Seen elsewhere

 

Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Barefaced | Main | This has to be a spoof »
Wednesday
Mar092016

Developing a consistent message

PwC was among the businesses who signed the World Bank’s call to governments and business leaders to support putting a price on carbon.

A prominent firm of accountants, September 2014

tax cut on North Sea firms would rescue the UK's oil and gas sector and safeguard future revenues for the Treasury, PwC has claimed. 

The same firm of accountants, 18 months later


PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (26)

But you don’t understand. Because of the perverted way they calculate "subsidies" an across the board tax cut for the oil industry actually cuts the calculated level of "subsidy" they get*. This means that what PwC is actually calling for is a reduction in subsidy which is consistent with a tax on carbon.

* When George Osborne reduced the Supplementary Charge (SC) from 30% to 20% this had the effect of reducing the calculated level of subsidy since some oil fields had a reduced level of SC

Mar 9, 2016 at 11:36 AM | Unregistered CommenterTerryS

They are actually consistent if the price on carbon is negative :)

Mar 9, 2016 at 11:54 AM | Unregistered CommenterJamesG

It seems that while the branch holds strong, it's fun to take a saw to our support but now it's making worrying creaking noises, they suddenly get nervous.

One of the accusations aimed at Exxon is that they didn't warn their investors that action on CO2 would reduce company profits. Their investors might have a reason to complain about them not forseeing the plunging oil price but a lack of demand due to acting on CO2 isn't one of them.

Mar 9, 2016 at 12:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterTinyCO2

Off topic, but regarding UK energy 'policy':

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/03/08/a-ruinous-price-will-be-paid-for-britains-scandalous-failure-in/

Mar 9, 2016 at 12:06 PM | Unregistered CommenterVarco

The message is consistent and here it is: " We are here to milk the system"

Mar 9, 2016 at 12:11 PM | Unregistered CommenterKeith L

Keith L, yes agreed. They change the advice they give to match the most profitable strategy.


Their expertise indicates that Green BlobWash is soon to be flushed away.

Mar 9, 2016 at 12:40 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

There's money to be had in carbon accounting.

Mar 9, 2016 at 12:52 PM | Unregistered CommenterDaveS

@DaveS: "There's taxpayers' money to be had in carbon accounting!"

Mar 9, 2016 at 1:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlan the Brit

Off topic, but a huge larf!!
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/03/uea-abandons-ambitious-biomass-scheme

Mar 9, 2016 at 2:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterCharlie

Mar 9, 2016 at 2:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterCharlie

They did not rest on their laurels. :)

Another proposed scheme looks to have closed with debts.

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016/03/03/batter-late-than-never/

Mar 9, 2016 at 5:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterMick J

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/03/09/huffpos-grim-54-private-jets-at-meeting-to-stop-trump/

Was Leo with them

Mar 9, 2016 at 5:28 PM | Unregistered CommenterJamspid

I don't blame them for not foreseeing a slump in oil and gas prices.

Mar 9, 2016 at 6:14 PM | Unregistered CommenterCurious George

And these morons get loadsa money for simply "following the herd".
Where's the analysis?

Mar 9, 2016 at 7:50 PM | Unregistered CommenterDon Keiller

But, as Tim Worstall keeps explaining, a real carbon tax would actually mean reducing existing taxes, fuel duties and escalators.

Mar 9, 2016 at 8:36 PM | Unregistered CommenterDiogenes

We are paying more for the externalities than we should,acording to Stern and the IPCC. Is that so hard to understand?

Mar 9, 2016 at 8:56 PM | Unregistered CommenterDiogenes

Diogenes:

I have always found Stern's reasoning hard to follow.

Mar 9, 2016 at 9:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterGraeme No.3

Graeme No.3, it is easier to understand where Stern is going, if you follow the money.

Mar 9, 2016 at 9:40 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Don K, 7.50pm:

Naturally; the herd creators rely on the morons following them in order to establish a herd, therefore, the morons have to be rewarded, but not as much as their leaders are pocketing.

Mar 9, 2016 at 9:54 PM | Registered CommenterSalopian

Accountants, eh? Putting their mouths where the money is as always.

Mar 9, 2016 at 10:29 PM | Unregistered CommenterJimmy Haigh

Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shia Iran over producing to bankrupt each other. Putin cutting the price of gas to bankrupt NATO.

Logical trying to impose a moratorium on burning Fossil Fuels in the middle of an oil glut.

Meanwhile back in England 99.7 pence for a litre of unleaded at Sainsburys with Tesco's and Asda hot on the trail.
The hardest working job in retail every manager of a petrol station having to keep changing the price sign every couple of hours.

At this rate it will be cheaper for every house hold in Britain to run a long lead down their drive way connected to the car battery whilst ticking over to power their homes than build Hinkley Point.

Mar 10, 2016 at 7:31 AM | Unregistered CommenterJamspid

While we're mentioning World Bank schemes, I can thoroughly recommend the BH link to the Hayek Lecture [at the top right] "The Tyranny of Experts". William Easterly describes very well some the bad consequences of the do-gooders grand schemes to 'help' the world, whether the people 'helped' like it or not.

One amusing anecdote he reports, after describing the World Bank as liking to think of itself as "The World's Knowledge Bank", is the statistic reported by a World Bank researcher:

“31% of the World Bank's “knowledge products” have never been downloaded. 87% never cited”.

Perhaps it is actually a good thing that so few of their schemes see the light of day.

Mar 10, 2016 at 12:58 PM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

I watched William Easterly's Hayek lecture yesterday, so can second Michael Hart's recommendation. I am still incensed that 20,000 Ugandan farmers were evicted from their land at gun-point, so that a World Bank forestry scheme could go ahead.

Mar 10, 2016 at 2:57 PM | Registered Commenterlapogus

@ Charlie

"Off topic, but a huge larf!!
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/03/uea-abandons-ambitious-biomass-scheme

Mar 9, 2016 at 2:33 PM | Charlie"

Thank you Thank you Thank you.

Made my day!!!

Mar 10, 2016 at 4:28 PM | Unregistered CommenterDougUK

Loks like PwC hired has Delingpole as a consultant :

http://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2016/01/hypocrisy-watch-ill-men-write-lives.html

Mar 10, 2016 at 6:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterRussell

Once upon a time PWC was a good company with impressive bean counters and auditors.
PWC is now a dismal company staffed by nitwits.

Mar 11, 2016 at 12:35 PM | Unregistered Commentertoorightmate

Oh, lordy. Russell comes here again just to make a link to himself elsewhere with his blog named after someone else's blog. WVWRussselll, can you spell tvvat?

Mar 13, 2016 at 12:31 AM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>