Posted on 08/22/2011 8:17:41 AM PDT by The Bronze Titan
Oil companies in Alaska are paying more money in taxes than ever before. The state's oil and gas tax revenues for its just-ended fiscal 2007 topped $10 billion. That's twice as much as fiscal 2006 and four times more than 2004. Some supporters of Barack Obama see that money coming in and say that John McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, must have done what Sen. Obama wants to do -- sock those companies with a big fat windfall profit tax. This is a deeply misleading reading of her 2007 tax reform.
...continued HERE.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
If that is what she is trying to do, that would be a progressive tax,
The way it is advertised is it is just to make sure that the state gets an equitable share of the profits and not to try to modify the price of oil .... which seems impossible since Alaska is too small to have more than a 1-2% affect on world oil prices.
Seems that the scheme may Incentivize higher prices...not lower....and there really isn’t anyway Alaska is going to lower prices by itself.
That’s a great point - as soon as a tax is in place the Dems will be chanting ‘Drill baby, drill!’
The long and short of it is that Sarah Palin didn’t DO anything TO the oil companies. She UNDID what the oil companies were doing to the people of Alaska via bribes and corruption...which allowed them to sit on leases without developing them, keeping prices high for everyone.
That is a good report. Here is the direct link to the source rather than through some blog with ads.
http://www.commonwealthnorth.org/documents_cwnorth/Final%20OITS%20Report%203-15-11.pdf
That report highlights how the Tax enacted under Governor Palin is too high and needs to be reduced. On page 4:
Recommendations
1. Alaska’s current oil tax structure under Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share must be made more competitive in order to encourage oil profits to be reinvested in Alaska. The progressivity tax should be reduced and/or capped.
2. Alaska should continue to encourage exploration for new oil reserves through tax credits and incentive programs.
3. The Governor and the Legislature must make oil production a matter of highest priority. The Legislature must pass revisions to ACES this year. If it takes a special session, hold one.
“The people of Alaska OWN the oil in the ground.. NOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT or the oil companies..”
Just to make clear, Alaska is the only state where this is the case - it is in their Constitution. And was a firm point - if they couldn’t hold on to ALL of their natural resources (timber, fish, wildlife, oil, minerals....) they weren’t going to become a state.
However, with so much of Alaska land tied up as Federal land - the fed’s can prevent them from getting to their resources (ANWR).
What leases did she change this way? No production has started from Point Thomson.
Just a note, I don’t pay state taxes here, due to the good management of the Government, they pay me.
Texas has oil, California has oil, compare the differences.
Now you Rabid yet?
This is an excellent point of discussion and debate. So refreshing to see it.
Paying a state resident for oil revenues seems to me an excellent idea, and consistent with capitalism, if you look at oil in terms of who owns it when its in the ground.
It’s not a stretch to look at oil as something different than something like owning forest land or farm land. Oil’s generally down there pretty deep. To say one ‘owns’ an oil well because you happen to own a parcel over a resevoir of it that may cover 1000’s of square miles is something I have an issue with.
It made sense when we were developing oil in the early days of the industry, but we know more now. In fact, its down so deep we know it could NOT have come from rotting dinosaurs and mesozoic plant life, et. al. If the state allowed oil companies to access the resource, and it was something every LEGAL CITIZEN of the state could have a share in, I think the costs to the oil companies would still be less than developing such resources in hostile foreign countries and then shipping it here.
In fact, we currently subsidize the defense of such assets right now protecting such interests in those same ‘partner countries’. If those assets should be destroyed or damaged, the current policy is that the cost of replacement is guaranteed by the taxpayers.
The oil company, through its private development and refinement of extraction technologies and processes is entitled to what they are getting in profit. However, if the oil extracted domestically can’t be looked at as a resource rightfully belonging to the citizens of that state, at least in part, then I don’t know what is?
I know that water is increaingly being looked at in a similar fashion, and it is already well established that one man drilling a water well on one piece of land and over extracting from it adversely effects other landowners in the area.
Palin not only gave the oil companies incentive to MAXIMIZE their extraction in Alaska, she argued that maintaining the average Alaskan as a permanent stakeholder would reduce their companies expenses in the medium and long term AND give the companies a willing laboratory for better future extraction techniques.
