No one would mistake a bunch of ethanol advocates for the folks at Second City, but we give the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) and the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association (IRFA) credit for injecting a little humor into their political statements.

In this case, the two groups are using the annual Biofuels Beltway March in Washington, DC, to throw what's being billed as a 100th birthday party for oil subsidies, according to DomesticFuel. The groups will take pains to point out that, while the three-decade ethanol subsidy was cut off at the end of 2011, oil subsidies have been enacted continuously since 1913. Monte Shaw, executive director of IRFA, told Domestic Fuel, "So little old ethanol somehow manages to get by without it but the 100 year old oil industry, the most profitable industry in the history of the world, still needs that taxpayer crush [sic] to get by at least that's the way they tell it." Plug-in vehicle advocates, that's your window to make a point about imbalance as well.

The "Century of Subsidies" party will take place Thursday afternoon and will even feature a birthday cake from Baltimore's Charm City Cakes, of "Ace of Cakes" fame. Yes, that's one of their designs above.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 28 Comments
      • 2 Years Ago
      Oil is not subsidized. Oil companies pay a lot in corporate income taxes, as well as excise taxes. The so-called subsidies amount to disagreements about exactly how the oil companies’ legitimate expenses should be treated when calculating their income, and at any rate, these so-called subsidies are much lower than the excise taxes paid on gasoline and other petroleum products. On the whole, therefore, the big oil and gas firms are among the highest-taxed industries we have. Keep in mind that the very concept of “income” means that the government isn’t taxing just the money a company takes in, but rather calculates the company’s profit, which is the revenue it brings in minus its expenses, and then taxes that profit or income. Further, a company isn’t allowed to deduct all of its expenses in the year they are taken; expenses incurred drilling a well or buying durable equipment have to be deducted a bit at a time over several years. Different products are expensed over different time periods, but that doesn’t mean that allowing, say, a corporation to expense its jets over 5 years instead of 7 years is some sort of nefarious subsidy, or that an oil company’s deducting foreign tax or royalty payments in the year they are taken is a subsidy in the same sense that writing federal checks or guaranteeing loans to a Solyndra or a high-speed rail firm is.
        sbourg55
        • 6 Months Ago
        Right on DP !! See my post too......but it's impossible to educate liberals, esp those with an agenda.
      • 2 Years Ago
      The solution is to dissolve the Internal Revenue Code (Repeal the 16th-A, and pass a National Comsumption Tax on all goods and services - including the services of non-profits. 8% should do it!
      raktmn
      • 2 Years Ago
      In B4 anti-ethanol super-trolls!
        Marcopolo
        • 6 Months Ago
        @raktmn
        @ raktmn Just disagreeing with you, doesn't make others 'Trolls' ! Yelling 'troll', 'Moron' , at everyone who disagrees with your opinions or political persuasion, only revels you as a bully.
        raktmn
        • 6 Months Ago
        @raktmn
        Piqutchi -- you have accurately described the super-trolls I'm talking about.
        lad
        • 6 Months Ago
        @raktmn
        Please make an intelligent argument; calling people names indicates null thought.
        • 6 Months Ago
        @raktmn
        It's not called "trolling" unless the person posts purposely to give people grief.
      Actionable Mango
      • 2 Years Ago
      So Monsanto is jealous of Exxon's lobbyists.
      sbourg55
      • 2 Years Ago
      These lib morons at ACE and IRFA don't know any facts. The biggest fact they ignore (or refuse to research and understand) is that oil products and oil companies are the highest taxed companies and products in the world. For example, when Exxon drills in Nigeria, that govt imposes a 50% tax, then when the crude is refined and comes to the U.S. the state and local govts here, tax each gallon an average of 60 cents. Meanwhile the net after-tax profits by Exxon are 5% of revenue -- about 20 cents per gallon for any liberal morons reading this who can't do math. Meanwhile the $4/gallon also includes salaries for Exxon and gas station owners/workers and they're taxed to high heaven. In sum, oil is a HUGE cash cow for the govts of the world. Again, Libs...net profits are 20 cents / gallon, and total taxes are over $2/ gallon. This is called ANTI-SUBSIDIES, aka TAXES, but of course morons like Monte Shaw of IRFA are too dense to comprehend. Geez.
        Steven
        • 6 Months Ago
        @sbourg55
        Your local gas station makes 2 cents per gallon, every step along the way is about the same until the government gets their paws in the pie; California alone gets 70 cents for every gallon. (only to hand it out it to government unions, welfare slugs and illegal aliens) Now who is the thief?
