Seeking Alpha
About this author:

Some politician (I am supposed to know his name, but this is a stock blog and not politico.com) immediately pounced on Evil Exxon-Mobil's (XOM) $11.68 billion in profits, and deemed that they needed to be taxed to the fullest extent. So, I had to investigate.

This is what I found. Exxon-Mobil had a pre-tax income of $22.2 billion. They paid $10.5 billion in taxes on the pre-tax income - for after tax profits of 11.7 billion. Yes, $11.7 billion is a lot of money. So, I dug in further. What about sales based taxes ? They paid $9.5 billion (in addition to the $10.5 billion on income). What about excise taxes? They paid $12.3 billion in excise taxes. In total, the $11.68 billion was 8.5% of their revenues of $138 billion for the quarter. Nice numbers, but let's see - the tax man got $10.5+12.3+9.5 = $32.3 billion.

Since I am not rich (enough) yet, I want to eat the rich too - yeah, tax the SOBs. But in the case of Exxon-Mobil, that would be tantamount to killing the goose that laid the golden egg. Flog the goose dear politician - do not kill it please. Not yet. You might think you don't need them, but $32.3 billion says you do.

Disclosure: none

Print this article with comments

This article has 48 comments:

  •  
    The politician is Chucky Schumer, NY's senior senator; complaining about Exxon's earnings is a quarterly ritual of his.
    2008 Aug 01 07:36 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    I have seen this sort of analysis of Exxon's income versus taxes for the full year that ended 4 months ago. They made $45 billion after paying $105 billion in various taxes, which means that taxes consumed 70 percent of the $150 billion they would have made had there been no taxes. Maybe we should have an excess profits tax on Sen. Schumer if he takes home more than 30 percent of his pre-tax income. Schumer did a pretty good job of ruining IndyMac bank, it scares me that he is turning his attention to Exxon without taking a refresher course in ethics first. He probably doesn't have enough sense to be ashamed of himself for causing a run on the bank.
    2008 Aug 01 08:06 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Yes, $11 billion profit is a lot of money, but percentage-wise it is only 8.5% of total revenue. Considering the 30 yr bond rate is 4.5%, ExxonMobil is taking a lot risk (via huge capital expenditures) to earn only 4% above the risk-free rate.

    Tech companies earn considerably more profit (percentage-wise) than oil companies. For example, Microsoft earns a 29% profit. Why isn't Chuck Schumer going after Microsoft for making a huge profit selling a crappy product like Vista ?
    2008 Aug 01 08:45 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    what most people fail to realize is exxon's senior partner is the gov't. since exxon and all the other oil companies are c-corps, ~50% of their realized profit is taxes. schumer and all the other jokesters in congress won't bite the hand that feeds them. i laugh when i hear how the "horrible" oil companies with their "excessive" profits are hurting the average citizen. do you really think anyone in congress has had to fill up their tank since they've been elected? where is all the legislation these morons promise to "clean up these energy carpetbaggers"? you have to marvel at the perverse beauty of the obvious conflict of interest and how they hide in plain sight. oh, and don't expect frank sinatra or denzel washington to fix this come january 2009; mom will show them the trump card and all will be well
    2008 Aug 01 09:25 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Spot on !! Chucky & Bride of Chucky (Billary) and other prominent politicians egregiously exploit Exxon earnings for pure political play and to further their own interests at every oppty. The bias and manipulation of information is so extreme as to be criminal. When most people are presented with the plain facts they are usually dumb-founded don't know what to think. You're absoultely correct, the aggregate of all taxes paid are more that 2x net income. Exxon's avg pre-tax profit margin for the (3) yrs ended 2007 was 17% less than Google, Cisco, Blackberry, Coca Cola, J&J, Proctor & Gamble, ADP and even Weight Watchers. This warrants a windfall profits tax??? Not to mention that approx 75 to 80% of Exxon ownership is represented by avg folks with pensions, IRA's, 401K's and College (Endowment) Foundations??? While Exxon funds taxes in excess of 100% of its profit margin, companies like GE pay as little as 15 cents on the dollar; in fact all of the aforementioned Co.'s have lower effective tax rates than Exxon. The media and politicians zeal to demonize BIG OIL has been so effective as to paint a very negative and unfair picture of a very important and essential industry. Big OIL controls less than 5% of world oil resources, 95+% is controlled by Govt's, many of which are not friendly. Most people have no idea that Africa (Nigeria, Algeria & Libya) produce more than 3x as much oil as Exxon, BP, Royal Dutch Shell, Conoco Phillips & Chevron all put together !! And Africa is a minor player. It's never been more critical for us to get serious about an Domestic Energy policy.
    2008 Aug 01 09:31 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Communists like Shmuck Schumer think 10% profit margins at Big Oil are too high but 35% tax margins at Big Government are too low.
    2008 Aug 01 09:36 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    schumer is a fascist pig. what do we expect? mark levine was talking about the numbers last night. he had a great take on it. schumer is just a little slimy tattle tale creep that never got over how the regular guys treated him as a little greasy i am going to tell on you punk. when i see or hear him i recognize him. he was the kid that a guy would slap in the head because he naturally rubbed everyone the wrong way. then chucky would run crying to teacher. last night i heard his little dirty harry sound bite about blocking domestic drilling. he never got over being a little punk. he is still the greasy little kid a regular guy naturally wants to slap in the head. now of course he has bodyguards so he gets to pretend he is a tough guy. the big problem is for some reason new york state is unable to see him for what he is, they are hopelessly lost or they know no limit to the shame they will embrace. as disgusting as hillary is, schumer makes her look almost acceptable.
    2008 Aug 01 09:37 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    I liked Al D'Amato infinitely better than Chuck Schumer as NY Senator

