Friday, March 09, 2012

68% of 2011 Tax Preferences Went to Renewables

The chart above is based on data in the Congressional Budget Office's report "Federal Financial Support for the Development and Production of Fuels and Energy Technologies," and displays the allocation of energy-related tax preferences for Fiscal Year 2011, by type of fuel or technology.  Of the $20.5 billion in energy-related tax preferences in 2011, 68% and $14 billion went to renewable energy, and 15% and about $3 billion went to fossil fuels, for a ratio of more than $4.50 in tax preferences for renewable energy for every $1 in tax preferences for fossil fuels.  

21 Comments:

At 3/09/2012 9:35 AM, Blogger juandos said...

Well you know Obama has to keep those bundlers happy, its an election year...

Also buying Nancy Pelosi's loyalty is not an unimportant thing...

 
At 3/09/2012 10:19 AM, Blogger morganovich said...

marmico-

that ELI piece is complete nonsense.

the talk about being able to deduct labor costs as an expense as if that is some wild, unusual practice when EVER SINGLE COMPANY IN THE US does it.

ever read an income statement?

then, they take tax treatment that every company uses and claim it's special for oil cos.

sorry, BS again.

there are NO specific tax breaks for oil companies.

XOM is the most heavily taxed company in the US by a landslide. no one else even comes close.

further, green jobs COST jobs.

look at what happened in spain. they shift capital away from better uses, increase energy prices, and depress growth. every green job in spain costs 2.2 other jobs.

XOM aids us by keeping prices down.

guys like solyndra and wind farms do the opposite.

 
At 3/09/2012 10:21 AM, Blogger Jon Murphy said...

Marmico,

Read the CBO report linked in the post, specifically "Historical Trends" on Pg 2.

 
At 3/09/2012 11:04 AM, Blogger Buddy R Pacifico said...

Marmico states:

"The fossil fuel industry "shills" will never get it."

What does ExxonMobile provide the U.S. economy in return for $9.6 billion in U.S. operating earnings?

$72 billion dollars.

From XOM:

"In other words, for every dollar we earned in the U.S., we contributed seven more dollars to the U.S. economy – to both governments and individual Americans."

How much did XOM pay in U.S. local, state and fed taxes in return for $9.6 billion U.S. operating earnings?

$12 billion.

 
At 3/09/2012 11:23 AM, Blogger Jon Murphy said...

Ethanol is a fossil. Only the dumbest shill could say otherwise

Question: Ethanol is made from a renewable resource, specifically corn, as opposed to decomposed fossils. How is ethanol a fossil fuel?

Also, one word of advice: stop calling everyone who disagrees with you a "shill." It's just making you look a like an idiot.

 
At 3/09/2012 11:32 AM, Blogger juandos said...

"No you don't, but the mortgage interest deduction is the biggest tax preference of the bunch in the tax code"...

What's your point in repeating my often made statement marmico?

"The Environmental Law Institute says that from 2002 through 2008 that the fossils were granted 7 times* as much preferences as the renewables"...

Yeah, that's exactly what I want! A group of clueless libtards who might be vaguely aware if at all that the government makes more money on a gallon of gasoline then the oil companies do...

"How many U.S. jobs has ExxonMobil (the largest fossil) created since 2005?

Zero, zip, nada, nuttin'
"...

You got something credible to back up that statement marmico?

While you're looking for something credible to back up your statement consider perusing this Wood Mackenzie study on jobs potential in the energy field...

 
At 3/09/2012 11:42 AM, Blogger Jon Murphy said...

So, you admit you're wrong, then? Since ethanol is a renewable, and renewables make up 68% of the tax preferences, then your point about fossils getting preferential treatment no longer stands.

 
At 3/09/2012 11:46 AM, Blogger Paul said...

"my people know more about balance sheets than some chum who moved from the Bay Area to Park City to pay lower rent and learn to capitalize a sentence."

I was unaware Morganovich moved to Park City in order to learn how to capitalize sentences. I was also unaware his migration patterns are a key indicator of his ability to read a balance sheet. I learn something new every day here at Carpe Diem.

 
At 3/09/2012 12:29 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

Paul: "I was unaware Morganovich moved to Park City in order to learn how to capitalize sentences."

Yes, it's true. He spoke of it in a recent comment. He's desperate to become a capitalist.

I didn't know it before, but Park City is home to some of the best sentence capitalizers in the world.

 
At 3/09/2012 12:30 PM, Blogger Jon Murphy said...

He's desperate to become a capitalist.

Dude, that was hilarious. You get bonus points :)

 
At 3/09/2012 12:31 PM, Blogger marmico said...

So, you admit you're wrong, then? Since ethanol is a renewable, and renewables make up 68% of the tax preferences, then your point about fossils getting preferential treatment no longer stands.

I thought that you were a carried interest guy that could use a calculator. Apparently not.

Now your job is to use Figure 1 to determine the CBO ethanol percent of renewables in 2008, the last year of the Bush43 administration.

Listen, the Obama administration increased renewable tax preferences by $5 billion a year. Agree or disagree is your preference.

So Perry should man up and show the 2008 data, ex-ethanol. He loves his charts.

 
At 3/09/2012 12:34 PM, Blogger Jon Murphy said...

But if ethanol is a renewable, then what good does removing that from the chart do? That's like putting together a chart of all the farmland in America, and taking out soybeans. Makes no sense and doesn't give a complete picture.

 
At 3/09/2012 12:38 PM, Blogger juandos said...

"The Bush administration mandated increased ethanol production"...

Really marmico? Did you expect different from a liberal?

 
At 3/09/2012 12:52 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

Jon: "Makes no sense and doesn't give a complete picture."

Your expectations are still too high.

 
At 3/09/2012 1:11 PM, Blogger juandos said...

"Your expectations are still too high"...

ron h! Damn dude! You're hot today!

Except for the fact we're taxpayers this story about a mean but green machine would be funny...

 
At 3/09/2012 1:15 PM, Blogger marmico said...

Jon Murphy,

I know you came from Cafe Hayek.

juandos and I have been busting butts for 5 years on Carpe Diem.

Let's just leave at that, and I want buddy to show Exxon employment numbers and you to show renewable tax preferences.

It's not complicated. Exxon the fossil has created no jobs in the last 10 years and Obama has charged a double cheeseburger per capita for renewables.

 
At 3/09/2012 1:21 PM, Blogger Mark J. Perry said...

See this
post showing significant employment gains for oil and gas.

 
At 3/09/2012 1:40 PM, Blogger Jon Murphy said...

Let's just leave at that, and I want buddy to show Exxon employment numbers and you to show renewable tax preferences.

You're talking in circles. Why do I need to show you a chart? The post is all about a chart with renewables.

 
At 3/09/2012 6:30 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 3/09/2012 6:42 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

juandos: "ron h! Damn dude! You're hot today!"

Seems like plenty of good material on this thread. marmico is a veritable fountain of funny.

 
At 3/10/2012 1:38 AM, Blogger markbahner said...

One reads the silliest things on the Internet:

"Ethanol is a fossil. Only the dumbest shill could say otherwise."

"...given increased ethanol production which is considered to be a renewable by the CBO."

So the CBO is the "dumbest shill"?

How about the Department of Energy Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy people, who write:

"Ethanol is a clean, renewable fuel."

DOE EERE calls ethanol "renewable"

So you're saying all these people at the CBO and DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy laboratory are dumb shills?

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home