Oil Man Proposes Increase In Oklahoma Oil-and-Gas Tax 182
Hugh Pickens DOT Com (2995471) writes "Daniel Gilbert reports at the WSJ that Oklahoma oil man George Kaiser is breaking with fellow energy executives in asking the state to raise taxes on oil companies, including his own. 'Oklahoma is in desperate financial circumstances,' says the billionaire who controls Kaiser-Francis Oil Co. Kaiser says a higher tax on oil-and-gas production could help the state pay for education and much needed infrastructure improvements, and is asking legislators to return the state's gross production tax to 7 percent, challenging a plan proposed by fellow oil company executives who want to see the rate settle at 2 percent for the first four years of production.
Several energy companies and the State Chamber of Oklahoma say that lower tax rates for the costliest oil and gas wells are necessary to continue drilling at a pace that has stimulated economic activity and created other sources of revenue. Berry Mullennix, CEO at Tulsa-based Panther Energy, credits the tax program for helping his company grow to more than 90 employees, up from 18 a few years ago. 'I would argue the tax incentive is a direct reason we have so much horizontal drilling in the state today,' Mullennix says ... When companies decide to drill a well, they make their best guesses on how much it will cost to drill the well, how much the well will produce and what the commodity price will be. All of those estimates can vary widely, Kaiser says. 'With ad valorem taxes, the difference among states is 2 or 3 or 4 percent. The other factors can vary by 50 or 100 percent.' Compared with those other factors, Kaiser says the tax rate is incidental. 'It's a rounding error.'"
Several energy companies and the State Chamber of Oklahoma say that lower tax rates for the costliest oil and gas wells are necessary to continue drilling at a pace that has stimulated economic activity and created other sources of revenue. Berry Mullennix, CEO at Tulsa-based Panther Energy, credits the tax program for helping his company grow to more than 90 employees, up from 18 a few years ago. 'I would argue the tax incentive is a direct reason we have so much horizontal drilling in the state today,' Mullennix says ... When companies decide to drill a well, they make their best guesses on how much it will cost to drill the well, how much the well will produce and what the commodity price will be. All of those estimates can vary widely, Kaiser says. 'With ad valorem taxes, the difference among states is 2 or 3 or 4 percent. The other factors can vary by 50 or 100 percent.' Compared with those other factors, Kaiser says the tax rate is incidental. 'It's a rounding error.'"
Everyone prepare for Armageddon! (Score:4, Funny)
An oil tycoon wants to give more of his money away, on purpose! Truly this is the first sign of the end of days!
Good for him... He thinks he doesn't pay enough taxes... That's mind blowing.
Weird.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's one of the most cynical observations I've ever read on Slashdot... Doesn't make it any less true though. LOL.
Re:Everyone prepare for Armageddon! (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, George Kaiser is Tulsa's largest philanthropist (perhaps in Oklahoma)
he's donated millions to Tulsa's park system.
Including at least a $100 million for a park project that begins construction this year
http://agatheringplacefortulsa... [agathering...rtulsa.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Corporations set prices at whatever level maximizes profits, in other words the equation profit = profit per unit * units sold = (price per unit - costs per unit) * units sold. Taxing the profit does not change the price level that achieves this. The same goes to all other costs that aff
Re: (Score:2)
...why should the minority with functioning brain stems have to be dictated to by stupid people with stupid agendas?
Majority rule, man...
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure that people without functioning brainstems are quite incapable of dictating anything to those who have them, except perhaps through mediums. If you are taking orders from the dead, and feel compelled to obey, perhaps you should seek psychological help and/or an exorcism?
Also, have enough integrity to not vote from now on.
Re: (Score:3)
um... no... he wants to give more of YOUR money away. The alternative would likely be an increase in income taxes which would likely be progressive and come directly out of his pocket. A gas tax is applied to everyone equally based on their gasoline use.