    D'Amato correctly labeled Schumer as a Putz 10 years ago.
    2008 Aug 01 09:43 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    LONGOIL thanx. need to laugh at the absurdity sometimes.
    2008 Aug 01 09:53 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    i am afraid we might as well get ready to try to make money on rising oil prices. it seems the controling party is determined to drive the price high enough to make alternatives look economically feasible. somehow it will be big oils fault or the speculators fault or our fault. i am not a mccain fan but i see this as a struggle to keep a true hardcore socialist out of power now. last night on my way home i stopped for a bite at a fast food joint. i overheard 3 obama supporters talking about his wonderfulness. they were arguing about where he stood on several issues. it kept going in circles that he said this no he said this no he said this. the one that thought himself the intelectual leader finally said see, he is going to do and not do all of these things. he is truly a genius. at that point i could not help it and i started laughing at them. they looked at me a little irritated, i asked ,guys can you not see that somewhere some of the conflicting statements must be lies. i could not quit laughing at them. the smart one said you must be rich. i said well i never thought so but apparently by the new definitions i am. the 3 stooges got a little smug. i was ready to go so i said, yes he will hurt me with taxes but wait until he is done with you at the gas pumps. then i left. i think if i was not in such good shape for an old man they would have become aggressive. they were not as coherent as i made them sound but it would take paragraphs to portray the depth of their ignorance.
    2008 Aug 01 10:22 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    i think it is pronounced scummer.
    2008 Aug 01 10:25 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    fireball is correct ... paragraphs could not express the general cluelessness most exhibit in either the real economics or the sham politics surrounding it. "it' the jobs, stupid" (oh wait; there are no jobs unless you want to commute to Chennai or Bejing, altho i heard that facemasks are hot in China...).

    regarding an earlier observation about IndyMac and schumer's role in that debacle...he criticizes wall street for "rumor and innuendo" and its manipulative effect on stock prices, yet his sky-is-falling rhetoric on IndyMac produced a $4B-to-$8B bailout from FDIC that, oh by the way, can only do about 10 more such bailouts before it runs out of the fractional reserves it has for the fractional banking system.
    schumer is a poster child of all that is wrong in congress and yes, he gives the arkansas twister credibility...
    2008 Aug 01 11:00 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Does anyone here know about the alleged subsidies to the oil industry? What are they talking about when they meantion them and how do they compare to the taxes on oil marketing?
    2008 Aug 01 11:06 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Fireball,

    There is quite a contrast in Washington.
    You have Schummer who is totally useless, except for pandering for votes. If we could harness all that hot air he spews, we would be well on our way to energy independance.

