Justice Department files antitrust suit to block Halliburton/Baker Hughes Merger. Collin Eaton, Chron.com
“The proposed deal between Halliburton and Baker Hughes would eliminate vital competition, skew energy markets and harm American consumers,” U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said in a written statement.Given that Obama's plan for so-called "green" energy would cause energy prices to necessarily skyrocket and, by extension, skew energy markets and harm American consumers, (A claim that caused so-called 'fact check' media organizations to ramp up the spin machine in order to make it seem less damaging) this is laughable. In fact, even IN full context Obama's intent is clear. Cheap, plentiful energy is not now, nor has it ever been, a goal of the ecomental movement. If it were then they would embrace relatively cheap, safe, nuclear power as the nation's primary energy source.
Instead, they focus on unreliable green sources such as wind, solar and geothermal, in other words, industries that have made both large financial donations to Democratic candidates/groups and who Al Gore and his green investors have large stakes in. If you think the green movement is about saving Gaia or "weening America off it's addiction to oil" you are mistaken. It's about power, control and financial gain for the "correct" group of people. Period.
In fact, probably the surest wager in the world would be betting that all of the scare over anthropogenic climate change would cease immediately if the domestic oil and gas companies were nationalized.
Unfortunately, the current GOP has lost its credibility on this issue under a flood of corporate welfare to oil and gas producers in the form of tax subsidies for production. Texas is the worst, with both the biggest tax incentives and the most unwieldy to implement, but other States are guilty as well. Not only do these provide incentives for companies to over-produce into a saturated market (Most tax incentives go into effect when the price falls lower) they skew good market judgement by bad management within corporate structures who step over dollars to pick up dimes in the form of tax incentives that sometimes only equal 1-3%.
That said, companies are stupid to not take advantage of these savings if they are offered, and they have a vested interest in trying to obtain legal interpretations that are as broad as possible to allow for the biggest tax break. The recent case surrounding application of the high-cost gas tax illustrates both this, and the law of unintended consequences that typically stem from these matters.
All these tax incentives do is open the door for crazy to come in in the form of so-called "pollution taxes" against targeted (read: politically unpopular) corporations who will not pay them anyway. If you understand the concept of corporate taxes (and few do) then you understand that the costs of these taxes are always, without exception, passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices. There is no market mechanism to prevent this and, if there were, then you can bet that the resulting wave of lawsuits would swamp the court system and threaten to irreparably damage the American economy altogether.
When writing about taxes before, I mentioned that the solution I would like to see is a fairer, flatter, lower and broader tax code with very few incentives or loopholes included. And while I consider sales taxes to be a much fairer means of taxing oil and gas production than I do severance taxes (and, less intrusive, requiring less data management and, ultimately, less reporting) I also understand that it would be hard to totally overhaul the system away from the current oil and gas severance system. Still, the overall rates should be lower and the incentives few and far between.
Not only would this ensure that the State's tax takings from oil and gas were consistent (and easier to forecast, based solely on commodity price) it would also allow companies to make wiser investment decisions, based on incremental volumes rather than some minute amount of tax decision. This would also reduce costs for both the State and the corporation by alleviating the need for constant audits, and the costly legal battles that are inevitably the result of them. It would also make payment, calculation and revenue processing much more simple, which increases accuracy and the potential for incorrect royalty payments to private royalty owners.
In Texas, where I live, tax and energy policy are a mess, and desperately in need of a total overhaul. At the Federal level things are even worse, and most other States are staring at glaring budget holes as well. At some point there will have to be discussions about fixing these messes that evolve beyond "raise taxes!" or "cut and watch the economy grow!" because neither plan will work.
Unfortunately, it's becoming very clear that the leadership at the Federal level, and (most importantly) at the State level is nowhere near competent enough to be up to the task. President Obama is currently more interested in legacy hunting than putting the Country's needs first, and Governor's such as Greg Abbott are pandering to the alt-right base by saying his top issue (the MOST important issue facing Texas mind you) is passing a ban on sanctuary cities.
Whatever follows the GOP should be paying attention to this. The alternative is a Democratic Party that's going to increase tax takings to unsustainable levels in the name of sustainability. (Of the ruling class)
