Investigating the so-called ‘windfall tax’

Spread the love
Rishi Sunak offers huge fossil fuel subsidies to develop fossil fuel extraction in UK.
Rishi Sunak offers huge fossil fuel subsidies to develop fossil fuel extraction in UK.

Rishi Sunak awards a huge tax break to further destroy the climate.

It’s called a windfall tax – it’s a further windfall for fossil fuel companies on top of their windfall of higher prices following the invasion of Ukraine.

https://neweconomics.org/2023/11/the-windfall-tax-was-supposed-to-rein-in-fossil-fuel-profits-instead-it-has-saved-corporations-billions#:~:text=The%20levy%20raised%20the%20effective,to%2075%25%20in%20November%202022.

Back in May 2022, the UK government announced the energy profits levy, as a response to the growing pressure for a ​‘windfall tax’ on the massive profits being generated by companies pumping oil and gas in the North Sea. These profits were fuelled by skyrocketing fossil fuel prices in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The levy raised the effective rate of corporation tax paid on oil and gas profits from 40% to 65%, and again to 75% in November 2022.

But, it came with a caveat. Despite the UK’s urgent need to kick its addiction to expensive fossil fuels, this government didn’t want to discourage investment in more oil and gas extraction. So they included a tax loophole to ensure that companies investing in new projects to pump fossil fuels out from under the North Sea would see their tax relief (already generous by most standards) rise to 91%. In other words, fossil fuel companies could deduct 91% of their capital investment costs from their corporation tax bill. The ​‘windfall tax’ may have, on the surface, attempted to tackle the grotesque profits being raked in by massive companies in the midst of the cost of living crisis – but it also made it cheaper for these companies to extract the fossil fuels contributing to the sky-high cost of living in the first place.

At NEF, we analysed last week’s new OBR data, and found that the loophole included in the energy profits levy has massively increased the amount of tax relief which fossil fuel companies will potentially receive. We estimate that oil and gas extractors could receive up to £18.1bn in tax relief between 2023 and 2026. That’s a massive increase of £10.5bn, or 136%, from the £7.6bn they were expected to receive before the energy crisis. This is an enormous amount of lost revenue that could go to the government to be spent on lowering our energy bills or improving our public services. The OBR expects the UK oil and gas industry to pay £24.3bn in tax between 2024 and 2027, meaning that closing the tax loophole in the energy profits levy could almost double the amount of tax revenue our government could receive – and the businesses in question would still walk away with billions.

Even if you accept the government’s warped logic, which seeks to encourage greater North Sea extraction, the policy appears to be failing. While total potential for tax relief has risen by £10.5bn, total forecast investment has risen by just £3.4bn. This would represent an abysmal return on a government tax measure. Relief has largely been extended to investments which were expected to occur anyway, suggesting the policy is (intentionally or not) little more than a vehicle for oil and gas companies to keep most of their explosive profit growth, while the windfall tax sustains an illusion of fairness.

The energy profits levy helped pay for the government’s emergency cost of living support measures – in theory. But our energy bills remain extortionate, costing 50% more than they did in early 2022, prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. With the poorest households over £200 a week short of the amount they need for an acceptable standard of living, this government has still not provided enough support. Looking forward, removing the perverse tax reliefs extended to the oil and gas industry could free up almost £13bn of tax revenue between 2024 and 2026: enough to give every household in the country three £150 annual payments to help cover their energy costs.

It’s reasonable to compare the so-called windfall tax to Norway’s windfall tax since they are both taxing fossil fuel activities in the North Sea. The Uk’s Labour party has repeatedly said that it intends to impose a “proper windfall tax”. There was further brief mentions of this during the Labour Party’s reformulation and massive restriction of it’s green policies yesterday 8th February 2024 but it remains unclear what is intended.