    Maryland is blessed with an excellent congressman, Roscoe Bartlett.
    He is aware of the consequences of Peak Oil. He is working diligently to get America off of fossil fuels and advocates a comprehensive energy policy.

    I liked Obama iinitially, but realized in the last few months he is like most other politicians whose primary goals is to get votes at any cost.

    I agree with you. Let's make money off the inaction of these politicans. I like Exploration and Production as well as Oil Field services and Deep sea drilling companies myself.


    2008 Aug 01 11:07 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Long oil,
    I am glad to see someone talk about the risk-free rate of return. I thought I was the only one left in America to remember and understand the concept. You must have gone to a private college.

    A/O yesterday, the 30 year RFR was 4.59% and XOM put up with all of the Democrap spittle to realize 8.50%. Hmmm.
    2008 Aug 01 11:10 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    LONGOIL one company i wish i had not taken profits on is io. i will probably get back in when it seems prudent. they seem to have a leg up on the competition in better seismic tech.. i am all for a shotgun approach to the energy problem. i guess as usual it is up to the private sector to fix the problem. looks like pickens will make his approach work and make money. that is o.k. government should just stay out of it and get out of the way. but they will not so they give us a chance to make more money so we can keep up with inflation so we can spend more so we have to make more so we can pay more......wait that is the old cocaine commercial .
    2008 Aug 01 11:27 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    I would like to see Big Oil direct its attention toward America for a change. They largely became the giants that they all are by feeding at the American trough, then wisely--or unwisely took their show around the world where in one way or another they could get at crude oil supplies wherever they could be found-- or bought.

    The deals and entanglements they bound we Americans up in have a cost far in excess of that which we are paying for at the pump today. When the Exxon Mobils, the Chevrons, the ConocoPhillips, etc, decided that they could provide the production expertise to virtually every oil producing nation on earth in return for reciprocal "deals" enabling them to buy boat loads of crude at whatever price OPEC (and others) set, deliver it to their refineries and pass the cost on to us, our national security, our economy and ultimately our American way of life was, and has been, seriously endangered.
    Those so-called "petro dollars" that are flying out of this country, the monstrous rise in worldwide terrorism and the fathomless amount of money spent on "defense" insuring that ill fated policy,has the capability to bring this nation to its economic knees.

    We have reached, or passed, the time where America can with impunity, dictate its future. If we are to continue it is imperative that we rid ourselves of the national addiction to crude oil. It is simply a substance we do not have and certaily should not want.

    We can no more be independent while being dependent on foreign governments to furnish us with possibly the single most important element of our economy, energy, than we could turn lead into gold.

    With an unharnessed, but virtually unlimited source of solar energy and recently discovered massive reserves of natural gas here in the United States we can regain control of our national economic future and relatively quickly. We have the means to do so, all we need is the national resolve to do so. Our children, our grand children and their grand children deserve no less than a secure safe future.

    2008 Aug 01 11:31 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    PRIUS2 , i bet paul8756 can anxwer your question accurately.
    2008 Aug 01 11:32 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    They would love to fucus on domestic crude but the Dems and the green lobby prevent them from even using the leases they currently pay for.
    2008 Aug 01 11:58 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    ALAMO it appears to me that the oil companies were forced to look anywhere but here. solar is great. wind is great. it is all good if it can become self supporting. reality is we need oil now and for quite some time. i like ng and coal as potentials for quicker relief. it will still take time. you have to be aware of the political stance against ouir own oil. my focus is financial survival now. i do like a strong national defense, even excessive. when push comes to shove china and russia are still not our friends. instead of worrying to much about the country your grandchildren will inherit it may be time to worry about feeding them next year. that is a sad state of affairs but we keep electing these pinheads that seem hellbent on damaging our country.
    2008 Aug 01 12:11 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Who is this Paul8756 what does he know and why would he care.

