Catalog of oil industry tax and other subsidies

[bhzmark]

Do the critics of electric car tax breaks want to eliminate all of the tax breaks and subsidies that the oil industry gets? Why should the oil and nuclear industry get lots of tax breaks, loan guarantees, and subsidies while green technology companies like Tesla don't get them?

Summary of fossil-fuel support to petroleum – United States
Severance Tax Exemptions for Crude Oil (TX)
Development Credit for Certain Producers (AK)
Exclusion of Low-Volume Oil & Gas Wells (WV)
Income support
Exception from Passive Loss Limitation (Federal)
Support for capital formation
Expensing of Exploration and Development Costs (Federal)
Excess of Percentage over Cost Depletion (Federal)
Temporary Expensing of Equipment for Refining (Federal)
Aid to Small Refiners for EPA Capital Costs (Federal)
Enhanced Oil Recovery Credit (Federal)
Sales Tax Exemption for Oil & Gas Equipment (TX)
Qualified Capital Expenditure Credit (AK)
Alternative Credit for Exploration (AK)
Support for knowledge creation
Amortisation of Geological Expenditure (Federal)
Consumer Support Estimate
Consumption
Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (Federal)
Small Municipality Energy Assistance Program (AK)
Power Cost Equalization (AK)
Alaska Heating Assistance Program (AK)
Gasoline Tax Exemptions (TX)
Fuel Tax Exemptions for Farmers (Federal)
Consumption
Fuel Tax Exemption for Aviation (WV
Fuel Tax Exemption for Dyed Diesel (WV)
Fuel Tax Exemption for Propane (WV)
Fuel Tax Exemption for County Boards of Education (WV)
Fuel Tax Exemption for Certain Public Administrations (WV)
Fuel Tax Exemption for Certain Off-Highway Uses (WV)
General Services Support Estimate
Strategic Petroleum Reserve (Federal)
Fossil Energy R&D (Federal)
Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve (Federal)

Fossil Fuel Subsidies: Overview - Oil Change InternationalOil Change International
http://priceofoil.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/OECD.US_.2009.2010-FIN.xlsx

"Triumph of the Drill"
Triumph of the Drill: How Big Oil Clings to Billions in Government Giveaways | Mother Jones

"As Oil Industry Fights a Tax, It Reaps Subsidies"
Log In - The New York Times

Read the definition of SUBSIDY ...
Subsidy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Excerpt:
Although commonly extended from Government, the term subsidy can relate to ANY TYPE OF SUPPORT - for example from NGOs or implicit subsidies. Subsidies come in various forms including: DIRECT (cash grants, interest-free loans) and INDIRECT (tax breaks, insurance, low-interest loans, depreciation write-offs, rent rebates).

 

[nwdiver]

You forgot one......

 

[ThosEM]

THANKS! +1

 

[RichardC]

You forgot one......

View attachment 77100

Not to mention the massive subsidies for airports, roads and other infrastructure which enables the use of oil!

 

[ChadS]

I find that many "anti-EV" (why would you be against a particular car propulsion system?) people don't think (or at least don't like to admit) that there are any petroleum subsidies at all. If you give them a list like the one above, then they will start arguing about the definition of subsidy (which is also spelled out above).

Next, they are likely to complain about not trusting the source. I then like to point them to the IEA's take (HERE). The IEA was created in response to OPEC and their mission is to keep oil flowing freely to Western countries. It is not a tree-hugging organization with an anti-oil agenda, so people trying to learn (rather than just argue) may be interested in what they have to say - which is basically that there are way too many oil subsidies, and that it would be better if they were reduced.

Of course some people just like to argue and then will switch to another argument.

 

[rays427]

Are you kidding me? Tesla and most other renewable industries have gotten all kinds of incentives. Do you remember loan guarantees (think Solyndra). I just got $10,000 from our government when I purchase my car. That's more than what I paid for gas over the last 3 years before I got the Tesla. Most of the exemptions mentioned are similar to those given every other industry. So what do you think would happen if they removed all these incentives? The oil companies make much less per gallon than the taxes the government collects. I think it's funny that RichardC included roads since gasoline taxes pay for maintaining roads whereas electric cars as of now pay nothing. Those of you completely against the oil industry need to read the book The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels. Just imagine what life would be like without fossil fuels? Cheap energy is what has allowed our prosperity.

 

[AB4EJ]

Are you kidding me? Tesla and most other renewable industries have gotten all kinds of incentives. Do you remember loan guarantees (think Solyndra). I just got $10,000 from our government when I purchase my car. That's more than what I paid for gas over the last 3 years before I got the Tesla. Most of the exemptions mentioned are similar to those given every other industry. So what do you think would happen if they removed all these incentives? The oil companies make much less per gallon than the taxes the government collects. I think it's funny that RichardC included roads since gasoline taxes pay for maintaining roads whereas electric cars as of now pay nothing. Those of you completely against the oil industry need to read the book The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels. Just imagine what life would be like without fossil fuels? Cheap energy is what has allowed our prosperity.

This is true. Fossil fuels will be a big part of the energy equation for many decades to come. Even if everyone is agreed that renewables should be used wherever possible, it will take a long time to make a shift of something this major. Still, I don't have to be against something to say that I like something else better. I like the experience of driving electric, and all the things I don't have to do when using that mode (go to gas stations, change oil, maintain exhaust system, filters, timing chain, etc.), and will be willing to cover my share of highway maintenance (if someone figures out how to properly do that).

 

[ChadS]

Hi Rays,

I suspect you were responding to this quote:

Why should the oil and nuclear industry get lots of tax breaks, loan guarantees, and subsidies while green technology companies like Tesla don't get them?

Is that correct? I agree with you that greentech companies, including Tesla, do get subsidies as well. But from looking at the sentence before it:

Do the critics of electric car tax breaks want to eliminate all of the tax breaks and subsidies that the oil industry gets?

and the other discussion in this thread, I don't think the OP or anybody else here really meant to make that claim. I have seen a lot of wacky theories on both sides, but I have never seen anybody try to claim that EVs don't get subsidies and I don't think the OP was. I think he was talking in the possible future tense, because there are several EV subsidies that are being taken away, and most of the rest have sunset dates.

I *have* seen many online comments that claim that there are no petroleum subsidies, and outright disbelief when they are mentioned. I think that is what the OP was trying to address with this thread - merely establishing that they exist, and it would not be good for America if petroleum keeps its subsidies and EVs do not.

 

[nwdiver]

Just imagine what life would be like without fossil fuels? Cheap energy is what has allowed our prosperity.

I generate ~150% of what I need from the sun... so I'm living fossil fuel free now, no imagination required and it's AWESOME. It's very true that 'cheap' energy has gotten us to where we are... just like my parents providing for my food and shelter for ~18 years got me to where I am. It's time for humanity to grow up and stop fueling our quality of life at the expense of future generations.

Fossil fuels are 'cheap' energy in the same sense that food at a soup kitchen is free... it's not... wether it's a drought stricken farmer in California or a drowned child in the Philippines fossil fuels are NOT cheap... someone else is just picking up the rest of the tab.

 

[dsm363]

Are you kidding me? Tesla and most other renewable industries have gotten all kinds of incentives. Do you remember loan guarantees (think Solyndra). I just got $10,000 from our government when I purchase my car. That's more than what I paid for gas over the last 3 years before I got the Tesla. Most of the exemptions mentioned are similar to those given every other industry. So what do you think would happen if they removed all these incentives? The oil companies make much less per gallon than the taxes the government collects. I think it's funny that RichardC included roads since gasoline taxes pay for maintaining roads whereas electric cars as of now pay nothing. Those of you completely against the oil industry need to read the book The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels. Just imagine what life would be like without fossil fuels? Cheap energy is what has allowed our prosperity.

