Laura Sheehan Defend your dividend

In 2003, Congress passed an important law – the Jobs and Growth Tax Reconciliation Act of 2003 – that temporarily reduced the maximum tax rate on dividend income to 15 percent. Extended in 2006, the reduced tax rate is now scheduled to expire on December 31, 2010. One of the original goals of the 2003 law was to jump-start the economy and generate investment in the stock of American companies.

Realizing the important role the dividend tax rate reduction played in creating economic growth, the 2006 extension pushed the expiration date from 2008 to 2010. Now, in an increasingly uncertain economy, Congress will soon debate whether to let the dividend tax rate reduction expire. If it does, we could see the tax rate on dividend income jump overnight to an astonishing 39.6 percent.

Recently the Defend My Dividend coalition, a national grassroots advocacy campaign that supports making low tax rates permanent, commended proposals by President Obama and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) to make permanent the current capital gains and dividend tax rates for the majority of Americans while capping the rate at 20 percent for higher-income families.  Chairman Baucus recently introduced legislation that mirrors the capital gains and dividend policies in President Obama’s FY2010 budget.

This issue is important because the lower dividend tax rate helps attract much-needed capital for the energy sector at a time when utilities are making major investments in power generation and delivery facilities. Since our economy relies on affordable, reliable energy, we need to help ensure investment in our energy infrastructure by capping the maximum tax rate on dividends.

If you are one of the more than 50 percent of households who own stock in electric and gas utilities, we urge you to visit the campaign web site, www.DefendMyDividend.org, and become a part of the effort to extend or make permanent today’s reasonable tax rate on dividends.

Posted in defend my dividend | Comments Off

Laura Sheehan Should Uncle Sam Turn Down Our Lights?

nationaljournalblog2 Should Uncle Sam Turn Down Our Lights? Recently Dave Parker participated in the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Experts blog to respond to their question, “Should Uncle Sam Turn Down Our Lights?” Please take a moment to read his response posted below and visit the National Journal Energy Experts blog to view the comments from others in this respected group.

While the American Gas Association (AGA) supports a portfolio of federal energy efficiency measures, including market-based incentives, voluntary programs, and minimum efficiency codes and standards, we strongly believe that any energy or climate change legislation must recognize the leading role U.S. natural gas customers have already played in improving energy efficiency and reducing greenhouse gas emissions at home and at work.  In fact, by using energy wisely and making smart choices every day, our members’ customers have reduced their per-household consumption so dramatically that there has been virtually no growth in emissions in nearly three decades, despite a 70 percent increase in households using natural gas.

With this in mind, AGA supports climate change and energy policies that focus on reducing energy consistent with the recent recommendations of a study published by the National Academies (NA). That study recommended using a full-fuel-cycle measurement when determining an end-use product’s overall energy efficiency.  This full-fuel-cycle measurement takes into account the amount of energy produced and lost from the point of production to the final point of use, which is far more accurate and would provide consumers with more complete information on energy use and environmental impacts.  For example, in producing, generating and transmitting electricity from its point of origin to the electric outlet in a customer’s home or business, 70 percent of the useable energy is lost.  By contrast, producing and delivering natural gas directly from its point of origin to the customer’s burner tip loses only about 10 percent of its usable energy.

The NA study also supports the “carbon footprint labeling” provisions championed by AGA that were recently included in the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation.  These provisions would expand the existing Federal Trade Commission EnergyGuide labeling program for appliances to include carbon footprint information.

AGA will continue to inform lawmakers about the benefits of natural gas and the energy efficiency and environmental advantages of incorporating the full-fuel-cycle measurement into any climate change energy legislation. As these critical issues are addressed in the next few weeks, we are committed to being involved in the debate on behalf of our members’ natural gas customers.

Posted in energy | Tagged | Comments Off

Chris McGill Natural gas market indicators

090715.ngmi Natural gas market indicators

Some energy analysts believe that natural gas pricing already has an expectation of a moderate hurricane season and a warmer than normal 2009-10 winter built into natural gas futures. A bigger question seems to be, however, “when will demand come back?”

The gas industry continues to make investment, drilling, and other decisions based on the observation that demand will recover.  It seems a reasonable assumption but by how much and when represent the million dollar (actually billion dollar) questions.

Visit this link to download the full Natural Gas Market Indicator. Topics covered include: Reported Prices, Weather, Working Gas in Underground Storage, Natural Gas Production, Rig Counts, Pipeline Imports and Exports, and LNG Markets.

Posted in Natural Gas | Tagged | Comments Off

Mike Pomorski Smart Guy Committee

By now, you have almost certainly heard about the Potential Gas Committee’s (PGC) announcement that the total natural gas resource base in the United States has increased by 39% compared to previous estimates.  To say that the natural gas industry is pretty excited about the PGC report is a bit of an understatement.

But forget the natural gas industry for a second.  Are you excited about this announcement?  You probably should be.

Imagine that a highly regarded, independent group (let’s call them the “Smart Guy Committee”) made the following announcement:

The Smart Guy Committee (SGC) today released the results of its latest biennial assessment of the nation’s gasoline resources, which indicates that the United States possesses a total resource base of gasoline that is 39% larger than previously estimated. This is the highest resource evaluation in the Committee’s 44-year history… “The SGG’s year-end 2008 assessment reaffirms the Committee’s conviction that abundant, recoverable gasoline exists within our nation’s gas station storage tanks… The SGC cautioned, however, that the current assessment assumes neither a time schedule nor a specific market price for the discovery and production of future gasoline supply. “Estimates of the SGC are ‘base-line estimates’ in that they attempt to provide a reasonable appraisal of what we consider to be the ‘technically recoverable’ gasoline resource potential of the United States,” the SGC explained.

In other words, imagine that a respected, independent group announced that every gas station in the country just realized that they had almost 40% more gasoline in their storage tanks than they previously thought.  Now, a lot of this gasoline may be located in storage tanks at abandoned gas stations, in depopulated rural areas, in storage tanks that are hard to get to or are sealed off, or in other places that may be difficult and/or expensive to pump into your car.

Still.  This caveat, which is important, would not change the fact that if you operate one of the nation’s 136 million state-registered cars you would probably dance in the streets, since this supply situation is good news for you at the pump.

Well, about 65 million of you are residential natural gas consumers, and, surprise surprise, the “Smart Guy Committee” statement above is taken from the Potential Gas Committee Report, with “natural gas” changed to “gasoline.”  The analogy is far from perfect, since producing natural gas is much more complicated and expensive than pumping gasoline at a filling station, but you get the idea.  All of a sudden, the United States has almost 40% more of a critical energy resource that is clean burning and used by tens of millions of people.

So, are you excited?

Posted in energy | Tagged , | Comments Off