11 votes

Romney Supports Stealing Your Tax Dollars for Big Oil Companies

In 2011, the top five oil companies (BP, Chevron, Conoco, Shell, Exxon Mobil) posted a combined profit of $137 billion. In the first quarter of 2012, these companies earned a combined $33.5 billion. Last year, these fossil fuel companies got $11 billion in government subsidies.

The fossil fuel industry receives nearly six times more in government subsidies than the renewable energy industry. This creates significant entry barriers for the renewable energy industry and stifles competition. Why is it that oil and gas companies are allowed to deduct up to 80 percent of the costs of drilling? Why do loopholes allow corporations like BP to deduct costs incurred from cleaning up spills and paying damages? How can we expect oil companies to prevent spills if they can rely on taxpayers to pay for cleanup?

Mitt Romney probably doesn’t pump his own gas, but he definitely has some friends who are oil executives. They’ve got his ear and they’ve lined his pockets, and they are counting on him to maintain their precious tax breaks. It’s time for Romney to stop dancing around the issue and admit that he wants taxpayers to subsidize his Big Oil friends who are making billions off of skyrocketing gas prices. Romney’s chief energy advisor, billionaire oil executive Harold Hamm, has vocally urged Congress to maintain the tax breaks he enjoys.

Four questions for Romney's chief energy advisor, Harold Hamm:

1. If you still need special tax breaks after your stock nearly tripled in value in three years, when would your billion-dollar company not need taxpayer help?

2. Given that you are one of the world's top 100 wealthiest people, do you defend tax subsidies so you have more money to give to Super PACs?

3. Are the billions in subsidies you already receive not enough for you to act to prevent toxic oil spills?

4. Can you identify which position on the Forbes Billionaires list a wind executive would have to obtain before he or she should be eligible for a tax credit?
http://realrepubs.com/content/four-questions-harold-hamm-rom...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

funny

"The fossil fuel industry receives nearly six times more in government subsidies than the renewable energy industry."

Shouldn't they receive much more of the "subsidies" if we consider how much more energy they produce in comparison with the "renewable energy industry"? (sarcasm)

How is a reduction in your government payment a "subsidy?"

??

_____________________________
"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels

Wrong question.

"Why is it that oil and gas companies are allowed to deduct up to 80 percent of the costs of drilling?"

The real question is: Why aren't they allowed to deduct 100 percent of the costs of drilling? (I was not aware they were not. Maybe you are not accurately presenting the situation.)

I'm not really convinced taxing businesses is a good idea in the first place. But if you're going to tax businesses, I would think you would only tax profits, not all revenue. (Then again, I think the idea of ascribing profits to businesses is kind of nonsense -- shareholders/investors collect profits via dividends/returns, employees collect profits via income, a business may form capital which it either reinvests or disburses at a later time, but the businesses itself doesn't really make any profit. The business is just the mechanism by which profit is made. Starting with such an illogical concept and then trying to write tax law to it is just a prescription for insanity, such as a special, somewhat punitive, tax called the Accumulated Earnings Tax which imposes a special tax on the corporation if it has what are deemed to be excessive earnings. Not only do businesses not really have profits, they don't really pay taxes either -- those too end up being paid by people.)

"How can we expect oil companies to prevent spills if they can rely on taxpayers to pay for cleanup?"

Spoken like someone who doesn't know math. If an oil company has to pay (say) 30% tax on their profits, and they had profits of $1000M, then they would get to keep $700M and have to pay $300M. But if on top of their normal expenses they incur a $400M cleanup cost, their profits are now only $600M, and they have to pay $180M in taxes, leaving them with only $420. If the "taxpayers pay for cleanup" as you say, then I think this company would like to know how it can get its $700M - $420M = $280M back.

(And guess what happens to prices if you start taxing revenue rather than profits... The market distortions from tax-avoidance "stove-piping" would be epic.)

"Mitt Romney probably doesn't pump his own gas"

In some states no one pumps their own gas. They've made it illegal.

"Are the billions in subsidies you already receive not enough for you to act to prevent toxic oil spills?"

Why would you think gifts with no strings attached (or at least no strings related to oil spills) have anything to do with preventing oil spills? That's some pretty fuzzy thinking.

Anyways, to the extent that oil companies are receiving actual subsidies, those should be eliminated. (And from what I've heard elsewhere there are some real subsidies issues in the oil industry - but you've done a poor job of presenting them here.) But deducting the real costs of doing business? Everyone should be allowed to do that.

We know! We know!

Romney's a D bag! Can we stop with all of the posts that state the obvious?

Um...he's right

You are basically using the socialist retoric that keeping more of your own money is somehow a subsidy.

I'm all for a flat tax system with no loopholes so government can't pick winners and losers, but save the retoric for the democrat websites. This is supposed to be a place where people understand freedom, less government, and basic economics.

No way Ron Paul buys this argument. I am frankly disappointed that people who claim to follow Ron Paul would vote this up.

I would expect to see this on HuffPo.

Tu ne cede malis.

2014 Liberty Candidate Webpage:
http://candidates4liberty.com/home.html

2014 Liberty Candidate Thread:
http://www.dailypaul.com/287246/2014-liberty-candidate-thread

So, you want oil companies to

So, you want oil companies to pay their fair share? Then, what? Do you think they will pay more and everyone else will pay less? Government will simply spend more. You should look into Obama's plans.

I am all for lesser taxes for whomever can get it. I think corporations should not be taxed at all.

“If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

Funny how some people

COMPLETELY miss the point of some threads.

Dumb: "So, you want oil companies to pay their fair share?"Do you think they will pay more and everyone else will pay less?"

Sorry, I don't have an occupy mentality, and I'm certainly not one of those "make the rich pay more" type of people. You don't seem to understand the purpose of the post, so you can take your "class warfare" somewhere else. I'll save the waste of time looking into Obamas plans as well.

De criminalize Liberty!

I have no problem with

them paying less taxes, or writing of a lot of stuff off.

I have on the other hand major problems with corporate welfare.

Romney/Ryan also voted for K-Street and TARP.....

Romney and Ryan, the two stooges also voted for K-Street three times.
They voted in favor of the government bailouts, four times.
And most disgraceful of all, they voted in favor of TARP as well as the Federal Education bill more than three times in a row.

If you didn't tell, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan's voting record are among the worst in the entire congress.
http://www.campaignforliberty.com
http://www.opencongress.org/roll_call/all

As if any help was needed on that end to support their crimes either way already.

With it being early in this election season, all I can say is I pray for a miracle and let the court filings begin. No matter what occurs, the Paul delegation needs to fiercely battle this out in court; show up and be loudly heard.

If this thing is turned around, at least we'll be able to offer a mighty roar towards Obama and scare him. Even if there is zero chance Paul would ever win, we owe it to ourselves to take complete control of the GOP and leave them smacked on their ass.

You do not know the political statement it would make, to have the last true commies booted from the GOP. It would at least make Obama so scared, he would never underestimate us again when he steals it.