That's not true in every state. WA pays $100 flat fee so if you drive less that the what you would have paid in gas tax you are actually penalized. Of course you benefit if you drive more. Other states will of course find ways to get their tax from EVs when they become more popular. Wouldn't worry about that.

 

[CalDreamin]

Are you kidding me? Tesla and most other renewable industries have gotten all kinds of incentives. Do you remember loan guarantees (think Solyndra).

Think Big Picture. Overall, U.S. taxpayers have made a profit on that loan program.

Most of the exemptions mentioned are similar to those given every other industry.

I disagree. I can't think of another industry for which the U.S. went to war to maintain industry's supply of raw materials over the past few decades, with long-term costs to U.S. taxpayers of over 2 trillion dollars.

So what do you think would happen if they removed all these incentives

The price of oil products would rise to better reflect the unsubsidized costs.

The oil companies make much less per gallon than the taxes the government collects.

Source? ExxonMobil's income before taxes exceeds the taxes they pay.

Those of you completely against the oil industry need to read the book The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels. Just imagine what life would be like without fossil fuels? Cheap energy is what has allowed our prosperity.

The oil companies will not disappear simply because government subsidies they enjoy were removed.

Our long-term prosperity would be enhanced by phasing out subsidies for the oil companies.

BTW, I'm not "completely against the oil industry". I work for an oil company. I'm against government subsidies for the oil industry.

 

[rays427]

CalDreamin,

I wasn't talking about the income taxes the oil companies pay. The income taxes are in addition to the State excise, sales and other taxes I was thinking of. California State Tax gasoline taxes are 65.98 cents per gallon. The average of all States is 48.85 cents per gallon. Major oil companies make about 25 to 30 cents per gallon profit in the best of times. Part of the reason I retired was I was tired of laying off employees in the 90's because the profits were so low. The last 10 years I worked for a major our profit was 0 to 5 cents per gallon. Removing the incentives will make producing US oil less attractive which makes us more reliant on foreign sources. It would also increase the cost to consumers which hurts the lowest income folks the most.

As far as going to war to protect our sources of oil I agree with you. However, what would happen if we were cut off from those sources? Our entire way of life is based on cheap energy. Actually the oil companies would probably do just fine since the price would sky rocket and they would make much more per barrel. Do you remember the oil embargo in the 70's? The most important thing we can do is develop alternate sources of energy so that we don't need the oil from the unstable places in the world. Not building the XL pipeline is just plane stupid. Having control of that Canadian oil would help reduce our reliance on oil from unfriendly countries.

It's hard to believe you work for an oil company and don't understand the risks taken by the industry versus the profits they make. Google, Apple, etc have much higher profit margins without the risks that oil companies have. Political risks, drilling in 10,000 feet of water not knowing if any oil will be found and of course the chance for a screw up like the BP blowout and the Exxon Valdez.

As far as the loan program they made money on some of the loans but lost a lot on others.

I am for removing all tax incentives by eliminating corporate income taxes. No company actually pays tax in the long run since they must be passed on to the consumer. Income taxes just increase the overall cost to the consumer because of all the money that is spent on trying to reduce them through our complex tax system. Just raise the individual taxes to make up the difference. Taxing corporations just hide the total tax actually being paid by us.

 

[nwdiver]

As far as going to war to protect our sources of oil I agree with you. However, what would happen if we were cut off from those sources? Our entire way of life is based on cheap energy. Actually the oil companies would probably do just fine since the price would sky rocket and they would make much more per barrel. Do you remember the oil embargo in the 70's? The most important thing we can do is develop alternate sources of energy so that we don't need the oil from the unstable places in the world. Not building the XL pipeline is just plane stupid. Having control of that Canadian oil would help reduce our reliance on oil from unfriendly countries.

