Great news on the clean energy front.

Yes, and the byproduct is water!

 

We're about 98% hydro power, so we're green. The only place not connect to hydro is the farthest northern regions where there isn't enough people living there to make sense. But even those will be converted in the near future.

Batteries last a long time now and are recyclable. We're also working on newer and better ones. They pay the same tax as everybody here since the tax is on immatriculation and permits. The tax on fuel is used for other programs just like the tax on tobacco and alcohol.

 

Immatriculation tax and permit tax. Any other questions?

 

Oh and I forgot, since the byproduct is water, those nations that don't have great water reserves can then use what is produce to irrigate fields or other needs.
Two bird, one stone...

 

And when the tax revenues on fossil fuels begin drying up it'll soon be anything but priceless.

 

We've done many innovation in that regard, with bypass channels and other things. We don't leave the forest to rot at the bottom of the reservoir anymore either.

 

Yep. Gonna need a new way to do that.

I think we can just have your car tell us how far you drive, but I bet you don't like that one.

 

I imagine if your car has "smart" features it's already telling someone your life story.

 

What matriculation tax and permit tax? I'm talking road use excise taxes as in the tax on the gas to power a gas powered car. Yea questions.

*****nevermind it appears you do not live in the US so comparisons are fruitless

 

It's sad, but foreigners could be forgiven thinking common sense is a felony crime in the United States. We make it sooo easy.

 

I don't know who "we" is and would not compare to my "we" and our tax system and how EV's here.

 

I don't know about your state or the USA as a whole, but here the tax money goes into the province/feds coffer and they decide where and when the money is used. There was a big hooplah years ago when the feds took the surplus money in the unemployment insurance fund to pay for other things and the SC here reached the conclusion that they had the right to.

 

Quebec, Canada... You're neighbor to the north...

 

Thank you. I will.

 

Utilities are switching over to renewables because they KNOW that it makes ECONOMIC sense to no longer be held hostage by the Fossil Fuels Cartel.

 

OFFSET by the elimination in TAXPAYER SUBSIDIES to the Fossil Fuel industry.

 

https://www.extreme-e.com/en/news/1...gen-fuel-cell-system-ahead-of-first-race.html

 

urgent https://insideclimatenews.org/news/...pxZzp2Vn9rKKOu-bHI5AUc79FZ2QAFfV444TyyDnCAlAw

 

No they are doing so under mandate and we see how well that works out with the rolling blacks in California. Trump had is independent of the cartels Biden is putting us back under them.

 

What subsidies? Not tax breaks like every business gets. Direct subsidies, money paid to them by the government, to the oil/gas/coal industries and be specific with your links. Then prove that those subsidies are more than the total taxes the industry pays and all the sales and excise taxes on their products.

 

APS in AZ announced a year ago that it was going renewable WITHOUT any mandate whatsoever and they are NOT the only utility that has figured out that it is more cost effective to invest in renewables and phase out fossil fuel plants.

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/arizona-public-service-carbon-free-power-2050

There is ZERO mandate in any of the states supplied by Dule Energy.

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/duke-energy-vows-to-eliminate-carbon-emissions-by-2050

 

Read and learn for yourself what all of these TAXPAYER SUBSIDIES to the Fossil Fuel Cartel cost We the People.

https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fa...-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs

 

Intangible Drilling Costs Deduction (26 U.S. Code § 263. Active). This provision allows companies to deduct a majority of the costs incurred from drilling new wells domestically. In its analysis of President Trump’s Fiscal Year 2017 Budget Proposal, the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimated that eliminating tax breaks for intangible drilling costs would generate $1.59 billion in revenue in 2017, or $13 billion in the next ten years.

Tax deduction just like other business deduct expenses and depreciate equipment from revenues, the government is not giving them money they do not have. Why do you want to get rid of it?

Percentage Depletion (26 U.S. Code § 613. Active). Depletion is an accounting method that works much like depreciation, allowing businesses to deduct a certain amount from their taxable income as a reflection of declining production from a reserve over time. However, with standard cost depletion, if a firm were to extract 10 percent of recoverable oil from a property, the depletion expense would be ten percent of capital costs. In contrast, percentage depletion allows firms to deduct a set percentage from their taxable income. Because percentage depletion is not based on capital costs, total deductions can exceed capital costs. This provision is limited to independent producers and royalty owners. In its analysis of the President’s Fiscal Year 2017 Budget Proposal, the JCT estimated that eliminating percentage depletion for coal, oil and natural gas would generate $12.9 billion in the next ten years.

