ShareThis Page

Here it comes again: Severance tax a nonstarter

| Saturday, Jan. 21, 2017, 9:00 p.m.

If the GOP-controlled Legislature goes along with Democrat Gov. Tom Wolf's renewed call for a severance tax, it would be a surefire way to debilitate Pennsylvania's shale-gas industry.

Always a bad idea, a severance tax is an even worse idea this time around — because 2016 saw the industry “shed a third of its jobs” and gas prices are still rebounding “from record lows,” according to the Commonwealth Foundation. The state's own Independent Fiscal Office estimates that Pennsylvania's existing impact fee is the equivalent of a 6.9-percent severance tax — higher than severance taxes in Louisiana, Wyoming and West Virginia.

Lawmakers should revisit the impact fee to ensure that counties and municipalities are spending that money on offsetting drilling's effects, not on the sort of seemingly unrelated purposes that the state auditor general highlighted in a report last fall.

With the industry showing some hopeful signs — a late-2016 upswing in well permits, increased 2017 investment by companies including Consol Energy and EQT Corp. — nothing would blunt that renewed momentum faster than saddling drillers with a severance tax.

The Legislature must stand firm against this tax-and-spend governor. It must reject both his severance tax, which would depress the shale-gas industry, and a misguided notion that has long shafted taxpayers: more revenue, not less spending, is the answer to Pennsylvania's fiscal health.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.