    Alamo, nice point, but really it is the face in the mirror that demands a lavish daily oil massage..... every read the things we did just to get fruit?
    2008 Aug 01 12:57 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    PRIUS2 just a guy as far as i know. last time the question came up he seemed to have pretty good info. just trying to point you to a pretty good answer. ALAMO you probably are aware of this but check out pickensplan.com
    2008 Aug 01 01:07 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Why shouldn't they be taxed at this rate? They are pumping oil from publicly-owned land and water. You cannot compare XOM's profit margins to technology stocks. MSFT and GOOG are not using national resources to make money.

    However, the $32 bil estimate above is incorrect. According to the SEC, when all of the subsidies and royalties are factored in (some of the "taxes" mentioned above are actually royalties for extracting the national resource), Exxon paid an effective tax rate of 34% to the U.S. government in 2007, or $5.12 billion. citation: www.wnbc.com/news/1613...

    2008 Aug 01 01:08 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    You are forgetting that energy prices rise in tandem. If oil is scarce and expensive that puts pressure on other forms of energy such as coal, and ultimately electricty prices as well. Look across the board energy prices are rising in all sectors. If people can no longer afford to heat their homes with oil, and natural gas, then they have to turn to electricy or downsize into somthing more energy efficient such as a smaller house, apartment, or warmer climate. Our guarantee you are electricity grid cannot handle million of people currently heating with oil and gas switching all of the sudden to electric. It will crash and overwhelm our grid.

    The fact is our economy, and the communities we work and live are all currently too energy intensive and inefficiently zoned and spread out to be economially sustainable at this time as oil and other energy prices rise. The U.S. needs to seriously rethink and retool how it does business and how it uses resources. Our military is currently spending over $700 million a year including supplemental spending for the wars, yet all of our current military technology is virtual useless at defending us if it is increasingly more expensive and difficult to obtain the huge quanties of oil we need to maintain our current economy and military operations around the world.

    America's powerful superpower oil empire has been dying since the 1970's but we haven't been really dealing with it. If we are not careful, we won't have the energy we need to sustain our economy and defend ourselves individually or at the same time. It would be possible for oil rich Russian or even Iran to attach us if we cannot obtain the energy resources needed to operate our enormous mechanized military.
    2008 Aug 01 01:16 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    TT let me see. if i have a business i locate where it is easiest to make money.
    2008 Aug 01 01:21 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    fireball - yes, USA is a logical choice for XOM even with the tax rate. I can't think of another large economy that is stable enough to house them (BRIC doesn't qualify and we're far better in the way of taxes than EU).
    2008 Aug 01 02:09 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    TT right now it seems that politics, taxes, alternatives, etcetera simply are what they are and it is time to focus on protection af assets keeping outrageous inflation in mind. maybe we can hope that the rising energy crises will force some real answers from our self serving politicians instead of the usual b.s., at least on where they stand. i think they would serve best by getting out of the way and let the private sector do what it does so much better than government and get to work on the broad approach with profit in mind. even biofuels can help by brazil and dar examples. i would love to see us off oil but i think it will take years, probably decades. so right now oil seems a place to try and preserve some assets. i am still trying to figure out if pickens is taking investors. he seems to be on a pretty good path to me and i think in the long run some nice profits. i like the guy because he started then said HEY OVER HERE. WANT TO HELP?
    2008 Aug 01 02:34 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    I wonder if he looked at geographic distribution of taxes: Exxon paid over $40 billion in tax in 2007...but on $5 billion of it was to the U.S.

    I doubt this quarter's tax distribution was any different.
    2008 Aug 01 03:21 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    AVIGHANDI mark levine was talking about it last night. the total was 32 or 33 billion. roughly 3 times what they made in profit.
    2008 Aug 01 03:28 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    The Sr. Senator from New York is either a pandering fool or completely stupid regarding how business works in this country. Well, which one is it?
    2008 Aug 01 04:16 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Fireball,

    IO looks like a very interesting company. I like their diverse portfolio of services (land and marine acquisition, data processing and services).

