Video Clips

Quoted moments from Alaska public meetings, hearings, and press conferences.

Clips from Alaska Department of RevenueClear
0:49

Adam Prestidge

“one of the benefits, one of several benefits that we see with the alternative volumetric tax is that it is calculated based on a reportable throughput on the pipeline that is then calculated by multipliers, and there's no value— there's no question of valuation applied to that. And so what that means is that we avoid, for all parties involved, the potential for litigation over what is the value of this property over the decades to come.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 15, 2026 1:30pm · Jun 15, 2026

0:37

Dan Stickel

“we certainly have produced the Phase 1 analysis and will be happy to provide that for the version of the bill that passed out of the House. And we do have extremely detailed model assumptions document. Provide that to the committee, and then I think we can go from there on providing any additional information that would be helpful and any additional sensitivities the committee would like to see. We'll go ahead and get that information. We'll see where we can slide that into our hearing schedule.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 15, 2026 1:30pm · Jun 15, 2026

0:37

Bert Stedman

“I would suggest that on the interest rate you use, not something below 5, but use the government bond rate.— as a base. I think the Department of Energy was talking about 20-year bond rate plus 3/8 and then step it up.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 15, 2026 1:30pm · Jun 15, 2026

0:52

Adam Prestidge

“that price cap, that commitment that we can get this project done with a cap on the price at $16, is an extraordinary commitment. It is a commitment that we're able to make on the basis of how 381 was put together. If there were a significant change to the tax structure, for example, going from 2 mils to 3 mils would be a 50% increase on the tax burden as set out in HB 381. That would really put in— that would really challenge our ability to maintain that $16 price cap.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 15, 2026 1:30pm · Jun 15, 2026

1:06

Adam Prestidge

“the 2 mills 2 mils is a concept that was first introduced by Wood Mackenzie and other— and Gas Strategies and other consultants to AGDC quite some time ago, and it was an assumption that went into our ability to commit to a $16 price cap. And so I don't see that there was a commitment to $16 at any time before we had an assumption that was based on 2 mils.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 15, 2026 1:30pm · Jun 15, 2026

0:34

Bert Stedman

“I think just for clarity on the $60 billion, that is the mid-range number of the Phase 1 and Phase 2, which is $49 billion plus a 20% contingency.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

0:46

Speaker B

“under this set of alternative assumptions, the breakeven LNG price into the global market would be $10.34 per thousand cubic feet, and that compares to $9.07 per thousand cubic feet under the baseline assumptions. So a pretty material increase to the, the— the delivered price of LNG that would be required under this set of alternative assumptions.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

1:29

Speaker B

“the baseline modeling assumes a total of 270 million barrels of additional production from the field at as the significant additional development to bring the gas online brings on additional oil as well.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

0:18

Speaker B

“that $100 per barrel oil impact scenario with the worst-case production scenario under Senate Bill 2001 as introduced by the Governor, which would be a $16.2 billion reduction to state revenue through 2062 in this scenario.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

0:42

Speaker B

“we're getting the property tax revenue and the royalties from gas are largely being offset by reduced royalties from oil, given the lower oil production. But the most significant impacts here in these $100 barrel oil with the worst-case oil production scenarios is due to reductions to production tax revenue.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

1:02

Speaker B

“on the top right is our baseline scenario, which is going to be the 270 million barrels additional production from Point Thompson and the zero oil impact at Prudhoe Bay. And then on the bottom left is kind of the worst case scenario with zero incremental Point Thompson production and a 500 million barrel loss at Prudhoe Bay.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

0:49

Speaker B

“So far about 20 million barrels have been produced, and so that would imply potential— potentially 80 million barrels of oil left that could be technically produced, and how much of that is economic would be a lesser number than that.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

0:35

Speaker B

“the $100 per barrel oil, um, with our baseline oil production case and Senate Bill 2001 as introduced. That would be $29 billion of cumulative state revenue.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

1:12

Speaker B

“there was a study that was presented in the Resources Committee where Department of Energy had estimated that the LNG project could reduce oil production from Prudhoe by a little over 450 million barrels total. And so that's where we developed the 500 as a nice round number to illustrate kind of a worst-case scenario there.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

