They are not receiving a subsidy. They don't get a check back from the government. Oil companies already pay somewhere around 41% in tax, compared to the 26% or so by other businesses in the nation.
I wouldn't take that as any sort of 'smoking gun' List of Senators who voted, and how many receive major donations for said oil companies Those 'democrats' who voted against the bill were only doing what they were paid to do; Keep the money flowing.
bull(*)(*)(*)(*). The rate itself is probably as such, but most companies pay much less, to the point of getting a rebate, because of extremely technical accounting tricks and loopholes. Plus they Do get subsidies story link subsidies they surely don't need now.
That is incorrect. A subsidy is when the government actually writes you a check. They receive tax credits for doing certain things, certain research and the like just as any other company does. http://www.forbes.com/2011/04/13/ge...iness-washington-corporate-taxes_slide_4.html
They say that it's a "tax credit", i.e. the oil companies have a preferred rate of rate to other industries. To any normal human being, it's a subsidy, but not to these guys.
My apologies, then. Its a Tax-Credit, not a subsidies. A rose by any other name... Personally - if your industry nets over 40Billion in profits? you don't deserve tax credits specific to their field, especially when most were instituted long ago to help the industry in its infancy.
I don't mind a tax credit for Oil companies. They're certainlytaxed by the government enough as well as us when we buy gas and oil. Obama's policies are destroying the comfort and safety of everyday americans bringing us into 3rd world poverty which seems to be his goal.
True, but Obama voted to approve them back in 2005. I guess he was for them before he was against them.
And I don't mind ending all tax credits and subsidies for all companies since that will limit the power of despots like Obama to influence private companies. What I don't want to do is foolishly end tax credits only to companies that tree hugging libs happen to dislike.
Count me on the side of eliminating tax breaks to big oil if they are not available to other businesses. Using the threat of rising gas prices as an excuse to continue giving these breaks is stupid. Using that argument, I guess we should give them more money, or better yet subsidize them completely and get free gas.
Exactly. Big oil already has a pretty good stranglehold on the market because government regulations crush the ability for small competition to flourish. Raising taxes on big oil companies isn't going to take a dent in their profits at all. They're just going to pass the costs onto consumers.
The answer isn't to give them subsidies and then tax them, the answer is to eliminate both the taxes and the subsidies. Do the subsidies they're given count as corporate profit? Are they taxed?
So? I was fervently against the oil sands as a younger man, and now I am for them. Its not really relevant to the question of whether Big Oil needs them anymore. They don't. I don't care who's in office.
No it won't not one cent will be passed. they don't need tax breaks or subsidies with 42 billion in profits. Tax the oil companies!!
noo..it isn't. What obama did or didn't vote for years ago has nothing to do with the question of whether oil companies need tax breaks. the simple answer to that question is no. where the makeup costs for that goes, is a different question. I wonder if they would be so quick to drop it into the customers laps, as it would be a horrible PR move and more then likely law makers would feel some need to get involved.
Our most expensive bombs are found in our entitlement programs and social programs...bombing the desert is simply the tip in the federal meal.
