• Overcast, light rain
  • 54°
    Overcast, light rain
  • Comment

Oil taxes among issues facing lawmakers

Posted: January 16, 2012 - 1:00am

JUNEAU — Oil taxes are expected to be a major issue this legislative session, with lawmakers needing to decide whether a change in the tax structure is necessary — as Gov. Sean Parnell says it is — to spur new oil production.

The focus in this regard will be on the Senate, where Parnell’s tax-cut bill stalled last year after clearing the House. Senate leaders at the time said they didn’t have the information needed to make a sound policy call and today there remains a divide as to what kind of change is needed — if a change is needed, at all.

Also expected to get attention during the session, which begins Tuesday: an explicit ban on texting while driving, education funding, Alaska’s unfunded pension liability and saving for the future. Lawmakers will need to decide whether to extend Alaska’s film incentive program, now set to expire next year, and whether to revive the coastal management program.

Bills pending at the end of last session, including one that would lengthen the legislative session from the current 90 days to 120 days, remain in play. Any bills not passed by the time lawmakers adjourn this year will die, meaning individual lawmakers will be eager to push pet legislation.

It’s not clear how much heavy lifting will be done: this is an election year, and lawmakers will be antsy to return home. If the proposed redistricting plan is upheld in court, several legislators will face off in their new, respective districts.

Parnell has said changing Alaska’s current tax regime is his top economic priority, casting a tax cut as a way to help reverse the trend of declining production and boost investment. The Senate’s bipartisan majority bloc doesn’t have oil taxes on its list of priorities but it could be an element of one of the caucus’ priorities: finding ways to boost oil and gas development.

Sen. Bert Stedman, R-Sitka and co-chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, has said he intends to look at issues including the progressive surcharge now triggered when a company’s net profits hit $30 a barrel, tax credits and whether the state should continue taxing oil and gas production together. He’s also said that he is interested in potential incentives to boost incremental production from Prudhoe and Kuparuk.

House Speaker Mike Chenault, R-Nikiski, said education could be a “sleeper” issue, with lawmakers needing to consider a more permanent solution to helping school districts meet and address high energy costs. He also expects debate surrounding an explicit ban on text messaging, but he said whenever an issue like that comes up, there are corollary discussions on whether such things as use of cell phones to talk while driving should be curbed or banned.

Lawmakers in 2008 passed legislation that was intended to ban texting while driving even though it doesn’t say texting anywhere in the law. The measure is being challenged in court.

Since technology is ever-changing, Chenault said it may be that lawmakers need to increase the penalty for distracted driving.

One of the more contentious issues of the last several years has been coastal management.

Coastal communities have long sought a greater say in development decisions that could impact their way of life, particularly with the future potential of offshore oil and gas development. Lawmakers last year could not agree on changes to the program, which lets states to put conditions on certain activities on federal lands and waters, and it died.

Signatures are being gathered for a proposed initiative that would revive the program. Backers face a Tuesday deadline for submitting signatures if they hope to get the issue on this year’s ballot.

House Minority Leader Beth Kerttula, D-Juneau, said she will push to try to get a bill passed this session regardless of what happens with the initiative process — which she also supports.

“We’re elected to lead,” she said, adding that thousands of people have signed petitions showing they want the program back.

  • Comment

Comments (12)

Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
Latitude58
384
Points
Latitude58 01/16/12 - 07:41 am
0
0

Oil giveaway

Where does Cathy Munoz stand on this issue this year? Last year she caved into Parnell. Will she do the same this year? If so, let's hear her stand up and clearly explain why she's voting that way.

Jo MacNamara
163
Points
Jo MacNamara 01/16/12 - 07:50 am
0
0

Cathy supports it

I was told Munoz supports the governor's $2 billion giveaway. She's voting this way because she is a republican and so is Parnell. She's putting party before people.

LEAVE ACES ALONE! It's working. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It doesn't matter what tax/royalty plan is in place, because the oil corporations will always attack it, find ways around it, or find ways to lower it.

The cuts Parnell proposes will do nothing to spur throughput or exploration because the oil companies haven't promised that $2 billion/year would be spent on that. They haven't promised anything. They will simply pocket that money at Alaskans expense.

If any tax cuts are remotely considered, they should be stapled to promises from oil companies of increasing production/throughput and increasing jobs. And those tax cuts come AFTER delivery of the above, not before. Translate $2 billion in tax cuts into $3 billion in jobs and increased throughput, then we can talk. But that ain't gonna happen.

And since the oil companies are unwilling to promise increased jobs or throughput, then the $2 billion/year giveaway Parnell proposes is nothing more than a gift to his buds.

Alaskans know better.

Calypso
229
Points
Calypso 01/16/12 - 10:05 am
0
0

Wow, jo, you should be an oil

Wow, jo, you should be an oil company CEO!

And if they won't have you, maybe you could act as the go-between with Obama and big oil. Do you think BO would listen to you? Do you think any of his administration's policies are affecting big oil?

I'm thinking there's just a little projection going on when you accuse Munoz of putting party over person.

aspert
0
Points
aspert 01/16/12 - 11:47 am
0
0

Parnell is Crony Capitalism

Lets also get a bill that will prevent anyone that has worked as a "lobbyist" from ever becoming an Alaska Governor again.

Sean Parnell has used most of his time and our states funds to look out for the interests of the resource extraction industries and to block Alaskans from having a voice in things.

