Thursday, August 28, 2008

Fat Cat Oil Shareholders? No, "Broadly Middle-Class"

According to the study "The Distribution of Ownership of U.S. Oil and Natural Gas Companies," authored by Robert J. Shapiro and Nam D. Pham of Sonecon:

The data suggest that ownership of oil and natural gas company shares is broadly middle-class.

1. 42.7% are owned or held by mutual funds and other asset management companies that have mutual funds. Mutual funds manage accounts for 55 million U.S. households with a median income of $68,7006, and the owners of mutual funds include 16% of households with incomes of $25,000 or less.

2. 27% of oil and natural gas company shares are held in private and public pension funds, and these funds manage assets, directly or indirectly, on behalf of 129 million pension-fund participants whose accounts have an average value of $62,280.


3. 14% of oil and natural gas company shares are held in IRA-type retirement accounts with an average value of $22,465, owned by 45 million Americans.

10 Comments:

At 8/28/2008 2:55 PM, Anonymous QT said...

Seems like everyone is richer than they think. Isn't it a comfort to know that your money is being so well managed and spent by such altruistic, dedicated people.

 
At 8/28/2008 3:07 PM, Anonymous QT said...

It just gets better...

 
At 8/28/2008 3:53 PM, Anonymous bob wright said...

So if we compared the profit of the average XOM shareholder with the income of Obama ($4.2 million in 2007 according to Walt g), where would the windfall income be?

 
At 8/28/2008 4:40 PM, Anonymous QT said...

Bob,

I guess we now understand the purpose of the new math.

 
At 8/28/2008 4:52 PM, Blogger juandos said...

"Isn't it a comfort to know that your money is being so well managed and spent by such altruistic, dedicated people"...

LOL!

Very good qt!

Well at least when we are pumping earmarks into our gas tanks we are at least getting something for the money spent from Exxon, et. al...

 
At 8/28/2008 5:06 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

As more people come to rely on self-funded retirement, this information becomes much more important. Don’t let the politicians dupe you into taxing yourself through windfall profits and corporate taxes. It’s just a trick to get your money and your votes at the same time. Taxes are always paid by individuals.

 
At 8/28/2008 5:15 PM, Blogger juandos said...

"As more people come to rely on self-funded retirement, this information becomes much more important. Don’t let the politicians dupe you into taxing yourself through windfall profits and corporate taxes"...

So very true walt g...

The really sad thing is that even without self-funded retirements these alledged windfall taxes were hurting those getting SS...

A company taxed to high, gets to many onerous rules and regs moves to an off shore facility...

There go all those folks who used to pay into FICA now looking for employment...

 
At 8/28/2008 5:50 PM, Blogger bob wright said...

There was speculation in the WSJ that U.S. taxes and regulations were a contributor to Budweiser's decision to sell.

Juandos, you being from the St. Louis area, is there any truth to the rumor?

 
At 8/28/2008 6:19 PM, OpenID sethstorm said...

They don't make much of an issue that those are in a mix of other shares. Any involvement may not necessarily be picked (completely) out of their own choice as well. It seems as if they just wanted to say "middle class" in a hurry.

Also of note, I doubt those "middle class" funds give any right to any shareholders meetings. So while there is a large amount free-riding on mutual funds, that's all they get. Virtually no real choice in the matter (outside of going for a stretch by saying indirection) exists.

There are particular groups (such as those in China and potentially other "undesirable/controversial" groups for reasons other than just environmental) that do not separate easily from others who do not have their specific issues.

In short: They may be a "majority", but they are quite the powerless one, without any direct voice.

 
At 8/28/2008 6:26 PM, Blogger juandos said...

"that U.S. taxes and regulations were a contributor to Budweiser's decision to sell"...

Yes sir bob wright, city taxes on the brewery were going up along with water and sewage...

The one tax that never shows up on the books but was heavy on the minds and wallets of the major shareholders at A-B was the, "kick in something for the community" tax such as revitalizing a park so it can be vandalized again, revitalize a Boy's Club so that there are new windows and lights to shoot out for the neighborhood kids, and so on and so forth...

There were some serious amounts of 'NET' dollars being extorted from A-B and not just in St. Louis either...

The one thing A-B also did quite a bit of was in the area of political contributions...
Anheuser-Busch Companies, - Political Campaign Contributions
(1999 to Present)

 

Post a Comment

<< Home