Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper
RECENT POSTS
- President Obama Puts Congress 'On Notice' Regarding Health Care Reform: 'We Are Going to Get This Done'
- Surgeon General Nominee Was World News Tonight’s Person of the Week in 1995
- The Doctor Is (Finally) In: Obama To Nominate Regina Benjamin as Surgeon General
- President Obama Refocuses on Health Care/Stimulus
- Bob Woodruff Returns to Iraq
- President Obama Orders National Security Team to Review 2001 Afghanistan Massacre
- Will It Get Ugly? Both Sides Prepared for Start of Sotomayor Hearings Monday
- Obama in Africa
- Out of Africa
- Kenyan President should be “squirming”, says country’s political analyst
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Obama Abandons Windfall Profits Tax on Oil Companies; Liberals Smell a Corporate Rat
December 03, 2008 2:47 PM
Shortly after clinching the Democratic presidential nomination in June, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., told voters "I'll make oil companies like Exxon pay a tax on their windfall profits, and we'll use the money to help families pay for their skyrocketing energy costs and other bills."
But not so fast.
The American Small Business League recently noticed that President-elect Obama's reference to a windfall profits tax -- which was once posted on the Obama Transition Team website after Mr. Obama's election victory -- is no longer there, having been removed in what the group called "an unceremonious and abrupt manner."
The Houston Chronicle first reported the story today.
"With the election behind him, President-elect Obama has failed to justify the removal of the windfall profits tax from his tax plan," says American Small Business League President Lloyd Chapman in a press release. "The subtle and unexplained elimination of this issue from the Obama-Biden agenda should concern Americans from every background. The American Small Business League questions whether the sudden elimination of this issue is a further indication that large corporations are already demonstrating their ability to influence the Obama Administration... President-elect Obama owes the American people an explanation as to why these campaign promises have been pulled from his agenda."
An aide to the Obama Transition Team tells ABC News, "President-elect Obama announced the policy during the campaign because oil prices were above $80 per barrel. They are below that now and expected to stay below that."
The Obama windfall profits tax was devised as the price of oil approached its July 3 high of $145.29 per barrel.
While Mr. Obama never specified just what exactly constituted a "windfall profit," the tax was supposed to provide a $500 per person “emergency energy rebate.”
Obama allies argue that Mr. Obama backed off the proposal when energy prices began going down; they point out that when Mr. Obama rolled out his middle class rescue plan in mid-October it did not include revenue from a windfall profit tax because of the price change.
But David Sirota, an outspoken liberal columnist, today writes that "Between this move and the move to wait to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, it seems like the Obama team is buying into the right-wing frame that raising any taxes - even those on the richest citizens and wealthiest corporations -- is bad for the economy." Sirota asks, "if oil prices are down and oil industry profits are truly down, what's the harm in passing a windfall profits tax? Even if you buy the right-wing nonsense about a windfall profits tax 'hurting the industry' or 'hurting the economy' when it is applied, if there really are no windfall profits to tax, then it won't be applied. That's what a windfall profits tax really is -- a safety valve regulation against profiteering, and one that can raise needed revenues when profiteering occurs. If there is supposedly no profiteering occurring, then what's the supposed harm?"
And at the liberal Mother Jones blog, a writer asks, "Did Barack Obama just break his first campaign promise?"
-- jpt
December 3, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (53)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Paul Gallagher, you are really confused. The oil companies --- the ones that Obama is targeting --- profits are made from crude oil not from gasoline sales. With oil <$50/barrel there is a big problem in that industry
Posted by: David Killion | Mar 15, 2009 8:14:43 PM
It's worth noting that "windfall" profits (i.e., profits on private goods with relatively inelastic demand)can occur even when crude oil prices are low. In fact, oil companies are probably collecting bigger windfall profits now than they were last spring. That's because prices for gasoline and other refined products are falling at a slower rate than their crude-oil costs.
What's sad about this episode is that the Obama team chose not to announce its change in strategy on the tax, but only remove it from the website and wait for someone to call them about it. That's Bush-league communications. Obama needs to be reminded that we expect better of him.
Posted by: Paul Gallagher | Dec 4, 2008 3:31:25 PM
How can you put a tax on a business specifically designed to prevent or discourage them from making a large profit, and then claim that it will not harm the industry?
Posted by: Larry | Dec 4, 2008 2:40:34 PM
Now is exactly the right time to put in a windfall profits tax. If you wait until the next time energy goes through the roof, it will be too late. Kind of like shutting the barn door after the cows leave. Put the law in place now. Who cares if you don't see a penny for a couple of years! What does it cost to enact such a law? ZERO, but what does it cost if we don't enact it now before its too late?
Posted by: BJ | Dec 4, 2008 12:49:29 PM
Sirota's approach doesn't make any sense. Pass legislation and then don't use it if there are no windfall profits? If there are no windfall profits, why pass legislation to begin with?
Posted by: Brooklyn Democrat | Dec 4, 2008 10:22:23 AM
Did Obama just break his first campaign promise?
No. Like Bush he broke his first campaign promise early in the primaries.
