[News] BP oil profits.

[Leekbrookgull]

Just released and £4.9B for the last three months,so you leave alone for future investments/pensions or a windfall tax and if you do tax how do you fairly share it out rather than fritter away?

 

[highflyer]

if you do tax how do you fairly share it out rather than fritter away?

That's fairly easy. Give it to the government.

Even under this venal, corrupt government, the vast majority will be spent on health, education and public services. And contrary to 'popular belief' (aka tabloid headlines), the vast majority will be well spent, on salaries, equipment, and maintenance (all of which has a greater, more positive, knock on effect on the wider economy than leaving it with BP).

https://www.gov.uk/government/stati...2022/public-spending-statistics-february-2022

I am generally opposed to hypothecation (ring-fencing) of any tax, but if, as part of the deal to create windfall taxes on fossil fuel companies, there was some proposed ring-fencing to spend on subsidising insulation and renewables I could live with that.

 

[zefarelly]

They could cut the price of sausage rolls in the wild bean cafe maybe?

 

[beorhthelm]

That's fairly easy. Give it to the government.

Even under this venal, corrupt government, the vast majority will be spent on health, education and public services. And contrary to 'popular belief' (aka tabloid headlines), the vast majority will be well spent, on salaries, equipment, and maintenance (all of which has a greater, more positive, knock on effect on the wider economy than leaving it with BP).

thats what business spend money on too, along with shareholders who'll invest in to other business doing the same. BP or any company doesnt have a big vault of cash the directors swim around.

to the original point, there's corporation tax on those profits and additional 10% for oil production in North Sea, isnt that enough? there's also a substantial shift to renewables we expect business to fund, a windfall tax just delays that.

 

[Weststander]

A free tank of fuel per UK registered car per annum and a gift Ronco Hit Singles Album 1970-1975.

 

[highflyer]

thats what business spend money on too, along with shareholders who'll invest in to other business doing the same. BP or any company doesnt have a big vault of cash the directors swim around.

to the original point, there's corporation tax on those profits and additional 10% for oil production in North Sea, isnt that enough? there's also a substantial shift to renewables we expect business to fund, a windfall tax just delays that.

How did I guess you'd be first to pop up and defend BP?

Expenditure and payments to shareholders by businesses like BP are regressive and will have an overall environmentally negative impact. Government expenditure is generally progressive. If you want a more sustainable and more equal world, then you need to take money away from big business and rich people and have it spent by government. Can we all guess why doing this is so hard?

As an aside BP and other large oil comapnies have done everything in the power, for decades, to create scientific doubt (when they knew full well what the science really said) and spent millions on lobbying (successfilly) to delay action on climate change. They've seen the writing on the wall and are scrambling to change ther image but you'd be pretty stupid to believe they have suddenly become our climate saviours. I've been a target of their lobbying in the past and they can F*ck off frankly.

 

[Swansman]

I've got 99 ideas about various islands the profits might end up on and yours ain't one.

 

[zefarelly]

Some of those Islands may be floating, with 2 helipads.

 

[highflyer]

I've got 99 ideas about various islands the profits might end up on and yours ain't one.

Hey, the world can never have enough gold plated yachts owned via tax haven registered shell companies.

 

[beorhthelm]

How did I guess you'd be first to pop up and defend BP?

Expenditure and payments to shareholders by businesses like BP are regressive and will have an overall environmentally negative impact. Government expenditure is generally progressive. If you want a more sustainable and more equal world, then you need to take money away from big business and rich people and have it spent by government. Can we all guess why doing this is so hard?

its hard because without business there is little value created in an economy. government produces nothing, spends on services that are costs. we can all agree we want those services, and argue about the amount and details. you can move from big business to small business if you think thats more efficent, its still business, commerce, industry that creates value and money we all live on, not government. regressive/progressive is a load of nonsense made up to justify taxation. taking randomly from a group of companies is not "progressive", you're just taking money from investment to produce future revenue.

 

[zefarelly]

its hard because without business there is little value created in an economy. government produces nothing, spends on services that are costs. we can all agree we want those services, and argue about the amount and details. you can move from big business to small business if you think thats more efficent, its still business, commerce, industry that creates value and money we all live on, not government. regressive/progressive is a load of nonsense made up to justify taxation. taking randomly from a group of companies is not "progressive", you're just taking money from investment to produce future revenue.

I agree with that, but the proportion reinvested is the question that needs answering, high profit companies have a tendency to over reward the few not reinvest for the many.

 

[highflyer]

its hard because without business there is little value created in an economy. government produces nothing, spends on services that are costs. we can all agree we want those services, and argue about the amount and details. you can move from big business to small business if you think thats more efficent, its still business, commerce, industry that creates value and money we all live on, not government. regressive/progressive is a load of nonsense made up to justify taxation. taking randomly from a group of companies is not "progressive", you're just taking money from investment to produce future revenue.

Govenment does not 'produce nothing'. That's ridiculous. Apologies for the Guardian link, but the facts in this article are not disputed as far as I am aware: https://www.theguardian.com/comment...private-sector-products-investment-innovation

Business is needed. But business like BP - not so much.

The principle of analysing policy impact as progressive/regressive isn't nonsense (even the very very mainstream Institute for Fiscal Studies uses it). It just happens not to suit a certain type of politics which wants to see every $ 'created' or 'lost' in an economy as being of equal value, no matter who loses or benefits.

 

[beorhthelm]

Govenment does not 'produce nothing'. That's ridiculous. Apologies for the Guardian link, but the facts in this article are not disputed as far as I am aware: https://www.theguardian.com/comment...private-sector-products-investment-innovation

Business is needed. But business like BP - not so much.

The principle of analysing policy impact as progressive/regressive isn't nonsense (even the very very mainstream Institute for Fiscal Studies uses it). It just happens not to suit a certain type of politics which wants to see every $ 'created' or 'lost' in an economy as being of equal value, no matter who loses or benefits.

fair enough "nonsence" is too strong. its relevant to taxation though and you where applying to all economics where this does not make sense. the terms speak to where a tax increases for those with more or increases portionally for those with less. little sense to veiw expenditure and spending in investment into the economy the same.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Will tax be payable? They have written off their £24bn holding in Rosneft, so they made an overall loss.

 

[Ding Dong !]

Wish the shares I hold would significantly increase.........but they've barely moved up !!

Profits going to the fat cats not the shareholders

 

[schmunk]

Wish the shares I hold would significantly increase.........but they've barely moved up !!

Profits going to the fat cats not the shareholders

Presumably you'll be receiving a dividend in due course...?

 

[Pavilionaire]

Will tax be payable? They have written off their £24bn holding in Rosneft, so they made an overall loss.

Yep, we should sorry for them because they've taken such a hit. You couldn't make this stuff up.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Yes. No justification at all for not imposing eye watering windfall taxes.

Government uses the money for green energy projects which reduce our need for dirty fuel in the future

 

[jakarta]

When it comes to facts, BP haven't had any significant presence on the North Sea for many years (says a Forties Field worker from the 1990's).

 

[nicko31]

Yes. No justification at all for not imposing eye watering windfall taxes.

Government uses the money for green energy projects which reduce our need for dirty fuel in the future

Government is a tough position now. They missed the chance of a windfall tax on the north sea, if they do it now they were be accused of stealing Labour's policies and pissing off the Tuffon St crew.