Announcement

**notyoueither** · April 25, 2006, 01:16

Originally posted by Flubber

I am thinking about the general good as well. Add special taxes and they become a disincentive to investment. The companies today have more projects that are feasible than they have people and equipment to do them.

Ask premier Williams of Newfoundland how a hardball stance to take a bigger stake worked for him when it came to the Hebron project. Bottom line was his demands were more than similar projects elsewhere so other projects beat that project out for capital.. . . Now the long-term effect on oil will be unchanged since some other project with a similar production rate will get done.

But in an attempt to take more "cream", the flow of milk disappeared

No doubt some intelligence is needed.

Do you think Suncor would shut down if the GoA announced a royalty increase?

What if the GoC slapped a tax on energy company profits?

**Flubber** · April 25, 2006, 01:18

Originally posted by notyoueither

In either case, the oil industry could afford to pay more to offset some of the costs of dealing with the price of oil.

Not the point. The oil companies aren't complaining but my point is that if BIGOIL needs a special tax since their profits have increased by certain margins, don't you also need a special tax on the service companies since their profit margins have, for the most part increased by even more.

Or is "windfall profit' only seen as such if its an oil company involved. Anyone else and we don't need to share their cream.

How about every constructiion firm with a "cost-plus' contract who have seen increasing costs just skyrocket their profits without them doing anything but reap the benefits of an increased price. Let's snatch that away .

**Flubber** · April 25, 2006, 01:23

Originally posted by notyoueither

No doubt some intelligence is needed.

Do you think Suncor would shut down if the GoA announced a royalty increase?

What if the GoC slapped a tax on energy company profits?

I know what would happen. They would say WTF and slow ALL expansion plans until things became clearer. This particular grab might be small but its not the quantity thats worrisome, its the principle that grabs are ok. If an extra tax is ok then why not one 3 times as large? Alberta is an attractive place to invest for the very reason that the government has a long-standing set of rules that they didn't vary when oil was at $12 and they shouldn't change now

In newfoundland they attempted to change the way projects were dealt with before a new project was constructed. Now all the other explorers want binding agreements with the government before they do any more exploration wells.

**notyoueither** · April 25, 2006, 01:24

Originally posted by Flubber

Not the point. The oil companies aren't complaining but my point is that if BIGOIL needs a special tax since their profits have increased by certain margins, don't you also need a special tax on the service companies since their profit margins have, for the most part increased by even more.

Or is "windfall profit' only seen as such if its an oil company involved. Anyone else and we don't need to share their cream.

How about every constructiion firm with a "cost-plus' contract who have seen increasing costs just skyrocket their profits without them doing anything but reap the benefits of an increased price. Let's snatch that away .

Nothing is as central to our societies as oil is.

You can choose not to buy a new computer and avoid paying Mr Gates for more software.

You can put off a new house for yourself or building for your company.

You cannot do without oil and gas. The price of that commodity is reflected in the essentials of your life, like food, heat, and electricity. I don't see a problem with the government trying to recover some of the windfall from that industry.

Or, if you really want to go by how others are forced to go, how about a Canada Oil Board. I'm really sure you in the oil industry would hate that.

**DanS** · April 25, 2006, 01:27

Nothing is as central to our societies as oil is.

Hogwash. Oil is just another commodity.

**notyoueither** · April 25, 2006, 01:29

Originally posted by Flubber

I know what would happen. They would say WTF and slow ALL expansion plans until things became clearer. This particular grab might be small but its not the quantity thats worrisome, its the principle that grabs are ok. If an extra tax is ok then why not one 3 times as large? Alberta is an attractive place to invest for the very reason that the government has a long-standing set of rules that they didn't vary when oil was at $12 and they shouldn't change now

In newfoundland they attempted to change the way projects were dealt with before a new project was constructed. Now all the other explorers want binding agreements with the government before they do any more exploration wells.

Newfoundland are stupid ****s. They should have let them drill before they tried to fleece.

So is Alberta, but in a differeent way. The GoA agreed to a royalty regime when oil was $12 as if oil would stay around $30.

We're still not really seeing anything in royalties from the oilsands despite oil being at $70.

If being bent over in perpetuity is a requirement, I'd rather the Socreds and we'll develop it ourselves.

**notyoueither** · April 25, 2006, 01:29

Originally posted by DanS

Hogwash. Oil is just another commodity.

Run your society on BS then, go ahead and try.

**DanS** · April 25, 2006, 01:30

Try running it without electricity from coal, too. Or a number of other commodities.

**notyoueither** · April 25, 2006, 01:30

Oil is as fundamental as food to the modern Western society.

Food is not an 'anything goes' industry. Why do you assume oil should be?

**notyoueither** · April 25, 2006, 01:31

Originally posted by DanS
Electricity from coal is much more central to our society than oil is.

**DanS** · April 25, 2006, 01:32

Hey, at least you're consistent in this thread.

Attaboy.

**notyoueither** · April 25, 2006, 01:34

btw, Dan, when was the last time coal tripled in price?

**Flubber** · April 25, 2006, 01:34

Originally posted by notyoueither

Newfoundland are stupid ****s. They should have let them drill before they tried to fleece.

They didn't have that option. Having faced last-minute government demands before, ther consortium needed an agreement before proceding

Originally posted by notyoueither

We're still not really seeing anything in royalties from the oilsands despite oil being at $70.

If being bent over in perpetuity is a requirement, I'd rather the Socreds and we'll develop it ourselves.

Huh-- give the projects a chance to payout why don't you -- Oilsands royalties increase dramatically as certain production levels and payouts are reached. Its a feature that allows for quicked repayment of the capital investment and was necessary or the projects would not have gotten off the ground.

People forget . . . Not that many years ago, not many companies wanted to do oilsands as it was uneconomic-- But some companies took a risk and now all the Monday morning quarterbacks with the benefit of perfect hindsight want to appropriate the reward.

They took a risk . .. it paid off spectacularly well. Thats business

**DanS** · April 25, 2006, 01:36

I don't know. It has doubled in price in the past year or so on the spot market, though.

**Flubber** · April 25, 2006, 01:37

Originally posted by DanS
I don't know. It has doubled in price in the past year or so, though.

and hydro and natural gas and nuclear should all be up as well--- doggone it maybe there's demand for that energy stuff

Announcement

Windfall Profit Tax on Big Oil

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment