Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsEnergy Tax
IN THE NEWS

Energy Tax

NEWS
April 16, 1993 | JONATHAN PETERSON, TIMES STAFF WRITER
So you just paid your taxes. You're like millions of other Americans, wondering why this annual Rite of April has to be so agonizing. You don't like it one bit. It costs you money. It makes you cynical. Well, guess what: It's likely to get worse, especially for high-income taxpayers, entrepreneurs, investors and many retirees, the experts say. President Clinton's plans for the Byzantine, 1,200-plus section U.S.
Advertisement
NEWS
April 11, 1993 | MARK FINEMAN, TIMES STAFF WRITER
Far from the Clinton Administration's closed-door budget strategy sessions, the world's most powerful oil producers are trying to close ranks and map a response that could send the price of American gasoline soaring several years from now. The producers are upset over the potential impact of President Clinton's proposed energy tax if it reduces demand for their only marketable commodity--crude oil.
NEWS
April 2, 1993 | JAMES RISEN, TIMES STAFF WRITER
The Clinton Administration, under pressure from powerful interest groups, said Thursday that it has restructured its proposed energy tax to reduce the impact on selected industries and shift the burden more directly to consumers. In its first detailed discussion of the controversial energy tax, the Administration disclosed that it has granted exemptions to a wide array of industries that have lobbied furiously for special treatment.
OPINION
March 28, 1993 | Kevin Phillips, Kevin Phillips, publisher of the American Political Report, is the author of "The Politics of Rich and Poor." His most recent book is "Boiling Point: Republicans, Democrats and the Decline of Middle-Class Prosperity" (Random House)
Just as some kids become chocoholics, some politicians become taxaholics. Bill Clinton, for one, is starting to look like one--which helps explain his declining job approval, the growing skepticism toward his economic pro gram and the resurging popularity of America's fiscal watchdog, Ross Perot. Public concern about rising tax burdens is well-founded.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
March 9, 1993
What?! An additional energy tax?! The proposed broad-based energy tax, which supposedly will reduce the federal deficit and conserve energy, will have a wide range of ramifications. It will not significantly reduce energy consumption. Instead, everything will cost more. We consumers already pay enough taxes on such things as utilities and gas. This type of regressive tax will only place a heavier burden on the poor and the elderly, because they will spend a greater share of their income on basic necessities.
BUSINESS
February 27, 1993 | MICHAEL PARRISH, TIMES STAFF WRITER
In the expanding debate over Bill Clinton's economic plan, two Southern California-based oil companies have parted company with other energy firms by supporting the President's proposed energy tax. Most out of sync with other companies is Atlantic Richfield Co., which vigorously supports a tax on energy--in clear opposition to the American Petroleum Institute, the industry's main lobbying group. Arco Chairman Lodwrick M.
NEWS
February 23, 1993 | CONSTANCE SOMMERS and KAREN TUMULTY, TIMES STAFF WRITERS
In the first direct attack by a powerful interest group on President Clinton's economic program, the American Petroleum Institute warned Monday that the proposed energy tax will be more expensive to consumers and damaging to industry than the White House has estimated. Clinton promptly denied that was the case, saying the industry's math "just doesn't work out."
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
February 22, 1993 | LEE SCHIPPER, Lee Schipper, staff senior scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, is the co-author, with Steve Meyers, Richard Howarth and Ruth Steiner, of "Energy Efficiency and Human Activity: Past Trends, Future Prospects" (Cambridge University Press, 1992)
Taxing energy to raise revenue, as proposed by President Clinton, would not only reduce the budget gap, but would also have the bonuses of encouraging of energy efficiency, addressing environmental problems and improving our energy security. The size of the tax should be related to the twin goals of stemming the deficit and reducing the negative impact of using energy. A $50-billion initial target would mean taxes of 8 cents per gallon of gasoline, 0.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
February 22, 1993 | DONELLA H. MEADOWS, Donella H. Meadows, an adjunct professor of environmental studies at Dartmouth, is the co-author, with Dennis L. Meadows and Jorgen Randers, of "Beyond the Limits" (Chelsea Green, 1992).
There is much talk of sacrifice these days, and much media drama about whether the American people will accept such a terrible hardship as an energy tax. The fuss is exaggerated. The energy tax is predictable, sensible and long overdue. The people asked for it. And it is not a sacrifice. The voters who supported Ross Perot and Bill Clinton in November already took a stand for an energy tax.
BUSINESS
February 19, 1993
President Clinton's tax package, if enacted as proposed, would have an impact on virtually all Americans making more than $30,000 a year. The bulk of the new taxes, though, would be paid by upper-income wage earners. The following examples, which do not include state or local taxes, illustrate the changes on individuals and families of all income levels. Taxable income reflects income after deductions and exemptions.
Los Angeles Times Articles
|