What’s obviously clear is that Norway’s windfall tax has made and continues to raise huge sums for Norway. There is still a disguised fossil fuel subsidy for exploration and extraction – from what I can see it appears to be 78%. That’s a long way from Sunak’s 91% and since we’re dealing with vast sums of money, 91 – 78 = 13% of vast sums of money is still vast sums of money (as any Chancellor should realise).

https://blogg.pwc.no/skattebloggen-en/the-norwegian-petroleum-tax-system#:~:text=The%20special%20tax%20is%20a,effect%20from%201%20January%202022.

Example:

Investment in an offshore operating asset in Year 1 is 100.

In the ordinary tax base (22%), 100 must be capitalized and depreciated linearly over 6 years. The depreciation in Year 1 is 100 / 6 = 16.7, i.e., a deduction of 16.7. This results in a tax amount in Year 1 of -16.7 * 22% = -3.7

In the special tax base (56%), the entire amount of 100 can be deducted directly. The special tax base will therefore initially be -100. However, we must deduct the tax amount from the ordinary tax base of -3.7 from the -100. The special tax base will thus be -100 – (-3.7) = -96.3. To calculate the special tax amount, we must use the technical special tax rate of 71.8%. The special tax will thus be -96.3 * 71.8% = -69.3.

Hence, total tax on the investment of 100 in the offshore operating asset in Year 1 is 

-3.7 + (-69.3) = -73, i.e., a tax deduction of 73.

In Years 2 – 6, the linear depreciation continues in the ordinary tax base. For each of these years, the tax on the investment of 100 in Year 1 is thus -3.7 in the ordinary tax base. At the same time, this tax is treated as “income” in the calculation of special tax, as the amount must be deducted in the special tax base. The special tax will thus be 3.7 * 71.8 = 2.7 in each of the years. Total tax per year will therefore be -3.7 + 2.7 = -1. 

Looking at the entire period Year 1 – Year 6 as a whole, the total nominal tax for the investment of 100 in Year 1 is the sum of -73 in Year 1 and -1 for each of Years 2 – 6 (5 years), i.e., -73 + (-5) = -78, resulting in a total deduction of 78 over the period.

https://www.globalwitness.org/en/press-releases/despite-windfall-tax-and-record-profits-shell-paid-just-15-million-to-uk-22p-per-brit-last-year/

Despite windfall tax and record profits, Shell paid just £15 million to UK, 22p per Brit last year

By comparison Norway received £6.3 billion from Shell, over a grand per Norwegian

28th March 2023, London – Energy giant Shell paid just £15 million in taxes and fees to the UK last year on their drilling, compared to over £6.3 billion to the Norwegian government over the same period, according to Global Witness analysis of Shell’s latest tax reporting, released today.   

This means Shell paid around just 22p per UK citizen, compared to the £1,171 it paid for every citizen of Norway. This £15 million is much closer to the £9.7 million it awarded its CEO in 2022, than the considerably more it paid to most other countries in which it drills.

The UK ranks 19th out of 25 countries for taxes received by Shell last year, with the likes of the USA, Germany, Qatar and Italy all receiving far more from Shell than the UK. It comes despite the introduction of a UK windfall tax that Rishi Sunak, as Chancellor, described as a “significant set of interventions”.

Rishi Sunak on stopping Rosebank says that any chancellor can stop his huge 91% subsidy to build Rosebank, that Keir Starmer is as bad as him for sucking up to Murdoch and other plutocrats and that we (the plebs) need to get organised to elect MPs that will stop Rosebank.
Rishi Sunak on stopping Rosebank says that any chancellor can stop his huge 91% subsidy to build Rosebank, that Keir Starmer is as bad as him for sucking up to Murdoch and other plutocrats and that we (the plebs) need to get organised to elect MPs that will stop Rosebank. [3rd version of image has same text].
Continue ReadingInvestigating the so-called ‘windfall tax’

BP and Shell’s spending on renewables flatlines in 2023

Spread the love

https://www.energymonitor.ai/finance/corporate-strategy/weekly-data-oil-majors-bp-and-shells-spending-on-renewables-flatlines-in-2023/

Protestors call out bp and Shell during a demonstration in the City of London in 2021. Credit: Vuk Valcic/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images.