Posted by: jan | Dec 4, 2008 6:08:56 AM
Maybe you whiners would rather have Alfred E. Bush for a third term?
Posted by: Pat | Dec 3, 2008 11:57:30 PM
Would some brilliant liberal please explain to me the logic of a windfall tax anyway? How do you tax a public company? It ALL get's passed on. The first corporate responsibility is to increase shareholder value. Profits made go into stockholder value, in turn improving the values of 401K, mutual funds and share holders around the world. Anyone who holds a mutual fund has probably been an owner in "evil Exxon" at some point. You punish Exxon, you punish honest, hard working people. I'm sure many of you Exxon haters were jumping for joy during the bull market from the last 6 years (2001 to 2007). You're probably the same ones who are griping about Exxon now. Exxon DOES NOT set the price of oil. Plus, service stations are just as culpable at pushing the price of gas upward. If you really think companies like Exxon just "use", then you're just as much a "user" if you drive a car or use. Why don't you put your money where your mouth is and ride a bike everywhere? Otherwise you're a hypocrites...
Posted by: jta | Dec 3, 2008 11:11:19 PM
Ha Ha Ha its only the beginning LOL LMAO
Posted by: Marie | Dec 3, 2008 10:42:47 PM
I meant "why should there be" in my post
Posted by: anthony | Dec 3, 2008 9:27:35 PM
The oil companies are not making windfall profits anymore. The recession is hurting them too, just like everyone else. So what should there be a windfall tax on the oil companies if they are not making windfall profits?
Posted by: anthony | Dec 3, 2008 9:24:59 PM
"I'll make oil companies like Exxon pay a tax on their windfall profits, and we'll use the money to help families pay for their skyrocketing energy costs and other bills."
Ummm, the critics seem to forget that there are no longer windfall profits and energy costs are groundrocketing. Sheesh. I'm a Republican and I have to defend him against his own wingnuts.
Posted by: Bridget | Dec 3, 2008 8:51:36 PM
Let's stop blaming the people at the top.
The truth is that a windfall profits tax won't do much to solve the foreign oil dependence problem.
Every State has the power to increase the sales tax it charges on petroleum products. Stop whining and write your state assemblyman, senator or governor and insist on an increase in that tax.
After all, taxes are going to have to be increased on SOMETHING OR SOMEONE to pay for the schools. Also, in the case of businesses, the state taxes paid may be deductible on federal taxes :)
Posted by: AVE_FAN | Dec 3, 2008 8:19:32 PM
I still think we need the tax to be IN PLACE so when the prices do go BACK UP and you know they will the statue will be there. Further I do not care what the price of oil is, I care what is the amount of outlandish profit that they (the olil companies) are making.
Posted by: Ranger Phx | Dec 3, 2008 8:04:03 PM
geecee: 'He cannot make the recession worse by making rash decisions, even if he "promised" to do something.'
But...but...but he made rash PROMISES! And I do like the way "promises" was qualified. Just kiddin', didn't really mean...
I'm just enchanted by the feeding frenzy, and some of his followers are right there with teeth bared...this is delicious!
Posted by: Laughing Cynic | Dec 3, 2008 7:55:02 PM
"I think we need to only implement taxing them when they raise those prices again."
Exactly. Because the oil companies won't pass those higher taxes onto the customer and increase gas prices even higher!
Brilliant!
Posted by: Concerned in OH | Dec 3, 2008 7:22:35 PM
I'm sorry I voted for Obama. Not one day in office yet and he's proving to be as big and nasty a liar as GWBush was. Sigh. Who stole my lovely America from me for so long now?
Posted by: buzzie | Dec 3, 2008 6:54:18 PM
Well he's starting to look just like all the other lying scum bag politicians. Once you get elected who cares. He also has changed his mind on the war and the Bush tax breaks for the rich. All that and he hasn't even taken office yet. I wonder what else he won't do. The only thing the guy was interested in was becoming the first black president. He could care less what happens to the rest of us, his family will live in the history books for ever.
Posted by: Dale | Dec 3, 2008 5:56:28 PM
Good Lord people! Isn't there something constructive to add?! He has not taken office yet. One day the stock market gains over 500 points the next day it's a freefall of 680 points. Things are good overseas and then Mumbai hits. He is trying to set up the best cabinet to deal with what might happen after he takes office. If he has to modify based on actual events AFTER he takes office, he will. That is not "breaking promises",that is just good management. If you are concerned with what is happening now, President Bush is still in office. Otherwise, remember patience is a virtue and wait until after January 20, 2009.
Posted by: aftbrat59 | Dec 3, 2008 5:30:36 PM
Yea yea yea...some we'll always find words to justify Obamas flops.
That can go on for a while. The fact the guy is bringing all those power houses in his cabinet is to control them well and learn from them at the same time. It will be very hard from them to go out and criticize him afterward, . I have to give credit to Obama as a politician. Who knows what will come up out of his government, no one can predict since the guy has not record at all.
Let's try to be optimist but cautious and treat the guy fair but demand real change and to fulfill his promises otherwise he will pay a big prize.
Posted by: Obama what | Dec 3, 2008 5:24:33 PM
Post a comment

