Obama ditches widfall profits tax on the oil companys

[Bruce MacPherson]

Well there goes that lower and middle class tax rebate he promised before the election. The industry is pleased, the enviros not so much.
Heaven forbid I might be inclined to think this guy has a clue.

mac

[backpasture]

Well there goes that lower and middle class tax rebate he promised before the election. The industry is pleased, the enviros not so much.
Heaven forbid I might be inclined to think this guy has a clue.

mac

At $80/barrel, the 'windfall' that oil companies were getting at $150/barrel is gone. Hard to have a 'windfall tax' without a 'windfall'.

Heaven forbid you might be inclined to understand what 'windfall' means.

[Matt McKenzie]

I suppose all the folks who wanted to impose a "windfall profits tax" when the price of oil was $140 a barrel are now willing to impose the inverse and give them a huge tax break since it's now $50 a barrel. Or not.

[backpasture]

I suppose all the folks who wanted to impose a "windfall profits tax" when the price of oil was $140 a barrel are now willing to impose the inverse and give them a huge tax break since it's now $50 a barrel. Or not.

Ya. Or not. They already GET huge tax breaks.

[Legacy 6]

When they are paying additional taxes, they just pass it right along to the consumer as part of the "overhead" anyway.

Heaven forbid anyone understands corporate tax.

By the way, what is a "windfall profit" compared to a normal "profit"? And besides, that thing never made sense anyway. You're going to take money from the oil company, in order to give it to the consumer, so they can give it back to the oil company...?? That's how I saw it from the beginning. I'm sure Backpasture will come up with how many scientists are out there who might think I'm stupid... and they might be right. But if they're so smart, how come NOBODY understands this.

Drinkin Kool-Aid regards

[K G]

What's going to be interesting is what happens AFTER 12/17, the date of the next OPEC minister's meeting. This past weekend they announced that $75 a barrel was a "fair" price...........so they'll move to reduce production to the point that they reach that price.

The pain that the Big 3 (and other) automakers are going through is going to work out in the long run IF they truly commit to making more fuel efficient cars. If we USE less, we'll cut OPEC's extorted profits naturally by using less of their product. They won't be able to artificially raise the prices in the world economy if demand for the product shrinks.

Now, if we can just make sure that China, Russia, and other developing countries don't overuse the resource.....we'll see.

JMHO, as always.....

kg

[backpasture]

When they are paying additional taxes, they just pass it right along to the consumer as part of the "overhead" anyway.

Heaven forbid anyone understands corporate tax.

By the way, what is a "windfall profit" compared to a normal "profit"? And besides, that thing never made sense anyway. You're going to take money from the oil company, in order to give it to the consumer, so they can give it back to the oil company...?? That's how I saw it from the beginning. I'm sure Backpasture will come up with how many scientists are out there who might think I'm stupid... and they might be right. But if they're so smart, how come NOBODY understands this.

Drinkin Kool-Aid regards

For an example of 'Windfall Profit', see Exxon Mobil's $14 BILLION profit for the 2nd quarter this year -- the largest profit ever recorded for a US corporation. It broke the previous record, which was set by (you guessed it) Exxon Mobil, in the 1st quarter of this year.

Your assumption that oil companies can just 'increase their prices' and pass a tax on Net Profits (and therefore effectively reduce their 'out of pocket' tax payments) shows your lack of understanding about basic accounting principles. The only way to effectively reduce the 'out of pocket' cost of a Net Profit tax is to reduce the Net Profit. And, assuming all else holds steady (expenses, etc) , increasing prices does NOT reduce Net Profit, it increases it.

Don't assume that because YOU don't understand something, that NOBODY understands it.

[Legacy 6]

For an example of 'Windfall Profit', see Exxon Mobil's $14 BILLION profit for the 2nd quarter this year -- the largest profit ever recorded for a US corporation. It broke the previous record, which was set by (you guessed it) Exxon Mobil, in the 1st quarter of this year.

Still doesn't tell me what a windfall profit is.

Your assumption that oil companies can just 'increase their prices' and pass a tax on Net Profits (and therefore effectively reduce their 'out of pocket' tax payments) shows your lack of understanding about basic accounting principles. The only way to effectively reduce the 'out of pocket' cost of a Net Profit tax is to reduce the Net Profit. And, assuming all else holds steady (expenses, etc) , increasing prices does NOT reduce Net Profit, it increases it.

I still think you don't understand that if the government places a tax on a company, that company has to figure that into their overhead costs... I don't have to "quote" (since you didn't) these huge lofty "accounting principles" to understand that the more my business is taxed, the more I have to charge to my customers.

Don't assume that because YOU don't understand something, that NOBODY understands it.

I just don't assume that because YOU can quote something that SOMEONE ELSE understands that YOU understand it.

[backpasture]

Still doesn't tell me what a windfall profit is.

Alright, then I will copy and paste what Wikipedia says:

Windfall profits are a type of windfall gain. They can occur due to unforeseen circumstances in a product's market, such as unexpected demand or government regulation. Since the profits were unforeseen, some legislators believe that taxing them at a higher rate, or confiscating them outright, should not hurt the company. This type of taxation is known as a windfall profits tax.

I still think you don't understand that if the government places a tax on a company, that company has to figure that into their overhead costs... .

You don't understand that 'overhead costs' are before Net Profit. There are NO overhead costs on Net Profit. Net Profit is the amount of money you have left over after you pay all of your 'overhead costs'.

This stuff isn't rocket science, it's Accounting 101.

[Hoosier]

So if your a waitress and someone gives you a $50 tip when you are expected to get a$10 tip that's windfall, and the government should get $40, Oh I get it. Extrapolating of course that seems to be the way we do things.