Shell decreased spending on “renewables and energy solutions” last year, while bp’s spending on “low carbon energy” has flatlined, finds an Energy Monitor analysis of fourth-quarter results.

On Tuesday, UK oil major BP reported that in 2023 it raked in $13.8bn (£10.93bn) in profits. This represented its second-highest annual profit in a decade – despite it being nearly half the record-breaking $27.7bn bp amassed in 2022 after oil prices spiked following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Days earlier, Shell also reported better-than-expected profits of more than $28bn, following a record-breaking $40bn in 2022. Yet both oil majors’ spending on renewables has flatlined, finds Energy Monitor‘s analysis of the companies’ filings.

Shell’s annual results show that investment in “renewables and energy solutions” fell from $3.5bn in 2022 to just $2.7bn last year. The company spent just 11.7% of its total capital expenditure (capex) on renewables in 2023 compared with 15.3% in 2022.

By contrast, bp slightly increased its spending on “low carbon energy” from $1.02bn in 2022 to $1.26bn in 2023, although as the chart below shows, spending on renewables by both companies has flatlined over the past five years.

https://www.energymonitor.ai/finance/corporate-strategy/weekly-data-oil-majors-bp-and-shells-spending-on-renewables-flatlines-in-2023/

Greenpeace activists display a billboard during a protest outside Shell headquarters on July 27, 2023 in London.
Greenpeace activists display a billboard during a protest outside Shell headquarters on July 27, 2023 in London. (Photo: Handout/Chris J. Ratcliffe for Greenpeace via Getty Images)
Continue ReadingBP and Shell’s spending on renewables flatlines in 2023

Climate groups taking UK Government to court over Rosebank oil field approval

Spread the love

https://leftfootforward.org/2023/12/climate-groups-taking-uk-government-to-court-over-rosebank-oil-field-approval/

The UK government is facing two separate legal challenges over its approval of the massive Rosebank oil project in the North Sea.

Both Greenpeace UK and climate group Uplift argue the approval of the oil field breaks the Government’s net zero pledges and fails to acknowledge the project’s environmental harm and emissions impact.

Uplift claims the Energy Secretary failed to prove how the oil field was consistent with the UK’s legally binding net zero emissions target and argues, the government did not provide a good enough assessment of the environmental impact of Rosebank on marine life.

In Greenpeace UK’s application, it argues the Environmental Impact Assessment used to approve the oil field did not consider downstream emissions, and is therefore invalid. The campaign group also argues that there is no evidence Scottish Ministers were consulted on the impacts of Rosebank, which it claims breaches Conservation of Offshore Marine Habitats and Species Regulations.

Greenpeace also argue oil contamination could affect whales and wild birds, while the drilling and cable laying under the sea could destroy habitats for species that live on the seabed.

Rishi Sunak gave the go-ahead for the controversial undeveloped oil field in September, set to be the UK’s largest untapped oil field containing an estimated 500 million barrels of oil. With Norwegian owner Equinor set to receive £3 billion in tax breaks.

https://leftfootforward.org/2023/12/climate-groups-taking-uk-government-to-court-over-rosebank-oil-field-approval/

Image of UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak reads 1% RICHEST 100% CLIMATE DENIER
Image of UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak reads 1% RICHEST 100% CLIMATE DENIER
Continue ReadingClimate groups taking UK Government to court over Rosebank oil field approval

Canada May Soon Give a $15.3B ‘Carbon Bomb’ Subsidy to Big Oil, Experts Say

Spread the love

Original article by Geoff Dembicki republished from DeSmog

Business leader says government tax credit for oil and gas ‘extends the life of Canada’s largest industrial sector.’

