IT'S OFFICIAL! FULLY ELECTRIC TOYOTA PICKUP TRUCK COMING! - 2023 TOYOTA TUNDRA EV?

What? No quote from greenpeace? "come on man!"

Deductions for expenses... Even if it's accelerated deductions, it's still deductions that would otherwise have been applicable in a couple of years. It front-loads deductions to offset immediate expenses instead of amortizing capital costs over a longer period in order to stimulate investment. Overall, it's a wash - you have more deductions now but less later. Many industries have been granted accelerated depreciation, especially during downturns. This shifts the timing of deductions, not the amounts. You still take costs and subtract them from revenue. Accounting is complicated in the details but not that hard in concept.

And in no way is drilling costs an intangible. Those costs are very tangible indeed. And a cost of business that should obviously be deducted from revenue.

As for depletion, it's available to all resource extraction where you have an asset which depletes... You start out with 100% of the asset in the ground and over time, you extract them. If you paid a billion dollars for an asset and you deplete it over 10 years, your depletion cost is ~1/10th of a billion dollars a year. That is NOT a subsidy to be able to write it off, it's a deduction off taxable income resulting from cost of business. This is true of ALL business. You tax income, not revenue. Income is calculated net of expenses. Depletion is an expense.

Now do NET government receipts. Add all the taxes, fees, royalties, sales taxes, gas taxes, income taxes, property taxes, taxes on taxes and add it all up. Then from that government revenue FROM the fossil fuel industry, then deduct any expenses available TO that industry not available to other similar concerns and get back to me on this magical "subsidy" that is a gigantic negative number. As it is with most business.

A subsidy is when the government writes you a check. Not when it defers taking even more money FROM you until next year out of the "goodness" of their precious hearts. Much of the green energies are subsidized - in that they pay an amount of overall tax that is less than zero on the business units involved (many have many concerns, like Samsung and GE making windmill bits but lots of other stuff.)

as for the "clean coal" thing, it's green subsidies and/or deductions to reduce ghg's. that's less oil industry "subsidies" than it is green corruption. Not interested in "credits" for coal. That said, I'd be willing to bet it's just more tax deductions for costs incurred repackaged by lawmakers to get industry to dance to its tune. Especially when it's those same lawmakers passing the laws which force the expenses. You can be sympathetic to the idea of forcing companies to clean up (as we all are) but that doesn't make deducting the subsequent expenses a subsidy. The spin of suggesting otherwise is an agenda driven organization telling tall tales.

When an oil company pays no NET tax after receiving $ checks then you may speak of subsidies. Even in years when a company (oil or otherwise) takes huge writedowns for losses incurred they still pay upteen different substantial taxes.

What I said about liars above I said about interest groups, lobbyists and activists.

 

It’s funny how it’s always bias when it doesn’t fit your narrative.

 

If we quote from oil industry sources would that be biased?

I have no narrative.

 

and it's not science if it doesn't fit yours?


Just stirring the pot.

 

Who would be a viable source of information that would be acceptable to your knowledge base?

we know... gas and oil are free without exception, right.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/fossil-fuel-subsidies-pentagon-spending-imf-report-833035/

 

Rebuke science with science.
I have no narrative.
Simply posting information that disputed a claim.

Personally, I don’t care what anyone drives.

P.S.
I’m in a v8 and will remain so for the foreseeable future.

 

nor do I.

I did know this Clampett guy that had some kind of crude.

 

Nope, he had Texas tea.

 

Yup, oil industry is obviously biased, interest groups are obviously biased, even a good portion of academic papers are biased (quality of research is abysmal now days...) but at least better, journalism is a sewer regardless of slant (that you can tell inside of 1/2 as second what their slant is would be a clue that they have one...) I also don't trust 99% of government's press releases and neither should you. Statistics departments and orgs are usually ok so long as you look at how they present what they are doing and figure out what the numbers are actually saying and more importantly what they are not. And look at the report, not a journalists spin on the report. The two are very different and not usually related.

Rule of thumb, be skeptical. Always.

But the rolling stone isn't the best source. If they can't keep taibbi...

As for enviro activist groups, no one should have to tell you why their opinion isn't objective.

As for who TO listen to, start with yourself. Does the source have an agenda? move on. If you try and read into what their motivation is, you can usually find it. In this case, when people tell you an expense is a subsidy they are not worth listening to. Either they are ignorant or they are dishonest. Either way they do you no good.

 

Thanks for a succinct and honest reply.

