Exxon Says NYT Distorted The Company’s History On Carbon Taxes

One of Exxon Mobil’s chief executives said Saturday the company lobbied hard for carbon taxes in 2009 despite what The New York Times claimed earlier this week.

Exxon has repeatedly made its position clear regarding carbon taxes, Suzanne McCarron, the oil company’s vice president of governmental affairs, wrote in a letter to The NYT editorial board. She was responding to a NYT article published Wednesday arguing the company “has done little or nothing to help put carbon taxes into effect.”

The company supports a carbon tax, she added, because it would allow the market to find solutions to climate change, as well as maximize transparency for the company’s stakeholders.

“We have expressed our position on climate change — that the risk is real and requires action — on many occasions to many audiences,” McCarron wrote in an effort to rebut any implications that the company sat on its laurels during congressional debates about carbon taxes.

Exxon repeatedly made clear the company’s position in more than 300 briefings in 2015 alone, she added, including letters to Congress and in various media interviews over the past eight years.

McCarron’s piece comes on the heels of various investigations by attorneys general and environmentalists into the company’s supposed history of hiding its knowledge about climate change from investors.

The reportage showing the supposed subterfuge was bankrolled in part by the Rockefeller Family Fund (RFF), a billionaire group set up by the lineage of oil baron John D. Rockefeller. Every one of the anti-Exxon voices the NYT used in its piece have received, in one way or another, financial backing from RFF.

One such voice was Kert Davies, who has spent years obsessing over Exxon’s internal documents. The former Greenpeace researcher told the paper that the company’s move toward carbon taxes was “all P.R.”

Davies attended a strategy meeting at the Rockefeller Family Fund offices earlier this year that was meant “to establish in the public’s mind that Exxon is a corrupt institution.”

Peter Frumhoff, the director of science and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, was instrumental in briefing Attorneys General Eric Schneiderman and Maura Healey ahead of a March press conference announcing the latter’s investigation of Exxon.

Read rest…

Comments (1)

  • Avatar



    Why doesn’t Exxon stick to it’s legal business and stay the F out of the tax support for a con – job ? What corporation runs around promoting taxes when their whole job is to act as the collector for the tax ? There are already plenty of taxes on fuel . Haven’t they sent a price signal ? The carbon tax is a politically correct liberal trick to fleece tax payers and will do zero to set the world’s temperature . Everyone knows that yet
    governments who have blown any semblance of matching expenses to revenue are thirsty to tap another tax vein . Who gets hurt ? It sure as hell isn’t Exxon is it ?
    Shut up Exxon and do your business . You have zero influence on the global temperature and you” know it ” .
    Even if it warmed a bit that is an overall benefit to the plants and animals on earth .
    Unless the clowns proposing a carbon tax make it so high as to destroy the economy
    Exxon and others know the elasticity of demand for their product because they witness the effects of volatility in price every day .
    Greenpeace is in the serial whining business. The bigger the whine the bigger the cash flow . Co- Founder Patrick Moore got out for a reason . It’s time Exxon but it’s big boy pants back on instead of cowering to political activist whiners with their own business interests .
    Who cares what Exxon thinks ? If they were so worried about destroying the planet
    they would stop flogging the legally produced products they sell .
    It’s like a tobacco company saying .. well we might be harming people so only smoke half a deck a day . Tobacco kills but CO2 doesn’t . It’s a trace gas plant food essential to life on earth .
    Exxon was picked on because they were sending out stupid signals they were ripe for the picking . A little grease for the wheels .

Comments are closed