The solution to our addiction is not more of what we're addicted to... this isn't the 70s... Solar PV isn't $99/w; it's $0.70/w. Ramping up the cost of fossil fuels won't squeeze the economy, it will encourage increased use of REAL solutions. Solar PV is already cheaper than fossil fuels... we just need the correct market signals to accelerate the transition.

It's human nature to keep doing what you've been doing... Solar PV could be free and there would STILL be people buying power from their friendly neighborhood coal plant because.... that's what they've always done. Sometimes you have to make them uncomfortable with the status quo... that's one role of a carbon tax.

 

[CalDreamin]

CalDreamin,
I wasn't talking about the income taxes the oil companies pay. The income taxes are in addition to the State excise, sales and other taxes I was thinking of. California State Tax gasoline taxes are 65.98 cents per gallon. The average of all States is 48.85 cents per gallon. Major oil companies make about 25 to 30 cents per gallon profit in the best of times.

For 2014, ExxonMobil produced oil that sold at an average price of $93.15/barrel while their average production cost was $12.55/barrel. That works out to a margin of $1.92 per gallon

As far as going to war to protect our sources of oil I agree with you. However, what would happen if we were cut off from those sources? Our entire way of life is based on cheap energy. Actually the oil companies would probably do just fine since the price would sky rocket and they would make much more per barrel. Do you remember the oil embargo in the 70's? The most important thing we can do is develop alternate sources of energy so that we don't need the oil from the unstable places in the world. Not building the XL pipeline is just plane stupid. Having control of that Canadian oil would help reduce our reliance on oil from unfriendly countries.

If we were cutoff from middle eastern oil then we'd obtain oil and other energy sources elsewhere. Supply would not match demand so the price would increase, This leads to two phenomenon that cause demand to equalize with supply -- (1) demand destruction and (2) an increase in supply as marginal producers enter the market.

It's hard to believe you work for an oil company and don't understand the risks taken by the industry versus the profits they make. Google, Apple, etc have much higher profit margins without the risks that oil companies have. Political risks, drilling in 10,000 feet of water not knowing if any oil will be found and of course the chance for a screw up like the BP blowout and the Exxon Valdez.

Taking business risks does not justify massive handouts from the taxpayers. Corporations with tens of billions a year in net earnings don't need subsidies.

As far as the loan program they made money on some of the loans but lost a lot on others.

Overall, the agency has loaned $34.2 billion to a variety of businesses, under a program designed to speed up development of clean-energy technology. Companies have defaulted on $780 million of that — a loss rate of 2.28 percent. The agency also has collected $810 million in interest payments, putting the program $30 million in the black.

 

[Incredulocious]

I had saved this list sometime ago and just came across it again. This seemed like a good place to post it. I saved it in June 2012 and a web search for the "Sanders/Ellison bill" finds this document as well as references to the bill in 2013 and 2015 with some different estimates. I don't know how much these estimates have changed since then:

TOTAL OIL AND GAS - $101.293 billion over ten years
TOTAL COAL - $5.357 billion over ten years
TOTAL OTHER FOSSIL FUEL SUBSIDIES - $6.705 billion over ten years
GRAND TOTAL, ALL FOSSIL FUEL SUBSIDIES - $113.355 billion over ten years

Subsidies Identified in the Sanders / Ellison End Polluter Welfare Act

Key– provision, statutory or tax code reference, section of the Sanders/Ellison bill, cost savings estimate over ten year years and source, and description of provision

OIL and GAS

•  Eliminate royalty relief, including for deep gas and deep water production, 43 USC 1337, 42 USC 15904 and 15905 (Sec 3) - $.01 billion (CBO estimate of just the deep gas and deep water royalty relief, from analysis of S. 916 112th Congress) – this provision repeals authority for the Department of Interior to provide discretionary royalty relief, and also repeals special royalty relief for deep water drilling.
  
  
•  Ultra deep water research program repeal, 42 USC 16371 (Sec 5) - $.100 billion (President’s FY2013 budget) – repeals 2005 public-private partnership to increase offshore production of oil and gas.
  
