Monday, February 13

Doctor Groups Flex Muscle In Capitol: $2.3 Million in Campaign Cash to Influence Health-Care Reform

News The State Capitol has been abuzz the last couple of days because of a hot list (PDF) circulating in ... More

Feb 10, 2012 06:00 pm by NIGEL JAQUISS  | Comments 3
 

Nonsense Knows No State Boundary: Washington Legislators Get Bogus Job Claims on CRC

News Up north of here, Washington legislators in Olympia are debating whether or not they should authoriz... More

Feb 10, 2012 09:09 am  | Comments 1
 

Occupy Arrestees Win Their Right to Full Trials—Even Though They May Not Need It

News The estimated 160 people arrested during Occupy Portland protests in the past five months have won t... More

Feb 9, 2012 01:24 pm by HANNAH HOFFMAN  | Comments 2
 

Almost Live: Rockets at Blazers

News So I'm having a bit of trouble with the picture, which is coming from my phone (I drew it on my way ... More

Feb 8, 2012 07:09 pm by CASEY JARMAN  | Comments 0
 
 
 
Home · Articles · News · News · PGE's Taxing Story
December 14th, 2005 NIGEL JAQUISS | News
 

PGE's Taxing Story

WW truth-squads the utility's claims it didn't keep tax charges from customers.

3 Comments
     
Tags:

IMAGE: RYAN ALDEXANDER-TANNER
Portland General Electric and its amen chorus have had a busy two weeks since WW reported that the utility joined with parent-company Enron to pocket income taxes rather than pass them on to federal, state and local governments.

The total taxes collected from Oregonians by PGE since its acquisition by Enron in 1997: nearly $700 million. Previously, PGE said whatever happened to that money was Enron's fault. But documents the utility recently provided to the City of Portland now appear to show PGE kept between $70 million and $270 million in state and federal taxes—not to mention $7 million more in Multnomah County taxes (see "Pants on Fire," WW, Nov. 30, 2005).

Over the past two weeks, City Hall has blasted the utility and called for hearings next year. PGE, for its part, has issued a series of denials. Here's an attempt to cut through some of the recent back-and-forth:

WW's story said PGE kept Oregonians' tax money. What does PGE now say?

It's not news that PGE collected taxes from ratepayers and passed them on to Enron, which never paid them to various governments. The development WW reported two weeks ago is that PGE itself also held on to some of Oregonians' taxes, contradicting its claims that it had nothing to do with the tax dodge and simply passed on all the money to Enron.

PGE's response—in press releases, City Hall testimony last week and an Oregonian op-ed—has been consistent: "PGE paid all taxes due and did not retain any taxes for profit that were collected from customers through rates."

This statement seems to suggest that the funds haven't been retained for "profit" because PGE will, someday, pay those taxes. When? Nobody knows.

The Oregonian editorialized last week in PGE's favor, blasting City Hall for ignorance of basic accounting. The paper told the city to butt out and let the Oregon Public Utility Commission protect the public interest. Should the public feel safe?

The O's lead editorial last Thursday was unambiguous: "If there are serious new questions about PGE's tax accounting, they ought to be investigated and answered by the PUC, not the city or its hired consultants."

With all due respect to the state's largest and most influential media organization, the PUC's oversight of PGE hasn't exactly been stellar.

The regulatory commission in recent years has allowed PGE to collect hundreds of millions of dollars in charges for the Trojan nuke plant after it shut down ("The Nuclear Option," WW, Sept. 7, 2005) and has regularly permitted PGE to earn profits far in excess of the maximum set by the commission ("PGE's Windfall," WW, Feb. 9, 2005). And one last note: When the Utility Reform Project, a watchdog group, asked the PUC in 2003 to determine whether taxes PGE collected had gone to taxing authorities, the commission dismissed the question as "irrelevant."

Part of WW's Nov. 30 story focused on the Multnomah County business income tax and emails suggesting that PGE retroactively altered its accounting to show more revenue in Multnomah County, thus allowing it to collect more in taxes from county residents. Yet PGE never paid those taxes. How does PGE explain that?

Since 1997, according to data PGE provided the city, the utility has collected about $7 million in county business income taxes from ratepayers—and paid less than $4,000 to the county.

(Interestingly, PGE contributed $10,000 to the 2003 political campaign that resulted in a $380 million income-tax surcharge over the past three years on county residents.)

PGE's response has been twofold. On KGW's Newsmakers program last Sunday, PGE spokesman Scott Simms said, "We really stand by the fact that we have not done anything unethical.... We're a transparent company."

But earlier, on Nov. 2, under pressure from a lawsuit filed by the Utility Reform Project, PGE announced it would stop collecting the county business income tax—which it has every right to collect—and determine how much of its previous collections it should refund.

PGE declined to comment for this story.

 
  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
 
 

 

 
12.13.2005 at 10:00 Reply
PGE's Taxing StoryTo the editor, The OregonianA photo accompanying your article on the City Council's unanimous vote to demand a true accounting of PGE/Enron finances ("City agrees to dig into PGE finances," Dec. 8) showed a PGE "governmental relations" director testifying and two other individuals waiting to testify. One was Bill Parish, a well known expert and consultant on utility finances and the other was Bill Michtom, a consumer advocate. I looked forward to learning what these two important witnesses had to say to the city commissoners. Instead, your reporter completely ignored them while giving generous space to Enron/ PGE's spokespeople, including unchallenged statements she solicited in interviews. In a another example of reporting bias, the article seemed to warn the City not to attempt to lower PGE rates because it would "meet harsh resistance from PGE" (what else?) and that it would "run up" against the state Public Uitlities Commission. I believe the time has come to ask whether The Oregonian's reporting on Enron/PGE reflects its historic ideological opposition to public power, expressed the same day on the editorial page by "Shooting PGE first, asking questions later" and the oped space ("The facts show PGE acted with integrity") donated to PGE's "public policy " flack. Your editorial page also noted that Enron's reputation ranked at the bottom of 60 corporations. You challenge your readers to ask whether they support the City Council's efforts to find out just why, compared to publicly owned utilities, we are paying such outrageously high rates. Especially when the alternative is having those rates manipulated by a corrupt corporation, of course we support our elected representatives. More power to them! Michael Munk—Mike

 

12.14.2005 at 10:00 Reply
PGE's Taxing StoryPGE has a shameful record going back as far as the 60's and 70's with deferred maintenance. Power poles [ in a WW story about that time] showed how neglect to replace rotting poles were endangering lives and the cause of most power outages. What has changed since than? PGE is more bold and brazen in the their attempts to flim flam their customers. However, in PGE defense without a willing partner as PUC they could not have been so successful. —john knipe

 

12.14.2005 at 10:00 Reply
PGE's Taxing StoryPGE announced that it will distribute stock to holders of debt. Doesn't PGE owe us? Shouldn't a sizable percentage of PGE be owned by the city of Portland and/or state of Oregon? You owe us! Now pay up!—Jeff P.

 

 
 

Web Design for magazines

Close
Close
Close