* This is my article last Saturday in the online magazine,
http://www.thelobbyist.biz/perspectives/less-gorvernment/1345-oil-prices-and-taxes
---------
Local oil prices have significantly jumped the past few days by about P3 per liter. This reflected the upward movement of oil prices in the world market over the past few weeks. As usual, the left-leaning groups raised howl and criticized the oil companies for their “greed” and called on the government to have another round of tax hikes on oil or other products and services.
Last July 11, 2012, I attended the “Platts Forum on Oil, Coal and LNG” at Edsa Shangrila Hotel. Among the speakers there was Ms. Zenaida Monzada of the Department of Energy. Below are among the slide presentations she gave in the said forum.
Taxes that contribute to the higher retail prices of petroleum products are (a) excise tax, P4.35 per liter for gasoline, P3.67 per liter for jet fuel, P1.63 per liter for diesel, and (b) value added tax (VAT) 12 percent. This means that for the P54 per liter unleaded gasoline, about P10 of it goes to excise tax and VAT alone. Or the government is directly accountable for expensive oil by about P10 per liter. There are other indirect taxes of course, like corporate income tax, documentary stamp tax, real property tax, etc. of the oil companies, trucking and gas stations.
The lower chart shows that the Pesos per liter retail price has moved along with the world crude oil price, from 1984 onwards.
Below, the same story is shown. From 1999 to June 2012, local gasoline and diesel prices have moved generally in steep with international crude and refined product prices. And world oil prices are dictated by the governments of the major oil exporting countries, both OPEC and non-OPEC member countries.
The conspiracy theory therefore, of oil companies dictating local oil prices to satisfy their greed is standing on a hollow ground.
Below, “prevailing prices” refer to early July 2012 prices. Prices across various oil dealers and retailers are generally similar, with minor price differential that can be attributed to other business costs like land lease or rent, and/or varying profit ratio.
The lower table shows comparative prices across major capital cities, converted into Pesos per liter. Philippine oil prices are not among the highest in the region. The most proximate explanation would be that those countries that have higher oil prices than us have higher taxes and fees, direct and indirect, that are slapped on oil products and oil producers and retailers.
The bottomline is that contrary to common public perception that the oil companies are the main instigator of oil price hikes, it is not. It is more due to the (a) governments of oil exporting countries like those in OPEN-member countries that set the price of crude oil, and (b) governments of net oil importing countries like the Philippines, for the various taxes and fees imposed both on the oil products and the companies that import, refine, transport and retail oil products.
Repeated calls to re-regulate if not nationalize the local oil industry are misguided and wrong. Instead of having more government involvement and intervention in local oil price setting, there should instead be lesser government taxes and involvement. The excise tax on oil products should in fact be abolished, instead of raising it as proposed by some sectors.
----------
See also:
Energy Econ 1: Coal Power, July 24, 2012
Energy Econ 2: Renewable Energy and High Electricity Prices, July 30, 2012
Energy Econ 3: Market Reforms in India's Electricity Sector, July 30, 2012
A discussion venue about the role (and misrule) of big government and high taxes. Also a second website of Minimal Government Thinkers.
Showing posts with label Platts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Platts. Show all posts
Monday, August 27, 2012
Energy Econ 4: Oil Prices and Taxes
Labels:
Department of Energy,
oil prices,
oil taxes,
Platts,
Zenaida Monzada
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Energy Econ 1: Coal Power
Posting here the major slides of the presentation by Mr. Ismael Ocampo of the Department of Energy (DOE) during the Platts' Forum on Oil, Coal and LNG last July 11, 2012 at the Edsa Shangrila Hotel, Ortigas, Mandaluyong City.
Labels:
coal power plants,
Department of Energy,
Ismael Ocampo,
Platts
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Fat-Free Econ 16: Coal, Climate and Government
* This is my article yesterday in TV5's news portal.
http://www.interaksyon.com/article/37648/fat-free-economics-coal-climate-and-government
--------
Coal is a cheap energy source for developing economies like the Philippines. We cannot develop fast enough, create more jobs fast enough, if we are groping in the dark with frequent power outages like what we experienced in the early 1990s. Or if a big portion of household and company expenditures are spent on high power rates.
During a Platts forum last week, one of the speakers, Ismael Ocampo of the Department of Energy, presented the following data:
Sources of power generation in the Philippines, percent of total.

Source: Ocampo, Ismael, “Overview of the Philippine Coal Mining Industry”, July 11, 2012.
Total power generation in 2009 was 61,943 gigawatt-hours and in 2010, 67,743 GWh, for a 9.4 percent growth. Notice the big jump in the share of coal from 2009 to 2010, and the decline in natural gas, geothermal and hydro.