"...He is among the top 100 richest people in the world..."
and
"...during the 1980s bust in the oil industry in Oklahoma and Texas, Kaiser bought up struggling energy companies whose losses provided him with tax deductions that effectively offset his own inco
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry; no. The 73,954 pages [townhall.com] of the Federal Income Tax Code blow that theory to hell. CEOs and other parasitic rich pricks leverage the countless loopholes to avoid the taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry; no. The 73,954 pages of the Federal Income Tax Code blow that theory to hell.
The Federal Income Tax Code isn't Oklahoma's Income Tax Code, and the tax being talked about is a state tax.
CEOs and other parasitic rich pricks leverage the countless legal deductions to pay the minimum amount of tax they are legally required to pay.
FTFY. Just like every other parasitic prick on the planet. I bet you don't pay more than you are required to, do you? Am I a "parasitic prick" because I gave a thousand bucks to the Red Cross last year so I would owe less in federal taxes? I'd rather see RC get the money than the feds and I'm a bad person?
Re: (Score:2)
A better alternative is to replace transportation sales taxes, which are regressive, with variable express tolls, which permanently eliminate traffic congestion at a much, much lower cost to taxpayers than constantly trying to build your way out of congestion.
Re: (Score:2)
He doesn't want to give more of his money away otherwise he just would. He wants the government to take more of other peoples money.
If he's an executive, the shareholders should fire him. Though he probably has some sweet golden parachute deal.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
oil prices are set on the commodities market not by oil companies.
Oil prices are mostly set by OPEC, a cartel, which can easily increase or decrease the supply of oil in order to move the market price.
There's currently a commodities premium that's been created by speculators,
but if OPEC wanted to, they could crank open the taps and wash that premium away.
/But they don't want to, since 100+ per barrel is great for their national budgets.
Re: (Score:2)
He'll probably increase his prices to adjust for the increase in taxes. The price of oil and gas production go up, and his margins are all a wash.
Good lord man, take an Economics class.
Re: (Score:2)
Warren Buffet could easily pay more taxes. He would just have to start taking compensation as salary, rather than as stock.
He is the biggest hypocrite in this sort of discussion.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You mean he wants to divide the costs of infrastructure evenly amongst the people who benefit it? Outrageous! Someone get the rope!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Everyone prepare for Armageddon! (Score:5, Insightful)
As if cutting/reducing services does not place a burden on its citizens?
If something can be cut without the citizens noticing it, then cut it (regardless of overall financial health, it's just waste).
But most services are there for a reason. It may be a lesser burden (especially if you take the long term view) to raise taxes than to allow certain services to degrade past the point of utility.
Re: (Score:2)
...most services are there for a reason.
Yes, to buy votes.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought they were already cutting services.. ..since that's what not having money for important infrastructure projects means.
*and hey not all of this oil is for selling to oklahoma citizens, so I don't get what the "burden on it's citizens" would be, it's a burden on business of drilling and like he said, 2->7 hike on the tax is not really something that would stop you from exploiting an oil well that you have... if it is, the oil operator is already fucked.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it's because his product is an international commodity. a change in the tax structure in Oklahoma has close to zero effect on the global oil price. He doesn't have the ability to raise his price. If he charges more, people will buy oil from other sources that are selling at the market price.
Re: (Score:3)
Idle threats (Score:5, Insightful)
The other companies that argue higher taxes would scare them from drilling are full of crap. How about paying a fair share to keep the infrastructure well maintained and the populace well educated?
As the last line of the summary says. Compared with those other factors, Kaiser says the tax rate is incidental. 'It's a rounding error.'"
Re: (Score:2)
So, what, exactly, is a "fair share"? And how did you decide how much "fair" was?
Do YOU pay that much? If not, why not?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Society is not a restaurant.
That's a useless statement of the obvious until and unless you provide another definition of "fair" that you believe better applies to society. The AC at least provided a line of reasoning.