  
•  Uncap 75 million for spill liability and 350 million for pipeline clean-up for tar sands, 33 USC 2704 (Sec 6) – current law limits economic damages for an individual offshore oil spill to $75 million, this section would make liability unlimited so that corporations are fully responsible for the damage they cause. It would also uncap liability for spill damages, currently at $350 million, for tar sands pipeline operators.
  
  
•  Eliminate enhanced oil recovery credit, 26 USC 43 (Sec 14) – 15 percent income tax credit for advanced oil recovery investments.
  
  
•  Eliminate marginal wells credit, 26 USC 45 I (Sec 14) – tax credit for production from marginal and inefficient wells.
  
  
•  Eliminate deduction for tertiary injectant 26 USC 193 (Sec 14) - $.100 billion (President’s FY2013 budget) – allows deduction for advanced oil recovery investments
  
  
•  Eliminate manufacturing deduction, 26 USC 199(d)(9) (Sec 14, 19) - $11.883 billion (President’s FY2013 budget) – This provision, included in a 2004 law, allows oil and gas industry to claim they are ‘manufacturers’ and take huge tax deductions aimed at incentivizing manufacturing in America.
  
  
•  Eliminate special rule for oil, gas wells, 26 USC 461(i)(2) (Sec 14) – accelerates deductions for oil and gas corporations.
  
  
•  Eliminate percentage depletion, 26 USC 613(A) (Sec 14) - $11.465 billion (President’s FY2013 budget) – allows oil and gas companies to deduct 15 percent of their sales revenues to reflect declining value of their investment, without regard to the actual decline in value of their investment.
  
  
•  Eliminate passive loss exemption, 26 USC 469(c)(3) (Sec 14) - $.082 billion (President’s FY2013 budget)– lets oil/ gas company owners and investors use losses from fossil fuel investments to shelter other income.
  
  
•  Eliminate special depreciation for Alaska natural gas pipeline, 26 USC 168(e)(3) (Sec 14) – eliminates special depreciation provision allowing 7 year depreciation for Alaska natural gas pipelines, instead of standard 15 year depreciation.
  
  
•  Amortization for pollution control, 26 USC 169 (Sec 14) - $1.6 billion (President’s FY2013 budget)
  
  
•  Eliminate refinery upgrade deduction, 26 USC 179(c) (Sec 14) - $1.6 billion (Joint Committee Taxation for FY13, 14, 15) – eliminates option to expense 50 percent of costs to upgrade refinery.
  
  
•  Eliminate expensing of capital costs to comply with EPA rules for refineries, 26 USC 179(B) (Sec 14) – would eliminate special deduction for certain oil refineries related to cost of compliance with EPA low-sulfur pollution rules.
  
  
•  Eliminate environmental remediation expense deduction, 26 USC 198 (Sec 14) – prevents oil/gas industry from taking deduction for certain environmental clean-up costs.

•  Eliminate intangible drilling oil and gas deduction, 26 USC 263 (Sec 14) - $13.902 billion (President’s FY2013 budget) – This provision allows oil and gas companies to immediately deduct the cost of things like wages and supplies, lowering their taxes, instead of normal process of deducting these costs over time.
  
  
•  Eliminate marginal wells production credit 5 year carryback 26 USC 39(a)(3) (Sec 14) – allows 5 year carryback for marginal wells production credit.
  
  
•  Eliminate oil and gas Arbitrage bonds exemption 26 USC 148(b)(4 )(Sec 14) - $.086 billion (Green Scissors report 2011, with projections) -
  
  
•  Eliminate alternative fuel credit for natural gas 26 USC 30C(c) (Sec 15) - $.176 billion (Joint Committee Taxation) – currently natural gas qualifies as an alternative fuel eligible for a tax credit, this provision would remove the credit for natural gas.
  
