2017年-IMF国际货币组织全球_Uganda_Technical_Assistance_Report_57页_794kb

Uganda: Technical Assistance Report on Implementing Fiscal Regimes for Extractive Industries

Core Content Overview

This report, prepared by the IMF staff team in November 2015, provides technical guidance on the design and implementation of fiscal regimes for extractive industries in Uganda, including upstream petroleum and mining. It outlines recommendations based on the findings of a second mission to Uganda, which took place in July 2015, and reflects the legal and policy environment at that time, with some updates up to October 2015.

Main Sections and Key Points

I. A New Model Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)

• Licensing Rounds and Bid Variables:

  • The first licensing round reached the prequalification stage in mid-2015.
  • Prequalified companies were invited to submit RFPs and the model PSA.
  • The mission recommends that bid variables be limited to at most two, such as an upfront payment or a higher government share of production, to ensure transparency and ease of evaluation.
  • A "Dutch Auction" mechanism is suggested for signature bonuses, allowing for competitive bidding with a minimum level and interval-based responses.
  • Financial bids should focus on either a signature bonus or an increased government share of production, with the latter being discounted due to uncertainty and time value of money.

• Model PSA Comments:

  • The model PSA includes new features such as the R-Factor production sharing system, which is a significant improvement over previous frameworks.
  • Definitions in the model PSA need to be aligned with the Petroleum Exploration Development and Production Act (PEDPA) 2013 to ensure consistency.
  • The definition of "Control" should be based on voting rights in equity shares, not just share capital.
  • The "Contract Area" ring-fence for cost recovery should be clarified, and the model PSA now correctly refers to the Industrial Goods Producer Price Index.
  • Production bonuses are redundant under the R-Factor system and should be removed or simplified.
  • The model PSA sets a fixed maximum cost recovery limit for both oil and gas at 65%, which is consistent with the R-Factor approach.
  • The treatment of "natural resources" in the model PSA includes water, which should be treated comparably to other minerals.
  • The "arm's length" price for oil at the delivery point is affected by the pipeline tariff, which should be reviewed for consistency.
  • The model PSA does not include an uplift mechanism for development costs, which is optional and not necessary under the R-Factor system.
  • The stability assurance under applicable law should be reviewed for symmetry and clarity, particularly in relation to taxation of additional profits.

II. Midstream Infrastructure: Configuration, Prices, and Taxation

• Crude Oil Pricing:

  • Crude oil prices for domestic sales to a refinery are likely to be negotiated, using the pipeline tariff as a reference.
  • The mission outlines two main commercial configuration options for the pipeline, emphasizing the need for transparency in pricing.

• Refinery Products Pricing and Taxation:

  • The report discusses options for pricing and taxation of refined products, focusing on ensuring fair and consistent fiscal treatment.

III. Mining Fiscal Issues

• Draft Mining Policy:

  • The 2015 Draft Mining Policy is reviewed for its fiscal implications, with the mission noting the need for clarity and alignment with international standards.

• Export Rules and Subsidies:

  • The report examines export rules and subsidies for domestic processing, drawing comparisons with other regional and global mining jurisdictions.

• Royalties:

  • The royalty regime in mining is highlighted as having gaps and uncertainties, and the mission suggests ways to address these, including clearer definitions and consistent application.

IV. General Taxation Issues

• 2015 Amending Legislation:

  • The report discusses technical amendments to the Income Tax Act (ITA) and Value Added Tax (VAT) Act, emphasizing the need for clarity and consistency.

• VAT on Imported Services:

  • The mission recommends improving the taxation of imported services under the VAT Act to ensure fair and transparent treatment.

• Double Tax Agreements (DTAs):

  • Guidelines are provided for developing a DTA policy and a model DTA, ensuring that the tax treatment of extractive industries is consistent across jurisdictions.

Key Recommendations and Simulations

• The mission suggests using the NPV (Net Present Value) method to evaluate bids, with the discount rate reflecting the government's time preference for early revenues.
• The R-Factor system is recommended for production sharing, which automatically adjusts to changes in production levels and reinvestment.
• Royalty calculations are not incremental, and the model PSA should clearly state that royalty is applied to total daily production, not per tier.
• The confidentiality of PSAs should be reconsidered, as the PSA is a public document and should be disclosed in line with Uganda's intention to join the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI).
• The stability assurance in the PSA should be reviewed for fairness and symmetry, especially regarding taxation of additional profits.

Conclusion

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of Uganda's extractive industry fiscal regimes, focusing on the design and implementation of the new model PSA, midstream infrastructure, and mining fiscal issues. It emphasizes the importance of transparency, consistency with existing legislation, and the need for a fair and competitive bidding process. The mission also highlights the benefits of aligning with international standards and the importance of public disclosure of PSAs to enhance accountability and governance in the extractive sector.