Personally I'd like to see the IRS eliminated and the Fair Tax Act implemented. The funny thing about that Act: I've never seen someone rail against it who actually understood how it works. Of course total ignorance about its most basic details didn't seem to stop such people from passionately demonizing it. Gotta
Re: (Score:2)
Fair is hard (Score:3)
Personally I'd like to see the IRS eliminated and the Fair Tax Act implemented.
It's a consumption tax on retail sales with a modestly complicated "pre-bate" scheme to help low income folks with the increased sales taxes. Not complicated to understand what it is. There is plenty of disagreement however regarding whether it is a good idea. It's (probably) progressive on consumption but regressive on income. It also would effectively become a very large entitlement program similar to social security. I don't see it as any more "fair" or sensible than any number of other tax schemes
Re: (Score:2)
As you hinted discussions of "fairness" tend to leave out clear definitions of what they mean by fair - fair in what sense?
I believe the "Fair Tax" proponents mean "fair" in the "equality under the law" sense. Instead of the current system with its varying rates and myriad special taxes and special exceptions and special rebates affecting different classes of people differently, you have, at least in theory, just two aspects applied universally to everyone: a flat tax on the consumption of new goods, and a relatively flat rebate based on standardized poverty level figures for the size of the household.
Regarding being "regressiv
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Idle threats (Score:4, Informative)
Uhh huh
http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/16-giant-corporations-have-basically-stopped-paying-taxes
"General Electric: The worst tax record over five years, with $81 billion in profits and a $3 billion refund.
Boeing: In addition to receiving a refund despite $21.5 billion in profits, the company ranked high in job cutting, underfunded pensions, and contractor misconduct.
Exxon Mobil: Made by far the largest profits in the group, but paid less than 1% in U.S. taxes, and yet received oil subsidies along with their tax breaks. Unabashedly reports a 2012 "theoretical tax" of over $27 billion, almost 90% of its total income tax expense. The company was also near the top in contractor misconduct.
Verizon: Second worst tax record, with a refund despite $48 billion in profits.
Kraft Foods: Received a refund from the public despite $13.5 billion in profits. Also a leading job-cutter.
Citigroup: One of the five big banks who are estimated to get a bailout/refund from the American public amounting to three cents from every tax dollar.
Dow Chemical: Received a refund despite almost $10 billion in profits.
IBM: Paid less than 3% in taxes while ranking as one of the leading job cutters, and near the top in contractor misconduct.
Chevron: In addition to a meager 4.3% tax rate and a share of oil subsidies, the company has been the main beneficiary of tax-exempt government bonds."
Wheres my $3 billion refund?!?
Re: (Score:2)
Do you think receiving a refund means people don't pay taxes?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A "tax refund" is given when a company pays more in taxes during the year than they owe. Why would the government not give a refund if the amount paid in was too high?
Also, the oil companies don't get bail outs, that was the banks, and the left was completely in agreement with it.
Subsidies? You guys keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Re: (Score:2)
Wheres my $3 billion refund?!?
Start a company that employs tens of thousands of tax-paying employees and we'll talk.
Re: (Score:2)
This is complete bullshit. I received a refund last year too. I also paid over 30% of my income in taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know what school you went to but it should be nuked from orbit and your parents need to be dope slapped, twice, just to make sure.
Lets seem 7 percent versus 2 percent....
Well golly, that's darn close to 5 percent.
Or in your math. a rounding error.
Really?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know what school you went to but it should be nuked from orbit and your parents need to be dope slapped, twice, just to make sure. Lets seem 7 percent versus 2 percent.... Well golly, that's darn close to 5 percent. Or in your math. a rounding error. Really?
Comparing the current tax rate to the proposed tax increase is not a "rounding error" at all. It's five percent, just as you say.
Comparing the additional cost of this proposed tax increase to all the other costs involved in obtaining the fuels is what has been identified as a rounding error.
So, while what you say is correct, you're missing the point entirely. This is why context is more important than trying to show everyone how clever you are for finding the obvious "flaw" everyone else "missed".
