to identify the types of and
17 specific tax provisions that have the largest effects on car
18 bon and other greenhouse gas emissions and to estimate
19 the magnitude of those effects.
20 (b) REPORT.Not later than 2 years after the date
21 of enactment of this Act, the National Academy of
22 Sciences shall submit to Congress a report containing the
23 results of study authorized under this section.
24 (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.There is
25 authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section
26 $1,500,000 for the period of fiscal years 2009 and 2010.
(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...
Translation: If you own a business and you breathe, we will tax you to death.
Is the Acorn subsidy still in this bill?
They’ll be finding all sorts of chestnuts buried in that thing for years to come. As for what it has to do with the bailout, surely you jest.
Frankly, I don’t care anymore. I’m voting straight anti-incumbent from now on. Won’t do much good, but it will still give me a tickle.
I’m not sure but it sounds as if they are looking to count profits from carbon credit trading as income for purposes of bill.
Any lawyers out there care to interpret this for us?
It does’nt. I can’t believe that Republicans in the senate voted for this...
Maybe the global environmentalists are attacking the industrialized world.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2091792/posts
Our unprincipled scumbags in Congress lack the integrity to pass one clean bill. They are all disgusting little parasites.
The 451 page document is a bit confusing. The "Bailout" language is on pages 2 thru 113. Apparently they gutted another bill and replaced it with the Bailout law, along with two other bills that had already passed the Senate (but not the House).
From what I can tell, this law that they passed tonight can be broken down into three categories, the latter two had already passed the Senate, as noted.
Page 2 - 113
DIVISION AEMERGENCY ECONOMIC STABILIZATIONThe new Bailout language
Page 113 - 261
DIVISION BENERGY IMPROVEMENT AND EXTENSION ACT OF 2008Page 261 -451
DIVISION CTAX EXTENDERS AND ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX RELIEF
[110th] H.R.6049 : To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for energy production and conservation, to extend certain expiring provisions, to provide individual income tax relief, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] (introduced 5/14/2008) Cosponsors (17)
Committees: House Ways and Means
House Reports: 110-658
Latest Major Action: 9/23/2008 Passed/agreed to in Senate. Status: Passed Senate with an amendment by Yea-Nay. 93 - 2. Record Vote Number: 205.
Here’s the quick list of the senators who voted NO on bailout/economic rescue.
Allard (R)
Barasso (R)
Brownback (R)
Bunning (R)
Cantwell (D)
Cochran (R)
Crapo (R)
DeMint (R)
Dole (R)
Dorgan (D)
Enzi (R)
Feingold (D)
Inhofe (R)
Johnson (D)
Landrieu (D)
Nelson (FL) (D)
Roberts (R)
Sanders (I)
Sessions (R)
Shelby (R)
Stabenow (D)
Tester (D)
Vitter (R)
Wicker (R)
Wyden (D)
Tomarrow i will e-mail each and everyone of them and thank them for standing up for the constitution, capitalism and freedom.
money for Global warming lie??
The Acorn subsidy was removed from the House bill. Still pouring through this 451 page pork barrel monstrosity...this gift from the 'Rats for the House failure to pass the original bill. It will take through the weekend to absorb all the grease from this pig trough.
I thought all tax laws had to start in the House.
BSCO2
US Govt shouts, “Death to Amerika”!
That's the gist of Article 1 Section 7. My son pointed that out in a text message this evening.
.
SEC. 45Q. CREDIT FOR CARBON DIOXIDE SEQUESTRATION. (a) GENERALRULE.For purposes of section 38, 2
the carbon dioxide sequestration credit for any taxable 3 year is an amount equal to the sum of4
(1) $20 per metric ton of qualified carbon di-5 oxide which is6
(A) captured by the taxpayer at a quali-7 fied facility, and 8
(B) disposed of by the taxpayer in secure 9 geological storage, and 10
(2) $10 per metric ton of qualified carbon di-11 oxide which is12
(A) captured by the taxpayer at a quali-fied facility, and 14 (B) used by the taxpayer as a tertiary 15
injectant in a qualified enhanced oil or natural 16 gas recovery project. 17
(b) QUALIFIEDCARBONDIOXIDE.For purposes of 18 this section19
(1) INGENERAL.The term qualified carbon 20 dioxide means carbon dioxide captured from an in-21 dustrial source which22
(A) would otherwise be released into the 23 atmosphere as industrial emission of green-24 house gas, and 25
----
SEC. 117. CARBON AUDIT OF THE TAX CODE.
(a) STUDY.The Secretary of the Treasury shall enter into an agreement with the National Academy of 14
Sciences to undertake a comprehensive review of the Inter-15 nal Revenue Code of 1986 to identify the types of and 16
specific tax provisions that have the largest effects on car-17 bon and other greenhouse gas emissions and to estimate 18 the magnitude of those effects. 19
(b) REPORT.Not later than 2 years after the date 20 of enactment of this Act, the National Academy of 21 Sciences shall submit to Congress a report containing the 22 results of study authorized under this section. 23
(c) AUTHORIZATIONOFAPPROPRIATIONS.There is 24 authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 25
$1,500,000 for the period of fiscal years 2009 and 2010. 26
The National Academy of Science is an offshoot begun about the time of the Civil War.
The present President of the Academy is an expert on the Atmosphere etc.. and has received numerous awards in this field.
The problem I have is "the power he may have over his "fellow scientists" at the academy...and whether they are followers or leaders and "finders of truth" or "creators of truth".
Is his verdict already in?
Go to wiki for more info and see what you think.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.