Again expense deduction. Why do you want to eliminate it.


Credit for Clean Coal Investment Internal Revenue Code § 48A (Active) and 48B (Inactive). These subsidies create a series of tax credits for energy investments, particularly for coal. In 2005, Congress authorized $1.5 billion in credits for integrated gasification combined cycle properties, with $800 million of this amount reserved specifically for coal projects. In 2008, additional incentives for carbon sequestration were added to IRC § 48B and 48A. These included 30 percent investment credits, which were made available for gasification projects that sequester 75 percent of carbon emissions, as well as advanced coal projects that sequester 65 percent of carbon emissions. Eliminating credits for investment in these projects would save $1 billion between 2017 and 2026.

You want to get rid that? Why? OK then don't require they invest in clean coal.

Nonconventional Fuels Tax Credit (Internal Revenue Code § 45. Inactive). Sunsetted in 2014, this tax credit was created by the Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax Act of 1980 to promote domestic energy production and reduce dependence on foreign oil. Although amendments to the act limited the list of qualifying fuel sources, this credit provided $12.2 billion to the coal industry from 2002-2010.

OK stop the war on coal, and domestic energy again the government gives them no money. Do you want to get rid of it? Why?

Indirect Subsidies

Last In, First Out Accounting (26 U.S. Code § 472. Active). The Last In, First Out accounting method (LIFO) allows oil and gas companies to sell the fuel most recently added to their reserves first, as opposed to selling older reserves first under the traditional First In, First Out (FIFO) method. This allows the most expensive reserves to be sold first, reducing the value of their inventory for taxation purposes.

Standard accounting decision the government gives them no money.

Foreign Tax Credit (26 U.S. Code § 901. Active). Typically, when firms operating in foreign countries pay royalties abroad they can deduct these expenses from their taxable income. Instead of claiming royalty payments as deductions, oil and gas companies are able to treat them as fully deductible foreign income tax. In 2016, the JCT estimated that closing this loophole for all American businesses operating in countries that do not tax corporate income would generate $12.7 billion in tax revenue over the course of the following decade.

Not a subsidy and all businesses get to deduct those taxes paid to foreign countries on profits earned in those foreign countries. You want to end that for ALL business? Why?

Master Limited Partnerships (Internal Revenue Code § 7704. Indirect. Active). Many oil and gas companies are structured as Master Limited Partnerships (MLPs). This structure combines the investment advantages of publicly traded corporations with the tax benefits of partnerships. While shareholders still pay personal income tax, the MLP itself is exempt from corporate income taxes. More than three-quarters of MLPs are fossil fuel companies. This provision is not available to renewable energy companies.

Not a subsidy to the energy industry, MLP's and LLP's are standard forms of organization. Do you want to eliminate it? Why?

Domestic Manufacturing Deduction (IRC §199. Indirect. Inactive). Put in place in 2004, this subsidy supported a range of companies by decreasing their effective corporate tax rate. While this deduction was available to domestic manufacturers, it nevertheless benefitted fossil fuel companies by allowing “oil producers to claim a tax break intended for U.S. manufacturers to prevent job outsourcing”. The Office of Management and Budget estimated that repealing this deduction for coal and other hard mineral fossil fuels would have saved $173 million between 2012 and 2016. This subsidy was repealed by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (P.L. 115 – 97) starting fiscal year 2018.

Again not an energy subsidy, do you want to get rid of it? Why?

You seem to prefer dependence on foreign sources for energy by putting punitive taxes on energy here, why?
Also when you deduct the interest on your mortgage is that the government subsidizing your house?

 

I had only heard of hydrogen fuel, as something for space rockets. I'm now curious to know more about it. I take it that it is still rather expensive, though, from the article saying that it was specifically for industrial use. If not cost, are there other issues that make this fuel impractical, for upscaling to use in the general population; for example, scarcity, due to requiring large installations to produce it (& therefore, bringing us back to its expense)? Or, perhaps, are the fuel cells, themselves, too large for anything but industrial use?

 

Hydrogen is exceptionally difficult to store and transport which increases costs.

However there are already hydrogen fuel cell passenger vehicles available in select areas.