Re: (Score:3)
So, while what you say is correct, you're missing the point entirely.
Another point that seems to be missing from the discussion is fracking.
This isn't traditional oil drilling they're talking about.
Fracking wells, unlike traditional wells, come with a very sharp drop in production after only a couple of years.
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-10/u-dot-s-dot-shale-oil-boom-may-not-last-as-fracking-wells-lack-staying-power [businessweek.com]
Chesapeake Energyâ(TM)s (CHK) Serenity 1-3H well near Oklahoma City came in as a gusher in 2009, pumping more than 1,200 barrels of oil a day and kicking off a rush to drill that extended into Kansas. Now the well produces less than 100 barrels a day, state records show. Serenityâ(TM)s swift decline sheds light on a dirty secret of the oil boom: It may not last. Shale wells start strong and fade fast, and producers are drilling at a breakneck pace to hold output steady. In the fields, this incessant need to drill is known as the Red Queen, after the character in Through the Looking-Glass who tells Alice, âoeIt takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place.â
Low taxes on output for 4 years means the State has given up its opportunity to tax most of a fracking well's production.
This is a naked resource
Re: (Score:2)
So, while what you say is correct, you're missing the point entirely.
Another point that seems to be missing from the discussion is fracking. This isn't traditional oil drilling they're talking about. Fracking wells, unlike traditional wells, come with a very sharp drop in production after only a couple of years.
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-10/u-dot-s-dot-shale-oil-boom-may-not-last-as-fracking-wells-lack-staying-power [businessweek.com]
Chesapeake Energyâ(TM)s (CHK) Serenity 1-3H well near Oklahoma City came in as a gusher in 2009, pumping more than 1,200 barrels of oil a day and kicking off a rush to drill that extended into Kansas. Now the well produces less than 100 barrels a day, state records show. Serenityâ(TM)s swift decline sheds light on a dirty secret of the oil boom: It may not last. Shale wells start strong and fade fast, and producers are drilling at a breakneck pace to hold output steady. In the fields, this incessant need to drill is known as the Red Queen, after the character in Through the Looking-Glass who tells Alice, âoeIt takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place.â
Low taxes on output for 4 years means the State has given up its opportunity to tax most of a fracking well's production.
This is a naked resource grab that will leave the land scarred and the frackers no where to be found once the oil disappears.
I assume you thought to reply to me because of the similarity between your scenario and the mistake GP made?
It really sounds like another instance of regulatory capture, in which the industry encourages or allows an idea to become enshrined into law that just so happens to benefit its bottom line. The fossil fuel industry is one that can bring to bear a nearly unlimited budget for things like lawyers, lobbyists, advertisers, etc. If they ignore or applaud a law, it's because it serves their interests.
Re: (Score:2)
Never mind RTFA, how about RTFS? I was quoting the summary. The point was not meant to be literal. It is an expression meant to point out how little this would impact the cost of drilling.
Re: (Score:2)
Yikes. And you think *he's* dumb?
Re: (Score:2)
In particular because oil isn't really something that spoils with age, nor is it something that's getting less valuable over time, as a general trend. Even if higher taxes did result in some more oil being left in the ground this year, it'd just be pumped later, probably for more money.
that new new... (Score:2)
...one of my favorite infotainers rush limbaugh was talking about this very meme yesterday on his show.
it was an idea based on an article here [nationalreview.com] that postulates that super wealthy individuals propose liberal ideas not because they really believe them, but to shield themselves from criticisms from the media.
so it's basically a 100% political act, which really makes a ton of economic sense for this guy...it's not like these tax increases are gonna affect his life in anyway.
i must say...due to the timing it woul
Re:that new new... (Score:4, Informative)
No, he's the opposite of Limbaugh -- he's a philanthropist.
