Hacker News Reader

Comment by erikpukinskis | Hacker News Reader

The thing in the US is that almost everyone already owns a car (so that’s considered sunk cost) and the cost of fuel is heavily subsidized.

So that’s the comparison I guess. It’s not fair, but it’s also sort of reasonable, given car ownership here.

View on HN

Fuel in the US is subsidized? I thought it was heavily taxed (not compared to European countries but compared to other consumer goods).

There’s very little federal tax, its mostly state tax (which varies).

I add the cost of “development” financing/spying/regime change as part of the cost of oil, and the U.S. pays for all of that, which is a de facto subsidy.

The US spends more subsidizing fossil fuels than on defense, according to a report from the International Monetary Fund:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/fossil-f...

The "subsidy" is not straight-up tax dollars being given to Exxon & co, but computed against "prices fully reflected supply costs plus the taxes needed to reflect environmental costs and other damage, including premature deaths from air pollution".

The total includes direct subsidies, such as tax incentives that reward fossil fuel investment, exploration, and extraction in addition to indirect ones you describe.

In the US, like many countries, these are very substantial:

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/07/oil-tax-break.asp

Reply on news.ycombinator.com