1:01

Speaker B

“We were asked to provide oil production sensitivities and price sensitivities on that as well.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

0:44

Speaker B

“This would result in a breakeven LNG price into the global market of $10.69 per thousand cubic feet. That compares to $9.07 per thousand cubic feet under our baseline assumptions. So a move of about $1.60 just from increasing that capital cost assumption really highlights the importance of of that capital cost assumption.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

0:53

Speaker B

“this next scenario was a request from the committee presentation from last week, and it was a request to model a $60 billion capital Capital expenditure scenario. So similar in total capital expenditure cost as the scenario that we just walked through, except that this next scenario keeps all of our other baseline assumptions unchanged. So the 20-year debt agreement, 70/30 debt split, 5% interest rate on debt, and other baseline assumptions, simply adjusting that capital expenditure from the $46.2 billion real up to $60 billion real.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

0:38

Speaker B

“Moving to the $60 billion CapEx increases the breakeven cost of supply from $8.48 under the baseline up to $9.91 per thousand cubic feet. And then under Senate Bill 2001 as introduced on slide 21, that would be $9.97 per 1,000 cubic feet, which again compares to $8.54 under our baseline assumptions.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

0:56

Speaker B

“The $60 oil price represents a price that's a little bit lower than what we're forecasting and is a situation where most of the upstream producers will be in a minimum tax floor situation in the forecast. The $100 per barrel scenario represents something closer to current prices and would be a situation where most of the producers are in a net tax situation for the production tax. And so the impact of that net versus gross tax is significant when it comes to running these price scenarios.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

1:19

Speaker B

“at $100 per barrel oil, it would be a reduction to state revenue in most years under this worst-case production scenario, and that again has to do to do with just the value of those barrels, we're actually in this worst-case production scenario, we're actually forecasting that oil production will be lower than it would be absent the AK LNG project.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

0:39

Speaker B

“the baseline oil price with the baseline oil production scenarios and $29.7 billion of cumulative revenue through 2062.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

1:04

Speaker B

“at a higher oil price, the impact of lost barrels, if you had a scenario where Prudhoe Bay production was declining, the impact of those lost barrels is significant to state revenue, both in the reduction of value and the fact that at higher oil prices, when companies are paying under the net profits tax, we're getting a larger share of a larger pie.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

0:57

Speaker B

“Under these alternative project assumptions, the breakeven price into the global market to get that 10% return for the investors would be $9.63 per thousand cubic feet. That compares to $8.48 per thousand cubic feet under our baseline analysis... the very LNG breakeven price would be $9.69 per thousand cubic feet, comparing to $8.54 per thousand cubic feet under our baseline assumptions. And so across the board, these, these alternative assumptions increase the required sales price of gas into the global market by a little over $1 per 1,000 cubic feet.”

Alaska Legislature: Senate Finance - June 8, 2026 10:00am · Jun 8, 2026

1:04

Dan Stickel

“state revenue from property tax is estimated at $25 million initially, ramping up to $244 million by 2033 in full operations. And then we lay out here the, the municipal revenues associated with the AK LNG project, which would total $50 million initially, ramping up to nearly $500 million in 2033. So in total, once the project is at full capacity operations in 2033, we're looking at around $750 million per year of property tax revenue from the project to the state and municipalities if it were to go forward under current law.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:35

Dan Stickel

“the core purpose of the legislation is to create a policy framework for replacing certain state and municipal property taxes with an alternative volumetric tax.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:43

Dan Stickel

“Must be scheduled to begin operations within 2 years after commencement of operations of a major component of the main project. Must connect with local distribution infrastructure.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:22

Dan Stickel

“AGDC has stated that they're talking about gas purchase prices in the $1 to $1.50 per 1,000 cubic feet range, and that's why we chose $1.50 as our assumed purchase price for modeling purposes.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:41

Bert Stedman

“The construction cost, Mr. Chairman, is highly— well, I think— Speculative. Speculative is a polite way of putting it.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:30