He was listed as the third largest donor behind Warren Buffett and Bill and Melinda Gates in 2008. He's also taken the Giving Pledge to give away half of his wealth to charity. The George Kaiser Family Foundation gives millions to the causes of education, child poverty, and community health services.
He's been proposing eliminating tax breaks for oil and gas companies for years. He would rather the money go to health and education.
He's not using this as a political stunt, he's willing to put his money where it counts instead of just being a blowhard like Limbaugh.
Not really (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
excellent link...pretty much proves my original point that this guy is just playing political games to appease the media and people.
Confirmation bias (Score:3)
...one of my favorite infotainers rush limbaugh was talking about this very meme yesterday on his show.
Because Rush is obviously an unbiased source of rational analysis... No chance at all that he would try to twist an event to try to bash liberal ideas. [/sarcasn]
postulates that super wealthy individuals propose liberal ideas not because they really believe them, but to shield themselves from criticisms from the media.
Or maybe we go with the simpler explanation that many of them actually believe what they are saying. It is possible to be wealthy and have liberal ideals you know. It's not like this guy is really in need of shielding from the media.
i must say...due to the timing it would seem that mr. kaiser is a rush fan.
Lots of people like to have their biases confirmed. Doesn't make them correct however.
Lack of demand, not capital, not labor is the key. (Score:5, Insightful)
Berry Mullennix, CEO at Tulsa-based Panther Energy, credits the tax program for helping his company grow to more than 90 employees, up from 18 a few years ago. 'I would argue the tax incentive is a direct reason we have so much horizontal drilling in the state today,' Mullennix says
It would be far more efficient to tax the damned company and keep it at 18 people and use the money to bridges and roads and schools. That would create far more than the measly 72 jobs created by that company.
Look, these entrepreneurs are hard negotiators. If the taxpayers start with, "please please please create some jobs", they will ask for an arm and a leg. You give them an arm and a leg they will be back next year, "an arm and a leg? That was last year. What are you gonna give us this year?". You give another arm and a leg. And the year after they ditch you and go to the next country or state or country because, "your state has people without arms and legs, we can't employ them".
There is plenty of capital. If this Panther Energy does not want to invest there will be a Jaguar Energy or Tiger Energy. The capital markets are sloshing with 3 trillion dollars not knowing where to invest. Tell them the same thing they tell their employees, "this is what this job pays, if you don't like it, keep moving there are plenty who would work at this wage". Well, "this is what costs to do business in our state. If you don't like it, keep moving there are plenty of other investors for us". Unless the tax payer negotiates like this, you will not get anywhere. These crony capitalists invest in the election system, and get their own shills elected as legislators and government executives. That is why money in politics is so insidious.
What we now lack is demand. That is what is stifling the growth. Not the lack of capital, Not the lack of labor (lack of labor would lead to wage inflation). What we need is tough negotiators to represent the tax payers in the government.
We all need to pay higher taxes (Score:2)
Fact of the matter is, our tax rates are too low to cover our preferred lifestyle. Full stop.
So if we'd like to continue living in the manner we're accustomed, taxes absolutely positively have to go up. And the pain of that needs to be allowed to flow down from the top to the lower class just as it has throughout the millennia, without monetary meddling.
Anything short of this will result in the eventual collapse of the system. There's simply no way around it.
And that's the thing that bothers me about the
Re: (Score:2)
This is some pretty fucked up logic right here. Shit, God only wants 10% and that should be more than enough for any government! The argument that we need to pay more taxes and keep giving more away to entitlements belies the facts that we've given away so many tax breaks to big companies and billionaires that the only way the Feds can keep things afloat is to borrow massively and tax the middle class out of existence.
Re: (Score:2)
The argument that we need to pay more taxes and keep giving more away to entitlements belies the facts that we've given away so many tax breaks to big companies and billionaires that the only way the Feds can keep things afloat is to borrow massively and tax the middle class out of existence.
It's a choice. Since we lack the political will to curb the spending in any meaningful way - and we do certainly lack that will - we need to up the taxes. It's just math.