The Rolling Stone was meant as sarcasm.

I try to research and understand the information that is available to a layman.
I agree, there is absolutely bias from all sides.
However, we do need alternatives, regardless of the final product.

We can spend all day trying to refute one another.
But, in the end, have we made a difference?

I’m skeptical of everything, but I don't let it overwhelm my thinking and observations.

 

I think most of us can agree on this.

And I agree here too, but my primary issue is with the timelines and lies used to push them. I don't think anybody is going to seriously complain if we can get equal or better performance across the board and do it cleaner. However, there are quite a few of us that will push back on anything that is made mandatory that causes problems, costs extra, and doesn't have a clear, noticeable, and readily proven benefit. *cough* DEF *cough*


If somebody want's a hybrid or an EV, go for it. Just so long as they don't try to tell me you're saving the planet with it, or try to mandate or bully others into it.

 

I agree 100%.

I spent months shopping when purchasing my last Bobcat.
I didn’t want to go DEF.
Fortunately, I found an older model that was available with zero hours and zero DEF.
Last year model available before the changeover.

 

I think that Toyota should put charging stations in their dealerships. Free for Toyotas and maybe charge for other cars. That would push people into dealerships both owners and "Potential" owners.

 

That'd still make the closest charger over 70 Miles away for me.

 

Here's something to ponder. There have been no sightings of Tundra's at charging stations. The latest one was at a gas station in WV. Also the camouflage has a cut out for the gas tank in the other sightings.

 

I wonder what they will do with all the junk batteries from these vehicles in 20 years, when they have more than they know what to do with... filling landfills with batteries, assuming they are not fully recycled, is worse then gas emissions.
-t

 

Don't think they need to do more than 2-400 miles in a day of testing so could return to factory or base to recharge out of sight. Also what if they put the charging port under the gas cap? Save on different body panels by doing it.

I don't think there's a test ready EV Tundra, if there even will be with this new generation - I think EV Tacoma would be a better match to start in the segment. But certainly not out of the question to get one in 2 years or so.

 

ever seen one of those EV cars burning? it can go on for days from what IM told. bring plenty of hot dogs.

 

https://youtu.be/j_dkXeWsXio

 

I can't wait for the Twin Turbo V6 Hydrogen Plug In Hybrid Vehicle Tundra!

 

I drove an electric car once, it was a bumpy ride, think they were called Bumper cars.

 

There will be a diesel engine hidden in the trunk.

 

UNLIMITED POWER!

 

Taxpayers are already heavily subsidizing alternative fuels as well as EV vehicles and EV tech research.

Federal Subsidies for Corn Ethanol and Other Corn-Based Biofuels
https://www.taxpayer.net/energy-nat...l-subsidies-corn-ethanol-corn-based-biofuels/

Federal Tax Credits for New All-Electric and Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/taxevb.shtml

Short Circuit: The High Cost of Electric Vehicle Subsidies
https://www.manhattan-institute.org...gh-cost-electric-vehicle-subsidies-11241.html

 

Yes, there are subsidies for alt-fuels, only that the history of subsidies for fossil fuels (including wars and death of our troops) has been astronomical over the years. Public roads are heavily subsidized, average of 50% road funding is general fund money nationally. Drive on public roads? Subsidized! Our country subsidizes transportation and energy. A switch in some sectors is needed.

Corn biofuel is a disaster. So much energy is wasted in production, the net yield is not worth it, negligible. There are better crops, like switchgrass, if we want biofuels. Corn biofuel programs are mostly pork.

Humans are smart and resourceful, and the USA is the most innovative country on Earth. A diversity of energy sources is a good thing. I expect fully functional electric pickups are 5 years out, then another 5 years to debug. My Tundra will easily last that long.

 

Not sure what exactly you mean by public roads being subsidized. It's the government's job to build and maintain roads.

 

I mean that non-road users are paying for roads. It is more a reference to some prior posts. The government’s job is to provide for the general welfare of citizens. Not all citizens use roads, though most all benefit from them, even indirectly. Likewise with energy. It gets a bit too political the further down this path, suffice to say the general welfare is being served by government.

 

The Government is funded by "We The People", they are spending money they receive from you and me.

 

Show me someone in the modern era who doesn't use a single road anywhere for anything (also bearing in mind that pretty much all the goods in all our stores are delivered by truck).

 

A good number of political elite make little use of our roads, they prefer helicopters and jets, as well as short rides in the limo.