Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Customer Service | Contact Us | Routes Available | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Should North Dakota lower its oil extraction taxes at this time?

  1. Yes
  2. No
  3. Raise them
sort: oldest | newest




Mar-23-13 9:55 AM


Please look at this.... then ask where does all this money go?

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-23-13 8:29 AM

disgusted you are wrong and right, in ND you can own minerals without owning the surface and the State of ND owns the most minerals in the state by many times over. So yes the state does have many many oil wells, over 2000 of them the last report.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-23-13 12:01 AM

In Alaska, the oil wells are NOT on private land, they are on land owned by the state and that is why the citizens get a share of the profits from the wells. That is not the same situation as the one we have here in ND

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-22-13 11:39 PM

ND voted to set aside the legacy fund till 2017. The state can not write a check to an individual per the Constitution. The government should never or nearly ever hold a slush fund. It should be returned to the people/businesses who sent money to the government in the first place. With the oil boom, infrastructure is ever changing, so in this case, I guess stteing aside the money for repairs and growth is a good idea. What is not a good idea is spending money like there is no tomorrow.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-22-13 11:17 AM

...and we will get SCREWED as usual!!

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-21-13 9:35 PM

icart, why should "You" get a direct check????Are you a victim???? Or do you want the cities or land owner/mineral owner, that put up with it all, to share . I suppose you live in the Eastern part of the State. We are NOT Alaska.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-21-13 8:02 PM

Well, we don't have to worry about the legacy fund... our "Representatives" just voted that we are apparently NOT RESPONSIBLE enough to even get a direct payment check...You know how "childish" we are!!! They are going to distribute it to us as "THEY SEE FIT"!! Which basically means, they are going to line their pockets and screw all of us!!

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-20-13 9:55 AM

The profits are shared by all the people who own shares, a few years ago most of the large investment groups including the government retirement programs channeled their investments into the oil market. Remember when oil went down a couple years ago and everybody lost half their money they had invested? Well hang on!

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 10:20 PM

Why are the oil companies lobbying for a reduction in oil extraction taxes and yet property taxes are rising for homeowners and landowners?

Wake up

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 8:38 PM

When Iraq became an oil-rich country, the oil companies were allowed 49 percent of the oil and the country of Iraq was in possession of 51 percent of the oil. Back when civilized humans actually existed, that's how it once was when humanity treated each other like they deserved to be alive. Now-a-days, it's a dog-eat-dog existence.

In North Dakota, it is 40 percent less in extraction taxes than compared to what Iraq was gaining. North Dakota is being taken to the cleaners.

The plundering of North Dakota's oil is on-going and the citizens of North Dakota are being totally hosed by the State of North Dakota and the oil companies.

You don't have to submit it to Ripley's Believe It or Not, it's the truth.

Greed is the word. May the bird of paradise fly up your nose.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 6:32 PM

disgusted Mar-19-13 3:32 PM

Reasonable post as usual.


1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 5:03 PM

The extraction tax is on all oil produced from privately owned minerals and state owned minerals. The state has a mineral interest in over 2000 wells in ND, that money is separate and different from extraction tax money. You have to realize the state is the largest mineral owner in the state and by far has the most mineral acres developed and in production. Of course the Oil companies holding the leases get the most.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 3:32 PM

muleskinner, two wrongs don't make a right. The government should not be in competition with the private sector on any level in any endeavor. How much do you want in the legacy fund? How much do you believe should stay there? Maybe what we should do is transfer a portion of everyone's property tax into a legacy fund for distribution in 10 years.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 3:10 PM

'All your oil to us belong' says the oil companies. Well, not yet anyway.

The extraction tax is a tax to make sure that the oil isn't just grabbed by any and all oil companies and making out like bandits. The tax is there so there is some payback for the oil that is being pumped.

North Dakota now supplies 10 percent of all domestic production.

It is at the point where the State of North Dakota can develop its own lands, pay for the drilling costs, retain 100 percent of the oil and sell it to a marketer. The state will become even richer.

It could easily drill 10 wells of its own at a cost of 120 million dollars. 1000 bpd/well would be 10,000 bpd which would be an additional $800,000 per day. Eventually, North Dakota could be the number one oil entity in North Dakota.

North Dakota could set up its own state oil company similar in nature to the North Dakota Mill and Elevator and the Bank of North Dakota.

It would be a profitable state-owned corporation.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 2:37 PM

Whoa! I'm with leftwing again!

Are the clouds parting or something?


3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 11:22 AM

Can you imagine the offers our legislators are getting from the oil people to lower the tax. This is the kind of talk that lines people pockets.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 11:10 AM

ND has given much to the oil companies already, not money, but other things.

I agree with not lowering the taxes. And I also say property tax relief for NoDaks.

Surprise, leftwing! I'm with you on this, but I'll keep it on the QT from now on. Sshhh...

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 9:25 AM

750,000 barrels per day at 80 dollars per barrel equals 60 million dollars per day.

6 million will go to the state coffers, oil companies have income of 54 million each day.

365 x 54,000,000 = 19,710,000,000 dollars for the oil companies in one year from Bakken oil just in North Dakota.

Not a bad day for the oil companies and a very good year.

Another tax on them won't hurt.

3 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-19-13 7:45 AM

I say yes lower them before the oil people suddenly stop drilling wells and just pump out of the over 2000 state wells. If we let them pump this highly migratory Bakken oil for 20 years or so that should reduce the need to make so many new wells. Actually I'm surprised the state is issuing permits around it's wells, if they are.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 19 of 19 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web