  
•  7 year amortization, 26 USC 167(h) (Sec 16) - $1.4 billion (President’s FY2013 budget) – tax break created in 2005 to allow certain oil and gas corporations to more quickly amortize incidental drilling costs, reducing taxes paid. This proposal would eliminate the current 2 year amortization and extend it to 7 years.
  
  
•  Natural gas gathering lines 15 year property, 26 USC 168(e)(3) (Sec 17) - $.5 billion (President’s FY2013 budget) – eliminates special provision allowing for 7 year depreciation for natural gas pipelines, returning to the standard 15 year depreciation.
  
  
•  Increase Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund Financing, 26 USC 4611(c)(2), and Apply Oil Spill taxes to tar sands oil, 26 USC 4612(a) (Sec 24 and 25) -$.717 billion (President’s FY2013 budget) – this proposal would institute a 1 penny per barrel increase in the tax that funds the oil spill liability trust fund, in response to BP oil spill in Gulf demonstrating the increased need for oil spill funding, and also would extend this tax to tar sands oils which are currently exempt from it.
  
  
•  Deny deduction for oil spill costs, Part IX, subchapter B chapter 1 IRC (Sec 26) - $6.792 billion (Joint Committee Taxation score of HR 3852) – BP was able to deduct from its tax liability billions of dollars for certain costs related to remediation from the Gulf oil spill. This provision would ensure that corporations responsible for oil spill clean-up and damages do not get a tax break for paying to clean-up their mess.
  
  
•  Recover lost royalties on offshore drilling through excise tax (Sec 27) - $10.644 billion (Joint Committee Taxation estimate from 2007, likely a conservative estimate today) – In the 1990’s certain offshore leases were provided without requiring royalty payments from industry, as a means of encouraging drilling when prices were very low. These leases did not have a provision to institute royalties when prices moved higher, causing a significant loss of tens of billions to the taxpayer over the life of leases. This excise tax of 13 percent would ensure that corporations not already paying royalties pay their fair share.
  
  
•  Termination of last in, first out, accounting for fossil fuel companies, 26 USC Section 472 and 473 (Sec 20) - $29.512 billion (President’s FY2013 budget, assumes only 40% of LIFO savings comes from oil and gas companies, per statement from White House)– This provision allows oil and gas companies to minimize the value of their inventories for tax purposes
  
  
•  Dual Taxpayer Deduction, 26 USC 901 (Sec 23) - $10.724 billion (President’s FY2013 budget, U.S. Chamber of Commerce says “nearly all” dual capacity taxpayers are oil and gas corporations) – allows oil and gas companies that operate overseas to classify royalty payments to foreign governments as taxes, thereby reducing their U.S. taxes because foreign taxes, unlike royalty payments, are fully deductable.
  
  TOTAL OIL AND GAS - $101.293 billion over ten years

COAL

•  Eliminate mining exploration deduction, 26 USC 617 (sec 14) - $.44 billion (President’s FY2013 budget) – allows coal mining companies to deduct certain exploration and development costs.
  
  
•  Eliminate mining and solid waste costs 26 USC 468 (Sec 14) - $.4 billion (Joint Committee Taxation) – tax deduction for certain costs related to mining and waste site reclamation and closure.
  
  
•  Eliminate credit for carbon dioxide sequestration 26 USC 45Q (Sec 15) – provides tax credit of between $10 and $20 per metric ton of carbon sequestered by industrial facilities such as coal plants.
  
  
•  Eliminate advanced coal credits 26 USC 48A and 48B (Sec 14) - $2 billion (Joint Committee Taxation based on projection of 5 year estimate) – tax credits provided for construction of advanced coal plants.
  
  
•  Repeal domestic manufacturing deduction for mining, 26 USC 199(c)(4) (Sec 18, 19) - $.271 billion (President’s FY2013 budget)– This provision, from a 2004 law, allows coal industry to claim it is a ‘manufacturer’ and claim deductions aimed at incentivizing American manufacturing.
  