The middle class is not being taxed out of existence, it is being job and wage-decreased "out of existence".
I genuinely believe that the middle class is a myth invented by politicians. It simply doesn't exist. There are those in power and those who are not. Unless those who are not in power are made to suffer, the system will collapse under its own weight.
It's blindingly simple.
Re: (Score:2)
With the deficits we're running right now and with the lack of new citizens to pay for all of it, I suspect we'll be collapsing here in about 8 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's a good article on it - http://www.forbes.com/sites/re... [forbes.com]
To understand the magnitude of this problem, the authors note one solution that includes all the following: âoeraise income taxes by 17 percent, raise payroll taxes by 24 percent, cut federal purchases by 26 percent, and cut Social Security and Medicare benefits by 11 percent.â
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit! We're being taxed out of existence to pay for all this horseshit. Nobody is arguing about basic services but why in the fuck is it necessary to dig deeper into my pockets to pay for fucking programs that do nothing but buy votes? Fuck the morality argument because I don't work 60+ hours a week as a small businessman to have it sucked away by some overbearing entity who thinks they know what's best for me. I think we all (that means even everybody) has to pay something into the system but as a
Re: (Score:2)
Virtucon, your anger is severely misplaced. Many of those regulations that are making life difficult for you are primarily from larger businesses that want to keep you from competing fairly with them. That's not to say that there aren't some that are real efforts at fixing a problem but that aren't well-designed, but that's the sort of problem that could be fixed assuming the government was set up to respond to the people. I'm guessing there are also some annoying regulations you don't like that are actuall
Re: (Score:2)
Oh shit, there's so much here that I could blow up on but leave it at this: You solve it by cutting it out, it's one problem and that's people who seem to think that because you work hard and have become successful that you should somehow miraculously give more back to society. What they forget is that all the while you were trying to establish yourself, you were giving, you were paying taxes. Taxes on property, on equipment, on vehicles on gas on fucking everything you buy just to make a living. Now we
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I did read it and I do get my news from multiple sources. Unfortunately since I gave away a lot of money in Federal Taxes last year, not including Self Employment Tax and spent a lot on local taxes and sales taxes and licenses and franchise taxes in multiple states I'm a bit, call it what it is, jaded. That means I have absolutely no fucking sympathy for any plans where people claim that more money is needed from our pockets. Fuck that, they need to make adjustments like we all do. They need to make pr
Re: (Score:2)
More taxes does not increase lifestyle. You can't take money from one pocket and then give it to another pocket and end up with more than you started with.
That's not even remotely what I said. Here's some code, maybe that will grok...
If (ContinueLifestyle)
then (If (IncreaseTaxes)
then (Survive)
else (CrashAndBurn))
else (Chaos)
Nobody said money moves magically, and in fact I'm advocating the oppo
Won't happen (Score:3, Insightful)
Oklahoma is one of the most conservative states of the Union. Instead the state government, under pressure from jerb creators, will cut social programs and raise sales taxes, while cutting corporate income taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even Alaska has put all residents on the dole.
Probably not what it appears (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He drills new wells as well. The 2% is on new production, not new companies.
He wants 7% becasue the state needs the money. There is no need for an ulterior motive here.
Says the man who is already rich (Score:2)
Not an unexpected proposal from a guy who already made his pile of money. Close the door behind him so nobody else gets to play by the same rules he did. I'd like to know how much money he would have had to pay in taxes if this were implemented when he was starting out.
Re: (Score:3)
A) Who cares?
B) It applies to new production; which include himself.
C) His company started in 1966. the lower tax didn't started until 1995.
IN short, you are wrong on every point.
You're welcome.
Re: (Score:2)
A) You should because it's indicative of the human behavior of successful people throwing road blocks in the path of anyone trying to do the same.
