San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-02-03
SANDBAGGING OIL

The legislature of Texas is reported
about to enact a per cent gross Produc-
ton tax on crude oil. If this act IS
passed it will seriously injure the OIL
industry in Texas and the oil industry
stands today as the leading money pro-
Queer OF the state.
In San Antonio and throughout South
west Texas we are particularly Interested
in this measure because our oil fields are
what are known as shallow producers
in which the wells arc pumped. These
properties are operated almost exclusively
bv small Independent companies and IN
dividuals and they will be hit hardest
bv this unfair taxation. 1t is not too
much to say that perhaps ninety per cent
of them will thus be leg1sIated Out Oh
business, hit over the head flguratlveiy
speaking with a political sandbag, done
TO death financially without chance to
fight for life. This is strong language
but the situation merits strong language
1t is an outrage not against the oil IN.
dustrv alone but against the people OF
South Texas, who TO very large extent
are affected materially by income from oil
in one shape or another.
A three per cent production tax in the
Somerset field and in the Laredo dis
trict will promptly stop development SHut
down wells that today are pouring hun
dreds of thousands OF dollars into the
state and crush out a flourishing indus
try with a great future.
The oil industry is paying taxation IN
excess OF any other industry today. 1t
not only pays a full measure of current
taxes but more than fifty per cent OF
special taxation is levied against oil.
Next to oil, cotton is the chief re-
source of Texas. How long could the
cotton farmer survive with three per cent
production tax on his cotton in addition
to his land tax and other advalorem
taxation?
Yet there are members OF the Texas
; legislature so short-sighted as to advocate
throttling the oil industry in that identi-
cal manner. Oil is not one whit differ
ent from cotton in that respect South
Texas is vitality interested in both be-
cause we are large producers of both. We
would fight a three per cent production
tax on cotton as quickly as on oil and
LOT lOEnUGdl ltt~OllS. llC NOllDl SlO''S
has no more risks, no greater investment
no more uncertain markets, not nearly sc
high labor costs and vet the average
grower Of cotton will declare he has dit
ficult work making a living from hi:
fields The small oil producer who drill!
the shallow wells of South Texas IS no
rich nor will he get rich under existing
conditions. His calling demands large
investment for a return pro-rated Owe
a long period OF years during which h
is in position where adversely can WIPE
out not only his income but his invest
ment He is a genuine pioneer in 'hcs,
shallow pools and as in Corsicana. usual,
the forerunner Of larger development ant
material wealth TO the community ant
to the state.
San Antonians who have any influenc
with the legislature should exert it im
mediately. Residents Of South Texas i
general should Immediately rally to til
aid of the small producer. Somerset an
miranda fields are producing several nil
lions of dollars Of new, clean wealth an
nually for this part Of the state givin
employment to a large number Of slslle
workers, attracting capital and supportin
refineries even with crude oil hovcrin
around the dollar mark
Doubtless it IS true that the state {
Texas needs additional revenue. But VIII
sandbag the oil industry to get it? An
why in particular, wipe out the promi
ing shallow fields Of South Texas and il
vite producers Of crude outside the stat
to ship in their oil to be sold to Tcxa
refineries? Give the oil man a square dca