      Steven
      • 2 Years Ago
      The idiots definition of Subsidies: Tax breaks that all legal businesses are entitled to... Actual Subsidies: government handouts to pick winners and losers in the market place. Ethanol is highly corrosive, it destroys any Internal Combustion Engine not specifically designed for it, 99.9% of automobiles and all marine / small engines. Don't take my word for it, look in you owners manual, call them directly, they'll have very bad news for you: your warranty is void if you put ethanol in your tank. The best part is your tax dollars have facilitated the destruction of your property.
      richard40
      • 2 Years Ago
      They have repealed the ethanol subsidy, but the ethanol mandate is just as destructive, and should also be repealed.
      EZEE
      • 2 Years Ago
      This just in - pot calls kettle African American.
      Marcopolo
      • 6 Months Ago
      @ lad Without patent protection, there would be very little US innovation. New technology and scientific research cost a lot of money., far more than the taxpayer can afford to fund ! The idea of "oil companies" buying up super inventions and sitting on them, sounds exciting, but it's largely fiction. Reality, is far less exciting. Firstly, patent law allows for dormant patents, that are deemed in the public (or national) interest can have their patent protection removed on application. Secondly, several nations, including the PRC just ignore US patent protection. In the case of Cobassy, it's almost impossible to dispel this urban myth ! But it's just a myth ! There was a period when oil companies were anxious to diversify into being "Energy companies". Each major oil company sought investments outside the oil energy. (BP became the larger producer of Solar in the world, Shell invested billions in Bio-fuels, Chevron still invests billions into geo-thermal, An Exxon employee developed Lithium battery technology. Exxon is stil a major component producer for Lithium battery technology. etc etc, Texaco bought a stake in Cobassy, shortly before Chevron bought/merged with Texaco. Corbassy was always a JV between ECD Ovonics' subsidiary Ovonic Battery Company, and Chevron Technology Ventures LLC. It proved to be an unhappy JV. Chevron argues that it found ECD to require endless infusions of money for product which were never ready for commercial production, while ECD's Stan Ovshinsky, has on occasion stated that Chevron deliberately delayed sales opportunities by withholding investment. In the meantime their was a lawsuit with Panasonic, and other problems, including an argument by Chevron that Stan Ovshinsky's ECD inc sold the less viable IP to Chevron and kept the best for themselves having used Chevrons resources to do so. But, no matter where you sit, the simple fact is that during this period EV's and hybrids were built using NiMH technology.
      Marcopolo
      • 2 Years Ago
      Like all industries, the Ethanol Industry employs a powerful lobby group, supported by the farm, and farm industry lobby, as well as the corn growing farm states political influence. This is understandable. There's a lot of money and vested interests involved. This is an all American Industry, helping out American farmers, so why is there such growing opposition to ethanol ? Is it the popular belief that it cuts into the profit of " Big Oil" ? Nope ! "Big Oil" no longer cares ! Oil companies are primarily concerned with finding more oil, not selling more ! In fact, US oil companies make the same profit from selling B 15 as selling straight gasoline. Ethanol producers may no longer be directly subsidised by the federal taxpayer, but since the product is mandated by federal law, why does it need to be ? Take away the mandate, the industry would disappear ! It's not 'big oil' that frightens the Ethanol Industry, it's the growing criticism from economists, scientists, environmentalists, EV auto-makers and politicians that the Ethanol Industry is uneconomic, harms the adoption of EV technology, and environmentally harmful ! It's undeniable that Oil depletion will eventually render the production of fuel oil, especially for road transport, uneconomic. In the search for a replacement energy source, many different technologies will be tried, most will fail. "Corn based' Ethanol, is one of those technologies that has already failed. The problem is, what to do with all those who's livelihoods depend on this increasingly economically disastrous industry ?.
      • 2 Years Ago
      Its well past time for serious tax reform. The OECD Tax Research Group recently released a review of tax subsidies for fuel across the OECD. Federal US tax subsidies were about $5.3 billion in 2010. Texas, which is usually considered a state that does not interfere in the market as much as northern states, exempted energy companies from over 1.2 billion in 2010. We would be better off closing loopholes and reducing rates than by the current practise of giving subsidies to everyone with a good lobby group.
      SublimeKnight
      • 2 Years Ago
      Ethanol advocates (ie Big Corn) complaining about others' subsidies... that's rich.
        sbourg55
        • 6 Months Ago
        @SublimeKnight
        And oil company subsidies are not even subsidies. Read my post and David P's.
    • Load More Comments