West Virginia severance tax

EQT is deducting "Gross Taxes" (5%, which I believe is WV Severance Tax) from my royalty check. My lease is 115 years old (1900) and makes no mention of taxes or deductions, but does say "1/8th, Free of Costs". I believe that West Virginia law requires EQT to pay me a minimum of 1/8th (12.5%). By tacking "Gross Taxes" out of my royalty check, what I receive is less than 1/8th. Should EQT be paying the "Gross Taxes" so that I receive the 1/8th payment required by West Virginia law and my lease?

Also, is the Severance Tax only paid by people who do not live in West Virginia or is everyone required to pay the Severance Tax, even if they reside in WV?

Thank you!

Views: 978

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

0ym9x5ag7ury2Permalink Reply by 0ym9x5ag7ury2 on February 17, 2015 at 12:55pm

Check the 1099 from EQT. If they are following CHKs lead they have taxed everything on your royalty statement, but show no taxes paid on the 1099.

Taxes are being used as an excuse to take more money from the landowners with no credit given to the landowner for paying a tax.

The tax theft is the smallest of our theft problems in Ohio.

I made a discussion on this topic but it kept being edited out each time I submitted it.

We should all smile while our producers are pick pocketing each of us as they have done for the past 115 years. It appears to be a National Tradition.

Permalink Reply by Marcus Huey on February 17, 2015 at 1:06pm

Exactly right Ron.  My 1099 is for the gross royalty amount, which I did not receive.

Permalink Reply by Jackie on February 17, 2015 at 3:43pm

Marcus, sounds to me that EQT should not be taking taxes out of your checks.  When I pointed out to Antero that we had a lawsuit in WV that ruled severance taxes could not be taken out, they refunded what they had taken out of my checks.  ECA just started showing costs on their check stubs.  They are taking out gross deductions and owner trans costs.  I think we need a class action suit again on the companies that are not paying the 1/8 royalty due to their taking out costs when leases clearly state 'No Costs".  

Permalink Reply by Mike Ratcliffe on February 17, 2015 at 4:05pm

I live in WV and Chesapeake, who owns 66%, has been taking out 4.6% "Production Tax". It is on the back of my 1099, but not listed in any of the boxes on the front.

Stat Oil, who owns 33%, takes out 5.5% Tax, but does not show it anywhere on my 1099

Permalink Reply by Marcus Huey on February 18, 2015 at 5:08am

Thanks, Jackie. I live in Arizona but will be meeting with a WV oil & gas attorney in Charleston on March 14. Will let you all know what I find out. I hope the WV legislature will step up and protect the mineral holders of West Virginia.

Permalink Reply by Nancy Mosley on February 18, 2015 at 5:28am

Marcus, have you written to the WV legislators about the Forced pooling bill, House 2688? There should be something about it in the West Virginia group.

Different issue, I know, but the legislators seem to be listening to the oil and gas companies this year. There were a lot of new legislators in the last election.

Would not hurt to ask about the severance tax issue as well. The more mineral owners they hear from the better.

Permalink Reply by Marcus Huey on February 18, 2015 at 5:55am

The attorney that I am meeting with works with the legislature. I plan to ask him his opinion of the forced pooling proposal. Like most things forced pooling could have good and bad consequences. I know some people who are in pools where 90% want to put their mineral rights into production, but 10% are stopping them. If the lease terms that are forced on to the holdouts are reasonable, then forced pooling might be a good thing for the 90% who want to see production of their mineral rights.

Permalink Reply by Nancy Mosley on February 18, 2015 at 6:21am

Yes I agree on that. The trick is what is "reasonable". Who gets to define it.

Permalink Reply by Marcus Huey on February 18, 2015 at 6:51am

Exactly Nancy.

Permalink Reply by Dan Warner on February 18, 2015 at 7:32am

Nancy,

I'm not sure that I do.

If I own a piece of timberland, and a lumber company wants to harvest timber from a tract that is 'behind' mine, should I have to sell them my timber also, or just a right-of-way to access theirs?

It seems to me a simple thing for the driller to simply not perforate and fracture that portion of the lateral that the owner does not wish to lease.

While it may sound foolish on the face of it, some would say that allowing the stand of timber to age and die off is foolish as well; it's a matter of principle.

In my opinion, this is eminent domain for private industry; a seizure of private, corporeal property.  These laws are bought and paid for by the industry to maximize their profits, all the while maneuvering to minimize owners' rights and 'consideration'.

If the complicit legislators aren't in the pockets of the industry, then they are shameless gluttons for the tax dollars produced.

That you can't see it should not mean that you don't own it.

Permalink Reply by Marcus Huey on February 19, 2015 at 5:06am

Jackie, when Antero refunded your severance tax, that they had been improperly withholding, did you pay the severance tax to West Virginia or was Antero responsible for paying the severance tax to West Virginia?

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service