B) Irrelevant to my point. He's already made his pile so he doesn't care if it costs him more. People trying to break into the business without the benefit of a large fortune to draw from are now less able to do so. Some won't even bother which works to his advantage because somebody will drill for it.
C) You're assuming that the higher tax rate prior to 1995 wa
Deficit Spending In The Guise of Job Creation (Score:3)
Texas has this issue too where Perry runs around to "over regulated liberal states", dishes up big tax breaks for them to put a plant in Texas, and ignores the costs while claiming all of the unrealized future benefits! Going to California and cutting a tax break to a small company of the tune of $50 million is a boon to that company but it makes no sense to the market or the state because they will never "create" $50 million in revenue for the state.
This behavior is stuff that creates bubbles and is just government deficit spending under the guise of "job creation". But that isn't their concern today is it because when the time comes that the business fails or overloaded infrastructure needs upgrades and expansions they won't have to deal with the raising taxes or a bond because they'll be long gone.
Re: (Score:2)
While I don't agree with Rick Perry on everything, the budget in Texas is just fine. [economist.com] Could there be changes? Yes, but there is no perfect economy in this nation and at some point you have to question governments that would much rather practice bureaucratic wealth re-distribution in the name of social progressiveness. That becomes collective thought where initiative dies. All that gets you is bigger government and more people wanting a hand out. Large, wealthy corporations don't deserve hand-outs and th
72 more employees: whoop dee do. (Score:2)
72 more employees doesn't really matter when the state is going to hell. If it was enough employees to make a difference in state revenue, they would have a point.
Use it for education (Score:2)
http://newsok.com/report-oklahoma-leads-nation-in-percentage-of-cuts-to-school-funding/article/3882174
Market entry (Score:2)
I can't believe that people are falling for this (Score:2)
We all know that businesses really don't pay taxes, right? I mean they do, but the companies charge more for their products and services as a result of paying taxes. There's not a single business around that just eats that cost. My point is that it's not like this man is voluntarily giving up money. He will still make just as much money.
Everyone who uses oil and gas products will pay a higher price because of this. I'm not saying that's good or bad - that's not the point of my post. I'm just trying to point
Re: (Score:2)
Looking at the wrong part of the equation (Score:2)
What news is this? (Score:2)
One billionnaire is'nt a fully selfish guy, and understands the need for state financed infrastructure and services. How does this qualifies as stuff that matters? There are others in the same mood.
Is this place becoming a libertarian shout house or what?
I have a better idea (Score:2)
If the state is in dire straits, he should donate some of his profit to help it. Why should the tax payer take on even more of the corporate welfare debt?
Hang on.... (Score:2)
Isn't the tax increase just passed onto customers as higher rates? How does this help? Wouldn't the same thing be achieved more efficiently by raising the income tax?
In any case, why would Gilbert care? It's not his money.
Re: (Score:2)
Hugh Pickens has at least three accounts that I've seen attached to stories.
Re: (Score:2)
They're all variations on that name. Can't remember them exactly, but one was "Hugh Pickens" (no dot com) and there was another one that's similar.
Re: (Score:2)
Then don't worry, because the tax this man is proposing is neither an oil nor a gas tax.
It is an ad volorem production tax. It is not a point-of-sale tax. It's more along the lines of a VAT.
The idea is that there are enormous external costs that oil and gas producers pass on to people without their consent. These taxes are meant in a very tiny way to obviate those external costs. There really is no other way to do it. Corporate structure in the
Re: (Score:2)
I think they are raising taxes on the oil and gas companies and not directly the oil and gas that consumers purchase.
So how do you do one without also doing the other? Or to put it another way: if you raise the taxes of all oil/gas companies, what do you think those companies are going to do next?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Prices are not affected by this type of ad volorem tax. The theory, at least, is that prices are set by competition and corporate tax rates do not enter into it.
As Republican Bruce Bartlett (Reagan Administration, George HW Bush Administration, staff of Jack Kemp and Ron Paul) reluctantly admits:
Re: (Score:2)
The theory, at least, is that prices are set by competition and corporate tax rates do not enter into it.
