Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf has signed into law the state’s $32.7 billion budget, which does not include his calls to implement a severance tax on unconventional natural gas production.

Wolf signed the budget late Friday, marking the first time since he took office that lawmakers sent a budget to him before the June 30 deadline that also includes his signature. In previous years, quarrels over spending and taxes led to prolonged budget impasses and Wolf’s decisions to let the state’s spending plans become law without his signature.

The budget includes $2.5 million for the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), which oversees oil and gas drilling in the state, to fill 35 positions. The agency has been chronically underfunded and understaffed, even as shale development has increased over the years. Wolf requested the funding to help fill positions in programs across the agency, including those that oversee air monitoring and oil and gas drilling, among other things.

The DEP’s $153 million general fund allocation is still just above where it was more than 20 years ago. About half of DEP’s budget comes from state and federal funds, while the other half comes from fees and fines. It is moving forward with a proposal to more than double unconventional oil and gas well permit fees to $12,500 to generate more funding.

While the budget -- signed by Wolf ahead of the general election in November, when he’ll face Republican state Sen. Scott Wagner -- included his request for more education funding, it did not include any new taxes or fees. Wolf, a Democrat, has proposed a severance tax every year since taking office in 2015.

Read the full article by Jamison Cocklin at NGI's Shale Daily

 



pennsylvania severance tax Pennsylvania severance tax

pennsylvania severance tax Pennsylvania severance tax

A 2012 state law violates requirements in the Illinois Constitution by creating an easy path for nonprofit hospitals to receive property-tax exemptions without first requiring that the hospitals be used exclusively for charitable purposes.

That claim was made Tuesday by an attorney for a Cook County woman during oral arguments in front of the Illinois Supreme Court as part of the woman’s challenge of the law.

If the law is struck down in a high court ruling expected this fall, not-for-profit hospitals around the state might have to revert to the previous, less-predictable system for securing millions of dollars’ worth in annual property tax exemptions from officials at the county level and the Illinois Department of Revenue.

Area hospitals that could be affected include Springfield’s Memorial Medical Center and HSHS St. John’s Hospital, as well as hospitals in Jacksonville, Lincoln, Taylorville, Litchfield, Carlinville, Hillsboro and Pana.

“There’s no hook in this statute that says a constitutional test should be applied,” Chicago lawyer Kenneth Flaxman told Supreme Court justices on behalf of his client, Constance Oswald, who didn’t attend the court hearing.But lawyers for the state and the Illinois Health and Hospital Association, trying to secure a definitive ruling from the court on the law’s constitutionality, said references in the statute clearly imply that hospitals must satisfy the Constitution’s charitable requirement.

Read full article by Dean Olsen here

The Alaska Oil and Gas Production Tax has been changed multiple times, particularly over the last 12 years. And each change in the statutes brings additional changes—and complications—to the regulations that the Alaska Department of Revenue (DOR) issues to implement the tax. Even the last few years are telling, with overhauls of the tax structure in 2013, 2016 and again in 2017, and debate about several production tax bills this legislative session. This uncertainty dramatically impacts the oil and gas industry in Alaska and investment in the state.

The oil and gas production tax structure is a critical consideration for oil and gas explorers and producers in Alaska due to its impact on project economics. It has been and will likely continue to be an area of uncertainty, and the Department of Revenue has finalized one set of regulations to implement House Bill 111, which passed last year, and has published a second set of draft regulations that govern carried-forward annual production tax losses that can be accrued starting in 2018.

Alaska’s oil and gas production tax regime is found at AS 43.55.011-AS 43.55.900. The production tax structure, including production tax rates, tax limitations, credits and other incentives varies depending on the area of the state that is the focus of the exploration, development or production activity.

Unlike other states that levy a severance tax on the gross value at the “wellhead,” Alaska’s production tax is levied on the net revenues of oil and gas production from leases or properties in the state, except for the federal and state royalty share and oil and gas used in drilling or production operations, or for repressuring. At a high level, the calculation starts with destination value, generally the higher of the sales price or a calculated prevailing value. The costs of pipeline and marine transportation are subtracted from the destination value to obtain the gross value at the point of production—the wellhead value.

Read full article by Jonathan E. Iversen here