This is wrong and it has cost our state dearly. Our state has huge challenges ahead and Parnell is wasting our time.
We will not get good policy for Alaska from an oil lobbyist

glacierdogs
-1
Points
glacierdogs 01/16/12 - 11:56 am
0
0

Rep. Munoz in the real world

Rep. Munoz stuck with the House leadership because it helps Juneau. The bill cannot pass the Senate so why in the world should Rep. Munoz oppose the decision-makers (including the governor of the strongest-governor state in these United States) to the disadvantage of Juneau by voting against the bill? And the bill was going to pass the House with or without Rep. Munoz. Juneau has to deal with the world as we find it; Southeast has 50,000 people while the Railbelt has over 500,000, and the disparity is projected to grow. Voting against the governor on a bill that cannot pass is usually stupid and certainly would have been in this case.

Apart from that, I also must point out that the naysayers to changing the petroleum tax progressivity (or anything else) apparently have no ideas of their own for stopping the North Slope oil production decline. It would help if the other Juneau member of the House would join the Majority so that two Juneau people could be in the room when decisions are discussed. Whining from outside the room doesn't seem to produce any results for Juneau.

Juneau is very, very fortunate to have Rep. Munoz. We should thank her for putting up with us.

aspert
0
Points
aspert 01/16/12 - 12:50 pm
0
0

glacierdogs?

glacierdogs?

Cathy Munoz was elected by Alaskans to represent Alaskans and not the interests of the oil company.
And thank god we still have represenatives with a backbone that are willing to do the right thing as opposed to just following the crowd - Good grief

glacierdogs
-1
Points
glacierdogs 01/16/12 - 12:19 pm
0
0

aspert

No, it doesn't work that way at all. The gov and lt. gov are elected to represent Alaskans, as are the Alaska delegation to Congress. Rep. Munoz represents District 4, and we elected her to do that (and will continue to do so).

If Rep. Munoz had to represent all Alaskans then she would be conflicted when the Railbelt wants to move the capital (or at least move the legislative sessions). Instead, because Rep. Munoz is part of the House leadership the capital move bills die in her committee. I sure hope that Civics is taught and taught well in Juneau schools.

aspert
0
Points
aspert 01/16/12 - 12:35 pm
0
0

Yes it does work that way

Yes it does work that way glacierdogs because last I checked District 4 voters were all Alaskans.

Latitude58
384
Points
Latitude58 01/16/12 - 12:42 pm
0
0

Well Dawgs

I'd like to hear that from Cathy herself, instead of her reliable apologist. If it's simply political expediency, fine. But maybe she actually believes that giving oil companies $2 billion will actually fill the pipeline back up. Please Cathy, explain it to us slow-witted VOTERS.

glacierdogs
-1
Points
glacierdogs 01/16/12 - 12:57 pm
0
0

Lat58

I hope Rep. Munoz keeps her cards closer than that, but at the same time I bet she would tell you what she thinks about HB110 today. I think you agree that there is some validity to the contention that voting against the House leadership and the governor on a bill that cannot be enacted would be stupid for Juneau. Rep Munoz might agree with me that the HB110 process is at best incomplete and that the governor's case has yet to be made very well but you would need to ask her yourself as she lives with this stuff every day whereas I only know what I read in the newspapers and hear on the radio. Representative democracy is expedient and practical, and it's believed to be better than alternatives but it can be uncertain and lack precision.

Latitude58
384
Points
Latitude58 01/16/12 - 02:16 pm
0
0

Dawg

You need to decide what you support. Not too long ago in this forum you were gushing over what a magnificent example of leadership Sean Parnell presented. Now you're suggesting that he's promoting some sort of half-baked scheme that will cost us $2 billion. Doesn't sound like leadership to me.

I'll bet you bootlicked for Palin, too. And Murky before her?

glacierdogs
-1
Points
glacierdogs 01/17/12 - 12:38 pm
0
0

Answer for Latitude

No, I don't believe I called the Parnell proposal half-baked; only incomplete and the case yet to be made. Yes, Parnell is showing leadership and I don't hear the opposition proposing any way to stop the pipeline from running out of oil; the best the opposition do is to argue about how low production can go. TAPS thru-put peaked in 1989 so quite a few governors have avoided dealing with the matter, and therefore I think we should be reluctant to criticize Parnell. Often a good solution comes from a process that discusses a not-so-good solution but seldom does a solution come from no proposals at all. I don't yet like HB110 but I am happy there is a process underway, and I credit Parnell for that.

I suspect that getting back to 1 million barrels a day (half of the peak amount of course) would be a good buy at $2 billion. Maybe the process, which is now in the Senate, will develop that. Perhaps more likely Alaskans need some changes in the senate to occur in November in order for a solution to emerge.

Back to Top

Spotted

Please Note: You may have disabled JavaScript and/or CSS. Although this news content will be accessible, certain functionality is unavailable.

Skip to News

« back

next »

  • title http://spotted.juneauempire.com/galleries/376083/ http://spotted.juneauempire.com/galleries/375478/ http://spotted.juneauempire.com/galleries/376058/
  • title http://spotted.juneauempire.com/galleries/375998/ http://spotted.juneauempire.com/galleries/375678/ http://spotted.juneauempire.com/galleries/374383/
  • title http://spotted.juneauempire.com/galleries/375278/ http://spotted.juneauempire.com/galleries/376063/
My Gallery

CONTACT US

  • Switchboard: 907-586-3740
  • Circulation and Delivery: 907-523-2295
  • Newsroom Fax: 907-586-3028
  • Business Fax: 907-586-9097
  • Accounts Receivable: 907-523-2270
  • View the Staff Directory
  • or Send feedback

ADVERTISING

SUBSCRIBER SERVICES

SOCIAL NETWORKING