    My only concern is their PE ratio is a bit on the high side (i.e. 33).
    Any thoughts on the higher than normal PE ?

    I can see this company doing well with the next oil rally.
    2008 Aug 01 04:44 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Alamo: Big oil simply went where they had to after being forclosed in the U.S. by the environmentalists, NIMBYs, and BANANAs. Why did they need more oil than was available to them here? Because of the average American consumer's insatiable apetite to live beyond his means, spending money he didn't have, and use vast quantities of energy in support of an overly abundant lifestyle. That overreaching consumer is the main cause of our current energy problems. But now - the parties over!

    BTW: It does seem that N.Y. State has trouble electing Senators.
    2008 Aug 01 04:52 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    LONGOIL, i was in io about three quarters back(sorry i am guessing a little). i had held it for about two years. i was looking at it and in it because they were still proving their superior technology. it made some decent gains and i was a little shaky just wanting to secure some gains. when i bought it was a company managed by oilmen with a lot of insider ownership. they are just now really getting noticed by the oil companies. their earnings have been pretty good since they finally are actually being used. the high pe is probably for the potential to become the leading provider of seismic technology. it seems every quarter that i was really watching the earnings improvement was better than expected. from my limited knowledge i liked that they just gave a better picture of what was below surface. they also have developed a portable device that they can look through to quickly scan a limited area. i have an alert set at $12.50 but am interested in buying if it should drop to 13.50. i believe they are way ahead of the competition but lack noteriety. another cutting edge energy company is silex in australia. i have been sitting on their shares for three years and it has been like a rollercoaster. they are into uranium enrichment with a new process. look at silex.com if you get a chance. they have several good projects but ge, ccj, and hitachi are building a plant in the u.s. to use their technology. if oil takes off too quickly i will still probably grab a couple of hundred shares of io at a higher price. one other that did really well for me was ngs. i made about 85% on it. i would like to get in there again if they pullback enough. i believe they have a good future. mr. pickens must think ng is part of our solution.
    2008 Aug 01 08:17 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    KURT WALTER i think maybe he is just an arrogant opportunistic ass. to me he is the epitomy of lawyer-politician that would turn on his own mother if it would help him secure power. i do not think he is stupid, more of an evil genius serial killer type(providing that his victims were helpless enough) if he had not found politics. the guy just excretes oil and grease. it is difficult to even hear his snakeoil voice and the false bravado of the dirty harry soundbite is just too much slime.
    2008 Aug 01 08:31 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Fireball,

    I like E&P companies that pay fat dividends: COSWF, PWE, ERF, SJT, HGT as well as the services guys RIG and BHI.

    Silex looks very interesting. Their technology is not only applicable to uranium enrichment, but I like the alternative applications to the microelectronics industry as well. Any suggestion when is a good time to buy into it? Do you think it has bottomed out ?
    2008 Aug 02 10:26 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Longoil
    any opinion on NOV, have some already, and understand that one of the restrictions to greater oil availability is a backlog in rig construction. Stock is high but is it a good time to get more.
    2008 Aug 02 12:30 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Could someone please respond to Ms. Pelosi (and me) the reasons BO doesn't pursue drilling on already leased lands/areas ??

    It would answer the question for me , and maybe shut that woman up !
    Thank you all for brilliant comments...especially about Chucky the Jackass !