This shift is also shown in the increase in local oil consumption, by a million metric tons per year on average. Both local production and importation were also rising.
Coal supply and demand in the Philippines, 2007 to 2011, in million MT

Source: Ocampo, Ismael
What drives this rather fast shift to coal? A second speaker, Cecilia Quiambao who is associate editor of Platts for coal, provided some answers. She showed these charts:
Global coal prices, December 2009 to May 2012.

Prices were increasing in 2010 with peak points at around $130 per ton in January 2011 for the Richards Bay (S. Africa), then mild decent for the rest of 2011, going down to around $98 per ton by May 2012.
Now is the time to further industrialize and modernize with declining global coal and other energy prices. This trend is supported by other developments, as Quiambao illustrated:
- US coal export capacity could reach 270 million MT in 2016, according to UBS. US coal producers can flood the international market once pricing becomes attractive to 270 million MT from the current 158 million MT, increasing the disruptive nature of US suppliers on the seaborne market.
- Bain & Co. said cheap shale gas is set to dethrone coal as the preferred source of power generation in the US in the long term as it is widely available and cost effective. The availability of cheap shale gas in the US and its wide use for power generation has led coal producers to export more to Europe and Asia at cheaper prices.
- Korea South East Power received offers for at least 1.3 million MT of coal in its two recent spot tenders for a combined 260,000 MT.
Thus, supply is five times the amount demanded in the case of Kosep. It is a buyer’s market, thanks largely to the further development of shale gas in the US and other rich economies.
Coal is not an “evil” energy source that is said to contribute to “man-made warming” as portrayed by the UN, Al Gore and some environmental groups like Greenpeace and World Wildlife Fund. Climate change is mainly natural, warming-cooling-warming-cooling in multi-decadal cycles, regardless of how many billions or trillions of tons of coal is burned worldwide each year. So while global warming was true, global cooling was also true, and is happening now.
See below the trend in global air temperature (UAH and RSS satellite data), average for northern hemisphere, tropics, southern hemisphere, and carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration in the atmosphere:
Air temperature vs. CO2 concentration, 1979 to May 2012

Source: Friends of Science, http://friendsofscience.org/
From January 2002 to May 2012, as CO2 kept rising to nearly 400 parts per million, global temperature was declining or cooling by 0.04 degrees centrigrade per decade. “Causality” between more CO2 and “more global warming” is not seen or happening. What we normally experience here in the Philippines and other countries in the tropics is more rain and more flooding, not less, little or no drought, not more. And these are indicators of cooling, not warming.
Recently, certain groups like the National Renewable Energy Board - a new bureaucracy created by the Renewable Energy Act of 2008 (Republic Act 9513) - are proposing to impose a carbon tax on non-renewable energy sources, like $1 per ton of imported coal. This is a rent-seeking move by the NREB and other lobbyists to demonize and make an affordable energy become more expensive. Renewables, like wind and solar power, will become “less costly” as they distort upward the prices of the non-renewables and impose an indirect tax to subsidize the renewables.
This indirect tax is called the feed in tariff scheme. Energy consumers - you and me - will pay FIT for the mandatory use of those expensive power sources. This will make our already high electricity bills more expensive. We have the highest electricity cost for industrial users in Asia: $0.18 per kilowatt-hour in 2010 as against $0.15 in Japan and Singapore, down to only $0.06 in Indonesia and Korea. Check out International Energy Agency, IMD World Competitiveness Online as well as Welfare Economics, Philippine Institutional Issues.
The role of government is to allow enterprises to seek cheaper and reliable power sources, and not play cronyism by taxing some power sources while subsidizing others. For now, coal will become cheaper as many industrialized economies shift to shale gas, and coal producers from those countries will sell lower to developing countries like the Philippines.
This is good news and will jibe with the high growth scenario of the government. Climate alarmism and renewable energy cronyism should not be allowed to distort this new development.
----------
See also:
http://www.interaksyon.com/article/37648/fat-free-economics-coal-climate-and-government
--------
Coal is a cheap energy source for developing economies like the Philippines. We cannot develop fast enough, create more jobs fast enough, if we are groping in the dark with frequent power outages like what we experienced in the early 1990s. Or if a big portion of household and company expenditures are spent on high power rates.
During a Platts forum last week, one of the speakers, Ismael Ocampo of the Department of Energy, presented the following data:
Sources of power generation in the Philippines, percent of total.
Source: Ocampo, Ismael, “Overview of the Philippine Coal Mining Industry”, July 11, 2012.
Total power generation in 2009 was 61,943 gigawatt-hours and in 2010, 67,743 GWh, for a 9.4 percent growth. Notice the big jump in the share of coal from 2009 to 2010, and the decline in natural gas, geothermal and hydro.
