Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

agent154 t1_j205l8d wrote

What the fuck do they mean by "arguing Brussels exceeded its legal authority"? Doesn't the EU set the fucking laws? What would limit their authority in this case?

63

TheSaxonPlan t1_j208mjn wrote

Probably using the legal approach of "throwing all the shit at the walls and see what sticks."

34

beltorak t1_j210h38 wrote

Probably something to do with international treaties, which the corporations have a major hand in writing. There's usually some clauses that boil down to "if the government changes the laws and that causes us to lose out on profits, then the government must pay us what we expected to profit". I believe it's called corporate sovereignty.

17

Cryptic108 t1_j21nbm0 wrote

This only goes so far though. If your business is profiting off making a substance so toxic its use is banned by the government, you can’t sue for loss of profits.

6

Admirable-Solid-8186 t1_j22ogoz wrote

I could be wrong but i dont think oil and gas has been banned by the government

4

Cryptic108 t1_j24hbyp wrote

Mandating minimum percentages of EV, offering tax benefits for buying EV, setting energy efficiency standards in buildings, climate change initiatives, all cuts down on oil/gas/coal usage and revenue; in essence all those policies effect on oil/gas profits. Governments have the right to tax businesses operating in their country however they see fit. And considering that oil/gas is a limited natural resource, governments should control its production and usage, not cartels that make as much profit as they see fit and threaten everyone dependent on those resources when governments try to rein in cartel’s activities.

1

TheThirdJudgement t1_j233a32 wrote

Yes and no, the EU isn't a nation, it doesn't have full control over its members, thus its capacity to make laws is restricted in certain domain. The scope of the EU is written in the treaties. It's fairly complex and there are grey areas, even as a EU citizen I don't have a perfect understanding of everything.

Exxon is going to be brutally introduced to the fact that the EU is in reality fairly free when it comes to that subject and very determined.

6

theknyte t1_j22dllk wrote

I never understood that. Here in America we have corporations suing cities to get what they want. I don't understand why the cities can't just go, "You're suing us? Well, until it's settled in court, we're suspending your business license to operated within city limits."

Corps have been become so big, so rich, and so powerful, they really are the ones in charge now.

2

RestlessCricket t1_j22znag wrote

The EU Treaties determine the scope of the EU's authority. Similar to how the US Constitution determines the American government's authority. They are basically claiming the tax isn't "constituional". Not agreeing with them by the way; just explaining.

2

nicknameSerialNumber t1_j23itex wrote

I mean, the EU doesn't have unlimited authority. The US federal government doesn't either. Imagine if someone claimed some law didn't fall into interstate commerce, that would be similar.

Here the regulation is based on Article 122, clause 1 TFEU, which reads: "Without prejudice to any other procedures provided for in the Treaties, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, may decide, in a spirit of solidarity between Member States, upon the measures appropriate to the economic situation, in particular if severe difficulties arise in the supply of certain products, notably in the area of energy."

Exxon argues the windfall tax isn't appropriate to remedy any shortage

2