    B
    2008 Aug 02 04:07 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Prius2,

    I think all the rig operators (DO, RIG, Noble, Pride, etc) are great investments. They typically get paid $1/2 million per day for deep sea drilling regardless of whether the drill results are good or bad. They have their rigs booked 2 years in advance. Therefore, NOV who builds the rigs for these guys stands to reap the same upside of guaranteed and stable revenue. The only risk is if oil prices drop significantly, which I doubt will happen.
    2008 Aug 02 05:01 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    LONGOIL silex seems to be stuck between $6 and $7.4 in the last few months. their income is sporadic because they are r&d. when the market gets hairy they usually drop pretty hard. they also come back fairly quickly. i do not use a stop loss on this one because it is sooooo volatile. a few bad market days could drop it as low as $4. if i understand correctly when the new GE, hitachi, ccj plant comes online they will begin recieving royalties. i look for it to jump good there. at one point it got down to around 3.6 or so. i got into this one for the very long haul. it seems to me that eventually most uranium will use their process. i would watch for $4 especially if we have a stretch of bad days. i would also keep an eye on the new plant. if the market has finished messing with us in such drastic manner below 6.5 should be pretty good. you know i am just making my best guess my friend.
    2008 Aug 03 11:04 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    BENEFICIARY you cant just poke a hole anyplace and expect oil to come out. pelosi knows that. her stance suits her agenda.
    2008 Aug 03 11:10 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Fireball: Not sure exactly what Pelosi's agenda is but her arrogance isn't in doubt, closing down Congress to prevent a vote on offshore drilling. Who cares what most of the public wants - not her!
    Beneficiary: Absolutely nothing will get her to shut up.
    2008 Aug 03 11:53 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Fireball: Thanks for the detailed info. I am going to watch this for a good buying opportunity. I see a lot of long trem potential.
    2008 Aug 03 01:01 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    The reason Pelosi is against off shore drilling is that she is trying to protect Obama. If this issue were left to a free vote, you would have many Democrats voting against the leader's position in favor of their constituents. Imagine what the McCain campaign could do with that event. 70% of Americans are in favor off shore drilling. I hear even Obama is starting to have second thoughts.
    2008 Aug 03 01:09 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    The 68 million acres they brag about has been seismographed. And if there was enough oil they would be drilling. BO would rather than drill there than in most foreign countries where they can change the lease agreements at a moments notice. Sometimes those dictators just throw you out if you don't like their new agreements. AKA Chavez-- Ask BP and Shell about Putin too!
    2008 Aug 03 01:40 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Excuse me but I PAY THE TAXES WHEN I BUY GASOLINE, HOME HEATING OIL AND OTHER ITEMS MADE WITH OIL.

    Exxon just takes their cut and sends the rest of my money to the government.

    Also, no mention in this article about highly paid employees.

    I did not earn One million dollars last year.

    And I resent it when corporate executives ( like the CEO's at freddy and fanny who made over 10 million dollars, each, in 2007) lose billions of dollars and get paid more than they deserve.

    At Penn West (PWE) a Canadian oil trust, there are two executives who earn over $40,000.00 A MONTH from DIVIDENDS on the shares they own. They also get a salary and benefits ( like options ) and I am sure that all these wealthy executives do not have to worry about whether they can afford to heat their homes this winter.

    We are being cheated by OPEC, foreign governments ( for US citizens, the Canadian government takes 15% of your dividends immediately ) the oil executives and the US government.

    Oil prices are being manipulated and not enough US citizens know about it YET.

    Go to:

    www.stopoilspeculation.../

    to learn more.
    2008 Aug 04 03:37 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    PS... I should have added that there are a lot of self-serving SOB's involved in all of this.

    Where have all the fair-minded people gone?
    2008 Aug 04 03:53 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    jjason - unfortunately, not enough u.s. citizens will ever know about it because they believe oprah and dr. phil...and they only deal with issues the media deems important...like feeling sorry for child molesters and solving eating disorders with the latest infomercial electrosuction gadget for $19.95 (But wait!...there's more!). our obsession w/ celebrity in the media effectively provides a veil over most people's eyes so they cannot see the puppet-masters. the matrix metaphor of the blue pill is so appropriate as to be prophetic: Will people be reduced to working (i.e., being harvested...) to afford nothing more than energy so they can continue to work...?
    2008 Aug 04 12:22 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Good analysis! Wish more saw it like you. When will our politicians stop pandering to whom they think are ignorant voters?
    2008 Aug 04 10:56 PM | Link | Reply