  
•  Termination of capital gains treatment for royalties from coal, 26 USC 631 (Sec 22) - $.422 billion (President’s FY2013 budget)– this provision was enacted in 1951, and allows coal companies to treat income from coal mines as a capital gain, taxed at 15 percent maximum, instead of regular income which could be taxed at a much higher rate.
  
  
•  Designate Powder River Basin coal-producing region (Sec 28) – would require BLM to designate Powder River Basin a “coal-producing region” giving federal government more impetus and authority to get a fair return on leases, and not to simply provided leases based on industry needs.
  
  
•  Fair Market value study Powder River Basin (Sec 28) – requires BLM to do a fair market value study of Powder River Basin to determine if taxpayers are getting a fair return for leases.
  
  
•  Repeal percentage depletion for coal 26 USC 613 (Sec 21) - $1.744 billion (President’s FY2013 budget)– allows coal companies to deduct 10 percent of their sales revenue to reflect declining value of their investment, regardless of actual value of their investment.
  
  
•  Eliminate DOE loan guarantees for advanced coal projects, 42 USC 16513 (Sec 10) - $.08 billion ($8 billion in loan guarantees with risk to government calculated at .01%, but risk could be much higher)
  
  TOTAL COAL - $5.357 billion over ten years

Other FOSSIL FUEL SUBSIDIES

•  Eliminate nonconventional fuel credit, 26 USC 45K (sec 14) – provides a tax credit for nonconventional fuels including produced from coal and other fossil fuels.
  
  
•  Increase onshore public lands royalty rate to 18.75 percent, 30 USC 207, 223, 226 (Sec 4) - $.625 billion (Bureau Land Management budget justification FY2013) – would bring onshore public lands royalty rates in line with offshore royalty rates.
  
  
•  Rescission of funds for World Bank Financing (Sec 7) – would rescind existing funding, and impose a future prohibition, on using U.S. taxpayer funds to finance fossil fuel projects through the World Bank. In 2010 the World Bank provided $4.4 billion for coal financing.
  
  
•  Termination of DOE office of fossil energy R&D, 42 USC 7133 (Sec 8) - $3.68 billion (based on FY2012 DOE budget, over ten years, assuming no increase) – would eliminate taxpayer-backed research and development programs for the fossil fuel industry.
  
  
•  ARPA-E no funding for fossil fuels (Sec 9) – would eliminate taxpayer-backed research and development programs for fossil fuel industry.
  
  
•  Eliminate USDA loans or guarantees for coal, oil, or gas, 7 USC 931 (Sec 11) – would eliminate USDA loans or loan guarantees for coal plants, as well as other fossil fuel plants or projects.
  
  
•  Rescission of funds for OPIC and Export-Import Bank (Sec 12) – Would rescind existing funds, and impose a future prohibition, on using U.S. taxpayer funds to finance fossil fuel projects through OPIC and Export- Import Bank. In 2011 the Export-Import Bank helped to finance nearly $5 billion in oil and gas industry projects, and hundreds of millions for coal-related projects.
  
  
•  No Federal transportation funding for coal, oil, or gas rail or port projects (Sec 13) – would prohibit federal transportation funds for rail or port projects designed to transport and/or export fossil fuels.
  
  
•  Eliminate Master Limited Partnerships for oil and gas and coal companies, 26 USC 7704(d)(1)(E) (Sec 14) - $2.4 billion (Joint Committee Taxation, based on projection of 5 year estimate) – would eliminate special partnership option for fossil fuel corporations and investors which is currently not available for clean energy companies.
  
  
•  Additional subsidies (Sec 29) – requires the Treasury Department to identify any additional fossil fuel production subsidies not already eliminated in this bill, and issue a report to Congress quantifying their cost to the taxpayer.
  
  TOTAL OTHER FOSSIL FUEL SUBSIDIES - $6.705 billion over ten years
  
  GRAND TOTAL, ALL FOSSIL FUEL SUBSIDIES - $113.355 billion over ten years