Dan Stickel

“in terms of the gas valuation, so when we're valuing oil and gas, we work off of a prevailing value concept in statute. And there's kind of an open question of exactly how prevailing value would be calculated with these gas sales.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:57

Bert Stedman

“Senator Hoffman and myself had a meeting with the Governor yesterday and expressed an interest in having accurate numbers for the modeling so we can make financial decisions. 'Cause you can't make good financial decisions without having the information.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:32

Bert Stedman

“the model that's the question or the operators of it. It's the inputs. Inputs and the lack of inputs where the discussion is, needs to be put on the table.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:23

Lyman Hoffman

“I would just submit that hope is not the ideal strategy when it comes to analyzing investments. That issue is of utmost importance to this committee, and we are working with administration to see what, if any, information can be provided.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:02

Dan Stickel

“Senator Kiel, through the Chair, I don't know.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:22

Bert Stedman

“The gas price of $1.50, I don't know what the gas price is, but we have a net tax system. I don't think that's gonna change.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:27

Jesse Kiehl

“Capacity is a good read on the question. Wasn't my intended question, so I'll clarify. Assuming the Department of Revenue and/or DNR's fiscal analyst, commercial analyst folks have the brainpower you need, legally and practically, will you have access to all of that information?”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:21

Lyman Hoffman

“That's the crux of the bill is the incentives of property tax relief, so I would concur with Senator Steadman. The more detailed, the more transparency on this issue for the committee and for the general public, the better.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:55

Dan Stickel

“our official spring revenue forecast conservatively does not include any revenue from the AK LNG project or related development. And so what we do here is we show If the project were to proceed without tax modifications under our baseline set of assumptions around the project, which include a $46.2 billion real 2026 capital cost”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:43

Dan Stickel

“for the conditional— for the conditional effect of the alternative volumetric tax, this is a one-time payment. Of $40 million upfront prior to pipeline construction or pipeline coming into production that is required to trigger the property tax relief.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

1:08

Dan Stickel

“The owner has to commit to negotiate a project labor agreement for the pipeline, and they have to commit to a Fairbanks spur line with several additional details around that Fairbanks Spur Line commitment.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:52

Dan Stickel

“we ran scenarios ranging from zero up to the 270 million incremental barrels of production. We ran scenarios for Prudhoe Bay looking at the zero oil impacts up to a 500 million barrel net reduction to oil production. And those scenarios, you know, they still show a positive impact to the state under our spring 2026 revenue forecast. If you were to assume higher oil prices, then yes, there are potential scenarios where the gas pipeline would be a net negative to state revenue.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:19

Bert Stedman

“$1 To $1.50 is a huge spread. And if they're as far off as they are on their construction cost as their gas price, that is a concern, to say the least, trying to use a model to make policy decisions.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:31

Dan Stickel

“when I talked earlier about our need to develop regulations, this is an un— this is kind of an open question that we will need to address through regulations is exactly how we're going to set up that, that valuation methodology for the North Slope gas. So will we use the contracts? Will we do some sort of an average of the contracts? Will we incorporate some sort of a pro forma netback to the North Slope?”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:43

Dan Stickel

“We are assuming a $46.2 billion real 2026 terms construction cost for the project. That was based on an assumption that was developed before Glenfarm came into the project and has been simply scaled up to 2026 based on an inflation.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:17

Bert Stedman

“we'll have to wait until there's gas, first sale of gas, to know the price, or when do you— when does the department think they may know the price of this? Gas.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:35

Bert Stedman

“we concluded after that meeting that the Department of Revenue and Natural Resources on the state level needs to put together an integrated financial model. And we had— we being LB&A had dialogue with administration and consultation with how the model works.”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

0:40

Jesse Kiehl

“how much help will your department be able to give a future legislature in this scenario? Will you be able to see all the way down into the corporate structures, all the way into the —gas sales agreements, potential gas supply arrangements, the equity terms on which other investors are entering. What— will you, will the Department of Revenue be able to give us fully informed advice, or will you be modeling based on what we mostly think?”

SFIN-260529-0900 · May 29, 2026

← Newer