"Citizen contribution" demanded from oil companies

Books, television programs, films, magazines or music to share, counselor to discover ... Talk to news affecting in any way the econology, environment, energy, society, consumption (new laws or standards) ...
User avatar
jean63
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2332
Registration: 15/12/05, 08:50
Location: Auvergne
x 4

"Citizen contribution" demanded from oil companies




by jean63 » 13/02/08, 11:07

UFC-Que Choisir demands "a citizen contribution" from oil companies

The UFC-Que Choisir called on Wednesday for the establishment of a "citizen contribution" for oil groups after the announcement by Total of a 2007 profit of more than 12 billion euros, in order to compensate for the "continued inflation" of fuel prices for consumers.

The consumer association "offers an incentive mechanism for a citizen contribution from oil companies", which would consist of an increase in their tax to 40%, she said in a press release.

This tax could return to its normal rate of 33% if these groups invest "a defined amount in renewable energies and / or if they contribute to the development of public transport", adds the UFC.

This source of financing "must be considered by the government and the actors of the Grenelle", according to the association which denounces the fact that consumers are "facing a continuous inflation of the fuel bill" while "the oil groups are raking in dizzying profits ".

The association had so far repeatedly called for the establishment of another mechanism, taking the form of an exceptional tax on the profits of oil tankers.

For its part, Total assured Wednesday that it had "kept its commitments" to moderating the rise in fuel prices in a context of soaring crude prices during 2007.

that would be a good idea, not to reduce the consumption of petroleum products, but to develop renewable energies and non-polluting public transport.

But, if they believe that TOTAL and the others will be dictated what to do with their profits, they dream : Lol:

They will distribute dividends to shareholders and invest to get oil + gas in increasingly difficult places .......... it is not for tomorrow that the oil will not be exploited and consumed on earth : Evil:

Thank you TOTAL : Cry:
Last edited by jean63 the 13 / 02 / 08, 11: 29, 1 edited once.
0 x
Only when he has brought down the last tree, the last river contaminated, the last fish caught that man will realize that money is not edible (Indian MOHAWK).
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 16072
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5221




by Remundo » 13/02/08, 11:16

Completely agree with Jean63.

Sacred UFC What to Choose ...
0 x
Image
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79270
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11020




by Christophe » 13/02/08, 12:23

Sorry i will shock more than one but I am ABSOLUTELY AGAINST such a measure and this despite all that I can blame the tankers in other cases! And you know that I don't carry them in my heart !!

My main motivations AGAINST such a measure are the following:

a) Apply such a measure for oil tankers today and who will be next tomorrow? Solar panel vendors? And how do you set the "limit"? It's called "green" discrimination ...

b) Where will this "over-tax" go ? Surely NOT in the search for a solution (ca the oil companies can do it themselves, so the State would do better to fix a law imposing them 5 to 10% of reinjection in research) .... remember the previous taxes largely diverted of their so-called initial role ...

c) Superimposing French tankers is limit their development in the future vis-à-vis foreign companies and in the current context the fight is and will be more and more difficult!

So in the future, would you prefer to pay Franco-French or Franco-foreign fuel? I love it as much as it is French ...

d) But above all, here is the main counter argument: on each liter sold the French State WINS MUCH MORE (4 to 5 times) than the oil tankers, so it only has to DIRECTLY increase the TIPP / TIC. But since the government is not brave, it prefers to say

"Look at the big bad guys, how much they earn they have to be overtaxed !!"


Obviously omitting to say that the state earns 4 to 5 times more ... I call that intellectual cowardice ...

State gains on one liter of fuel

So to conclude: I am obviously FOR an increase in the price of fuels but NOT in the form of a tax for the oil companies because it is the door open to the worst drifts !!! : Evil:
Last edited by Christophe the 13 / 02 / 08, 18: 33, 1 edited once.
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 16072
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5221




by Remundo » 13/02/08, 17:25

Hi Christopher,

Ah, Ah! everything is arguing : Cheesy:

Christophe wrote:a) Apply such a measure for oil tankers today and who will be next tomorrow? Solar panel vendors? And how do you set the "limit"? It's called "green" discrimination ...

It's true, but is green discrimination really so inhuman as that? :P
b) Where will this "over-tax" go ? Surely NOT in the search for a solution (ca the oil companies can do it themselves, so the State would do better to fix a law imposing them 5 to 10% of reinjection in research) .... remember the previous taxes largely diverted of their so-called initial role ...

Yes, but the embezzlement does not call into question the merits of the tax. It should be EXCLUSIVELY to support initiatives on renewables, from individuals and SMEs and even (not too much anyway ...) large groups.

c) Superimposing French tankers is limit their development in the future vis-à-vis foreign companies and in the current context the fight is and will be more and more difficult!

This is true. Finally, there is a margin ... this measure, like all environmental measures, must be global, and not Franco-French ...
d) But above all, here is the main counter argument: on each liter sold the French State WINS MUCH MORE (4 to 5 times) than the oil tankers, so it only has to DIRECTLY increase the TIPP / TIC. But since the government is not brave, it prefers to say

"Look at the big bad guys, how much they earn they have to be overtaxed !!"

Well seen, I bow ... :?

From this point of view, we would only put 4% of the TIPP on renewable, that would already make a good little mattress of tickets : Cheesy:

@+
0 x
Image
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79270
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11020




by Christophe » 13/02/08, 18:32

Remundo wrote:Well seen, I bow ... :?

From this point of view, we would only put 4% of the TIPP on renewable, that would already make a good little mattress of tickets : Cheesy:


4%? 0,1% would be good.

Did you know that IFP receives a fraction of a cent for each liter sold in France? For "Research" supposedly ... It is mainly injected in search of even more oil :|

Voila I believe that there is not much to add on this file ... except that it is an eco-government masquerade more ...good when you vote for me that we start doing real econology? : Mrgreen:
0 x
SixK
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 670
Registration: 15/03/05, 13:48
x 272




by SixK » 13/02/08, 22:27

I am also against it.

To make Total invest in renewable energy would be to ensure their dominance in this market ...

And I admit that total there is a little fed up ...

SixK
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79270
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11020




by Christophe » 14/02/08, 09:58

SixK wrote:To make Total invest in renewable energy would be to ensure their dominance in this market ...


I trust them: in due time and auspicious they will do it ... That is to say when it will be really economically profitable to develop an alternative to petroleum, they know very well that without petroleum they will die ...

The ecological aspect and warming they do not care about. The environment is not their priority except in their "Marketing & Advertising" department.

In other words: they know better than we do what oil is really left and how much they can earn with oil and how far renewable energies are still far from being competitive for their margins ...
Last edited by Christophe the 14 / 02 / 08, 12: 26, 1 edited once.
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 16072
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5221




by Remundo » 14/02/08, 10:54

Hi Christopher,

Your last analysis is excellent from my point of view ...

@+
0 x
Image
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79270
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11020




by Christophe » 14/02/08, 12:28

Remundo wrote:Your last analysis is excellent from my point of view ...


What do you say? Aren't they all? : Mrgreen: : Mrgreen: : Mrgreen: (What ankles? No, it's okay :D)
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 16072
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5221




by Remundo » 14/02/08, 12:34

Ah ah ... : Cheesy:

I saw a pair of sneakers very wide at the level of the kick ... it would not be yours :?: : Lol:

Let's say that your analyzes have a good general average. I put you 15/20, and should not remain on its assets :P

Really, I'm starting to fall victim to professional distortion : Lol:
0 x
Image

Back to "Media & News: TV shows, reports, books, news ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 81 guests