Bold Proposal
Consumers enjoy the benefits of lower oil prices but President Obama wants to take that joy away.
In a dead-on-arrival lame duck proposal, Obama Proposes $10 per Barrel Oil Tax.
The White House is proposing a bold $10 per barrel tax on oil in a move that immediately sparked a backlash from an energy industry buckling under the pressure of low prices.
The White House said that the tax would encourage a shift away from an oil-dependent transportation system and provide revenue that it would use to pay for much-needed infrastructure investment.
But the Obama administration was vague about how it would be levied. Jeff Zients, director of the White House’s national economic council, told reporters that it would be paid by oil companies, but not at the wellhead where oil is produced.
Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, who are vying for the Democratic presidential nomination, have sought to outdo each other with their attacks on fossil fuels and calls for action on climate change.
Jack Gerard, chief executive of the American Petroleum Association, which represents the industry, said: “The White House thinks Americans are not paying enough for gasoline, so they have proposed a new tax that could raise the cost of gasoline by 25 cents a gallon, harm consumers that are enjoying low energy prices, destroy American jobs and reverse America’s emergence as a global energy leader.”
Trial Balloons
Obama’s trial balloon is not only lacking air, its full of holes. Details? There aren’t any. Supposedly it will be “paid by oil companies but not where it’s produced“.
I am trying to get a handle on that, but the best translation I can come up with is “consumers will pay for it one way or another“.
Don’t worry, the tax will only be on imports, not exports.
Hmmm. Is this allowed under the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement?
Well, who knows? It’s probably in the fine print somewhere in terms only the lawyers understand.
The TPP is another one of those things you have to pass to find out exactly what’s in it for everyone!
But here’s one thing you can count on: Whatever is in the agreement won’t be any good for consumers, at least compared to a true free trade agreement.
Toilet Paper Proposal
Contrary to popular myth, the Trans-Pacific Partnership is not about free trade. And certainly taxing oil imports but not exports isn’t either. Let’s recap TPP.
- April 07, 2015: Obama’s Trans-Pacific Partnership Fiasco vs. Mish’s Proposed Free Trade Alternative; How Will TPP Function in Practice?
- April 11, 2015: Legacy Skills and Capital; Sugar and Steel; Turning TPP to TP
- October 11, 2015: TPP and Free Trade Canadian Style
- October 12, 2015: Hillary Clinton, Dead Rats, Toilet Paper Politics
Hillary Clinton, who as Secretary of State in 2012 said the Trans-Pacific Partnership “sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field,” has… come out against TPP.
“I’m continuing to learn about the details of the new Trans-Pacific Partnership, including looking hard at what’s in there to crack down on currency manipulation, which kills American jobs, and to make sure we’re not putting the interests of drug companies ahead of patients and consumers. But based on what I know so far, I can’t support this agreement,” said Clinton.
How is it that it’s more important for a private citizen to be more concerned about and more aware of details in a trade bill than the Secretary of State?
How is it that president Obama is clueless on his own energy proposal?
Mish’s Proposed Free Trade Agreement
To call TPP a “free trade” agreement is ridiculous. Import taxes and tariffs are equally ridiculous.
I am in favor of free trade. An excellent free trade agreement would consist of precisely one line of text:
“All tariffs and all government subsidies on all goods and services will be eliminated effective immediately.”
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
Obama probably wants the money so he can make some more of those great “Green” investments like Solyndra. This will only become a business expense passed on to consumers who finally caught a break with lower energy costs. Politicians just can’t stand the thought that consumers get a break; they want to immediately tax it and that tax will still be there when oil prices go back up.
LikeLike
Pingback: Dead on Arrival: Obama Proposes $10 Per Barrel Oil Tax; What About TPP? « Financial Survival Network
Obummer just signed the TPP but it still has to be approved by Congress. Many on both sides of the isle are opposing it. The devil is in the details and there are some bad details, unless you are one of those promoting the One World Government. That would mean the end of America as we know it.
Obummer has an unAmerican agenda and the Lame Duck is going to promote it.
LikeLike
“Many on both sides of the isle are opposing it.”
Congress fast tracked it. Only majority approval needed, not Constitutional treaty 2/3 approval. That many on both sides of the aisle oppose it, means little.
Calls against TARP were 100 to 1 or more against TARP. Congress passed it anyway, with a little pork barrel juice to grease a second vote through the House. What will be the grease this time?
LikeLike
“The TPP is another one of those things you have to pass to find out exactly what’s in it for everyone!”
Which translated, means it is a fraud against the American people.
Congress voted to fast track, which eliminated the treaty provision of a 2/3 majority approval. Congress is supposed to represent the American people. Congress is supposed to follow the U.S. Constitution, which they swore an oath to protect and defend. Oaths apparently mean little any more. It is all for show.
H1B visas, H2B visas, the latter just quadrupled- to put Americans out of work, in favor of foreigners. TPP, to put Americans out of work, in favor of foreigners. Who does congress really work for?
The political establishment is trying to prevent the party members from choosing the party candidate for President. The political parties do not belong to the party members.
It is just for show. Goldman Sachs said Hillary or JEB were acceptable to them. That is all that counts. If not JEB, who will be the republican establishment’s, Goldman Sachs candidate?
Goldman Sachs for President. Goldman Sachs for congress.
LikeLike
Goldman Sucks!
LikeLike
Just like the gasoline tax hikes were going to pay for infrascture and HWY funding. Been there done that BS.
LikeLike
O/T
Your new site is superb, Mike! It has been a long time coming.
LikeLike
Congress: “We will pass it, so we can see whats in it!”
LikeLike
The oil tariff is just another tariff. Add that to the long list of tariffs that already exist. The TPP is with Saudi Arabia?
Doubt it – nor Venezuela.
It is only those parties to the TPP that can initiate legal action.
LikeLike
It should have been obvious to everyone long ago that an economic illiterate occupies the White House.
LikeLike
Ever notice how ‘free trade’ agreements never include the ability of humans to move freely to where the jobs will be?
LikeLike
Free trade only with countries with ~ labor, enviromental, and IP as US.
Everyone else? Bring on the friction.
LikeLike
New tax really should be considered a service fee. To pay for DOD budget to secure oil from middle east suppliers. Defense budget certainly isn’t being used for national defense.
LikeLike
Pingback: Dead on Arrival: Obama Proposes $10 Per Barrel Oil Tax; What About TPP? | Grater Post
Contrary to popular opinion, “Green Energy” is NOT very GREEN … !!!
For instance, electric-car batteries and solar panels and wind-turbines use rare earth metals (REM’s). And REM’s in turn are “very rare” and involve massive strip-mining projects to extricate REM ores.
Moreover, the processing of REM ores is very expensive and produces terrible pollution:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_earth_element
Finally, the imminent disposal of BILLIONS of toxic “dead batteries” from MILLIONS of electric cars, represents a nightmare even greater than the disposal of waste from nuclear power-plants.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-17357863
As of 2015, electric cars and solar-panels and wind-turbines are still heavily subsidized by government, because they can NOT yet compete in the free market against oil, gas, coal, etc.
PS: Do you really think a 1000 acres of wind-turbines can really compete with oil and gas power-plants? What happens when a tornado passes thru the wind farm of when a freezing rain falls on a wind farm?
LikeLike
so it’s for imported oil or US oil too(not that you could differentiate.) That should totally crater the energy economy. Is Obama long on Tesla Stock?
LikeLike