• 3 minutes Could Venezuela become a net oil importer?
  • 7 minutes Reuters: OPEC Ministers Agree In Principle On 1 Million Barrels Per Day Nominal Output Increase
  • 12 minutes Battle for Oil Port: East Libya Forces In Full Control At Ras Lanuf
  • 23 hours Could Venezuela become a net oil importer?
  • 17 mins Oil prices going Up? NO!
  • 2 hours Reuters: OPEC Ministers Agree In Principle On 1 Million Barrels Per Day Nominal Output Increase
  • 1 day Tesla Closing a Dozen Solar Facilities in Nine States
  • 2 mins Could oil demand collapse rapidly? Yup, sure could.
  • 23 hours Gazprom Exports to EU Hit Record
  • 1 day EU Leaders Set To Prolong Russia Sanctions Again
  • 1 day Why is permian oil "locked in" when refineries abound?
  • 23 hours Oil Buyers Club
  • 17 hours Oil prices going down
  • 6 mins Renewables to generate 50% of worldwide electricity by 2050 (BNEF report)
  • 1 day EVs Could Help Coal Demand
  • 1 day China’s Plastic Waste Ban Will Leave 111 Million Tons of Trash With Nowhere To Go
  • 1 day Saudi Arabia plans to physically cut off Qatar by moat, nuclear waste and military base
  • 15 hours Russia's Energy Minister says Oil Prices Balanced at $75, so Wants to Increase OPEC + Russia Oil by 1.5 mbpd
  • 10 hours Battle for Oil Port: East Libya Forces In Full Control At Ras Lanuf
Alt Text

China’s Oil Demand Could Take A Big Hit

In the last three years…

Alt Text

Oil Markets Unmoved By North Korea Summit

Today’s North Korea summit, and…

Alt Text

Russia Boosts Oil Production Before OPEC Meeting

Russia pumped almost 11.1 million…

James Hamilton

James Hamilton

James is the Editor of Econbrowser – a popular economics blog that Analyses current economic conditions and policy.

More Info

Trending Discussions

The EIA Says Now is the Time to Drop Fossil Fuel Subsidies

The EIA Says Now is the Time to Drop Fossil Fuel Subsidies

With domestic oil production soaring, and petroleum and coal sector profits rising at a rapid clip, now seems the right time to cut back on tax expenditures related to oil extraction and processing.

US oil field production
Figure 1: US oil field production in thousands of barrels/day (blue, left axis), and profits in the petroleum and coal sector according to NIPA, in billions SAAR (red, right axis). Source: Energy Information Administration, BEA.

The Administration has proposed elimination of several tax expenditures. According to OMB, this would yield ten year savings equal to $41.4 billion.

Provisions of the US Tax Code Subsidising Fossil Fuels
Table 5-1 from Aldy (2013).

In the recent debate over the sequester, other provisions were suggested, including an end to an exemption for the tar sands industry that excludes it from paying an 8-cent-per-barrel fee that supports an oil spill fund. [1] The Congressional Research Service has discussed the elimination of the provisions in the table above.

On the one hand, the tax changes proposed ... would increase tax collections from the oil and natural gas industries and may have the effect of decreasing exploration, development, and production, while increasing consumer prices and possibly increasing the nation’s dependence on foreign oil. These same proposals, from an alternate point of view, might be considered to be the elimination of tax preferences that have favored the oil and natural gas industries over other energy sources and made oil and natural gas products artificially inexpensive, with consumer cost held below the true cost of consumption when external costs associated with environmental costs and energy dependence, among others, are included.

I believe the negative impact on output is highly overstated. From Aldy (2013):

Proponents of fossil fuel subsidies claim that these subsidies support American energy independence. This argument does not appear to be applicable to coal, as the United States has been largely self-sufficient in coal over its history, with modest imports and exports in recent years. Moreover, it is quite unlikely that the current oil and gas subsidies explain this bullish outlook for domestic oil and gas production, since most of the prominent subsidies—such as intangible drilling costs expensing and percentage depletion—have been in the tax code over the 1970–2009 period that was characterized by a nearly 50 percent decline in U.S. oil production.

More important, the economic analyses of the impact of oil and gas subsidies show very little response in domestic production to these tax preferences. In one analysis of subsidy elimination, the estimated reduction in U.S. oil production would amount to about 26,000 barrels per day (Allaire and Brown 2009). This is quite modest considering the rapid growth in domestic oil production, which has grown, on average, each month by more than 30,000 barrels per day since January 2009. Thus, these tax subsidies do not meaningfully increase production, and as a result they do not stimulate job creation or lower U.S. oil, petroleum product, and natural gas prices. As largely inframarginal subsidies, they convey billions of dollars of benefits to the firms claiming them without an identifiable benefit for consumers or for the nation’s energy security.

By. Menzie Chinn

Original Source: http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2013/03/eliminating_ene.html




Back to homepage

Trending Discussions


Leave a comment

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News