Every Alaskan to get $1174

ABC ^ | September 20, 2011 | AP

[SMGFan]

Most Alaska residents will soon be getting a check for $1,174 simply because they live there.

Each person's share of the state's vast oil wealth was announced with much fanfare in Anchorage Tuesday, with Gov. Sean Parnell ripping open a gold-colored envelope to reveal the number. This day is so widely anticipated in Alaska that the announcement of the Permanent Fund Dividend amount was carried live on television statewide, and dozens tuned in to watch a live webcast by the governor's office.

[thackney]

But I'd be willing to bet that the average oil company didn't pay 12.5% in federal taxes.

A better comparison is not taxes but Federal Royalty rates. The federal royalty rate for the infamous BP Macondo oil spill lease in the Gulf of Mexico was 18.75 percent. Many landowners are getting 20 percent or higher royalties for their Barnett Shale production. Fort Worth City Council approved a royalty rate of 28 percent for natural gas drilling rights under Meacham Airport. Some nations require a 51 percent or higher royalty from foreign companies drilling and producing within their borders.

http://wellservicingmagazine.com/royalty-rates-around-oilpatch

- - - - - - -

The Interior Department is also considering, through a separate effort, an increase to onshore production royalty rates, now at 12.5%. The royalty rate for offshore production is 18.75%

http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=107877

[thackney]

I agree the PFD is wealth distribution. I still took my portion of it while I lived there.

But Royalties are not tax, regardless of your attempt to confuse them.

Alaska does have far too much tax on oil companies in addition to their royalties. It is oppressive and restricts business.

But the royalty rate is fair. Since the State was create in a far different manner than most the states, purchased by the federal government for the production of resources, there are some very distinct difference from other states. Mineral ownership makes sense, given that government paid money for the resources from Russia in the first place.

[Reeses]

Food stampers get more than that per person per year and that’s just the start. Once someone has an EBT card they qualify for all kinds of socialist give aways, free cell phone, cable TV, broadband internet access, etc., and free rides to the voting booth.

[SoJoCo]

A better comparison is not taxes but Federal Royalty rates. The federal royalty rate for the infamous BP Macondo oil spill lease in the Gulf of Mexico was 18.75 percent.

But since that is a royalty and not a tax then I assume you don't have a problem with it?

[thackney]

All owners of minerals charge royalties to sell their oil or gas.

I don't understand why you think owners of minerals should give them away for free, regardless if that owner is a private individual or a government entity.

If the producer makes a mistake and wastes the oil rather than capturing it for production, I think they still should pay the royalty. The mineral was lost, the original owner no longer has it and should be paid for it.

[SoJoCo]

All owners of minerals charge royalties to sell their oil or gas.

States are not private individuals. Just imagine how beneficial it would be to the oil companies if Alaska wasn't taxing them that 12.5% or whatever it is. Think of the jobs they could be creating. Think of what that would do to the price of our gasoline.

I don't understand why you think owners of minerals should give them away for free, regardless if that owner is a private individual or a government entity.

If taxing the job creators is a bad thing then why are we cheering on Alaska for doing just that?

[redhead]

"Did you build a fruit cellar just a year back or so?"

I wish. But if you have the urge to build one, come on down!

[thackney]

Just think how your customers would benefit if you gave away your goods and services for free as well. Their business would do great. If you are a farmer, why should the bread maker pay for your wheat?

Alaska owns its oil, just as Kansas owns its oil under state land. When that oil is sold, just like any individual or government property, payment is returned.

When a state sells land, you expect them to get payment. When a state sells used equipment, you expect them to get payment. Why do you think that when they sell the oil they own, they should give it away for free?

You keep wanting to pretend this is a tax; it is not. It is the exchange of a physical commodity and payment is returned for the possession. In Alaska, that payment is often made in oil. The state will accept 12.5% of the oil produced as payment for the rights to produce the states oil.

[mojitojoe]

Kansas