Bill Overview
Title: Stop Gas Price Gouging Tax and Rebate Act
Description: This bill imposes an excise tax of 50% of the excess of the windfall profit of a producer of crude oil (including crude oil condensates and natural gasoline) that has an average daily worldwide production of crude oil of at least 300,000 barrels for the taxable year, and had gross receipts in excess of $1 billion for its last taxable year during 2005. The bill defines windfall profit as the excess of the adjusted taxable income of such producer for taxable year 2022 over the reasonably inflated average profit for such taxable year. The bill requires payment of energy price rebates to eligible individuals.
Sponsors: Rep. DeFazio, Peter A. [D-OR-4]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals potentially receiving energy price rebates
Estimated Size: 250000000
- The bill affects producers of crude oil with an average daily production of at least 300,000 barrels and annual gross receipts exceeding $1 billion in 2005.
- It imposes a tax on windfall profits for these large producers, potentially affecting their financial operations and profitability.
- Consumers could benefit from energy price rebates, which aim to offset high energy prices caused by inflation and other factors.
- The number of individuals eligible to receive rebates is likely large, given that this measure seems aimed at addressing widespread consumer impact of high gas prices.
Reasoning
- The bill targets large oil producers, implying the primary economic effect will be on companies with significant oil production operations, potentially leading to changes in pricing structures across the supply chain.
- Given the rebate component, individual consumers across the US could see direct financial benefits, especially if they encounter high energy costs.
- The rebate distribution depends heavily on the eligibility criteria and whether it reaches the most in-need populations such as low-income households more vulnerable to energy cost fluctuations. The effectiveness of the policy in terms of wellbeing impact will thus hinge on execution.
- Budget limits necessitate efficient use of funds to maximize policy reach and effectiveness.
- Considerable portions of the budget will need to handle the administrative and distribution costs associated with the rebate.
- A policy like this could have a differential impact based on geographic location due to climate or economic reliance on the oil industry.
Simulated Interviews
Marketing Manager (Dallas, Texas)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think any policy that can lower gas prices will help families like mine save on commuting costs.
- The rebate aspect sounds promising, but implementation will be key to see any real benefit.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Oil Rig Worker (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned that taxing my employer might trickle down into fewer jobs or less pay.
- I don't believe the rebates will really reach everyone who needs them.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Freelance Designer (Miami, Florida)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm all for any bill that can help lower what I pay for energy, whether that's fuel or electricity.
- If the rebates happen, it could really help me financially.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired (Bismarck, North Dakota)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Anything to decrease oil prices directly impacts my budget.
- I hope the rebates will be prioritized for people on fixed incomes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
IT Consultant (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 43 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support measures that rein in excessive profits from non-renewable energy.
- I worry about the long-term impact of financially supporting fossil fuel consumption.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
School Teacher (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reducing oil prices sounds great given current inflation.
- I'm skeptical about how the rebate distribution will actually occur.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
College Student (Salt Lake City, Utah)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 17/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm excited about rebates; they would help me a lot given my tight budget.
- I hope such measures don't impact my job or my parents' financial situation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Small Business Owner (Houston, Texas)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Taxes like this can sometimes make operations harder for small businesses.
- The potential rebate could offset some of the impacts if it's passed through to business consumers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Healthcare Worker (New York, New York)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Such policies feel designed more for those who drive a lot, less so for city dwellers like me.
- If prices in general came down, I'd probably see more savings.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 73 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I try to follow energy pricing as it really affects my budget here in the desert.
- Rebates directed to seniors would be very beneficial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $12000000000 (Low: $10000000000, High: $15000000000)
Year 2: $12000000000 (Low: $10000000000, High: $15000000000)
Year 3: $12000000000 (Low: $10000000000, High: $15000000000)
Year 5: $12000000000 (Low: $10000000000, High: $15000000000)
Year 10: $12000000000 (Low: $10000000000, High: $15000000000)
Year 100: $12000000000 (Low: $10000000000, High: $15000000000)
Key Considerations
- The stability and predictability of oil prices overtime can significantly alter the financial dynamics of this policy.
- Administration costs for managing the rebate program could be substantial, influencing overall costs.
- The policy might face opposition from the oil industry leading to potential legal challenges.