Started By
Message

re: Chyna Joe another nail in the oil industry

Posted on 1/27/21 at 8:16 am to
Posted by Mid Iowa Tiger
Undisclosed Secure Location
Member since Feb 2008
18756 posts
Posted on 1/27/21 at 8:16 am to
quote:

What subsidies?



My understanding is he is going after things like MLPs (now wanting to tax the entity and then also the investor's income); depletion allowances, allowances for intangible drilling costs, etc.
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
119044 posts
Posted on 1/27/21 at 8:21 am to
quote:

My understanding is he is going after things like MLPs (now wanting to tax the entity and then also the investor's income); depletion allowances, allowances for intangible drilling costs, etc.




That ain't happening under an EO. That is tax law. Congress needs to make those changes. And those legal corporate structures are not subsides. FWIW, those corporate structures were set up to incentivize energy companies to bring reliable energy to consumers. Renewable energy producers can participate in those corporate structures too. It's not limited to just O&G energy providers.
Posted by TigerDog83
Member since Oct 2005
8276 posts
Posted on 1/27/21 at 8:27 am to
quote:

depletion allowances, allowances for intangible drilling costs, etc.


No way this can be changed by some flimsy executive order. The last president that tried to heavily push this was JFK and see how that worked out. The industry should be allowed to normalize their tax policies on inventory just like any other industry. The playing field should be level and that's essentially what these tax policies were originally put in place for.
This post was edited on 1/27/21 at 8:30 am
Posted by BiteMe2020
Texas
Member since Nov 2020
7284 posts
Posted on 1/27/21 at 8:37 am to
quote:

My understanding is he is going after things like MLPs (now wanting to tax the entity and then also the investor's income); depletion allowances, allowances for intangible drilling costs, etc.


Back when America still followed the Constitution, he'd need to work with Congress to change those policies. And Congress used to not like to forfeit these powers to the Executive Branch, but have increasingly done so, making our Constitution moot.

"depletion allowances" are legitimate and proper, since they reflect the decreasing value of the initial investment in buying or leasing land with reserves. There's literally nothing wrong with that - it reflects an economic reality.

Geez. Double taxation of partnerships would also seem to require Congressional action... at least back when the President could not write law.

But frick, the Executive Branch now can extend the lowering of the statutory rates on student loans to 0%, costing taxpayers, without getting Congressional approval. I'd have to dig through the legislation to see if this was yet another Congressional power they abdicated to the Executive Branch in the Muh COVID Relief Bill.

There's a legal concept of what powers can be legally delegated to another branch, but I'm not sure where that fits in here.
This post was edited on 1/27/21 at 8:38 am
Posted by MrLSU
Yellowstone, Val d'isere
Member since Jan 2004
26042 posts
Posted on 1/27/21 at 8:52 am to
The elimination of the IRS 179 deduction for vehicles over 6k pounds is included in this which means he just really screwed farmers, businesses, and car manufacturers.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram