IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cdh/commen/501.html

Death by a Thousand Cuts? Western Canada’s Oil and Natural Gas Policy Competitiveness Scorecard

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Dachis

    (C.D. Howe Institute)

Abstract

Pipelines face delays or are not built at all. Governments are adding greenhouse gas emissions prices. Provinces have introduced higher corporate income taxes. Property and other municipal taxes on energy producers have also been on the rise. Taken together, what are the costs of these recent policies for the western Canadian energy sector? And how does each compare in its effect on the competitiveness of Canadian provinces, both in relation to each other and to US energy-producing states? To assess the effect of policy-induced competitiveness costs on energy producers, this Commentary calculates the cumulative change in profitability that energy producers would face for an otherwise identical well because of government policies that affect taxes and pipeline access. In the first of what will be an annual series – updated as policymakers change the policy-induced costs on conventional oil and natural gas producers – this Commentary finds that: • pipeline constraints have greatly reduced the price that oil producers receive. This effect is by far the largest competitiveness cost on energy producers; • corporate taxes and provincial royalties are major policy costs for producers. Canadian provinces have historically been competitive with the US on taxes, but recent changes in the US highlight the need to examine the cost of taxation – the outcome of Alberta’s recent royalty review was a step in the right direction; • greenhouse gas emission taxes have been big news politically and publicly, but so far have not been economically important for energy producers. Further, the Alberta (and similar federal) system gives companies a strong incentive to reduce their emissions with little competitiveness cost. Indeed, companies with below-average emissions are better off under the current system; and • finally, property and municipal taxes have enormous variation across Canada and the US. There is room for provinces to reduce the cost of both provincial and municipal property taxes on energy producers. Policymakers now need to take steps to ensure that approved new pipelines get built and to reduce the burden of corporate income, royalty, property and greenhouse gas emissions taxes.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Dachis, 2018. "Death by a Thousand Cuts? Western Canada’s Oil and Natural Gas Policy Competitiveness Scorecard," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 501, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdh:commen:501
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cdhowe.org/sites/default/files/attachments/research_papers/mixed/C.D%20Howe%20Commentary%20501.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin Dachis & Robin W. Boadway, 2015. "Drilling Down on Royalties: How Canadian Provinces Can Improve Non-Renewable Resource Taxes," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 435, September.
    2. Benjamin Dachis & Blake Schaffer & Vincent Thivierge, 2017. "All’s Well that Ends Well: Addressing End-of-Life Liabilities for Oil and Gas Wells," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 492, September.
    3. Richard G. Newell & Daniel Raimi, 2015. "Shale Public Finance: Local Government Revenues and Costs Associated with Oil and Gas Development," NBER Working Papers 21542, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Brian Conger & Bev Dahlby, 2015. "Policy Forum: Taxation of Machinery and Equipment and Linear Property in Alberta," Canadian Tax Journal, Canadian Tax Foundation, vol. 63(2), pages 487-499.
    5. Adam Found & Peter Tomlinson, 2017. "Business Tax Burdens in Canada’s Major Cities: The 2017 Report Card," e-briefs 269, C.D. Howe Institute.
    6. Zachary Spicer & Adam Found, 2016. "Thinking Regionally: How to Improve Service Delivery in Canada’s Cities," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 458, October.
    7. Brown, Jason P. & Fitzgerald, Timothy & Weber, Jeremy G., 2016. "Capturing rents from natural resource abundance: Private royalties from U.S. onshore oil & gas production," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 23-38.
    8. Bošković, Branko & Nøstbakken, Linda, 2017. "The cost of endangered species protection: Evidence from auctions for natural resources," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 174-192.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Walls, W.D. & Zheng, Xiaoli, 2021. "Environmental regulation and safety outcomes: Evidence from energy pipelines in Canada," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elaine L. Hill, 2024. "The Impact of Oil and Gas Extraction on Infant Health," American Journal of Health Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 10(1), pages 68-96.
    2. Catherine Hausman & Ryan Kellogg, 2015. "Welfare and Distributional Implications of Shale Gas," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 46(1 (Spring), pages 71-139.
    3. Brian E. Whitacre & Dylan L. Johnston & David W. Shideler & Notie H. Lansford, 2020. "The influence of oil and natural gas employment on local retail spending: evidence from Oklahoma panel data," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 64(1), pages 133-157, February.
    4. Brown, Jason P. & Coupal, Roger & Hitaj, Claudia & Kelsey, Timothy W. & Krannich, Richard S. & Xiarchos, Irene M., "undated". "New Dynamics in Fossil Fuel and Renewable Energy for Rural America," USDA Miscellaneous 260676, United States Department of Agriculture.
    5. Benjamin Dachis, 2018. "Fiscal Soundness and Economic Growth: An Economic Program for Ontario," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 505, March.
    6. Boslett, Andrew & Hill, Elaine & Ma, Lala & Zhang, Lujia, 2021. "Rural light pollution from shale gas development and associated sleep and subjective well-being," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    7. Katie Jo Black & Shawn J. McCoy & Jeremy G. Weber, 2018. "When Externalities Are Taxed: The Effects and Incidence of Pennsylvania’s Impact Fee on Shale Gas Wells," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(1), pages 107-153.
    8. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/3vsrea3gla9r5oaa2cle5jrqfh is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Benjamin Dachis, 2018. "Hosing Homebuyers: Why Cities Should Not Pay for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure with Development Charges," e-briefs 281, C.D. Howe Institute.
    10. Burnett, J. Wesley, 2015. "FOREWORD: Unconventional Oil and Gas Development: Economic, Environmental, and Policy Analysis," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 44(2), pages 1-15, August.
    11. Ben Dachis, 2016. "National Priorities 2016: The Future of Canadian Energy Policy," e-briefs 224, C.D. Howe Institute.
    12. Liu, Jing-Yue & Zhang, Yue-Jun, 2021. "Has carbon emissions trading system promoted non-fossil energy development in China?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 302(C).
    13. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/2b9jeu7kmm94kq22avt9ejbu5k is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Harleman, Max & Weber, Jeremy G., 2017. "Natural resource ownership, financial gains, and governance: The case of unconventional gas development in the UK and the US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 281-296.
    15. Fleming, David & Komarek, Timothy & Partridge, Mark & Measham, Thomas, 2015. "The Booming Socioeconomic Impacts of Shale: A Review of Findings and Methods in the Empirical Literature," MPRA Paper 68487, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Ilia Murtazashvili & Ennio E. Piano, 2019. "Governance of shale gas development: Insights from the Bloomington school of institutional analysis," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 32(2), pages 159-179, June.
    17. Solarin, Sakiru Adebola, 2020. "The effects of shale oil production, capital and labour on economic growth in the United States: A maximum likelihood analysis of the resource curse hypothesis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    18. Cronshaw, Ian & Grafton, R. Quentin, 2016. "Economic benefits, external costs and the regulation of unconventional gas in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 180-186.
    19. Max Harleman, 2023. "Compensating communities for industrial disamenities: The case of shale gas development," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 61(1), pages 10-34, January.
    20. Hitaj, Claudia & Weber, Jeremy & Erickson, Ken, 2018. "Ownership of Oil and Gas Rights: Implications for U.S. Farm Income and Wealth," Economic Information Bulletin 276228, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    21. Newell, Richard G. & Raimi, Daniel, 2018. "The fiscal impacts of increased U.S. oil and gas development on local governments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 14-24.
    22. Dong, Xiao & Klaiber, Allen & Gopalakrishnan, Sathya & Wrenn, Douglas H., "undated". "Silence of Falling Trees: Hidden Forest Loss from Shale Gas Development," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274446, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q4 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdh:commen:501. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kristine Gray The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Kristine Gray to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cdhowca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.