No "theory" is required. There's plenty of empirical evidence that when a local tax is applied to the production of a globally traded commodity, there is virtually no effect on the price of that commodity.
Of course, what happens to the level of production within the tax authority is another matter.
Re: (Score:2)
If we want the owners of capital to pay taxes, then we don't need to tax corporations (and rely on unproven economic theories to assure ourselves that the cost won't be passed onto ourselves). We need to tax capital gains directly.
I suspect, in fact, that once we start doing so, we could institute flat (and relatively low) tax rate for personal income, get rid of sales taxes and minimum wage (and other forms of regressive taxation), and just go over to universal basic income guarantee - and still have plent
Re: (Score:2)
Or to put it another way: if you raise the taxes of all oil/gas companies, what do you think those companies are going to do next?
That's great, except no one is talking about raising taxes on ALL oil/gas companies. Kaiser's proposal affects the rate levied on producing wells in Oklahoma. The proposal will have virtually no effect on overall oil/gas prices, much less prices at the pump.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What is going to happen next is that Oklahoma will spend money on roads that the oil industry uses and services that will make the state a palatable place for oil workers with families to live, thereby creating a reliable supply of skilled employees. New drilling projects become more reliably on time and on budget, thereby reducing the effective risk.
The competent oil men whether the 5 year projects overrun budget and take 7 years to complete, because deliveries are always late and their best employees hav
Re: (Score:2)
It's more about hemorrhaging money for Taj Mahal schools and paying teachers more money than god for half a year's "work". My teachers in the 1950s and early 60's taught for very short money because they loved it and were dedicated, and they did an infinitely better job of it than today's grossly overpaid teachers and administrators.
For education, ZERO dollars should flow from the feds to the states, and minimal dollars from the states to the towns. Th
Re: (Score:3)
Are you..high?
Taj Mahal schools? what? half a year? what teacher only works half a year? Teacher work MORE hours today then ever. Teachers pay more out of pocket expensive for the class room then ever.
Average Work schedule
Works 9 months
Teaches 8 hours per day
Arrives early or stays late by about an hour
Spends 3-5 hours daily planning, grading, communicating with parents, attending meetings, etc.
Spends 2-4 weeks per year participating in continuing education
Spends 3 weeks per year planning curriculum
Spends 4
Re: (Score:2)
"First, increasing corporate taxes will ultimately increase the cost to consumers."
And?
"Why haven't prices plummeted?"
becasue we allow exports of local petroleum products. Locally, it's a lot of oil, globally, it is not.
" I would be looking at where our Federal taxes are going and asking why we get nearly zero dollars back to states for education from the Feds."
That's in no way relative, or accurate.
Re: (Score:2)
We already pay more for oil, it's called the free market where oil and gas are traded as commodities. Problems in the Ukraine, the price of oil and gas goes up. Problems with Iran, oil and gas go up. The problem is that the brokers and middlemen all take their cut and the producer gets a windfall. Unfortunately because they've claimed poverty and the need for incentives to produce, they get tax breaks in terms of property taxes both on land and equipment. Oil and Gas production in this nation has gamed
Re: (Score:2)
It's the collective action [problem.
Also, there is the issue where raising it for all is a level playing field.
Re: (Score:2)
Mod This Up. Nothing is stopping old Warren from giving a gift to the Treasury, but has he done it? Fuck No.
Re: (Score:2)
Bilked? He lost his shirt is Solyndra, he owned over 1/3rd of the company and it's now bankrupt.
Re:Stop the presses! (Score:4, Insightful)
A rich asshole who has everything life has to offer feels guilty and proposes liberal ideas. No! Say it ain't so! That's SO unique!
Wrong! Headline reads, "CEO of an established oil company, seeks to eliminate subsidy on new competitors, while pretending to be self-sacrificing."
Racist (Score:2, Flamebait)