Oil firms pay $630M in Pennsylvania drilling fees, critics say it's not enough

Drilling fees on nearly 6,500 natural gas wells in the Marceluus Shale will bring more than $630M to Pennsylvania's coffers by the end of the year, three years after the state passed the fees into law, but critics say the oil and gas companies aren’t paying enough.

Range Resources (RRC) paid the most with $27M in fees last year, followed by Chesapeake Energy (CHK) with $26.6M; among others, Cabot Oil & Gas (COG) forked over $13.2M, Anadarko Petroleum (APC) paid $12.3M, and EOG Resources (EOG) coughed up $4.5M.

Critics who want the companies to pay more point to a report from the state’s independent fiscal branch that found Pennsylvania’s drilling fees were lower than severance tax rates on gas production in Texas and other states, which do not have drilling fees.

From other sites
Comments (8)
  • Larry Meade
    , contributor
    Comments (111) | Send Message
    Who are the critics? Name them, please.
    8 Apr 2014, 06:31 PM Reply Like
  • zebra114
    , contributor
    Comments (247) | Send Message
    8 Apr 2014, 06:40 PM Reply Like
  • fuzzymc
    , contributor
    Comments (198) | Send Message
    The critics are a large number of pa voters who are going to elect a new governor in November .
    8 Apr 2014, 06:53 PM Reply Like
  • Seeking Predictability
    , contributor
    Comments (18) | Send Message
    I believe that TX severance tax is per mcf (or $ revenues?) of production, not per well drilled. If so, it would take a significant effort to compare the results of the two types of taxes over past and/or projected exploration and production. Note that "environmentalist" organizations often produce more heat (political noise and frivolous lawsuits) than light (honest research/argument). The free market (competition and choice) serves human need for low-cost energy; "environmania" favors plants and animals over humans.
    8 Apr 2014, 08:15 PM Reply Like
  • marpy
    , contributor
    Comments (1764) | Send Message
    Texas has been doing this for so long that you wander why other state would not use them as a model when determining how to handle taxation of oil and gas. No matter how many people try to re-invent the wheel, it still comes out round!;-)
    9 Apr 2014, 08:11 PM Reply Like
  • jaymarcellus
    , contributor
    Comments (5) | Send Message
    Two administrations struggled to pass income producing legislature and it was the
    present admin. which was successful. Critics forget this law Act 13 was approved by by parties in both branches of gov.
    Critics need to be reminded it is called an impact fee because much (not all) of the funds stay within the impacted counties. This is important to the small rural counties in which the drilling is happening,, othewise with a general type tax it would flow to the large counties: Phila, Lehigh, Allegheny, etc.
    8 Apr 2014, 09:35 PM Reply Like
  • User 25302823
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
    I am involved with the oil and gas business in Texas. Have been since birth, 67 years ago. If the eastern states want to argue about money, I say...Pull out, no more production in the eastern states, no more piplines, let them freeze in the dark.
    9 Apr 2014, 06:17 AM Reply Like
  • DevilDog85
    , contributor
    Comments (266) | Send Message
    I agree. PA is a union state and BIG entitlement mentality. And yes, I lived there and know. Let um' eat cake.
    9 Apr 2014, 10:15 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs