Wednesday, June 17, 2015

Resource Nationalism and Development

Resource Nationalism and Development

Resource nationalism has become a common feature of state policy in many developing countries in recent years.
The Rise of Resource Nationalism
“Resource nationalism has become a contagion impacting the mining & metals industry across the globe. The industry needs to become more engaged in the analysis and management of this risk which can place a heavy burden on existing operations and influence future decisions on where to invest.”
Andy Miller, Global Tax Leader — Mining & Metals, Ernst & Young
Examples of Resource Nationalism in Action
South Africa (Coal and Platinum)
  • •50% windfall tax on super profits
  • •50% capital-gains tax on sale of prospecting rights
Mongolia  (Gold and Copper) 
  • 68%  windfall tax on super profits
  • Law of Mongolia on the Regulation of Foreign Investment in Business Entities Operating in Sectors of Strategic Importance. In my view, As a result of 20 year stable foreign investment supporting policy Mongolia attracted investments and has permanent GDP growth. But in recent years due to the Resource Nationalism and political intervention some laws, Especially, Law on Foreign Investment in Strategic Sector (SEFIL), that limits foreign investment, discriminates investors have been adopted and as a result foreign direct investment drop by 62 percent between 2013 and 2015. [After this SEFIL, that limits foreign investment, discriminates investors have been adopted and as a result foreign direct investment drop by 62 percent between 2013 and 2015.] 

Ghana (Diamond and Gold)
  • •35% company tax
  • •10% windfall tax on super-profits
  • •5% royalties on output
Australia (Iron Ore, Nickel, Coal)
  • •Government plan to implement a Mineral Resource Rent Tax
  • •(MRRT) on iron ore and coal. Set to raise $8bn a year.
Peru – Copper
  • •Use it or Lose it’ - With a fall in commodity prices companies tend to have lower capital expenditure which can lead to a revoking of their license
Since the financial crisis of 2008 many countries have struggled to maintain manageable budget deficits as their economies contract. With revenue down from reduced economic activity and increasing expenditure on items such as social welfare, governments around the world are either tightening their belts or finding new sources of revenue. In a number of producer nations, concerns over ‘Dutch disease’ or two-speed economies have led to plans to tax resource extraction more heavily, and provide tax relief or subsidies to other sectors.
The Dutch Disease refers to the fact that once countries start to export oil or other natural resources their exchange rate appreciates making other exports uncompetitive and imports cheaper. At the same time there is gravitation towards the natural resource industry which drains other sectors of the economy, including agriculture and traditional industries, as well as increasing its reliance on imports.
Those that have natural endowments such as minerals and other commodities have been continually assessing how they can acquire more revenue from these resources. This could be done by various means – taxes, royalties or full-scale state-ownership– however they need to be vigilant in that significant charges to overseas companies might inhibit foreign direct investment (FDI) which is crucial to many countries that have plentiful natural resources.
Furthermore the initial capital investment in mining, etc., is usually substantial and governments have to be careful not to implement drastic revenue-making means that curtail further investment. This is especially common when you consider the volatility of commodity prices and the cyclical nature of the mining sector.
In 2011 accountants Ernst & Young identified at least 25 countries that increased or intended to increase government revenue by taxing those companies involved in the commodity industry. On average at recent commodity prices these increases have raised the average effective tax rate by approximately 5%. According to their research, nationalism places a large cost burden on mining and metals companies and can influence the decision of where to invest in a particular country.
Today Governments are searching for new ways to extract more out of foreign-owned firms that are doing very well financially from what lies beneath the soil. Those countries that are prepared to implement higher rents and taxes on overseas mine companies run the risk of the loss or the reduction in some long-term investments. Although existing mines are not mobile the level of extraction, reinvestment, and expansions are and the temptation to divert resources to another country are highly plausible when you consider the mobility of capital resources.
A lot of this depends on high commodity prices which encourage the exploration of potential sources of commodities. However, with lower prices and increasing government fiscal demands 

Minireal-rich countries are ensuring that they are extracting sufficient economic rent for the rights of mining companies to export their resources. each month, countries announce increases, or intended increases, in resource revenues via taxes, royolities, benefication or state ownershio. tet at the same time, we are now increasingly seeing countries change their laws to encourage mining investment.

Analysis update focused on mining and metals summarizes these legislative and taxation changes by country to help you better manage the implication of resource nationalism for your business.

No comments: