Politics of Energy Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: RetiredNow who wrote (3336)	12/3/2008 8:57:30 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 86355

We provide $13B of direct tax subsidies for oil every year. Even taking your statement as true, it would amount to alternatives being much more heavily subsidized than oil and refined oil products. $13bil is a very small part of that market. Its small enough to arguably be considered insignificant, while the subsidies for many alternatives are very significant. And it isn't true. The only thing that could be called a tax subsidy is the more favorable depreciation. Even with slower depreciation the assets would still be written down, just over a longer time. Yes writing them down faster means the reported profit is reduced now rather than later, but the value of that is a relatively small part of the total expenses. And its not like there is one perfect time frame, any time frame you pick is going to be rather arbitrary. As far as methanol subsidies, that is nothing more than a farm subsidy. I think you mean ethanol. Yes it is put in place mainly for farmers, but since it does cut down the cost of an alternative fuel it is an alternate fuel/energy subsidy.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next