by coyote » Fri 04 Nov 2005, 16:10:38
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')il firms' profits too high
Public Policy; Political and Legal News
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has demanded hearings for energy company officials to face questioning. Sen. Byron Dorgan is leading the Democrats' response. The North Dakotan has introduced legislation allowing for three years a 50 percent excise levy on oil companies' profits when the price of crude oil exceeds $40 a barrel. There is provision made in the bill for the companies to avoid the tax by the amount they invest their profits in producing energy by drilling for oil or natural gas, building new oil refineries or producing renewable energy forms. The proceeds would be rebated to consumers under Dorgan's plan.
Bismarck Tribune
Does anyone else think this is a draconian response? I'm not a huge fan of the oil companies myself, but I think the fact that they're applying their profits to buy back shares is a reasonable preparation for possible future slim years. Remember the nineties were a nervous decade for this industry, with a lot of smaller oil companies going out of business. The industry hasn't forgotten that.
I think this is just another example of politicians' decisions being driven by political pressure from a lot of upset voters who are pretty thoroughly unaware of the real issues. Applying the windfall tax revenues to customer rebate paybacks has the net effect of forcing the American oil companies to sell cheaper. The equivalent of a price cap. It will make them even less able to compete with the big oil producing nations.
Why give the oil companies a huge amount of pork money with an idiotic energy bill, then turn around and take it away again with a windfall profits tax? Today's politics seem more and more insane to me.
If they are going to do something like this, then how about applying the tax revenue to alternative energy investments? That would at least make some sense.