The government of Alberta, home to the tar sands pictured here, has announced taxpayer funding in the range of $3.5 billion to $5.3 billion for CCS projects. Credit: (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

As world leaders meet in Dubai for the COP28 climate negotiations, federal and provincial governments in Canada are preparing to give an estimated $15.3 billion in new subsidies to oil and gas companies, and other heavy emitters, for expanding the production of fossil fuels, according to climate experts. 

Those subsidies are taking the form of massive new tax credits for carbon capture and storage (CCS), which is a technology that companies use to grow their extraction of oil and gas while burying a fraction of their greenhouse gas emissions underground. 

“I completely agree that Canada’s tax credit for carbon capture and storage is a subsidy to the oil and gas industry,” Jason MacLean, an adjunct professor who studies climate policy at the University of Saskatchewan, told DeSmog in an email. 

The federal Canadian government is close to announcing details on a tax credit that will go to top oil and gas companies like Suncor, Cenovus, and Imperial Oil, along with other major industrial polluters. Policymakers previously estimated the value of these investment tax credits to be $10 billion. The government of Alberta, home to the tar sands, has meanwhile announced taxpayer funding in the range of $3.5 billion to $5.3 billion for CCS projects.

The Pathways Alliance, an industry lobbying and marketing group representing 95 percent of tar sands production, says these tax credits are essential for oil and gas producers to lower their emissions in line with achieving “net-zero emissions” by 2050. Reaching “net-zero” entails stabilizing global temperature rise at 1.5 degrees Celsius, a level beyond which scientists warn the impacts to humankind could be catastrophic. 

Yet, in submissions to the federal government, the Pathways Alliance explained that lowering a portion of oil sands emissions via carbon capture will create opportunities for the industry to expand globally — even as other countries move away from fossil fuels. “We believe Canada should seek to increase its market share for responsibly produced, lower emissions energy, even if global market demand, as a whole, begins to decline,” the group said in one submission. 

“We need to keep in mind that this is about reducing emissions and not reducing production,” the organization said last year in a separate submission, as revealed by DeSmog. 

Representatives of the Pathways Alliance are among the 35 people with ties to the fossil fuel sector who are part of Canada’s official delegation to COP28 this year. At the climate talks, they are pushing for policies supporting global deployment of carbon capture, which will allow companies to keep producing oil as countries get stricter about regulating emissions.   

“It is really important for the energy industry in Canada because it extends the life of Canada’s largest industrial sector and maintains our competitiveness over the long term,” Scott Crockatt of the Business Council of Alberta told the Calgary Herald last month.

However, tax credits supporting carbon capture risk accelerating already dangerous levels of global temperature rise, MacLean argues. Even if the technology can fully capture emissions from the production of oil and gas in Canada — which is an expensive and uncertain proposition — the vast majority of climate impacts occur when fossil fuels are burned in places like car and truck engines and house furnaces. 

“No possible innovation or improvement to [carbon capture technology] can change the fact that it applies only to the direct and upstream greenhouse gas emissions arising from the production of oil and gas, not the downstream emissions resulting from the combustion of oil and gas, which represent approximately 85 percent of the total emissions,” MacLean told DeSmog.  

Allowing oil and gas to expand while relying on carbon capture could result in the release of 86 billion additional tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide between 2020 and 2050, according to a new analysis from the organization Climate Analytics. This “86 billion tonne carbon bomb” could derail efforts to keep global warming from exceeding dangerous thresholds, the group argues. 

The Canadian government earlier this year unveiled detailed plans to remove “inefficient” oil and gas subsidies, with Environment and Climate Minister Steven Guilbeault saying at the time that “the simple reality is that it’s no longer free to pollute in Canada.” 

But climate campaigners say that promise risks being completely undermined by the new carbon capture tax credits. 

Original article by Geoff Dembicki republished from DeSmog

Continue ReadingCanada May Soon Give a $15.3B ‘Carbon Bomb’ Subsidy to Big Oil, Experts Say