If more states went to the Alaska model, you’d have fewer envirowhackos prevailing in those states. Go to any refinery town and start pissing on about how ‘burning dead dinosaurs is so dirty and so yesterday’. You won’t find many sympathetic ears.
Colorado is especially critical in this regard. They not only hold shale and coal resources on par with most oil nations, they also have much of the worlds proven Thorium, and a great deal of the world’s proven Uranium.
None of it is coming out of the ground because the average citizen doesn’t have a stake in it. Were the governor there go to the Alaskan model at this opportune moment in economic history, I think he’d have allies from all stripes - oil companies, mining companies, unions, D’s, R’s - everyone but the greenies, and they are wearing out their welcome everywhere.
You just have to agree that the resources have to be developed by US interests, or foreign companies with US ownership above some acceptible percent. Each state can agree to its own terms.
The other thing that HAS to end, however, is the great US federal land grab. Turn that all back over to the states and let them go to market as they are wont to. The winners and the losers will sort themselves out.
Great topic.
The Alaska Constitution only holds on to the State and Private land mineral rights. The natives hold their mineral rights and the Feds own the Federal Land mineral rights.
No, not satisfied with my knowledge.....not her fault
If she enters the race .. I will find out, I thought someone might already know on FR.
If it is progressive then it still means she is a top choice for me ... meaning she maybe 1 of 2 or 3 to choose between
But if it as so many have told me to be a straight percentage then not only will I vote for her, I will march in the streets for her.
I think Palin can ride this energy theme into the White House as an EXPERT, which is something the rest of the field cannot.
I don’t think Texans get checks when oil companies drill there.
If every state could go to the Alaskan model, it could turn the whole country around.
You gotta get a drill to the oil before production. The Liberty project is the biggest side drill in America. It may not be producing oil yet but hey, in the long run It may produce more than any other field.
It really is not fair to say its not in production when they started building the drill rig a year ago.
[ Their oil revenue is so huge and their population relatively small, so they are all getting a nice chunk of the oil wealth, plus I think it finances most state government programs. A deal no other state has that I know of. ]
YOU have a problem with that?...
WHat re-distribution program would satisfy you?..
The LAST THING the federal government needs is MORE MONEY...
Giving a heroin addict more heroin is also WRONG..
“...and the Feds own the Federal Land mineral rights.”
Oh - thanks! One of these days we will have to storm the gates to develop our natural resources. Have the feds open up their land to development and reap the rewards to bring down our debt.
Could you provide a source for your quote please?
This is from the article
“ Some say Mrs. Palin’s ACES is like that, because this year every Alaskan will receive a $1,200 check as a share of the oil bonanza. (The check comes in addition to the approximately $2,000 every Alaskan will receive this year as a dividend from the Permanent Fund, which was established by state constitutional amendment in 1976 as a way of sharing the state’s mineral wealth with the people.)
A direct share in oil profits for every citizen is the ultimate incentive for more drilling.”
There are two types of payments. The Oil Companies do not own the land they are drilling on. They must pay a fee for it’s use and the fee goes directly to the people of Alaska instead of into the state coffers. That sounds like an awesome plan to me.
That is only the base rate at or below $30 per barrel. At $92.5/bbl it is 50%. From there it rises another 0.1% for every $1 increase.
http://www.commonwealthnorth.org/documents_cwnorth/Final%20OITS%20Report%203-15-11.pdf
Page 6,p> Keep in mind this is after the royalties are first paid. The companies also pay property taxes if the property is used for oil/gas. No other industry in Alaska has to pay state property taxes.
Then the Feds add their corporate taxes.
I forgot the Alaskan Corporate tax as well.
When you find out could you tell me please. I *thought* I was smart enough to have almost figured it out but I’m not so sure. I like things simple, and this is definitely not a simple subject.
Individual Texans get a check from the minerals rights they lease. Mineral rights are individual owned and can be sold separate from the surface land in Texas and many other states.
If every state could go to the Alaskan model, it could turn the whole country around.
If you want to take individual owned mineral rights from the individual owners, Texas or elsewhere, you better come prepared for a fight.
[ The long and short of it is that Sarah Palin didn’t DO anything TO the oil companies. She UNDID what the oil companies were doing to the people of Alaska via bribes and corruption...which allowed them to sit on leases without developing them, keeping prices high for everyone. ]
True.. thats the short and sweet of it... well said..
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.