This shift is also shown in the increase in local oil consumption, by a million metric tons per year on average. Both local production and importation were also rising.
Coal supply and demand in the Philippines, 2007 to 2011, in million MT
Source: Ocampo, Ismael
What drives this rather fast shift to coal? A second speaker, Cecilia Quiambao who is associate editor of Platts for coal, provided some answers. She showed these charts:
Global coal prices, December 2009 to May 2012.
Prices were increasing in 2010 with peak points at around $130 per ton in January 2011 for the Richards Bay (S. Africa), then mild decent for the rest of 2011, going down to around $98 per ton by May 2012.
Now is the time to further industrialize and modernize with declining global coal and other energy prices. This trend is supported by other developments, as Quiambao illustrated:
- US coal export capacity could reach 270 million MT in 2016, according to UBS. US coal producers can flood the international market once pricing becomes attractive to 270 million MT from the current 158 million MT, increasing the disruptive nature of US suppliers on the seaborne market.
- Bain & Co. said cheap shale gas is set to dethrone coal as the preferred source of power generation in the US in the long term as it is widely available and cost effective. The availability of cheap shale gas in the US and its wide use for power generation has led coal producers to export more to Europe and Asia at cheaper prices.
- Korea South East Power received offers for at least 1.3 million MT of coal in its two recent spot tenders for a combined 260,000 MT.
Thus, supply is five times the amount demanded in the case of Kosep. It is a buyer’s market, thanks largely to the further development of shale gas in the US and other rich economies.
Coal is not an “evil” energy source that is said to contribute to “man-made warming” as portrayed by the UN, Al Gore and some environmental groups like Greenpeace and World Wildlife Fund. Climate change is mainly natural, warming-cooling-warming-cooling in multi-decadal cycles, regardless of how many billions or trillions of tons of coal is burned worldwide each year. So while global warming was true, global cooling was also true, and is happening now.
See below the trend in global air temperature (UAH and RSS satellite data), average for northern hemisphere, tropics, southern hemisphere, and carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration in the atmosphere:
Air temperature vs. CO2 concentration, 1979 to May 2012
Source: Friends of Science, http://friendsofscience.org/
From January 2002 to May 2012, as CO2 kept rising to nearly 400 parts per million, global temperature was declining or cooling by 0.04 degrees centrigrade per decade. “Causality” between more CO2 and “more global warming” is not seen or happening. What we normally experience here in the Philippines and other countries in the tropics is more rain and more flooding, not less, little or no drought, not more. And these are indicators of cooling, not warming.
Recently, certain groups like the National Renewable Energy Board - a new bureaucracy created by the Renewable Energy Act of 2008 (Republic Act 9513) - are proposing to impose a carbon tax on non-renewable energy sources, like $1 per ton of imported coal. This is a rent-seeking move by the NREB and other lobbyists to demonize and make an affordable energy become more expensive. Renewables, like wind and solar power, will become “less costly” as they distort upward the prices of the non-renewables and impose an indirect tax to subsidize the renewables.
This indirect tax is called the feed in tariff scheme. Energy consumers - you and me - will pay FIT for the mandatory use of those expensive power sources. This will make our already high electricity bills more expensive. We have the highest electricity cost for industrial users in Asia: $0.18 per kilowatt-hour in 2010 as against $0.15 in Japan and Singapore, down to only $0.06 in Indonesia and Korea. Check out International Energy Agency, IMD World Competitiveness Online as well as Welfare Economics, Philippine Institutional Issues.
The role of government is to allow enterprises to seek cheaper and reliable power sources, and not play cronyism by taxing some power sources while subsidizing others. For now, coal will become cheaper as many industrialized economies shift to shale gas, and coal producers from those countries will sell lower to developing countries like the Philippines.
This is good news and will jibe with the high growth scenario of the government. Climate alarmism and renewable energy cronyism should not be allowed to distort this new development.
----------
See also:
Fat-Free Econ 12: Privatizing PAGCOR, June 08, 2012
Fat-Free Econ 13: P2 Trillion of Election Spending and Taxes, June 15, 2012
Fat-Free Econ 14: Traffic, Car-pooling and LTFRB, June 21, 2012
Fat-Free Econ 15: IMF and Freedom From Debt, July 01, 2012
Energy rationing 2: The Renewable Energy (RE) law, February 18, 2011
Energy rationing 6: FEF on the RE racket, June 09, 2011
Climate stupidity 22: Expensive Electricity and the Durban Meeting, December 03, 2011
Labels:
Cecilia Quiambao,
CO2,
coal power plants,
Ismael Ocampo,
Platts,
RE law,
shale gas
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)






