House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., noted it was two years ago, when oil cost $55 a barrel, when Bush said oil companies need no government subsidies to pursue more oil or gas.
“With the price of oil hovering around $100 do we really believe this incentive is justified?” asked Hoyer. “Do these companies need taxpayer subsidies to look for new product? They don’t need any incentive.”
This is in reference to the House’s recent approval of new taxes on the oil industry amount to an estimated $18billion over the next 10 years. Really it isn’t so much of a new tax as roll back of previously enacted tax breaks (I try to not use the word “subsidy” when an industry is given a tax break that is minuscule compared to the overall tax burden leveled on its product).
The article continues:
But other energy industries and energy efficiency advocates have campaigned for the legislation because of the tax incentives that would be directed their way.“These incentives must be extended immediately to void significant harm to the development of clean energy industries in the United States,” said a letter to lawmakers from more than 100 businesses, electric utilities, environmental groups and energy efficiency advocates.
Ok Congressman Hoyer, let’s be consistent here. So let me ask. With the price of oil hovering around $100 do we really believe this incentive [to other energy industries] is justified? Do these companies need taxpayer subsidies to look for new product?
Although, if the legislation does get passed the Senate and the President’s veto pen, I won’t be surprised at all if the oil companies targeted in the legislation aren’t suddenly pursuing technology that will qualify them for the new subsidies.
