what should your royality be on your minerals

Obama Hikes Royalties on Oil Industry by 50% - CleanTechnica

 should our minerals be worth less than the federail goverments?

Views: 1916

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by lynn on June 30, 2012 at 2:57pm

The nightmare is who we have controlling the senate and presidency right now.  We do not have a stagnated congress-we have recently elected republicans doing their absolute best to keep the promises they made to their constituents despite being regularly vilified by the press and and the democrats.  Yes if you got a substantial bonus check you paid 40% in taxes, the same amount anyone earning that amount per year paid.  That's earnings, not dividends which are taxed at 15%, dividends paid on money invested in companies which allows them to have money to grow their business.  Whatever Romney paid he did it legally and he at least understands that NO business or country can survive when it incurs debt that it cannot pay.  Romney also understands that energy ie: oil and gas, are required to run this country, unlike the current administration which is determined to end their use.  If Obama succeeds we all lose.

Permalink Reply by Donald on June 30, 2012 at 4:19pm

SEEMS THIS DISCUSSION GOT OFF TRACK. THE QUESTON WAS ABOUT MINERAL G/O  ROYALITYS  NOT WHO YOU ARE VOTEING FOR.

Permalink Reply by Robert J. Smith on August 2, 2012 at 2:02am

Anybody receiving a bonus check did not receive earned income. If it were earned income it would be taxable by social security and income taxes withheld. Likewise Romney had no earned income, he had long term capital gains even though he had no money at risk. He paid no social security on this income nor was income tax withheld. Both we and Romney eventually paid income tax but at two completely different rates. We paid about 40% of what we received and Romney paid about 15%. We have held our property with the minerals under it for years but the royalty was not treated as a long term capital gain like Romney's no risk to himself long term capital gain. Dividends are usually taxed as ordinary income. What happened here is that Romney and people like him, both democrat and republican, used their influence to buy our senators and representatives. These senators and representatives then passed a law via the Internal Revenue Code that gave special tax treatment to Romney and others of his ilk who do not place their own money at risk but still get an unfair tax break on monies they receive as a result of investing other peoples money. These monies should be taxed as earned income not long term capital gain. Romney was workiing a job that is no different than a man on the factory floor and he should be taxed the same. Do you wonder why he will not release the rest of his tax returns? My understanding also is that Romney set up a trust for each of his kids so that they would receive large sums of money taxed at the 15% tax rate. Yes, Romney did it leghally but who passed the laws that lets him pay a percentage of earned income to taxes that is substantilly less than what we pay? Maybe if everybody in this country paid the FAIR tax that they actually owe we wouldn't have a deficit. Special interests will bring this country down and Romney is the epitome of such interests. As for energy, if we find viable alternatives to fossil fuels it is in our best interests. Contrary to what you say everybody knows that we need energy. The sticky point is whether or not we look for alternatives now, while we have sufficient energy, or wait until we reach a crisis point. As for villification and trying their best both sides are doing that. Both sides are representing a constituency and both sides believe they know which way to go. Now we need compromise, not stone throwing. We need to both raise taxes and cut expenditures, not one or the other. We could start by raising taxes on guys like Romney and cutting the fat out of the defense budget in the form of equipment and weapons that we don't need..

Permalink Reply by Samuel J. Orr on June 30, 2012 at 3:52pm

You ought to be ashamed of yourself. Romney saved a number of companies and a number of jobs. He couldn't save them all. He made his own money and to my knowledge made it legally. He had nothing to do with enacting the tax code. I suppose you don't take all your deductions on your income tax to which you are entitled. This fiasco known as the "Affordable Care Act" amounts to a hugh tax increase. By the way Romney gave 15% of his income to charity while Obama gave 2%. As for government health insurance, each state ought to have its own, but if and only if, a majority of the citizens in the particular state want it.

Permalink Reply by Robert J. Smith on July 1, 2012 at 3:41am

I don't think that yo0u or any of the other posters hve a clue as to how Romney earned his money.  The lesson is that he found investors who gave him money to invest for them.  Romney invested the money (none of his own was at risk) and took his share of the profits as a long term capital gain.  Romney invested none of his own money into the ventures.  He just took profits from what someone else invested as a long term capital gain.  For me to get the same tax treatment I would have to purchase an investment putting my own money at risk and hold that investment for a year.  Romney did not put his own money at risk.  On top of that he set up lrusts for his children for the money to be paid into the trusts to lessen his tax even further. And here are us saps paying 40% of our lease money in taxes with more taxes to follow on the royalties at the same rate.   I don't think that this discussion is off track at all.  No one should have a preferential tax break without risking their own money and I sure don't want a guy in office who perpetuates such preferences.  Make no mistake, the tax breaks tht Romney used were perpetuated by the influence that he and his ilk exerted on the politicians.      

Permalink Reply by time will tell on July 1, 2012 at 4:53am

Robert building off of what you are saying do you think it is worse to get rich from offering a product or service that has helped some people , not all but some that are still benefiting from the saving of dying companies that are keeping people working vs getting money from special interest groups that hate America and free markets ?

How many jobs does the latter create ? Some but they are to restrict and regulate rather than stimulate free markets and free will .

Lets look at the health care issue , where does the worlds leaders go when needing specialized health care , China , Russia ,the middle east - no they come here so why 

choke the creativeness of this free will and free market ?

Answer , there is no reason period other than control and greed .

To me this is far worse than Romney's way of doing business .

To set the record strait Romney was not my first or second choice but looking at the alternative he gets my vote hand down . I agree that he is out of touch with most of us 

but I don't see him selling us down the river to foreign countries .If he tries I'm first in line to trash him !

I heard the mention of his religion being a factor of not to vote for him REALLY ?

What your thoughts on a person who sat in a America hating church for 20 yrs. and hiring people that hate this country ?

Countless lies , promise of transparent policies , no one making 250k or lower any tax hikes blocking new exploration for our own natural resources while letting foreign countries "drill baby drill". Why not us which would make us more independent and create tons of jobs"   the true owners of the resource , accepting  large amounts of money from not so friendly places , the list goes on and on .

So Robert are you telling us that what we have now is the best deal for us and our families if so please explain how .

 

 

0l1a6laz7smpfPermalink Reply by 0l1a6laz7smpf on July 1, 2012 at 7:08am

donald,   I read the info at the link you provided.   I don't understand yet what that has to do with your question...would you further define it for me...as a landowner with a natural/gas lease...it doesn't include 'hard minerals" and most leases are not listing minerals....are you talking about gas/oil (as they are not considered minerals though most refer to those leases as 'mineral leases'.

thanks..

Permalink Reply by Donald on July 1, 2012 at 12:56pm

THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE IS, IF THE MIN. ROYALITY THE O/G COMPANYS PAY TO DRILL ON GOV. LAND IS 18,75%. SHOULD THAT BE A FLOOR WHEN A LANDOWNER NEGOCIATES A LEASE WITH A GAS AND OIL COMPANY?

I MENSION MINERALS AS THE LEASES I HAVE SEEN SAY HYDROCARBONS, HYDROCARBONS ARE CLASSED AS MINERALS. WHEN YOU PAY TAXES ON MINERALS YOU GET A DEPLETION ALLOWENCE. OIL AND GAS IS TAXED AT THE RATE OF MINERALS.

Permalink Reply by jason smith on August 1, 2012 at 6:30pm
The real nightmare is if Obama gets a second term , because the producers will be asked to redistrubute there income to buy votes for Obama & democrats, just ask Joe the plumber who is the face of middle class Americans..

RSS

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service